Bitcoin Forum
May 23, 2024, 02:49:59 AM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 27.0 [Torrent]
 
  Home Help Search Login Register More  
  Show Posts
Pages: « 1 ... 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 [55] 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 »
1081  Economy / Scam Accusations / Re: Usagi: falsifying NAVs, manipulating share prices and misleading investors. on: December 27, 2012, 02:11:15 AM
The Nyan structure was totally fucked from the start...

Just because you don't understand it, doesn't mean it was fucked. For example:

With multiple tiers the same principle applies - and the underlieing point is that you have to know the ratios to assess the risk/reward of the different tiers.  This dismally failed to happen with Nyan.  Parent Nyan seemingly was meant to maintain some sort of balance - but the ratios were never given, never adhered to and Nyan bailed out on it before closure (sales of A and/or C were stopped eventually - but by then the damage was done).

The ratios were published on the spreadsheets and were relatively stable after the IPO period. In addition I announced the number of shares weekly in shareholder letters. So to put it simply, you don't understand what I did, and you are assuming I did something wrong, when I didn't.

Do you get it? You are saying I didn't publish the ratios --- BUT I DID. And not only did I publish them, I went out of my way to show them to investors by presenting the share counts in weekly letters to shareholders.

When it comes to buying back one thing is an obvious fact - unless you buy back in exactly the current ratio of each tier, the act of buying back will necessarily change the ratios and hence alter the risk/reward for investors. That's an absolute no-no to do.

You don't understand our contract, nor the shareholder motion which I had up to vote on this. You also don't seem to understand this had been discussed and was a generally approved plan of action. M. in the previous message is acting like he doesn't understand how buying back 1,000 shares of NYAN.B would help .C investors -- it was discussed to death 3 months ago.  He doesn't need to understand it now. Secondly, the only reason why SOME of the shares were bought back under 1 is because despite my pleas to IGNORE puppet, eskimobob, and YOU, people panic sold my stock.

Don't you remember? You people viciously attacked me.

Seeing as how EskimoBob among others have NON-TRIVIAL amounts of investment in my companies, it now seems obvious you were engaged in a stock price manipulation scheme. Did you know EskimoBob's NYAN.A holdings alone are worth more than $500 US? He was in deep. Why was he pushing so hard? Was he buying on the cheap? This wasn't 1 or 2 shares. Mircea was in too. All the time MPOE-PR was shitting on me, and the trouble I had with smickles, pigeons, and so on -- and what comes out in the end? Mircea has over $1,000 US in NYAN.A alone and is invested in almost every one of my companies. What the hell? $50 bucks says you and puppet were also in. Now the picture becomes clear doesn't it?

There's actually more evidence towards you scamming me and intentionally trying to destroy my business tnan there is towards me "falsifying NAVs" (proven false), manipulating share prices (proven false), and misleading investors (proven false). Stick to the topic. Am I guilty of what has been claimed against me here, or am I innocent?

Put simply, usagi totally failed to implement an absolutely essential requirement to run a properly structured asset of the type it was intended to be.  And then screwed up whatever little equilibrium there was by doing buy backs - meaning anyone who had actually done some calculation just had it negated.  And that's when it actually got even worse - but that's a different tale entirely.

EDIT: to be clear this post isn't alleging scamming - just pointing out the mind-boggling degree of ignorance and incompetence associated with the way nyan was run.

No. You are ignorant. I did what I said I would do in my contracts and I went above and beyond what everyone else was doing at the time by publishing weekly letters to shareholders. Now stick to the topic. I have been cleared of the claims made against me in the OP.

Where is the statement from the moderators?
1082  Economy / Scam Accusations / Re: Ian Bakewell on: December 27, 2012, 01:58:57 AM
do you consent to burnside confirming whether or not shares in bakewell were issued to it?

Burnside knows what e-mail address I used to lay claim to GLBSE shares because it's at the top of all the lists he owns. To date I have received zero notice at that address. Did I miss it? Where is it? Either way it will be handled. That isn't the main issue.

The main issue here for me is that Ian Bakewell has damaged my reputation and defrauded me and my investors. If you think he hasn't damaged my reputation -- look around. There's money involved here. Real damages.

I've offered an easy remedy for Ian.
1083  Economy / Scam Accusations / Re: Ian Bakewell on: December 26, 2012, 02:34:35 PM
quoting this because it's relevant (note: please do not reply to this on the other thread; respond to it here only)

...Ian Bakewell broke a signed contract with CPA...publicly lied to me, threatened to lie about me in PMs (on record, theymos or other mods can see), lied about his company's finances, and so forth.

I don't think this scam accusation does not have it's merits. I strongly believe that Ian should get a scammer tag, but I don't think other people's scammer threads are the good place to post this.

bold emphasis mine (and FWIW I am sorry to HorseRider and BadBear for posting off-topic the other thread).
1084  Economy / Scam Accusations / Re: Ian Bakewell on: December 26, 2012, 01:29:51 PM
Quoted Posts:
(*):
Usagi: Refusal of payment after result of this: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=104489.msg1231746#msg1231746

My position is clear.

Our communication prior to the motion makes it easy to see that we were speaking in regard to Section A4 and the acceleration of your obligation (Bringing us to expiry)

Section D 1-2 Gives the option to release the trust account to the business

Shareholders have voted unanimously (all but you anyhow) to close our account, under the assumption that:
Although if you do want the money back that's fine, I just want to see that your shareholders agree (motion).

Anyhow, to keep this thread clean, I will take this over to the Scammers Accusations thread. This is obviously more Usagi doublespeak in action.
  Wants the shareholders to be paid in an attempt to claw back, as they hold some BAKEWELL shares that would get the divvy.
Having a whole refund to use as working capital makes much more sense for us as a company.


Dear shareholders of BAKEWELL.

