It is in the right forum. Securities
This section is for topics about individual Bitcoin bonds, stocks, etc. Topics about exchange sites which deal in securities should go in the top-level Marketplace section. Hmm... Looks like I read it wrong and I thought it was just in the market forum. Sorry for the alarm. Thx I don't understand how information about dividends of multiple Bitcoin bonds and stocks is not the same as topics about individual Bitcoin bonds, stocks, etc. |
|
|
|
So yesterday, the bitcoinica.com domain was pointing to their blog, explaining that they will be closed for months, and will begin the return of funds soon. Today, it doesn't point to anything again. Am I missing something here? Why did they redirected the domain once again?
Maybe Bitscalper was brought in for some technical advise. |
|
|
|
I am sure that will help lol The authorities will send you your money, no doubts about that! It might not be possible to freeze or seize bitcoin accounts but it is possible to freeze or seize bank accounts denominated in fiat currency. Why are Bitcoiners, the trumpeters of currency free from the tyrannical and corrupt reign of the government over money, turning towards those governments for help when their free currency is stolen from them, due to lack of regulation? It is the ultimate in hypocrisy, IMO. Bitcoinica decided to be regulated not Bitcoiners. If Bitcoinica wants to play by the rules of the government so be it, I am only showing what channels are available for people if they are not satisfied with how Bitcoinica is handling the situation. |
|
|
|
I am sure that will help lol The authorities will send you your money, no doubts about that! It might not be possible to freeze or seize bitcoin accounts but it is possible to freeze or seize bank accounts denominated in fiat currency. |
|
|
|
So you guys chose to take over a bucket shop which is constantly at the risk of getting into massive BTC denominated debt (while BTC rallies way up), blinded by greed upon the profits the few shares the mystery investor gave you would promise and now had your reputation tarnished. You made the mistake of operating for free just to commit another one to correct it.  While it is true that the identity of the investor did not have to be shared, I believe the fact that ownership changed in November SHOULD have been announced. Unless there was an announcement I am aware of, zhoutong deceived us for half a year into believing he solely owned the company. +10000 Fine, I don't care who the investor is. Who is the CEO and/or Director, and/or Officer in charge of the day to day operations of the company? You surely must have a name for us? This is required by any government on earth as far as I know.And by the way, Bitcoin LP (the NZ structure) is a PARTNERSHIP and not a corporation, and as per NZ rules, the name of the general partner must be public and known. You don't want to reveal who owns the shop? That's fine. But please provide a name for a responsible officer of the company as required by law. + ∞ |
|
|
|
As I said before, the current owners of Bitcoinica have by far exceeded their legal obligations in helping Bitcoinica recover from the previous hack and have pledged their continued support in seeing this incident fully resolved. I am honestly amazed by their integrity. Even though, I am not sure they knew how insecure the site was when they first bought it.
Similarly with Intersango, although we've operated without any incidents in 8 months or so, in our early days much of our banking was not automatable with Lloyds, this meant that occasionally we would process a double withdraw due to manual error. Also 8 months or so ago, during the Britcoin to Intersango switch over, we also misattributed 511BTC (we are able to keep Intersango's hot wallet small because it has less volatility in it's daily BTC withdraw). Intersango has paid all errors out of their pocket and although finding a fully automatable UK bank was a very tough process we were finally able to do it.
Who are the general partners then? |
|
|
|
Um, now it's even more confusing.
First, Zhoutong said that Bitcoinica will be shut down and their working on the claim page, with all positions forcefully liquidated (which, as Instated before, is not only plain wrong, but looks even illegal, considering Bitcoinica was a legal money processor).
Then, Team Intersango shows up and tells us that Bitcoinica will be back up, more secure than before. Nothing about currently open positions in this statement.
So... Which is it?!
Stop hoping you will have your positions respected. Nothing about Bitcoinica being back up "more secure than before" contradicts the previous statement. ZT also said as much, which was part of the reason he needs to clean shop now: it will take time to do significant changes to the code base/rebuild. The longer the process takes the more untenable is to keep positions frozen. Liquidating positions is definitely one of the most, if not the most sensible things to do if you cannot bring the site back securely VERY soon. If Bitcoinica was a registered company interested in doing everything according to the law, then why do they need to hide their identities? Where is the police report detailing the first theft of 40,000 bitcoins and this second one of over 10,000? Whether the police do anything or not to recover the stolen items or investigate the alleged hacking incident, Bitcoinica should report this incident. Most thefts occur by people within a company. It is a registered company and their identity is not hidden. Companies don't generally disclose the identity of their main investors - only companies traded in the stock market have this obligation. This is Bitcoinica's identity: http://www.business.govt.nz/fsp/app/ui/fsp/instance/viewChangesCompanyFSP/677086.doAFAIK Bitcoinica is a Limited company not traded in any stock market. Their identity is the company (look up "juridical person" or "juridical personality"). All that is strictly in accordance to law. The liability lies within this juridical personality, and how it carries over to the people behind it depends largely - through not exclusively - on their jurisdiction (applies to the jurisdiction where an allegedly wronged user may be, as well, but good luck with opening an international prosecution). Welcome to the financial world. Sorry but this is not their financial identity, Bitcoinica LP is the trade name that their registered company is actually using. This link is to the Bitcoinica LP trade name that has registered as a Financial Service Provider. On that website you can register as one too, it is not difficult. They are actually registered as another entity, most likely in one of the companies associated with this Chris Heaslip. Also, Limited Partnerships do require reporting of some investors. If someone is a major investor in the company then they may become one of the directors and directors must be reported in most states and countries. Just look at my links above in my other post and you can see this. When I registered my own companies I need to list myself as the one of the director and list any other initial investors in the company. In most jurisdictions a limited partnership is set up so that there is at least one general partner that will be held liable for the company's negligence and then there are limited partners of that won't be held responsible. These general partners must be listed on the paperwork of the company because it is these people that will be sued when something like what happened to Bitcoinica. Remember, there is always a paper trail when dealing with the government. When starting a company there has to be a name on that paper, with an address. |
|
|
|
Earnings will be 15.7BTC
7.9BTC sent as dividend
7.9BTC saved.
BTC in the Bank before: 76.6
BTC in the Bank now: 84.5
Difficulty 1,733,208
Hash Rate is estimated to be 12GHash/S
48.8 coins mined.
Electric is estimated to be 1240 KWH at .1323$ KWH = $164
$164 / $5.00 = 32.8BTC
48.8 - 32.8 = 16BTC
16BTC x 95% = 15.2BTC
Namecoin bonus will be .5BTC
Is this money from actual bitcoins mined or is this coming out of your pocket like it did in the past? |
|
|
|
Um, now it's even more confusing.
First, Zhoutong said that Bitcoinica will be shut down and their working on the claim page, with all positions forcefully liquidated (which, as Instated before, is not only plain wrong, but looks even illegal, considering Bitcoinica was a legal money processor).
Then, Team Intersango shows up and tells us that Bitcoinica will be back up, more secure than before. Nothing about currently open positions in this statement.
So... Which is it?!
Stop hoping you will have your positions respected. Nothing about Bitcoinica being back up "more secure than before" contradicts the previous statement. ZT also said as much, which was part of the reason he needs to clean shop now: it will take time to do significant changes to the code base/rebuild. The longer the process takes the more untenable is to keep positions frozen. Liquidating positions is definitely one of the most, if not the most sensible things to do if you cannot bring the site back securely VERY soon. If Bitcoinica was a registered company interested in doing everything according to the law, then why do they need to hide their identities? Where is the police report detailing the first theft of 40,000 bitcoins and this second one of over 10,000? Whether the police do anything or not to recover the stolen items or investigate the alleged hacking incident, Bitcoinica should report this incident. Most thefts occur by people within a company. |
|
|
|
Yep, that's the guy. /zhoutong Based in Seattle, CoinLab is an emerging umbrella group for cultivating and launching innovative bitcoin projects. Until now, they have been relatively quiet regarding their initiatives but they are credited with releasing a comprehensive Bitcoin Primer in January 2012. The founders are startup entrepreneurs Peter Vessenes, Mike Koss, and Tihan Seale, each with a strong passion for the broad advancements enabled by a decentralized currency. I wonder what is so important that they have to hide their identity. |
|
|
|
Who are these so-called "owners" ? Zhoutong claims it is not him => you claim it is not you => then who is it  Just a hint from a another lurker here in the forum  Zhoutong pointed out that the owner requested not to be publickly known. This started a rather lengthy discussion right here in this thread about business and ownership in generall, but like it or not, such things are very common in the current world of business. I might be wrong, but just from the answers available here in the forum, I would be surprised to get any further disclosure on that topic. Personally I'm glad that Team Intersango spoke up and clarified their position and the technical details. --Ichthyo Doing some digging I find on the Bitconica FSP registration page that it was updated by a Chris HEASLIP. Doing another search I found a Chris HEASLIP on LinkedIN that states he is in New Zealand and founder of Pushpay. Some more investigating and the registration page shows the address to be: Name
Bitcoinica Lp
Incorporation / Registration number
2558460
Type
Limited Partnerships (NZ)
Registered office
Auckland Chartered Accountants Level 1, 10 Manukau Road Newmarket Auckland 1023
Status
REGISTERED Now where do you think Pushpay Limited is registered at? ACCOUNTING BRANDS LIMITED, Level 1, 10 Manukau Road, Newmarket, Auckland, 1023 , New Zealand
Address for service
ACCOUNTING BRANDS LIMITED, Level 1, 10 Manukau Road, Newmarket, Auckland, 1023 , New Zealand Directors
Eliot Barry CROWTHER
Flat 2, 166 Blockhouse Bay Road, Avondale, Auckland, 0600 , New Zealand
Christopher HEASLIP
Flat 3, 10 Dorchester Street, Meadowbank, Auckland, 1072 , New Zealand There is the 10 Manukau Road, Newmarket, Auckland address again. Just a coincidence that a Chris Heaslip is updating the Bitcoinica LP information, is founder and managing director of an online payment company, and registers his information with the same address? |
|
|
|
Ngzhang is going to sell his new FPGA mining rigs. If it is purchased in bulks, then discount will be available. Garr, what'your opinion about it?
I haven't been following lancelot's development much. I've been looking more toward a mini rig or two. I'll do some research and get back to you. TheSeven, I agree. Does anybody have some metaphorical dynomite? For those that see a wall keeping the price from rising, others see an anchor keeping the price from going down. If there was demand for Cognitive then those 2000 asks at 0.55 would be gone. You could increase demand by showing shareholder value. This is a mining company, not a bond, so having detailed accounting with the actual value of the company would allow potential investors to see if the company is cheap or overpriced at the current share value. I would say to publish a monthly report estimating the current value of the mining rigs, cash on hand, and any other asset value for all to see. |
|
|
|
|
You should really be considering incorporating more than two currency pairs for this arbitrage. There is plenty of opportunity with multiple currency arbitrage. Such as USD -> RMB -> BTC -> USD
|
|
|
|
Ah I thought the ipo was .55 that's why. Surprised because I originally bought in at .63 so there's been a lot of variation in the past couple weeks.
Shortly after the IPO, it appears the majority shareholder of Cognitive tried to dump almost the entire stock @ .55. The bid's still there, without much eaten. Massive askwalls like that create strong downward pressure -- they're either dumb or malicious. Similar thing happened a couple days ago with Gigamining (on a much smaller scale in terms of % of total stock in the askwall). Giant askwall @ 1.5, and others who want to sell need undercut, while potential investors don't see potential movement other than down below the askwall. I'd love to take on more Gigamining @ 1.5, but a 4400 BTC askwall at the same price makes me wonder how long I'll have to wait to be able to sell it at a profit even though I think it's undervalued. With that said - if I had 4.4k BTC, I'd devour that askwall. Same with Cognitive. It was 0.65 and has been lowered to 0.55 in the last few days. This effectively makes Cognitive undervalued, and a great deal for anyone who missed the IPO. I'm going to buy 10btc worth right now. I'm planning on expansion soon, so let's try to take down the wall! Edit: Cognitive has some extra funds just sitting in a wallet. Are there any objections to buying Cognitive shares with that with the Cognitive account thus increasing dividends? Edit: I just threw everything I have at the wall, bringing it down to 2297. Where did the money come from? The dividends from the 500 shares? |
|
|
|
"We are a generation of men raised by women" -Tyler Durden
Blasphemy! It is written "What you see at fight club is a generation of men raised by women." which the Prophet Tyler peace be upon him said to his disciples when imparting the 7 Rules to them. My apologies, I wasn't quoting from the book. Now, a question of etiquette - as I pass you and leave this thread, do I give you the ass or the crotch? All true believers of Tylerism know the sign of the crotch. |
|
|
|
Can women reproduce asexually now?
thats the point of the agenda. the destruction of the family unit, the home, traditional relationships, morals and values based mindsets, creation of life ... in efforts to depopulate. Sucks for them. Men drive evolution. |
|
|
|
The investor demands his identity to be protected so I won't share more information on this. Sounds familiar... |
|
|
|
Ah I thought the ipo was .55 that's why. Surprised because I originally bought in at .63 so there's been a lot of variation in the past couple weeks.
Shortly after the IPO, it appears the majority shareholder of Cognitive tried to dump almost the entire stock @ .55. The bid's still there, without much eaten. Massive askwalls like that create strong downward pressure -- they're either dumb or malicious. Similar thing happened a couple days ago with Gigamining (on a much smaller scale in terms of % of total stock in the askwall). Giant askwall @ 1.5, and others who want to sell need undercut, while potential investors don't see potential movement other than down below the askwall. I'd love to take on more Gigamining @ 1.5, but a 4400 BTC askwall at the same price makes me wonder how long I'll have to wait to be able to sell it at a profit even though I think it's undervalued. With that said - if I had 4.4k BTC, I'd devour that askwall. Same with Cognitive. It was 0.65 and has been lowered to 0.55 in the last few days. This effectively makes Cognitive undervalued, and a great deal for anyone who missed the IPO. I'm going to buy 10btc worth right now. I'm planning on expansion soon, so let's try to take down the wall! Edit: Cognitive has some extra funds just sitting in a wallet. Are there any objections to buying Cognitive shares with that with the Cognitive account thus increasing dividends? Edit: I just threw everything I have at the wall, bringing it down to 2297. What makes you think it is undervalued at 0.55 BTC/share? |
|
|
|
She should change her terms from "humans" to "western culture" as not ever culture puts women and children first. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
