Bitcoin Forum

program

The Usagi provides.
The Usagi cares for you.
The Usagi wields terrible powers.
All hail the Usagi.

Well, they did provide some very useful advice... you can't deny that those that followed it are considerably better off now.

However, I must agree they quite overdid recently, going from pointing out legit concerns to sometimes plain trying to damage Usagi no matter what (why should they  give free advice to V.HRL investors on how to try and profit at his expenses (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=100800.msg1238660#msg1238660), for instance?), or just repeating the same points over and over... as someone else already pointed out, beating a dead horse is no use to anyone; nearly everybody on this forum has long made up his mind on the issues they point out, I believe, and having pages of rage and accusations is simply not worth it anymore. So for a sane discussion it's probably a wise idea to leave them out.

cytokene offered a swap with assets with that have a combined 5 day avg price equal to (actually slightly in excess off)  his bond IPO price, and he ate the losses.  So do I understand correctly you are doing the same and for each bond, a Nyan.B bondholder can pick and choose assets that have a combined 5 day price average of 1 BTC ?

That's already happened because people acted on  what usagi said the first time. It costs transfer fees both ways.

If I was still holding some .B's this would sound good to me.

Carrying over from the previous thread some points that I suspect are important.

In the first motion, Usagi has proposed being able to value some securities based on his/her own website.  Please do not let that happen.

In the second motion, his/her plan was to allow people to trade assets on a first come, first served basis.  I would argue that this screws over anyone not at the front of the line and thus violates his/her fiduciary duty to protect all shareholders equally.

I have a lot of respect for Usagi and have high hopes for an orderly and equitable shutdown, if a shutdown is indeed necessary.

They cant delete something when you quote it....

Really? What does the HRPT in OBSI.HRPT stand for again?

So the assets in NYAN.A did change.

Dont you need to liquidate all 3 funds and cant just decide to close one of them without winding the whole thing up ?

Thank you, that's what I was after.

On what planet? Its trading for 0.45 and its worth even less if I look at the assets. Your numbers are  woefully out of date or mistaken; you have "RMB" of FZB.A at 0.2 (its average is 0.021 and trading around zero), GSDPT is off by a factor 10x too,  obsi by at least a factor 2x. Your spot price seems  a little more correct, but they seem  outdated too, and even they show only  949 / 1543 = 0.6 BTC/share. There is no way you will be able to give everyone 1 BTC worth of assets without adding a lot of coins or other assets.

Would my quick math be correct if you used Spot numbers instead the NAV to be 0.61?

It's a question, not a critique, I understand the importance of what you trying to do, even if you take a lot of Flak for it.

I more than looked at it, I did the math, as did you (but you are ignoring it) and probably everyone with asks below 0.5
5day average trade price for your assets is 937 BTC, or 0.6 BTC per share and thats hopelessly optimistic, because there is not way anyone is going to be able to sell ADMINSORTED, V.HRL or most of the other shit at anything like last trade prices. Most of your assets have a combined bids of less than 1 BTC. If no one wants them, they arent worth anything. Thats where cytokene is so different; he offered a swap with shares that you could actually sell and get your coins back for, not worthless rubbish no one wants.

If you really think Nyan.B fund is worth anywhere near 1 BTC, why dont you put up bids?
You can have mine for 0.8 BTC, 20% profit for you!


Why dont you have a look at all of them?
BIF.P2P.LOANS is overvalued by >1000%
FZB.a is overvalued by infinity
OBSI.HRPT by >200%
CPA by 30%
etc

0.2? LOL.
It was never over 0.1, no one is even ASKING 0.2, let alone bid 1/10th of that.
https://glbse.com/asset/view/FZB.A

No, I'll just change the local rules. From now on local rules for this thread are that usagi must begin all posts with the following string "All hail the great and mighty MPOE-PR" and end all posts with the string "Praise be to the glorious MPOE-PR". Please edit your posts accordingly and modify the first post to reflect these new rules.

Ps. I've not notified the mods cause I'm lazy. Please notify them yourself.

