I did request a refund to, no response here either sofar.

Yea what about BITVPS, i was woundering that to ?
I guess cryptostocks would probably accept most things to get listed at there site but i doubt many people would like to have any significant amount of btc there until kumala(the owner of cryptostocks and majority owner in vircurex) pays what he owes his shareholders in vircurex and proves he dident steal the 2500 btc + 20 000 usd or whatever the amount "missing" was...

He should of course honer our redeem requests as fast as it is possible.

Whether or not he likes to announce what he used some of the loans for or when he likes to do that has nothing to do with peoples redeem requests and should be no reason for him delaying those requests.

Maby we should call it an improvement(that they is reducing the demands to 1 government issued photo id) for those people that would have had problems or where it might have been impossible to get verified in case they dident have one or some of the documents that the first, 8th Oct change required or if it would be illeagal for them to get verifyed if they weren't allowed to scan those documents according to the laws in the country they live.

But like some have mentioned in the thread it's most likely illegal also for Bitfunder/WeExchange to require that type of information(scanned copy's of ID/Passport/Drivers licence & credit cards) from a lot of people in different country's around the world depending on there local laws.
Even the fact that they demands that type of documents even if no one in any of the affected coutrys actually had sent in the documents is most likely a criminal offense they commited in many countrys.

Even thou that statment may usually be right, that is not correct if you gamble on EV+ situations, when the expected value is better than 100% return on avg, and such games you find all the time in Dragon's Tale for example.
There's also professional gamblers in lots of fields like poker, horse racing, sports betting and so on that live on there profit from gambling so even if gambling for the masses is an ev- thing on avg, everyone has the chance to win in the short perspective and there is also those that win and profit good on it in the long run.
So if you only(or most of the time) bet on situations your expected to win in the long run on, your almost garanteed to profit on your gambling.....

There is never any need for ever paying any transaction fees unless you want to, all you need is some bigger input amount of coins(like 1+ btc) that have been resting for a while in your wallet to ballance out the dust you send with the same transaction...
But i guess you would earn better by having that 1+ btc invested in Ukyo loan or something like that than having it tied up in your wallet for days to remove a single transactions fees..lol

I did earn 4 btc from a few faucets on the net back in 2012 or a few minutes time a day for a couple of weeks before they started to reduce the gifts they gave, and on Dragon's Tale if you count that as a "Free BTC" site i have of course earned way more than 4 btc there...

Usually the verification email comes immediately, you should have it within a few seconds time unless something went wrong.

I guess you will get 98% of the whole gamblingsite's profit if your the only investor Eternity...

Good luck on this yakuza699, i think you should polish up the ide a bit first and at least make a prototype of the site to attract investors. 98% of the profit may give your dice site ide an edge for investors compared to 90% on JD but what will the edge that attract gamblers be, there's already JD and a buch of other dicesites that offers 1% house edge.

I think there need to be some updates from Kenilworth on this, how the transferring of shares process goes, if there will be options with direct shares(for other than the big majority owners) or if there might be an option with listing and transferring shares to another exchange like Havelock or maby even Cryptostocks as an alternative for those that will not be able to continue trading on Bitfunder.

I did send him a PM to, i guess he will check them sooner or later, maby i should try sending him an email to ?

Thanks for the info Ukyo, great news.

Not at all, i have not bet on it and i weren't fooled and whether the SEC or something else is behind this is still to be seen. Whatever the cause for this is in any case, won't matter that much for us non US citizens. Most of us should already be or be able to come out as a winner on this situation, i feel sad for the US based people thou that will end up loosing a lot on this, there the one that really got screwed...

 

Such terms is rather ridicules and im sure they wont hold up in court in many country's, what matters depending on what type of product/service people buy/use would be the laws in the country the company is registered/operating in and/or laws in the country the consumer/user is located in.

well  the usgov don't have jurisdiction to do whatever they like wherever they like in the world even if the usgov seems to think they can, there is international laws to that stand above us laws even that the usgov seems to not give a damn about that most of the time...

This Bitfunder thing is a total mess.
Ukyo the Bitfunder & Weexchange sites was supposedly getting registered in "respectable" non us country i think you mentioned before, what on earth does us laws(that looks to be the problem here) have to do with Bitfunder and there users.
If the site's .com domain is a problem by all mean change that, but if the Bitfunder and Weexchange both is registered in other country's and the site's owner(s) is not American citizens(Japan and Australia i presume) whats the problem. No gag order that prevents you from communicating whats behind the drastic change at least....

Why will American's be locked out of the site and why does international users on Bitfunder have to get verified (at Weexchange !!??) at a level where it's hard or impossible (at least in that short timespan) to achieve for a large number of the worlds population or do you expect all international(and US) users that miss at least one of driver license/passport/creditcard to get that in the coming 22 days, will Bitfunder pay for those users expenses getting those then...


And what has verification level at Weexchange anything to do with international users(or even usa based users current trading) future trades or not on Bitfunders site ?
If people wanted to trade btc for usd/cad/aud at Weexchange i can somewhat understand that they might need to get some verification level for that, but Weexchage and Bitfunder was supposedly set up like this to prevent any problems for people trading shares at bitfunder.

If this change will force anyone to sell at loss, are Bitfunder going to cover there losses then as this is not the conditions people signed up for as a user of Bitfunder...

Also the Weexchange site dosent send out verification emails, at least thats an issue for some and i saw someone mention they had the same problem with Bitfunder to, fix that !

2FA really should be possible to remove and just have that as default for people that will need to transfer shares to another family member for example and they don't have modern phones that can handle it. if other options than using mobile phones exists and works on Bitfunder you need to make a good explanation on exactly how people should do to make that thing work unless the requirements will be lifted for transfers.


What will happen to the us citizens that can't get verified on Weexchange and those that refuse to sell at underprices caused by this mess, are Bitfunder going to steal there assets(stocks/shares..) ?

What will happen to international users that don't see what has happened before the 1 Nov and can't get verified on Weexchange or refuse to sell shares at underprices caused by this mess, will bitfunder steal there assets(stocks/shares...) to ?

I saw it was mentioned they could still transfer out funds(btc's) after the 1 Nov but what about shares they may never will be able to sell, are people allowed to redeem shares back to the asset issuer after the respective deadline 8 Oct/1 Nov ?

Will redeems of shares work for those that can't be verified after there respective deadline (8 Oct/1 Nov) ?

What about shares that people have left after the deadline, will the asset issuer be able to call back those at a further date and pay the shareholders that can't get verified ?

Will the us/international shareholders still be able to receive dividend after there respective deadline if they can't get verified ?

How on earth did you think this is going to work out for shares that don't have any buyback options in the contract, will Bitfunder buy those people's shares(that has got, will get or may get there shares in a position where they can't sell them) out at fair prices if people want out of them or are Bitfunder just going to confiscate them ?

As it looks now the whole thing looks like a gigantic attempt to steal btc's from users on Bitfunder if things not get fixed, explained and improved soon in a way so that all people have a reasonable way to continue trading as it was before on Bitfunder or at least so there able to access and sell off all there current holdings if they so like.
I presume there will be 100's if not 1000's of lawsuits(..or one big joint lawsuit for all that was effected) from people if this will be the final version of how things is going to work on Bitfunder..
 

Im sure you have a lot to do at the moment Ukyo, just a reminder, dividend has not been paid for the 6:th and 8:th oct in your Ukyo.Loan.

I think they said they were on a tight schedule, hopefully they will get there ASICs out as scheduled, but one could guess that they will have a video up on the first device running probably the day before first shipping date or maby even the same day just a few hours before they ship, who knows ?

It woulden't be supprising if they are going to work weekends to during the first batches 15-20 days or so shipping windows, but even if they dont they still have thursday, friday and monday to start the delivery on.
Im pretty sure there should be people in Sweden on day 1 that should get there device the same day it's shipped if the first days delivery is sent early in the morning and some people in Sweden(and probably some from other country's to) that bought at least 5-10 machines or so will probably go and pick up there machines in person at KnC's place in Stockholm on there shippmentdate(to earn another 1-2k usd value in extra mined btc's) if there resonably early in the delievery order, so if they send out there first 500 or so day 1 devices even on monday morning there should be people that get there devices up and working in September...

They still got thursday friday and monday to ship, if they work weekends to, two more days so they could still deliver before 30 sept.

Last time i saw something about it they had raised the cost for new traders to be allowed to trade on there exchange from 20 btc to 30 btc and that was after btc started to rise they changed the fee, around half a year ago if i remember correctly, i doubt they have had a single trader sign up for that kind of silly deal as the signup was free for the traders on there exchange way back....

Lots of things in your post to comment on, but lets start with the above and have a look at the LTC.AFT contract at LTC-global.
From LTC-AFT's Contract with it's shareholders we read the following:

"LIQUIDITY & FUND CLOSURE

The fund does not pay dividends - so the only way for investors to realise
profits (or losses) is to sell their units. The fund shall attempt at all times
hold at least 5% of fund value in LTC for the purpose of buying back units.
When the manager is online (and has an accurate current valuation of the fund)
this shall be done by bid-walls placed on LTC-GLOBAL at between 95% and 99% of
NAV/U (the precise value within that range may be set by the manager - based,
primarily, on volatility of the LTC/BTC exchange rate).

If significant bids already exist at above 99% of NAV then the manager is
released from the obligation to place bid-walls - but not from the obligation to
hold sufficient liquid LTC to place such walls if the need arises.

If circumstances arise such that the manager is no longer able to continue
operating the fund then the manager shall dispose of all assets held by the fund
and distribute the proceeds to unit holders. Such process shall be conducted in
as timely a fashion as is possible without incurring major loss by selling into
under-priced bids."

 
The contract say "If circumstances arise such that the manager is no longer able to continue
operating the fund..", it dosen't say if the exchage the fund is listed on were to close down.
I can't see that it would be stranger to run a fund denominated in LTC on an BTC exchange (like Bitfunder or Havelock) than having bonds denominated in BTC on an LTC exchange.....
So BTC-TC and LTC-GLOBAL's closing is not really a reason for closing the fund according to the contract, that is not an option that excist for you to take in this type of situation(it would have been another situation if there woould have been no btcstocktrading platforms or exchanges left or if you had been seriously ill and couldent continue things because of that) accourding to the contract as it's possible to continue running the fund either on another exchange or totally without any exchange, so that looks like a breach of the contract.


The only slight problem i can see in the contract is this line:

"The manager is entitled (and expected) to buy back units. This may only be done
on the LTC-GLOBAL exchange at prices below the current NAV/U."

And i can hardly think investors would object to having trades of the share be done at another exchange instead and the wording in that sentance dosen't mean the funds have to close just because you can't buyback shares at that specific exchange after the 7 october ....


So the action you took on LTC-AFT, LTC-AFT.B1 and LTC-AFT.B2 looks to have been taken to quick and be incorect ones. The coming 2 weeks on LTC-golobal and BTC.TC may also result in a lot of profitable situations for you and your fund so there's probably lots of BTC's and LTC's for the fund and you to make in that period so closing the fund now seemes like a very bad decition for the shareholders and bondholders.
Also the BMF position the fund recently took just a few days ago looks like it can be a very profitable one with those options rights to.


There's also the fact that some(/many ?) people that invested in your fund relatively late will make big losses on the action you decided to do while closing things down, witch probably was in breach of the contract(s) they made there investment based on.

LTC.AFT.B2 has probably for most periods only been trading at max at 4% over face value, but LTC.AFT.B1 for example has at times traded at over 30% or so over face value and even worse the LTC-AFT itself that has been trading at around 300% NAV for quite a while now.

Therefore i think the least thing you should do if you stand by your decition that things should be closed down for good is to compensate those shareholders/bondholders that made a loss on this action you took(as it most likely was a incorrect one), whether they have bought LTC-AFT stocks at above NAV value, LTC-AFT.B1 or LTC-AFT.B2 bonds above face value and havent made there investments back on them sofar, as the LTC-AFT shoulden't have been closed accourding to the contract and therefore neither the bonds should have been bought out.
It also looks like many/most of those LTC-AFT.B1 bonds and LTC-AFT stocks that has been sold at high market prices recently has been sold by either you personally or your other fund DMS that you also own significant amount of shares in, so your quick decition to close things down in what looks like a very profitable situation for shareholders/bondholders if things would have been carried on gives a very bad taste...

Bitfunder have 0% trading fee for buying and 1% for selling(at least last time i looked) so 0,5% on avg if you intend to do both and 0% if you only intend to buy, they also have discounts if you trade(sell) big volumes.