Bitcoin Forum

If you are a large investor I will give you 10% off shares of NYAN.A or BMF. I am desperate to make this work and I think that you can see that with the way I am backing this with my own personal money. I have absolutely no intention of giving up and I will fight for my companies till  the very end.

BMF -- CPA -- NYAN
October Special Letter to Shareholders
by: Usagi

Dear Investor;

  My name is usagi, and as you know I run three separate companies on the GLBSE:

1. BMF -- Bitcoin Mining Fund -- a sector fund which only invests in mining securities and mining hardware.
2. CPA -- The Bitcoin Insurance Company
3. NYAN -- Nyancat Financial, a CDO-like general market fund.

In this letter I would like to address many of the concerns people have raised recently about the businesses I run and reassure investors of my plan for the future.

The first and most obvious question is, "what the hell is going on!" but I think to understand that, you will need to know what happened. So I'll start there.

First, BMF.
Back in may/june, I launched BMF as my flagship business. We raised around 1500 bitcoins. However, we were fighting an uphill battle as a sector fund investing in mining. The difficulty was rising by solid percentage points each week, and the USD/BTC price kept rising.. and rising.. and rising. BMF did well considering the value of our hardware. When BMF IPO'd, we started at 1 BTC a share. 1 BTC was worth $5 and a single was worth $599. In other words, one share of BMF was worth 1/120 of a Bitforce FPGA single. If one bitforce single was 832 mh/s, that means one share of BMF produced income valued at around 6.9 mhash/share. GIGAMINING, to compare, produced income corresponding to 5mhash/share.

As the weeks turned into months, the bitcoin price steadily rose. Today, one bitcoin is worth $12.70 and as a result the price of BMF has fallen. It's true that BMF has lost money in terms of bitcoins, but look at the reality of the company's operation: At 0.48/share today, 1 share of BMF is now worth $6.10 -- this means one share of BMF is now worth 1/100 of a single. By careful trading and expansion, we increased the intrinsic value of BMF -- we increased our effective hardware under management (via ownership in funds).

In other words, while bonds like GIGAMINING are still worth 5mhash/share today, BMF went from 6.9mHash/share to 8.47mHash/share. We gained. I know it doesn't look like it, but we did a LOT better than mining bonds. We did what any normal company would do.

But the exchange rate placed BMF in a difficult situation. Many people believed we lost tons of money -- this was not true. We were simply exposed to exchange rate risk because we invested entirely in mining. ALL mining stocks went down. GIGAMINING went from 1.50 to .55. We went down from 1 to .50. So yes, from the standpoint of bitcoins, we did in fact lose money, just like everyone else. And I'm sorry, but that does not make me a scammer.

If the USD/BTC price stays the same or goes down, BMF will go up in bitcoins. The BTC price cannot rise forever.

So, what the hell is going on with BMF? It's simple. Nothing. We're plugging along, paying divs and reinvesting. BMF has a bright future ahead of it. And, what's more, I have a very special suprise for BMF investors going forward, which I will tell you later on in this article. But first, let's talk CPA.

CPA
After I launched BMF, I was excited at the prospect of launching a "real business" on the GLBSE. So I got together with some of my investor buddies online and I launched CPA. CPA was a great idea, it really was. We sold about 2,500 BTC worth of shares. Maybe 3,500 -- somewhere in that range. The problem with CPA is that no one would trust us. After a couple of weeks it became apparent that we couldn't sign any contracts because everyone thought I was a scammer. Here I was, the new kid on the block, with BMF and CPA and 5,000 coins of other people's money. So I spoke with the members of CPA's round table and we came up with a plan. First, we would invest into the community.

We put the money into the following areas:
1,000 bitcoins into BMF
500 bitcoins with Patrick harnett (Starfish Bank)
500 bitcoins into Gamma Bitcoin Fund
500 bitcoins with Hashking
500 bitcoins with Imsaguy's EIEIO fund.

It looked something like that.

Magically, as soon as we did that, we started signing contracts -- a lot of contracts! We signed a few thousand (bitcoins worth of) contracts for Pirate. One particular contract with ciuciu was valued at over 2,000 coins. Another with kakobrekla was worth over 1,100 coins. We had many smaller contracts as well. Due to the extreme popularity of pirate insurance, we decided to cancel all existing contracts (except Kakobrekla's) and start YARR.

First, why we didn't cancel kakobrekla's contract. The idea was that we would risk 1,000 bitcoins on insuring pirate. If pirate blew up, we were planning to pay, and come out as the heroes of the day. I truly believed that if I paid that money, everyone would love CPA and sign contracts with us. It was a calculated risk. I told myself that it would be the best free advertising we could ever buy.

ok, so YARR. We sold 2,800 shares of YARR at 1.5 bitcoins per share.

Then about a month later pirate collapsed. What did we get out of YARR? We lost 100 bitcoins. not a huge amount. We basically bought back all the shares. There's still 30 or 40 out I think, some small number. People are holding out trying to sell at 1.20 and up. Well, what can I say. A contract is a contract, they will be bought out at 1. So overall YARR was another way that CPA proved we could be trusted. We bought back 2,800 bitcoins worth of YARR shares.

And we paid out 1100 to Kakobrekla as well.

We saved asses, there is no doubt. We saved people's ass big time. BIG TIME.

But then something terrible happened. Gamma bitcoin fund was in trouble because of JRO. DeadTerra shut down withdrawls for 2 weeks. During this time, GBF started to lose more and more money. When we finally got back the funds, there wasn't even 400 left in CPA's account, and we had to trade for assets. We were hurt but it wasn't major.

Then Hashking blew up.

Then Imsaguy blew up.

We managed to get 400 out of Starfish Bank, bless Patrick's immortal soul, but the last 100 (which is the last 100 we owe, to Kakobrekla) cannot be repaid (until who knows when?)

All of the people I just mentioned, incidentally, are doing their best to pay us back. We have recieved payments (some recent, some not) from all of them. The point is that CPA does not have the money NOW. As a result we have set ALL of the money we held with them to zero.

So what's left? CPA has less than 40,000 shares outstanding, and here are our assets:

1,213 shares of BMF
1 share of YARR
283 shares of NYAN.C
604 shartes of OBSI.HRPT

In the end, the only thing we have of value in CPA is the mining fund I run myself. So all in all, CPA is worth about 0.02 per share right now.

Now let's talk NYAN briefly, before I explain to you what my plan is for the future.

Nyancat Financial. Ahh, the magic of a CDO. NYAN.A is fully insured and guaranteed by CPA. When investots demanded OUT, I sold assets and bought back over 450 shares of NYAN.A and over 700 shares of NYAN.B in just 2 weeks. But I am not superman. And many NYAN investors want to know what is going on. It's simple, the market is crashing, and while we do our best nothing can stop a general market fund from tanking when the general market is tanking.

That being said, the NYAN funds are doing suprisingly well. Except for NYAN.C, which was basically 50% pirate and 50% OBSI.HRPT. Both of them crashed, so NYAN.C is worth zero. In almost every NYAN letter to shareholders I cautioned people against investing too much into NYAN.C -- let's hope they listened. What does the NYAN.C contract say?

Investments are chosen entirely based on their interest rate without regard to the risk profile.

Well, I am sorry that pirate and obsi and V.HRL and BIF.LOANS and god knows what all crashed. I provided you the chance to invest in a diversified portfolio of risky-risky securities. Nothing like that existed on the market. Unfortunately it turned out to be a bad investment choice, however there is hope. Hope for NYAN as well as for CPA, which I will explain in a moment, in my plan for the future.

