Topic: HEAT Discussion and Technical info - page 8. (Read 61304 times)

1. The ICO is intended to accept HEAT.
2. Heat Ledger Ltd is making profit from this deal, which may reflect to the valuation of Heat Ledger Ltd shares and their possible dividends. Heat Ledger Ltd security tokens, directly or indirectly connected to HEAT coin, are in the works.
3. The partnership contains arrangements that should result into attractive features on Heat wallet, potentially increasing its usage.

What does this mean in simple terms. HEAT exchange will be used for what? THe project has its own token so why would HEAT token profit of that?

HEAT announces crypto fiat wallet partnership with Monetum.



https://heatledger.com/media/Heatledger_Paytah1.pdf

Anyone have experience with this automatic pool?

https://heat.community/pool/

The pool payed automatic when i reached 100 Heat or payed all 12 hours at my lease address?

Also hae the pool a detailed view for the mining?

I was so happy that finally theres someone who doesn't portray me as a paid fudder, a multiple personality disorder type or a borderline psycho anymore

Your lunatic side persona is not allowed to post false information here, the same applies to you

Like a proper troll, you're pulling that figure from your presumed bottom! There's nothing like 20 Million Dollars currently and never has been except for a momentary virtual peak at the height of the crypto bubble. The company's balance sheet of a few million USD worth of liquid funds are used to fund company operations in the long term and to potentially bring value for the HEAT coin in the ways and time we consider most effective related to the company's product line and market sentiment.
Wrong, about 1M USD worth of crypto of which >25% illiquid FIMK

Any posts specifically containing misleading figures will be immediately deleted from this thread.

Censorship continues:
This time:

So whats your stance on the presumably 20 Million Dollars? Whats supposed to happen with them?
Remember - at ICO time the investments they got were a mere 1.2 or 1.3 Million

Delivered as proven by the short semi public benchmark testing period
20k+ tps has been achieved in house tests, 10k tps boost rate available on private chain co ops right now
Available technically, anyone can create offline tx and print them on voucher to be bx whenever
Available since several months, Heatwallet supports genuine Eth and Btc in addition to HEAT and more is coming

Apart from so called atomic swaps long in progress, p2p BTC/Eth trade is factually available without need to leave Heatwallet
Custom tokens and whitelabel software implemented and out, private tokens and colored accounts importable from public FIMK sources
Implemented for a partner
One of the most cost effective and technically flexible crowdfunding opportunities available for any entity on the public HEAT DEX for 18+ months
Major work (hundreds of hours) put into tokenized shares business is beginning to become visible
Both licensed partners still intact on board and close to launch.

Major commitment for the HEAT team to tie token value closely into the performance of the company has been progressing all the time and despite the difficult waters to navigate we're getting there. Note the nonexistence of similar arrangements until a few preliminary public projects seen arise only very recently.

Untrue. HEAT is well usable system within its last 25% stint towards its full technical maturity and is currently expanding fast on areas of business development, partnership signups and staff / contractor acquisition. Crudely half of our ICO attractions are taking a bit longer than expected - about 1.5 to 2 years, some even 3, which is fairly standard or quicker than average for projects in this space, or should I say the 5% of them that deliver anything.

The hate speech trolls on this forum don't simply have a clue of anything thus most conclusions, accusations and especially figures are grossly distorted to suit the purpose of inciting disorder. For now we're still fine with that as our focus is where the money is and not where the crap flies high. If someone is seriously interested in info about HEAT and Heat Ledger operations, you can contact me through PM and we'll answer when we can. Thanks

Memberberrry:
Well, regarding my account - I need the new one, because the original (Qiuyue201) was stolen and I am in process of recovering it. And regarding HEAT, it would be hard to prove that the goals were not met on purpose. You are suggesting something serious,  a fraud, so it would be good to have proofs. Most startups promise something and do not deliver it. To be fair, yes, there is a chance that it was pre-planned failure, they haven't intended to deliver, they had not enough skills to do this and simply wanted to drag the process as long as possible, till ICO participants get bored and move to the other projects. Yes, many projects do something like that. But there is also a chance, that they simply failed.

lemonandfriesonetwo:
When would you suggest to call a project failed? IMO there is no reason to sugercoat it. If a project promises X and launches without X and even couple of years later there is no X, then we have assumed it has failed. If Ethereum - which was promoted as smart contract platform - would launch in 2016 and still have no contracts till 2018, while being unstable, highly centralised etc. we would call it failure. I am not trying to beat the project's creators, because I understand how things work in startup business (and in crypto) and that most projects fail, but also there is no reason to pretend that all is good, because obviously it is not. If YouTube was announced as video streaming service but then over 2 years after the launch it would offer only text descriptions of the videos, it would be considered failure, wouldn't it? There are various ways to scam people. You can simply run away with BTC (and risk being chased), or you can pretend you are working on something, paying yourself the money. Not saying that latter is the case here (but many people rightfully suspect that), but many crypto project did it this way.

I don't understand where the project has been stated as "failed".

It is in progress.

You want to call something failed? Talk to the many of us who have dumped BTC into projects just for devs to give us that dumb confetti.gif and disappearing with our BTC.
That's a fail, all I see here is people not diversifying and taking the necessary precautions in this type of environment.