As you have recently voted to end the Shareholder Protection contract with CPA, I will agree to accelerate CPA's obligation. A motion was therefore held, and as the shareholders agree the contract should be canceled, the money will be returned to the shareholders. This decision is final, if I break my end of the contract I will lose trust.

I am not trying to screw anyone here, I am just following the contract. The contract which states there is a no-cancellation clause. The contract says:

C.
1. If the business breaks the terms of their contract without
   reparation, CPA will pay the value of the trust account to
   the shareholders of the business on behalf of the business.
2. A period of 30 days will be allowed for the business to
   respond and make reparations before paying out on any
   default event.


As Ian wanted to cancel the contact, BAKEWELL is in technical default. However I agree to accelerate my obligation here and work with Ian to return the money to the shareholders. tl; dr:

A.
2. CPA will insure shareholders by paying out on behalf of
   the business should the business become unable or unwilling
   to fufill the terms of it's contract (see section C).
4. No party may cancel this contract although any party may
   choose to accelerate their obligation at any time.

The full contract may be viewed online here.

I now suspect Ian will become angry at me because he took my words in PM to mean I would return the money to him personally (as an agent of BAKEWELL). I obviously cannot do this.

As soon as Ian pays a dividend of 4 BTC on Bakewell, I will send 4 BTC to the address listed below. This isn't up for appeal; Yes, CPA is in a bad situation and the last thing I need is MPOE-PR, EskimoBob, Puppet or some other jackass turning this on me saying I broke my own contract. Sorry Ian, that things had to turn out this way, again, in 6 months when this blows over and I am still around you should probably apologize for breaking your contract. Your reasoning here was exceedingly faulty, unfortunately you are bound to be angry over this, but time will tell, won't it?

Please don't expect a discussion, this decision is final. You signed a contract.

-----

Ok, at this point there's two options. Please pay a dividend of 4 BTC to your shareholders and I will transfer the money to your account on GLBSE (or to the address you have provided). Second option I can ask Nefario to take the 4 BTC out of CPA's account and have it distributed that way (if you don't trust me :p)

Anyway, sorry to see so many people voting to return it, six months later when I'm still around I might suggest you apologize. This hurt CPA and we're already in a bad situation now. When the going gets tough for BAKEWELL I can only hope your customers don't treat you as badly.

Usagi,

The understanding was that this would be a refund. You were to give the coin back to me.
Otherwise, why would my shareholders have needed to agree to have it paid to them as a dividend?

Although if you do want the money back that's fine, I just want to see that your shareholders agree (motion).

I do want the money back, my shareholders do agree, please pay:  1Q1k2uTUZ1ZSSufH2w9xnCnPPzC1QmreEa

Ian

No, you signed a contract. The disbursement options are specific. It can be paid as a dividend. This was a shareholder protection agreement, you cancelled the contract via a motion, and the money will be returned immediately -- to your shareholders. As you were told before this money was held in trust on behalf of your shareholders. It isn't BAKEWELL's money anymore.
The option to have it paid as a dividend through Nefario was offered to me prior to saying I could have the money back but you wanted to see a motion.
The motion was asked for when you said "if you (me) want the money back that's fine"
Please send the 4 BTC to:  1Q1k2uTUZ1ZSSufH2w9xnCnPPzC1QmreEa


Ok, if you don't want to pay it as a dividend, I'll send a letter to Nefario asking him to do it. Are you going to pay the dividend or not, yes or no?

[edit: If you agree to pay the dividend soon after (say within a day) I'll take you at your word and send you the 4 BTC first. But be advised if you don't pay the dividend, you will lose trust with your shareholders.]







(**):
Those of you following along will remember that not to long ago CPA had started talking about potential problems.
I have had my doubts about their ability to honour our agreements from that time on,
CPA has openly admitted to being in a liquidity crunch, and other community members have pointed out the held assets will not cover current liabilities.

[CLOSED] [CPA] [BMF] [NYAN] Liquidity Loan Request
[GLBSE] CPA - No Dividends for the month of August, 2012

In the last little bit, much drama has surrounded Usagi and CPA, cumulating in a scammers accusations thread:

Usagi: falsifying NAVs, manipulating share prices and misleading investors.

I am not the type of person to walk away from a commitment, however at this time I think it would be best to stop payment on the CPA account until this is resolved.

I have raised a motion this afternoon asking the shareholders to approve the closure of the Shareholder Protection Fund held in trust with CPA.

A few days ago I reached out to Usagi about options on closing the account.
I will add that conversation bellow. Mods are welcome to confirm the messages are in my pms and appear here unedited (personal conversation removed, BAKEWELL stuff posted):

Hello Usagi,

In the time between founding BAKEWELL and creating the shareholder insurance fund with you, and now, the plan for BAKEWELL has dramatically changed.
BAKEWELL is a much smaller company than I initially thought I would launch with. We will continue to grow, but on a slow roll out basis.
At this time, the dividends from BAKEWELL will not cover the funds fee. As such I am not able to continue with it at this time.
I will be utilizing the small dividend I receive to aggressively grow BAKEWELL until the first half of the ipo is sold out.
I apologize for any inconvenience this causes you.

The fund currently has 4 BTC in it.
I would like to work out a refund of this from you, less a small management fee.
I would then like to restart this with a larger initial contribution and a payment plan based on dividend income once half of my ipo is cleared out.

Thank you,

Ian


Hi. Working out a refund is not possible because this is an agreement designed to protect your shareholders in case of a default on your end. These funds are held in trust on behalf of your shareholders. Second point (the obvious one) but bears bringing up, there is a non-cancellation clause.

The first problem here, on my end, is that whether or not you are experiencing financial difficulties, this is precisely what a scammer would try to do before he defaulted on his contract. He would try to get money such as this returned to him. That is precisely the reason why I cannot return it; this is a shareholder protection agreement.

The second problem is on your end. If you fail to pay your premium your contract will be voided and I must announce this publicly since your shareholders would no longer be covered.

