SCAM IPO [Bakewell] - Finally, a 'transparent' investment that will 'grow'!

[btcash]

Thanks for the warning. I never would have purchased any shares/dumped all my shares if I knew that you would move to BF.

Glad to hear there's solid reasons for the move - otherwise people may have suspected it was just to avoid having negative remarks showing up on the asset.

Did I miss something? Weex is not a solid reason at all. He had the worst rated asset on BTCT. That is why he moved.

[Deprived]

Thanks for the warning. I never would have purchased any shares/dumped all my shares if I knew that you would move to BF.

Glad to hear there's solid reasons for the move - otherwise people may have suspected it was just to avoid having negative remarks showing up on the asset.

Did I miss something? Weex is not a solid reason at all. He had the worst rated asset on BTCT. That is why he moved.

Heh, sarcasm never comes across clearly on the internet - sorry.

[btcash]

Thanks for the warning. I never would have purchased any shares/dumped all my shares if I knew that you would move to BF.

Glad to hear there's solid reasons for the move - otherwise people may have suspected it was just to avoid having negative remarks showing up on the asset.

Did I miss something? Weex is not a solid reason at all. He had the worst rated asset on BTCT. That is why he moved.

Heh, sarcasm never comes across clearly on the internet - sorry.

Actually it is pretty obvious. I am just too tired.

[strello]

I too am angry and disappointed about yet another arrogant stunt by Ian Bakewell, and really wish I had never invested.

I don't like Bitfunder, especially for their insistence on all sorts of personal information, and have no wish to do business with them. But I have been forced to without being asked or even notified.

As for the title of this thread (from Merriam- Webster):

Definition of EQUITABLE
1: having or exhibiting equity : dealing fairly and equally with all concerned

Definition of TRANSPARENT
d : characterized by visibility or accessibility of information especially concerning business practices

There has been none of either of these qualities shown by Bakewell recently, and no signs whatsoever of growth, or even any sort of future planning.

In the light of your extreme disregard for your shareholders, and if you really believe there is a future for Bakewell, I think you should immediately offer to buyback shares at somewhere near the IPO price from anyone who is dissatisfied by your kamikaze behaviour.

[bitcoinbear]

Thanks for the warning. I never would have purchased any shares/dumped all my shares if I knew that you would move to BF.

Glad to hear there's solid reasons for the move - otherwise people may have suspected it was just to avoid having negative remarks showing up on the asset.

Did I miss something? Weex is not a solid reason at all. He had the worst rated asset on BTCT. That is why he moved.

Heh, sarcasm never comes across clearly on the internet - sorry.

Actually it is pretty obvious. I am just too tired.

I totally missed the sarcasm and was totally confused

I guess this has the benefit of showing how easily assets can be moved between exchanges now? I just hope this does not become a fad, it will be hard to keep track of everything if people start jumping between exchanges all willy-nilly.

[Evolvex]

Cheers for the heads up Ian, I like how seamlessly transfer from btc-tc to bitfunder seemed to go, no probs getting my shares at all.

Hopefully you wont have to move again however.

[Deprived]

Thanks for the warning. I never would have purchased any shares/dumped all my shares if I knew that you would move to BF.

Glad to hear there's solid reasons for the move - otherwise people may have suspected it was just to avoid having negative remarks showing up on the asset.

Did I miss something? Weex is not a solid reason at all. He had the worst rated asset on BTCT. That is why he moved.

Heh, sarcasm never comes across clearly on the internet - sorry.

Actually it is pretty obvious. I am just too tired.

I totally missed the sarcasm and was totally confused

I guess this has the benefit of showing how easily assets can be moved between exchanges now? I just hope this does not become a fad, it will be hard to keep track of everything if people start jumping between exchanges all willy-nilly.

Yeah, at the moment BTC.CO has the only built-in system that allows moves quite so swiftly (asset issuer gets email address + number of shares).  But I'm sure BitFunder/Crypto would provide equivalent information if requested - purely because to refuse to do so would deter anyone else going there.  They both already have a means for identifying investors - just not quite so straight-forward to use.

[Ukyo]

Simple transfer of my shares over to bitfunder, and so far I've done two BTC transfers through wex to buy more shares. So far so good.

I like both bitfunder and btc-tc. Both great platforms with huge potential, I hope they succeed and grow.

Always if i try to Login on weex i get the Error: Could not connect to 2nd stage server...

Ah hah!
I take full responsibility for this.
There was a space in the username that was uncaught. The handling of it has been corrected.

Thanks Charles for helping me find that!

-Ukyo

[burnside]

Ian, why do you keep deleting and re-posting the same thing over and over?  Every time you do that it re-emails everyone your posts... it's fairly annoying...

[Deprived]

Ian, why do you keep deleting and re-posting the same thing over and over?  Every time you do that it re-emails everyone your posts... it's fairly annoying...

He's always done that - same as every time he does anything he makes a new locked thread and keeps bumping it to top of forum.

[btcash]

Ian, why do you keep deleting and re-posting the same thing over and over?  Every time you do that it re-emails everyone your posts... it's fairly annoying...

He did the same thing with the last motion. He did it for days to get everyone to vote on his fake motion. It was more than ridiculous.
Good luck luring newbies to Bakewell. Only a fool or a newbie would buy shares.

"Guys look I am important!"

[Charles Bass]

1. The M&G Shares cant vote and nobody can vote with them.
2. a Supervisory Board elected from the shareholder check and allow expenses and investments!

greets chuck

[bitcoinbear]

1. The M&G Shares cant vote and nobody can vote with them.
2. a Supervisory Board elected from the shareholder check and allow expenses and investments!

greets chuck

+1

[Deprived]

I am not personally against just considering the shares inert, but I want to make sure the decision is well reasoned. Are there any regular wall st examples of how this should be done?

There's no such examples - as no regular company puts aside shares just to calculate what 30% of revenue is.

I've still to hear any reasoning on why those shares need to exist at all - what is it they allow the company to do that it couldn't do without them?  What benefit do they offer to compensate for the mess they make of voting?

[bitcoinbear]

1. The M&G Shares cant vote and nobody can vote with them.

I agree not voting would make things easier and it seems to be what people want. but, why?
Why should these shares abstain and the fund not have an input, especially considering the next suggestion of creating a board. Shouldn't this board use the voting power to help steer the company?
I am not personally against just considering the shares inert, but I want to make sure the decision is well reasoned. Are there any regular wall st examples of how this should be done?

2. a Supervisory Board elected from the shareholder check and allow expenses and investments!

greets chuck

Assuming we decide to go down this route, how do you guys think we could effectively create a board with the tools available to us in bitcoin land here?

I agree with Deprived, there is no reason for these shares to exist.

Any uses of the growth fund should be passed by a shareholder vote. Instead of having a "board" of the largest shareholders, have a board consisting of all shareholders. Have shareholders join in meetings held in IRC or somewhere.

[Charles Bass]

The Supervisory Board should not be a replacement for Shareholder Votings or Motions.
Its a control committee for finance, bakewell and ian.
For exmaple before ian buy hardware or buy shares back he has to commit the Supervisory Board...

its time to make Bakewell more attractive and realy transparent!

And the M&G Shares are only to organize the payments for m&g, you could also cut of 30% and pay the rest out as divident...

greets Chuck

[Deprived]

Why should these shares abstain and the fund not have an input, especially considering the next suggestion of creating a board. Shouldn't this board use the voting power to help steer the company?

I didn't properly address this.

Shares don't vote (or abstain).  Share-holders vote.

Those shares have no ownership so no vote (there's noone with the entitlement to vote with them).  In the same way treasury shares don't vote.  They could be considered as belonging to the fund as a whole - in which case their voting should reflect the desire of the fund as a whole (i.e. all other votes).  But in that case them voting only reinforces a decision already made - and adds nothing to the voting process.

There wouldn't be anything wrong in principle with a board voting with those shares - but then you get into the messy situation of how the board votes: and making sure that control of the company can't be obtained by a minority of shareholders who get to control board votes.  In practice it's too large a chunk of votes to give control to a small board without effectively removing all voting power from normal shareholders.

Boards should make recommendations, shareholder approve those recommendations.  The person (or group) making a proposal shouldn't also be given the power to enact it.

Still not heard ANY explanation of what useful function those shares offer.  Some while back there was some vague "they'll be useful in the future" type comment - but with no attempt to define that usefulness (and, more specifically, why it needs shares to exist) at all.  You can keep dodging that issue all you want - but the most significant answer to your latest question ("How do we sell more shares?") lies in providing the transparency and equity the topic of the thread claims.  So either explain how those shares benefit investors or get rid of them (the shares, not the investors).

[btharper]

One other thing that has popped into my mind while preparing to rewrite the description for BAKEWELL is how bakewellfund makes use of BTC it holds.
Any rule suggestions on how to go about purchasing new equipment, making investments with idle coin, how to deal with monthly expenses should they begin to incur, etc etc

I imagine that any investments made would need to be very secure. While the requirement may not be to make any large sum, it should be expected that it should not depreciate, if that can be assured to some level then I wouldn't imagine an issue. Though unless a general consensus can be made about the level of risk (that is inherent in investing) it may be best to leave each investment up to a (admittedly tedious) motion requiring some given percent of support (possibly above 51%). It may simply be best to let this extra funds sit in a published address; simple to audit and no depreciation.

New equipment purchases seem like something that should be done from the G&M portion of proceeds, determining which hardware gets bought may be up for discussion and likely depends on what's available at the time of purchase. Hopefully this will be simplified by the time any additional hardware purchases are needed.

It was my impression that a portion of your personal shares were to cover operational expenses. Is this not the case?

Etc etc should probably be elaborated on, and now's a good time to do it, though I can't think of anything else to add personally. It may also be a good time to enumerate what can and can't be done with respect to certain issues that have come up previously, at least including voting of G&M shares and transfer to different exchanges (both with and without closure of the existing exchange).

[tulkos]

Now that it has been confirmed that an Avalon ASIC has shipped and is working will we be making an ASIC purchase soon?

[Peter Lambert]

Now that it has been confirmed that an Avalon ASIC has shipped and is working will we be making an ASIC purchase soon?

That sounds like a good use for the growth fund.