Usagi: falsifying NAVs, manipulating share prices and misleading investors.

[Deprived]

You cannot just say "Oh look, BMF paid CPA 30 bitcoins therefore fraud". That is illogical and irreverent.

Irreverent?  Are you a God now?

[1715472931]

1715472931

[1715472931]

1715472931

[1715472931]

1715472931

[usagi]

You cannot just say "Oh look, BMF paid CPA 30 bitcoins therefore fraud". That is illogical and irreverent.

Irreverent?  Are you a God now?

ir·rev·er·ent/iˈrev(ə)rənt/
Adjective: Showing a lack of respect for people or things that are generally taken seriously.

rev·er·ent/ˈrev(ə)rənt/
Adjective: Feeling or showing deep and solemn respect: "a reverent silence".

rev·er·ence/ˈrev(ə)rəns/
Verb:   Regard or treat with deep respect.
Synonyms:   verb.  revere - venerate


Does this have anything to do with "Usagi: falsifying NAVs, manipulating share prices..." ?

Please make a clear post outlining exactly what you feel I did to deserve a scammer tag, and provide clear evidence of your claim. I'd be happy to respond to a claim that is made with evidence besides "I heard someone else say it so it must be true". Make it simple. Make it cut and dry. If you cannot do this, you should probably stop making an ass of yourself on these forums.

[deeplink]

Please make a clear post outlining exactly what you feel I did to deserve a scammer tag, and provide clear evidence of your claim. I'd be happy to respond to a claim that is made with evidence besides "I heard someone else say it so it must be true". Make it simple. Make it cut and dry. If you cannot do this, you should probably stop making an ass of yourself on these forums.

There are many clear posts outlining exactly why I feel you deserve a scammer tag, providing clear evidence of those claims. I'd be happy to respond to an answer to these claims that is made with evidence besides "usagi says it so it is true". Make it simple. Make it cut and dry. If you cannot do this, you should probably stop making an ass of yourself on these forums.

[Bitcoin Oz]

Turns out there is a special song you need to sing to make usagi finally go away. XD

Is it that song that was a big hit on parts of the Internet about 9 years ago?

I'm not sure when it is from but someone just linked me and I almost died laughing.

Sounds like the same song. That is an awesome song.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mRJRfPjhGyk  that would be this one.

[augustocroppo]

There are many clear posts outlining exactly why I feel you deserve a scammer tag, providing clear evidence of those claims. I'd be happy to respond to an answer to these claims that is made with evidence besides "usagi says it so it is true". Make it simple. Make it cut and dry. If you cannot do this, you should probably stop making an ass of yourself on these forums.

Where are the evidence? Where are the victims of Usagi's fraudulent business?

[Bitcoin Oz]

You cannot just say "Oh look, BMF paid CPA 30 bitcoins therefore fraud". That is illogical and irreverent.

Irreverent?  Are you a God now?

More like monty python.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2eMkth8FWno

[deeplink]

There are many clear posts outlining exactly why I feel you deserve a scammer tag, providing clear evidence of those claims. I'd be happy to respond to an answer to these claims that is made with evidence besides "usagi says it so it is true". Make it simple. Make it cut and dry. If you cannot do this, you should probably stop making an ass of yourself on these forums.

Where are the evidence? Where are the victims of Usagi's fraudulent business?

Can you only ask questions? Where are your answers? Why is BMF not a victim of usagi's fraudulent business if the insurance contract is violated?

[augustocroppo]

Can you only ask questions? Where are your answers? Why is BMF not a victim of usagi's fraudulent business if the insurance contract is violated?

If the contract was violated, then there are certainly parties that suffered a loss. If that is the case, where are the claims of the parties which suffered the loss?

[deeplink]

Can you only ask questions? Where are your answers? Why is BMF not a victim of usagi's fraudulent business if the insurance contract is violated?

If the contract was violated, then there are certainly parties that suffered a loss. If that is the case, where are the claims of the parties which suffered the loss?

Maybe they keep silent because they still get money from usagi. Maybe they are ashamed to admit they invested. Maybe they gave up trying to argue and cut their losses. Why does it matter who the investors of BMF were? Does that make it any less of a scam?

[augustocroppo]

NOTE: The below text represents the false accusations made against Usagi by multiple users. I am not the author of any part of the text and I do not endorse the content expressed.