So, what about NYAN.B? Well when FPGAMINING and JRO's ventures (BDT, REBATE, and ZIP.A) all crashed, we lost over 100 bitcoins. So I transferred assets from .C into .B and tried to sell them down. I also transferred some of .C's assets to .A. I was luckily able to sell all the high risk assets in A, and now A has no high risk assets. But .B had to take risky assets from .C, and there simply was no time to deal with the situation. I was faced with multiple defaults, all at the same time:

1. BDK.BND crashed
2. FPGAMINING crashed
3. UDN went to zero (BMF went down from .60 to .50)
4. Goat's assets were delisted (we had 25 BTC of goat's TYGRR.BOND-A in NYAN.A)
5. OBSI.HRPT started crashing
6. The market crashed in general and stuff got sold down

There was almost nothing I could do -- nowhere I could invest that was not blowing up. NYAN.B is mandated as follows:

Investments are chosen entirely based on sector; we seek to invest in the bitcoin community at large; but again, no mining, and no pirate.

Basically, NYAN.B is the middle of the road, company fund. We invest in Satoshidice, we invest in BitVPS. We invest in Bitcoin Racing Syndicate. Feedzebirds advertising agency. We invest in lots of stuff like that. A lot of these companies are doing OK but for some reason the market is trashing them. FZB for example, IPO'd at 0.1 -- today it is worth 0.02, much like CPA. But there's nothing wrong with FeedZeBirds. One of the guys who runs it (Erik) also runs SatoshiDice. On September 27th just 5 days ago there was news that Ira was hiring a developer to work on a new webpage, and that FZB would partner or be integrated with coinapult. So why did the market sell them down? We really don't know. But that is why NYAB.B is having trouble -- because honest, good companies are being sold down and we are suffering the consequences.

Many people are upset that "usagi is stealing money" or "scamming". Nothing could be further from the truth. We invested good money in companies like Feed Ze Birds -- we invested over 100 bitcoins in them. And now they are being sold down. It's not our fault, and we honestly believe there is value in Feed Ze birds and many of our other investments. We are simply caught in a crashing market, and there is nothing we can do. Or is there?

Usagi's Plan for the Future

This is the part you have been waiting for. This is what is going to make everything right -- even the stuff that isn't our fault.

Right now, it should be obvious that I have staked everything on one cental point -- BMF.

CPA owns over 1,200 BMF.

NYAN.A owns over 1,000 BMF.

I also own, personally, 800 shares of BMF (250 of which are non-saleable management fee shares). My personal ownership is being mentioned because it will play a part in my plan.

So here's the plan. CPA is still in operation. Based on our NAV of 0.02, we are making around 2% a week on our BMF holdings. I know that CPA has lost a lot of money but it has a FUTURE. We are in talks now for some major contracts, and we still have contracts with Luceo's VPS, and several other customers. CPA has a future. CPA is making money, and although it would be foolish for us to pay a dividend in this situation CPA is by no means out of the picture. We will FIGHT. We will WIN. We will persevere. That is that. News of CPA's demise is laughably premature.

CPA is going to be a big company someday. Mark my words.

And what of NYAN? NYAN.C is worthless now, isn't it? No, not really. Notice how NYAN.A holds over 1,000 BMF shares. That provides an income of 10 BTC a week or more. This alone is about enough to pay the dividend on NYAN.A and have funds overflow into NYAN.B. And it isn't like NYAN.B doesn't make any money. Slowly but surely, we will rebuild NYAN.B, and overflow into NYAN.C. Those shares which were worthless? They'll still pay dividends. It won't be easy, but I am staking NYAN's future, as well as CPA's on BMF. I just can't trust the money with anyone else.

What about NYAN.B? Now is the time to close NYAN.B. Let's agree to quit while we're ahead. NYAN.B has assets which are very close to 1-- hopefully close enough to allow investors to get out cleanly. Since inception, NYAN has paid more than .13 bitcoins of interest per share. That is substantial. Investors might not get 1 bitcoin if OBSI.HRPT goes to zero, but if we can sell out at current prices .95 is not out of the question. So NYAN.B is under aggressive buyback right now. It's NOT expanding. Please don't sell your NYAN.B too cheaply! Remember, it recieves income from NYAN.A beyond the 1% NYAN.A makes.

Now, NYAN.A. NYAN.A is the KEY to ALL of Nyan. Read this NEXT part VERY carefully because it is VERY VERY IMPORTANT.

Right now, as of right now, NYAN.A has 956 shares outstanding and owns (among other assets) 1026 shares of BMF. These BMF shares pay about 0.01 per share per week.

That means NYAN.A does not actually need any other asset to support it's dividend, just the extant shares of BMF. For the record however, BMF is only about 50% of the portfolio of NYAN.A. So NYAN.A generates considerable overflow into NYAN.B and NYAN.C. Our plan for NYAN is to use this overflow to buy back shares of NYAN.B and support NYAN.C shareholders. This plan will work, but it may take up to 3 or 4 months.

Now, BMF.

BMF is really the key, isn't it? Everything now depends on BMF.

In order to make this work I have to make an effort to defend the share price of BMF at .50 per share. This will be difficult as the price of bitcoins is continuing to rise and ALL ASSETS. ALL BUSINESSES will decline in price. But I will try. I will make one last effort, one great, giant last stand.

The first act I will perform is to voluntarily return the 250 management shares of BMF that I own. This will raise the value of BMF to over .50 bitcoins and encourage people to invest in BMF.

Seconly, tomorrow morning I will buy 200 bitcoins on mtgox (well, I will buy them on friday, tomorrow I will wire the money). I control via personal account and funds:

1026 BMF in NYAN.A
1213 BMF in CPA
 963 BMF in my personal account (250 of which are management shares).

There are currently 5,132 outstanding shares of BMF. This means that I control 3202/5132 of the fund. After I return my management fee shares I will 'control' 2952 shares of 4882. In other words, /other people/ own 1,930 shares of BMF. 200 bitcoins will currently buy 400+ shares of BMF; just over 20% of what other people besides myself have.

These 200 bitcoins will be used in 2 ways:

1. I will order two Bitforce FPGA singles for BMF;
2. I will defend the price of BMF at .50 per share (or .49 until BMF starts selling shares to buy hardware).
3. I will loan the rest of my current personal stake in BMF (~750 shares) to NYAN to defend the price of NYAN.A and NYAN.B along with CPA.

I believe this push will encourage people to invest in BMF. As BMF gets more and more hardware, it will increase in value and in cashflow and it will help NYAN to buy back NYAN.B and support NYAN in general; it will also help CPA grow.

I have staked everything on BMF. I'm pouring my heart into this. I am transferring my management fee shares back as we speak.

The value of BMF is now decidenly over .50 per share. NYAN.A, B and C have a future. CPA has a furture. BMF has a very bright future.

I hope you are with me on this. I will defend BMF because it is the right thing to do. Please recognize I am doing my best here and that a crashing mining market really is not my fault.

If you buy shares of BMF or NYAN.A it will help me. I will do my best for you as my shareholder. If you have any questions or comments, please e-mail me at bmf@tsukino.ca.

If you are a large investor I will give you 10% off shares of NYAN.A or BMF. I am desperate to make this work and I think that you can see that with the way I am backing this with my own personal money. I have absolutely no intention of giving up and I will fight for my companies till  the very end.

BMF: CAMELOT LIVES! We will get thru this! One way or another!