Strange how the RMV of that one is 0.2, but there's 2123 shares available for 0.036 or less. I'm shocked Usagi hasn't purchased all the shares he could get at 1/6th their true value between his host of different funds. Someone's not doing their job as a fund manager.

I wouldn't dream of being wise with you, bro. You might come at me or something, and I have no desire to get spray tan on my clothes.

http://thechive.files.wordpress.com/2012/10/really-good-point-24.jpg?w=500&h=342

Usagi, you really did miss a zero in FZB.A's valuation. It has never ever  traded anywhere near 0.2, it IPO'd at 0.1 and its been steeply downhill ever since, If you valued it at 0.02 it might be defensible (its still double of the current highest bid and 400000x last trade), 0.2 is absolutely and utterly insane;  The site doesnt even work, isnt maintained and people woke up to the reality that even though its a good idea,  30% of  1/100,000th of a ~1 day development website isnt worth a fortune.. certainly not 60,000 BTC.

As for Adminsorted; it looks like a scam to me and it appears you are the only one buying it. Even if its not a scam, the total of bids is 0. You can claim its worth 1 BTC or 100BTC per share, if no one has an interest in buying it at any price, then its worth..  zero. If you dont believe me, put your shares up for sale and see who buys them at your "FMV".

The same goes for most of your other shares. You can say they are worth X but if the market is only willing to pay  1/2x or 1/3x, then how does that even make sense? You may think you know better than the market, but then you should act on it and your trackrecord shows your market prediction rate is... not very good and consistenly overoptimistic. Dont you learn from your blunders mistakes?

Lastly, allowing shareholders to pick and chose is a bad idea, because your idea of valuation is not in tune with the market at all. You would allow the first shareholders to pick up the shares that actually have a resale value close to 1BTC, and the others will be left with rubbish. Nice way to screw those who have faith in you.

One more thing
The fair market value is the price at which the property would change hands between a willing buyer and a willing seller, neither being under any compulsion to buy or to sell and both having reasonable knowledge of relevant facts.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_market_value

Show us your willing buyers for any of the assets you are listing well above GLSBE average. If there arent any, then your FMV isnt FMV.

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.

How do you get so warped NAV's for those portfolios?

UTC 16.20 2012.03.10 NYAN.B (if you actually hold what you have published) is about 0.50665 BTC and this is very generous.
Looks like you managed to pick up another 2651 OBSI.HRPT (now 8218). I bet all the share holders are ecstatic about that.
There is someone, who want 53 shares of that junk and is willing to pay 0.005302 (notice the .00 !) :)

What's the value of the fund after that change?

Been wondering about the .A bidwall myself. The few times I wanted to liquidate .A, there was no bidwall. I haven't seen one anytime recently either.

Im interested in the answer to these questions too

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.

Why would you change it to IPO price? What is your reasoning that fair market value is 10x the current highest bid and 5x the 5 day average?
Missing a zero could be an honest mistake.  Deliberately inflating your asset value by 10x is not.

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

Are you talking about FZB? I believe there is in fact negative news - multiple reports of users unable to start funding campaigns, multiple reports of users unable to get their coins back.

I would have more faith in "the same guy who runs Satoshidice" if I got the feeling he had time for other ventures.

There is no rule that allows you to ban anyone asking or speaking up against your bull shit. If there is, can I have the link for this forum rule? (not your made up rule, that helps you in spreading lies and incorrect information about the NAV etc of those portfolios, you have single handedly destroyed.


So, you are refusing to answer honest questions? How long do you think you can keep lying to pole on this forum?
What if they all start asking those same questions but with different wording?

 

There have been reports of the site not working, and the response has been slow to say the least. It appears the site is working, but there is not a whole lot of activity on it, which means that the original estimations were incorrect. The website also has not been updated in a while, and the longer they wait to add features the more likely it is that somebody else will make something as good or better. The price of bitcoins has doubled since it was IPOed, and while that increases the value of this company slightly, I would not say the value has doubled. I would actually call the value somewhere between 0.03 and 0.02 (I would buy at 0.02 but sell at 0.03), I think the recent sales have just been people exiting the market due to the Goat/Nefario kerflufle, but since the volume has been so low it is hard to get a meaningful price from the market.