To be honest, yes, it used to make me angry. But then I realised that startup world (and blockchain in particular) is like that and there is nothing that can be done, because those are the rules of the game. I often stumble upon a project that fails but also there are some good ones. Instead of wasting energy on being angry I simply move to the next one and try not to make mistake. HEAT was expensive lesson, but worth it. Many people in this community are still naive and hoping for the HEAT bull run, others are still angry, but IMO best way to deal with it is simply move to the next project. That being said, if you would be doing any lawsuit you have my sword and probably some other people would join you too, but I guess you would need personal data and that would require loss of anonimity, so that should happen as further into the preparations as possible, because probably people will not be eager to share that data before they are 100% sure that lawsuit is happening.

Doesn't that make you angry?

I do get angry.

And of course it is impossible to say what a court will say to this (Finnish jurisdiction, not American one..I doubt they judge as liberally as Americans) but as I said, I regard this as either comitting fraud, or the community actually owning a lot of money in a (yes, failed) company and therefore being elligible to retrieve it.

I don't want to silently sit by and let them retrieve money that they got by deception.

Okay, let me concretize...are there 5 people willing to join me in bringing this to court?

I am not saying this is good. I am just saying this is how things work.
People willingly donated 1 million USD to the startup based on both the promises and their chances of delivery.
The startup chose not to sell that 1 million USD in crypto for FIAT but instead kept it and multiplied it thanks to both bitcoin price appreciation and additional coins from forks, which was good move on their side and not every project behaves like that (for example Augur, which was first Ethereum ICO, has almost no funds, since they immediately converted most of it to FIAT). So the fact that they have now 20 million instead of 1 million is thanks to their skills/choices and congratulations to them, they fully deserve to keep it. It is all good, even if they decide to pay out 19 million as salary bouns that is fair. What is not fair though is that they promised some things and those things were not delivered. Yes, we have to say it once again - the project failed, it is a failure, what was promised was not delivered and who knows how much of those 1 million USD was spend towards achieving this goal and how much was spent on business trips in luxury hotels. That being said, it was our duty to do proper due dilligence and we failed to correctly estimate how solid is the team (it is not solid), what is their success history (previous projects failed) etc. It was their mistake that the project failed but it was our mistake to invest in it. Fingers crossed for everyone, who is attemtping to salvage anything from this, but IMO this is not how things work in crypto and in startup business in general - if startups fails investors simply move to other startups and stop investing the initial startup in secondary rounds, which is basically happening here (HEAT ICO investors moved to other projects alredy with some exceptions, new investors / secondary rounds are not coming). Nothing to see here, just better luck next time. But really curious how long people from both groups (both: "give me back my money" and "HEAT will recover") will hang around here.

While I think that Tetra's attempts to get back any money from the project will be futile, I have to give it to him, that he is right about the promises.

There are many things that were promised and not delivered, just to quote some from the original post of the ICO thread:


The difference is, that Tetra (and some other people) took it as guarantees and now are disappointed that the project failed. The thing is that most startups fail, and as I stated before, you need to look not only at what project wants to deliver (the guarantees) but also if it will deliver this. Did HEAT promise all this? Yes. Did the project fail? Yes. Will they give us money back? No, because we took a risk and lost on this particular startup.

Both groups (the one that is raging to get their money back and the one that is believing HEAT somehow magically will recover on the next bull run) are wrong.
Info for the first group: no, HEAT will not give you money back, because you donated it to them based on the promises and your estimation of how probable it is that they will actually deliver. Promises were good but delivery failed.
Info for the second group: no, HEAT will not somehow magically go up on the next bull run. Actually, the next bull run will kill failed projects that are still around, because this is what bull runs do - they make already successful projects go even higher and they clean the cryptosphere of the failed projects. Did the 2017 bullrun made FIMK (HEAT team's previous project) skyrocket? No. Will the next bullrun make HEAT skyrocket? No.

Just be responsible people, accept the risk it takes to invest in crypto.

Okay, what about it do you not understand?
The issuance of shares?
The entitlement for HEAT token holders?

And please don't come with that argument Ive been in crypto for more than one bubble

Clarify again where it states anything they promised?

Are you just mad you're not a millionaire by now, maybe you invested more than you could bite and now are regretting it in this down market Bitcoin is experiencing in general.

Okay its not in the whitepaper, maybe I remembered that wrong, but its in the opening post:


IPO STOCK OPTIONS FOR HEAT TOKENS

Heat Ledger Ltd will arrange share release of private stock equity in Q2 - Q3 2017. Approximately 50,000 to 62,500 company shares are planned to be available for the public to constitute 20% - 25% of total company equity. HEAT token holders who participate in round 1 ICO and hold their tokens will receive options that entitle for 50% minimum rebate from IPO share price.


Although I know that the rules around that have changed every now and then and I don't know the current stance - anyway it should be enough

Please point to the instances where it is mentioned in the white paper.

Assuming you have read the white paper, you should be able to quickly point out which page and paragraph your statement originated from.

The whitepaper. Which is, why I assume that if the promises there aren't kept (in the regard as to who owns what) it would be committing fraud.
But as said, I alone can't do anything. I just offer to lead the move if the community supports it

State your sources/proof for this claim of "promises".