Ah sorry - misundestood, thought you were talking about a deposit.

I'm sure burnside will fix it when he shows up.

The rejection has absolutely nothing to do with BTC-TC.  Looks like you were trying to double-spend or something - or sending coins that hadn't yet arrived.

Indeed - by the time everything was tested the need would be over.

And we still end up (if the bot traded pairs for PURCHASE) with 0.2% on each side being lost in transaction fees in a market trade.  Or I then have to make the payments manually.  If the bot tried to do payments then I run into the problem that it's a pain verifying them as wallet transfers don't show up in the same lists as share transfers.  So I end up spending loads of time manually verifying even in the best case.

I'll do them manually - accepting any number of transfers over a certain size ( a few BTC) plus ONE transfer per person for those who just want to cash out.  What I won't do is process loads of tiny transfers from people trying to arb dust - those will be considered to be donations.

I've put two advisory motions up on each of MINING and SELLING.

One motion is WHETHER you want to relist.
The other is WHERE to relist if we DO relist - expressing a view there will NOT be taken as indicating that you prefer to relist.

If there's a clear majority of BOTH Mining and Selling who want to shut down then we WILL shut down - if most people want out and are happy for me to pick the final prices then we'll do that.

The vote on where to relist would be taken into account if appropriate (i.e. if we DO relist) but ultimately it's highly likely that other factors will end up making the decision for us.

Whilst I'm not going to disclose precisely how I would split funds between MINING/SELLING if we close down (as it would likely screw up prices if we then didn't close down) I HAVE worked out a basis on which I can determine whether I got it roughly right AFTER the fact.  If I get complaints BOTH from those holding MINING AND from those holding SELLING that I screwed them then I can be pretty sure I got the price about right

No you weren't meant to be buying up pairs - the reason teh fund always bought up pairs (and why I'm offering to) is because there's nothing subjective in the value of a pair (it equals NAV/U of PURCHASE).  And also because that ensures (when the fund does the buying) that the same number of MINING+SELLING stay in circulation (which is pretty important).

Once NAV/U is established (i.e. we know what's happening with CIPHERMINE and have the Coinlenders cash back) yes - I'd definitely be offering repurchases just as I did before, both on PURCHASE and also on MINING+SELLING pairs.  The detail of the resolution in respect of CIPHERMINE may obviously amend what value I place on it in the books at that point.  As we'd no longer have any investments I'd actually be willing to do this at a lower % reduction than we previously have - we're now in territory that the contract couldn't predict and my main intention is to try to minimise any loss people take as a result of BTC-TC closing (whilst maintaining whatever profit/loss their position had gained prior to that point).

Right now I'm personally willing to buy up pairs of MINING+SELLING at .0075 in decent quantites (10+ BTC worth) as following Kate's last posts I now believe we're likely to recover substantial value from CIPHERMINING.  But I believe if you hang on for a few days to a week it's likely you'd get back ..008+ (less whatever is paid out in dividends in the meantime).

No fund money will be used on buybacks until I have a NAV/U that I'm confident about - at a minimum a lower bound.  I'm just moving some of my own money on so I can step in and stop any really stupid panic selling.

The latest post from Kate is much better than her initial one (it's quoted above in part by Ranasha).  I just responded to it - right now the situation as I see it is:

If DMS continues on a new exchange then I wouldn't be actively seeking any change to the bond contract and wouldn't be interested in a buyback at any discount.  I would, however, consent to selling back immediately at full face value if that was what they wanted (by the contract they should pay a fairly hefty premium to do that - but I'd waive that).
If DMS closes down then I'd consider a small discount if it meant getting the cash now rather than in 3 months (which is what the contract entitles us to).

I'm not going to be pushing for resolution on it - realistically they need to decide what they're doing with CIPHERMINE then it should be obvious what they want to do with the bonds.  As neither DMS or CIPHERMINE has lost any significant assets due to BTC-TC closing there's no real reason why either party should NEED to change the contract.

Just a point for anyone struggling to work out how to price the shares with uncertainty over what will happen with CIPHERMINE bonds.

If you valued those bonds at 0 then NAV/U for PURCHASE would be : .00703442
That's pretty much the worse case scenario - and it's VERY unlikely the bonds will be worth nothing.  So don't panic sell where MINING+SELLING would come to less than that.

I'll sling some of my cash on and try to keep the price at least at that - so those who desperately want out now don't lose out too horribly.  But I'd seriously not recommend selling even that cheap.

Once we have the Coinlenders cash back (in my wallet or here) then the fund itself can buy back at those prices - until then I can't buyback with the fund itself even that high just in case a load of TF's cash happened to be in BTC-TC securities that crashed or whatever (which I don't rate as at all likely).

I won't be selling any DMS shares I buy up (or any I already hold) - I'm just doing it because I'd hate to see investors panicking and selling at stupidly cheap prices.  I'll only be moving 100 BTC on initially - if anyone's desperate to sell large amounts I could sort something out but I don't recommend it.  Right now the trading ranges seem reasonable - amounting to a fairly small discount on NAV/U.

I'm also about to put up advisory motions on relisting.  My personal viewpoint is moving more and more towards relisting - as much as anything so I can duck out of defining prices for MINING/SELLING   But also because at an absolute minimum there's going to be cash left for SELLING after the 2 week period - I can't see any likelihood of the CIPHERMINE bonds being cashed out within a few months (when I bought them the plan was always just to gradually sell them to keep them at ~20% of capital, which we'd been doing fine - with about 10% of them sold already without really trying).

Yes, deposits work fine.

I've done significant(ish) deposits to both BTC-TC and LTC-Global today to get funds in so I could close my securities out.

DMS' J-D funds have now been withdrawn BTW.

I gave link to the address earlier, here's the transaction ID with the withdrawal : 040ff50735e1c8946f5d038b45b277c69fd68f63989897dd909b34dba718b433

It doesn't show up on blockexplorer yet but my wallet already picked it up so it definitely went.

Craziness on J-D today BTW.

Think it hadd dropped to about -1500 when we withdrew (I didn't make a note of it).  It then fell to worse than -3K but the guy has proceeded to give a chunk back and looks like he just ran out of his current batch of cash with J-D house back up to nearly +3k.  So terrible timing for us - but such is life (I wouldn't have pulled our cash if it wasn't for BTC-TC closing of course).

I haven't bothered taking a management fee for the few sales yesterday/today prior to BTC-TC's announcement.  Obviously there'll be no management in future unless/until sales of PURCHASE reopen.

BTC Balance (BTC-TC)   1142.774967
9071 LTC-ATF.B1    90.71000000
CIPHERMINE Bonds    360.61000000
Coinlenders CD 27/9   203.0881027
Coinlenders Cash   0
Just-Dice Balance    153.86146722
TOTAL ASSETS    1,951.04453736
   
Outstanding MINING   210981
Outstanding SELLING   210981
Outstanding PURCHASE   14397
Effective Units   225378
   
Block reward   25

Difficulty   112,628,549
Hashes per MINING   5000000
   
Daily Dividend    0.00002233
50 days (Min Liquid)    0.00111629
100 days (Forced Close)    0.00223259
365 days (Buyback)    0.00814895
405 days (IPO)    0.00904199
400 days (Post SELLING div)    0.00893036
410 days (Pre SELLING div)    0.00915361
   
NAV Post MINING Div    1,946.01277294
NAV/U Post MINING Div    0.00863444
Days Dividend Post Div   386.75
SELLING Dividend    -         
NAV Post SELLING Div    1,946.01277294
NAV/U Post Selling Div    0.00863444 << Now there's no investments/sales this is what MINING+SELLING should add to (less any discount you believe needs to be applied to CIPHERMINE bonds.
PURCHASE selling price    0.009066
PURCHASE buy-back price    0.008462

Short answer is it doesn't matter - as difficulty isn't going to stop rising soon.

For now it'll be listed in the books as full value - and dividends paid accordingly.  Those trading SELLING need to apply whatever (if any) discount they believe is appropriate - I won't (and can't) force a market valuation on them, all I can do it do my best to provide as much information as possible for everyone to accurate as best they can.

I won't be personally trading at all for now - as it would be unfair for me to do so given that I may posses slightly more information than the rest of you.  For the record I personally hold something like 15-20K SELLING and 0 MINING right now (can't remember exact numbers but it's in that area).

Yes.  Any loss from investments falls on SELLING (unless it zeroed SELLING - which can't possibly be the case at traded prices).

The LTC-ATF.B1 is cashed out and sitting in a wallet controlled by me.
The J-D was divested (and of course the whale then lost some back - but I posted the balance at time of divestment which can be proven from J-D records if necessary) and will be withdrawn as soon as dooglus is around at same time as me.
The last Coinlenders CD runs out in a few days at which point it'll be withdrawn.
It's only really the ~360 BTC of Ciphermine bonds that aren't at present properly determined in terms of status.  And there's no reason to believe those will lose significant value - though I obviously can't rule that out.

Until there's clarity on the status of the Ciphermine bonds I can't reopen sales of PURCHASE or redemptions - as I don't want to allow massive trades in both directions based upon a guess, as that could end up with someone losing out without having done anything wrong.

I WOULD recommend NOT to panic sell - worst case is pretty much that the CIphermine bonds are worth zero (and that's HIGHLY unlikely) so noone should sell at a discount below that.  Once I have the Coinlenders CD cash back as well I'll offer a cashout at that rate if prices on the market have fallen stupidly - as that can't cost anyone else anything and prevents total desperation sales.  Such a buyback would, of course, be for pairs of MINING/SELLING (or PURCHASE).

It doesn't work like that.

Imagine it's a forum with lots of child-porn posted on it.  You CAN'T sell the forum complete with content.  But you could sell the forum software.

If something is illegal to own/do and you have some of it then you can't (legally) sell it once you realise it's illegal - even if it's bundled together with other stuff that's perfectly innocent.  And that extends to conducting an illegal business.  The software on its own could be used to run things that are perfectly legal.  Selling it with data relating to specific things are aren't (as his lawyers will have told him) legal crosses the line.

The problem here isn't the exchange itself or the software - it's the investors, issuers and securities.  And not only is the issue whether they're legal - it's also that if he sells the exchange on fully functional then he has no closure in terms of getting away from liability in respect of the software, exchange and securities on it.

Well I'd say that, pretty obviously, his lawyers have told him there's NO practical way it can be turned into something legal.  That doesn't mean it's impossible to run a legal exchange - just that it's not possible to turn BTC-TC into one.  I don't think there's one simple reason why that's the case - it's a mix of a few things.  None of the things on their own are a problem - but put them all together and as soon as he hired a lawyer it was pretty obvious that at a minimum US investors (and probably issuers) would be getting the boot.

1.  There was no restriction on who could use the exchange.  Neither in terms of a membership fee/referral system (making it private) or in terms of restricting access to those meeting certain criteria (such as $X in cash).
2.  There was no AML/KYC process.
3.  Despite the site claiming everything was virtual, many securities explicitly refer to USD in their contracts - including some with dividends and/or face values defined in fiat rather than BTC.
4.  Some securities relate to real businesses/companies.
5.  The site makes contradictory claims (and actions) in terms of due diligence conducted by the operator.

The problem with trying to continue would largely be that MASSIVE work would be needed on some securities - and others would end up having to be delisted.  But if BTC-TC were to try to become 'legitimate' then it would no longer be able to claim protection against any losses incurred as a result of actions its operator took.  Continuing would gut the site (in terms of securities - and possibly of investors) and expose burnside not just to liability going forward but also liability for actions he'd taken in the past.  Which is another reason he won't be able to comment much about the legal advice he received - doing so could increase his liability.

I believe he was naive believing the "it's a game" thing would work - but genuinely did his best to try to make it happen until he spoke to lawyers who likely just laughed at the idea.  I'm sure he'd LIKE to explain everything in detail but can't as it would be very risky for him to do so.

Let's be clear about one thing here.  ALL of us who used the sites knew (or should have known) that the sites were, at best, in a bit of a grey area.  Trying to lump all the blame for that on burnside is totally unfair.  If he was naive then so was everyone else who acts all surprised now.  I'm not surprised nor do I blame him for what losses I'll make - that's the result of MY decision to 'gamble' NOT his decision to allow me to 'gamble'.  I'm mainly grateful that he's shutting down in an orderly fashion rather than the cluster-fuck/theft that occurred when GLBSE ended.

Selling the code is the only chance LTC-Global shareholders have of getting anything back.[/list]

Some withdrawals (e.g. mine) will be for unrelated reasons - i.e. BTC-TC closing.  With that happening the DMS investment had to be pulled as part of getting it fullt liqud (and with a fixed NAV/U) and my own had to be pulled because a lot of my other liquid BTC was used in buying my own securities out fast at full value and I have other commitments I need to meet in the short-term.

No news on that yet - believe Kate got married this weekend so not expecting any proper resolution of that immediately.  Would assume she'll sort out what's happening with Ciphermine itself first - then what happens with the bond will naturally follow on from there.  Under the contract I COULD give notice now that I want cash back in 3 months time (and forfeit all interest in the meantime) but I'd prefer to wait a bit and see what happens before doing anything drastic like that.  A more friendly solution would be better for all involved : if Ciphermine and the bonds relist elsewhere then we can probably sell on the market at or above face value faster without causing unnecessary grief for Ciphermine (and collect interest in the interim).

If clear direction is provided and I rate the risk low enough then, if DMS closes rather than moves, I could cash out the last chunk to speed the process up a bit.  But bailing out the whole 360 BTC myself isn't an option.

At present I'm not attempting to sell below face value at all.  I DID sell 9 BTC worth last night/early this morning at a bit over face value:

2013-09-23 06:43:28    Market Sell    200    ฿ 0.01027    ฿ 2.054
2013-09-23 06:43:27    Market Sell    400    ฿ 0.01027    ฿ 4.108
2013-09-23 06:43:26    Market Sell    89    ฿ 0.01028    ฿ 0.91492
2013-09-23 06:43:26    Market Sell    1    ฿ 0.01029    ฿ 0.01029
2013-09-23 06:43:25    Market Sell    200    ฿ 0.0103    ฿ 2.06

Those were our sales - not too long before the announcement it seems : I've been trying to reduce positions where I can since it became apparent last week that this was a significant possibility.  I didn't expect it quite so quickly however - and wasn't sure whether close-down was on the books or just getting rid of US investors/issuers.  I didn't sell any of our LTC-ATF bonds (or my own) as I knew face value was safe on those.

I like CoinBR but there's a few problem with it which mean I can't consider it for this:

1.  Monthly maintenance fee - many investors have tiny holdings which, if they want to sell, would get eaten by the fee.
2.  Large withdrawal fee (0.1 BTC from memory).  If I relist I have a responsibility to ensure ALL my investors can get their cash out fine.
3.  No ability for inter-account transfers on CoinBR - that's the killer as DMS NEEDS that (and for it to be free) to function.

If I decided to move DMS to MPEx then it would have to be a brand new version - not a transfer of the existing one.