---

one last thing. It's 4:12 AM right now. 4am, 5am every night. I don't know how this keeps happening but my schedule is ruined. I'm really tired from all this. I've been working and communicating with people a lot on here recently. Please stop calling me a scammer ok? I really don't make much money for the work I do, and now that I have given up my management fees I make nothing. If it is really not obvious to you that I'm not a scammer then anything is a scammer. milk is a scammer. Ok? So i'm not a scammer. I have a job too, so I need to go to sleep. This letter is going to have to last you quite a while. I need to focus on my work now because this has been draining me. And after all who do you think is going to pay for the 200 bitcoins I am buying tomorrow. So give it a rest please.

So what's left? CPA has less than 40,000 shares outstanding, and here are our assets:

1,213 shares of BMF
1 share of YARR
283 shares of NYAN.C
604 shartes of OBSI.HRPT

In the end, the only thing we have of value in CPA is the mining fund I run myself. So all in all, CPA is worth about 0.02 per share right now.

BMF is really the key, isn't it? Everything now depends on BMF.

[Local Rules : Anyone can post in this thread, even people who are confused over their gender, can't do basic math, view failure as doing well and in general lack any idea of how to run a business]

GIVING AWAY MONEY

Think this shows just how dumb usagi is.

QUOTE OF ENTIRE POST

Quoting entire post - just so everyone can see what I was responding to in case it changes.

Not only is this sort of insurance cover wrong and meaningless - it's also specifically against the contract of CPA.  I quote:

"5d. limited segregatability (de-risking sector default/widespread default)
To mitigate the risk of the default of an entire sector, THE CPA will seek to issue no more than 25% of it's coverage to any particular sector and will and to not insure assets using other assets from the same or similar sector. For example, we will avoid securing assets of a mining company with assets from other mining companies. In cases where this is unavoidable we will limit segregatability to pay claims on a first-come-first-serve basis, with the actual contract holders for the default event taking first priority. "

Now, inadvertently ending up in this situation is NOT (of itself) a breach of the contract.  But CPA SHOULD be acting to get its funds properly segregated quickly - right now EVERY insurance policy it has out rests on a single asset (BMF) which doesn't exactly have a stellar record of growth expressed in BTC.  And, whine all you want, about how it's gained in USD - how many of CPA's insurance policies are denominated in USD? (I could be wrong here - it may well be that CPA actually doesn't have any/many other policies out).

But it does raise the question:  WHEN did CPA's holdings in BMF go over 25%?  HOW did they get to nearly 100% without it ever being noticed?  Has CPA actually been BUYING more BMF even after it had passsed its own 25% rule?

So, let's get this clear:

Half (roughly) of nyan.a's holdings are BMF.
BMF is insured by CPA.
CPA's only assets of any note are BMF.

Its even worse than that, CPA also insures Nyan.A.

NYAN ("the customer") will be indemnified (by CPA) against loss defined
   as a NAV (Net Asset Value) of NYAN.A less than 1 per unit.
http://www.tsukino.ca/cpa/customers/account-15/

Was actually a typo which I'll correct - 2nd line was meant to say "Nyan.a is insured by CPA".

I am not sure you are applying this section correctly. The way I see it, this is dealing with *insurance* not *investments*. This section says that no more than 25% of the insurance policies sold will cover the same sector, however you want to define sector. The issue with BMF is more that all of CPA's investments (capital) is in one place. This is a huge red flag, a disaster waiting to happen, as you pointed out, but this section of the contract just does not apply.

The rest of what you said is good though.

Not a typo. Unless you accidentally typed the truth. BMF is insured by CPA as well!

 BMF ("the customer") will be indemnified (by CPA) against loss defined
   as a NAV (Net Asset Value) of less than 1 per unit.
http://www.tsukino.ca/cpa/customers/account-12/

edit: well, you know that since you mention it already, but it doesnt make it any less true,

I am not sure you are applying this section correctly. The way I see it, this is dealing with *insurance* not *investments*. This section says that no more than 25% of the insurance policies sold will cover the same sector, however you want to define sector. The issue with BMF is more that all of CPA's investments (capital) is in one place. This is a huge red flag, a disaster waiting to happen, as you pointed out, but this section of the contract just does not apply.

The rest of what you said is good though.

I think it is possible to gain knowledge as you go, but the scale of your business should never exceed the scale of your capability (YARR).

Well.. you could always insure it with infinite Ego if you lack capability and/or expertise, I suppose  ::)

Anyway.. Is this going to be the "Best of Usagi" thread? - I'm sure some psychology or economics major will end up owing their degree to Usagis flamboyant use of BistroMath and rampant self-denial, would be nice if they had a comprehensive catalog to choose from,  I think it should at least make 'Movie of the Week' ;D

BTW: Anyone actually understand how "NYAN"(no .A .B or .C) fits into the Tetrahedron scheme of things?

Usagi should be viewed as a case study regarding what happens when a person with nearly zero knowledge of finance and business tries to manage a venture (let alone multiple ventures at once.)

I don't believe usagi ever truly understood how this sort of offering should be properly structured - as is clearly demonstrated by various of my points above.

Aug 15 00:22:52 <mircea_popescu>   mkay so i'm about to offer a proper CD, three tiered.
Aug 15 00:23:32 <Diablo-D3>   require 15 mhash per trade
Aug 15 00:23:57 <mircea_popescu>   if anyone knows of bond issuers that are neither pirate nor mining exposed, and owned by really well known supertrustworthy people i wanna hear.
Aug 15 00:23:58 <usagi>   A three tiered CD?
Aug 15 00:24:01 <mircea_popescu>   yes.
Aug 15 00:24:54 <usagi>   mircea: http://tensionhead26.deviantart.com/art/Black-Sabbath-devil-34718908
Aug 15 00:25:56 <Diablo-D3>   usagi: see pm.
Aug 15 00:26:21 <mircea_popescu>   yes, i am devil.
Aug 15 00:26:32 <teek>   two of my bonds are not pirate or mining exposed
Aug 15 00:26:38 <teek>   there are others
Aug 15 00:26:48 <usagi>   TEEK.A is fully guaranteed
Aug 15 00:26:57 <mircea_popescu>   lettuce look into this teek.
Aug 15 00:27:50 *   Chaaaang-Noi has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
Aug 15 00:27:52 <assbot>   [MPEX] [S.MPOE] 4200 @ 0.00036438 = 1.5304 BTC [-]
Aug 15 00:28:41 <mircea_popescu>   teek : 10k issued 586 total volume since day 1 ?
Aug 15 00:28:50 <Diablo-D3>   usagi: see pm now.
Aug 15 00:28:54 *   Isepick (~chillin@fl-184-5-24-15.dhcp.embarqhsd.net) has joined #bitcoin-assets
Aug 15 00:30:02 <teek>   mircea_popescu: something like that.. seems the interest is too low, everyone wants pirate rates
Aug 15 00:30:03 <teek>   :P
Aug 15 00:30:21 <mircea_popescu>   i hear you.
Aug 15 00:30:26 <usagi>   It's the same with nyan, everyone buys .c, NO ONE buys .a or even .b
Aug 15 00:30:43 <usagi>   And if I close sales... the price shoots up, and no one buys a or b
Aug 15 00:30:48 <usagi>   thats stupid
Aug 15 00:31:05 <mircea_popescu>   the ideea here is that im tranching 500 btc of mpoe bonds (yielding ~5% per month) + 500 btc of harnett's (yielding 1% per week).
Aug 15 00:31:29 <mircea_popescu>   i can't paste that with stuff doing 0.3% per week, even tho i understand that 15% pa is significant.
Aug 15 00:32:36 <teek>   tranching?
Aug 15 00:32:51 <Luceo>   mircea_popescu: If you offer 15% outside bitcoin they'd call it a HYIP :P
Aug 15 00:32:51 <mircea_popescu>   you know how cd's work right ?
Aug 15 00:32:53 <Luceo>   or a ponzi
Aug 15 00:32:56 *   Chaaaang-Noi (~J@mo-184-6-53-35.dhcp.embarqhsd.net) has joined #bitcoin-assets
Aug 15 00:32:57 <Luceo>   in Bitcoin its too low :D
Aug 15 00:33:01 <mircea_popescu>   Luceo and for a good reason.
Aug 15 00:33:13 <mircea_popescu>   i fully understand this, and it's ap roblem, but it can't be resolved overnight.
Aug 15 00:33:23 <mircea_popescu>   there must be a popped ponzi first for people to learn.
Aug 15 00:34:20 *   copumpkin has quit (Quit: Computer has gone to sleep.)
Aug 15 00:36:51 <Luceo>   People still wont learn :/

[...]

