Deprived already made most of the points I wanted to make. But let me add;  I would avoid betting on the short term, this market isnt always very rational or quick to understand, and low liquidity could hurt us. More importantly, right now, I would be wary of shorting (or buying) mining bonds or shares in general. The asic switch is difficult to predict, we dont know how many devices will be shipped, when they will be shipped, who will get them first and how long it will take for the others to receive them. Its even more difficult to predict how investors will react on what I expect will be a brief but very substantial gain in dividends (especially for those who get them early), to be followed by very sharp and prolonged decline towards nothingness. Most likely this will create great shorting opportunities at some point, but I wouldnt start the bet today, I would rather wait until these companies are mining with asics and see if enough investors get fooled by the apparent spectacular rise in perceived profitability and/or dividend payments.

One last thing, not directed to you in particular, but the fact the vast majority of assets on GLBSE are IMO not worth buying, shouldnt be viewed as criticism on all the issuers. Its not (always) their fault if investors will buy the "least worst" at whatever the current price,  or hang on to shares that are ridiculously overpriced.

So there are 8000 shares, that puts the nav at 0.19.

LOL, its micrea who just copy/pasted it from my post. I dont even use IRC.

Neither I think. Sounds like he is talking about usagi's CPA.

Woha. Good stuff, I had no idea. Here I was thinking the main issue was CPA's insurance of Nyan.A (which holds 60% of its assets in BMF), I had no idea CPA had also insured BMF's NAV directly. And lol, at 1 BTC per share? Even usagi himself puts it 0.5 now, and in reality its ~0.33.

 Im beginning to understand the desperation now.

Let me stress this part of the contract:

Incorrect. You base your NAV claims on the (un)"real" column and there it still shows your BFL gear at prices way above listprice. Shipping costs or wishful thinking are not assets. Keep in mind this all started by you proclaiming BMF has a NAV (NET ASSET VALUE) of 0.50, not that it has an unreal value of 0.50.


You changed it from 15000% of a sensible estimate to 14000% above any sensible estimate. You are still valuing your ABM shares as if their non upgradable BFL single would somehow be worth 375 BTC.

'nough said.

I agree with your concerns, which is why I also dont expect to be shorting all that much all the time, but that should not stop us from trying.

Also, I think we can alleviate the perceived risk by finding a truly trustworthy escrow. I dont mean a reputable forum member (or it would have to be someone like Gavin himself), but didnt Tangible Cryptography offer escrowing services? Something like that is what I would want to use. Or Usagi. (j/k).

As for your third point; I kinda doubt it. Some investors might see the light of course, but its rather clear to me that most of them are easily blinded by high dividend payments, or they wouldnt be investing in the first place,  and if we offer even higher ones with a completely trustworthy escrow, there will be customers. Worst case, we find none at all, and we still end up with not losing a penny and therefore outperforming most other stocks

Im not too concerned by that. Remember, we would generally be short in GLBSE assets, and our actual assets would be bitcoins, most of them in escrow elsewhere or cold storage. If GLSBE would go tits up or get closed down, it would probably be the best thing that could happen to us. And if Nefario for whatever reason freezes only our account, there wont be much in it anyway.

That said, I do have a fair level of confidence in Nefario. He has made his mistakes, but generally I think of him as reasonable and fair. And I dont see why he would object to this project, it should help correct inflated prices and help provide early warnings for scams, thats not against his interests at all.

I hadnt heard of it yet, I will check it out. But since the assets we would be most interested in  are traded on GLBSE, and we would need to sell them there anyway, it seems logical to host it there, no?

Hi all,

Im gauging interest in a GLBSE bearish fund. This fund would be run on the assumption that nearly  everything currently on GLBSE will, in the long run, produce a negative ROI, as almost all the assets are overpriced, insolvent, a scam or (indirect) passthroughs to (other passthroughs to) overpriced assets, insolvent assets or scams.

The reason I believe this to be the case is that everyone is trying to “make his coins work for him” by investing and searching for the highest possible APR at a perceived risk level they deem acceptable, but the reality is that almost none of the companies listed on GLBSE create any added value that could sustain these returns.

