The maximum profit at that time was around 7.5 BTC
Look closer, those are the same roll, before and after they changed the amount to an INVALID amount
Were you able to withdraw what was left of your winnings? It is still shown as "manual withdrawal" So, no Maybe shouldn't have gone public until you were able to withdraw. I hope you get your coins. |
|
|
|
|
Total scam site. We can now conclude there was no third developer on the grassy knoll. Manl is a straight up con man. He was caught cheating players once, managed to recover somehow to the point he had investors and players again, and then is caught scamming them another way.
What absolutely kills me is that this site has the best UI of any dice site since JD, maybe even better than JD in the end. Manl could have easily made a lot of money running an honest site, but that greedy asshat would rather steal than run an honest business.
What a complete and utter waste.
|
|
|
|
|
Oooooh, I didn't even think about the biggest losers! Bonus stats!
Thanks, and keep up the good work. I'll be interested to see what you do to enhance the UI, if you end up making any changes at all.
|
|
|
|
|
I think it's a really unique type of game and I've noticed a lot more people playing now, so it seems to be growing in popularity. I think some more statistics would complement the site well, such as the ability to see what the bonus pot is, be able to view rankings beyond the 10 top players, and also to be able to sort users by highest net profit in addition to highest gross profit, and all time bonus award leaders. I think the more stats you can display the better.
|
|
|
|
I work in this field, so let me give you some really general information.
No matter what you're selling (shares, interests, etc.), it's still a security, and to comply with the law, you will need to register the security with each state you plan to offer it in. The regulatory hurdle for registering securities is high, at least much higher than I anticipate you want to deal with.
There are ways to legally sell securities without registering. The most common way is through an exemption under Regulation D. There are three exemptions under Reg D: Rule 504, 505, and 506. Each carries different requirements that must be met, otherwise you blow your exemption and are selling an unregistered security, which the SEC and the states take seriously. They regularly and effectively punish people doing so for the safety of the public.
As an example, under Rule 504 of Regulation D, you can raise up to one million dollars, but all your investors must be "accredited" investors, which means they have a net worth of at least one million dollars excluding their primary residence (so $1M not counting their home), or they must have an annual income of more than $200,000. So we're talking about rich people. Also, I believe there is a ban on general solicitation for investors, which means you can't advertise to the public. And this is just the federal rule, in addition, you will have to comply with any state rules that are in place for each state you offer your security in.
There are different requirements under Rule 505 and 506, but 504 is probably the least stringent. To say the least, to fulfill the legal obligations of selling a security, you would have to jump through a lot of hoops, and the expense to get everything in order would be high, as you would need to hire a securities law firm to help you navigate the regulatory landscape.
I am not a lawyer and nothing in this post should be construed as legal advice.
What about some guys getting together and building a business? Whats the difference there then? Or lets say 10 guys put their money together and buy one of those bitcoin ATM's. They would all own it but it doesnt sound like its something like a security then. Is the difference that the shares of the company cant be sold so easily? Or that there is no issuer? But even when you are a partly owner of a business you would be able to sell your part of the business. And i cant believe that you have to apply for SEC rules only for creating a business with others. Though im no american so... It gets pretty granular and specific to the situation, but you're talking about an exemption from the rules in this case. Very generally speaking, there is a litmus test the Supreme Court established a long time ago to help determine whether or not the investment is a "security." If the venture has the following four characteristics, it is generally a "security": 1. investment of money due to 2. an expectation of profits arising from 3. a common enterprise 4. which depends solely on the efforts of a promoter or third party Most likely, the situation you're talking about would not meet the 4th criteria because people pooling money together to start a business would be active participants in the business, and not be third parties or outsiders who expect to profit off the work of the people running the business. That's generally the difference between owning a part of a business and owning a security. The rules differ for every state, and by the specifics of the situation. |
|
|
|
Thanks for the replies guys, so basically everyone in cryptostock, coinsortium and similar including nxt assests are just doing everything illegally?
And i dont have an option unless i want to spend thousand of dollars just trying to go legal on the SEC part?
Basically any website or company, especially the gambling sites, using pooled money from "investors" to operate and is sharing profits or promising to share them with American citizens is violating US securities laws. Because of the mostly-anonymous way it's being done though through bitcoins and the internet, it makes it a pretty low priority for regulators, although it's scrutiny that is only guaranteed to grow the more common or bigger it gets. You'd be rolling the dice. There's already been one case I know of of regulators hitting someone with a bitcoin business for selling unregistered securities, he had to pay more than $50,000 in fines and disgorgement: http://www.sec.gov/News/PressRelease/Detail/PressRelease/1370541972520#.VCsCV_ldVqI |
|
|
|
Just so I understand the relationship properly, Cryptx runs the rigs and charges hosting fees for doing so? Is that how they make their money?
Havelock lists the securities and charges fees for trading them.
Do I have these two things correct?
Just about So Cryptx is charging 14 BTC per day as a hosting fee, which is basically what the equipment mines now, and that's why divs have reached zero? |
|
|
|
|
Just so I understand the relationship properly, Cryptx runs the rigs and charges hosting fees for doing so? Is that how they make their money?
Havelock lists the securities and charges fees for trading them.
Do I have these two things correct?
|
|
|
|
|
I work in this field, so let me give you some really general information.
No matter what you're selling (shares, interests, etc.), it's still a security, and to comply with the law, you will need to register the security with each state you plan to offer it in. The regulatory hurdle for registering securities is high, at least much higher than I anticipate you want to deal with.
There are ways to legally sell securities without registering. The most common way is through an exemption under Regulation D. There are three exemptions under Reg D: Rule 504, 505, and 506. Each carries different requirements that must be met, otherwise you blow your exemption and are selling an unregistered security, which the SEC and the states take seriously. They regularly and effectively punish people doing so for the safety of the public.
As an example, under Rule 504 of Regulation D, you can raise up to one million dollars, but all your investors must be "accredited" investors, which means they have a net worth of at least one million dollars excluding their primary residence (so $1M not counting their home), or they must have an annual income of more than $200,000. So we're talking about rich people. Also, I believe there is a ban on general solicitation for investors, which means you can't advertise to the public. And this is just the federal rule, in addition, you will have to comply with any state rules that are in place for each state you offer your security in.
There are different requirements under Rule 505 and 506, but 504 is probably the least stringent. To say the least, to fulfill the legal obligations of selling a security, you would have to jump through a lot of hoops, and the expense to get everything in order would be high, as you would need to hire a securities law firm to help you navigate the regulatory landscape.
I am not a lawyer and nothing in this post should be construed as legal advice.
|
|
|
|
Was this issue ever resolved?
Yes, his coins were stolen by someone and that's it. We will never find out what was really the case here. Do we know if it was malware? I know that was suggested, but have not seen anything definitive about it. |
|
|
|
|
Was this issue ever resolved?
|
|
|
|
But the fact is that eventually you will profit?
Mathematically, it is extremely likely you will profit over the long term on a highly trafficked site that is run honestly. DB currently is moderately trafficked, but the honesty part cannot be attested to. If you look at this site and say "despite all the problems they have with honesty and reputation, the potential small profit here makes it worth the risk" then you are really terrible at evaluating risk. |
|
|
|
I don't think an identity would prove anything. IMO the programmer would likely deny creating the code as it would open him up to civil liability from dicebitco.in and potential criminal liability. They wish to stay anon and will likely not give up that anon just to feed the trolls
DB previously said he's personally associated with the developer and outing his identity could lead to himself being identified. I think it's an excuse, I don't believe there was a third developer, but that's the "official" reason for not naming him. As far as liability goes, no court has the power to enforce a civil remedy on a website that likely isn't operating completely legally. As for criminally, perhaps on a looooooong shot. But you all do realize that you're "investing" or gambling with a (at best) semi-illegal gambling website owned anonymously, operated entirely though the internet, and only interacting with the owners through anonymous screen names, right? If your money is stolen, that's really on YOU. |
|
|
|
Another ponzi?  Good news! Cryptx sold the mining rigs. |
|
|
|
|
So back to your original observation, what would cause Invested to go up 500 BTC while bankroll drops 150 BTC and site profit only goes up 3 BTC?
|
|
|
|
Are you sure about that?
God no, I'm such a moron. I just retried my experiment and it worked the way you would expect. Which means it probably did the first time as well, but I didn't notice it change the first time I divested. Durr. |
|
|
|
So basically, the commit was blindly accepted? Seems quite irresponsible... Where's my refund? He's always maintained the commit was blindly accepted. The only question to my mind is if this whole 3rd developer thing is concocted or true. Manl's refusal to name the developer is troubling, especially since if he exists, he attempted to steal coins from the players Manl promised to treat fairly by running his site. Protecting this guy (if he exists) does not make you a trustworthy individual. |
|
|
|
The "invested" and "bankroll" figures on the last two lines are interesting. Invested went up 500 BTC while bankroll went down 150 BTC. I think it's to do with how the site doesn't count profits or losses as affecting "invested" until commission has been paid on them - or something like that.
What I don't understand is how is BR and Invested not the same number? What would cause that to be different? You know what, I just did some experimenting on the site with the dust I still have there. It appears the "Invested" number doesn't change for divested amounts, but always changes when new amounts are invested. I divested with no change to the "Invested" number, then reinvested the same amount and the "Invested" number changed by the exact amount I invested. I wonder if divestments of a certain size don't subtract from the total "Invested" for some reason. Tangential question: for the purpose of attributing profits properly to folks who are invested, is the site properly computing your percentage of the BR or is it assigning you profits based on your percentage of the amount "Invested." If it is the latter, then investors are getting screwed on profit as it is being watered down.Edit: It is using the correct BR number. I still don't understand the "Invested" number. |
|
|
|
The "invested" and "bankroll" figures on the last two lines are interesting. Invested went up 500 BTC while bankroll went down 150 BTC. I think it's to do with how the site doesn't count profits or losses as affecting "invested" until commission has been paid on them - or something like that.
What I don't understand is how is BR and Invested not the same number? What would cause that to be different? |
|
|
|
|
Short version is the site never went down. It has been operating the whole time, though with much less activity. It was slowly re-acquiring investors, and at one point when the BR was growing (don't know the exact number, maybe around 1000) "Mateo" returned and went on a huge losing streak. Those are the facts of the situation.
There is continued speculation as to whether Mateo is a legit user or an insider. Some people are saying Mateo is a Manl account who lost all the money back to lure investors back so Manl can steal money. I personally don't find this compelling, since Manl could have just stolen 7500 BTC the first time.
Either way, you need to form your own conclusion, but continue to be weary because this site was found to be cheating players once already by skipping winning nonces, whether or not Mateo is a legit user.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