The complaints of bad service are on a separate thread, in "marketplace" or somewhere, I will see if I can find it ... found it: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=106242.0 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=106242.0)

My question is, what is your answer to deprived's questions. They seem quite valid questions,  I see no reason why I or anyone else should waste time rephrasing them.

BTW this local rule ban stuff makes you look like a 12 year old trying to weasel his way out of something. Its not reflecting well on you at all.

Others have touched upon this already, but the answer is that it doesnt matter. If it interests you, you should ask the people selling why they are selling at that price, but the price is not what you think its worth, nor is it what you ask, its what a fool is willing to pay. Ever since the IPO,  no fool has been willing to pay anything like IPO price. The biggest fool right now is bidding 0.012 and for almost no shares. The only real volume is at a 10x lower price even.  100x what you say is a fair price. 1000x what you had in your books
You might want to think about that for a second.

Ok, I will ask them on other people's behalf.

How many of those 1100 shares were bought back from the public via GLBSE as opposed to bought back at "RMV" from your own companies via private transfer? 

Where is the contractually required bidwall at .99 for NYAN.A ? Is CPA still honouring its contract for NYAN.A ?

These two sound like a good start.

Since this is being asked repeatedly I assume you have prepared a statement?

Thats not an answer, its a rant.
You sold Nyan.A as a zero risk asset with the explicit guarantees of NAV and .99 rebuy.
It doesnt matter that you say you are trying when in reality, you are doing neither. NAV has fallen well below 1 BTC and there is no bid wall. There is an askwall and I expect it will be gone in a few days replaced by the bidwall you promised in your contract.

As for the reason why people are selling, in case you are interested, it has nothing to do with "trolls", it has everything to do with you proving yourself dishonest and or incapable. Its clear to me the CPA guarantee is absolutely worthless, NYAN.A is not worth what you say it is,  and now that you are closing  Nyan.B for a price far above its actual NAV, it doesnt take a genius to figure out where this is headed.

Hint: its not above 1 BTC.

Because Twitter advertising is a waste of time, money, and energy. IMO, .02 is FMV for FZB.  unless you've got some earning numbers to support it. Further, Twitter isn't the most reliable when it comes to operating through their platform....they tend towards arbitrary rule changes (sound familiar, usagi?) Finally, basing a company completely off another company's platform, fixing all your revenue to that other company's performance, and continued production of the product yours is based off of, and contued permission/potential for you to actually base your product off theirs is a recipe for a short lived business. Twitter could kill FZB in an instant with a rule change, or in other ways changing their platform. There's plent of example of, say MSFT doing this to companies. I said most of this (to Erik) when FZB first came out. It's still true now. If I needed one more thing: Erik seems to move quickly onto new projects - I don't suspect FZB will be much improved over its life.

In fact, I wouldn't even pay .02 for it. It's done nothing but fall since IPO. (usagi's favorite kind of issue to invest it!! :) )

Actually he's trying to make a solid point about FZB valuation which was an active discussion here already - there is significant risk involved with depending on twitter as a business model. This is just a good example of how your local rules are just causing you to make an ass of yourself at the expense of yourself and your investors.

That being said I'd agree with others that the whole reason to buy insurance from CPA - a distinct company on paper - is to provide an appropriate bidwall for NYAN.A. In now way is the market supposed to play into that. CPA is an insurance company who is now being asked, and required by contract, to provide their services. Is there a reason CPA cannot make good on it's contract?

I'll just leave this here. Glad to see you've quickly recovered recovered from your three wine spritzers, usagi.

How solvent are your companies if you've lost your life savings and your wife is going to kill you?

With this GLBSE thing, I hope that I'm still a shareholder in a few days.

I'm starting to think we should treat the site as though it is in a sort of beta.

GLBSE has had wording on the main page that it is in beta as long as I have been using it.

