Topic: Here's what the Mt. Gox Press Release will say and why (Read 7019 times)

unfortunately... thank you

Quod erat demonstandum 

Finally it appears people are coming to their senses !

Its clearly written on the wall....still the Stockholm syndrom unleashes one theory after the other why it can´t be so !

The stunner is that the selling of all remnants at Gox still goes on and the heist gets bigger by the minute - hilarious

those bitcoiners

About the office building
Read: http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/1ygedk/mtgoxs_new_office_is_literally_a_virtual_office/

They are backing out of their assets so they can vanish into thin air....
The security problem is the fact that lawsuits could get their money they are taking time to put it into an offshore account

Thats it !

No other convoluted theory can explain the huge volume selling from 300 to a 100 bucks !

Don´t you hear maxwell covering his ass ? You won´t see Mark again only laywer statements.

This much money (your money) is still, as we speak, drained to whatever accounts he wishes !

The japanese authorities are apparently bought off and all prooving data magically disappeared in the office change

or due to some other technical bug. ( His laywers are already working at the closing announcement )

And every other exchange is entitelt to do exactly the same------bitcoin is fucked as its headed by thiefs

Cheers

You have to take into account the concept of "saving face" tho... MtGox is based in Japan...

It wouldn't do to have people protesting outside of the building where you are a renter.

It reflects poorly on your landlord, for something that is your own fault. The landlord has done nothing to deserve it, and yet, you are making him look bad.

Moving operations to another location, even if it is just a ruse and nothing has been moved... if it gets the protestors to move, then you are saving face with the landlord, keeping the focus of the controversy away from him.

Here in the US, we barely give a shit about it... tho perhaps we should sometimes... but there, it is important, particularly in business relationships.

=squeak=

well, my speculation as to the announcement was off, but the announcement is still consistent with what I believe to be happening. the announcement was carefully worded and certainly has nothing to do with malleability. "security problems" and "technical challenges" is not mentioned as having anything to do with malleability or hacking, and could easily be referring to financial security and order fulfillment technical challenges.

the office building move due to security problems is worrisome though. certainly no one walked in with a gun and stole the btc. even if they did, moving office buildings is not a solution.

so what is "moving back into the old office" a solution to?

1) not being able to afford the new facility anymore (a move as part of a business plan to get back on track financially). this is a sudden move, and it seems odd that it coincides with the downtime. it seems like they would just move back quietly when no one was looking if financial hard times had been building (which was my speculation). this is more indicative of a sudden, unexpected financial loss... perhaps the malleability issue really is at the core and mt gox had a huge qty of coins stolen at nearly the same time as SR2.0. the idea that they really were hacked lines up with this action, as much as i doubted it to be true. i guess they wouldn't want to announce a huge loss through hacking since it would demolish the exchange immediately.

2) i think, very unfortunately, that this moving offices lines up better with my original speculation - due solely to the cryptic references to the japanese gov't meetings, and "making sure they were doing everything in accordance with local law." this just doesn't fit the hacking and sudden loss of coins theory very well (they may have gone to the authorities over it... but "following all laws"? what could they be doing, putting out a hit on the theives?). what does fit it well?

Bankruptcy.

bankruptcy with a gov't contingency that they can attempt to still operate the exchange in order to attempt pay back whatever portion of (apparently unpayable) debt they can manage. in bankruptcy, existing nonessential assets are seized, often the leadership is replaced (watch for a mention of staff leaving or Mark leaving), and the company is allowed to operate once again. Unfortunately, the bankruptcy plan process can take a while - perhaps longer than they thought?

Honestly after reading I would not be surprised at all if you are correct on some or all accounts!

sorry spin, didn't see your post. didn't mean to double post

Well, they could just change the BTC balances they use internally, "creating" more BTC than they actually have, and you could consider that fake BTC, but that has nothing to do with the blockchain.

