|
I'll freeze that asset then.
|
|
|
|
hey NEF,
- make a new company "XYZ"
- move all abandoned shares from LIF into the XYZ
- proportionaly distribute XYZ shares to LIF shareholders
- sell or manage abandoned shares from LIF and pay dividends to XYZ shareholders
you can use this system for all bad companies
he sounds like he does not have the time / motivation. I think somebody with good forum reputation and a lot of lif stocks should get the job. Shareholders could appoint a liquidator(who could I would give power to do the above). But as was mentioned, there doesn't seem to be anything there of any worth. Has anyone calculated the current value of the remaining portfolio? Nefario |
|
|
|
what will happen to the stocks in Peter's account?
I'm not sure, how many of them are there left that are legit shares? I think either they should be sold at market price, and the proceeds paid to the shareholders, although I would have no idea on how they be distributed across which shares. You're the shareholders, you guys work out whats left and what you'd like to do with it. Nefario. |
|
|
|
|
I don't know, I haven't the time or the necessary skill in working out from these records where the mistake lies. This is why I've made them available in public, for the shareholders to pick through and work out for themselves whether fraud was involved.
I am guessing someone who has some experience trading in stock markets (or other kinds) might be able to work it out.
I have also looked at what accounts were the biggest buyers and sellers of these assets and have come to the conclusion that no foul play was involved, none had made an exceptionally large number of trades in them. That is Peter had not set up another account to secretly buy up his own shares to give the market the impression there was more demand than there really was.
I'm waiting for LIF shareholders to give their verdict on Peters intentions.
Nefario.
|
|
|
|
|
Withdrawal history
Amount(BTC) || Address ||Date(YY-MM-DD)
-20.00000000 || 1Mo2hJjX4nxrFgSKYAvefeH96Smw43zpqo || 11-08-07
-1.50000000 || 1JtPtQTh5yNsCg2y6ywEzqfU5BrYeUjRuW || 11-08-10
-1.74000000 || 1C6xMKmPtgncJ8baiGLKwcmfo5nm2m233w || 11-08-11
-49.99500000 || 1LSCXP7JxJHPLrXZ3TWcAYLqaFFPr8R1tg || 11-10-19
-9.99500000 || 19BbA9cnFVMYtDFGHe9taaaUdvQTaEFQTL || 11-10-21
-17.49500000 || 1EroAsyvhDFoVqnFUB7hxVKmKYFDxFiU64 || 11-10-22
-37.49500000 || 1EoD2BUh4NVvYYXdZaPBXdM8UfwbjLBiwg || 11-10-22
-21.49500000 || 1HMYix5bPp4wzRYdhAHuneh3frAtwNHXBH || 11-10-23
-4.49500000 || 1GoQMU5hDAJPHvfh7bXoQhSacBMbY4MP5U || 11-10-25
-45.99500000 || 12LhAnKRpWpdVBPSyStQ5VBKBR4ZrDpaQf || 11-10-27
-31.49500000 || 148EBg2328sjqWPuizX4YZK3fHmLZNP6GH || 11-10-28
-25.99500000 || 1C4LpUVf6FkibWhKf7dnzVN637bydYf7nz || 11-10-29
-19.49500000 || 1C4LpUVf6FkibWhKf7dnzVN637bydYf7nz || 11-10-29
-20.99500000 || 1FeUeCDu4BKHyqadpLrxTpDGZcu36jiDNH || 11-10-30
-24.99500000 || 1FeUeCDu4BKHyqadpLrxTpDGZcu36jiDNH || 11-10-30
-27.50000000 || 15Q1f4q1BGGqAk5UNNGoB6e3sNpgPKG7sp || 11-11-01
-50.00000000 || 15Q1f4q1BGGqAk5UNNGoB6e3sNpgPKG7sp || 11-11-01
-88.50000000 || 15PAvLteWMLV6kZuCwxUFFNV6X1757CyAV || 11-11-04
-35.50000000 || 15pVYohj4q3Uo3StiUnHYZgrEuKyowUwcb || 11-11-05
-20.00000000 || 15pVYohj4q3Uo3StiUnHYZgrEuKyowUwcb || 11-11-05
-48.41000000 || 16iY6oqVTLEhs9z8vmJ73ZFX5eYFGTnGVy || 11-11-07
-30.00000000 || 12HsWorsgARYf3dxscn6aV73fFf3d9hLTP || 11-11-10
-100.04500000 || 1HERo1RNf9tFySH4ZD8igTDBnKnNBpnLzc || 11-11-12
