Entropy we know* that the price on Crypto-Trade is unreal. Like an actually unreal price point that we won't be seeing anytime soon, if at all. Trying to convince the main people who try to pump the price isn't really a good use of time or effort.

No one is going to buy a share for over .0005, and I will not be putting up bids (if any) till we go down to .00005 or .00007 as I think this is a reasonable place for me to get in more than I have. Now I know this is overvalued in your opinion but I am factoring in the chance that this company my succeed, and the spare BTC I have laying around due to the lack of other stuff to do with them.

Now I would just like to state a very important point. I am not calling you a troll, or a fudster or anything. You have admitted to being against the company, you have stated that you don't own any shares and that Ken is incompetent. I understand where you are coming from and I have taken what you said at face value.

There is one thing that people in this forum are very paranoid about; people with shares facading a very bullish appearance about the company to pump the price and people without shares facading a very bearish appearance about the company to crash the price. Now I am not stating that you are doing that, and I really don't care what the price is because I have little desire to sell and less desire to buy but, you are appearing as the later in the moderated thread and it is going to cause people to mistrust you.

No one really thinks the company is worth $250M or close to that.

* Shareholders

BTCT does not have an update book of asset holders. Bitfunder does until our shares go on the exchange excluding the >100 sold on Cryptotrade

I am against for two reasons.

1. Ken should not have control of the price of shares like that, I'm against the shares he has up now. It's unethical imho.

2. I don't think they will be locking the security when shares start going out. I can pretty much feel it with every fibre of my being that this security will not be locked as some people gain their shares before others. This means the people who gain their shares first can sell through the .005 wall and then (if they want) wait for shares to crash which they will inevitably do until we get some substantial proof of anything Ken has said and buy shares for 1/2 or 1/5 or 1/10 or 1/100 what they just sold them for.

As always, so that I am not called some Fudster or what not. I have faith that this company will succeed and do not plan to sell my shares unless the price hits a number that I am very sure it won't be hitting anytime soon.

I do not.

You thought correct.

Oh, whoosh.

Anyways guys!


The 7th Day is on Tuesday (I guess Thursday? is 7 Days after the 22nd) I believe.

Step 7 is definitely optional too because I think I am a realist. I don't remember raging.

@breadcrumbs I think people just have you on ignore. Your username is very similar to a very infamous "crumbs" whose account was banned back in December, (or was it January?) and he has been making alt accounts weekly ever since. No one thinks you are making any personal attacks, atleast I haven't. If you check my post history you will see that I am all for pressuring Ken for answer as his lack of communication has been infamous (too) in the past. Though he has recently opened up a little more than usual (which is definitely good).

Probably someone who bought at .006 or .01

So then that means this isn't a ponzi scheme.

I am giving him to Q2 to have actively started paying down the .0025 a share. Otherwise that means he has gone a full year with our money living off of it without creating a product.

He says we have 55nm chips taped out and chips expected in Q2 so I am going to take this at face value and hold him to it. He said we should have shares  on the sight by Tuesday Jan 28th, so I am going to hold him to this. He says we have 28nm being worked on in unison so these chips should be coming to us by Mid Q3 (this is the latest I am accepting).

I can understand that this is a new company, you need to feel your way through the first year and the first few projects. Mistakes happen, I can accept this. I don't expect the .0025 to be paid fully by September 25th but I do expect us to have received a substantial part of this payment by then.

I do not think stacking unnecessary pressure, worrying about Ukyo, insulting Ken (or others) or screaming scam, failure, etc.. is a something that should bog up this forum.

I think every time Ken comes on here he should see our concerns and see that they are not going away. But threats against him, insults about him, screaming about how the competition is better is not doing anyone a favor. Everyone here knows about the competition, we know what they are offering and we have decided to stick with Active Mining for a reason.

I altered your post to elaborate on what the question meant and what my answer meant. You altered my post to make me look foolish. But I forgive you, anyways. Knc and HashFast are both private, they have no shareholders. Now if Ken calls this a public company with shareholders then he has an obligation to audit it. Every other public company on this planet gets audited, this is precedent and it is law. Now if Ken is honest with what he is saying (which is very doubtful following the last two months) then an audit will only help him.

I have said it before but I think I will have to say it in every comment so people don't think I am some sort of troll. I have shares in this company and I believe that it will succeed.

Slinging insults is not going to get your point across.

@Miner

HashFast and KNC are Private companies. Active Mining is a Public company.

Yes.

+1 I have suggested that the company hires an accountant or two and does an audit for its investors. Every company on the NASDAQ has to be audited. I think we should show some professionalism here and follow the precedent set (and set our own for new companies that come in to Bitcoin securities). If Ken is telling the truth then an audit can only help.

This website still down for people?

EDIT: Nvm Clearing Cookies does work. My apologies.

Just throwing this out there. But whoever is buying shares on Crypto Trade right now is basically giving Ukyo a premium for his shares. $8 a pop. Now honestly, I think Ken should put Ukyo's shares on some lockdown until Ukyo pays Ken or they work out some other civilized agreement. From that point forward Ukyo should have full access to his remaining shares to do with as he pleases.

Ken doesn't need to spend anymore time on this issue. Why fight over 106 BTC when he believes (a lot of people on this thread believe) that there is a bigger fish in the pond (getting these chips made; sold and mining)

@Zum you are right, after checking your recent post history; I have grouped you with Miner in the group who has recently made wild speculations that have to do with 5x/10x BTC prices to keep the business afloat (this doesn't mean I am biased against what he post). I sincerely apologize.

I can understand that you think BTC will hit 10k, hell. I hope it hits 10k or 20k or 100k, but those are outside the realm of smart investing right now and I'm glad you can see why I think speculating like that is hurting this company. We need to be profitable with the possibility that BTC stays at $800 throughout the entire year).

BTW: Criticism isn't bad as long as it is constructive.

@Miner;

• Q2 Goes all the way up to the end of June my friend. That's 5 months away, so I don't know where you guys are getting just April; theres April May and June in Q2 (And this is just to get chips).
• I would also like to know where you are getting 5k per BTC from because I haven't seen BTC even break 2k yet (please at least start you speculation at current BTC price and work from there).
• Just because Ken says he plans to sell 40m worth of hardware does not make it happen. If you wish to factor that in then you should reduce it quite a bit, I think ken said that in November, We might not even get Chips until June. So you should already cut that 40m down to 20m.
• Now I'm not an engineer, and I don't mine BTC myself. But I've heard from multiple people that the 55nm chips Ken is producing are not going to meet ROI. Now if they do, that will be amazing. But I've heard to the contrary way too many times in the last few days. If this is the case, we will not sell 10m worth or 8m worth. Now we might make ROI at cost of making them, but that will not be 10m back into our pockets from inefficient chips.
• Ken says the 28nm are being worked on parallel to the 55nm chips but how far behind are they?