It is now past June 30, 23:59 UTC and TYGRR.BOND-B has failed to make 0.008 BTC coupon payment between June 2, 00:00 UTC and June 30, 23:59 UTC.
A total of 0.00799999 BTC/bond were paid, so there is 0.00000001 BTC/bond remaining.
Therefore, as stated in the contract, holders of HEDGE.TYGRR.BOND-B.SHORT will be bought back at 0.04544066 BTC per bond.
Holders of HEDGE.TYGRR.BOND-B.LONG will receive 0.00000001 BTC per bond. This is the minimum amount I can force a buyback of these.
Buybacks will be initiated in a few minutes.
A contract is a contract I guess, but off by 1 satoshi.. lmfao.. hope you don't have me on some type of technicality.. @Goat - 1 satoshi just cost you 10 btc.. oh the lulz, did you do that intentionally as an experiment or what? |
|
|
|
Bitcoin has made my friends and family think I have lost my mind.
OgNasty - I kinda know what you mean I think, but care to elaborate? lol |
|
|
|
|
I would get behind this in a second.
I've played on SWC a few times.. yeah it could definitely use a facelift. but its playable.
Bridging the gap from Pokerstars player with visa to SWC player with Bitcoin is what's important.. Pulling that off would be game changer..
|
|
|
|
Bought a bunch of stuff only a few days ago, needed a few things fast. Spoke with Teek, he fixed me up pronto.. Stuff arrived today, I swear its only been 4 days since I ordered.. Winnepeg to Ontario.. A++++++ transaction on every single conceivable part of the process.. Thank you Teek.. you da man...  Thanks for the kind words teflone, enjoy your order! |
|
|
|
|
Dividends paid! .0042 gross, minus our 0.0015 fee = .0027 BTC per share paid to shareholders!
|
|
|
|
Now that is a good deal. I would buy that, but I wont use bitpay We don't use bit-pay, not that there is anything wrong with bitpay.. Right, now I remember. Such a long signup process just to get a quote for shipping. Also, prices seem more reasonable now. do you use escrow ? or http://bitmit.net/en/user/crosby/?ref=1644 ?? Thanks Thanks for the feedback on the shipping cost. I think we can find a way to make that better and will do so. We don't use escrow, but you do get tracked and insured shipments from an actual corporation when you order from us. teek |
|
|
|
Now that is a good deal. I would buy that, but I wont use bitpay We don't use bit-pay, not that there is anything wrong with bitpay.. |
|
|
|
Yes, that's why I wasn't including my claim ID. I would think they can associate my email with my claim ID easy enough, and it isn't as if I'm requesting sensitive information. I just want to know if somebody is evening listening. What's the status of my claim? Is there some trust issue with me? If there is, let me know what it is so I can address it. As it stands, I've been totally left in the dark despite providing all sorts of contact info, MtGox codes and transaction records, and a correct password...
+1 - starting to get annoyed. I've got hundreds of BTC tied up in this mess and so far the responses I have received, though polite, have been discouraging. So far they cannot seem to even find my account from the sounds of it. Considering I had an account since basically the first day Bitcoinica opened I am not sure how that is possible, even a db dump from months ago would have me in there. Also the claims page did seem to verify my password.. it didn't give me the missing hash error or whatever that other people have reported. Also I had a large open position, that would be WAY in the money right now, and I had some USD in there too that is now way out of the money. Between paper losses, and lost opportunity.. I am starting to hit my patience limit, and I didn't even make a peep until these last few days so I think I have been pretty patient to let them sort out this unfortunate situation. I really don't want to join the mob with pitchforks but man.. |
|
|
|
|
So you're going to get TCC back in action?
|
|
|
|
|
shit i sent 5 btc too
please repay mine back to : 14dEL5WyMx2YyWBZZMxkN1RQNaiapSdCCA
|
|
|
|
|
@genjix - sent an e-mail to you regarding my claim
teek
|
|
|
|
Hello Teek,
How are you coping with the increase in bitcoin price? Does it affect your profit?
Not being able to hedge due to the bitcoinica drama is more of a factor than the price itself.. not to mention the significant balance I have tied up there still due to that. did I understand you correctly that you will also invest in real life conventional stuff and not only in the bitcoin sector? I respect your decision to keep your investment strategy to yourself but could you give us a rough estimate of the % off your funds invested irl? I ask because there are few companies listed on glbse that are part of the "normal" economy so your fund would be more interesting for diversification reasons.
Depends, if you want to look at "percentages to meatspace" right now I try to keep it pretty low because I don't want to take the chance on being short bitcoin at the moment. More importantly though, it's starting to get to the point where I am using bitcoin in real life all the time, facilitating trade without being converted to fiat. A reliable way to hedge would change this though, it was pretty bad timing that I launched this asset and bitcoinica went down almost right away. |
|
|
|
|
Dividends paid! .0044 gross, minus our 0.0015 fee = .0029 BTC per share paid to shareholders!
|
|
|
|
|
down again..
edit: back up when i posted that.
|
|
|
|
Does anyone know why Giga and many other Mining bonds have lost around 20% of there value in the last few weeks.
Has a large investor pulled out?
I believe a large part of our current issues can be explained by the following asymmetry/inefficiency in the GLBSE market: If I want to sell 1000 GIGAMINING bonds (or any other bond or stock) I can simply put in a sell order and it does not cost me anything. However, if I want to buy 1000 GIGAMINING bonds (or any other bond or stock) I have to put up the full amount of BTC in order to place the order. So for the entire time the buy order is in the book I have to tie up that amount of BTC. So there is a cost, an opportunity cost, to placing buy orders. So the bottom line is that it is easier to sell than to buy. Until this issue is fixed the bids will always be lighter than asks and there will be an intrinsic bias toward selling and therefore and intrinsic downward pressure on prices. Someone forward this to Nefario, I nag him enough. please recall how gigamining was issued. private (otc) sales before ipo bought bonds at 1 btc / bond, thus selling at 1.20-1.30 still represents a 20-30 % profit (plus the dividends from the meantime of holding the bond) it is not true that selling is easier i.e. it does not cost anything - the sell order blocks the shares and prevents them from being transferred or offered for sale at a different price. thus you can't have fake sale wall the same way as you can't have a fake buy wall. what you see in the order book is what you can have. nothing else. if you expect bitcoin / shares in the future and want to make the order now, hm, no worky. wait and act after you have the funds in your account. even if you have a regular income and would like to post a permanent order that would be filled per partes as the funds arrive, can't do it right now. well you cannot sell shares you don't have on GLBSE and many people would like to have this option ... but it is a little bit more complicated most of us miss a much more simple thing ... placing multiple buy orders with my balance ... I have the money ... I don't ask for margin trading ... and simply if any of my buy orders gets filled - all the other are checked imediately and if my new balance isn't sufficient for any of them -> they are or deleted (very simple) or reduced in volume (to max volume my funds fit) or stay in full on my own orderbook but are listed publicly (and thus tradeable) only in reduced volume (but if some of my sell orders gets filled the new higher balance could allow to have them listed publicly again in full) We don't need to have immediatelly the complex solution ... but the simple one with deleting the orders would be great ... the only condition is that the orders must be executed sequentially by the exchange (which I guess is how GLBSE works now) and with each trade check all buy orders of the buyer and delete those that don't have adequate balance for Nefario, How long would it take you to implement the simple version (just delete all other orders ) of this idea? We/YOU really need this. Nefario is on the road for the next few hours, but asked me to post that he agrees with this idea and hopes to have it in place over the weekend. sorry to continue hi-jacking this thread, but this will be a game changer, it's been mentioned many times before, even by myself, this will actually give some much needed liquidity to glbse. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