=squeak=

you only get the private keys to coins if you withdraw.. Gox holds all (any) real coins. your cash and coin balances on the website are just numbers on their ledger - you don't actually have either anymore unless you withdraw. for Gox to sell a fake coin is as easy as taking real cash from your acct, transferring it to a Gox acct, and  increasing the number of coins that appear in your "balance" on the website. there don't have to actually be any coins unless you want to withdraw. that balance you see on the site is just a promise, an IOU

You can't validate balances at Mt Gox like regular bitcoin balances because you don't know at what bitcoin address your money is.  This is true for other major exchanges also.   Your balance with them is simply an entry in their books/accounting database.  This should but may not be backed by actual cash/BTC in their bank account/cold storage etc. 

So you can't know if they used your money to pay wages, or pay other users instead of keeping it separate.   

Hi eric,

I liked the post and read it with much interest. But I have some questions.

1) How could MtGox realistically produce "fake" bitcoins? Doesn't the algorithm insist that each transaction be validated independently?

I am a relative BTC noob and may be mistaken, but from what I understand about the block transaction chain, the scenario you describe would be very difficult to pull off. It would indicate that the majority if not all of the Mt Gox transactions are fraudulent to have any chance of success. A pretty wide-ranging conspiracy would be needed, and most of us know that wide-ranging conspiracies tend to fall apart very quickly.

On the other hand, the possibilty that MTGox is over-extended is very real. I don't know at what point MtGox needs to publish accounts, submit to auditing etc. but up until now no one has officially suggested that this needs to take place (other than the Feds who beat him up for 5 M$). If MK has about 250 million USD in bitcoin (that is the last estimate I heard) he can still cover a large amount of any loss caused by potential bad bets. If he really wanted to make people feel better about MtGox Bitcoin, he would start by telling the world how much he has invested in bitcoin and how much is tied up in fiat. Anybody with that much money can afford to pay the people needed to fix any lingering technical issues.

On the other hand, I do agree with many of the posters here, Karpeles has not been using very good PR, and sometimes acts like an emotionally stunted geek when it comes to assuaging his customer bases' deepest fears. He badly needs a PR manager and probably some good accountants.

Let's stay tuned,
 

good point - i had zero evidence for my speculation that everyone is fully invested in coins, just an assumption based on what I would do (luckily I pulled out of Gox a few weeks ago). this seems like a good subject for a survey. its a small sample of the Gox population (and not at all a random sampling representative of the population). additionally, we don't know the Gox population size (who have assets still in Gox), so we can't calculate a statistical confidence interval, but at least we can know for certain that, across the board,  our confidence goes up (from 0% )

Cool story, but we'll never know if this is what actually happened. Just as likely is that no one with any cash on gox wants to buy, so the price continues to tumble.

erm....   eh.... hmm...

  nope... speechless.

Wow, your density is in the super elite levels.

It's not an argument, it's a different way to look at exactly what is going on with mtgox. People have been waiting over 7 months (or more) for fiat withdrawals, do you really truly think that this restaurant scenario would happen? My goodness.

This sounds pretty close to what I believe their announcement today will be:

im sorry, i didnt identify this as an argument. just a poignant rhetorical question. one where food is ridiculously large sums of people's money being held hostage.

which is a question that begs to be answered. because i sure as fuck wouldnt eat there.


im glad someone else noticed this as well. ineptitude of this magnitude is civilly/criminally liable. you either accept that they don't know any better (which would make you a fool to utilize their services after this) or they are doing it on purpose (which would make you a fool to utilize their services after this).

 

see what i did there?


op, good thought exercise. you've raised valid points to be considered by the community, and we appreciate you for it.

~Green

Thanks ericmoulton for your entertaining post. True or not, at least you put some thought in it and made predictions, better than 90% of other threads here.



He wasn't unwilling to issue false statements in their message on the 10th.

In fact, he seems to deliberately wording his statements to maximally affect the market.
Look at the way that he was blaming a bug in the bitcoin protocol. He knew ofcourse it wasn't quite true but that it would have a dramatic effect on the market, and he must have profited handsomely.