If you feel the financial difficulties you are experiencing are temporary, I will agree to postponing payments for up to four weeks.

Yes, I know I could "just take back" what we signed and it would be easy for me to just absolve you of any liability and return the money. However if I did that I would not be doing my job. If your company is unable to meet the obligations in it's contract as a direct result of having to pay 1 btc per week, you have a problem.

Anyways, if you really really feel sour about this I suggest we discuss it openly with your shareholders. The best I can offer you is to have Nefario pay the money as a special dividend, as you wouldn't have met the trust concerns of no default over a 1 year period.

Good luck!

Usagi,

BAKEWELL is fine and sitting cash heavy right now. 110btc and $4k CAN. I will be purchasing the rigs this week. I can expect around 650mhash per 7970, looking at 4-6 of these cards to start, I can estimate my dividends. We are not big enough yet that my portion of earnings would cover the fund contribution.
We are equitable, with a small return and utilizing the 7970's as a stop gap until asic tech is available for delivery.

I am 737 shares into my second funding round. I will need to sell another 1763 shares before my contract allows for another equipment purchase anyhow.

I am aware of the contract clauses, particularly A4 and section D. A4 allowing you to accelerate your portion, and section D pertaining to the expiry date & offering repayment to myself or as a dividend to shareholders.

I understand this is a "scammer" move, asking for the refund. But in all reality, the 4btc against the 500+ I have raised to date, is les than 1%.
In the event I defaulted right now, I doubt many are going to care about their share of the 4btc.

If we are not able to move forward on this privately (and I understand the commitments and reputation you must maintain) then I would ask that we begin working on this option: "The best I can offer you is to have Nefario pay the money as a special dividend, as you wouldn't have met the trust concerns of no default over a 1 year period."

Thank you,
Ian

I changed my mind and decided to wait a few days more, see how things would play out over the next little bit. Maybe Usagi is all good and trolls are trolls.
I send them this:

Usagi,

Another idea:
Would you be willing to move the minimum contribution down from 1btc to 50% of my dividends (as pledged here)
I would be happy to continue on with CPA as we grow.

Ian

Ok, I have confirmed that's ok here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=104489.msg1223276#msg1223276

Although if you do want the money back that's fine, I just want to see that your shareholders agree (motion).

As you may guess I've been busy as can be recently and I haven't had a chance to look at the new securities in greater depth, but glancing thru the thread I'm happy to see your shareholders are excited ^^ That's a good sign.

Ok so to recap, moving forward, we're lowering the minimum payment to 0.1/week (or 50% of div or whatever) -- the idea I think should be to show investors the fund is increasing every week by something. If it's a small amount thats probably fine, since you don't have your ASIC units yet.

*bold emphasis mine*
1085  Economy / Scam Accusations / Ian Bakewell on: December 26, 2012, 01:28:48 PM
Summary:
I made a scam accusation against EskimoBob, in which I posted IRC logs and several witnesses came forward to confirm what I said was true. Maged allowed EskimoBob to derail the thread, and said that I had made dishonest statements. Ian Bakewell read those comments and decided to back out of a contract with a no cancellation clause. In order to do this, Ian Bakewell threatened me, lied to me, defrauded CPA and attempted to defraud his own investors.

Detail:
Ian Bakewell broke a signed contract with CPA. We had a public contract which he signed in his asset thread. Ian was spotty with payments but managed to pay 4 btc. One day he sent me a letter stating quite clearly that his company had financial trouble and could no longer afford to make payments. He himself offered to make half payments or reduced payments until such time as he could afford to pay the full amount. I agreed. A few days later he sent another e-mail stating he could no longer keep his contract and would be forced to break it. I told him I understood his position but that due to the structure of the contract I could not return the bitcoins to him. He immediately blew up and threatened that if I did not return the bitcoins to him, he would "drag my name through the mud". After some back and forth I informed him I would require a shareholder motion before returning the funds as a dividend. He refused and begain issuing malicious libel against me; for example he stated I was attempting to clawback the funds. he stated I was breaking the contract (I was keeping the contract!) He stated that when I said I would return the money I meant "to him" (I did not, please see the contract). He also began attacking me in other theads. He took potshots against me in many other threads and was a contributing factor in the troll campaign against me. To this day he continues to mock me and take potshots against me. I feel the time has come this must stop, and I have a little free time tonight, so I am finally typing this up.

I request that Ian Bakewell be given the scammer tag for:
1. Defrauding CPA and CPA's investors by backing out of a contract in a hostile manner;
2. For lying about me, threatening me (in short-- for blackmailing me into acquiescing to his demands)
3. For attempting to defraud his investors, by reclaiming funds under which contract stated would be returned to his invetsors
4. For issuing libel and slander against me, which has caused the value of my companies to decline and has harmed my shareholders.

Proof:
1. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=113708.msg1235273#msg1235273 (* quoted in post #2 below)
Ian lied to me about his financial position in BAKEWELL and asked me to reduce his payment. A few days later he said he had to break the contract.
He then tried to drag my name thru the mud. Read the above link. it's quite clear I stuck to my contract and he was a total asshole to me. here are some of the other lies he told about me:

---"I would then like to restart this with a larger initial contribution and a payment plan based on dividend income once half of my ipo is cleared out."
This is clearly a lie based on his later stated reasons for breaking the contract. He was trying to trick me.

---"Wants the shareholders to be paid in an attempt to claw back, as they hold some BAKEWELL shares that would get the divvy."
The contract clearly stated the money would be returned to shareholders. Read the thread, people were agreeing with me.

2. (ibid)
"I do want the money back, my shareholders do agree, please pay:  1Q1k2uTUZ1ZSSufH2w9xnCnPPzC1QmreEa"
No shateholder motion was issued or voted on at that time. He lied.

3. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=113708.msg1343386#msg1343386
"Long live those trolls."
Announces his recognition and supports the idea that he was just trolling against me to damage my reputation and crash my business.

4. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=113708.msg1343639#msg1343639
No unresolved issues.

5. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=112443.msg1226222#msg1226222
"I make all my financials available in the third post of my thread & I try to stay as current as possible."
Ian did not disclose for several weeks that he could not get his 7970's to work, thereby defrauding investors in his company who were lied to in order that Ian could get more BTC from sale of shares.

6. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=104489.msg1231746#msg1231746 (** quoted in post #2 below)
In this post Ian presents himself as a scammer by his own words. Read the post.
A rough summary is as follows:


a. Ian says:
"In the time between founding BAKEWELL and creating the shareholder insurance fund with you, and now, the plan for BAKEWELL has dramatically changed.
BAKEWELL is a much smaller company than I initially thought I would launch with. We will continue to grow, but on a slow roll out basis.
At this time, the dividends from BAKEWELL will not cover the funds fee. As such I am not able to continue with it at this time.
I will be utilizing the small dividend I receive to aggressively grow BAKEWELL until the first half of the ipo is sold out.
I apologize for any inconvenience this causes you.

The fund currently has 4 BTC in it.
I would like to work out a refund of this from you, less a small management fee.
I would then like to restart this with a larger initial contribution and a payment plan based on dividend income once half of my ipo is cleared out."

b. I immediately respond:
"Working out a refund is not possible because this is an agreement designed to protect your shareholders in case of a default on your end."

c. Ian responds he is aware he CAN NOT cancel the contract in this way:
"I am aware of the contract clauses, particularly A4 and section D."

d. He gets caught in the lie here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=104489.msg1232050#msg1232050

e. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=104489.msg1236180#msg1236180
In this post Ian once again states that the "single largest factor" in losing his business was the troll threads. This is in sharp contrast to his statement in a).

7. Ian bakewell tries to blackmail me by threatening to "drag my name through the mud" if I did not do what he said:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=104489.msg1236142#msg1236142
Please note above (point 6c) that Ian was fully aware of the no cancellation clause when he lied to me and threatened me in this way.

8. Ian Bakewell voted NO on one of my securities on BTCT.CO and left nasty, damaging comments which surely affected other investors. As a result I have been forced to list with restrictions -- My companies can not trade. Therefore I am unable to establish market value and this will severely and adversely affect the value I am able to return to shareholders.

9. Ian Bakewell has not returned the 423 shares of BAKEWELL to me nor acknowledged any e-mails requesting the return of those shares.

In short, Ian has committed fraud on multiple fronts; he defrauded CPA, he lied in order to cancel his contract in full knowledge he could not do this and he attempted to slander me on the forums in order to get out of his contract. Secondly he is ripping off BMF for about 60 bitcoins (423 shares of BAKEWELL).

As is required by common law and intelligent people, I offer Ian Bakewell a remedy; if he issues a RETRACTION and an APOLOGY (these are two separate things) and returns the 423 shares of BAKEWELL, then I will consider the matter settled. If he does not then I want him to get a scammer tag until such time as he issues a retraction and an apology and returns the shares, The bitcoins (from the CPA contract) were returned to BAKEWELL shareholders so that is not an issue; this is about the likely irreparable damage he has done to my reputation and my businesses.

I only ask that this case be treated fairly. Thank you for your time.
1086  Economy / Scam Accusations / Re: SCAMMER:matthewh3. Violating agreement on: December 26, 2012, 05:14:34 AM
Evidence 5: Matthewh3's excuse


So I either piss you off horserider by making you wait.  Or could possibly leave the company bankrupt if the ASIC's were fake.  I don't personally have that kind of money to buy them personally.  If I did I would have had no need for RSM as I could of just bought my own hardware.

I'm thinking now of listing everyone's shares on btc.co (to ease dividend payments) with the intention of buying them all back with my dividends.

In your situation it appears that you only had a verbal contract and that Matthew just wants a little time until the ASICs arrive. This is completely reasonable since you should know he would invest it in mining hardware, having run RSM, right? It is completely fair that you, as owner of RSM shares, now must acquire the liabiliy of waiting for the ASICs to arrive.

[NOTE: comparisons to another scam case have been apologized for and edited out by usagi.]
1087  Economy / Securities / Re: NYAN/BMF/CPA CLAIMS (latest news in post #45) on: December 26, 2012, 05:05:23 AM
Not even sure what you think burnside can do with the lists if you don't want him to import the shares : reason he needs them for companies relisting on BTC.CO is so as to automatically create accounts for each investor with correct number of shares in, then email them the login details for it so they can assume control of the shares.

Additionally, many investors have requested that I personally and manually liquidate their shares on their behalf. As you can see, I've been hard at work contacting shareholders and trying to let them know what is going on. If I have to now make them register on BTCT.CO I think that would upset many people. I don't think it is an unreasonable request to let me manage the share distribution entirely manually if I give the lists to burnside anyway, as all transactions are on record and the shares are locked from trading. If I were to do anything nefarious it would be immediately apparent.

This is just what I've received in the last couple of days:

Claim #8:
Hello,
I believe you have ... shares.
... is a clearcut 0.01 BTC each, guaranteed.
... is ... 1 BTC (per share)...
Did you want to trade some of these for BMF?

Claim #13:
Hello, Thank you for your hard work, I really appreciate your doing the right thing. I would like my assets to be liquidated, and sent to: ...
Thanks, and Merry Christmas!

Claim #21:
Please liquidate my assets @ 1 BTC per share.
Thank you.

Claim #28:
Please liquidate it.
Address:...

