Topic: Usagi: falsifying NAVs, manipulating share prices and misleading investors. - page 29. (Read 92686 times)

Why? What's changed? Nothing.

I'm still not a scammer.


Thanks for admitting you're a troll and an asshole.

Time for the scammer tag.

We also need hero tags for the people who trolled this fuck.

No he did it himself after GLBSE went down.

Huh, I was reading the threads when Usagi had turned out to be pulling a lot of shady tricks and unethical business practices (circular investing in his own funds to control the price and inflating his value shamelessly with imagined numbers) and looking back over the old threads they have been scrubbed. Almost all relevant posts are gone, there are just a couple quoted posts missed but most posts quoting his posts are gone too. Someone on the moderation staff would have to have done that...

This forum is probably the worst thing for Bitcoin right now.

I am interested how you will answer these questions as well?

How many of those 1100 shares were bought back from the public via GLBSE as opposed to bought back at "FMV" from your own companies via private transfer?  Nyan seems to have managed to divest itself of nearly all its assets - the assets that supposedly secure nyan.a and nyan.b

"Holders of NYAN.B are guaranteed second claim (after holders of NYAN.A) to any holdings, bitcoins or other assets of NYAN."

Shame those assets all vanished back to CPA (by selling off its nyan.a/b/c ahead of other people trying to sell then buying back its own shares from CPA).

Oh - and:

"The value of NYAN.A shares is guaranteed by CPA and NYAN against capital loss via the reasonably timely maintenance of a bidwall at 0.99 bitcoins per fund unit."

bidwall's still missing - has been for days.  145 nyan.a shares on market at .99 or less and only a trading volume of <5 BTC worth of them in last 5 days.

Yes - I saw your local rule thing.  No need to quote me to point it out.  But if YOU won't follow what's in the OP of your threads (e.g. the nyan.a bidwall) then you can hardly expect anyone else to.

How is that relevant to this thread?  Well CPA are supposed to be guaranteeing nyan.a by maintaining that bid-wall (your words, quoted above, not mine).  If they can't do that then their guarantee of value for nyan.a is defunct - and you shouldn't be closing down nyan.b before nyan.a.  Normally in a tranched security the senior tranche (nyan.a here) is closed out first.  Whilst nyan.a had a credible guarantee it seemed reasonable to not enforce that.  But if CPA is now refusing/unable to honour its guarantee (and YES - you knew it wasn't: I pointed it out a few times before) then you really should be closing out the senior tranche first.

(FTFY)

Which may of course be the biggest problem when those bodies are contacted.

Certainly, in the US, it's a significant issue to sell securities to unaccredited, non-sophisticated investors (especially unregistered securities) - thus it's a potential issue for and foreign citizen selling securities to US citizens. The US has brass balls when enforcing money regulations. (it's illegal to sell securities to non-sophisticated investors because a fraudulent issuer could present a rosy picture, much as usagi has, and coerce more money out of non-sophisticated investors than they can actually afford to lose....i.e. the old man's life savings)

Also, just because a security is unregistered doesn't mean it's unregulated.

Furthermore they are the bodies in those countries that investigate securities fraud, which is what I certainly suspect is going on here. It's not like those agencies will not investigate suspected securities fraud simply because the security wasn't registered. Just because it's bitcoin, not dollars or yen, doesn't mean they won't investigate either. The SEC doesn't care if investments are denominated in USD, EUR, JPY, coal, gold, or bitcoins. Investments are investments; the definition of "security" is quite broad.