Aug 15 00:49:18 <kakobrekla>   im afraid this is going to be a pump and dump
Aug 15 00:49:33 <usagi>   I will certainly sell at .5
Aug 15 00:49:36 <usagi>   Maybe a little at .3
Aug 15 00:49:49 <usagi>   1-3-5-8-13
Aug 15 00:49:59 <usagi>   price points.
Aug 15 00:50:21 <assbot>   [GLBSE] [FOO.PPPPT] 5 @ 1.0001 = 5.0005 BTC [-]
Aug 15 00:50:39 <usagi>   The reason why is because each price point represents a new wave of investors after the old wave has covered their risk
Aug 15 00:50:47 <DeaDTerra>   evening people :)
Aug 15 00:50:55 *   rdponticelli (~rdpontice@200-081-038-072.wireless.movistar.net.ar) has joined #bitcoin-assets
Aug 15 00:51:07 <mircea_popescu>   <usagi> 1-3-5-8-13 < what's this ?
Aug 15 00:51:11 <usagi>   The next wave will take it to .3 when it sinks into the market that ASICMINER is real
Aug 15 00:51:11 <mircea_popescu>   heya DeaDTerra
Aug 15 00:51:18 <assbot>   [GLBSE] [FOO.PPPPT] 7 @ 1.0001 = 7.0007 BTC [-]
Aug 15 00:51:20 <assbot>   [GLBSE] [FOO.PPPPT] 23 @ 1 = 23 BTC [-]
Aug 15 00:51:24 <assbot>   [GLBSE] [OBSI.HRPT] 93 @ 0.1047 = 9.7371 BTC

Aug 15 00:51:25 <assbot>   [GLBSE] [OBSI.HRPT] 7 @ 0.1048 = 0.7336 BTC

Aug 15 00:51:32 <usagi>   Then greedy people will rush in and the original investors will sell at .5
Aug 15 00:51:54 <usagi>   Then it will go back to .3 then up to .8 again, but that might not happen for over a year
Aug 15 00:52:01 <usagi>   Just technical analysis price points
Aug 15 00:52:09 <usagi>   wave analysis etc
Aug 15 00:52:15 <DeaDTerra>   Selling ASICMINER shares :) Pm me if you are interested!
Aug 15 00:52:18 <assbot>   [GLBSE] [FOO.PPPPT] 50 @ 1 = 50 BTC [-]
Aug 15 00:53:10 <assbot>   [GLBSE] [TYGRR.BOND-P] 3 @ 0.999 = 2.997 BTC [-]
Aug 15 00:53:25 *   teek is selling asicminer shares too, smoking deal @ .3
Aug 15 00:54:06 <teek>   mircea_popescu: i think i get it, thanks for the info.. so out of curiosity why would mixing something at .3% and something at 1% not be desirable?
Aug 15 00:54:32 <assbot>   [GLBSE] [TYGRR.BOND-P] 17 @ 0.987 = 16.779 BTC [-]
Aug 15 00:54:33 <assbot>   [GLBSE] [TYGRR.BOND-P] 3 @ 0.986 = 2.958 BTC [-]
Aug 15 00:54:34 <assbot>   [GLBSE] [TYGRR.BOND-P] 76 @ 0.98501 = 74.8608 BTC [-]
Aug 15 00:54:35 <assbot>   [GLBSE] [TYGRR.BOND-P] 1 @ 0.985 BTC [-]
Aug 15 00:54:45 <mircea_popescu>   teek you either mix things of the same risk and varying rewards to arbitrage reward
Aug 15 00:54:54 <mircea_popescu>   or things of the same reward and varying risks to arbitrage risk
Aug 15 00:55:06 <mircea_popescu>   my ideea is that nobody currently has an inkling as to risk measurements in btc world
Aug 15 00:55:10 <mircea_popescu>   so  that'd be what i want to offer.
Aug 15 00:56:49 <assbot>   [MPEX] [S.MPOE] 46372 @ 0.00037287 = 17.2907 BTC

Aug 15 00:59:28 <assbot>   [GLBSE] [DMC] 22 @ 0.04999999 = 1.1 BTC

Aug 15 00:59:43 <DeaDTerra>   how do I do the purple thing? :(
Aug 15 01:01:00 <teek>   mircea_popescu, still a little confused.. so in this case harnett would be the senior tranche thus offering the least reward, then mpoe, then you need some others in there or?
Aug 15 01:01:13 <mircea_popescu>   no
Aug 15 01:01:21 <mircea_popescu>   if you wait a few minutes i'll show you the actual contract.
Aug 15 01:01:30 <mircea_popescu>   putting the finishing  touches on it nao.
Aug 15 01:01:41 <teek>   sure, now i just want to understand it :)
Aug 15 01:02:45 <Chaaaang-Noi>   $12.34
Aug 15 01:02:50 <teek>   ;;ticker
Aug 15 01:02:51 <gribble>   Best bid: 12.32479, Best ask: 12.3248, Bid-ask spread: 0.00001, Last trade: 12.32479, 24 hour volume: 47868, 24 hour low: 11.7555, 24 hour high: 12.34
Aug 15 01:02:58 <teek>   holy craapola
Aug 15 01:03:01 *   asa has quit (Quit:  HydraIRC -> http://www.hydrairc.com <- The alternative IRC client)
Aug 15 01:03:22 <teek>   cmon btc!  daddy needs a new set of gpus!
Aug 15 01:03:27 <teek>   ;)
Aug 15 01:04:00 <Chaaaang-Noi>   lol
Aug 15 01:04:12 <Chaaaang-Noi>   want me to send you a second box full of 21 gpus? :)
Aug 15 01:04:16 <DeaDTerra>   What has pirate changed his rates to?
Aug 15 01:04:22 <DeaDTerra>   and is there a official announcement yet?
Aug 15 01:04:51 <teek>   lol
Aug 15 01:05:11 <teek>   naw i think im good for now :P
Aug 15 01:05:58 <teek>   DeaDTerra, 5% top tier
Aug 15 01:06:27 <DeaDTerra>   hm that sucks :(
Aug 15 01:06:35 <DeaDTerra>   I just got started with all of this :P
Aug 15 01:07:14 <assbot>   [MPEX] [F.GIGA.ETF] 790 @ 0.00112057 = 0.8853 BTC

Aug 15 01:07:15 <assbot>   [MPEX] [F.GIGA.ETF] 9410 @ 0.00112095 = 10.5481 BTC

Aug 15 01:08:02 <assbot>   [GLBSE] [DMC] 2 @ 0.04999999 = 0.1 BTC

Aug 15 01:08:21 <assbot>   [GLBSE] [DMC] 23 @ 0.04999999 = 1.15 BTC

Aug 15 01:08:23 <assbot>   [GLBSE] [DMC] 27 @ 0.05 = 1.35 BTC

Aug 15 01:09:38 <Chaaaang-Noi>   5% a week is still freaking awesome
Aug 15 01:10:14 <DeaDTerra>   It is but not as good at 7% xD
Aug 15 01:10:16 <teek>   yeah yeah mr top tier
Aug 15 01:10:17 <teek>   :P
Aug 15 01:10:18 <assbot>   [GLBSE] [DMC] 4 @ 0.05 = 0.2 BTC