There are only three possibilities I can immediately see (please feel free to suggest any i'm missing):

1. He's been misquoted
2. He misspoke (unlikely, given he apparently said this repeatedly) or he didn't understand the meaning of the word (possible).
3. The company really is insolvent, and he knows it.  And he is unwilling to issue a false statement to the contrary because he doesn't want to go to jail.

I have no idea which of the above is the case (or if I'm missing a fourth possibility).

roy

Maybe his lawyers are manipulating him into (unknowingly) manipulating the market.

UPI is reputable. Here is the original article: http://stream.wsj.com/story/markets/SS-2-5/SS-2-456759/ (google if paywalled)


I found this to be very bizarre -- more so than unnerving. I can understand why people view Karpeles as malicious. At best, he is so mind-bogglingly stupid that he doesn't understand the effect of refusing to deny accusations of insolvency. At worst, he is intentionally manipulating the market.

If that article is accurately quoting Mark Karpeles that's a very bizzarre thing for any CxO of a company to say.  I'll certainly accept that it could be a slip of the tongue by a techie who's not really a businessman....  Or possibly even that your typical techie doesn't precisely understand exactly what the world "solvency" means.  But still, it's difficult not to read things into that.  Always assuming the source is reliable, of course (I know nothing about upi.com).

roy

Taking over a lemonade stand and turning it into Tropicana in just a few years, however, is not just luck.

It's planning, clever strategy, careful risk assessment, a compelling pitch, building relationships with sharp backers with deep pockets, large-scale financial management, contract negotiation, mitigating legal nuances and lawsuits, possibly some corruption, and a little luck.

You have every right to hate this guy. Every right. But - he did something that I doubt most of us have the ability to pull off (or you'd be doing it right now and making millions on millions 2 years from now.. and most of us probably aren't halfway through building our multi-million dollar empire - that only takes us about 3 years to build up). And as it was stated earlier, he did it with no formal education - a testament to either the intelligence/experience of his team, or to his own intelligence and extraordinary luck. It's unlikely that it was any one of the three - it often is some combination thereof.

Taking over Magic The Gathering exchange was just pure luck.

Really enjoyed reading that opening post. Great theory, something to think about.

Too bad they have died 2 times already and somehow they are still alive and breathing.

I believe they will.
It will be best for the entire BTC community to get them out of the game as soon as possible.

Actually, my speculation is that Gox itself purchased coins, artificially crediting a cash number to a seller with plans to cover fiat withdrawals from their cash reserve if it came to that... though it often did not come to that since people withdraw coins more often than the burdensome fiat withdrawal process. I speculate that they did this to stimulate volatility - necessary for them to generate legitimate revenue. After enough time goes by, there is substantial Gox-backed fiat in user accounts - which originated solely from the earlier cash deposits Gox pulled commissions from (and gathered from pseudo-coin sales). Conversely, I speculated that Gox sold coins for the same reason, crediting investors btc balances with coin iou's. In their selling, they simply gather up and siphon off more of the original cash pool.

As Gox spends their cash reserves and fulfills withdrawals of promised coins, it is anything but a zero-sum game. This really is one of the foundations of my speculative conclusions.

I agree that it's hard to do much research on them because Mark seems to be so arrogant that he wants only his name and face on everything. That said, here is Gox's Business Development Manager:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B9BHjl691LgRR0VXNDItVkJDemM/edit?usp=sharing

Complex theory for sure, but with VC money there is no telling what could have really happened. Liquidity should never be an issue with a start-up, that's why they need VC money to survive the bumps.

Sure this is a very big bump, but I doubt they'll let anyone take real losses (meaning coins disappeared) because it would ruin the reputation of the VC firm backing them, as well as a huge loss of their initial investment.

Here's what I think happened, someone fucked up, whether it was the CEO or someone else, and they ran. Prompting the halt of all withdrawals, probably to prevent a "bank run" which would have emptied the value of the coins, as well as their coin cache.