-11.50000000 || 1HERo1RNf9tFySH4ZD8igTDBnKnNBpnLzc || 11-11-13
-60.00000000 || 1BwyAtfLs4Vw6x7QfoHJsoMB1uUdM7FeHC || 11-11-15
-20.50000000 || 1H64ExDApWKgRTynE2hCLsAs3rhNQhDxfn || 11-11-17
-13.94500000 || 1Leq1tTGPWNwujbiFCucdgmy4CRVe4tEb7 || 11-11-19
-155.99500000 || 1EX2xkiLxTAHyCVR18qvzm9v6rZh3FhCfu || 11-11-20
-58.49500000 || 1Mo2hJjX4nxrFgSKYAvefeH96Smw43zpqo || 11-11-22
-43.99500000 || 1Mo2hJjX4nxrFgSKYAvefeH96Smw43zpqo || 11-11-25
-49.99500000 || 13jBAntpDdaWPkA5fqCjqhmUrbjSd5nQfn || 11-12-22
Grand total BTC -1147.56000000
Deposit history
.57000000 || 11-08-03
5.00000000 || 11-08-25
.90430888 || 11-09-30
4.56347366 || 11-10-07
3.85786629 || 11-10-14
15.54170000 || 11-11-04
22.12000000 || 11-11-11
40.00000000 || 11-11-30
15.00000000 || 11-12-01
200.00000000 || 11-12-03
30.00000000 || 11-12-10
40.00000000 || 11-12-11
50.00000000 || 11-12-15
43.01000000 || 11-12-31
30.00000000 || 11-12-31
40.94742400 || 12-01-05
95.22108000 || 12-01-05
78.66631980 || 12-01-06
.90000000 || 12-01-14
.56000000 || 12-01-14
1.97290702 || 12-01-17
10.00000000 || 12-01-18
3.46929550 || 12-01-20
8.00000000 || 12-01-24
Grand total BTC 740.30437515
Dividend payments total 443.42382796
|
|
|
|
|
Well having a quick look at his account now and he's not made any BTC withdrawals for some time. Will report more, digging deeper.
|
|
|
|
|
Give me a while, I will also prepare a list of all withdrawals or transfers of bitcoin and the btc addresses. We should be able to determine quickly enough if this is a case of outright fraud, of attempts to cover up mistakes or plain stupidity.
|
|
|
|
If that makes him a valuable part of the GLBSE community, then in this writer's opinion you are embracing the dishonest element, and should be held accountable for that decision. I wonder if the rest of the owners of the GLBSE feel as warm and welcoming to fraud and methodical theft? The last thing the GLBSE needs at this point is to side with the demons, but if that is your choice... the greater community and market will respond with their rapidly decaying trust and use of the GLBSE.
I guess I spoke too soon, I thought that the issue was that he wasn't making any payment at all, my bad. In this environment it's difficult to discern the difference between fraud and simple failure. Also bear in mind that we're working a lot of anti-fraud measures into GLBSE 2.0 Now I have frozen peters account, here is a list of his current shares held, where the balance is 0 these are shares that he HAS held before. Give me a little time and I will see if I can find his trade history. There were only a few satoishi's left in the account. BTCWEB:0 XID.ALPHA:0 SDM:0 IBB:0 LIF.B:1180 BTCNSC:6 BTCBOND.FEB2012:30 BitPonzi:0 CL:0 PBJ:247 BTCBOND.MAY2012:30 BitCoinTorrentz:0 UBTC:91 MESC:10 USGOLD:10 SIN:0 BSF:12 bitdedi:20 TyGrr:0 IMCEX:0 BB:0 SMM:1451 BIB.goat:0 JLP:0 LIF.CX:2172 LIF.M:962 BitFlowSys:0 DISHWARA:0 GEM:4 Bond-RonGross:19 CheaperinBitcoins-Stocks:0 JLP-BMD:0 CM400:0 ENjan16:0 CIB-Solutions:9 SLV:0 MergedMining:0 FPGA.contract:0 CC:0 LIF.A:9170 OPTIMALBITCOIN:0 bit.inc:0 BMMO:0 UBX:0 LIF:671 BCL:11 OTF:0 SDM.LEVA:161 BID:100 |
|
|
|
|
I would like to thank Peter for fulfilling his obligations while winding up his company. I think he was a valuable part of the GLBSE community.
|
|
|
|
as part of the terms of this site users agree that if they are U.S. citizens they will not issue or purchase shares on this exchange.