Claim #9:
Hi, Usagi  I want to liquidate all my assets, you can send payments
to address above - ...
Merry Christmas to you and your family Smiley)

Claimant G.:
I so appreciate the efforts you are making to try to get this mess
straightened out.   I had "invested" the bulk of over a year's worth of
mining profits in GLBSE.
I actually thought I was doing rather well to only be down 8% or so at the
time. Hehe

Claim #2 (holds 22% of NYAN.A)
Thank you for processing the NYAN.A claims. For the record, from what I
remember I also had ### shares of NYAN.B and ### shares of NYAN.C at the
time that GLBSE went down. According to your message I will probably be
receiving letters confirming the other holdings as long as they made it
onto Nefario's lists.

At present I do not really have enough information to make a clear decision
on whether to accept the BMF shares or have them liquidated and accept the
bitcoin. Although I followed the threads at the Bitcoin Forums where you
were releasing news regarding the NYAN assets, I did not investigate each
entity that NYAN held. I was investing in the NYAN assets as a sort of
speculative mutual fund where I did not necessarily need to track each
individual holding. In other words, I am not familiar with BMF, what it
does, whether it is still a viable entity, or what its market value might
be in the future.

Therefore, unless I can gather more information on BMF and be convinced
that it has a reasonable chance of appreciating in value, I would probably
be better off exercising the liquidation option and simply accepting the
bitcoin. The liquidated value can be sent to the same bitcoin address that
I used to file the claim at GLBSE and is in your original message:
...

At any rate, I am grateful for your efforts to resolve this whole mess
after the unexpected closure of GLBSE. I had nearly written off my original
investment of 500 BTC as a total loss when I went back to the forum about a
week ago and discovered that Nefario was actually beginning to send out
payments again and was compiling lists of the asset holdings. On December
12 I finally received a payment of 30 BTC, presumably from Nefario because
GLBSE was the only place where I had posted my bitcoin address. This was
not a full payment; as I recall, I had about 40-45 BTC on my account at
GLBSE when the site went down, but at least I have managed to recover most
of it. If I can also manage to recover most of the approximately 500 BTC I
had tied up in the NYAN assets, this would be very good news indeed.

Claimant B.:
Hi there,
... My wallet address is:  ...
Please confirm receipt and let me know if you need anything else.  Thanks!
Regards,
B.

Claimant V.:
Greetings,
...
Thanks,
V.
Oh also, I PM'd you long ago about YARR and bumped many of your threads
with positive stuff on the forums if that lends any credibility.
1088  Economy / Securities / Re: NYAN/BMF/CPA CLAIMS (latest news in post #45) on: December 26, 2012, 04:26:18 AM
Burnside has been given the complete asset lists from Nefario.

I've advised him that I should handle the distributions manually as several customers have already requested liquidation, and some other customers owe us money (like patrick harnett) and still other customers are in negotiations with us for value exchanges -- such as Namworld & friends whom we are discussing right now if an asset exchange is in the best interest of our companies.

I'll post here again when burnside gets back to me on what he is going to do with those lists. If they are processed automatically there may be some issues with scammers like Patrick Harnett, etc. receiving too many shares. Dunno, we will see what happens.

You could always give him the lists and first remove those who there are issues with (i.e. those who owe you funds) - then you can subsequently manually transfer to them shares if necessary.  Ones like namworld you're negotiating with aren't a problem - as they can transfer the shares back if you make a deal.

Key is to get all the smaller, undisputed, ones into the system - otherwise you're left unable to do any distributions whilst you wait for them all to respond to your emails (plus you still have to then do something with their shares - as you know their email address and BTC address you can hardly just return the shares to treasury).  Plus doing it through burnside removes several nasty possibilities - like someone spoofing someone else's email address in an email to you to get you to send to wrong account on BTC.CO.


Are you joking?

Are you suggesting I alter the lists nefario gave me? Do you realize the shitstorm that would cause if I did that?

YOU would probably turn around and accuse me of fraud.

You know, this is supposed to be, essentially, a fund -- i.e. a passthru business. If the stocks we invested in go down I lose the money I get from it, you know? I only held 5% of shares as management fee and the only god damn money I got from this was from the profits distributed from dividends. The point here is that I want to look after my own interests as well as those of my shareholders because our interests are aligned.

Every time you said I did something deceitful, every time eskimobob said I was misrepresenting NAV, every time anyone said I was scamming, they seem to forget the only person I could have been scamming was myself. Now you suggest I edit the lists that nef gave me before I give them to burnside. That's insane, even in a normal situation. I cannot create a fraudulent list any more than I could not create a fraudulent list of shareholders, which is why I did NOTHING to process claims until I got a full list from Nefario.

Why can't everyone see I am just trying to do what is normal and right? It's because of what you said, Deprived. You, EskimoBob, deeplink and Puppet. You have people actually believing I knew patrick harnett ripped people off in kraken before pirate crashed. You have people believing that I knew hashking lied about his guarantee and that he really had all the money in pirate. You guys claim that I misrepresented the NAVs of what we invested in despite the fact it was in the contract we would add value via analysis AND we provided two valiation columns, one with data pulled DIRECTLY from GLBSE. AND*** we ran shareholder motions authorizing us to do this. What is your god damn problem? Do you realize how badly YOU screwed this up? YOU personally, not to mention the others?

And on it goes. You know what I seriously don't care anymore. If I can't distribute assets manually, I don't care! It's your fault I cannot do that. If the value of the company goes down because patrick harnett and hashking (and others) ripped us off and we also have to give them a peice of our company on top of that well whoop de do, the power to do the right thing was removed from me. The damage you did to me is probably irreversable. And you yourself admitted you have no proof. So did puppet. And guruvan. And EskimoBob posting out of date lists. And diablo not recognizing my e-mail address in his list. And on and on.

U know, Theymos AND badbear have both told me they will never issue a statement or close the scammer threads against me, in theymos's case he said it was because he could not prove a negative (that I was not a scammer). Guilty until proven innocent. That's me, the scammer without a tag.
1089  Economy / Securities / Re: NYAN/BMF/CPA CLAIMS (latest news in post #45) on: December 26, 2012, 02:27:15 AM
Burnside has been given the complete asset lists from Nefario.

