Pages:
Author

Topic: NEO and BEE talk (unmoderated) - page 6. (Read 153231 times)

sr. member
Activity: 378
Merit: 254
April 06, 2014, 01:57:36 PM
I'm not an expert either, but here's a start:
Quote
Upon bankruptcy, a firm will be required to sell all of its assets and pay off all debts. The usual order of debt repayment, in terms of the lender, will be the government, financial institutions, other creditors (i.e. suppliers and utility companies), bondholders, preferred shareholders and, finally, common shareholders. The common shareholders are last because they have a residual claim on the assets in the firm and are a tier below the preferred stock classification. Common shareholders often receive nothing at all, as there is usually very little left over once a firm has paid its debts.
 http://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/06/bankruptpublicfirm.asp

There are different types of bankruptcies (in US Chapter 7, Chapter 11, 13 etc., etc.) under Chapter 7, a debtor surrenders his non-exempt property, under Chapter 13 he retains it.  It's not trivial stuff, and "bankruptcy" is just a catch-all term.  Anyhow, no one filed for bankruptcy AFAIK.

This presupposes actual shares, these shares don't represent partial ownership of Neo, but "shares of the profit.'  This makes bankruptcy the worst-case scenario for Neo shareholders -- they are explicitly not entitled to any post-liquidation residual value.
hero member
Activity: 630
Merit: 500
Bitgoblin
April 06, 2014, 12:59:19 PM
...
Basically they say "we try to rebuild the company and maybe we manage do to it, but even if we are successful, you might get nothing".
...

"...investors should read the company's proposed plan of reorganization." (https://www.sec.gov/answers/qadded.htm)
Sure, but I was wondering why under any circustance "just erasing" old share would make sense. As opposite as, as I suggested, putting them "last in line", just in case something comes up. Which is usually nothing, fine, but at least in the rare case it does, they get it.
Maybe it's obvious to an expert, but it's not to me.
sr. member
Activity: 378
Merit: 254
April 06, 2014, 11:09:55 AM
...
Basically they say "we try to rebuild the company and maybe we manage do to it, but even if we are successful, you might get nothing".
...

"...investors should read the company's proposed plan of reorganization." (https://www.sec.gov/answers/qadded.htm)

There is no such current proposal, so currently, investors are simply gambling.
This doesn't imply that they are being foolish.  Assuming there is absolutely no underlying value does not preclude wagering that the price will float up and you can get out with profits.  This was done with Labcoin shares, where pretty much everyone knew Labcoin was a scam.  This is Bitcoin, no one has ever gone broke by banking on greater fools.
hero member
Activity: 630
Merit: 500
Bitgoblin
April 06, 2014, 05:43:06 AM
Well a Q rating means that if someone takes over the reigns they could easily erase the old shares structure so it is a risk
https://www.sec.gov/answers/qadded.htm

When a company is involved in bankruptcy proceedings, the letter "Q" is added to the end of the company's stock ticker symbol. In most cases, when a company emerges from bankruptcy, the reorganization plan will cancel the existing equity stock and the old shares will be worthless. Given that risk, before purchasing stock in a bankrupt company, investors should read the company's proposed plan of reorganization. For more information about the impact of bankruptcy proceedings on securities, please read our online publication, Corporate Bankruptcy.
I don't get it.
Basically they say "we try to rebuild the company and maybe we manage do to it, but even if we are successful, you get nothing".
Umh... why?
I fully understand not giving money back if they are unable to recover, and I definitely understand that creditors should be paid first, but what's the point of "just erasing old shares" instead of "they are last in line"?
legendary
Activity: 1806
Merit: 1090
Learning the troll avoidance button :)
April 06, 2014, 04:07:40 AM
And anyone with 320 btc can take control of the company.
320 btc just buys you the dividends, and only about 1/2 of the pubic shares.

And yesterday, you could have bought all of that for less than 100 btc.

Well a Q rating means that if someone takes over the reigns they could easily erase the old shares structure so it is a risk
https://www.sec.gov/answers/qadded.htm

When a company is involved in bankruptcy proceedings, the letter "Q" is added to the end of the company's stock ticker symbol. In most cases, when a company emerges from bankruptcy, the reorganization plan will cancel the existing equity stock and the old shares will be worthless. Given that risk, before purchasing stock in a bankrupt company, investors should read the company's proposed plan of reorganization. For more information about the impact of bankruptcy proceedings on securities, please read our online publication, Corporate Bankruptcy.
sr. member
Activity: 476
Merit: 250
April 05, 2014, 09:21:45 AM
And anyone with 320 btc can take control of the company.
320 btc just buys you the dividends, and only about 1/2 of the pubic shares.