Is Mtgox dead? Yes, in terms of a brand, they murdered our trust by withholding information.

I see so many people discussing theories instead of focusing on recovering their losses. This is a business and the inherent risk of loss never goes away.

Hey, just thought I should pull you up on this as the 'Mt Gox was a Magic the Gathering exchange'line gets bandied about a lot, but there is zero evidence that it ever was that (although the name likely does spring from it). Also when Karpeles bought Gox from Jed McCaleb, in *2011* (not 2010) it was already a Bitcoin exchange. The biggest Bitcoin exchange in fact, which it remained for ~2 years. So don't feed us crap about Karpeles buying a Magic exchange. He didn't.

I hate Gox and I think Karpeles is bumbling devious fuckwit, but there are enough damning FACTS about Gox that we can refrain from making up falsehoods.

So will gox die soon?

You miss one fundamental problem: For someone to deposit BTC onto gox and sell it, there has to be another guy on the other side of the trade that has fiat deposited to buy it.

Whichever way you slice it, is a zero sum game for customers, and gox just cream fees off everyone.

So the math is simply:

1. gox_fees - gox_overheads = gox_profit

whether gox_fees > gox_overheads is where the question lies. no theory (conspiracy or otherwise) needed.

gox_overheads have been inflated due to the confiscation, and potential loss of coins to malleability.
but, gox_fees just keep on piling up.

its anybody's guess what the balance is.

Customer balances be it fiat or btc (should be) ring fenced if gox_fees < gox_overheads, then perhaps this isn't the case. To know that, you must know the answer to question 1 above.

didn´t you guys get the memo ?



1) mtgox found out that the bug is a bug that can´t be fixed.
2) core devs/earliest investors found out gox is right about the impossibility to fix it.
3) bitcoin will blow completely
4) core devs/early dudes have their stashes traditionally on gox and asked kindly if the could get out.
5) MK (already rich) felt that he could do those guys (who made him so rich) a last favour: ok, you guys have one week to sell your coins on gox and withdraw the cash secretly, coming thursday i let everything blow. gox was anyway bankrupt, this way MK can blame the core devs...  & they remain silent since they need the cash.



disclaimer:  

Really enjoyed that theory post, whether it's accurate or not.

The btc withdrawal limit does look shady as heck and simply wouldn't happen if there wasn't a solvency issue. I expected it to happen as soon as this whole fiasco began but it's still a disappointing reality.

Please. Stop. Saying. This.  "They" are not a HUGE team of multi talented executives.  

IT'S ONE F*CKING IMMATURE GUY RUNNING MT GOX, AND HIS NAME IS MARK.

Actually I believe we will.
The bad PR around mtgox affects the general bitcoin scene. Once they're done we can resume gaining a positive image with trusted decentralized exchanges.

now this is a real prediction. not some lucky guess.

Most people can't live without food for more than a week. Your argument is invalid.

Ok, obviously this is not getting into many people's heads. Let's try this:

You walk into a restaurant with your significant other for a nice dinner, this restaurant asks you to pay for all of the items you plan to consume that evening up front and then puts your order into the kitchen. Now, you wait for your order to come, but as time passes nothing happens. This is when something goes wrong with the doors and now no one can come in or out of the restaurant, you end up waiting inside of that restaurant for 7 months and you still haven't got your food. Something happens to be wrong with the chef and the locking mechanism on the doors, but no one knows exactly what and they won't tell you about what is going on.

If this restaurant happened to fix the problem with the door and their chefs, would you ever come back to dine there?

I think on Friday a lot of people here will feel very silly. Gox will do what they said they will do and that's the end of it.

There are a lot of angry people around here. Many of them only discovered Bitcoin in the last year, are resentful of that fact, and lash out at those who bought coins cheaper than they could.

Many have little understanding of the protocol and resent the fact that their experience in traditional finance doesn't necessarily serve them well with Bitcoin.

Some are just angst-filled adolescents who resent anyone other than their peer group.

