Share without voting right, should receive much more dividends and before the share with voting right.
Topic: [HAVELOCK] PETAMINE - 1,150 TH/S HASH RATE (1GH/S per Unit) - page 103. (Read 565833 times)
Big Shareholder receive insider info and vote, small receive nothing because they're too small to vote anyway... And during trading activity
Share without voting right, should receive much more dividends and before the share with voting right.
Share without voting right, should receive much more dividends and before the share with voting right.
-This investment is making excellent returns. If you don't want it, sell it. Many people such as myself would be happy to buy.
+1
almost 9000... cryptx! buy them all!!!
I think you misunderstand the point of selling. You would sell below the current price, attracting buyers. I've already bought my fill at current prices.
-This investment is making excellent returns. If you don't want it, sell it. Many people such as myself would be happy to buy.
+1
almost 9000... cryptx! buy them all!!!
-This investment is making excellent returns. If you don't want it, sell it. Many people such as myself would be happy to buy.
+1
Good news, everyone! I can justify you not being asked to vote with your voting shares thusly:
See? All shares have voting rights, but some have more voting rights than others.
Quote
Investopedia explains 'Class B Shares'
For example, one Class A share may be accompanied by five voting rights, while one Class B share may be accompanied by only one right to vote, or vice versa. A detailed description of a company's different classes of stock is [err... might be--ED] included in the company's bylaws and charter.
For example, one Class A share may be accompanied by five voting rights, while one Class B share may be accompanied by only one right to vote, or vice versa. A detailed description of a company's different classes of stock is [err... might be--ED] included in the company's bylaws and charter.
See? All shares have voting rights, but some have more voting rights than others.
We would like to inform you that a vote was cast for every change made by cryptx since they have been listed on Havelock. The votes were cast by unit holders that collectively own more than 60% of the Fund. If you did not get to vote on changes and you personally own over 5% of the Fund please contact us. Cryptx did not need to bring the vote to a public one when the majority of the unit holders of the Fund voted for those changes. So even if a public vote has taken place the same result would have been voted on.
So if you currently own more than 5% of the Fund and you were not contacted to cast a vote for a change please PM or email us at [email protected]
There was no breach of contract, all decisions were made by majority shareholders that were monitored by us prior to public release of decisions.
To take the vote public and get the same result would have been a waste of time and cause more confusion.
We believe that PETA is on the right track and has made the right choices to keep the company viable over the past year. If you do not agree with the decisions made by PETA we are always looking for great companies to list their Fund on Havelock apply today!
Havelock Investments
So if you currently own more than 5% of the Fund and you were not contacted to cast a vote for a change please PM or email us at [email protected]
There was no breach of contract, all decisions were made by majority shareholders that were monitored by us prior to public release of decisions.
To take the vote public and get the same result would have been a waste of time and cause more confusion.
We believe that PETA is on the right track and has made the right choices to keep the company viable over the past year. If you do not agree with the decisions made by PETA we are always looking for great companies to list their Fund on Havelock apply today!
Havelock Investments
If you're doing a "private" vote, inform everyone at once when it's happening and about what it is. Then see if it results in >50% of *all* votes (for simplicity's sake). If theres a concensus, go ahead with it. If not, include the "small" unit holders in the vote. Also, publish the vote results.
For anyone missing brain cells, which is apparently a large number of people on this thread:
-VIRTUAL SHARES ARE DEREGULATED, EXTRALEGAL SECURITIES, NOT SUBJECT TO RULES GOVERNING TRADITIONAL INVESTMENT.
...
-VIRTUAL SHARES ARE DEREGULATED, EXTRALEGAL SECURITIES, NOT SUBJECT TO RULES GOVERNING TRADITIONAL INVESTMENT.
...
Cap lock = TRUTH.
Virtual shares have little in common with IRL securities. But we are forever indebted to those fooled by these recreational simulacra--without believers, who'd buy our ersatz sharez?
What annoy me the most is that a few people were aware of this strategy before everyone and they had the opportunity to make a move before the public announcement.
This is unfair.
This is unfair.
+1
What annoy me the most is that a few people were aware of this strategy before everyone and they had the opportunity to make a move before the public announcement.
This is unfair.
This is unfair.
For anyone missing brain cells, which is apparently a large number of people on this thread:
-VIRTUAL SHARES ARE DEREGULATED, EXTRALEGAL SECURITIES, NOT SUBJECT TO RULES GOVERNING TRADITIONAL INVESTMENT.
-In the real world INFORMATION TRADING HAPPENS ALL THE TIME, legal or not.
-There is no legal recourse in this investment. In short, if you invest you are trusting CryptX. SO IF YOU INVEST, TRUST CRYPTX.
-This investment is making excellent returns. If you don't want it, sell it. Many people such as myself would be happy to buy.
-VIRTUAL SHARES ARE DEREGULATED, EXTRALEGAL SECURITIES, NOT SUBJECT TO RULES GOVERNING TRADITIONAL INVESTMENT.
-In the real world INFORMATION TRADING HAPPENS ALL THE TIME, legal or not.
-There is no legal recourse in this investment. In short, if you invest you are trusting CryptX. SO IF YOU INVEST, TRUST CRYPTX.
-This investment is making excellent returns. If you don't want it, sell it. Many people such as myself would be happy to buy.
Sureeee, trust Danny, trust Mark, trust TradeF, trust Ukyo, trust... trust everyone and be a TRUE INVESTOR! God forbid you ask questions caz then you are "missing brain cells".
For anyone missing brain cells, which is apparently a large number of people on this thread:
-VIRTUAL SHARES ARE DEREGULATED, EXTRALEGAL SECURITIES, NOT SUBJECT TO RULES GOVERNING TRADITIONAL INVESTMENT.
-In the real world INFORMATION TRADING HAPPENS ALL THE TIME, legal or not.
-There is no legal recourse in this investment. In short, if you invest you are trusting CryptX. SO IF YOU INVEST, TRUST CRYPTX.
-This investment is making excellent returns. If you don't want it, sell it. Many people such as myself would be happy to buy.
-VIRTUAL SHARES ARE DEREGULATED, EXTRALEGAL SECURITIES, NOT SUBJECT TO RULES GOVERNING TRADITIONAL INVESTMENT.
-In the real world INFORMATION TRADING HAPPENS ALL THE TIME, legal or not.
-There is no legal recourse in this investment. In short, if you invest you are trusting CryptX. SO IF YOU INVEST, TRUST CRYPTX.
-This investment is making excellent returns. If you don't want it, sell it. Many people such as myself would be happy to buy.
Hey, I'm one of the people missing few brain cells.
Want to buy 277 shares of scryptx? Make an offer and they are all yours (and I'm out and stop bothering this forum people who have ALL brain cells working).
PM me.
thanks
For anyone missing brain cells, which is apparently a large number of people on this thread:
-VIRTUAL SHARES ARE DEREGULATED, EXTRALEGAL SECURITIES, NOT SUBJECT TO RULES GOVERNING TRADITIONAL INVESTMENT.
-In the real world INFORMATION TRADING HAPPENS ALL THE TIME, legal or not.
-There is no legal recourse in this investment. In short, if you invest you are trusting CryptX. SO IF YOU INVEST, TRUST CRYPTX.
-This investment is making excellent returns. If you don't want it, sell it. Many people such as myself would be happy to buy.
-VIRTUAL SHARES ARE DEREGULATED, EXTRALEGAL SECURITIES, NOT SUBJECT TO RULES GOVERNING TRADITIONAL INVESTMENT.
-In the real world INFORMATION TRADING HAPPENS ALL THE TIME, legal or not.
-There is no legal recourse in this investment. In short, if you invest you are trusting CryptX. SO IF YOU INVEST, TRUST CRYPTX.
-This investment is making excellent returns. If you don't want it, sell it. Many people such as myself would be happy to buy.
We would like to inform you that a vote was cast for every change made by cryptx since they have been listed on Havelock. The votes were cast by unit holders that collectively own more than 60% of the Fund. If you did not get to vote on changes and you personally own over 5% of the Fund please contact us. Cryptx did not need to bring the vote to a public one when the majority of the unit holders of the Fund voted for those changes. So even if a public vote has taken place the same result would have been voted on.
So if you currently own more than 5% of the Fund and you were not contacted to cast a vote for a change please PM or email us at [email protected]
There was no breach of contract, all decisions were made by majority shareholders that were monitored by us prior to public release of decisions.
To take the vote public and get the same result would have been a waste of time and cause more confusion.