Aug 15 01:10:18 <DeaDTerra>   Greedy maybe
Aug 15 01:10:54 <assbot>   [MPEX] [S.MPOE] 106 @ 0.00038108 = 0.0404 BTC

Aug 15 01:10:56 <assbot>   [MPEX] [S.MPOE] 23390 @ 0.00038129 = 8.9184 BTC

Aug 15 01:11:07 *   patrickharnett (cb4f5ec0@gateway/web/freenode/ip.203.79.94.192) has joined #bitcoin-assets
Aug 15 01:12:11 <Chaaaang-Noi>   its not hard to get 4.8 or 4.9% with a bit of trust :)
Aug 15 01:12:26 <mircea_popescu>   actually, my lower tier will do 9%.
Aug 15 01:12:32 <mircea_popescu>   just give me a second here to finish this :D
Aug 15 01:12:34 <assbot>   [GLBSE] [JTME] 1 @ 0.9 BTC [-]
Aug 15 01:12:53 <usagi>   I hope your not copying Nyancat Financial :P)
Aug 15 01:13:06 <usagi>   It's weird. Every time I list a new security, 2 or 3 pop up just like it
Aug 15 01:13:16 <mircea_popescu>   haha i think i have dibs on cdo's usagi
Aug 15 01:13:17 <DeaDTerra>   hahahah xD
Aug 15 01:13:23 <mircea_popescu>   see the link i sent to teek above, it's from april lol
Aug 15 01:13:29 <usagi>   Mmm

[...]

Aug 15 01:59:47 <mircea_popescu>   alrighty so. ANNOUNCEMENT : introducing MPCD.A, .B and .C
Aug 15 01:59:49 <mircea_popescu>   http://polimedia.us/bitcoin/mpex.php
Aug 15 01:59:54 <mircea_popescu>   go read the contract and have fun trading!
Aug 15 01:59:58 <mircea_popescu>   taking any questions.
Aug 15 02:01:39 <DeaDTerra>   Wow creative... I think I have heard about that before... something about a cat
Aug 15 02:01:40 <usagi>   Lol
Aug 15 02:01:47 <mircea_popescu>   a cat ?
Aug 15 02:01:47 <usagi>   Lol DT I know, like I said
Aug 15 02:02:14 <DeaDTerra>   Maybe a NyanCat? or maybe it wasn't a cat at all just Nyan. yea just Nyan
Aug 15 02:02:27 <mircea_popescu>   https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?;topic=76515.0 << APRIL omg.
Aug 15 02:02:39 <mircea_popescu>   and btw, pinging teek.
Aug 15 02:03:32 <usagi>   No one is saying they invented the CDO
Aug 15 02:03:43 <usagi>   Just seems strange 2 days after I explained NYAN to you, this comes out :p
Aug 15 02:03:54 <usagi>   Kind of like TYGRR.BOND-PI and yarr but hey
Aug 15 02:04:02 <usagi>   It's a big market, I'm not the only fast food restaurant
Aug 15 02:04:05 <kakobrekla>   mpoe bonds are fixed at 4.9?
Aug 15 02:04:12 <assbot>   [MPEX] [B.MPCD.C] 5000 @ 0.001 = 5 BTC
Aug 15 02:04:16 <assbot>   [MPEX] [O.BTCUSD.C100T] 1 @ 0.25910304 BTC

Aug 15 02:04:20 <mircea_popescu>   kakobrekla currently fixed at 5% kakobrekla
Aug 15 02:04:42 <mircea_popescu>   dude srsly. this was announced ~4 months ago!
Aug 15 02:05:03 <kakobrekla>   lolwhat
Aug 15 02:05:11 <usagi>   No one is saying they invented a CDO
Aug 15 02:05:12 <eennaam>   start a niche market with regular speed food restaurant , or hell even slow food
Aug 15 02:05:13 <mircea_popescu>   as in can't go over 5%
Aug 15 02:05:26 <usagi>   I'm just ribbing you mircea. But I doubt you will pay 15% like you said
Aug 15 02:05:34 <mircea_popescu>   9% ? why not ?
Aug 15 02:05:40 <usagi>   9%, right
Aug 15 02:05:52 <usagi>   Because it's too imbalanced
Aug 15 02:06:06 <usagi>   You're paying 2x the value of the highest known paying security
Aug 15 02:06:12 <usagi>   What kind of guarantee are you offering?
Aug 15 02:06:14 <mircea_popescu>   well that is the very point of a cdo.
Aug 15 02:06:16 <usagi>   for the top trance?
Aug 15 02:06:41 <usagi>   It's too much pressure. You will have to limit sales.
Aug 15 02:06:50 <mircea_popescu>   the top pays 2. the bottom pays 9.
Aug 15 02:06:52 <usagi>   Then the price will shoot up and investors will not realize 9%
Aug 15 02:06:57 <BTCHero>   aww all the asicminer is gone
Aug 15 02:06:59 <mircea_popescu>   sales are limited. did you read the contract ?
Aug 15 02:07:05 <usagi>   No
Aug 15 02:07:07 <usagi>   lol
Aug 15 02:07:16 <usagi>   Well sales are limited, right
Aug 15 02:07:20 <usagi>   I should probably do that too
Aug 15 02:07:36 <usagi>   Henceforth NYAN.C is limited to 3,000 outstanding
Aug 15 02:07:40 <usagi>   GET IT WHILE YOU CAN
Aug 15 02:07:41 <mircea_popescu>   cdos are limited by their very nature.
Aug 15 02:07:44 <mircea_popescu>   lol!
Aug 15 02:07:46 <kakobrekla>   hm imho clean mpoe bonds is better deal than A or B
Aug 15 02:07:59 <usagi>   quick im logging in now to cancel the ask
Aug 15 02:08:11 <mircea_popescu>   kakobrekla well possibly, depends on your risk profile et all.
Aug 15 02:08:20 <mircea_popescu>   A has practically no risk i would guess.
Aug 15 02:08:44 <kakobrekla>   i dont see how A can have less risk than MPOE bond if its operated by you on the end
Aug 15 02:08:45 *   Chaaaang-Noi has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
Aug 15 02:09:41 <assbot>   [MPEX] [B.MPCD.B] 80000 @ 0.001 = 80 BTC
Aug 15 02:09:58 <mircea_popescu>   well mpoe bond can either not kick in (if people offer lower interest)
Aug 15 02:10:07 <mircea_popescu>   or lese it could get hosed if people buy options and get lucky.
Aug 15 02:10:22 <assbot>   [MPEX] [S.MPOE] 16100 @ 0.00038129 = 6.1388 BTC

Aug 15 02:11:08 <assbot>   [GLBSE] [TYGRR.BOND-P] 12 @ 1 = 12 BTC

Aug 15 02:11:48 <brendio>   MPOE bonds loose if MPOE makes a loss. For A to lose, one and possibly more of MPOE bonds, Patrick and NYAN would need to makes losses.
Aug 15 02:11:54 <assbot>   [GLBSE] [BIB.PIRATE] 56 @ 0.98 = 54.88 BTC [-]
Aug 15 02:12:08 <BTCHero>   patrick starfish
Aug 15 02:12:08 <mircea_popescu>   A is 400 out of a 1.1k pool.
Aug 15 02:12:09 <BTCHero>   ?
Aug 15 02:12:19 <mircea_popescu>   either mpoe or patrick would have to completely wipeout
Aug 15 02:12:20 <mircea_popescu>   and then some
Aug 15 02:12:26 <mircea_popescu>   yes BTCHero
Aug 15 02:12:30 <assbot>   [MPEX] [S.MPOE] 22110 @ 0.00038129 = 8.4303 BTC