And yesterday, you could have bought all of that for less than 100 btc.
sr. member
Activity: 476
Merit: 250
April 05, 2014, 09:11:38 AM
Link, or more FUD?

vela said that they filed for ceo change, i asked for link, or it is more of his FUD

right here: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.6053935

Notice that it was submitted on the 14th of March.

sr. member
Activity: 378
Merit: 254
April 05, 2014, 09:10:10 AM
You are trading on an licenced Panamanian exchange in shares of a company illegally funded by US investors, just where do laws come into this?  Whose laws?  US?  Cyprus? Panama?
Things kids say Roll Eyes

Said MP's shill who's about to be extradited to US to face charges. Sweet irony and double standards. https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/mpex-owner-in-danger-of-being-extradited-to-us-to-face-charges-553092

Havelock is actually a registered company while MPEx is just one dude and some paid shills, who doesn't even have a registered company behind it.

Learn the difference between a registered company and a licenced exchange.  Registering a company is trivial, becoming a licensed exchange isn't.  Havelock is not a licenced exchange.

@thekekk:  Your incoherent sentence fails to answer my question, that being:  Whose laws are being broken and what laws are those?

@minerpart:  Lay off the glue and return to your containment thread, where you may continue with your failings.


You don't seem to understand the difference between company and registered company let alone everything else.
You can pick either UK law or Cyprus law both laws are the same Cyprus law copied from UK. Read the articles of association.

Fail to answer the question yet again:  Whose laws are being broken, which laws, specifically, and why do these laws apply to an unlicenced Panamanian exchange?
full member
Activity: 140
Merit: 100
April 05, 2014, 09:06:38 AM
You are trading on an licenced Panamanian exchange in shares of a company illegally funded by US investors, just where do laws come into this?  Whose laws?  US?  Cyprus? Panama?
Things kids say Roll Eyes

Said MP's shill who's about to be extradited to US to face charges. Sweet irony and double standards. https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/mpex-owner-in-danger-of-being-extradited-to-us-to-face-charges-553092

Havelock is actually a registered company while MPEx is just one dude and some paid shills, who doesn't even have a registered company behind it.

Learn the difference between a registered company and a licenced exchange.  Registering a company is trivial, becoming a licensed exchange isn't.  Havelock is not a licenced exchange.

@thekekk:  Your incoherent sentence fails to answer my question, that being:  Whose laws are being broken and what laws are those?

@minerpart:  Lay off the glue and return to your containment thread, where you may continue with your failings.


You don't seem to understand the difference between company and registered company let alone everything else.
You can pick either UK law or Cyprus law both laws are the same Cyprus law copied from UK. Read the articles of association.
sr. member
Activity: 378
Merit: 254
April 05, 2014, 08:56:01 AM
You are trading on an licenced Panamanian exchange in shares of a company illegally funded by US investors, just where do laws come into this?  Whose laws?  US?  Cyprus? Panama?
Things kids say Roll Eyes

Said MP's shill who's about to be extradited to US to face charges. Sweet irony and double standards. https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/mpex-owner-in-danger-of-being-extradited-to-us-to-face-charges-553092

Havelock is actually a registered company while MPEx is just one dude and some paid shills, who doesn't even have a registered company behind it.

Learn the difference between a registered company and a licenced exchange.  Registering a company is trivial, becoming a licensed exchange isn't.  Havelock is not a licenced exchange.

@thekekk:  Your incoherent sentence fails to answer my question, that being:  Whose laws are being broken and what laws are those?

@minerpart:  Lay off the glue and return to your containment thread, where you may continue with your failings.
sr. member
Activity: 280
Merit: 250
IIIIII====II====IIIIII
April 05, 2014, 08:55:27 AM
You are trading on an licenced Panamanian exchange in shares of a company illegally funded by US investors, just where do laws come into this?  Whose laws?  US?  Cyprus? Panama?
Things kids say Roll Eyes

Said MP's shill who's about to be extradited to US to face charges. Sweet irony and double standards. https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/mpex-owner-in-danger-of-being-extradited-to-us-to-face-charges-553092

Havelock is actually a registered company while MPEx is just one dude and some paid shills, who doesn't even have a registered company behind it.