Don't let them bother you. Cheers.

time to be positive and optimistic. we have no gain collapsement of mtgox

Is that you, Mark?

wow. I'm really surprised by all of the hostility... and centered not around my speculation, but around how much you hate this guy and think there's no way he could be qualified enough to think through things carefully. if I'd done a google search for Mark Zuckerberg's qualifications, I'd have found a psychology and computer science major .. who dropped out of college as a sophomore.

it's just like any of us who work.. you learn the job when you get the job. he's been running it- poorly or well. he knows what it takes to run a large business

Thankfully he's no Jamie Dimon, because:

then he'd be a criminal beyond the reach of the law

Gox would be found guilty of the rigging of multiple markets and only be fined

be able to knowingly process the funds of a known ponzi scheme (Madoff)

I'll stop there as it will end up a long list!!

Senior management team?  Maybe do some basic research before creating a wildly unrealistic an insanely complex conspiracy theory.

This is no Jamie Diamond.  Mark's background is in web development.   His linked in profile lists his role at MtGox secondary under his simultaneous position as CEO of a 3D model company in Japan.   ( BTW that one is news to me. Looks like he started in 2013, I guess there wasn't enough to do at MtGox because everything was running like clockwork. )

In 2010 you know what he was doing?  Massive M&A deals? Complex quant fund management? Billion dollar private equity deals and hostile takeovers?  Doing website design and support. In 2010 he bought an trading card auction site (yes MtGox was originally going to handle trades between Magic the Gathering playing card owners) just as Bitcoin hit the uber-nerd scene and the rest is history.

That is you ultra elite senior management.   Start to see how silly that nonsense of a story line you pulled from your butt looks to people who know the facts?  I mean not just kinda silly but laughing out loud silly.

Next time type the name of the person at the center of your conspiracy theory into google and just read a couple links.  Save us both the time.  Ok?

I stopped reading there. Mark is a developer who ended up purchasing mtgox, he has no business development/management history whatsoever. We aren't talking about MBA's here, we are talking about Starbucks FRAP's and PHP code. Exactly the reasons why we are running into these huge problems.

heh. agreed on both accounts. :)

Wow. I don't usually subscribe to TL;DR but that's just brutal.

No offense, but I've seen posts overlooked for being TL;DR that were shorter than what it would take to hold a recap of what you posted.

You might get more people reading and responding if you broke it up into more digestible chunks.

JMHO  

That said, perhaps this would be better posted in the Conspiracy Theory thread.

They are a senior management team of a huge business. This is what executives do - this is their whole job. This is part and parcel for someone with an MBA in senior management role. They don't sit around with their feet on their desks (as much as we like to make them into cartoons that way). Ask a few entrepreneurs who grew large businesses and they will tell you that upper management lives and breathes financial strategy. They don't walk into a meeting with the Japanese Gov't and say "sup? we're screwed, what do we do?" They walk in with a business plan. That's what they do - and most senior executives are very bright - that's how they get to the top. It's not luck. They create effective strategies - it's the whole job.

Let's think about what's led up to this.... Once upon a time, Mt. Gox owned a cache of coins and a cache of cash and opened the doors to negotiating btc trades. User's deposit money or coins and they trade the two amongst themselves, with Gox taking a tiny cut of the coins and of the cash. In theory, this model does not require Gox to have any coins...

 That is, unless the bulls and the bears have both taken hard stands and are waiting for the next move. This is where MtG begins living off of it's cash reserve - server fees, salaries, payment processor fees, overhead. Just paying and waiting. Now Gox needs to also pay off its venture capital, and really need to show profit to continue rounds of venture cap funding. So you're the CEO, what do you want? You want volatility and you want btc to be priced as high as is possible, maximizing commission revenue. How do you keep it volatile? Buy up enough coins to move the price when the depth is thin. Cash out - coins in. Dump coins down to resistant buyers. Coins out - cash in. Little by little, buying a little deeper than selling to drive the price up. More cash out. Still paying server costs, repaying loans. They gradually accumulate a cache of coins with actual cash always being pulled down - they're not paying anybody in coins, but the cash is always being drained (coin buying, investor payback, overhead, etc..). This seems like a safe bet because they are making steady revenue from commissions and they're financially backed by a growing cache of coins with growing value. But gradually, something starts to happen that they didn't foresee...