I've advised him that I should handle the distributions manually as several customers have already requested liquidation, and some other customers owe us money (like patrick harnett) and still other customers are in negotiations with us for value exchanges -- such as Namworld & friends whom we are discussing right now if an asset exchange is in the best interest of our companies.

I'll post here again when burnside gets back to me on what he is going to do with those lists. If they are processed automatically there may be some issues with scammers like Patrick Harnett, etc. receiving too many shares. Dunno, we will see what happens.
1090  Economy / Scam Accusations / Re: Usagi: falsifying NAVs, manipulating share prices and misleading investors. on: December 26, 2012, 02:16:44 AM
I didn't fail. GLBSE failed.
That makes for a convenient excuse now, but unfortunately you and everything you operated had both well and truly failed way before the GLBSE shutdown. You'd already significantly overstated the value of the assets your securities held, and were in the process of screwing over NYAN investors through a bizarre shutdown scheme for NYAN.B that broke your contractual obligations and screwed over investors in all the NYANs except possibly NYAN.C.

A convenient excuse for what? You seem to be under the impression that a) I invested in stuff that the contract said I wouldn't invest in, or b) invetors were not fully informed of what was in the contracts.

If that isn't what you're saying then spit it out. I only did what was in the contracts and everyone knew what I was doing. It was only after the fact when GLBSE started crashing that people attacked me, saying I knew all along, and other impossible to believe garbage.

Like you for example --> I loved how you called the NYAN shutdown "scheme" bizzare. You mean like when I bought back 1100 bitcoins of NYAN.A and NYAN.B on the open market in about a week, with 400-500 bought back the following week? Oh that's so bizzare. Oh and the shareholder motions that allowed me to do it. SO, SO bizzare, huh.

I also loved how people were saying it made a lot of sense since it would help out the NYAN.C shareholders as NYAN.B would not take up the extra dividend flow from NYAN.A. And how there were no victims because NYAN.B holders could still get 1 bitcoin per share. And thousands of shares were bought back in that manner. I did good. But now, you want to be an asshole, so you call it "bizzare". Get something straight, YOU are bizzare.

I think I get it now. People like you, who don't understand anything about investing or finance are looking for a pinata to beat up. Who knows maybe some candy will fall out. It doesn't matter that i'm not responsible for your loss, I'm just a convenient scapegoat. All I did was invest in companies on behalf of investors. I invested in a WIDE RANGE of securities according to the contracts. If you can't point out where I violated my contract for NYAN in particular, or if you cannot point out that I knew mining would crash (for example) then you CANNOT logically say I am responsible for what happened.

95% of commodity futures investors lose all their money in the first 6 months (http://www.financialsense.com/financial-sense-newshour/2012/12/15/opposing-forces-monetary-vs-fiscal-policy). Did you know that? When you invest in bitcoins you acquire commodity risk due to the pricing of bitcoins in US dollars. Not to mention a secondary commodity risk in the value of the hardware. If you do not understand what you are doing when you invest in mining and you lose your money IT IS ENTIRELY **YOUR** FAULT. I very, very publicly disclosed what I was doing, what I was investing in, etc. and NO ONE was lied to as to what we held. I was VERY CLEAR on the risks as well. The contracts are VERY CLEAR and were VERY PUBLIC. There is no way you can say that I am responsible for someone losing their money in a SECTOR FUND.

There is no excuse for blaming me for what happened. I know it makes you feel good to beat someone up over your loss but it's just not my fault.
1091  Economy / Securities / Re: NYAN/BMF/CPA CLAIMS (latest news in post #45) on: December 25, 2012, 08:07:08 AM
all BMF shareholders have been sent the following:

Dear BMF participant;

I have (as of December 21st) received a complete and final list from Nefario and I am now in a position to begin distributing assets, liquidating holdings, and making final payments.

BTCT.CO has graciously agreed to let us list -- temporarily and with restrictions -- so that I may shut this down in an orderly fashion. You will be able to sell your shares back to me or trade them back to me for shares in the companies we held and/or bitcoins as appropriate. Funds raised from the sale of assets will be paid out as dividend until there is nothing left in the company, at which point it will be removed by burnside and this will signal that my obligation has been completed.

The following is your CLAIM NUMBER for BMF. This number will be used in any public disclosure to identify you without revealing your personal information.

Claim No.   
Participant:   
Address:   
# of BMF   
% of BMF   

-----

My only goal here is to do the right thing by transferring assets and value to you, and then shut down the company.

You have until the end of January, 2013, to register on BTCT.CO, request liquidation. Or just wait and your shares will be liquidated and you will receive a final payout.

Happy holidays.
1092  Economy / Securities / Re: An open letter to LTC-GLOBAL members who are downvoting BMF on: December 25, 2012, 07:05:09 AM
Hey all, don't have a lot of time to post.  Busy time of the year and all.  Smiley

I have decided to help Usagi wind things down.  We'll be re-creating all of his assets on BTC-TC.  They will all bypass the moderation stage and go straight to active, HOWEVER... they will not be trade-able on the open market.

Usagi will be able to issue dividends, execute buyouts, trade shares of his assets for shares of other assets.  But there will be no open market trading unless by some miracle he passes the usual moderation process.

I believe this to be in the best interest of everyone involved.  Please let me know if there is something I'm missing.  (eg, some way he could take advantage of this situation?)

It will definitely take us a few days to get everything setup.  Don't expect progress until after Christmas.  Wink

Cheers.


Thank you very much. These restrictions are fine and I'll agree to any other restrictions as needed.

The complete list of assets is:
BMF
CPA
NYAN
NYAN.A
NYAN.B
NYAN.C
YARR

Take your time, I'll send out letters to all the shareholders letting them know to sign up to BTCT or confirm an address for liquidation.
1093  Economy / Scam Accusations / Re: Usagi: falsifying NAVs, manipulating share prices and misleading investors. on: December 25, 2012, 06:55:56 AM
usagi, please stop feeding the drama.

