[CRYPTOSTOCKS] Vircurex [VCX] - Going public

[Hfleer]

The chain of arguments is getting too complicated, lets me "streamline it":
I am forming a company (Vircurex Ltx?) which will acquire the current trading platform and its business from its current owner (for 1500BTC). I am offering to sell 30% of the company shares to the public (Face value being sold 3375BTC). 70% I will be holding. For the first one year, I will not be collecting any dividends, all of those go to the 30% shareholders.

Here's why those people posting in this thread are confused with what you're saying.  In one line you say (Vircurex Ltx?) will acquire the business from the current owner(for 1500BTC), which would mean that at this point you no longer own it, so you would not get to sell 30%.  What it should say is that you're forming (Vircurex Ltx?), then selling a 30% stake in it.  Simple enough.

[1715117220]

1715117220

[1715117220]

1715117220

[1715117220]

1715117220

[1715117220]

1715117220

[1715117220]

1715117220

[smoothie]

Is there any new info regarding Cryptostocks being hacked?

+1

~ 3 weeks and no response to this thread.

Although there is a report Kumala just published to their site indicating that investors will be taking the hit for the losses in the form of no dividends for months to come.

[jubalix]

Is there any new info regarding Cryptostocks being hacked?

+1

~ 3 weeks and no response to this thread.

Although there is a report Kumala just published to their site indicating that investors will be taking the hit for the losses in the form of no dividends for months to come.

I don't get why people voted for that nan or whatever increase

I don't understand how these sites keep getting hacked, I mean, if you set it up right, and the guy raise 8K BTC in the IPO plus dividends to himslef for the larger part of the shares, he can afford some decent security and IT help.


Then he take is out of dividends to shareholders, well that's a complete lack of discipline to him to run it.

[king_pin]

Although there is a report Kumala just published to their site indicating that investors will be taking the hit for the losses in the form of no dividends for months to come.

Where did you get this info?

[thy]

You can read here https://vircurex.com/Reports/2013-05.pdf
It's mentined in this thread https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=226366.0 to.
The minority shareholders(30%), will pay the full loss in the form of no dividend(in breach of whats stated in the vircurex contract on cryptostocks) has kumala decided.
The first 12 months Vircurex majority shareholder kumala(70%) was not entitled to dividend. Now he has decided that those owning the public 30% of the shares should be the ones paying 100% of the loss in the form of no dividend for the next 9 months or so....

[Kumala]

There is no breach in contract, the dividend payment is inline with the result of request for vote #16.

[jubalix]

There is no breach in contract, the dividend payment is inline with the result of request for vote #16.

Kumala

why is the host provider not sharing the cost of this loss for there errors?

[thy]

There is no breach in contract, the dividend payment is inline with the result of request for vote #16.

Kumala

How could it not be a breach of the contract even after the passing of vote #16 for whatever reason some people voted yes on that proposal ?

Vote ID #16 at cryptostocks the vote in Vircurex you mention Kumala:
"Change current process of paying out complete revenue as dividend to paying out 70% of the net profit as dividends and retain 30% of the net profits to increase the NAV until NAV reaches the value of 0.25."

Profit for May one think should have been in the neighborhood of the same as April(an up-going trend that was temporary stopped by the security breach and a few days with service not working 100%) if you diden't temporary lower the fees(to 0,1% was it ?), that might be a good thing in the long perspective(to keep customers that otherwise may go trade there coins at another exchange where that was possible) to do, but was probably negative(at least for that month) to the minority(public 30%) shareholders, so such thing you should probably have taken a vote on before doing.

Well anyway, profit was 130.65 BTC according to the May 2013 Report for the month May, if one considers full profit(0,5% fee) for 1/3 of the months volume and 1/5(0,1% fee) on the volume for 2/3 of the month then Vircurex actually trades pretty good volumes in May, volume up 11% even thou the problems you had that month.

Dividend that should be paid out according to the contract should then be 130.65 and if you had not reduced the fees probably up to around 280 BTC

Dividend according to the vote you mention, if that vote's result is a legally binding reason to change the dividend rules set in the original contract. 130,65*0,7= 91,455 BTC and around 280*0,7= 196 BTC if you had not reduced the fees for May.
The retained BTC to raise the NAV then becomes 39,195 BTC or around 84 BTC if you had not reduced the fees for May.

The shareholders(30% public shares) that effectively have voted to give away 8162*0,25=2040,5 BTC (if the vote is reason to change the original contracts rules) of there dividend for the first 12 months period when the majority owner is not entitled to any dividend to build up NAV value, effectively giving away 2040,5*0,7= 1428,35 BTC to the majority owner, you Kumala,
Those shareholders you have decided that you should punish and take another 91,455 to 280 BTC from this month and around 2300-2400BTC in total(1454 BTC 23 400 LTC and 225 263 TRC) the coming months without any support for the actions you have taken in either the contract or the votes you mention.

Would you care to answer the other questions in this thread https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=226366.0

[bbit]

Is there any new info regarding Cryptostocks being hacked?

+1

+1 +1

[jubalix]

There is no breach in contract, the dividend payment is inline with the result of request for vote #16.

Kumala

How could it not be a breach of the contract even after the passing of vote #16 for whatever reason some people voted yes on that proposal ?

Vote ID #16 at cryptostocks the vote in Vircurex you mention Kumala:
"Change current process of paying out complete revenue as dividend to paying out 70% of the net profit as dividends and retain 30% of the net profits to increase the NAV until NAV reaches the value of 0.25."