'He listed mining hardware up to almost 30% above list price, included shipping costs as assets, doubled some share prices, etc. ABM is just an example, if you go over Usagi's spreadsheet, you will find almost nothing but numbers that are similarly detached from reality, although not all of them are quite this extreme. Usagi needs to inflate his bubbles. BMF shareholders have apparently paid over 500 BTC to CPA for this insurance, but they  are getting nothing in return for it. CPA (ran by usagi) has refused to pay out BMF (ran by usagi) for reasons he is not disclosing. At this point, I fear this is more than just about lying and misleading, and Im beginning to fear this whole thing is a scam that goes a lot further than what I described here. I have many other red flags pointing in that direction, but I will give usagi a chance to explain first before I list them here. But IMO, the above alone would be enough to put him in jail in any regulated market. Identifies himself as Oliver in the first post, but constantly signs with Serena. One of the above is a lie. He has earned a scammer tag for misleading his investors too many times. It's like Usagi is mad at you and others for trying to kick over his or her house of cards. To be fair, even if we prove nothing from this thread at least we have a place to discuss Usagi's securities. I'm going to deal with two seperate incidents where there is a clear indication of usagi acting against the interest of one group of shareholders in favor of shareholders in a different company also managed by usagi.'

'They paid for something - and usagi should have ensured they got that something (and is the only person in a position to honour that insurance).  Instead they're just paying 5 BTC a week to CPA for absolutely no gain. It's absolutely clear from the contract and the context in which it was introduced to investors what this insurance was against.  Yet usagi has refused to ever claim on it. I think we all know that if your appeals to the mods had any merit, Puppet and any other name that you drop would be gone from the forum. The reason why is obvious - there's no explanation it can give which would be at all credible.  I half expect to see the contract vanish from its website to be honest - though wondering just what usagi could replace it with that would be at all credible. Oh - and how DID you get more yes votes than have EVER been in circulation?  You didn't by some chance transfer unsold ones to yourself to vote with (then send them back) did you?  I asked nefario about that particular nasty little trick a while back (by PM) but got no answer - so assume it IS possible for a company owner to generate as many yes votes on a motion as they like. If Usagi is not getting a scammer tag for all that bs, then whats the point of this forum in the first place? Do we really need to wait until he has wasted all the coin on who knows what or cashes inn and runs? Sure, then we can cry here and confirm that BTC community got fucked once more. Just about every other question raised, usagi will try to bluster around with an explanation that (often) doesn't make sense - but at least is an explanation of sorts. So, does usagi know something about FPGAMINING that you dont, or is he just buying up distressed shares that he already owned to temporarily push up GLSBE prices to inflate his book value (and even then doubling that value in his books like he does with most things anyway)? Lets see if Usagi even denies doing those trades before I provide further evidence.'

'While no proof or even evidence of scamming, I did a quick back-of-envelope calculation to get an idea of the size of this unfolding trainwreck. The more evidence I see, the more convinced I am that usagi is not incompetent but is acting with the criminal intent to steal funds from investors. When I first met usagi, I thought it was an idiot. When it made CPA, I was pretty sure it was a crook. Now that we're starting to look more deeply into the books, I'm quite certain that usagi is a crook. Usagi keep lying to forum readers and publishing unreal NAV's. And now he is really busy deleting (forum mods deleting for him?) questions from forum threads. I was reading the threads when Usagi had turned out to be pulling a lot of shady tricks and unethical business practices (circular investing in his own funds to control the price and inflating his value shamelessly with imagined numbers) and looking back over the old threads they have been scrubbed. This forum is probably the worst thing for Bitcoin right now. He is a cancer for this forum.'

