Anyone from Havelock care to explain themselves in freezing the COG asset with zero warning or reason? Is this the kind of behavior I should expect in the future? Do you have a policy or guidelines on what substantiates the freezing of an asset or on preventing a user from taking actions on the securities he/she owns?
Topic: Havelock Investments - Exchange feedback/comments - page 8. (Read 248078 times)
I will concede Cavirtex as it is a legitimate point and it was a bit unusual in my opinion that they decided to link the shares to fiat post closure thanks for the reminder Troc
Hard to believe its barely been a year
Minimum purchase: 1 share
Share price: $30 CAD = 0.64 BTC (Man exchange rate changes!)
VirtEx IPO will issue 10,000 shares for sale on
www.havelockinvestments.com
on March 19, 2013
Edit In:
Went back in time
Problem with Virtex was the shares were non voting and the clause in the contract allowed them to use fiat conversions when the IPO was launched
For the initial public offering, VirtEx is seeking $300,000 CAD in BTC equivalent representing a total 10% equity stake.
The Bitcoin shares are linked directly to VirtEx This is NOT a separate fund; this is the fund that represents real equity ownership in VirtEx!
o By investing in Bitcoin, your name will not be listed on the notice of shareholders; instead your account with HAVELOCK will be linked to the corporation by the number of shares you own.4
o These represent non-voting shares
In the case where VirtEx is bought out by another company or VirtEx pays a dividend to its shareholders, Bitcoin shareholders will get paid in Bitcoin ... at the Canadian dollar equivalent rate using the best market prices at the time.
Hard to believe its barely been a year
Minimum purchase: 1 share
Share price: $30 CAD = 0.64 BTC (Man exchange rate changes!)
VirtEx IPO will issue 10,000 shares for sale on
www.havelockinvestments.com
on March 19, 2013
Edit In:
Went back in time
Problem with Virtex was the shares were non voting and the clause in the contract allowed them to use fiat conversions when the IPO was launched
For the initial public offering, VirtEx is seeking $300,000 CAD in BTC equivalent representing a total 10% equity stake.
The Bitcoin shares are linked directly to VirtEx This is NOT a separate fund; this is the fund that represents real equity ownership in VirtEx!
o By investing in Bitcoin, your name will not be listed on the notice of shareholders; instead your account with HAVELOCK will be linked to the corporation by the number of shares you own.4
o These represent non-voting shares
In the case where VirtEx is bought out by another company or VirtEx pays a dividend to its shareholders, Bitcoin shareholders will get paid in Bitcoin ... at the Canadian dollar equivalent rate using the best market prices at the time.
HaveLock doesn't protect their users like they ought to.
They have to vet the stocks much better than they have.
Starting with LabCoin, SDice... they have continually pulled stocks, leaving the users with nothing but all the funds are in Havelock's hands.
Now Neo/Bee.
I am done with Havelock.
They have to vet the stocks much better than they have.
Starting with LabCoin, SDice... they have continually pulled stocks, leaving the users with nothing but all the funds are in Havelock's hands.
Now Neo/Bee.
I am done with Havelock.
I guess you weren't around for the GLBSE (Not many Were)
But more recently the Bitfunder and BTCT days with exchange collapses and a lot of stocks being pulled.
Basic, Labcoin, Activemining, BitVPS etc among them compared to that this is pretty mild.
That said I sort of miss the days when you could vote in an asset although it did result in a few flops being voted in, that said for the most part the list of stocks havelock uses and what remains now is fairly decent valuations aside.
Of course with Cognitive and Neo recently it isn't that good of a feeling, although with Neo the trade halt wasn't on havelocks side but on neobees request, and Sdice was Everohees buyout and a pass-through of MPEX to begin with so they had no control on the exchange owners decision and the stock in that case.
agreed, sdice was out of havelocks hands.
but not cavirtex which seems to have been forgoten; they set the precedent by removing their shares from trading. Cavirtex's move was a real shitty deal for havelock users but not for cavirtex, which walked away with a nice cash grab.
HaveLock doesn't protect their users like they ought to.
They have to vet the stocks much better than they have.
Starting with LabCoin, SDice... they have continually pulled stocks, leaving the users with nothing but all the funds are in Havelock's hands.
Now Neo/Bee.
I am done with Havelock.
They have to vet the stocks much better than they have.
