What to expect from Bitcoin Magazine

[cbeast]

Clearly a magazine with lots of issues.

Bitcoinmag was a scam anyways....  I paid for two copies, got 1.

There is hundreds of people like me..

Yeah, two out of three for me. International shipping is likely the problem.

[1714280354]

1714280354

[1714280354]

1714280354

[1714280354]

1714280354

[greyhawk]

Yeah, two out of three for me. International shipping is likely the problem.

I worked at a company library once. We had about 500 subscriptions to journals from outside of our country.

Let me tell you something about international shipping of journals.






It works flawlessly, what are you talking about?

[edd]

Clearly a magazine with lots of issues.

+1

[Micon]

1)  Thread delivers much:  

1a) accusation of theft or otherwise funny fiat finances
1b)  possible shareholder shenanigans in the sale
1c) the BTCtalk 1-liner of the year (deserves the applause IMO)
1d) even BurtW came up for air.  (how's the pirate bet going?  still think "it's not a Ponzi" as you once advertised in your sig?  I hear the Kansas City Chiefs are looking for a pass-through operator to sell superbowl shares and your name came to the top of the list)

2)  I wrote a BTC gambling article for Bitcoin magazine, I think it's supposed to be in issue #4, which I bought for around .8 btc around 2 weeks ago.   (just love to see my name in print & to show my mother: "see mom! I'm not wasting my life, someone printed my thoughts once") My first 3 that I ordered had long shipping delays like everyone else, still waiting on the 4th.  I do not fault a young BTC-facing organization for delays in it's infancy.  This is not be taken as a support statement for BFL, which I am highly questioning at this point along with many others - they have had a lot of time and a whole bunch of community money - I think it's wrong to keep sending them money at this point but that's a rant-post for another thread. I interacted with some of the magazine staff, and I will post my thoughts:

2a) I used a very friendly, intuitive, and easy to use software interface for collaboration that I kept thinking was fucking awesome and must cost alot of $.  

2b) I interacted with Mihai a handful of times and believe him to want the best for bitcoin.  He is very passionate about his work.  I interacted only briefly with Vladamir.  I have no knowledge of the inter-workings of their business but love speculating with incomplete information:  

IMO Vladamir made poor monetary decisions.  If this is eventually qualified as "stealing" I would not be surprised.  The nature of the relatively large personal payments towards the end of the business relationship certainly does not look good.  His statements in this thread I will qualify in my head as net negative to his case.  Having said that, it also appears to me that Mihai acted quickly and possibly breaking the former bitcoin magazine corporate laws.  However it is also my belief that Mihai did this for the good of the company, so Bitcoin Magazine could be in the safe hands of well-funded champions of bitcoin industry.  Bit-Pay satisfies this and I personally do not think Mihai's actions were for personal gain or anything other than an altruistic love of the project and the bitcoin idea.  

1 gambler's thoughts only.  I will continue to write for Bitcoin Magazine if they want my articles.

2c) IMO check out the Cardplayer poker magazine and website for a great example of a mature, extremely successful industry-focused content-based product.  Their focus is on the online component, as it should be IMO for bitcoin mag.  A handful of journalistic organizations that I respect (Vice, Wired) have made fun of the fact that there even is a physical bitcoin mag.  I don't agree with them and believe there is a place for the physical version, but maybe 4x per year, or 2x.  Make that website *the* source of btc info IMO



 

[SgtSpike]

IMO Vladamir made poor monetary decisions.  If this is eventually qualified as "stealing" I would not be surprised.  The nature of the relatively large personal payments towards the end of the business relationship certainly does not look good.  His statements in this thread I will qualify in my head as net negative to his case.  Having said that, it also appears to me that Mihai acted quickly and possibly breaking the former bitcoin magazine corporate laws.  However it is also my belief that Mihai did this for the good of the company, so Bitcoin Magazine could be in the safe hands of well-funded champions of bitcoin industry.  Bit-Pay satisfies this and I personally do not think Mihai's actions were for personal gain or anything other than an altruistic love of the project and the bitcoin idea. 

I completely agree with this.  Vlad's actions seem focused on his own personal gain - what the magazine could do for him, rather than what he could do for the magazine.  But Mihai is very much focused on the success of the magazine.  To me, it seems as though he cares much less about what money he can "make" from the magazine, and much more about the success of the magazine and the well-being of the people involved in producing it.

1 gambler's thoughts only.  I will continue to write for Bitcoin Magazine if would like my articles.

I very much enjoyed your article, and hope you do write more for the mag! 

[stochastic]

Here is another reason NEVER to form partnerships with other people.

That's sorta like saying "trust no one."  Follow that rule religiously, and you will lead a barren, lonely life.

Sure, some humans are fallible and will let you down.  But other humans are wonderful and will boost you up.

It is called hiring people.  You don't have to give everyone and his mom an ownership stake in a business.  When you go into a partnership with another person you are basically marrying that person, their spouse and any family members they have.  If your partner unexpectedly dies, now you have one of their family members as your new partner.  Your partner decides to get a divorce.  Well now your business is being torn apart by divorce lawyers.

Joining a partnership only increases risks involved with starting a business.  The only exception to this rule is if you are joining a firm for attorneys, accountants, or doctors.

[MPOE-PR]

It is called hiring people.  You don't have to give everyone and his mom an ownership stake in a business.

Hiring people runs into this problem known as having to also pay them.

[Herodes]

Well, although I may have based some opinions from this thread, I'd suggest you take your arguments outside this forum. Whatever has happened, I'm sure the magazine can continue in the future, if there's a will to do so. If you need to raise capital, I'm sure the community would be able to contribute.

As for anyone that has done anything wrong, this is something they'll probably not stop doing in the future, and eventually it will bite them in the ass. This always happens in the end.

[DeathAndTaxes]

It is called hiring people.  You don't have to give everyone and his mom an ownership stake in a business.  When you go into a partnership with another person you are basically marrying that person, their spouse and any family members they have.  If your partner unexpectedly dies, now you have one of their family members as your new partner.  Your partner decides to get a divorce.  Well now your business is being torn apart by divorce lawyers.

Joining a partnership only increases risks involved with starting a business.  The only exception to this rule is if you are joining a firm for attorneys, accountants, or doctors.

Well a partnership makes it a lot easier to raise capital.  A small business can be quite a capital sink.  Unless you have the hundreds of thousands of dollars you can personally lose it can be very difficult to expand without either a partnership, LLC, or corporate structure.  Given the success rate of a small biz simply having $100K+ isn't sufficient the startup capital has to be a small enough % of one's net worth that a complete loss (which is probable even likely) won't be damaging.  

There aren't that many people with millions of spare dollars just laying around who suddenly also happen to come up with a great idea, and have the entrepreneurial spirit so they can startup a brand new company hire talent for pure salary only, and keep all ownership and management decisions to themselves.

There is a reason why "joint venture" structures (LLC, Corporations, Partnerships) exist.  Still your larger point is a good one.  Know your partners completely and don't take on more than you absolutely need.  The more owners there are the more complicated it gets.

[MPOE-PR]

There is a reason why "joint venture" structures (LLC, Corporations, Partnerships) exist.  Still your larger point is a good one.  Know your partners completely and don't take on more than you absolutely need.  The more owners there are the more complicated it gets.

Especially for over-the-Internet stuff. I'm willing to bet a majority of "partnerships" started on the grounds of "I met this guy online half an hour ago, he seems cool because we both like Linkin Park". Well....