Then why did you cause it? You took potshots against me for months, despite nothing ever coming of the scam accusation threads. You sit there and tell me to stop feeding the drama but it's your drama, you made it.

No, you made the drama by deleting thousands of posts,

after 2 months of solid trolling I think I just wanted to delete the posts I had made because I had become sickened by it.

by coming back here telling everyone how many hours you'd put into your Japanese language venture when you hadn't even sorted out the post GLBSE clusterfuck

I did not get complete and accurate shareholder lists until december 21st. What did you expect me to do, sit on my ass and make up shareholders to pay out? Did you see the crap I had to go thru when people thought I might be paying out some shareholders before others? And now, you say I should have done that earlier? How can you say that's my fault now, and my fault then? It doesn't make sense. YOU don't make sense.

and now by trying to open a new listing which basically involves trying to sell people shares in stuff you already own.

Just like every other precious metals fund? Yea. So?

Your internet history shows one drama after another going back years, and they all have a similar pattern.

Yeah, some stupid fool like you blows a lot of hot air. Thanks repentance.

No-one's ever going to convince you that you've done anything wrong with any of your ventures because you're so fucking delusional that you refuse to accept that the great usagi can ever be wrong.  You say that you invested with the PPTs because no-one trusted you, but apparently you refuse to look at why that was the case.

No, I did not say that, I said I invested with deposit holders. All of which swore up and down my investment was guaranteed and NOT in pirate. You're lying about me again.

If you want to play fund manager, you don't get to blame it on someone else when your judgement proves flawed.  It was foreseeable that pirate's ponzi would collapse and take the PPT operators down and it's ridiculous to claim that it wasn't.

You don't seem to remember that I had taken the advice of my round table members and cut our pirate exposure by thousands of bitcoins. A lot of people were pissed because they had 2000+ coin contracts with us and we got out of the contracts. Legally, according to the contract. The only contract we had remaining was kakosan's and we paid out the full 1100 bitcoins on it IIRC. We made almost that much anyway. The real issue is what happened with other pepole. I did what I was supposed to do. But I got blamed for other people screwing us over.

If anything, you need to explain why you turned to them in spite of that knowledge and the best you've come up with so far is that people didn't trust you so you decided to try to give yourself credibility by association.

"In spite of that knowledge". You really make me sad. You're either stupid -- really stupid, and can't read, or you really just don't have a clue. And in either case why on earth are you even posting this? Nobody knew that Imsaguy was not going to be able to pay back. Saying I knew -- wow that's really a new level.

It doesn't matter whether you're an intentional scammer or not.  You're unstable as shit and your own actions have utterly destroyed any chance you had at redeeming yourself.  You need to wrap this up and move on to your next obsession.

Take it to IRC or email or reddit.  You're incapable of not being a drama queen here.  And I am sorry about your health problems but perhaps you should be sort those out first before trying to take on business ventures which are going to be inherently stressful even if successful, never mind if they fail (and failure is always a risk in business, and an especially high one in the kinds of Bitcoin enterprises you chose to launch).

I didn't fail. GLBSE failed. And you failed to understand simple logic like no one could have predicted PH, HK, etc. five months before it happened. And the community failed me when I tried to relist to process claims. But you are wrong, I did not fail, and I won't. Unstable, yes, that's what happens when you have to put up with months and months of lies like the crap you just posted when you said "in spite of that knowledge".
1094  Economy / Scam Accusations / Re: Usagi: falsifying NAVs, manipulating share prices and misleading investors. on: December 25, 2012, 04:48:44 AM
usagi, please stop feeding the drama.

Then why did you cause it? You took potshots against me for months, despite nothing ever coming of the scam accusation threads. You sit there and tell me to stop feeding the drama but it's your drama, you made it.
1095  Economy / Scam Accusations / Re: Usagi: falsifying NAVs, manipulating share prices and misleading investors. on: December 25, 2012, 03:52:37 AM
My suggestion is to stop popping back on here with new businesses/investments/whatever and finish the liquidation process of your old stuff first

I agree.  It seems fairly obvious to me at least, that usagi is running ponzi after ponzi and only profiting from selling shares and then buying them back dirt cheap after he mismanages the asset.  He's taking a play out of Goat's playbook.  Now that GLBSE is gone, he can't buy back his shares for nothing, so he has to raise more funds to try and save his reputation by paying out whatever fake value he has assigned to his shareholders.  Expect more and more investment opportunities coming from him until he's labeled a scammer, or the exchanges stop listing his ponzi schemes.  Beware.  I would also recommend taking a long look at any exchange willing to list his assets.  It is obvious at this point what he is doing and any exchange that would assist him is begging to be shut down the same way GLBSE was.

The only way to prove I am not doing this is to dump the list of shareholder assets and/or CSV files.

So in other words you have created, with no evidence against me, a situation where I am either a scammer or a scammer.

There's no way out for me.  Is that what U want? For me to do something stupid like post the 100s of shareholder e-mails I was given to Nefario? It's the ONLY way to show what you just said is wrong. Even after I pay out (like I have already paid out over 2,000 bitcoins) people will say I am a scammer. The scammer without a tag.
1096  Economy / Securities / Re: An open letter to LTC-GLOBAL members who are downvoting BMF on: December 25, 2012, 03:46:38 AM
A victim has come forward. Which proves I am a scammer. I will do my best to fix his complaint but Imight not be able to. But this is what I say:

Quote
I am a victim. YOU LIED about the obvious market value of assets for your made-up and proven wrong valuations, no matter what your excuses.

I am sorry. I said I was going to add value by marking to model. this is why i didn't mark down BAKEWELL for example. I belived in BAKEWELL, for example. I belived it was worth the IPO price even though bulk buyers who got 10% off sold down at 95% of IPO.

