Perhaps instead of one seemingly insurmountable wall Ken should drop 5k shares every day or so at the current ask, so as not to scare investors into selling?
Thoughts?
I actually don't mind the wall. It will prevent a blow off top which is of benefit to medium-to-long term investors. The last thing we need is for the price to go from 0.0025 -> 0.01 -> 0.0020 in a few hours. Remember the walls are there to raise funds for the NRE. Short term flippers don't like walls because it limits their upside ie they need to hold for much longer than they like to make a quick buck. With dividends increasing and good news to come out over the next few weeks, the walls will be eaten away. It might frustrate the flippers but it is good for the health of the company. |
|
|
|
....
Well, since bitfunder does it over all the issued shares it will be over 10 million, however the dividends from the unsold shares will go into the pot for the next weeks dividends.
WHAT?! You can not pay dividends to treasury stock. Think about it for a second. This is beyond absurd if bitfunder allows this  If you have issued 1 000 shares (Shares Total in btf speak) and 100 are outstanding (not held by issuer aka issued and sold to shareholders "Shares Issued" in btf speak), profits will be divided among 100 shares and not by 1 000 shares. 900 shares are treasury stock and those have no right for dividends, voting or for anything else. Issued shares - shares outstanding = treasury stock If a Co buys back its own shares for whatever reason (usually undervalued on the market and Co has huge amounts of cash laying around) those shares become automatically treasury stock. This is the virtual world not the real world. Really? And how is this making it OK to fuck up a concept as simple as treasury stock? Paying divs to treasury stock is like robbing from shareholders, but then smiling and "giving" it back via perpetual loop of diminishing payout. I'm guessing you'll be transferring your shares from BitFunder to btct.co, as I plan to? Problem solved!  |
|
|
|
Yep, Im ready for the final draft of the full contract, lets get it looked over and get the process started
This is the full contract to keep it simple. However, if the community wants more details added, I can do that.  Wow, I'm digging your style. Ok, I'm happy with what I have seen. If anyone wants modifications, now is the time to say. Please be aware that it isn't 'proper' to have long, complex contracts just because 'that's the way they are supposed to be'. It doesn't really benefit anyone other than lawyers, so let's keep it as simple as possible! If we can wrap this up in fewer words, it benefits all of us. |
|
|
|
Yes, With the AM shares investors will have 40% of the profits were that only have 10% now, so in that respect it is a good deal. On top of that they will have a new company that sales hardware. AMC (Belize) owns everything, VMC is just used to keep all of the manufacturing in one place, all of the profits from VMC will go to AMC which Investor who hold the 10 Million shares get 100% of profit until the total dividends paid is equal to or greater than .0025 BTC. AMC will be sold or liquidated when the time comes. First of all, before that happens 9 Million shares will have to be tendered to AMC (Belize) before the merger can go forward. So, 90% of shareholders in AMC (Cooperative) will have to agree to the merger before it will happen.
Got it. So with AMC (Belize) owning everything, the 10m AM public shares will account for 40% of AMC (Belize). All profits (100%) from VMC manufacturing & sales will go towards AMC (Belize). All profits (100%) from the mining operation will also go towards AMC (Belize). Once all profits are funneled into AMC (Belize) the investors will get 40% (10m shares) of those profits for and management will get 60% (15m shares) in the form of weekly dividends. By having AMC (Cooperative) sold or liquidated it will clear up any confusions or headaches for us all. I hope this can happen sooner than later. Also how would you go about voting rights for the shareholders? How would you get appoint the board of directors? Can you appoint board of directions by the number of shares owned? If a shareholder has a significant amount of stake within the company it would be a fair way to appoint those directors to help make major decisions. I look forward to some more details in regards to that now that it seems as this entity issue has been sorted out. None of that is in the contract/offering to keep it simple. However, I would do what was in the really complex offering after this is all worked out. Yep, this is my expectation. We could go on forever here asking questions/refining points. Everyone who isn't happy with the the ground work so far please say so now. Otherwise, let's allow Ken to present the final, detailed draft - which we can have amended if required. |
|
|
|
Wait, what does L-O_L mean?
I think the trailing ' ,' may be significant. However, could be this guy is out of our intellectual league, as in off-planet, so we might not be worthy of understanding.  |
|
|
|
I'm not hot on the abbreviation being the same. I think if you really believe in yourself, be you a company or whatever, you don't have to piggyback on the success of others. Do your own thing and let the people come to you for your own merits.
But hey, its a minor thing I think in the overall scheme of things.
I see where you're coming from, but this is business. Let's not forget the scale of our ambition here, which is to build the biggest bitcoin mining farm on the planet. So, I say, 'ASICMiner, lock and load. We're coming for your coins!' L-O_L , you made me laugh hard btw, have fun guys trying to sort out "amc" vmc" and other useless crap created by ken to no benefit for investors Lock and load guys, trolls r coming! |
|
|
|
I'm not hot on the abbreviation being the same. I think if you really believe in yourself, be you a company or whatever, you don't have to piggyback on the success of others. Do your own thing and let the people come to you for your own merits.
But hey, its a minor thing I think in the overall scheme of things.
ASICminer is clearly, and without a doubt labeled ASICMINER on BTCT.co, BF, and Havelock, as it is referred to as a general forum term as AM, simply because there has been nothing else within the realm of it. Taking into account that we want to be the organization that directly competes with ASICMINER, and Friedcat has not been quiet when it comes to ASICMINER wanting and needing competition to be able to continue to sell and deploy at high volume, then the abbreviation of AM seems EXTREMELY strategic and proper. They are not abbreviated AM, its just used lazily on this forum, and will always require clarification because people are lazy (brings up both names). Abbreviating ourselves with the AM moniker, from a viewers stand point, will make us stand out as that second player by name, but also because we carry the competing hashrate. The only reason I decided to get into AMC is because AMC was a possible 'The' next player in mining if Ken played his cards as he had planned. Bump in the road, whether self created or not, started us with a not so good hand, but it has played out nicely because Ken has decided that he wants to open up to his shareholders and work at this collectively. AM works This 100% Me too! |
|
|
|
PM can stand for Post Meridiem and it can also stand for Prime Minister.
It is actually AMC (us) and AM (them) or am I mistaken?
This is why we should just call ourselves one name. We are AMC (Cooperative). Within AMC there is a division called ActiveMining (AM). Right now the AMC shareholders are investors for Active Mining Cooperative. Once this new offering is accepted by majority of the shareholders we will be able to swap the AMC (Cooperative) shares for AMC (Corporation) incorporated in Belize. We will become 40% shareholders in the AMC (Corporation) venture. I hope this clears up any confusion. How about we go with the names for the company/departments/divisions in the new prospectus, but we all agree to informally refer to the complete 'entity' as... what? 'AM'? 'Active Mining'?, 'Ken's Club'?. We can really chose what we want, it then becomes convention, the understanding being the internal structure of this entity is a bit more nuanced, just like it is with many other companies. |
|
|
|
I'm not hot on the abbreviation being the same. I think if you really believe in yourself, be you a company or whatever, you don't have to piggyback on the success of others. Do your own thing and let the people come to you for your own merits.
But hey, its a minor thing I think in the overall scheme of things.
I see where you're coming from, but this is business. Let's not forget the scale of our ambition here, which is to build the biggest bitcoin mining farm on the planet. So, I say, 'ASICMiner, lock and load. We're coming for your coins!' |
|
|
|
Do you really want to start using the name AM? The name AM has previously been heavily used in the ASICMINER context and if Active Mining Corporation starts using the same AM abbreviation it is going to create a lot of confusion between the two.
That means more eyes on our AM, and thats good business strategy Also Asicminer is clearly labeled "ASICMINER" on all the exchanges, so there wont be that much confusion +1 |
|
|
|
auto2nr1, think about it this way: Active Mining Corp (owns "old" AMC+VMC+cat+dog+bird+world) ----------^--------- | | Investors Management hold holds 10M AM 15M AM shares shares This is how profits are split. Don't confuse it with what Active Mining Corp consists of internally, since the internal "departments" have nothing to do with the profit split. This is what i've been understanding. Now what happens to the AMC security that is exchanged on BitFunder? I as well as other investors are going to be converting our shares to the new AM shares. Will that security cease to exist? I don't think that is going to happen, AMC will continue to exist for a long time to come. Even if the 10M shares where all swapped for VMC shares, AMC still has more to offer and will continue to grow. The only difference will be that some of the revenue from AMC will flow into VMC. I think it is a win for AMC and a win for VMC.
Ken, from the bolded points above, it is clear that you have mixed up what was supposed to happen ... what everyone was asking for. AMC and VMC was supposed to be merged ... so that there is only ONE entity. Now, you are completely changing this around so that both will still exist, and AMC will grow ?? This is completely wrong! and will bring us right back to all the issues and dramas of the last 130 pages of this thread. You need to merge AMC into VMC, with the express intention of COMPLETELY dropping AMC from existence.Sure, it will take sometime for all AMC shares to be swapped over, but no one is going to hold on to AMC shares on purpose when they know AMC is being closed/merged into VMC. If you don't do this, and FIX what you have been saying for the past few pages, then we are right back where we started. Two companies, and a lot of crap in between. Please fix it, and stop confusing/mixing sh!t up. I just want to make sure that the bold text above is cleared up for everyone. We are completely dropping AMC (BitFunder shares i have now) from existence correct? One entity which will now be AMC (Belize) will be the only entity that will exist. I still don't know where VMC is coming from (internally). Can anyone explain that to me? I am only picking at this so that in the future there is no confusion among us shareholders as well new investors and no one will question the structure as we have before the AMC/VMC merger was agreed upon. Yes, With the AM shares investors will have 40% of the profits were that only have 10% now, so in that respect it is a good deal. On top of that they will have a new company that sales hardware. AMC (Belize) owns everything, VMC is just used to keep all of the manufacturing in one place, all of the profits from VMC will go to AMC which Investor who hold the 10 Million shares get 100% of profit until the total dividends paid is equal to or greater than .0025 BTC. AMC will be sold or liquidated when the time comes. First of all, before that happens 9 Million shares will have to be tendered to AMC (Belize) before the merger can go forward. So, 90% of shareholders in AMC (Cooperative) will have to agree to the merger before it will happen. Excellent, so my understanding is correct. |
|
|
|
auto2nr1, think about it this way: Active Mining Corp (owns "old" AMC+VMC+cat+dog+bird+world) ----------^--------- | | Investors Management hold holds 10M AM 15M AM shares shares This is how profits are split. Don't confuse it with what Active Mining Corp consists of internally, since the internal "departments" have nothing to do with the profit split. This is what i've been understanding. Now what happens to the AMC security that is exchanged on BitFunder? I as well as other investors are going to be converting our shares to the new AM shares. Will that security cease to exist? I don't think that is going to happen, AMC will continue to exist for a long time to come. Even if the 10M shares where all swapped for VMC shares, AMC still has more to offer and will continue to grow. The only difference will be that some of the revenue from AMC will flow into VMC. I think it is a win for AMC and a win for VMC.
Ken, from the bolded points above, it is clear that you have mixed up what was supposed to happen ... what everyone was asking for. AMC and VMC was supposed to be merged ... so that there is only ONE entity. Now, you are completely changing this around so that both will still exist, and AMC will grow ?? This is completely wrong! and will bring us right back to all the issues and dramas of the last 130 pages of this thread. You need to merge AMC into VMC, with the express intention of COMPLETELY dropping AMC from existence.Sure, it will take sometime for all AMC shares to be swapped over, but no one is going to hold on to AMC shares on purpose when they know AMC is being closed/merged into VMC. If you don't do this, and FIX what you have been saying for the past few pages, then we are right back where we started. Two companies, and a lot of crap in between. Please fix it, and stop confusing/mixing sh!t up. I just want to make sure that the bold text above is cleared up for everyone. We are completely dropping AMC (BitFunder shares i have now) from existence correct? One entity which will now be AMC (Belize) will be the only entity that will exist. I still don't know where VMC is coming from (internally). Can anyone explain that to me? I am only picking at this so that in the future there is no confusion among us shareholders as well new investors and no one will question the structure as we have before the AMC/VMC merger was agreed upon. My understanding is 'AMC-PT' trading on BTC-TC and 'AMC' trading on BitFunder will continue to exist for a while. Current holders of those shares will be offered a 1:1 swap to the new 'AM' asset. This new asset will be more valuable, so just about everyone following this thread will swap their current 'AMC' shares for 'AM'. I can't imagine why you would not do so. The key to this deal is there is a NEW corporation called 'Active Mining Corp'. It owns everything. All profits made by this corporation are paid to holders of the new 'AM' asset. Early on, the 10 million investor shares take all the dividends. Once each investor share has earned 0.0025 BTC, all 25 million start getting paid ie the 10 million investor shares and the 15 million owned by Ken. |
|
|
|
Active Mining Corporation (Belize) owns everything and receives all the profits, 100% of which are then paid to the 10 million shares held by Investors until a total of .0025 BTC in dividends are paid to Investors.
I read that as there will be no share swap to another entity anymore, instead everybody just keeps their AMC shares but gets more bang for the buck now. Right?!? There will still be a swap if you want it. Swap current AMC for the new AM. The new AM will be more valuable, so the obvious course of action is to go ahead and do the swap. Edit: Note the old 'AMC' was 'Active Mining COOPERATIVE'. The new, proposed 'AMC' is different, it is 'Active Mining CORP'. So, this is one reason why I prefer to think of the new 'Active Mining CORP' as one, big thing (with internal departments) that pays 100% of profits to shareholders. The first 10 million investor shares get the first tranche of dividends until each share has earned 0.0025 BTC. After that, all shares including Ken's 15 million earn dividends equally. |
|
|
|
auto2nr1, think about it this way: Active Mining Corp (owns "old" AMC+VMC+cat+dog+bird+world) ----------^--------- | | Investors Management hold holds 10M AM 15M AM shares shares This is how profits are split. Don't confuse it with what Active Mining Corp consists of internally, since the internal "departments" have nothing to do with the profit split. To make it easy, I just think of the new, proposed 'Active Mining Corp' as one monolithic entity paying all profits to share holders. First 0.0025 BTC goes to to the 10 million investor shares, which is the icing on the cake for me. |
|
|
|
started to be too complicated, usually i prefer easy business, 1 company, 1 profit
What's complicated? At this stage it is decision time, you are either in or out. If you don't like the deal sell or walk away. |
|
|
|
This is getting better by the day.
Thank you for the perseverance.
Yep, this does it for me! |
|
|
|
I don't get it, does it look like this now?
AMC
---^---
| |
AM VMC
AMC owns a 100% VMC, and owns 60% of AM?
Why the confusion? Bitfountain also holds ASICMINER in the same way.
In the example above, AMC (in Belize) owns VMC Delaware (the management owned part) and ActiveMiner (the public owned part). The parent company has to be outside of US, for avoiding legal troubles.
No, bitfountain has shares in asicminer. Just as Joe off the street does.
This is 3 companies, with what correlation?
Legal troubles? What part of everything here is legal?
Doesn't ASICMINER look like this? ASICMINER ------^------- | | Public Bitfountain Shares (managers) In which case, no one needs to worry about Bitfountain - they do their own thing (ie. own majority shares, and manage asicminer)? Then ALL income belongs to ASICMINER, and profits are distributed. Simple No, it looks like this: Bitfountain ------^------- | | ASICMINER Bitfountain Shares Shares Ken has it so that everything is intertwined, 10% royalties, different company mining, to different company doing hardware and sales and blah blah. Stop making this complex. Below is the structure as it should be as done by auto2nr1, nice and simple.
**STRUCTURE**
ENTITY NAME
-----^-----
| |
40% 60%
PUBLIC MGMT
OWNED OWNED
40% of the shares will be sold to the public (10m shares)
60% of the shares will be held privately by management (15m shares)
Then all revenue goes to 'Entity Name', and it ditributes profit to share holders (40% / 60%) Then, Ken's salary and whatever else should be his own business, coming out of the 60% - that's his pay. This is what ASICMINER does I believe. It's not complex anymore. All royalties, complex details, etc were scrapped. It's not complex anymore! The biggest confusion at the moment seems to be people are thinking there is a new division in place (AM). It's not! There is just ONE thing now, Active Mining Corporation, that owns everything. AM shares are just a means to divide the profit, nothing else.The current structure is: Active Mining Corp ------^------- | | 10M AM 15M AM Public Management Shares Shares That's how I see it as well. I'm ok with the proposed structure. |
|
|
|
Thanks for clearing things up Ken. I think this merger will work out fine for me and my options. I also appreciate the ability to invest in AMC or VMC depending on my opinions of the value of hardware selling or snowballing mining power.
Ah, ok, now I have thought it through, you should be fine. AMC shares will still be listed come your Expiry Date and the AMC stock price should trend as you originally expected (or better ) because AMC continues to earn from mining despite the new plan to launch a public VMC. If you exercise your options, you likely then choose to swap AMC for VMC, because we obviously expect VMC shares will be more valuable. |
|
|
|
This is really not a stock split, it is a swap, 1 share of AMC for 1 share of VMC when approved for trading. The option owner are placing there bets and it up to them to guess right on the timing. As an option trader myself I understand their concerns.
Sure, I'm just thinking that scenario might help us think along the correct lines. I'm wondering if it would be up to the exchange where Surprise bought the options to rule a decision on expiry date or the strike? Edit: added ' or the strike' |
|
|
|
Ken - I believe this operation will be a success and I've bought a lot of 2-3 month call options to AMC shares. I'd appreciate it if you take guys like me into consideration when setting the expiration date for the AMC to VMC share swap deadline.
We need to make sure there is a way to make Surprise (and any others in this position) whole. The first Google hit I found for what happens to an option following a stock split, is here: http://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/03/092103.aspThe answer might help us figure out a solution. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