Think about it, which company listed there offers products or services you are willing to pay for? Precious few. The vast majority (including mining bonds and companies)  only produce promises to generate you more coins than you put in. That obviously cant work, and therefore, a few small exceptions aside, the only ones that create "added value", create it for themselves, either as plain scams, or by issuing bonds/shares and taking their cut before their investors lose their principal due to their own or other assets crashing or defaulting.

Now, if you also believe thats true, you may wonder why do I start a fund and how on earth could it profit?  Bearmarkets are an opportunity too, especially if you are one of few to realize it and act on it. PuppyBear will try to short assets by borrowing them from other investors, provided there is enough liquidity to make it feasible and provided we can find willing investors to borrow them to us on acceptable terms. This would be our primary business.

PuppyBear will also try to identify small windows of opportunity to invest in, should they arise, even high risk ones, but we will generally hold most or even all of our assets in bitcoins, either as collateral for shorting or ready to be used  if/when an opportunity arises. Puppybear willl not try to invest in “the best of the worst” as all other investment funds seem to do. Puppybear realizes that its far better to have bitcoins and 0% APR  than a crappy investment that pays high dividends but ends up losing 10% per month. If there is nothing worth buying, we wont buy "nothing" (but we will try to sell short overpriced assets if we can).

Trying to preempt some questions.

Q What ROI  do you expect to achieve?
Let me put it this way: In the long run, I am convinced  we will provide a better ROI than ~98% of all other GLSBE assets. If you think thats a bold statement, its not and this fund is probably not for you, as  Im fairly sure that a cold wallet would have provided a better ROI than 98% of all investments on GLSBE over the past year. If we can beat a cold wallet, I will consider it a success. I am not going to guess by how much we can beat it, but I will take 1% APR over -10%.

Q will you run off with the coins?
Nope. I will get fully verified on GLBSE, and Ill be as transparent as I can be. If we short shares, the collateral will probably be put in a trusted escrow service. Im also thinking cold wallet bitcoin storage addresses will be provided to shareholders or made public.

Q What makes you think you are qualified?
It wont just be me, I assume anyone investing in this will  be “like minded”, so I will gladly listen to and consult with my shareholders to identify opportunities, whether it is for investing or shorting, or doing nothing. Unlike many other "CEO's", I realize the coins actually belong to you, the shareholder, so you will have your say. But never having been scammed once so far,  realizing whats going on GLBSE, and being able to perform first grade arithmetic with very few errors already gives me a clear leg up over 99% of the other “fund managers”. Iif you think Im not qualified, dont invest.

Q How would you structure the IPO, how would you structure dividends? What will the contract state?
I havent quite thought this through yet, and I wont until I see sufficient positive response. Im open to suggestions, though I certainly would avoid a never ending IPO like DMC. As for dividends, as I see it, dividends will only be paid if there are substantial and sustained profits, and after shareholders approval. Dividends will be the exception, like after we completed a very successful shorting, it wont be the rule, they wont happen daily or weekly.
Same goes for issuing new shares, only if shareholders approve it, and in a way that rewards early shareholders, rather than dilute them.

Q what will your cut be?
Up for debate.  Whatever it is, it will be humble and most of it should be performance dependent.  I dont think I should get paid a fat fee for losing your coins, most of you are quite capable of doing that yourselves without my help .

Another perspective;  judging by Pirate debt prices,  someone who invested in Pirate at the same time DMC IPO'd, never withdrew a penny, always reinvested his dividends, got caught by total surprise when pirate defaulted, waited more than a month after the default before accepting this reality and selling his worthless debt, would still have lost less than someone who bought in to DMC.  And yet we are supposed to believe there is no wrong doing here.

I havent checked or assessed all of them; only the red one's have a manually estimated NAV. If I am going to have to assess all those assets, someone will actually have to pay me for it (as usagi claims).

That said, there is another clear error in my table that someone pointed out to me; I accidentally put JAH at 0.3934 in the red colum; it hasnt been that high since May. I dont know this company, but its average price is 0.12. This boosted Nyan.A estimated NAV by ~85BTC. The correct estimated NAV for Nyan.A would therefore be 0.662 instead of 0.72

If it was a due to some colossal "lack of skill" but with honest intentions,  he would have corrected his "errors" after they were pointed out, and he would have amended his investors guidance. He has done neither (quite the opposite in fact).
 
Im also quite confident usagi himself will not agree with you that gross incompetence plays any role here. Its not like you need a PhD to understand that a $599 BFL single isnt worth 350 or 700BTC.

somewhat?
I would urge you to read this:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=113708.msg1228551#msg1228551

Before deciding to buy BMF (or CPA or any usagi asset for that matter).

The is a split from the thread where Usagi accuses EskimoBob and Usagi himself came under scrutiny by Maged. To avoid that thread from derailing even further, I will continue this here.

I already provided evidence that Usagi is deliberately and grossly misleading investors about the value of his assets here:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=112443.msg1225358#msg1225358

Basically he told investors that BMF fund has a NAV of 0.50 (link) and that a price of 0.57 BTC per share would be completely reasonable (link),  and people should  not sell below those prices, while his own books at that time showed the NAV to be ~0.4  even after inflating almost everything he holds by 20% or more. He listed mining hardware up to almost 30% above list price, included shipping costs as assets, doubled some share prices, etc. Any factual calculation using list prices for the hardware and GLBSE prices for the other assets  put the NAV around 0.32-0.35 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=112734.msg1225573#msg1225573).

Its hard to argue against basic mathematics, so since I started calculating his actual NAV using GLBSE prices, Usagi has resorted to new tricks. He has updated his spreadsheet (http://tsukino.ca/bmf/holdings-nav/) to show a "real value" column instead of GLBSE averages,  with no explanation of how he achieves "real value".  The "real" numbers are on average almost 50% above average GLBSE 5day average prices. And even that isnt enough to warrant his 0.5 BTC claim, so on top of that he has resorted to attempting to manipulate GLSBE share prices of some of the ultra low volume assets he holds. Here is a good example:

A few days ago, Usagi's BMF fund held 200 shares in ABM and ABM traded for 0.125 5-day average. (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=112734.msg1225573#msg1225573)
As of now,  Usagi holds 210 shares and ABM traded (briefly) for 0.45BTC. As a result, GLBSE 5 day avg shot up to 0.25 , though the shareprice is now again lower than it was before usagi bought in, trading at ~0.10 as of the time of writing (link).

Now putting the nav for ABM at 0.25BTC could be considered rather questionable already, but usagi actually put 0.35 BTC/share as "real value" in his books. So I decided to check out ABM to see if there was a rational explanation for that.

ABM has only one asset: 1 BFL single, thats mining with horrendous electricity costs and no ASIC upgrade path. 25% of the mining revenue is kept to cover costs. ABM has issued 1000 shares. These are facts, confirmed by ABM's CEO.

So, usagi thinks the "real value" of this one $599 single is 1000*73.5/210= 350 BTC and he almost certainly bought a few shares at a price that would only be warranted if this single was worth ~700 BTC!

For the record, list price for a BFL single is $599 or ~12 BTC (and that will give you 100% of the hashrate, not just 75%, plus it will let you upgrade to ASICs, whereas ABM does not offer an  ASIC upgrade path).

After exposing this, Usagi has "adjusted" his "real value" of ABM to 300 BTC, which still is roughly 10x more than the market value of 75% of a used BFL single, and since there is no upgrade to asics, arguably 50x above any reasonable estimate.

ABM is just an example, if you go over Usagi's spreadsheet, you will find almost nothing but numbers that are similarly detached from reality, although not all of them are quite this extreme.

Now why would Usagi do this? The answer is simple; Usagi needs to inflate his bubbles.  Nyan holds a truckload of BMF shares, especially his Nyan.A bond. At current prices, 60% of its value is in BMF shares. Why is that a problem? Because if BMF shares were to be valued around a reasonable NAV instead of some 50% higher, the NAV of those Nyan bonds would tank even further. Nyan.A by my estimate currently has an actual NAV of ~0.66 if you apply more sane numbers for BMF; but Nyan.A is insured by CPA to be worth 1 BTC. CPA is another Usagi company and this company already has liquidity problems

edit: I wasnt aware of this, but if you read further on in this thread, it turns out CPA also directly insured BMF against a NAV loss below 1 BTC per share (!). BMF shareholders have apparently paid over 500 BTC to CPA for this insurance, but they  are getting nothing in return for it. CPA (ran by usagi) has refused to pay out BMF (ran by usagi) for reasons he is not disclosing.

So usagi has been aggressively buying up BMF shares to push up the price far above any reasonable NAV estimate,  has been buying for just a few BTC incredibly overpriced low volume assets such as ABM to further boost his own funds apparent value,  and has been spreading what can only be described as factual lies to support this price lvel and avoid people selling in to his meager bidwall.

At this point, I fear this is more than just about lying and misleading, and Im beginning to fear this whole thing is a scam that goes a lot further than what I described here. I have many other red flags pointing in that direction, but I will give usagi a chance to explain first before I list them here. But IMO, the above alone would be enough to put him in jail in any regulated market.

Oh thats easy.
Two days ago you held 200 ABM shares and they traded for 0.125. Today you have 210 shares and they traded for 0.45. Do I really need to explain?

For those not seeing it, these are very very low volume shares with an enormous spread. Usagi seems to focus primarily on making his books look better than they really are, so he buys a few shares way above of any reasonable NAV estimate, so GLSBE share price shoots up, and if no one sells, which happens a lot with those low volume assets, particularly without any bid walls,  he can put those inflated values in his books.

He did the same with CPA,  BMF,  DMC etc. Spend a few BTC and you can put a multiple of it as "asset value" in your books. And even then he seems to think its a good idea to increase that value further.
.

Thank you. I read it, but thought I might have missed something, like a solid gold cooler on your BFL .

Back to the topic of BMF and creative accounting. Usagi's spreadsheet is becoming more and more interesting with this new "real value" column. Looking over some of the holdings.

Usagi has 210 shares in ABM and has been buying more recently. ABM IPO'd at 0.25 and has a 5 day avg of 0.255 BTC/share.
210x0.255 = 53 BTC.
Usagi lists the "real value" of his shares as 73.5 BTC

So I had a look if that was defensible

Ive asked the operator to confirm this, so perhaps Im wrong, but as far as I can tell, ABM has as only asset one BFL single, thats mining with horrendous electricity costs and no ASIC upgrade path. 25% of the mining revenue is kept to cover costs. ABM has issued 1000 shares.

So, usagi thinks the "real value" of this one $599 single is 1000*73.5/210

350 BTC

or ~$4000

or

0.42 BTC per MH

Usagi, can you explain to your shareholders why you think 350 BTC is the "real value" for ABM, and not, say, 75% of ~40 BTC going rate for a used BFL single?

Hello,

Do I understand correctly you are currently mining with 1 BFL single, and paying 75% of its revenue as dividends? No asic upgrade plans?

thx

It isnt an attempt to value them, its an attempt to calculate the NAV and show what you are exposed to.
Because of the contractual obligations, and assuming you would honor them,  if I wanted to valuate it, NYAN.C would be worth zero, Nyan.B significanlty under current market price, Nyan.A would probably still be good for ~1 BTC, although Im getting increasingly concerned your business is not sustainable and you might even be running a scam.

Your constant short term and expensive actions that serve only  to push up share prices temporarily should be worrying to investors. For instance, I noticed you bought back 100's of Nyan.Bs at ~1 BTC. That is substantially above their expected NAV and value by any reasonable measure. OF course its very good for Nyan.B shareholders wanting to get out, but it doesnt make any sense and increases the risk for all other existing shareholders (particularly CPA) as you become less and less solvent. The same goes for CPA and BMF on which you spent a lot of money just to push prices over what the market thinks it worth. And that loan you took out recently, I cant find it in your books. Where did you put it? Your books also still show you hold 1000s of DMC shares, though you said you sold them. It cant be both. Where did the coins come from to repurchase the BMF and Nyan,B assets? You only had a handful on your books, and there is no change,  so who is paying?  Every day there is a new red flag going up.