Profit for May one think should have been in the neighborhood of the same as April(an up-going trend that was temporary stopped by the security breach and a few days with service not working 100%) if you diden't temporary lower the fees(to 0,1% was it ?), that might be a good thing in the long perspective(to keep customers that otherwise may go trade there coins at another exchange where that was possible) to do, but was probably negative(at least for that month) to the minority(public 30%) shareholders, so such thing you should probably have taken a vote on before doing.

Well anyway, profit was 130.65 BTC according to the May 2013 Report for the month May, if one considers full profit(0,5% fee) for 1/3 of the months volume and 1/5(0,1% fee) on the volume for 2/3 of the month then Vircurex actually trades pretty good volumes in May, volume up 11% even thou the problems you had that month.

Dividend that should be paid out according to the contract should then be 130.65 and if you had not reduced the fees probably up to around 280 BTC

Dividend according to the vote you mention, if that vote's result is a legally binding reason to change the dividend rules set in the original contract. 130,65*0,7= 91,455 BTC and around 280*0,7= 196 BTC if you had not reduced the fees for May.
The retained BTC to raise the NAV then becomes 39,195 BTC or around 84 BTC if you had not reduced the fees for May.

The shareholders(30% public shares) that effectively have voted to give away 8162*0,25=2040,5 BTC (if the vote is reason to change the original contracts rules) of there dividend for the first 12 months period when the majority owner is not entitled to any dividend to build up NAV value, effectively giving away 2040,5*0,7= 1428,35 BTC to the majority owner, you Kumala,
Those shareholders you have decided that you should punish and take another 91,455 to 280 BTC from this month and around 2300-2400BTC in total(1454 BTC 23 400 LTC and 225 263 TRC) the coming months without any support for the actions you have taken in either the contract or the votes you mention.

Would you care to answer the other questions in this thread https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=226366.0

this, your shifting wealth while it doesn't effect you, to you!

[numberbit]

Where can we find the JUN 2013 monthly report?  Interested in how much of the deficit has been paid off thus far.

[Kuroth]

Watching.. 

[numberbit]

Where can we find the JUN 2013 monthly report?  Interested in how much of the deficit has been paid off thus far.

Still cannot find any of these documents at https://vircurex.com/welcome/investors....

JUN 2013
JUL 2013
AUG 2013 <- Quarterly statement

Interested in how much of the deficit has been paid off thus far.

[mechs]

Update on the listing.

We have two positive news for the listing of Vircurex.

1. The license fee costs for the platform has been reduced by 200BTC.
2. The cost of BTC/USD has changed in a favourable way, i.e. we will require to raise less BTCs.

Assuming the BTC/USD remains at its current level, we'll adjust he listing as follows:

   Total number of shares issued:   31,000 shares
   Total publicly listed/traded shares:    9,300 shares

Kumula,
  I have used your exchange and like it.  But this is a terrible deal for shareholders.  It is not fair, common or reasonable to charge a large licensing fee and keep the majority of the equity.  The licensing fee to yourself is a scam and you know it.  It one or the other - when you do an IPO, your payout is two parts:
1. You can now draw a management fee
2. The equity you still hold is now easy to sell - you have liquidity
 
    If you are serious, scrap the IPO and remake the prospectus. 

[numberbit]

So, I happened to notice that the AUG 2013 report is now available.

https://vircurex.com/welcome/investors

What does it mean for depositors (user's accounts) that the exchange is reporting a book value of -931.95 BTC ?

[K1773R]

So, I happened to notice that the AUG 2013 report is now available.

https://vircurex.com/welcome/investors

What does it mean for depositors (user's accounts) that the exchange is reporting a book value of -931.95 BTC ?

nothing id say, otherwise problems would already have arised. its just sad he put his own failures (the hacks) to us investors... this was probably one of my worst investments :S

[shmoula]

Well, since vircurex and cryptostocks are related a bit, I'll try to link my question about transaction history on cryptostocks in another thread. Hope someone can help. Thanks for your time!

[Bullbear]

Kumala, is there an envisaged date when dividends will resume? The NAV seems to be approaching the threshold of 0.25.

[thy]

Kumala, is there an envisaged date when dividends will resume? The NAV seems to be approaching the threshold of 0.25.

Vircurex showes a number of -0,0324 btc in there august report those number dosent make much sence thou. Do you have any other information about the real number that is higher than that and that vircurex reported numbers is faked then ?

Vircurex should have been paying dividend every month, they break there contract with the shareholders.

At the moment he refuses to follow the contract and lets the minority sharehloders (30%) pay the 2500 btc+20 000 usd and he(70% shareolder) pays nothing of this himself.
He also hasent showed any evidence that vircurex actually lost any btc, other digital currency or the 20 000 usd, so at the moment it looks like vircurex themself is behind it.

The way it's looking now kumala will never pay any dividend to the minority shareholders unless people take him to court.

[shmoula]

I think vircurex and cryptostocks are just one big scam.

Vircurex showes a number of -0,0324 btc in there august report those number dosent make much sence thou. Do you have any other information about the real number that is higher than that and that vircurex reported numbers is faked then ?

Vircurex should have been paying dividend every month, they break there contract with the shareholders.

At the moment he refuses to follow the contract and lets the minority sharehloders (33%) pay the 2500 btc+20 000 usd and he(67% shareolder) pays nothing of this himself.
He also hasent showed any evidence that vircurex actually lost any btc, other digital currency or the 20 000 usd, so at the moment it looks like vircurex themself is behind it.

The way it's looking now kumala will never pay any dividend to the minority shareholders unless people take him to court.