Since Gox was leading the way, driving the price up, nobody wants to deposit cash and buy coins at Gox. That would be crazy. Instead, coins are bought elsewhere (coinbase, other exchanges), and brought in to Gox to sell... and then cash out. But Gox has trouble getting a payment processor to deal with a bitcoin-backed company with limited and draining cash reserves - especially with some of the bad press and legislative uncertainty surrounding bitcoins. They pay higher payment processing feeds to "low-end processors" (see this great article: http://www.coindesk.com/mt-gox-may-headed-bankruptcy/). Then the price of btc crashes. The company suddenly has much lower net assets, commissions are falling, and though they may acquire cash through the sell-off of their coin reserve, they would be doing so at a net cash loss since they purchased many of their coins at higher prices. They begin selling off coins to cover expenses, losing currency faster and faster. They continue buying up coins periodically to halt the crashes, and to keep from going in the red, they begin selling fake coins - which cause no net-loss (as selling their real coins would). They begin sliding down the slippery slope, feeding pseudo-coins to get cash... besides, when the price finally reverses, they can always just buy the coins back up cheaper and hand them out to investors when they move their coins out of Gox. They have been in financial trouble for a while at this point, but promise their investors that when the market regains strength and returns to its original price, they will have plenty of assets to be stable. Through this all, another phenomenon was occurring in the background.

Since no one was depositing cash into Gox (because of their crappy processors and the Gox btc premium), the total revenue of Gox was being drawn through commissions on the relatively static total cash deposited in the past. Everyone brings coins in, trades up or down, and takes coins back out. There's no real money entering Gox. When the prices were going up before the crash, the profits earned by traders came from the static pool of long-ago user deposited cash, and from Gox's own commission revenue. They give free and discounted commission rates (the Merry Christmas stunt) to try to attract new money, but with no luck. As people continue to withdraw, Gox is forced to borrow from other user's accounts to cover withdrawals. After the two big crashes wrecked Gox and the price never rebounded fully, Gox was left with coins they were "upside down in," heavy overhead, debt, and no new incoming cash. They continue to delay withdrawals to discourage the draw on their dwindling cash reserves. They sell off coins at a loss to regain liquidity... but now they are oversold on both user cash balances and user coin balances.

As the prices started dropping again recently, Gox could no longer cover operating expenses and allow withdrawals, so they identified some "questionable transactions" (where they had - as they had been for some time - given coins to an investor's withdrawal by borrowing from other investor's balances), and issued a statement saying that they needed to halt withdrawals (citing the well known btc malleability issue as something they were looking at.) They probably did address that, but it gave a convenient reason to do what they desperately needed to do - take inventory. They needed to see exactly what they had in cash and coins, and what they owed in cash and coins, and create a business plan to get out of the hole. They are careful to never mention malleability as the true issue they are looking at, but rather as one of the items they are addressing (as I'm sure they have). This explains why he does not say they are solvent (which any solvent company would readily assure), and why he makes this cryptic reference to meetings with the government: (http://www.upi.com/Business_News/2014/02/17/Mt-Gox-CEO-apologizes-for-bitcoin-withdrawal-freeze/UPI-99051392667941/#ixzz2tjyv6jZc).