Aug 15 02:12:30 <assbot>   [MPEX] [S.MPOE] 22390 @ 0.000383 = 8.5754 BTC

Aug 15 02:12:43 <mircea_popescu>   tbh i don't think there exists more secure anything than .A atm.
Aug 15 02:12:59 <teek>   mircea_popescu, the %'s for a,b,c are these arbitrary #'s you decide or is there some math behind them?
Aug 15 02:13:20 <usagi>   nyan.a is guaranteed by bitcoins held in an offline paper wallet.
Aug 15 02:13:26 <mircea_popescu>   teek i just picked numbers.
Aug 15 02:13:43 <mircea_popescu>   pretty much want to see what market says.
Aug 15 02:14:28 <assbot>   [MPEX] [S.BVPS] 188 @ 0.003828 = 0.7197 BTC [-]
Aug 15 02:15:02 <teek>   i see
Aug 15 02:15:39 <teek>   usagi, this isn't really the same as nyan
Aug 15 02:16:16 *   rdponticelli has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
Aug 15 02:16:42 <usagi>   there are three, chain-default tiers for which the interest paid is declared by fiat out of a pool, and not related to the underlying value of the funds?
Aug 15 02:17:20 <usagi>   Actually I think she mentioned there are 2 tiers
Aug 15 02:17:44 <mircea_popescu>   who's she ? and whether there's 2 or 18 is not really too important.
Aug 15 02:17:54 <usagi>   Well teek, didn't you actually invented the first CDO you know, teek.A and teek.B?
Aug 15 02:18:22 <assbot>   [GLBSE] [TYGRR.BOND-P] 3 @ 1 = 3 BTC

Aug 15 02:18:35 <assbot>   [GLBSE] [ARS] 5 @ 0.009 = 0.045 BTC [-]
Aug 15 02:18:41 <teek>   i am honestly not sure, but teek.a and teek.b really have no relation other than name
Aug 15 02:18:59 <teek>   so if what mircea_popescu is doing is a cdo then no
Aug 15 02:19:10 <mircea_popescu>   i think it's pretty much by the book a cdo.
Aug 15 02:20:00 <kakobrekla>   someone should make a cdo from all pirate insured offers
Aug 15 02:20:22 <mircea_popescu>   that might be a great ideea actually.
Aug 15 02:20:41 <mircea_popescu>   tranche it 10/20/30/40 in 4 tiers
Aug 15 02:21:27 <assbot>   [GLBSE] [TYGRR.BOND-P] 2 @ 0.99 = 1.98 BTC [-]
Aug 15 02:22:23 *   Luceo (~luceo@gateway/tor-sasl/luceo) has joined #bitcoin-assets
Aug 15 02:25:27 <assbot>   [GLBSE] [FPGAMINING] 1 @ 0.94 BTC [-]
Aug 15 02:25:29 <assbot>   [GLBSE] [JTME] 1 @ 0.99899 BTC

Aug 15 02:26:56 <mircea_popescu>   the only difference, teek, might be that in general cdos are based on fixed rate investments, which arguably mpoe bonds aren't, or at least eskimobob so argues.
Aug 15 02:27:11 *   eennaam has quit ()
Aug 15 02:27:13 <smickles>   oooh, i see some nifty bonds
Aug 15 02:27:19 <mircea_popescu>   o hai.
Aug 15 02:27:37 <patrickharnett>   yes, there is a lurking starfish
Aug 15 02:28:10 <assbot>   [GLBSE] [DMC] 40 @ 0.05 = 2 BTC

Aug 15 02:28:20 <assbot>   [GLBSE] [TYGRR.BOND-P] 3 @ 0.9999 = 2.9997 BTC

Aug 15 02:28:56 <mircea_popescu>   patrickharnett so i guess this has the side advantage to you that you know when you'll be asked to repay : 30th of october or thereabouts.
Aug 15 02:29:02 <assbot>   [GLBSE] [DMC] 1 @ 0.05 BTC

Aug 15 02:29:34 <patrickharnett>   I didn't notice the 30'th date - wouldn't be a problem anyway
Aug 15 02:29:47 <assbot>   [MPEX] [S.MPOE] 32810 @ 0.000383 = 12.5662 BTC

Aug 15 02:29:48 <mircea_popescu>   well since the bonds die and repay on the 1st of nov
Aug 15 02:29:49 <assbot>   [MPEX] [S.MPOE] 18714 @ 0.00038423 = 7.1905 BTC

Aug 15 02:29:50 <assbot>   [MPEX] [S.MPOE] 797 @ 0.00039267 = 0.313 BTC

Aug 15 02:29:51 <assbot>   [MPEX] [S.MPOE] 5615 @ 0.00039477 = 2.2166 BTC

Aug 15 02:29:52 <mircea_popescu>   it'd be a few days prior.
Aug 15 02:30:09 <patrickharnett>   it's only 500+interest, it's not lots
Aug 15 02:30:11 <assbot>   [GLBSE] [GIGAMINING] 1 @ 1.1375 BTC

Aug 15 02:30:22 <mircea_popescu>   not this time.
Aug 15 02:30:32 <mircea_popescu>   if these are successfull any i will make larger ones.

http://www.efmoody.com/arbitration/fiduciary.html

In the handling of money and when one acts as a corporate or individual trustee, there is a fiduciary responsibility owed to the principal party.

It is defined as a relationship imposed by law where someone has voluntarily agreed to act in the capacity of a "caretaker" of another's rights, assets and/or well being.

The fiduciary owes an obligation to carry out the responsibilities with the utmost degree of "good faith, honesty, integrity, loyalty and undivided service of the beneficiaries interest."

The good faith has been interpreted to impose an obligation to act reasonably in order to avoid negligent handling of the beneficiary's interests as well the duty not to favor ANYONE ELSE'S INTEREST (INCLUDING THE TRUSTEES OWN INTEREST) over that of the beneficiary.

Further, if the agent should find him/herself in a position of conflicting interests, the agent must disclose the dual agency (acting for two parties at the same time) or risk being accused of constructive fraud in regards to both or either principals.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=74975.msg1243259#msg1243259  I think this is relevent to usagi re: fiduciary duty and declaring a conflict of interest.

Ive not seen usagi post anything in the OP of any of the funds they run about conflicting interests they may have. In the CPA thread for example usagi doesnt mention NYAN.A or BMF which is required as a fund manager imo.

Usagi has never ever brought up the conflicts of interest and this is quite telling.

(quoted from Icebreaker)

You just fucked up.

You made a typo -- as puppet -- and corrected it as Deprived.

I was waiting for this, asshole.

Pretty lame reason. You already asked this, I'm pretty sure I put it in the FAQ. The contract was a test of what would eventually become the shareholder protection contract. This isn't something like I didn't honor an agreement with BAKEWELL (I actually took a lot of flak for sticking to my contract there -- see, I told you, I wasn't going to let myself get trolled over this. Sorry trolls.) This is me running 2 companies and doing something very, very public. This contract was posted about on the forums and posted on the CPA website. There is absolutely nothing wrong with what I did. Previously you were complaining that the contract existed. When it was explained to you I did this to test that kind of contract you started whining that I was breaking contracts. Please dude, read the contract. Nothing was broken. You simply aren't a very good businessman.