We believe that PETA is on the right track and has made the right choices to keep the company viable over the past year. If you do not agree with the decisions made by PETA we are always looking for great companies to list their Fund on Havelock apply today!
Havelock Investments
So if you currently own more than 5% of the Fund and you were not contacted to cast a vote for a change please PM or email us at [email protected]
There was no breach of contract, all decisions were made by majority shareholders that were monitored by us prior to public release of decisions.
To take the vote public and get the same result would have been a waste of time and cause more confusion.
We believe that PETA is on the right track and has made the right choices to keep the company viable over the past year. If you do not agree with the decisions made by PETA we are always looking for great companies to list their Fund on Havelock apply today!
Havelock Investments
Excellent! That's just what we needed to hear, thank you Havelock for clearing that up, perhaps some transparency and greater clarity in the prospectus would have avoided this but I am certainly satisfied now. It just seemed strange to all use lowly <5%ers that voting rights were mentioned but we never heard anything about it. Sorry for getting all antsy, and thanks again for responding.
Havelock, maybe thats how they role in Panama (and why you are based there), but in any developed economy you would be looking at jail time for conducting insider information and trading like that.
G. PROHIBITED ACTIVITIES, CIVIL LIABILITY AND ENFORCEMENT
Civil liability for any person found responsible for the loss or damage caused by the use of fraudulent or deceitful devices in connection with the sale or purchase of securities is established by the Law. Besides, insider trading, as well as the use of any fraudulent or deceitful act or market manipulation (i.e., wash sales) that may affect the purchase or sale of securities is prohibited.
A treble damage sanction is established for insider trading and the CNV is empowered to impose administrative fines for up to US$300,000.00 for violations of the Law-Decree.
As a very particular provision of the Law-Decree, a class action is recognized in favor of the CNV, which has standing to file complaints in its name to enforce the provisions of the new securities law. Any amounts recovered by the Commission through a class action shall be transferred to a trust19 which beneficiaries are the investors conforming the class.
The statute of limitations for civil remedies are up to three years.
(source: http://www.legalinfo-panama.com/english/securities_nutshell_04.htm)
So, maybe it's time to prove that the rest of 40% that didn't get informed about the changes matters.
+1
We would like to inform you that a vote was cast for every change made by cryptx since they have been listed on Havelock. The votes were cast by unit holders that collectively own more than 60% of the Fund. If you did not get to vote on changes and you personally own over 5% of the Fund please contact us. Cryptx did not need to bring the vote to a public one when the majority of the unit holders of the Fund voted for those changes. So even if a public vote has taken place the same result would have been voted on.
So if you currently own more than 5% of the Fund and you were not contacted to cast a vote for a change please PM or email us at [email protected]
There was no breach of contract, all decisions were made by majority shareholders that were monitored by us prior to public release of decisions.
To take the vote public and get the same result would have been a waste of time and cause more confusion.
We believe that PETA is on the right track and has made the right choices to keep the company viable over the past year. If you do not agree with the decisions made by PETA we are always looking for great companies to list their Fund on Havelock apply today!
Havelock Investments
So if you currently own more than 5% of the Fund and you were not contacted to cast a vote for a change please PM or email us at [email protected]
There was no breach of contract, all decisions were made by majority shareholders that were monitored by us prior to public release of decisions.
To take the vote public and get the same result would have been a waste of time and cause more confusion.
We believe that PETA is on the right track and has made the right choices to keep the company viable over the past year. If you do not agree with the decisions made by PETA we are always looking for great companies to list their Fund on Havelock apply today!
Havelock Investments
Excellent! That's just what we needed to hear, thank you Havelock for clearing that up, perhaps some transparency and greater clarity in the prospectus would have avoided this but I am certainly satisfied now. It just seemed strange to all use lowly <5%ers that voting rights were mentioned but we never heard anything about it. Sorry for getting all antsy, and thanks again for responding.
Havelock, maybe thats how they role in Panama (and why you are based there), but in any developed economy you would be looking at jail time for conducting insider information and trading like that.
G. PROHIBITED ACTIVITIES, CIVIL LIABILITY AND ENFORCEMENT
Civil liability for any person found responsible for the loss or damage caused by the use of fraudulent or deceitful devices in connection with the sale or purchase of securities is established by the Law. Besides, insider trading, as well as the use of any fraudulent or deceitful act or market manipulation (i.e., wash sales) that may affect the purchase or sale of securities is prohibited.