So why are they allowing trading to continue during the no-withdrawal period? There would no doubt be a rush on coins and cash withdrawals upon re-opening. If they continue to release cash slowly, they can avoid the inflicted financial pain from those, but coin withdrawals must be instant... and they don't have enough coins to keep letting people withdraw. Due to the instability they showed by the "hacking attack" that they never really confess to, nobody is rushing to bring in new coins (to help them continue the borrow-and-pay practice). So they need cash. With cash, they can buy coins. How do you raise cash? You sell a boatload of non-existant coins, taking both the coin price, and the commission (essentially robbing the cash account of the investors). Think about this: When the doors were closed for withdrawals, why did the price of coins go down? I know, I know - consumer confidence / what they're worth... but really think about it. Everyone is "locked in the room," unsure if they will ever get their coins or cash back out. What percentage of those investors are really thinking, "If I can just get my coins into cash, surely Gox will let me cash out... in a few weeks."? What everyone is really thinking is, "####! I need to turn my money into coins and get the #### out of here as soon as the door cracks open!" That would make the price go up, not down. Down suggests that everyone has either liquefied their coins with hopes of squeezing an eventual bank withdrawal out of shady Mc'Gox, only to redeposit the physical cash in a new exchange later (doubtfully the majority's sentiment), or, down suggests that there is such a supply of coins available, that everyone who was able to buy coins has already bought them and everyone's out of cash (and at that low price, I'm pretty sure everyone's fully invested). Additionally, driving the price down (and leeching out everyone's cash accounts) is encouraging a huge influx of new cash being deposited (as difficult as it may be), which is exactly what Gox needs. They are trying to regain their financial footing at the expense of a huge debt of bitcoins. Now what?

They know that there will be a run on the coins as soon as they open the doors, and that they can't afford to buy that many coins. So they implement a "queue" system (which is surprisingly not being talked about more - since it couldn't possibly relate to the malleability facade.) In other words, "Get in line, and when it's your turn, you will get your rationed amount of coins back too." But they can't say it like that or the company goes under (as all trading ceases completely). They need to regain traction - to restore transaction (and commission) volume. They need their trading price to come back up to restore legitimacy and investor confidence - but ideally pulling down the global btc price so Gox can more easily afford to buy them and ration them back out. So what will they say?

They'll say this: "We have thoroughly evaluated our withdrawal system and the malleability bug is no longer an issue. You can have confidence that Mt. Gox is as strong and secure as ever, and we thank you for your patience through this examination period. We are grateful to our partners, . We are happy to announce that trading, withdrawing, and depositing are fully functional once again and the market is open for trading. As a precaution, the withdrawal system will now implement temporary security measures including daily/weekly withdrawal limits and a queuing system, but once the system proves to be technically sound, these measures will be removed. To ensure the safety of our investors, we will be giving away $50 to all new accounts, but all new accounts will require contact details and a minimum initial deposit of $200. We are grateful . Happy trading!"

Remember, nobody locked in Mt. Gox right now is selling their low priced coins to each other - that would be dumb when the price is so much higher outside the gates. Also, nobody has cash to spare to buy up new coins. What does this mean? Just after the announcement, Gox will sell, to itself, loads and loads of fake coins, purchasing them with fake money - creating tremendous volume and boosting the price closer to the other exchanges (but still under so nobody makes a cash run on Gox). This sudden surge will appear to indicate that the public must be rejoicing over the news that they can trust Gox again! Keeping the price a little lower than the other exchanges for a while (and possibly charging an "entrance fee" to come get the "cheap coins") will allow them enough cash liquidity to purchase real coins for those cashing out. It will be a slow process of withdrawal though, hopefully letting no one out, but welcoming fresh new blood in the door, with each new investor putting cash on the table. They will reinstate their artificially stimulated volatility because it's like roach bait for investors, and it creates high transaction (and commission) volume. Over time, they will allow the price to return to matching other exchanges and the run on coins will be over. They will release the withdrawal restrictions with some more fanfare, do a low commission trading celebration, and resume business as usual.

At least, that's the plan. Let's see if they can pull it off. But yes, if they can pull it off, you'll get to keep your cheap coins and make some money off them - so long as the price of btc hasn't dropped significantly a month from now when it's your turn in line for a coin withdrawal...

I wish it wasn't so, but I strongly suspect this is all true. It fits every press release and every action they've taken. It's consistent.

Good luck, and we'll see.

ericmoulton