Is it illegal for me being from the U.S. to purchase shares in this manner? Issuing shares, perhaps. But I don't know of any regulation that I would violate if I were to buy shares, regardless of where the issuer is from. Now, if GLBSE wishes to specifically prohibit those from the U.S. from buying shares so as to protect the exchange that is something they can do if they want. But breaking the terms of a usage agreement is different from breaking the law. I don't know if this (breaking the law) will be the case if U.S. citizens buy/sell or issue shares. The line of action that I'm most in favor of is simply putting in the terms that the user, in using this site must not break the laws of whatever country they are under the dominion of. As I said before GLBSE is still too small to be on the radar of the U.S. or almost any government that is. And this will be our primary protection for the time being. |
|
|
|
Thanks for the news SG, it's interesting how close the USGov is willing to go without going all the way. Another issue that will help GLBSE is that it's operations are not based inside the U.S., what will not help GLBSE is that we use a .com domain name, which the U.S. government has deemed enough to consider a website in it's jurisdiction.
Would migrating to something like a .me domain eliminate that liability? Actually I think the SEC considers you under their control if you even SELL 1 share to a US citizen which means whatever domain you have you are rooted if an American buys your ipo shares. Its idiotic I know. Good point, we will have to include a legal warning, that as part of the terms of this site users agree that if they are U.S. citizens they will not issue or purchase shares on this exchange. Anyway we'll deal with this when we come to it. Nefario. |
|
|
|
dot bit would be even better. Someone get working on a firefox browser plugin as soon as possible  I get an error on the feedback page application error NoMethodError at /user/mail/compose/server
undefined method `[]' for nil:NilClass
file: compose.rhtml
location: evaluate_source
line: 8
I created ALPACA demo version asset but a few things were confusing as a complete noob to doing so. I might suggest a demo/example of what is required. Mostly the "terms". Would be nice to have examples or links at least to other companies who have created these things. One thing I didn't understand was issuing shares. I wanted to issue 30 000 shares at 1btc each but when I entered 30 000 it said I only had 60. So some more price feedback is required. Up to this point there is something missing from the glbse picture. Ive pointed it out before and its pretty obvious there is both a need and a business opportunity. Personally I think we need more customer service for glbse to take the load off Nefario a bit so he can deal with coding and making the site as good as possible so on that note I am looking for share brokers for glbse. This is an opportunity to form a share brokerage firm which will itself have shares issued on glbse. We need some "founding partners" to control the firm with equal amount if shares. So possibly 4 is a good number. The company has the holding name btcsharebrokers.com You can walk people through setting up their contracts through to the IPO itself. This might require live skype calls or we might get "gotomeeting" or similar software. Also helping glbse by collecting their details so we can have a few more "verified" companies on glbse and avoid the money pits of the past. GLBSE.bit is already taken, if someone can find out how we can get ahold of it I'll pay 5BTC for GLBSE.bit BitcoinMedia thanks for testing, that feedback link bug has been fixed. Great idea on the sharebrokers I think that is something that will need to be fleshed out a bit more, let me get back to this in a minute. I take your point on the issuing assets/shares confusion, you are quite correct in that unless someone totally understands how GLBSE works they're going to have problems. What I will introduce to tackle this issue is the IPO, we will make this a part of creating the share. Here is how it will work: You state how many shares are to be issued (of which what percentage or number you or others are too keep a hold of), and when the IPO will happen. The share/asset will then be created, and an IPO notice made (this will go out in email and an IPO RSS feed), and people can then begin making orders for that share(the bids). And can allow them to decide at what price to sell their share at (i.e. it lets the market price the share). When the IPO date arrives(lets say after 1-2 weeks, whatever the case) the shares are sold to the highest bidders and trading begins. Now back to your point about share brokers. I will begin to make it mandatory for shares to have a treasurer and a secretary(each with their own separate GLBSE account). For the share issuer to actually get access to any of their funds they must make a request for a withdrawal, in the request they must state the exact amount to be released and the purpose of the funds. For the funds to be released the secretary and treasurer must then approve the release, and the share creator must also supply receipts for those expenses. Treasurers and secretaries will be paid a portion of the total IPO funds, as stated in the IPO each month for performing their duties which are to scrutinize the share creators expenses and protect funds on behalf of the shareholders. I foresee people of high levels of trustworthiness performing this task for a number of shares/assets or companies. Their GLBSE identity (which will be verified to their real life identity) will also be listed on the share/asset as the roles of treasurer and secretary. The purpose of this is to prevent fraud and protect shareholders. This is how we run things at GLBSE/BitcoinGlobal, what do you think? Nefario |
|
|
|
|
I've frozen all the scam and abandoned assets, they have been removed from the GLBSE assets page and if there we're traded recently will be removed from the GLBSE charts page when that system updates.
Please keep this list updated regarding dead/scam assets.
Nefario.
|
|
|
|
|
All the assets in red are going to be frozen (not deleted) and can at some future point be migrated to GLBSE2.0 by their owners at no cost.
this leaves the door open for bidding pond and Oz
Nefario.
|
|
|
|
I'm guessing it will be similar to how it works now where anyone can create something, however on top of that they will have optional verification, and it is upon the buyers to insist that sellers be verified.
This is how we're planning on doing things, viewing verification will be made as easy as possible, while at the same time giving users the option of investing in something more anonymous if they wish to take the risk. Nefario. |
|
|
|
I have sent my 8 LIF.CX shares to peter. I can confirm he sent me the 4 BTC.
thank you peter and good luck
This to me is what makes this a scam, not the loss of 90% of the funds. The lack of disclosure and private deals with influential shareholders. The contract states that all shareholders have the same rights, and yet some holders get their funds back in full, and other have to take a 90% haircut. If Peter comes out with full disclosure and financials showing how 90% of the funds was lost, then it is not a scam. We all invested knowing our capital was at risk, and invested on the basis of Peter's "strategy". It is now apparent that Peter's strategy involved a lot of risk. That Peter's strategy failed does not make him a scammer. If I were to list an asset calling for investors for my strategy, and that strategy was to go to the casino and place it all on red, and I subsequently lose all shareholders funds, I wouldn't be a scammer, if I show how we lost the money and fulfilled the contract with my shareholders. If I post saying we've lost all the money and then disappear, I am a scammer. Until I see financials, I am not prepared to accept a bid selling my shares at a loss and Peter should have a scammer tag. Alternatively, Peter can send 24 BTC to 1M4nFtisF8LrbyXbur2DHHo997LBnqLQtK and I will transfer him my 48 LIF.CX holding. But I don't think that's how this should be handled. I would not advise to agreeing to do deals outside the infrastructure of GLBSE. It leaves no record and no accountability. |
|
|
|
And that, dear friends, is why any market that hopes to be taken seriously around here needs to have serious enough fees to get in that a criminal needs to think twice about doing a loot and scoot. If there was a 50 or 100 btc escrow balance against the asset creator's integrity, there would be value that could be liquidated to make the asset holders whole. And perhaps a piece of work like little Peter Rip-off Tail might think twice about losing hundreds of his own dollars to steal from others.
That and some hardcore proof of identity to open an investment opportunity, rather than just the ability to post a badly mangled script. The owners of the exchange should have proof of who is offering these assets, and should have the ability to turn that proof over to authorities for action if the asset turns out to be a fraud. Honest business owners should not have a problem with this, criminal douche bags would. Who would you prefer to have starting companies on your exchange?
This above, exactly. We tried to do go the anonymous route based on reputation, hasn't played out too well as you can see. All of the above points mentioned by LoupGaroux will be a core part of GLBSE2.0 along with more anti-fraud protections. Nefario. |
|
|
|
Hmmm. LIF.CX deleted. So now there's no way to get even 0.075 BTC for my 50 shares. :-(
Not deleted, frozen. Everyone who has frozen shares will not be able to trade them. What the asset issuer can then do is make dividend payments until restitution is made. Assets/shares that are not to be bought by new shareholders should not be traded publicly. |
|
|
|
for the record, dishwara was not a scam, he bought back all the shares except just 1
Correction, a dead stock still able to be traded for no reason.. Not anymore, I've removed a lot of the dead and scam shares from trading. They still show up on charts.glbse.com for the moment but should be removed when that site does an update. I'm going to be removing all but traded and legitimate shares on GLBSE over the next couple of days. Really clear it up before the eventual move to GLBSE 2.0 |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
