|
Title: Counter Evidence for the BCB thread Post by: usagi on December 31, 2012, 01:18:23 AM BCB has treated me in a hostile manner from the beginning. As he's locked his thread I will lock this one and provide evidence here to counter his claims.
#5 is a great example of BCB's lies. He claims EskimoBob lost money as a result of being a NYAN.A investor. This is patently false. I am handling the NYAN.A claims right now and EskimoBob will recieve his full value just like everyone else. Why is BCB lying about me? This is central; investors did not lose money BECAUSE of what I said. And NYAN.A investors in particular lost nothing. I quote, from shareholder letter #39: "After buying back almost 1,500 bicoins worth of NYAN-related securities over the past 2 weeks (900 NYAN and almost 600 NYAN.A and NYAN.B..." When NYAN.A dipped down low because of EskimoBob and Puppet's initial accusations that I was insolvent and misrepresenting assets, I launched a campaign of buybacks where I spent 1,500 bitcoins buying back NYAN, NYAN.A and NYAN.B shares. I did this partly out of my own personal money to support the bid price at 0.99. Now, I am in themidst of processing NYAN.A claims. How is it possible to state that EskimoBob lost money? He didn't. This is a lie that is being told in order to defame me. I have spent months of my life on this crap already. The only reason I am even bothering with this is because BCB is apparently respected in the community. Following is a complete list of the things BCB has stated about me and a response. 1. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=133823.msg1425098#msg1425098 "vampire has responded that: Usgai deleted the agreements and all statements. Vampire claims to prove that the financial statements are fraudulent. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=113708.msg1228703#msg1228703" In this post BCB states that vampire has said that I deleted all my statements, yet he claims to prove that the financial statements are fraudulent, The quoted post says: The spreadsheet uses a formula which uses the average of the 24h and 5 day averages* Not a scam. *=max(fetchTicker(concatenate(A13), "t5davg"), fetchTicker(concatenate(A13), "t24havg"))/100000000 The problem with using this to state I misrepresented how I value the funds is that it is not supported by fact. The above quote was never used to advertise NYAN. It was used in a discussion where we were discussing how I valued NYAN. It was a mistake in wording. How do you know? Simple. I posted the formula in the same message, and I had also posted the formula in plaintext on the spreadsheet. There was no intent to deceive, contrary to what BCB is now claiming based on this evidence. For more information including a timeline and screenshots of the actual BMF spreadsheet, please see: http://kongzi.ca/BCB/misrepresent1 (http://kongzi.ca/BCB/misrepresent1) 2. In the following post from above, "FROM: ianbakewell "...Usagi has gone back and deleted nearly 1000 of their old posts. Many of these posts made statements that built confidence and caused me to invest into the assets run by Usagi. In the resulting bullshit of Usagi swapping things around to make it look like they were not doing so bad after the pirate losses, those statements were later proven to be false or were unhonoured. The stock prices collapse and I sold out at an extreme loss." I've provided the NYAN contract and letters to shareholders on the forums. (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=133819.msg1426340#msg1426340) Ian has clearly failed in his duty to perform due dilligence. The contracts clearly state (in part): III. 2. NYAN will act to balance it's ownership of NYAN.A, NYAN.B and NYAN.C by buying and selling shares. III. 4. Nyancat Financial's operations and balance sheets will be made fully transparent to the public and backed up by signed statements from our backers where appropriate. It's nice that Ian feels I lied to him about the status of the fund; but this does not make sense. The data had been online for several months before Ian and others suddenly felt "misled". You mean all this time, there was no problem, and as soon as the linked events occurred (linked) (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=133362.0) Ian suddenly hates me? What happened here is obvious. Ian bakewell attempted to demonize me out of his own vicious and scammy nature. Where's the evidence I lied to Ian? The onus is on you to provide actual evidence, not claims -- and not on me to attempt to prove a negative by spending 100 hours combing through 1000 deleted posts. 3. from https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=133823.msg1425786#msg1425786 to which I responded: Quote So I just heard from usagi he indicates: "the spreadsheets were published on tsukino.ca/bmf, which was a wordpress site which I have deleted. So it is unrecoverable. " * admitting to deleting material information. Why did you say that when I provided reasonable evidence that the material information a) was republished by me, accurately, and b) is in possession by a large number of other people in the form of lists by nefario? Quote he says he "can't remember" specific facts. The fact in question is whether or not the contention was between publishing an average value in the spreadsheet, forum thread and shareholder letter and accidentally referring to it as a max function, OR publishing it as max