He's not a Shill he is Marcel Popescu. He is online 14hrs a day he's doesn't need shills. He hasn't heard on international extradition treaties based on a common set of laws and values or shared agreements. LOL It's been a long long time since a countries boundary has allowed someone to escape from justice. And Romania IS CERTAINLY NOT THAT COUNTRY!!!

http://www.fbi.gov/newyork/press-releases/2013/three-members-of-international-cyber-fraud-ring-extradited-from-romania-to-the-united-states
newbie
Activity: 14
Merit: 0
April 05, 2014, 08:47:16 AM
You are trading on an licenced Panamanian exchange in shares of a company illegally funded by US investors, just where do laws come into this?  Whose laws?  US?  Cyprus? Panama?
Things kids say Roll Eyes

Said MP's shill who's about to be extradited to US to face charges. Sweet irony and double standards. https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/mpex-owner-in-danger-of-being-extradited-to-us-to-face-charges-553092

Havelock is actually a registered company while MPEx is just one dude and some paid shills, who doesn't even have a registered company behind it.
full member
Activity: 140
Merit: 100
April 05, 2014, 08:41:56 AM
You are trading on an licenced Panamanian exchange in shares of a company illegally funded by US investors, just where do laws come into this?  Whose laws?  US?  Cyprus? Panama?
Things kids say Roll Eyes


If that was the case SEC will have not make any enquiries to anyone neither MPEX
sr. member
Activity: 280
Merit: 250
April 05, 2014, 08:41:05 AM
sr. member
Activity: 280
Merit: 250
IIIIII====II====IIIIII
April 05, 2014, 08:35:21 AM
They put USD into a NB pay-in account didn't they? That would then take a day or two to process before NB could move it to an exchange to buy the coins? And then the coins need to be transferred into their NB account? This could take 4 days during which the bank may have ceased trading. How else would it work?
They could have reserves in order to pay you now.
Pretty simple, actually.


They could but where is the fun in that? Banks make profit from holding your funds for a few days before processing them. The bigger the sum being regularly 'held in processing' the more profit the bank can make form this free cash. I'm not saying N+B were holding for processing but their partnered FIAT agency/middleman or whatever they were using to process their USD. N+B could obviously pay out from reserves immediately and probably would have in the future despite the processing delays in FIAT but you wouldn't if coins were tight at N+B. And coins were tight.
sr. member
Activity: 378
Merit: 254
April 05, 2014, 08:33:20 AM
You are trading on an licenced Panamanian exchange in shares of a company illegally funded by US investors, just where do laws come into this?  Whose laws?  US?  Cyprus? Panama?
Things kids say Roll Eyes
full member
Activity: 140
Merit: 100
April 05, 2014, 08:26:53 AM
Doesn't really matter if the CEO  has quit the company still belongs to the shareholders, the scary think now is that Havelock is trading shares of  a multimillion company for peanuts. And anyone with 320 btc can take control of the company.


 

the shares have no voting rights + the shares available havelock are less than 50% of the company.

Not only that, but the company doesn't belong to the shareholders and never did.  The shares are shares in *the profits* of Neo, not in the company itself.  Do folks even bother reading before giving away their coin?

On the other hand i do wonder why people assume that NEOBEEQ = NEOBEE.

Neo and bee shareholder is LMB Holdings, people pay for LMB Holdings shares.

"shares" are representative of ownership in one company. Laws cannot change by rules

They probably add the Q to avoid lawsuits  
newbie
Activity: 14
Merit: 0
April 05, 2014, 08:21:26 AM
@Luttinen

noone said maybe, in the quote i used,
maybe you got confused?

vela said that they filed for ceo change, i asked for link, or it is more of his FUD

Dude https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.6081611

You were talking to this guy, were you not?
sr. member
Activity: 378
Merit: 254
April 05, 2014, 08:14:01 AM
Doesn't really matter if the CEO  has quit the company still belongs to the shareholders, the scary think now is that Havelock is trading shares of  a multimillion company for peanuts. And anyone with 320 btc can take control of the company.


 

the shares have no voting rights + the shares available havelock are less than 50% of the company.

Not only that, but the company doesn't belong to the shareholders and never did.  The shares are shares in *the profits* of Neo, not in the company itself.  Do folks even bother reading before giving away their coin?

On the other hand i do wonder why people assume that NEOBEEQ = NEOBEE.  Assuming that the trading halt was done per Neo's request and was legitimate (which I admit is sorta lulzy), the shares known as NEOBEEQ have nothing to do with NEOBEE, unless Danny has authorised this tradefest.
full member
Activity: 154
Merit: 100
April 05, 2014, 08:08:15 AM
Doesn't really matter if the CEO  has quit the company still belongs to the shareholders, the scary think now is that Havelock is trading shares of  a multimillion company for peanuts. And anyone with 320 btc can take control of the company.


 

the shares have no voting rights + the shares available havelock are less than 50% of the company.
Pages:
Jump to: