A credible linkedin profile was posted here a day or so ago, good luck wading through this thread to find it

Yeah, but I could fake a screenshot just as well, so I didnt bother making one (*) editing out my personal info and posting it, since it proves nothing.
(*)That and Im using Elementary OS and screenshots end up black due to some bug. heh. But you wouldnt have believed that either, nor would I.

Anyway, if you dont believe it, ask fabrizzio, I dont see why you would get a different answer than me. I suspect he will soon enough publish something somewhere as there must be plenty of people bugging him over this now.

Not really. See here:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=263445.msg3246057#msg3246057

(read the quoted part too)

BTW, since I dont have a horse in this race, Im not going to push Fabrizzio any further, but anyone that does want to retrieve his funds should push him to give the identities of the people involved. Its clear that Fabrizzio is scared of potential legal consequences (and rightfully so)

Its not as bad as it could have been. If Fabrizzio is not bullshitting (or misled even more than he claims to have been), then at least there has been a production run of something at some point. I dont see that leading to a profitable venture though, and so far, my conjecture I posted earlier still fits the known facts fairly well.

IM in contact with Fabrizzio using google+. Here is what I got so far after pinging him about labcoin:


Yes I could be faking that, but Im not, and have no reason to. Feel free to ask him yourselves.

UNlikely. Whether or not labcoin is a scam changes almost nothing about his liability. Its illegal to sell these shares, even if labcoin were a real enterprise.

Even if Fabrizio's company placed an order somewhere, what exactly does that prove? How do you prove it has anything to do with this labcoin "IPO"?

Just follow the money. "sam" got it, I dont think he exists, but theswede should know and you can point a legal gun to theswedes forehead because even being "just a spokesperson" makes him just as liable as labcoin under the securities act. IM pretty sure thats where theswede fucked up, and intended to hide behind "I am just a spokesperson" defense, and blaming the non existent sam. He didnt read the act well enough.

Without knowing what he signed, its kind of hard to prove he is complicit or liable. But if at least he is aware of "labcoin" then he should be able to point to the right people.

Personally I wouldnt waste my time finding a possibly imagined chinese from ghana ("sam"),  Id focus on theswede first. He is (I think?) in the US, legally liable for facilitating and promoting public sales of unregistered securities and should know the identity of the other people behind labcoin if there is anyone else behind it.

Maybe this is a start:
http://www.mingles.com/theswede75/

and this:
https://twitter.com/TheSwede75
(Andrew James @TheSwede75 born in MN, live in the OC and married to Kristi. Long Beach, CA)

Is it? Theswede used his name and his company name, but can you prove Fabrizzio was in any way involved? Did he sign anything? Say anything? Has anyone been in contact with him?

To expand on my hypothesis; we know the "itec pro" company was founded by Fabrizio Tatti in February. The goal of this company as stated on linkedin is online sales of chinese smartphones and tablets. But soon after Fabrizzio joined Oppo, a Chinese handset manufacturer, its very unlikely they would have allowed him to continue his online shop. Hence the website is defunct, and the company became inactive, if it ever was active.

Howard Wang, "sam" or theswede know Fabrizzio and offered to use his idle shelf company for their bitcoin project in return for some of the profit. Fabrizzio may not know the first thing about bitcoins, but had nothing to lose, so agreed. He is not involved in the activities (in so far there any) of labcoin in any way shape or form. Small wonder he never communicates about it and doesnt even seem to have a forum account here.

Its all conjecture, but it does make a credible story IMO.

You can always have another daughter, you will never again have the historic opportunity to pick up the first 28nm miner!
j/k

Actually, this part Im willing to believe. Universities can have research fabs. They are not big, dont have large capacity but can produce chips in limited quantities using usually old/obsolete technology. The Howard Wang story producing some 180nm chips at his university is actually quite credible.

Whats less credible is that prior to IPO that was somehow changed to 130nm with 20x better specs while maintaining the same time table.

What entirely not credible is that a 65nm chip could be developed in any reasonable amount of time with the money they raised.


My guess is that Howard Wang really exists, really worked on a 180nm chip. Found some people to help monetize this. Once they realized that a 180nm chip with those specs, even if it worked, wouldnt exactly be a gold mine that would attract enough capital, theswede started making up stuff to make this venture look potentially lucrative.

Lets hope it wont look more like this

Next difficulty (estimate): 195,903,813
http://bitcoindifficulty.com/

Next 199,980,104 x1.34
http://dot-bit.org/tools/nextDifficulty.php

Thats presumably before any KnC machines where turned on.

Ryanair from eindhoven to stockholm costs <50 euro. Well maybe a bit more once you actually book and pay all the inevitable surcharges, but thats probably cheaper than UPS or whatever they are using and  less than 1/3 of a single day mining revenue at todays difficulty. And you'd get to see stockholm.

I wouldnt think twice about hopping on a plane.

Yeah a 28nm mask set would cost several million dollar.
Bitfountain is on record saying a 65nm maskset would cost $500K at a cheap fab in China. Assuming LC could obtain similar prices, that leaves them almost penny less for the chip development, packaging development, PCBs,  actual wafer runs. miner components, assembly etc.

That money was never intended to fund a 65nm chip or farm, they would have needed to raise more.

FYI, 7K BTC most likely isnt enough to develop a 65nm chip and deploy miners based on it en masse. The mask sets alone might be on that order of magnitude.
Small wonder they have nothing to show for, other than theseven doing some contract work in the margin, probably just to keep up appearances.

They raised 10K BTC didnt they? And we dont have a frigging idea who is really behind it. That would qualify as a successful scam to me.

Im pretty sure the flight would pay itself if the alternative is waiting a week, possibly longer due to customs

And has anyone been in contact with him? I could make an IPO and list Bill Gates as chairman.

As for the current share price, I have to say, if anything its still rather high. Am I wrong saying it IPO'd at 0.001 and its now still about half of that?

If even labcoin is legit, its clear they will be unable to meet the expectations set forth at ipo. But the current price only makes sense to me if people still believe their chip not only exists, but will start hashing fairly soon with a relatively small risk  this is going absolutely nowhere. IOW, Im amazed its holding up so well and equally amazed how most of you seem to think this price is low. Facebook value dropped about as much after the IPO, no one thought FB was a scam.