I hope dank's absence is because he's off doing real world research on the premises he's hoping to secure.

The document is not requiring them to sign on behalf of Bitcoinica Consultancy Ltd (the general partner of Bitcoinica LP) but as individuals.  As individuals, they have a combined interest of 25% in Bitcoinica LP (which they were given in exchange for Wendon being issued shares in Intersango).  

Whether or not they try to stall the liquidation is not going to affect whether they are found personally liable for the failure of Bitcoinica and/or whether they are sued as Bitcoinica Consultancy Ltd and individually in other actions which are either in progress or anticipated.  It will, however, make the liquidation a more expensive process and result in smaller returns to users.

I think everyone involved with Bitcoinica made some appalling decisions, including Tihan, but the immediate focus needs to remain on the most efficient way of returning the funds on hand to Bitcoinica users.  The bitch-fight about who should have done what and when is for another venue.

You're assuming that the "media" in attendance will even know about the Bitcoinica clusterfuck let alone regard it as worth any kind of in your face questioning.  To date, media reports regarding Bitcoinica and other Bitcoin debacles have tended to be inaccurate and far from probing.  Investigative journalism isn't something we've really seen in relation to Bitcoin.


Zhou's role will be looked at but a liquidation isn't a criminal investigation, although it might reveal criminal actions which would be referred to the Serious Fraud Office for further investigation.  The role of a liquidator is quite specific, and even though Iain McLennan is fully qualified to do all sorts of financial investigations, he can only do the specific work for which he has been retained.  As his fees come directly from the insolvent estate, he's ethically bound not to waste money on matters which will not increase the return to creditors.


It's their right to do that but they need to bear in mind that their choice may have implications which extend beyond Bitcoinica.

I doubt there are very many people on this forum who would not like to see the thief/thieves caught and prosecuted.  That is - however - a separate legal issue from liquidating the company, which is what needs to happen for the assets which are currently in hand to be distributed to creditors.  There is absolutely no need to delay payments to creditors through the civil process of liquidation.  If further funds are recovered at a later date as a result of criminal prosecution, the distribution of those funds will be determined separately.  The liquidation of Bitcoinica does not preclude recovery of funds through other legal means outside of New Zealand (and it doesn't even affect the recovery of funds within New Zealand if they have been illegally or fraudulently obtained).

Criminal proceedings against the thief/thieves should absolutely pursued and it's in the best interests of all at Intersango to actively seek and assist a criminal investigation by the relevant authorities of the Bitcoinica thefts.

I, for one, will be reading the liquidator's reports with great interest and if they appear inadequate I can assure you that I'll not only make that fact public on this forum but I'll also be on the phone to the Official Assignee's office in New Zealand.  Zhou's role in this will not go unexamined.

For the record, Tihan is anything but "semi-anonymous".  If you don't know any information about him which he hasn't disclosed on this forum, then it's because you haven't looked.  Do you really think that when the shit hit the fan with Bitcoinica and Tihan's involvement was first revealed people didn't go digging.  Hell, even the amount he paid for his house is a matter of public record.

I even believe that walking away from the refund process following the MtGox intrusion was the right thing for the Intersango guys to do.  In doing that, however, they had a duty to ensure that the process of returning user funds was legally handed over to someone authorised to conduct that process as soon as possible - by passing a resolution like the one in the OP and appointing a liquidator.  It really is that simple to put a business into voluntary liquidation and it could have been done a long time ago.

It's not entirely true that they have nothing to lose.  There will be lawsuits regarding Bitcoinica and the findings of the liquidator are bound to be introduced into those proceedings.  It's never a good thing to have evidence that you have failed to act in good faith presented in litigation against you.

The liquidator is obliged to investigate the totality of the circumstances surrounding Bitcoinica's failure.  His investigation will not be limited to what took place between 24 April and 12 July - it will certainly look at the state of the business when Bitcoinica Consultancy assumed control and whether it was on the brink of collapse at that time.  Given the very short life of the company, it is highly probable that it's financial history since it was formed will be reviewed.  People other than the directors can be found to have personal liability in respect of the failure of the business, and to the extent that Bitcoinica Consultancy claims that they were not totally to blame for the failure of Bitcoinica (a stance with which I happen to agree), the liquidator can determine any other parties who may have civil or criminal liability.