A treble damage sanction is established for insider trading and the CNV is empowered to impose administrative fines for up to US$300,000.00 for violations of the Law-Decree.
As a very particular provision of the Law-Decree, a class action is recognized in favor of the CNV, which has standing to file complaints in its name to enforce the provisions of the new securities law. Any amounts recovered by the Commission through a class action shall be transferred to a trust19 which beneficiaries are the investors conforming the class.
The statute of limitations for civil remedies are up to three years.
(source: http://www.legalinfo-panama.com/english/securities_nutshell_04.htm)
So, maybe it's time to prove that the rest of 40% that didn't get informed about the changes matters.
Well, the prospect doesn't state that only shareholders >5% have voting power.
However, even if we live in 2014 and we have methods to cast votes and make them have the appropiate weight by number of shares owned, I must say that if the original message of the whole change was stating: "We asked shareholders >5% to vote and the result is: blablabla"
It could have been a different story.
(by the way, why is Havelock answering to Cryptx messages? Is Havelock a shareholder?)
However, even if we live in 2014 and we have methods to cast votes and make them have the appropiate weight by number of shares owned, I must say that if the original message of the whole change was stating: "We asked shareholders >5% to vote and the result is: blablabla"
It could have been a different story.
(by the way, why is Havelock answering to Cryptx messages? Is Havelock a shareholder?)
We would like to inform you that a vote was cast for every change made by cryptx since they have been listed on Havelock. The votes were cast by unit holders that collectively own more than 60% of the Fund. If you did not get to vote on changes and you personally own over 5% of the Fund please contact us. Cryptx did not need to bring the vote to a public one when the majority of the unit holders of the Fund voted for those changes. So even if a public vote has taken place the same result would have been voted on.
So if you currently own more than 5% of the Fund and you were not contacted to cast a vote for a change please PM or email us at [email protected]
There was no breach of contract, all decisions were made by majority shareholders that were monitored by us prior to public release of decisions.
To take the vote public and get the same result would have been a waste of time and cause more confusion.
We believe that PETA is on the right track and has made the right choices to keep the company viable over the past year. If you do not agree with the decisions made by PETA we are always looking for great companies to list their Fund on Havelock apply today!
Havelock Investments
So if you currently own more than 5% of the Fund and you were not contacted to cast a vote for a change please PM or email us at [email protected]
There was no breach of contract, all decisions were made by majority shareholders that were monitored by us prior to public release of decisions.
To take the vote public and get the same result would have been a waste of time and cause more confusion.
We believe that PETA is on the right track and has made the right choices to keep the company viable over the past year. If you do not agree with the decisions made by PETA we are always looking for great companies to list their Fund on Havelock apply today!
Havelock Investments
Excellent! That's just what we needed to hear, thank you Havelock for clearing that up, perhaps some transparency and greater clarity in the prospectus would have avoided this but I am certainly satisfied now. It just seemed strange to all use lowly <5%ers that voting rights were mentioned but we never heard anything about it. Sorry for getting all antsy, and thanks again for responding.
Havelock, maybe thats how they role in Panama (and why you are based there), but in any developed economy you would be looking at jail time for conducting insider information and trading like that.
We would like to inform you that a vote was cast for every change made by cryptx since they have been listed on Havelock. The votes were cast by unit holders that collectively own more than 60% of the Fund. If you did not get to vote on changes and you personally own over 5% of the Fund please contact us. Cryptx did not need to bring the vote to a public one when the majority of the unit holders of the Fund voted for those changes. So even if a public vote has taken place the same result would have been voted on.
So if you currently own more than 5% of the Fund and you were not contacted to cast a vote for a change please PM or email us at [email protected]
There was no breach of contract, all decisions were made by majority shareholders that were monitored by us prior to public release of decisions.
To take the vote public and get the same result would have been a waste of time and cause more confusion.
We believe that PETA is on the right track and has made the right choices to keep the company viable over the past year. If you do not agree with the decisions made by PETA we are always looking for great companies to list their Fund on Havelock apply today!
Havelock Investments
So if you currently own more than 5% of the Fund and you were not contacted to cast a vote for a change please PM or email us at [email protected]
There was no breach of contract, all decisions were made by majority shareholders that were monitored by us prior to public release of decisions.
To take the vote public and get the same result would have been a waste of time and cause more confusion.
We believe that PETA is on the right track and has made the right choices to keep the company viable over the past year. If you do not agree with the decisions made by PETA we are always looking for great companies to list their Fund on Havelock apply today!
Havelock Investments
Excellent! That's just what we needed to hear, thank you Havelock for clearing that up, perhaps some transparency and greater clarity in the prospectus would have avoided this but I am certainly satisfied now. It just seemed strange to all use lowly <5%ers that voting rights were mentioned but we never heard anything about it. Sorry for getting all antsy, and thanks again for responding.
With 12'000 shares sold in this (I)PO, PETA will hash at about 1'200TH/s, and we will have to invest about 900 btc more.
That means no dividends on 6.6. (300 btc is in reinvestment fund from last week, and I think 1200TH will mine another 600 in two weeks).
Dividends are then starting from 13.6.
I'm still not sure in what ratio ??
That means no dividends on 6.6. (300 btc is in reinvestment fund from last week, and I think 1200TH will mine another 600 in two weeks).
Dividends are then starting from 13.6.
I'm still not sure in what ratio ??
Damn, if this ends up being such an extended delay till the 13th of June I wonder how much the difficulty factor will pick apart dividends? Hard to predict I'm sure, but I don't believe it'll be a friendly looking number compared to today's present dividend, but hopefully not to much of a downer.
So there is apparently 9009 shares left (at present time to this post) to the second IPO @ 0.09750000 btc per share. With that in mind and being that it is (at present) the 28th of May... It is safe to say (unless big buyers start rolling in) that we are not going to fully sell this IPO and I would bet that we would not get below 8000 share left (2000 sold).
With all this said, what would be added to the pool if we do not sell this IPO? I take it we wont be reaching our 1500th/s? At Present we are hashing at 1.2ph/s (1h interval). However, I do understand that we will still be reaching our 15gh per share, but I'm hoping that we get the pool size up to keep up with the ever rising difficulty. Especially if we don't start receiving our dividends soon. Or would this really be a concern? Anyone have good knowledge about this?
With all this said, what would be added to the pool if we do not sell this IPO? I take it we wont be reaching our 1500th/s? At Present we are hashing at 1.2ph/s (1h interval). However, I do understand that we will still be reaching our 15gh per share, but I'm hoping that we get the pool size up to keep up with the ever rising difficulty. Especially if we don't start receiving our dividends soon. Or would this really be a concern? Anyone have good knowledge about this?
The pool size = (present size) + (15 TH/s for each additional share sold). CryptX already made the purchase. They are privately mining with the unsold shares and simply transfer them over when sold.
Pool size is not a concern. Pool size does nothing to keep up with difficulty. The important part about keeping up with difficulty is the TH/s growth rate, which depends on reinvestment, not pool size.
Hope this helps.
Much appreciate the knowledge, this helps me very much, as clarity on the mechanics is important on any investment.
So there is apparently 9009 shares left (at present time to this post) to the second IPO @ 0.09750000 btc per share. With that in mind and being that it is (at present) the 28th of May... It is safe to say (unless big buyers start rolling in) that we are not going to fully sell this IPO and I would bet that we would not get below 8000 share left (2000 sold).
With all this said, what would be added to the pool if we do not sell this IPO? I take it we wont be reaching our 1500th/s? At Present we are hashing at 1.2ph/s (1h interval). However, I do understand that we will still be reaching our 15gh per share, but I'm hoping that we get the pool size up to keep up with the ever rising difficulty. Especially if we don't start receiving our dividends soon. Or would this really be a concern? Anyone have good knowledge about this?
With all this said, what would be added to the pool if we do not sell this IPO? I take it we wont be reaching our 1500th/s? At Present we are hashing at 1.2ph/s (1h interval). However, I do understand that we will still be reaching our 15gh per share, but I'm hoping that we get the pool size up to keep up with the ever rising difficulty. Especially if we don't start receiving our dividends soon. Or would this really be a concern? Anyone have good knowledge about this?
The pool size = (present size) + (15 TH/s for each additional share sold). CryptX already made the purchase. They are privately mining with the unsold shares and simply transfer them over when sold.
Pool size is not a concern. Pool size does nothing to keep up with difficulty. The important part about keeping up with difficulty is the TH/s growth rate, which depends on reinvestment, not pool size.
Hope this helps.
Jump to: