Topic: [Payout Updates] Bitcoinica site is taken offline for security investigation - page 70. (Read 156693 times)

Im not jumping the line. I suggested that zhou got rid of the bureaucracy.
We have waited long enough, and im getting impatient.

lol trying to jump the line. Try not to be an idiot.

you have access!!!
Just send my 60-70btc to 19PKMheiAr2Lxm2YN67pTUpTmwTW96PGvF .

I don't even know myself. I only know that I'm still an employee.

I was not updated about the refunding for over 4 days, but I can magically access the fund account with all the customer deposits (at least 75% of total valid claims are in that account). I can't touch the money even though technically it's allowed.

On the other hand, I'll have to wait for updates and instructions like everyone else.

COULD YOU PLEASE TELL US THEN???

I would say the take over happened in April. Before that, even though I didn't have any financial interest, I was still recognized as CEO and most of my actions were approved by Tihan. Because I had a lot of control, it is fair for me to take respective responsibilities.

However, after the take over, my control was "secretly" transferred to a bureaucratic team, without formal notice. Till today, no one knows my position at Bitcoinica and when it changed.

6 months, the company was secretly sold in November according to zhoutong.

I signed up in early April before the official announcement was made. Thought it was a good idea to earn some interest on BTC, so I had no open positions whatsoever. If the company was long sold by then I critizise strongly that such mundane information as a fricking CHANGE OF OWNER was withheld from the customers for weeks if not months!!!

Edit: If you really want to help why not talk to Bitcoinica consultancy about personally starting to pay back customers' deposits without open positions (aka those who will have no legal ways to complain about being treated unfairly and therefore likely won't take legal action) on your own account and get the money back once the consultancy has finalized their database?

did i sign up under your management, i signed up before 21/11/11?

Personal announcement:

I'll officially resign from Bitcoinica immediately after they have returned at least 50% of total amount owed, or when they ask me to resign, whichever is earlier.

As promised before, before my resignation, I will assist all Bitcoinica customers who signed up under my management with their claims and communication with the company. And this will be my only involvement about Bitcoin-related projects.

My new project, NameTerrific, will accept Bitcoins after the public launch in August, most likely via the new Mt. Gox merchant platform. However, if PayPal or the merchant bank objects, credit card processing will remain a priority.

Alright, I would imagine a shareholder running away with all assets away leaving the debt behind for his company. The shareholder should still be liable by common sense. Essentially the company has been robbed, even though the decision-maker permits so.

This is so, but only if veil of limited liability cannot be pierced and this might be not impossible under the circumstances. Limited companies have been declared a sham on many occasions before. Do not believe everything formation agents tell you. All I am saying is that this all not so black and white as some might think.

Anyway this is all just academic discussions. Since surely Bitcoin Consultancy guys will do the right thing and all will be sorted soon.

-- This is all about publicly available information. Nothing should be secret or any way official. --

The problem is, Bitcoinica LP is a Limited Partnership, with a General Partner being a limited company (it could be either Core Credit Ltd or Bitcoinica Consultancy Ltd, depending on their status and agreement). Most likely the limited company has no or very little capital. They can declare bankruptcy outright and no one will be able to do anything by legal actions.

The limited partner can't manage the company, so the bureaucracy isn't likely to come from Tihan.

EDIT:

It's worrying that the price of Bitcoin is moving. On the second day since the hack I had already advised them to immediately announce settlement plans, because there are at least 100K long and 100K short open positions (this was in publicly available charts). One cent means $2,000 disputed loss. ($0.50 means $100,000 disputed loss) The longs will want their positions to be recognised, while the shorts won't. And there will be associated opportunity costs as some people re-established their positions elsewhere to hedge, and some people didn't. There's no way to verify at all.

I still hope that they can come up with something fair for most customers. It's unfortunate that they keep ignoring my advice as the ex-operator of the platform.

Well, I feel very upset that people are not getting their funds back. But I can't do anything now. I have spent over half a year to build the brand, but it's suddenly destroyed by bureaucracy, which is something I hate the most in the business world.

I learned an important lesson: Being responsible for something that I don't have control over is one of the worst things in life.

I hope Bitcoinica Consultancy can do something, or at least say something immediately.

If this latter part is true, we might have a problem.

I'm wondering if this "legal wrangling" / bureaucratic hurdles might be Tihan (or whoever the owner is) trying to force bitcoinica consultancy out of their contract. Or maybe they're arguing over which party will be liable for the theft or potential loss of profits. Whatever it is, it feels like depositors are serving as hostages in these additional delays to the claims process.

I used your complete post as a search term wrapped in quotation marks on Google, and the following was the only result returned.

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.794583

I stated laughing after reading up to the comma of 6., knowing this was going to be a fun post, but just about fell off the porcelain stool when I reached Lithuanian New Year. Thanks, LG.

Back to reading, for I'm two pages behind. Hope the rest of this thread is just as good.

~Bruno~

Edit: Option 6 is currently in the lead, but I still have money on a long shot in this race--http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hq2kv-QQhIE.

Whatever payout process they use has to stand up to legal scrutiny if they end up in voluntary or involuntary liquidation. Giving an unfair preference to an unsecured creditor while insolvent can be a legal minefield which results in those who received preferential payments being required by the liquidator to disgorge the funds they received.