Starting with LabCoin, SDice... they have continually pulled stocks, leaving the users with nothing but all the funds are in Havelock's hands.
Now Neo/Bee.
I am done with Havelock.
I guess you weren't around for the GLBSE (Not many Were)
But more recently the Bitfunder and BTCT days with exchange collapses and a lot of stocks being pulled.
Basic, Labcoin, Activemining, BitVPS etc among them compared to that this is pretty mild.
That said I sort of miss the days when you could vote in an asset although it did result in a few flops being voted in, that said for the most part the list of stocks havelock uses and what remains now is fairly decent valuations aside.
Of course with Cognitive and Neo recently it isn't that good of a feeling, although with Neo the trade halt wasn't on havelocks side but on neobees request, and Sdice was Everohees buyout and a pass-through of MPEX to begin with so they had no control on the exchange owners decision and the stock in that case.
AM had some news today and access to the exchange is the Achilles heel of doing anything about it. Not good. Not good at all.
yes, i think (more and more) that this has something to do with cloudflare and ddos'es.
but it seems to be not ddos but more likely some new(?) art of it - "Distibuted Continious Interferring Of Service" (in waves), so to say
and i mean it.
because sometimes, rarely, the site is really-really fast. so there should be no hardware problem and less likely - software problem... well, maybe, idk.
just one i do not understand - who needs this... aehm... questionably DCIOS? lol. no. really. gg.
but it seems to be not ddos but more likely some new(?) art of it - "Distibuted Continious Interferring Of Service" (in waves), so to say
and i mean it.because sometimes, rarely, the site is really-really fast. so there should be no hardware problem and less likely - software problem... well, maybe, idk.
just one i do not understand - who needs this... aehm... questionably DCIOS? lol. no. really. gg.
It's looks to be DOA ATT.
Question whether this may be another DDoS attack given the poor performance. Last trade I see on shares I trade was 17 local it's now showing the sever at 06 local. This thing trades every few minutes not no trades in 13hrs. Screens don't even complete.
I remarked about poor performance before and it t was deleted by an admin. I hope this time they appreciate the gravity of the situation when it's discussing an exchange and preserve these posts.
FWIW I'm seeing similar issues with sites utilizing CloudFlare. It wouldn't be a first.
http://www.cnbc.com/id/101407999
Question whether this may be another DDoS attack given the poor performance. Last trade I see on shares I trade was 17 local it's now showing the sever at 06 local. This thing trades every few minutes not no trades in 13hrs. Screens don't even complete.
I remarked about poor performance before and it t was deleted by an admin. I hope this time they appreciate the gravity of the situation when it's discussing an exchange and preserve these posts.
FWIW I'm seeing similar issues with sites utilizing CloudFlare. It wouldn't be a first.
http://www.cnbc.com/id/101407999
Hey yeah I'm having the same issue, the website is slow and doesn't seem to be working...
site is incredible slow, regularly, over a month maybe, or longer.
it's almost unusable for the most time.
some thoughts? am i alone with this?
it's almost unusable for the most time.
some thoughts? am i alone with this?
Anyone from Havelock care to explain themselves in freezing the COG asset with zero warning or reason? Is this the kind of behavior I should expect in the future? Do you have a policy or guidelines on what substantiates the freezing of an asset or on preventing a user from taking actions on the securities he/she owns?
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.5898980
Last infos we have....
Anyone from Havelock care to explain themselves in freezing the COG asset with zero warning or reason? Is this the kind of behavior I should expect in the future? Do you have a policy or guidelines on what substantiates the freezing of an asset or on preventing a user from taking actions on the securities he/she owns?
Hmm... so MP just published an email exchange he had with some SEC toadie who came enquiring after his MPEx customer records, specifically pertaining to Satoshi Dice.
Seems to provide confirmation of what many have suspected... that US SEC is coming after bitcoin securities.
http://trilema.com/2014/interacting-with-fiat-institution-a-guide/
What's everyone's thoughts on this?
Seems to provide confirmation of what many have suspected... that US SEC is coming after bitcoin securities.
http://trilema.com/2014/interacting-with-fiat-institution-a-guide/
What's everyone's thoughts on this?
MP did the right thing the jurisdiction of the SEC does not directly enter into the Bitcoin sphere
Secrecy can be observed and rather than having these private conversations they should be transparent in their process
Governments thinking this right to intrusion is a default privilege of theirs and that they have by right the option to do so is not the approach they should be taking but one of cooperation in relation and pertaining to Bitcoin exchanges.