and accidentally referring to it as average. Do I need to point out that the fact in question was already linked to you by vampire? You are coloring what I said. Quote he admits to incorrectly valuing his assets: "I mis-spoke about the nature of the formula. I think I said "average" instead of "max" – " No I did not. Why did you say I admitted to incorrectly valuing the assets when you know the context of what was said? You are making it look like I engaged in a campaign to promote my stock as being valued by avg (or max) in opposition to how it was actually valued. That's not right. Quote He admits that while he was representing the value of his investments in the future - if the investor how liquidated their asset would actually receive less value.: "The claim was that if someone wanted to liquidate their investments, that would be the price they could get. This is true " It's not looking good for usagi. Why did you say it's not looking good when I told you that this is how all funds operate? Are you aware that no fund in the world ever buys at asks and then reports value at bid? Do you understand how a mutual fund operates? When we buy x shares of a security at 1 bitcoin per share, we do not turn around and immediately value them at bid. That's crazy. I used formulas that STABILIZED the value of the fund so that when we made purchases it would not adversely affect the price of the fund. This is normal. This is how an IPO works. You are proposing, are you not, that if we sold 100 shares in IPO, then immediately the other 9,900 shares would be worth less than 1 btc per share merely because we now must value the company at bid price. That is not how investing works, that is not how markets work, and that is not how mutual funds work. I demand that you publish what I have said here if you are to remain impartial in this case. It is not a crime or a fraud to value stocks at what we paid for them or by analysis especially since that was written into the contract, of which all investors were made aware. I don't yet understand why you are misrepresenting what I said in this way. If you are going to say, for example, the quotes you said -- but ignore the explanation -- you are doing people a disservice. Furthermore the spreadsheet also cautioned investors that all values were estimates. Are you familiar with fair value accounting? Here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_value In accounting and economics, fair value is a rational and unbiased estimate of the potential market price of a good, service, or asset. It takes into account such objective factors as: acquisition/production/distribution costs, replacement costs, or costs of close substitutes actual utility at a given level of development of social productive capability supply vs. demand and subjective factors such as risk characteristics cost of and return on capital individually perceived utility Please note words "potential market price" (future value) "utility...cost of and return on capital" (capital gains but also dividends) also note: "subjective factors". The fact that I didn't value long term holdings at bid price is actually a GOOD thing. I did not admit to misrepresenting value, incorrectly valuing assets, or deleting material information. I demand you post a retraction of that if you are going to remain in charge of a fair assessment. You need to understand finance and accounting practices to understand that I was doing a GOOD job and not a BAD job valuing assets. The fact that deprived or vampire don't really know anything about finance or accounting does not mean it looks bad for me. It means they don't really know anything about finance or accounting. Additionally I have posted the NYAN contracts and shareholder letters as directly requested by BCB here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=133819.msg1426340#msg1426340 Therefore, it is wrong for BCB to have said I admitted to incorrectly valuing funds. For one, the correct way had not been established so it is impossible to have valued funds incorrectly. Secondly the entire point was to establish I did not believe I was incorrectly valuing funds. 4. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=133823.msg1426569#msg1426569 "Usagi claims to be following general accounting/inventing principals in valuing his assets and quotes a length the Financial Accounting Standards Board which states in part: "While internal inputs are used, the objective remains the same: estimate fair value using assumptions a third party would consider in estimating fair value." However numerous third parties with access to Usagi's valuations claim that he was NOT fairly valuing his assets. So again this is an example of Usagi using information "subjectively" to suit his position and omitting or ignoring relevant points that counter his position. Usagi continues to provide NO FACTUAL information in his defense and when he does make statements they often end up supporting his detractors claims." a) I conducted two public and at least two private interviews. One with Garr of Cognitive and one with GigaVPS of Gigamining. I'll post those interviews later in this thread, I should have them logged in my e-mail. In these four interviews it is obvious I am interested in many of the kinds of questions a third party would be expected to ask. I will also post internal company data that shows I was evaluating miners based on their published data as well as any information I could dig up by contacting the asset issuer. Additionally you can check the NYAN letters to shareholders, as published, for additional proof. I will also post, where I can, letters from prospective analysis which I attempted to hire because my workload was a little large. All of this proves my intent was to fairly value securities as a third party would. But to be clear, the document BCB is quoting does not merely say "a third party", it states "...estimate fair value using assumptions a third party would consider in estimating fair value." It is therefore a little redundant; the principle of fair value as defined does in fact include perceived value and subjective forms of valuation as stated in the document we're quoting (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_value). The documents I intend to provide, as stated above, are: -- interview with Garr of COGNITIVE -- interview with GigaVPS of GIGAMINING -- interview with friedcat of ASICMINER -- interview with Juan of BTC-MINING -- internal documents showing we were performing sensible analysis based on hardware, etc. -- e-mails showing we were doing analysis and/or trying to hire additional analysis, whose quality of work was assumed to be at least as great as our own *i.e. we did not ask anyone to scam or lie, just do a normal job as we were doing*. Please see another post (post #2?) for these documents. Please note that at the time of posting the above, BCB was in reciept of the NYAN contract and shareholder letters, and the reposted BMF holdings. What he said (I had continued to not provide any evidence) is a lie. He had directly requested this and only this information to me in PM: Usgai [...] Unless you provide facts such as Contracts Lawyer info Etc I will continue to call you a liar and I will request a scammer tag. I am asking for facts and evidence and you can't or don't want to provide it. Yet others have no problem proving the facts in your own words. I'm sorry. It is not looking food for you. #5. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=133823.msg1426577#msg1426577 EskimoBob has responded in the other thread. He is the second investor who claims to have lost fund do to Usgai's inaccurate valuations. Quote from: EskimoBob on December 30, 2012, 06:34:09 PM Quote from: BCB on December 30, 2012, 05:22:40 PM Hello Eskimo bob. Good to hear from you as you name has come up quite frequently. So far usgai has been accused of and evidence has been provided that he: Misvalued assets Lied about assets owned Tried to use company assets to pay off a personal loan Deleted material evidence supporting this activity to cover up this activity And refuses to supply specific facts to support his claims and instead spAms the threads There was no evidence provided here and apparently no evidence provided in PM to BCB, by EskimoBob. These are just the same claims EB has been making for months. Where's the evidence? 1. Did you lose any funds as as result of usgai misrepresenting his various businesses and assets? 2. What facts can you provide that may support or refute these claims Thanks. In the above response, BCB seems to get this and asks for clarification; i.e. did EskimoBob really lose any money? In response, EskimoBob writes: All the fact are in the forum posts by me and multiple other people, who git fed up with constant BS. Misvalued assets - yes Tried to use company assets to pay off a personal loan - I can not recall at the moment all the details. Dig the forum, it's all here Smiley Deleted material evidence supporting this activity to cover up this activity - yes. This has been proved in forums to ad nauseum And refuses to supply specific facts to support his claims and instead spAms the threads - yes. This has been proved in forums to ad nauseum This is not proof. It's just a statement with "I cannot recall the details, look it up, I promise it's there". Ok, so where's the link? How dare BCB accuse me without any proof! 1. Did you lose any funds as as result of usgai misrepresenting his various businesses and assets? - yes, because information published (now deleted by usagi) was constantly wrong - that was discovered later. 2. What facts can you provide that may support or refute these claims - it's all in the forum post. People quoted me. I was involved in dozens of discussions. If you claim I deleted it, where are the surviving quotes from responses? Using the fact I deleted posts because I was pissed off is a convenient excuse to label me. Sorry, the absence of proof is not proof. The onus is on EskimoBob to provide a link or BCB to confirm a link. Expecting me to attempt to prove a negative is unrealistic. Even if I agreed to have my posts undeleted (which I did, in principle -- I said any post related to the scam accusaion against me had my full permission to be undeleted if possible) it is not on me to go digging through the undeleted posts. It's BCB's job if he wants it. Again, I cannot prove a negative. "Screenshots or it didn't happen". 6. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=133823.msg1426591#msg1426591 Usgai also repeatedly states: "...the contract clearly stated I would provide value through analysis.." which I assume to mean that his analysis allows him to value his assets even if his analysis is wrong - which others including Usagni have pointed out was wrong not only due to faulty analysis but also due to bad math or incorrect of calculating formulas. Does that make his inaccurate valuations ok. I would think not. This is again an example of Usagi shirking his fiduciary responsibility. This is a joke. BCB has stated he assumes that "added value" means I can lie. What? BCB does not understand English? Added value in financial analysis of shares is to be distinguished from value added. Used as a measure of shareholder value, calculated using the formula: Added Value = Price that the product/service is sold at - cost of producing the product In short, added value means BMF's NAV should be higher than a mere summation of our assets by any formula, for several reasons; the risk analysis I did, the hardware analysis of companies, the interviews, the shareholder letters, the ability to partake in bulk orders like we did with ASICMINER, etc. We were not an index fund. That is merely what my job was, my stated duty as the manager. I intended to do analysis and value the stocks as I saw fit. Of course I would only invest in stocks which I believed were undervalued! I'm not an idiot that I would keep stocks on the books if I felt they were long term losers! And I did in fact do better than bonds like GIGAMINING or YABMC. While they lost 65% or more of their value, BMF only lost 50% in the mining crash. That is a fact. BCB writes "this is again an example of Usagi shirking his fiduciary responsibility" because he has again stated I made inaccurate valuations. However, I haven't made inaccurate valuations! Where is the proof I have made inaccurate valuations? Do you understand what proof means? You have to show that I valued incorrectly by making it obvious how a correct valuation should be done. BCB has attempted and failed to do this. he has based his conclusion on the quote from "#3" above and possibly on the liquidation-value spreadsheets posted by puppet and eskimobob. However, his conclusion from #3 is that I admitted it therefore it must be true (all I did was state we used fair value accounting, that is not an admission of valuing incoreectly) and for the liquidation-value contention, I again quote the definition of fair value: "Under US GAAP (FAS 157), fair value is the amount at which the asset could be bought or sold in a current transaction between willing parties, or transferred to an equivalent party, other than in a liquidation sale." That it was proposed at all that I was misleading investors by publishing a NAV "which was not at bid prices" is a complete joke. 7. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=133823.msg1426595#msg1426595 Usagi Used Threats and intimidation to silence critics. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=133819.msg1426051#msg1426051 BCB is unable to read -- I quote my exact words in the above linked post: "I'm still thinking how to proceed but whatever decision will involve a community-approved decision, ..." and in a clarification to EskimoBob here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=126560.msg1416758#msg1416758 " No, you're going to get something, just minus a community approved amount for the financial damages you've caused the company. There are other issues at stake here besides obvious financial damages such as the BAKEWELL contract -- for example, have you returned your double payment from Nefario? Why should I pay you full value for your shares when your actions have directly harmed every other shareholder of BMF? Why would I pay you for what you have already been paid for? This will be the gist of what I'll be going to the community with when I propose that you be docked a fair price for the damage you've caused." It is quite clear I am not using intimidation or threats to silence my critics! It's well known EskimoBob cannot be silenced by any means! I contend that it is false and misleading that BCB has stated I used intimidation to silence critics, and that his comparison of me to pirate was unfair and defamatory. As was his calling me "delusional" and a "liar" during the initial time of this case before he received such evidence from eskimobob and deprived. 8. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=133823.msg1426602#msg1426602 "Usagi claims to have consulted and paid an "Internet defamation lawyer" to investigate EskimoBob's Defination claims as part of his intimidation yet he can not provide an invoice that this fee was paid nor even a name of he lawyer." I have told BCB I had a telephone consultation with a lawyer and that it was unlikely that the lawyer would confirm any details of my consultation with him because I did not retain him and because it would violate the privilege I have when consulting with a lawyer. So far BCB has given me little reason to trust him and I don't want to start revealing personal details and the details of people I do business with to such a person. Also, the fact that I contacted a lawyer means nothing. So not sure where you're going with this. The fact is, I was accused of fraud and of committing crimes, and of being under investigation for crimes. If you do not get that this is illegal and it's only a matter of time and money to prosecute these people, you are completely unqualified to do any sort of arbitration. 9. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=133823.msg1426621#msg1426621 "Deprived has pieced a time line from actual post of Usagi's attempt to misappropriate company assets. .. The Case of the Vanishing Hardware" Oh for FUCK SAKES. I sold my personal property single to jborkl and got a refund from BFL for the others. I'm in the process of handling claims. How can you state there is "vanishing hardware"? Based on what evidence? Stop lying about disappearing hardware. There is no dissappearing hardware and there is no timeline because there is no case. I got a refund and will return the money to BMF investors in due course. It makes me very angry that you have posted this without allowing me to make a response. You have treated me unfairly by taking Deprived at his word and yet refuse to take me at mine, and deny my evidence. You have stated I am guilty until proven innocent. Bitforce Single 832 MH/s (Personal Property, output donated to BMF) Order #7650 Order date Sep. 10 BitForce Jalapeno 3.5 GH/s Order #7839 Order date Sep. 11, 2012 BitForce 'SC' Single 40 GH/s Order #7971 Order date Sep. 13, 2012 Bitforce Single 832 MH/s Order #8665 Order date Sep. 19, 2012 Bitforce Jalapeno 3.5 GH/s #8670 Order date Sep. 19, 2012 E-MAIL SENT TO BUTTERFLY LABS: On 04/12/2012 10:46 AM, Tsukino Usagi wrote: > Dear Butterfly Labs; > > Thanks for the update back in October re: my order no. 8665. > > I also have order numbers 8670, 7839, and 7971, the first two for > bitforce jalapeno units and the third for a bitforce sc single. > > It's been a long time and while I realize there is a huge demand for > these units, I no longer wish to purchase them due to what amounts to an > act of god regarding my financial position. So I will make the following > request, sil vous plais; > > Please let me know if I can cancel those three orders and get a refund > in bitcoins (I will provide an address), or please give me an > approximate date when my units can be shipped. Thank you very much! > Update: I found a list of the order numbers I made: 7650 <--- forgot I had this one, it's on my list. 7839 7971 8665 <--- has already arrived, thank you 8670 In regards to the other four order numbers, I very much need to know if I can cancel and get a refund or re-route shipping, and what the approximate date is for shipping. I know you guys are probably swamped but please answer as soon as you are able! Thank you. RESPONSE #1: Hi Tsukino, I see you have 2 Jalapenos (7839 and 8670) and one Single SC (7971). The other orders were for FPGA Singles which have shipped to you. I can send you a refund through BitPay, but I need a BTC wallet address to send the money. Kind regards, Jody RESPONSE #2: Hi Usagi, I think you should have all your money refunded now. Jody SENT TODAY TO BUTTERFLY LABS: Dear Jody; I can't seem to find the tracking number for the second single. If you have it on file can you please send it to me? The tracking number for the first single was Tracking # xx xxx xxx xxx xx www.usps.com and was sent to me by "Alicia". Thank you for your consideration. The order numbers are: 7650 8665 <--- has already arrived, thank you My statement: "Suddenly 2 FPGAs (on the 18th that was the only pre-orders and they had no hardware) has become "a few FPGA and ASIC singles"". Is BCB really trying to indict me for speaking about the hardware in general terms? I can't imagine why he has put any stock in Deprived's constructed bullshit. 10. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=133823.msg1426637#msg1426637 deprived and makomk have posted evidence that Usagi mislead his investors to lower the share price of his assets then bought them back at a lower price. deprived and makomk have posted evidence that Usagi mislead his investors to lower the share price of his assets then bought them back at a lower price. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=113708.msg1426523#msg1426523 They posted evidence? Evidence that I misled investors TO (with the intent of) lowering the share price, AND THEN buying them back at a lower price? No. First, nowhere in Deprives post is any information about me misleading investors NOR is it mentioned I purchased shares back. it seems to be entirely about claims he has made that are unsubstantiable by him -- such as what was on CPA's balance sheet, or irrelevant quotes from unrelated threads, such as the TECSHARE scammer thread. For example: "I am not going to be able to use any of the designs, and we might go under." - claims on August 18th CPA may go under (or is it some other insurance company he runs?)" This is from a PRIVATE MESSAGE that was sent to TECSHARE. The TECSHARE case is not related to this, and this was NOT an advertisement to shareholders, or even public. The TECSHARE case has been very well documented -- I was defrauded by TECSHARE. Even though TECSHARE has recieved full payment for his art, I have not recieved any art!!!! Then, the most unbelievable thing: BCB quotes: But on Aug 23rd says to CPA investors: "In the event of a full pirate default, NYAN.C will loose out, and CPA holds NYAN which holds NYAN.C. Then we have contracts on the outside as well. All in all CPA will remain very solvent, it may lose 20% of it's value in a full default. But we stands just as ready to gain 20% if pirate doesn't default." - it will remain very solvent. Does this look like I was trying to crash the value of my company? Unbelievably, BCB has used a public statement by me that we are solvent and we will not default, as proof I was trying to crash the company. This is incomprehensible to me, how he could have gotten this so wrong. |