While this sort of thing will probably be embarrassing and in the long term and I'm sure Usagi isn't particularly excited about that post, who cares? I know I've been on the forums drunk before, it can be quite fun and makes a lot of the bullshit much funnier (I personally ended up going off on someone spamming links in the pyraming thread). That being said six hours (per timestamps) is plenty of time to sober up, worst case is he's got a hangover at this point. That being said I'd say it does mean he gives a shit about his investors and realizes that the situation sucks no matter how you look at it.

GLBSE might end up like GMail, there's probably going to be a very long beta and/or "beta" period. To keep from going too far off-topic, the best thread I've seen so far is at https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=115467 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=115467). Large upgrade/change, botched update, or FSA (British version of the SEC) looking into it and there are conversations with lawyers happening.

To rephrase my earlier question and avoid Guruvan's post. When do you believe that CPA or yourself will be able to maintain a consistent bidwall at 0.99 for NYAN.A again? As CPA is an insurance company and not an investment company the value of the markets should be of little consequence. Also, do you believe the interconnectedness of your companies is affecting their abilities to function?

You got drunk, I don't care, and I agree that it'd be a pretty weak point to attack you on. I figured the drunken post might be not be one of your proudest moments but I know you do hold your companies in high regard and that's admirable, I'd be more worried if you didn't.

The current plan is for GLBSE to come back up at some point, what happens is up in the air still since no official news has been published. We all just have to wait and see. And while GLBSE is down there's nothing to be done about any of it anyway, that's not the worry.

What I'm wondering is (provided GLBSE is functioning as expected of an exchange) when can CPA provide the appropriate bidwall for NYAN.A? Or is CPA not currently able to provide for a bidwall at this time?

Usagi owns some shares in  BitcoinRS for NYAN.B and if its any consolation one of our dogs just won lol.

http://youtu.be/NTD7pmqojys (http://youtu.be/NTD7pmqojys)

If all else fails there is at least one thing not related to bitcoin where NYAN made a difference, and still holds shares even if glbse goes down. We have enough dogs to keep going for the next 3-5 years without any more investment, maybe longer.

And bitcoinrs put 200+ BTC in Nyan. One loop after another. Small wonder if things go downhill they suddenly come crashing down. Dont you guys understand what you are doing?


That someone is you, right?
And for the record, I  do expect you to sell your personal stuff if thats what it takes to meet your contractual obligations that dont mention a "void if GLBSE prices go down" clause. FFS you run an "insurance" company, the only point of having an insurance is for when things do go down. An insurance company that takes premiums when there is no problem, and doesnt pay out when there are problems isnt an insurance company, its a scam.


IF GLSBE closes I expect a claim code system as with Goat. So you will know where to send the coins you owe to your investors. And why do you say "if"? You have for ~350 BTC worth of hardware on your NAV sheet. Surely you mean "when"? You could just cancel the order and refund the people who paid for it in the first place.

It says your value may decline. No shit einstein, thats only a worry for CPA shareholders who are already screwed anyway. Where does it say a "lage (sic) or widespread default" discharges you of your liabilities? Particularly regarding Nyan.A.

Anyway, if GLBSE is closing down due to the SEC, you have far bigger worries.


Common violations that may lead to SEC investigations include:

Misrepresentation or omission of important information about securities  Check
 
Manipulating the market prices of securities Check
 
Stealing customers' funds or securities
 
Violating broker-dealers' responsibility to treat customers fairly Check
 
Insider trading (violating a trust relationship by trading on material, non-public information about a security) Check
 
Selling unregistered securities. Check

http://www.sec.gov/news/newsroom/howinvestigationswork.html

Its kinda redundant if glbse doesnt come back  :P

just in case

What policy?  Anyone is allowed to post here.  Hell, they still let Atlas post here.  You clearly don't have the power to ban users in this specific thread, and you have zero authority to compel them to stop.  

If you don't want people casting light on your insurance scam, don't run one.

I find it funny that "free speech" only seems to apply to "stuff that I like" and not "stuff I don't like." 

q: We paid for insurance and it is time for that insurance to do it's contractually obligated function.


a: YOU ARE AN IDIOT AND BANNED FROM MY THREAD

I literally just saw this happen. How long until Usagi gets the scammer tag? NYAN may not have been a complete scam, but CPA most certainly seems to have been an outright fraud.