They should have obtained legal advice about liquidating the partnership two months ago.  They know that it can be put into voluntary liquidation immediately with their agreement or forced into liquidation without their agreement by court order.  It's not like this issue has only just arisen.  Creditors lose out twice over if the liquidation has to be ordered by the High Court.  Firstly from yet another unnecessary delay, and secondly because all legal costs associated with obtaining that ruling will be deducted from the insolvent estate before distributions to creditors are made.

Maybe Patrick's tracked down the hacker/s and will reveal their identity during his presentation.

People will definitely steal the bowls, too.

Can you tell us about the hookahs you're thinking of buying?  You want something with minimum breakage potential.

I think people forget just how much Bitcoinica still owes its users. 

Here's a thread from someone who started his own hookah lounge earlier in the year.  Might give you some ideas.

http://www.hookah.org/forum/start-hookah-lounge/1633-my-lounge-social-smoke-edition.html

The SS pro hoses he bought are $16.50 each.

http://www.socialsmoke.com/Professional-Series-Lounge-Hookah-Hose-i

Notice he bought 100 bowls and 500 mouthpieces to start.

Looking around different hookah forums, one of the most common complaints about lounges is not enough different brands or flavours on offer.  


People will steal anything that's not nailed down.

Another idea which another lounge owner had was offering steam stones for those who don't smoke tobacco.  It means you can make money out of people who don't smoke tobacco when they tag along with their friends instead of them just sitting around taking up space.

Can I suggest that you get a few now and clean them every day using various methods so that you know which cleaning method degrades them fastest and how the decoration holds up to the cleaning process?  You want to be sure that the plastic won't hold flavours and odours after its cleaned, too.

It will have to be washable hoses.  The others have a life-span of only months when used and cleaned once a week, and they'll have to be cleaned all the time not just for health reasons but also because people are going to be pissed off if their hookah tastes like left-overs of someone else's different flavoured session.  

If they don't sign it, it will take an order of the New Zealand High Court to put Bitcoinica into liquidation.  I'm sure Bitcoinica's creditors will be thrilled about paying lawyers for that.  One way or another, the actions of everyone associated with Bitcoinica are going to be examined by a liquidator sooner or later.  Delaying that process or making it more complicated than it need be ultimately only disadvantages the people who are owed money by Bitcoinica.  Nobody's liability is going to be lessened by delaying the liquidation process.

You could go really retro and go for the Jane Fonda in Barbarella look.

I have no sense of aesthetics, so you'd be better off consulting dank about chrome vs steel, etc.

Sorry dank, thought you must have gone to bed seeing you haven't given us any more numbers.

Yes...yes you are.

I am so ordering 10 of those for Christmas presents.

How's the spreadsheet coming along, dank?

I've been doing some research on hookah cleaning and it looks like you're going to have to make sure that the ones you purchase can be completely disassembled for cleaning and make sure they have washable hoses.  The cleaning options depend on the material from which the hookah is made.  Thick glass might be your best option as it will allow you to put the base in a dishwasher.  You're going to need hookahs which can be cleaned quickly but thoroughly, and the commercial cleaning products for hookahs can't be used with acrylics.

It also looks like the hoses are going to have a really short lifespan in a commercial setting.

Bwahahahaha.  And you haven't even started thinking about the furry market yet...  (Hardcore cosplayers pay thousands of dollars for their fantasy costumes).

There's a market for everything.  Another online contact of mine makes mermaid tails for a living - the high end custom made ones sell for thousands.

It would be cheaper to source the fabric in Asia and have the garments made in Asia by one of the many tailoring services which custom make garments for a song.


It's still going to have to withstand groups of morbidly obese people sitting on it.  Trust me - the most fragile piece of furniture in the room will become a magnet for your 400 pound patrons.  If they so much as get a splinter, they will sue you.

Just make sure you check on the required standards before you start building (even decks have to comply with local building codes).  Every regulation - including those which you don't even know exist - you don't comply with is a lawsuit waiting to happen.

The liquidation and the other matters are separate legal issues.  Failure to liquidate the company can be an offence in itself.  When the liquidator establishes the cause of the company's failure, he is bound to determine if any criminal offences have occurred and refer them to the Serious Fraud Office.

Yes, there are issues which should go to court.  Beginning the liquidation should not be one of them.  The only people who benefit by the liquidation being delayed are those who may be found to have personal liability in respect of Bitcoinica's failure.