I WAS WRONG. I am very sorry and I will process your claim and make sure you get a little extra for your shares, I have a complete list of holders and I have bought about 50 or 100 btc extra to distribute. I just want shateholders to be happy.

Quote
YOU LIED when you said "there is literally NO WAY CPA can go bankrupt". YOU LIED when you said your funds were collateralized and then you sold them in the wrong order. Selling them in the wrong order was one of the biggest bitcoin scams ever and you can't just pretend it is acceptable. Since you claim this asset will help you repay people, fine, I'll remove my vote.

Thank you. Although I am sorry I do not know what you mean. CPA invested 500 bitcoins with Patrick Harnett, 500 with Hashking, and 500 with Imsaguy. No one trusted us so I turned to the community and invested with the biggest deposit takers t the time. I fucked up. It was my fault. I just wasn't good enough to do what was supposed to be done. So I can't tell you what I should have done. I just sholdn't have done it. And as soon as I make reparations to you, and ALL shareholders equally, I will go away. Forever. I am sorry. Please believe me Sad Even if I can't list on BTCT.CO anyways.

what the ....

Usagi, you might as well as want to just click 'Log out' on bitcointalk and set sails.

That's what I just said. But the last thing I will ever do is give the satisfaction of just walking away. I am going to do what I always was going to do -- pay out on all the claims. No matter what. That's something that no matter how many times people say I won't do, I will do. Because in the end, I am not a scammer, and I was treated unfairly. That will come out. You will see.
1097  Economy / Securities / Re: [BTCT.CO] -- SILVER -- on: December 24, 2012, 09:01:19 PM
3,  Your bullion guarantee is confusing as it refers to gold as well as silver - when fund otherwise appears to only be for silver.  Not seeing how if you hold a mix of gold and silver you can guarantee 100% silver backing.  Unless you also hold more silver than total outstanding units represents- at which point mentioning the gold at all seems irrelevant.  If reads as though the contract was originally written to deal with both silver and gold, then edited down to just silver with some references to gold not removed.

The contract does not state 100% silver backing -- it states 70% silver backing with up to 30% in gold. The reason why is because I already own a substantial amount of gold. I am in the process of trading it for silver. I don't think it is a major issue-- silver and gold for better or worse generally trade together. The plan is basically to hold 100% silver, I am just making an allowance for the gold I already have. If it's an issue I'll just manage the conversion myself and alter the contract to state 100% silver backing -- although I don't see how it could possibly be an issue, it's very clearly stated.

I agree with Deprived. You wrote that a share represents 1/10th oz of silver, but that's not true because some of the silver is not actually silver. Smart investors will avoid your fund for that reason. It is too fuzzy and complicated.

I think you will find that precious metal funds are not as popular as you think. I don't think any silver fund has ever had more than a few ounces in assets. I'm sure there is no need for you to include gold in the mix. Just holding silver will make it easier for both you and your investors.

I actually know investing and markets extremely well and I was planning to surprise the hell out of everyone by selling covered calls out of my own pocket & distribute the profits as dividend. I thought it would be cool to one-up the existing gold/silver funds. it's the kind of thing I would to just to be #1 and be the best. But it'll never happen now. I am just so very tired.
1098  Economy / Securities / Re: An open letter to LTC-GLOBAL members who are downvoting BMF on: December 24, 2012, 08:53:23 PM
A victim has come forward. Which proves I am a scammer. I will do my best to fix his complaint but Imight not be able to. But this is what I say:

Quote
I am a victim. YOU LIED about the obvious market value of assets for your made-up and proven wrong valuations, no matter what your excuses.

I am sorry. I said I was going to add value by marking to model. this is why i didn't mark down BAKEWELL for example. I belived in BAKEWELL, for example. I belived it was worth the IPO price even though bulk buyers who got 10% off sold down at 95% of IPO.

I WAS WRONG. I am very sorry and I will process your claim and make sure you get a little extra for your shares, I have a complete list of holders and I have bought about 50 or 100 btc extra to distribute. I just want shateholders to be happy.

Quote
YOU LIED when you said "there is literally NO WAY CPA can go bankrupt". YOU LIED when you said your funds were collateralized and then you sold them in the wrong order. Selling them in the wrong order was one of the biggest bitcoin scams ever and you can't just pretend it is acceptable. Since you claim this asset will help you repay people, fine, I'll remove my vote.

Thank you. Although I am sorry I do not know what you mean. CPA invested 500 bitcoins with Patrick Harnett, 500 with Hashking, and 500 with Imsaguy. No one trusted us so I turned to the community and invested with the biggest deposit takers t the time. I fucked up. It was my fault. I just wasn't good enough to do what was supposed to be done. So I can't tell you what I should have done. I just sholdn't have done it. And as soon as I make reparations to you, and ALL shareholders equally, I will go away. Forever. I am sorry. Please believe me Sad Even if I can't list on BTCT.CO anyways.
1099  Economy / Scam Accusations / Re: Usagi: falsifying NAVs, manipulating share prices and misleading investors. on: December 24, 2012, 08:08:24 PM
You're the one who keeps dragging this thread back up...

I can't list on Bitfunder or BTCT.CO because everyone thinks I am a a scammer. I don't get it. Ian bankwell rips me off for 4 btc and he gets to list on BTC.TO. I post a contract similar in every respect to BTC-GOLD and instead of 8-0 it gets 0-8. Yeah guys I get it.

Well I can't deal. The community has voted. I'm a fucking scammer. I have absolutely no idea what I am going to do. Please. Help me. I am begging.
1100  Economy / Securities / Re: [BTCT.CO] -- SILVER -- on: December 24, 2012, 07:59:36 PM
Can't get a listing to deal with your current garbage anywhere and here you are trying to launch a new asset. LMAO.

Ya. I'm a fucking loser. And I deserve it. all of it.

I am sorry.
Pages: « 1 ... 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 [55] 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 »
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!