I appreciate Mirceas transparency and hope other exchanges such as havelock if ever given this type of false dilemma would be as transparent in their replies as MP was, in seeing the underlying premise and noting that their is a third option.
I'll borrow Rap News simply put no Orwellian State
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o66FUc61MvU
MP's style is not to everyone's taste. However it is good to see MPEX's dealings with the SEC in the open. I doubt if Havelock Investments or The Panama Fund will be equally as forthright.
There have been a number of good points, requests and queries raised publically by others in this thread ---let alone the SEC--- which should have been dealt with by now.
Let me add to these queries and yet again in contrast to MPEX; which has described diverse and resilient contingencies for operational continuity in a number of scenarios. Havelock Investments is especially fragile and vulnerable in this area (not only talking of httpd/cloudfail). How is this going to be changed ?
There have been a number of good points, requests and queries raised publically by others in this thread ---let alone the SEC--- which should have been dealt with by now.
Let me add to these queries and yet again in contrast to MPEX; which has described diverse and resilient contingencies for operational continuity in a number of scenarios. Havelock Investments is especially fragile and vulnerable in this area (not only talking of httpd/cloudfail). How is this going to be changed ?
Please adjust the network transaction fee, you can keep the fee for Havelock as it is, at least for me.
TLDR version:
SEC Drone: Hi. Gimme all your SDice records, plz.
MP: Bitch, you ain't got nothin' to back your request up. Learn to legal, noob.
SEC Drone: Pretty please? I'm totes legit! See, I haz a SEC email *and* a phone extension!
MP: Bitch, we all gots emails and extensions. Unless you spittin' somethin' real, back da fuck up.
SEC Drone: But, I sent you a letter verifying my identity and supposed authority.
MP: Pssshhhhh we done. Git ghost, girl.
SEC Drone: Hi. Gimme all your SDice records, plz.
MP: Bitch, you ain't got nothin' to back your request up. Learn to legal, noob.
SEC Drone: Pretty please? I'm totes legit! See, I haz a SEC email *and* a phone extension!
MP: Bitch, we all gots emails and extensions. Unless you spittin' somethin' real, back da fuck up.
SEC Drone: But, I sent you a letter verifying my identity and supposed authority.
MP: Pssshhhhh we done. Git ghost, girl.
Hmm... so MP just published an email exchange he had with some SEC toadie who came enquiring after his MPEx customer records, specifically pertaining to Satoshi Dice.
Seems to provide confirmation of what many have suspected... that US SEC is coming after bitcoin securities.
http://trilema.com/2014/interacting-with-fiat-institution-a-guide/
What's everyone's thoughts on this?
Seems to provide confirmation of what many have suspected... that US SEC is coming after bitcoin securities.
http://trilema.com/2014/interacting-with-fiat-institution-a-guide/
What's everyone's thoughts on this?
I luled so hard on MP's answers
Yeah, agreed. He went toe-to-toe with this lady. Pretty hilarious exchange.
I luled so hard on MP's answers
Polite, comprehensive and to the point.
Hmm... so MP just published an email exchange he had with some SEC toadie who came enquiring after his MPEx customer records, specifically pertaining to Satoshi Dice.
Seems to provide confirmation of what many have suspected... that US SEC is coming after bitcoin securities.
http://trilema.com/2014/interacting-with-fiat-institution-a-guide/
What's everyone's thoughts on this?
Seems to provide confirmation of what many have suspected... that US SEC is coming after bitcoin securities.
http://trilema.com/2014/interacting-with-fiat-institution-a-guide/
What's everyone's thoughts on this?
I luled so hard on MP's answers
Keep your records. They may be looking for the three cents you made or lost some day.
Hmm... so MP just published an email exchange he had with some SEC toadie who came enquiring after his MPEx customer records, specifically pertaining to Satoshi Dice.
Seems to provide confirmation of what many have suspected... that US SEC is coming after bitcoin securities.
http://trilema.com/2014/interacting-with-fiat-institution-a-guide/
What's everyone's thoughts on this?
Seems to provide confirmation of what many have suspected... that US SEC is coming after bitcoin securities.
http://trilema.com/2014/interacting-with-fiat-institution-a-guide/
What's everyone's thoughts on this?
Jump to: