Don't worry. I forgive you  |
|
|
|
The ActM Thread account has been locked down - only two of us have access. So the shenanigans will stop.
Can I ask who has access to it? Probably Vince and Kleeck. I do not believe I'm invited to that particular party. (And I'm OK with that.)  Ah, I thought I remember you saying you have access. Not that it's an inherently bad or good thing. |
|
|
|
The ActM Thread account has been locked down - only two of us have access. So the shenanigans will stop.
Can I ask who has access to it? Probably Vince and Kleeck. |
|
|
|
Great job this week guys. Your coins worked hard for us and somehow managed to retain over 5% of the amount wagered!
Jun 9 2014 2.06% 142.75%
Can you please clarify this? You said there was a 5% retention (ie. house edge) but the profit was only 2.06%? Obv 5℅ of what was wagered Or not. 5% of what was wagered would be a 5% effective house edge (aka "profit"). Let's put it into a mathematical formula you can utilize: 5.00% profit = 2.06% profit, false Here's a link to help you verify that (though this is basic mathematics): http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=5%25+%3D+2.06%25If the Investment pool is 100BTC and only 10BTC was wager that week. 5% of 10 BTC is .2BTC profit for the Investors. .2BTC is .2% of 100BTC, so the profit that week is .2%, not 5%. The effective house edge is 5% of all wagered coins. That doesn't tell you how many coins are wagered. Would you expect to make 5% profit if no one even used the site all week? |
|
|
|
This really shed's a lot of light on the situation. Thanks man. I think everyone should see this. Fucking Dogie.. How could he? The fucking balls on him. |
|
|
|
why on god's earth do we want to bother FC right now with this exchange site?
havelock is robust enough that there is literally no reason for FC to even consider a new platform, especially when he's in the middle of a product cycle like gen3.
because it sure wastes him and us more time to ping pong pm/email to transfer shares. FC does not like rent seekers that eventually screw, or he would give all the shares to havelock to manage. Personally I don't see havelock last more than 3 years. Distributed exchange lasts forever, although things might not be as quick as centralized one. I think, that our Panamanian Havelock is preparing for final run. We as community addressed several security concerns to them months ago, like locked withdrawal address, pgp encrypted mails, fixed time period between change of settings, they always tell you that they care, but true is they don't care, nothing changed. Better to have counterparty or coloredcoins than this ready to run away centralized fog what do you mean by final run. some new security implementation? He means disappear or close down I assume. |
|
|
|
ANNOUNCEMENT:
We will soon start refunding all of our Pre-Order customers that have requested a refund and have not received their refund. We will be refunding the pre-order amount converted to BTC @ the coinbase current sell price. Our pre-order customer will have to agree to being refunded in BTC. We will post in about 1 week an agreement to be refunded in BTC. Should a pre-order customer wish to receive their refund in USD we will also do those refunds after the BTC refunds.
|
|
|
|
|
Consider:
Many people are still feeling the burn from Neo & Bee, Labcoin, (And now ActiveMining unfortunately) Along with Mt. Gox, many are probably completely done with Securities and others are probably itching to make their money back. AsicMiner being the known security to actually make money for its shareholders (along with Just-Dice).
Also Consider:
People in BTC securities are not investors. That said APR, etc.. (I personally don't think) are the most accurate ways to determine what the share price will reach. Yes it will be a way to accurately deduce the appropriate value of a share, but it won't be accurate of the real selling/buying value due to the weird array of characters in this sphere.
If AsicMiner starts paying divs, and companies like HashRatio, Rock, etc.. start selling profitable chips then the share price will increase substantially, not only that but it will be very very very fast/quick to increase as the entire market price right now seems to be based on Havelock. (Which is just a mere 25K of 400k shares). So going from .3BTC a share to say 1 or 2BTC a share will be a very fast climb compared to what it was last summer/fall when there was Bitfunder/BTCT, etc..
That said, I have no idea what the share price will end up reaching but I do know that if someone where to buy shares today, they will be able to sell them for more later. From the information from both Jutarul, FC, and seeing information from Rockie, etc.. I can't see how the share price won't shoot far higher than .24BTC off of news alone. Once that first Div hits I think the price will skyrocket.
|
|
|
|
Any chance the chips might be open source too? Yes. But there are no written plans in the near term yet. Also it's much harder than making a piece of software open source, because the whole flow to generate GDS has tons of manual operations and very fab and technology node specific. Please don't do this in the near future  Why not? Open source mining chips benefit the community the best, I think? Or am I missing something? Miner is an investor in AsicMiner, by open sourcing chips wouldn't that give advantage to the competition? I assume this is why he is saying. "don't do this." you are revealing your hand to your opponents I would assume. |
|
|
|
Couterparty is open source...
Maybe it is open-source, but : XCP, the native currency to the Counterparty protocol was the first currency to be initialised by proof-of-burn concept (destroying bitcoins) which ensures a fair and honest launch. you need to actually DESTROY BITCOINS to get XCP(thanks to that proof-of-burn-concept) I dont like that... also XCP is another ALTcoin(i am polite here, because I have several other names for these ...), very good idea, but wrong way taken Why is Destroying Bitcoins inherently bad? From both an economic standpoint I don't see how that is necessarily a bad thing, unless you are saying that whoever makes the PT on Counterparty has to use their own money. |
|
|
|
|
Got the shares I wanted for cheap. I'll be back at the end of June. =) Good luck to everyone. Good to see FC out and about on the forums, really boost confidence.
|
|
|
|
Anyways, BG never mentioned the load of crock that Intellihash was on the forum IIRC.
First that was my opinion on it, sorry I didn't make it vocal on here for the trolls since I only put out facts when I came back from my trip on the forum. If you wanted to know my opinion on it you should have been in IRC when I stated multiple times to the main shareholders that I didn't know what it could possibly be and I thought it was a gimmick. Ultimately I don't give two shits about anyone individually on this plague filled forum. As a whole, ActiveMining "Investors" need to bail in whatever way you can from this company. You can blame myself, Micky Mouse, MSD, or whoever/whatever you want for all I care. Reality of the situation doesn't change. Game over. I'm not calling you a shill for Ken or anything. I hold you accountable for 0% of my actions. I was just stating so others knew that you didn't actually say Intellihash was crap. |
|
|
|
Another fun fact, when I visited I called bullshit on his Intellihash and said that it's probably just a gimmick. He shrugged his shoulders and said I'll have to wait and see.
oh right, okay this tells me ken didn't actually knew what he was doing and getting himself in to, but only funny part is you mentioning that now, when shit went through the fan already and splattered all over walls. unless you did mentioned it before but we missed it?.. He didn't. He's trying to cover his tracks and push blame elsewhere when he was quite happy to pump the stock and price beforehand!! I agree, except for "pump the stock and price beforehand." As the shares were not being traded, better to say. Quell discontent that was gaining momentum at the time of his venture. We all see how anyone who says anything good about a company when it goes under, turns out to be a scam, etc.. Also gets the pitchforks thrown into their faces (In this case, I would assume Zum, Vince, GJP, BG, etc.. though I can't feasibly blame them for anything about this company) along with said company. BG is trying to make sure he leaves this physically and reputably unscathed I assume. Anyways, BG never mentioned the load of crock that Intellihash was on the forum IIRC. But it doesn't matter, it was obviously a lie. The problem is everything else, we have no proof of anything else Ken has said on this forum except for maybe one or two things here or there. For all we know, Ken sat on his ass from Summer 2013 to Spring 2014 and then decided to buy chips and make boards. I really haven't seen much proof of anything else. |
|
|
|
lol, I came here afraid that Havelock got shut down or something, haven't been able to access it. Hopefully it's just from people racing to buy up all of the AM100 they can AM is crashing. Atleast AM1 is. .24 Today, High was .32 yesterday. |
|
|
|
Guys, if you bought shares on BTCT. You will have received emails stating how man you bought, what you paid for each share and the time and date of the purchase. If you transfered your shares from BTCT to Bitfunder you will have a record of this from having an email with Ken as that's how we contacted him for transfer.
No matter how high the bar Ken tries to make it to prove ownership of shares, there is more than enough proof. (Thank you Burnside)
Are only shares eligible that were bought at IPO price (0.0005 / 0.0025) directly from ACM for a refund or are all on Bitfunder/BTCT bought shares eligible? I do not know at this point. It would be stupid to expect that only IPO holders would be getting a refund, seeing Ken has led us on for months after the IPO and has verified on multiple occasions the legitimacy of the shares then I do not see why these shares would not be worthy of a refund. Otherwise Ken might make quite a bit money on this whole situation. |
|
|
|
|
Guys, if you bought shares on BTCT. You will have received emails stating how man you bought, what you paid for each share and the time and date of the purchase. If you transfered your shares from BTCT to Bitfunder you will have a record of this from having an email with Ken as that's how we contacted him for transfer.
No matter how high the bar Ken tries to make it to prove ownership of shares, there is more than enough proof. (Thank you Burnside)
|
|
|
|
(Not sure why I got deleted but there you go.) Am I the only one that is seeing the same repeating patterns in this thread? Lol, we are currently exiting the mass hysteria phase and seeing that give way to the next phase. It's around now that people start calming down and listening to the voices of reason. Before you know it we discover Ken & Co have had a breakthrough and suddenly we're sitting pretty again. Guys, this is far from over and there's plenty of time left for ActM to succeed. As I suggested yesterday, the boil has been growing under the surface for some time. A couple of days ago it reared it's ugly head and all we need to do is lance it. This recent development IS actually good news and I'll hear nothing against that. If there are repeating patterns there must be several breakthroughs that have really left you guys in a great position, please list some. +1 lmao |
|
|
|
|
If you bought on BTCT, they sent you an email everytime you bought at the exact time and date you bought along with the price and the number of shares lol
Not only that. Burnside sent out API Keys that should let you access your records. BTCT.co is still up btw.
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah I can prove I moved shares from BTCT to Bitfunder.. And then from Bitfunder to Cryptotrade
|
|
|
|
|
Ok so.
$.054 a Share such that 10 shares = $.54
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