'Oliver Richman, know troll in mailing lists and forums, is about 40 years old and not a single bank trusts him with a CC? As you probably know, usagi (Oliver Richman) is following me around the forum like a pervert.  And only because I (and multiple others) pointed out that he is incompetent. Guess what, he is not only incompetent but he is also mean spirited nuter with long history of trolling. Time for the scammer tag. We also need hero tags for the people who trolled this fuck. I'm sure the time for a scammer tag has long since passed, and the time for a hasty exit before the cops get here has since arrived. I'm sure the deletion of posts is in response to the likely investigation by major governments' securities regulating agencies (SEC/FSA) - wouldn't want to leave any evidence lying around. Usagi is another version of Dank - the trolls will consistently bomb the threads for us. He already deserved a scammer tag imo and if Maged was not sure at that point, I agree that the deletion of his posts should now convince him. Applying for reconsideration of the scammer tag for usagi. 1) usagi has been misleading his customers in the past in various fraudulent business schemes. Even if it were the case that this was not enough for a scammer tag, he now: 2) has deleted about 1000 of this posts to remove the evidence. 3) does not want those posts to be restored. Something else to be considered: 4) he has a VIP label and should therefor be under extra scrutiny. 5)  Is back hawking a new business venture in this community despite there being unresolved issues surrounding his past ventures.  If the point of the scammer tag is to warn people against dealing with those who have an unsatisfactory record when it comes to meeting their obligations, then this is exactly the kind of situation in which it can be useful. 6) Voting as a shareholder with interconnected stocks and personal shares. 7) Usagi first promised then rescinded on Bakewell insurance saying that it would be refunded at first if Ian wanted, then if the shareholders voted for it. 8) BMF's CPA insurance plan, usagi failed to properly resolve a conflict of interest.'

'This is also when usagi started defrauding nyan investors (which I never got around to posting about) by making interest free loans to CPA (dressed up as holding YARR shares for the books).  At this point usagi is attacking me instead of what I'm posting, and in fact skipping over entire chunks of my posts just to pull out parts where I come right out and say I'm trolling him. On that note why isn't usagi getting a scammer tag for personally deleting every bit of information about his businesses?  I'm not even a shareholder and I'm finding it inconvenient.  I can only imagine how much his shareholders have been screwed over by his action. Usagi however is bush league, there's dozens that did the same exact things he did except they had the common sense to keep quiet. I think there's another very big reason why usagi hasn't got a scammer tag.  Look at the record of who does and doesn't get tags - pretty much without exception tags are only awarded to people who don't ste up and attempt to defend themselves in the complaint thread against them. We have an example of a high volume posting troll being banned in Rarity ... I wonder if Usagi is nearing that territory. It is easily observable that Usagi is not attempting to contribute in the community and visits the forum strictly to stir up shit. Similar to Rarity. The tipping point I believe with Rarity was bringing false scammer claim up against Dank. Similarly Usagi is making baseless and malicious accusations now. The same actions Usagi took with CPA and BMF are what Usagi calls me all kinds of names over. What a nice way to lure newbies in to your bullshit projects and scam them for coin. Good job usagi, honest indeed. You deserve the scammer tag only for this. Newbies must be warned of you and this is the best way to do it.'

'Apparently usagi's now selling off FPGAs bought using BMF funds on behalf of BMF shareholders and using the proceeds to repay the "liquidity loans" he took out for CPA, presumably because he offered to make himself personally liable for those loans but reckons he can tell the BMF shareholders to go screw themselves. That's gotta be fraud, surely? Of course this is not a "company" in any meaningful sense of the word so there's really not much to stop usagi "liquidating" his ventures any way he wishes. The contract never said anything about preferential shares. Using BMF assets to pay off a separate company debt is a scam. It is completely dodgy but it's what happens when you have these toy companies where there is no restraint on the founder/CEO/whatever acting entirely out of self interest because you can't oust someone from control of a company which doesn't actually exist.  "Shareholders" have no power in these toy companies. I think usgai genuinely believes having most of the shares allows you to steal from the remaining shareholders - it actually it believes it has that entitlement and that there's nothing wrong with doing it. If you don't follow this plan in the real world, you end up in court, usually jail. Yes that is the case and there is no evidence that a "secured note" exists. As a CPA shareholder I certainly didnt sign such a thing that would make usagi have first rights on any assets. If usagi is unable to provide proper accounting, it is reasonable to assume that he is bankrupt. As a CPA shareholder I demand to see the books right now. Consider this a letter of demand and if you havent produced the books in 21 days you will be considered insolvent. Also where is Usagi's company registered so people can serve legal papers ? This is pretty much a requirement in most countries. I'm still going on the assumption that there is no official record of his ventures as registered legal entities, which strongly suggests that his "contracts" created an assumed trust, and that said trust is now under liquidation. Usagi stated that intent himself. It wasnt like some accused him of doing it. He said he was boxing up assets and paying out one creditor over another. usagi has provided no evidence that he had a secured interest in the mining equipment (which doesn't come about purely because he's the major shareholder in BMF or because his name might be on the receipt for the equipment). He needs to explain how that secured interest was created and how he's legally a secured or preferential creditor of BMF. But if someone has a look in the last posts usagi made on that topic before GLBSE died (posts ofc are now deleted) you'd find that usagi was at the stage of admitting that the BTC was in theory owed and actually talking about various ways to address it - including CPA returning its shares in BMF to BMF.'

'Yeah, in recent (last week or so) discussion about the BMF insurance thing the issue came up of my accusation that usagi lied when saying that the policy was publicised and voted on by BMF shareholders (remember, my accusation was that BMF were defrauded - not that CPA was). It's also the easiest one to prove - as all the facts in it have already been admitted by usagi (basically ALL my evidence is usagi's own posts - plus the presence on blockchain of premiums but no insurance payout).  And the (now deleted) posts right before GLBSE shut down (like same day) had reached the point where usagi was admitting liability but arguing against BMF enforcing it as it would hurt CPA.'

[vampire]

@augustocroppo

False? Read the #2 post of this thread. Prove me that any of my statements are wrong.

[augustocroppo]

@augustocroppo

False? Read the #2 post of this thread. Prove me that any of my statements are wrong.

Well I was preparing some documentation, and I didn't have enough time to prepare.. But since puppet posted, I'll release my accusation of usagi's lies:

Exhibit
 

I wrote several books, including highschool textbooks and some free books on Go on the internet using my real name. Take a second look at that link. I make it blatantly clear I do not care who knows my "real name". I am who I am. And I have nothing to hide. I used usagi and my name interchangably all the time on KGS (a go server). I created the advanced study room in 2006 using these names.

Thank you for your support,
 
Serena

Identifies himself as Oliver in the first post, but constantly signs with Serena. One of the above is a lie.

Just because Usagi present himself with different aliases does not mean he is willful lying (even less committing fraud). Therefore your second statement is wrong.

http://oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/lie--2

Definition of lie
noun
an intentionally false statement:

[vampire]

Just because Usagi present himself with different aliases does not mean he is willful lying (even less committing fraud). Therefore your second statement is wrong.

http://oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/lie--2

Definition of lie
noun
an intentionally false statement:

For fraud check the statement #1 which you avoided. AVG and MAX are two different functions. That's fraud.
Statement #2 is about lying, not fraud. Though I wonder what would a judge think about a person who issued illegal securities using a false identity. Usagi deleted his statements shortly after this thread.

[augustocroppo]

For fraud check the statement #1 which you avoided. AVG and MAX are two different functions. That's fraud.

No, that is not the definition of fraud. That is the definition of mistake.

Statement #2 is about lying, not fraud. Though I wonder what would a judge think about a person who issued illegal securities using a false identity. Usagi deleted his statements shortly after this thread.

You ask to me prove any of your statements was wrong. I proved that your second statement was wrong with simple reasoning. Just because Usagi identified himself with different aliases it not means he was intentionally producing false statements. Further speculation over what a judge would possible think about does not prove your statement is right.

[vampire]

No, that is not the definition of fraud. That is the definition of mistake.

If it was a mistake then usagi needs to refund everyone. If he didn't then it's fraud.

You know what Martha Steward went to jail for? Exactly for this, making a false statement.

[augustocroppo]

No, that is not the definition of fraud. That is the definition of mistake.

If it was a mistake then usagi needs to refund everyone. If he didn't then it's fraud.

Yes, indeed. So, do you know if Usagi refunded 'everyone'? Do you know what agreements he made to correct this mistake? There is any user of this forum claiming for a refund?

[usagi]

No, that is not the definition of fraud. That is the definition of mistake.

If it was a mistake then usagi needs to refund everyone. If he didn't then it's fraud.

You know what Martha Steward went to jail for? Exactly for this, making a false statement.

No, you need to get your facts straight. You wrote:

Exhibit
Quote from: usagi on September 27, 2012, 04:24:25 PM
The spreadsheet uses a formula which uses the average of the 24h and 5 day averages* Not a scam.
*=max(fetchTicker(concatenate(A13), "t5davg"), fetchTicker(concatenate(A13), "t24havg"))/100000000

The above formula isn't average, it returns the largest of two averages.

What you fail to have mentioned is that the marked passage (marked with a star) is a quote from the actual spreadsheet. Your complaint amounts to that I made a mistake in responding to a scam accusation -- regarding actually falsifying NAVs -- and not that I DID falsify NAVs or misrepresent how I valued issues on the spreadsheet! You and others have clearly announced that this has become a witch-hunt to find something to label me with a scammer tag, and that you have no actual evidence that I deserve one. Deprived has said 'I believe you deserve one anyways...' recently in this thread. Puppet and guruvan have flat out admitted they do not have evidence (I can provide a link). Deeplink repeatedly ignores questions to provide supporting evidence. Cunicula and Ian Bakewell are self-admitted trolls or just cheering trolls. Greyhawk is a troll who has had posts deleted from this forum specifically for trolling me. And so on. Do yourself a favor. Make an OP, clearly outlining what it is you feel I did to deserve a scammer tag, and in that same post provide the evidence you have. If you cannot do this, stop. Now, as you have made an exhibit in post #2 and I cannot remember if I responded to it, I'll respond to it now.

My response is that you seem to have recognized there is no validity in "Usagi: falsifying NAVs, ..." and have instead decided to blow a simple mistake in wording way out of proportion. At no time was there ever an intent to deceive because the actual formula was shown in immediately readable form on the spreadsheet. So no, I am not guilty of fraud. It is obvious that the mistake I made does not constitute fraud; there is and was simply too many other statements by myself on the matter, and further, this is the scam accusation forum, I was not trying to advertise my business or advertise to any investor, I was merely responding to a scam accusation. So you will have absolutely no luck accusing me of fraud here.

Do you realize your mistake now? I did not falsify NAVs. Please stop your obvious smear campaign. If I actually falsified NAVs then state that i did so and show where I did so -- Quoting the spreadsheet where I show and explain the actual formula on the spreadsheet used to value NAVs is not proof I misled anyone. It's actually proof I was doing my best to disclose how I valued issues to investors. You are actually showing the exact opposite of what you are claiming by quoting that formula.

You also seem to be ignoring the very great amount of evidence that the intent was to provide added value through analysis. And I am not talking about the NUMEROUS times I stated that, I'm just talking about what I actually did -- which you should become familiar with first before making serious allegations against me or my companies. I conducted interviews with GigaVPS (GIGAMINING), Garr255 (COGNITIVE) friedcat (ASICMINER, MOORE), Juan (BTC-MINING) and more. My mandate was clear and that you are trying to ignore all of that makes me think you are being deceitful in accusing me of misrepresenting NAV because of a mistake in wording I made when responding to a scammer accusation.

You also seem to ignore the fact that there were two clearly labled valuation columns. One containing the values using the formula described above, and one containing an analysis value -- which is the actual complaint. I was going WAY over what was required to disclose price to investors.

You also seem to be ignoring the shareholder motions I made to see what shareholders wanted in terms of valuation on the spreadsheets. All of this material evidence you have ignored undermines your credibility in this case as it's become clear you have no idea what you are talking about, and are an incredibly biased individual who is incapable of presenting a clear and concise accusation nor any supporting evidence that cannot immediately be shot down by posting facts about what I actually said and did about my company. Please just stop being a jerk.

[capn noe]

What is this 'music' you speak of? Can you prove that I can hear it when you play it? I'm not saying I can't hear it, and I'm not saying I CAN hear it, but if you can't even prove the basic building blocks of this 'album' you speak of 

[greyhawk]

Greyhawk is a troll who has had posts deleted from this forum specifically for trolling me.

So what you're saying is you have a man on the inside covering for you? Thank you for confirming this nagging suspicion.

[deeplink]

Deeplink repeatedly ignores questions to provide supporting evidence.

Haha right, check the last pages of this thread and see who ignores the most direct and simple questions?

Do you realize your mistake now? I did not falsify NAVs. Please stop your obvious smear campaign. If I actually falsified NAVs then state that i did so and show where I did so -- Quoting the spreadsheet where I show and explain the actual formula on the spreadsheet used to value NAVs is not proof I misled anyone. It's actually proof I was doing my best to disclose how I valued issues to investors. You are actually showing the exact opposite of what you are claiming by quoting that formula.

First part is easy: I state that you falsified NAVs, among other fraudulent activities with your toy companies.

About the second part: If you insist. Can you ask theymos to restore your 1000+ deleted posts and put your companies websites back online, so we can show you the evidence again?