It's not an hour of work if you need to access safety deposit boxes/safes in storage centres/safes in other cities. And the dude just said it's an exercise that proves nothing as the coins could belong to anyone happy to sign from their own wallet for a fee. So it's not as conclusive as you are hoping. It would be easy to forge. Instead think chips not coins.  Proof of chips is substantial not this.  

You might be a concerned investor but making statements like that is a very very unusual way to support your own investment.

Yes that's possible if they allow you to take a Laptop into the secure area to generate the signing code. Being safe is an area I'm sure Ken is highly aware of due to him being a known face and having an open work address. Security is everything both online and in the real world. A lot of people would do almost anything to get their hands on a million untraceable dollars. With the previous VE threats I warned Ken about taking his own personal security seriously and he assured me he had taken steps to increase it and was treating it very seriously.

Ken hasn't said he is using Armory though I don't think. There is a security issue here we need to be aware of. You are asking Ken to confirm he has a million dollars of BTC on a laptop with Armory on it (for example) and his work address is public knowledge. Do you see the issue? I would think the cold wallet keys are kept in a safety deposit box in a bank in Springfield or Kansas City and there they should stay until they are needed and their safety shouldn't be compromised just to supply a signed message. Surely we want evidence of chips and not just company cash deposits?

Can a signed message be sent from a cold wallet without compromising the private key? ie entering it online?

To clear up the Goxcoin issue - there are it seems three identically named projects. I was commenting on this one:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=500241.0

It's not the same project as the one mentioned on the podcast.

Goxcoin is a Ponzi Scheme and should not be  encouraged.  It could do more harm to the community than the failure of Gox itself.  Do you understand the concept? It's unique in the realm of other Ponzi-like alt coins in that it openly admits it's a classic Ponzi.  Anyone accepting benefit from it would be on dangerous ground.

And you think con-man Karpeles is going to email them over the user data base from Gox? It ain't gonna happen.

Not the most sensible question to ask - unless you want a wave of cancelled pre-orders to refund in the morning.

Ken has always said customers and shareholders are the number one priority.  If VMC succeeds then so does Active Mining so there is no possibility of one side going bankrupt over the other.

edit- and with a near full refund from eASIC the company will have more than enough money to go round so there is no need or benefit from bankruptcy. Quite the opposite in fact. 

These remaining Bitcoins need to be kept offline in multiple  cold wallets otherwise they could be lost to a hack.  Ken can you confirm you are storing the coins in cold wallets? It's crucial.  

These last few days of posts from disgruntled shareholders proves one thing - we never needed the Trolls on here.

There are, and have always been, enough grown adults on here for the doubts to be raised in a clear and direct manner. We can ask our own questions and examine the record of the CEO ourselves.

And infact if you think about it, the presence of the Trolls prevented this sort of doubting consensus from forming earlier - because so many of us were just focused on combating the daily onslaught of Troll posts. We would have been asking these sorts of difficult questions more often and more effectively months ago if it wasn't for the Trolls turning the thread into useless chaos.

If the company succeeds or fails the one thing no-one should ever say is 'the Trolls made some good points'. They just stated the obvious, and caused disruption, and completely got in the way of us all questioning this company how we needed to and should have done months ago.

The People's ASIC 55nm was never part of the IPO deal that we invested in so no-one should be so outraged by its cancellation.

As we know it was taken on as an added value (stop-gap) scheme for the company but sadly BTC is currently showing no signs of moving from the $600 area and that seems to make the project non-viable. Even after investing company time and money into developing the 55nm it's a project that seems unable to make returns for us so what other decision could be made . That's how business rolls in a very fluid industry. That's the risk you have to take as a businessman in this field. I can't see what Ken has done wrong with this 55nm project - other than not pre-warn us that it would be dependent on the price of BTC stabilizing at previous ($1k) levels. That would have saved this latest drama as we would have expected the late-stage cancellation.

Before launching any more legal disputes have a look at what the good news coming out is. The company is being actively investigated by the MSD and while it looks like the company shouldn't be in trouble with this investigation the CEO is still not going to be stringing anyone along when he is illuminated in the middle of the radar.

140k USD is 254BTC or around 45,000 shares you dumped. You have done incredibly well - there have only ever been around 25k NB shares sold at 0.006. Sounds like you sold every one of those then. Infact you must have sold almost all of the shares that have gone on the Havelock Investments exchange over the past few days to make 140k USD. Excuse me if I say that sounds a bit implausible. Or is there another exchange selling these shares?

Or when you say 140k 'profit' do you mean you actually sold 280k USD of shares? Even more amazing.

Anyway, so is NeeBee such a bad investment proposition that you need to get out right after it is just getting started? I thought they were about to go stratospheric? If a major holder like you (100% of the daily traded volume sold!) announces that they just dumped a serious number of shares then things are looking bad for NeoBee. Maybe some of these fleeing investors will come to ACtM?

No not right now. Keep checking back each week or so and you will see when and where the shares will be tradeable again.

Does this mean the Financial Services Agency (Japan) has closed them down? They are 2 weeks too late if their intention was to protect their users.

I wonder how easily they will be able to cover the lost 30k USD. Could they have even made that much in fees yet? Does anybody know how to work out their fee structure for the sale of Ukyo's 232k shares? What would they have made off the 100-odd BTC that went through their books?

EDIT - lol I may have found their bug?

'News Updates
1st Jan,1970'

Absolutely. But during times of high volatility say, a lot of people will have BTC in their exchange account in order to be ready to take advantage of price moves. With hundreds of investors involved these trading funds can amount to a significant number coins. Others may at times liquidate all their shares and hold the BTC in their account ready to buy back low. A risky strategy for sure, not to be recommended, but it's made all the riskier if the exchange has major security flaws!

A bug. Do they mean they suffered a malleabilty attack? If so they should have been aware of and fixed that issue last week. If it was buggy software can they be trusted to hold millions of dollars in shares and coins? 30k is a huge sum for such a smalltime exchange. A weeks worth of turnover?

If they had any honesty about them they would have suspended trading on their exchange. This has been a giant scam to get Gox thousands of cheap coins at the expense of thousands of small-time panicked customers.

'Become an MtGox customer - and lose 80% of your money overnight.'

Well I took a while writing my post as I was watching some TV at the same time so it wasn't there when I started typing. And when I read it after trying to post it didn't seem relevant to my reply to the OP in the slightest. Still doesn't.

EDIT - my scenario is simplified but it is also accurate in the real world. Mining is long-term gain, selling is instant gain - that is the central point.

Now that doesn't mean a manufacturer will never mine their own hardware. There are cases where it would and one situation would be that they have already raised enough capital from selling machines to fully meet the cash demands of designing and creating the next generation of miners. In that case they have no need to instantly realise the profit tied up in the rest of their unsold machines and can thus mine with them to generate more than the retail value over say the next 6months. I mentioned a firm who had 1000 machines at 1k each with a total asset value of 1Mill USD. Obviously KnC are way beyond that level so they have what you could call 'excess capacity' in their machine stock. ie they don't need all the capital these machines represent right away. So they can afford to wait for the cash which means they can afford to mine.

When KnC first set up in business they could not afford to mine so they had to sell all the machines they made for immediate reinvestment capital. They are basically in a tier above a firm that still needs to sell everything for instant profit - the '1000 machine companies'.

No not atall can you explain why I should?

I wasn't talking about KnC or any real world company I was describing a non-specific scenario that explains why selling can make more for a company over a shorter time than mining.

If you read the first post on this thread you will see that my post is a direct reply to the OP's  question. My reply in no way suggests that companies like KnC don't mine with their own machines......does it??

I might be getting the wrong end of the stick here as I'm not 100% what you mean by should I feel stupid.