Instead of assuming you know what is going on, why don't you just ask? Dumping all these theories on the ground without thinking makes you look like a jerk. Here's a theory: you have an IQ of 50 and are unqualified to make the kind of reports you are purporting to make. Is that a good theory? Maybe and maybe not. But wouldn't it just be easier to discuss it with you privately? Why bother to incessantly lie about someone -- repeatedly -- often repeating the same questions which you asked (and had answered) in a FAQ?

The deal with the 10% off, is that holders must agree not to sell the shares between 0.90 and 1 inclusive for a period of three months, depending on the size of the order. If they do that, then 10% off is not out of the question. I'd also require a purchase of at 200 shares.

Oops, troll abortion in progress (emphasis mine). No, CPA doesn't really insure BMF. This was explained to you quite recently. Read the contract. Do I need to spell it out for you?

You just fucked up.

You made a typo -- as puppet -- and corrected it as Deprived.

I was waiting for this, asshole.

a) 2. CPA will not be liable for loss greater than 500 bitcoins.
b) 3. Multiple indemnification payments are allowed so far as the total amount does not exceed 500 bitcoins.
c) 1. BMF will send 5 bitcoins per calendar week for 110 weeks to CPA...
d) 4. Neither party may cancel this contract although any party may choose to
   accelerate their obligation at any time.

All that has happened here is 10 bitcoins were transferred to CPA. Furthermore, this agreement is valid for 110 weeks (over 2 years). Where's the break? Where's the default? Your accusations over this contract are meaningless.

How do you manage the apparent major conflicts of interest that appear to happen with all these funds and the insurance company you are running ?

I dont think people would be complaining if you were only running a mining fund.

When you did the motion for BMF to sign the contract with CPA did you even mention that you are the operator of CPA and thus it would present a major conflict of interest ?

Im simply pointing out that you fail to declare these conflicts of interest nearly every time. You dont need to declare anything if you sign a contract with "bumfuck insurance" but you do when its with CPA. A company YOU RUN You made a motion and failed to declare your conflict of interest to the shareholders, which may have changed the outcome.

You just fucked up.

You made a typo -- as puppet -- and corrected it as Deprived.

I was waiting for this, asshole.

There WAS NO MOTION.  When it said there was a motion and it was voted on that was just a bare-faced lie.

Not sure WTF usagi is on about about me/puppet.  Puppet pointed out I'd written BMF when what I wrote also applied to nyan.a.  I said it was a typo - and that I'd meant to type nyan.a in the first place.  Just because I AGREE when someone corrects me, doesn't make us the same person.  I think maybe usagi misunderstood what was being said - I edited the OP after puppet pointed out my mistake.

Ah i see. I just went through the old motions for BMF and cant find one wrt signing an insurance contract although
I did find two motions that are exactly the same for CPA and BMF lol. So CPA shareholders voted n something that concerned BMF shareholders  :P

CPA and NYAN are still afloat while all deposit takers have now been wiped-out.

When CPA repays it's massive 600-BTC liquidity loan, which was raised in the community during the troll attack by eskimobob, puppet and deprived, even as they had entered scam accusations against me, then I will proffer a wonderful suprise. I think you can guess what it will be from what I just said.

Anyways what happened here is simple; 3 out of 4 sectors crashed and only one (mining, via BMF) is left. That doesn't mean we broke 5d -- it means we KEPT it, and we are very very lucky we did.

I would just like to say how borderline fraudulent it is for trolls to claim we are breaking 5d in a situation like this. And I've already commented on buying back 1150+ BTC worth of shares in the last 3 weeks. So when people way we are not maintaining a bidwall... they're lying.

Usagi should be viewed as a case study regarding what happens when a person with nearly zero knowledge of finance and business tries to manage a venture (let alone multiple ventures at once.)

I am never going to get a scammer tag because mining crashed. It just simply is not my fault.

I was skimming through the thread (haven't read it entirely yet) and was reminded of the "liquidity loan." I didn't think much - more along the lines of "I haven't read the Lending forum in awhile."

Surely other people have read posts about how unverified mining operations could easily be simple loans, paying back "mining rewards." This kind of discussion has been popping up lately.

With these two things in mind, I recalled the many askwalls recently placed for BMF.

I've stayed up all night working - my mind is probably just tired and paranoid. But on the other hand, I'd love photo evidence of BMFs mining hardware! Got to rest now before it gets any brighter.

~pyotr

You're on the wrong track there.

The ask-walls are to raise new funds to buy more hardware - think each one is enough for one rig or something like that.

The mining hardware is ordered but not delivered (from memory there may have been one old rig usagi donated or is loaning to BMF), so no way photos of any substantial amount of gear could be provided.

Remember, BMF started as an investment company then passed a motion to change to doing mining (bear in mind usagi controls the majority of shares so can pass any motions it wants) - so it's not like it SHOULD have a load of mining gear as it's only just transitioning.

Just clearing that up as I don't want totally wrong accusations in here - 'cos that gives usagi the easy way out of answering an inaccurate accusation then claiming that somehow proves every other accusation is wrong.

Surely other people have read posts about how unverified mining operations could easily be simple loans, paying back "mining rewards." This kind of discussion has been popping up lately.

I never said there was a motion -- you misquoted me. I told you this twice already.. wake up. I said it was announced and publicized. It was posted here on the forum and on the CPA webpage. A link was posted to the contract. No one cared for 2 months until you started whining like a little bitch about it. You can't even understand the contract. Why are you the only one complaining? You're not even a shareholder. Go away.

You can't be serious. Look at the date on the post you are quoting. This was announced, publicized, motioned, voted on and passed two months ago. If you wanted to complain you should have done it then. Seriously, go bother hashking, pirate or matthew; look around and you will see I run the finest companies on GLBSE.

And while you're at it, read the contract we signed VERY VERY CLOSELY and you will "see what I did there".

Now. If you're a shareholder, please go vote on the motion :) Seriously - You wanna know what my shareholders think of me? Wait till the motion passes and look at the numbers. Until then if you are not a shareholder do not post on this thread or I'll lock it and make a new one with local rules. Please, don't ruin this by dragging innuendo and BS onto here as well.

You never said there was a motion?


Bolded the relevant bit.  That jog your memory at all?

No. BMF has paid CPA a couple times, and then I decided to accelerate both BMF and CPA's obligation; I just stated that BMF paid CPA approximately 100 times and then CPA gave BMF 500 bitcoins. This canceled the contract. Read the contract. You have a mental problem; this has been explained to you many many times.

First Deprived and puppet et. al were whining that the contract was even made in the first place. That there was a conflict of interest. When it was shown beyond a shadow of a doubt there was no conflict of interest....

then they were whining that it wasn't kept. When it was explained that it WAS kept, merely accelerated and closed as per it's own wording...

then they now complain that I said it was motioned on (which was a mistake) the point of which itself is irrelevant because the contract itself is meaningless, does not affect the operation of either company, and was done in public.

Do you get that you are being trolled here, bitcoin.me? The contract is meaningless and affects no one and no thing.

I will never ever get a scammer tag for this. It isn't even on the radar considering such terms as logic and critical thinking. Deprived needs a ban to get it into his head it is not his job to try and hurt people's business.

This next part isn't for you bitcoin.me...

Trolls, seriously guys get a fucking life.

I've been under the microscope for about a month now. Do you get it? I'm not doing anything wrong. Now fuck off.

To this end we have signed an insurance contract with CPA which indemnifies us against capital loss.

We have decided to publish this contract (http://www.tsukino.ca/cpa/customers/account-12/), to give a clearer picture of what is going on with BMF these days.

This contract means we will likely begin paying dividends again by next week.

This is good news! Ok, don't celebrate yet, let's get through the week first :)

No, let me be clear; I wasn't talking to you(plural) i.e. my shareholders, I was talking to you(singular) meaning the entity known as Deprived. And my meaning was along the lines of "I do not give a fuck about you."


See when bitcoin.me asks, as a shareholder, I'm nice, I try to be accommodating, and I offer to run a motion since it's obvious that he has a valid issue. Maybe not an issue every shareholder agrees with or cares about, but it is possible a motion could solve a great many issues.

When YOU ask, I just tell you to fuck off because you are a deceitful, fraudulent asshole. Capiche? I do not care about you.

It's very obvious you do not care about the truth. if you cared about the truth you would ask a question on the FAQ thread and I would answer it. You shied away from doing that very very quickly because you saw it was working in my favor. You just make these troll threads, and infect other serious discussion threads with your bullshit. You know the deal, Deprived. Go post a question on the faq thread, or fuck off. Your choice. No one is paying me to deal with your bullshit so don't be suprised when I sidestep you.

Let's look at two scenarios.
1. Under the contract BMF and CPA can choose to accelerate their obligations to the point where the contract expires. In this case BMF would owe CPA exactly 10 bitcoins. I could do that (and I have stated I have -- although I have not made an exact accounting of it, the figure should be very close to that).

2. CPA could easily "give 100 bitcoins" by returning 200 shares of BMF to BMF. Hell, it could easily give 1,000 shares to BMF (500 bitcoins value). What would this accomplish? Well, CPA would get the money back yes, but it would weaken CPA and indebit BMF to CPA for 2 years. The BMF share price would go up but BMF has been around 0.5 for 2 months now. BMF has a plan for increasing in value. I don't think it is really necessary.

Actually now that you have made me think about it a little more, this looks like the kind of thing a motion could solve.

Do you think I should put this up as a BMF motion? Technically it's BMF that would have to ask for the insurance. I just don't think it's worthwhile to do.

No -- I'm saying your opinion isn't worth shit, because even if you're a shareholder, you're not the only one, and I am asking if you think I should run a motion.

As for the contract, trading 10 bitcoins for 10 bitcoins does not make anyone more or less solvent. Especially not 10 bitcoins when you have a market cap of 2500. So  yeah, let me know when you are planning to actually communicate with me cuz I just asked you a question (Do you think I should put this up as a BMF motion?)

Enough of your bullshit. I have responded to your accusations in the OP and I will now ignore this thread.

New policy, like it or not:
If you have any other accusation to make, post it in a new thread and I will make exactly ONE response to you, and I will then ignore the rest of the thread except in instances where someone provides a correction or question directly relating to what I said which I did not already answer. This will be done because you are dodging posting questions in the FAQ thread. I will not allow you to control this discussion. I will control it. You will have my responses to your questions and that will be all. Have a nice day Mr. Troll.

(For the curious this policy was suggested to me by a former member of CPA's round table who wishes to remain nameless.)

I'm doing you the courtesy of now staying out of your threads (unless you make an inaccurate statement about me).

Started a new scammer thread about not disclosing the conflict of interest. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=115411.0 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=115411.0)

Thank you and goodbye (hopefully).

You should have done this 3 weeks ago.

As for the contract, trading 10 bitcoins for 10 bitcoins does not make anyone more or less solvent. Especially not 10 bitcoins when you have a market cap of 2500. So  yeah, let me know when you are planning to actually communicate with me cuz I just asked you a question (Do you think I should put this up as a BMF motion?)

I'm just catching up on all this, but I am ASTOUNDED by what usagi has going on here.

The conflict of interest is patently true, the NYAN accounts are being shut down out of order, CPA is an absolute scam, and all he has to say is that folks with questions are 'IDIOTS' and then demand they stop posting.

I'm really amazed at how little leverage ya'all have against someone that is so obviously fleecing the hell out of your community. How he doesn't have a scammer tag is beyond me.

I'm just catching up on all this, but I am ASTOUNDED by what usagi has going on here.

The conflict of interest is patently true, the NYAN accounts are being shut down out of order, CPA is an absolute scam, and all he has to say is that folks with questions are 'IDIOTS' and then demand they stop posting.

I'm really amazed at how little leverage ya'all have against someone that is so obviously fleecing the hell out of your community. How he doesn't have a scammer tag is beyond me.

Because you got trolled. Everything I did was according to my contracts, I published everything I did and wrote letters to shareholders. Before this little trollfest took root I was getting compliments, daily, for how I was running CPA, NYAN and BMF.

True, but it's more about how you react to the critique than the trolling. Patrick, Victor, Kluge and a few others have set good examples on how to respond to criticism.

The only measure is how successful your businesses are, so focusing on the critics and even blaming makes you look more guilty than you really are. One of the methods us investors use is to gauge people's trustworthiness is to observe their behavior here. I've invested in CPA before the "trolling" began because of the reasons you say. However, ahem, coincidentally, the "trolling" intensified as you started losing money. It is nothing but an expected part of business. The fact that you don't (at least seem to) look at it that way made me lose trust.

So why don't you go ahead and make us money? That's the only way you will show them (or us, depending on the criticism).

Companies acting on technicalities such as "accelerating payments to cancel each other" makes it apparent that there is a huge conflict of interest.

The only way I see these issues getting resolved is getting fresh managers on board. Would usagi be willing to let us appoint different managers/CEOs to some or all of these funds/companies, if any suitable candidates come up? I'm asking both usagi and the shareholders.

Companies acting on technicalities such as "accelerating payments to cancel each other" makes it apparent that there is a huge conflict of interest.

The only way I see these issues getting resolved is getting fresh managers on board. Would usagi be willing to let us appoint different managers/CEOs to some or all of these funds/companies, if any suitable candidates come up? I'm asking both usagi and the shareholders.

This is the only way to solve the conflict of interest.

Bit premature for that in my opinion.  Let usagi build a tighter noose for itself by blatantly trying to get BMF investors to act against their own interest via a motion.  When usagi's properly ripe for the picking on this one I'll see if I can motivate myself to properly document one of the nyan conflict of interest scenarios that's happened - and make any scammer accusation rock-solid by demonstrating that this insurance mess isn't some one-off occurrence.

How about you try to be constructive

Now back on topic, the operations of CPA are EXCEEDINGLY simple. We have a stable of contracts. You just take in the premiums and pay out when required. I'm willing to bet even nimda could do it.

Creating contracts is not terribly complicated. Creating insurance contracts that are based fully on proper math and assessment and on a whole benefit a company and it's shareholders can be quite complicated. This is evident in CPA losing around 80% of shareholder value since inception.

FWIW, it hasn't lost value through insurance, at least not most of it anyway. Though I completely agree with you that it's a very hard task.

So what you're saying is you have absolutely no proof, after all this time, but you are determined to trash me and my companies every chance you get, in the hopes that I'll actually scam someone?

So in other words I haven't done anything scammy yet? Oh this just keeps getting better and better.

Yes, totally.

I own about 1800 shares of CPA which are non-saleable "management fee" shares and these would be transfered to anyone who wanted to take over CPA.

As for NYAN, it's just a fund of GLBSE securities. If anyone wants to run it either temporarily or permanenty they can. I don't take management fees from NYAN but anyone who wanted to run it would be completely justified in taking 5% which I think is pretty standard.

If anyone is interested in this we can arrange for them to run it for 1, 2, 3 months, or even permanently. We don't even need to motion on it because the business operation and contracts would not change.

If you think you can do a better job you are more than welcome to try. CPA and NYAN have no assets which are not on the GLBSE right now so it would be extremely easy to hire a new manager or CEO.

Maybe that is what is required. Maybe I should step down. Let someone else run the company and do a better job.