[AMC]-The Official Active Mining Cooperative Discussion

[Vbs]

So, my proposal for the VMC shares would be:

• 9 to 10M for investors at 0.0025
• 10M for Ken

For a total of 19-20M. If more funds are needed in the future, more shares can be issued as needed, as means to increase the capital of VMC.

Ken did/is doing the hard work on everything, so he should get a nice amount of shares, and it's only thanks to him that there's an ASIC coming (one year of work already on optimizing Xilinx code).

Thoughts?

[somestranger]

Anyone else been snacking more shares at these prices in speculation of this merger?

EDIT: I pushed the price too high btct.co now I have to wait a while.

Oh hell yes. I just doubled my position on Bitfunder. The merger and the fact that people are going to visit AMC to verify its legitimacy are amazing news. I think once potential investors wake up and see the news it won't take long for it to surge upwards.

[lolstate]

Anyone else been snacking more shares at these prices in speculation of this merger?

EDIT: I pushed the price too high btct.co now I have to wait a while.

Oh hell yes. I just doubled my position on Bitfunder. The merger and the fact that people are going to visit AMC to verify its legitimacy are amazing news. I think once potential investors wake up and see the news it won't take long for it to surge upwards.

These latest developments are fantastic news for current and future share holders. I can see Ken and us share holders getting rich out of this.  

[lolstate]

So, my proposal for the VMC shares would be:

• 9 to 10M for investors at 0.0025
• 10M for Ken

For a total of 19-20M. If more funds are needed in the future, more shares can be issued as needed, as means to increase the capital of VMC.

Ken did/is doing the hard work on everything, so he should get a nice amount of shares, and it's only thanks to him that there's an ASIC coming (one year of work already on optimizing Xilinx code).

Thoughts?

These numbers look sensible to me!

[Vbs]

The general feeling I am getting is that most people including myself are getting past the "AMC might be a scam" point to more of a "The way Kenneth Slaughter has set these 2 companies up is not optimal for the shareholder" viewpoint.

Few (paid) shills and dozen of really dumb investors got the lead but that does not mean scam is scam no more. I'm losing interest in helping a lot
of stupid people not got skinned here. How easily most can be persuaded into beliving anything and switch sides is disturbing. You people still have
no clue even who is Ken but it takes not much more than him posting "I'm not scammer" for you to belive it.

Sweet dreams!

Damn, I was beginning to worry! Where have you been???

I officially nominate Bitcoin Megastore as the hardest working person in show business.  Move over James Brown.  Look at the posting times.  That guy only needs 5 hours of sleep a day, the rest of the time he is hard at work.

[Vbs]

Your point? Yet another thing you have no clue about and can't figure out yourself, I guess.  

Indeed, I'm just a small kid compared to your highness!

[stereotype]

The general feeling I am getting is that most people including myself are getting past the "AMC might be a scam" point to more of a "The way Kenneth Slaughter has set these 2 companies up is not optimal for the shareholder" viewpoint.

Few (paid) shills and dozen of really dumb investors got the lead but that does not mean scam is scam no more. I'm losing interest in helping a lot
of stupid people not got skinned here. How easily most can be persuaded into beliving anything and switch sides is disturbing. You people still have
no clue even who is Ken but it takes not much more than him posting "I'm not scammer" for you to belive it.

Sweet dreams!

Damn, I was beginning to worry! Where have you been???

I officially nominate Bitcoin Megastore as the hardest working person in show business.  Move over James Brown.  Look at the posting times.  That guy only needs 5 hours of sleep a day, the rest of the time he is hard at work.

You beat me to it. The ironic thing is, a history like that can only be because of 'paid' interest, surely? Or the alternative 'disturbing' thing is, it has echoes of the rpietila saga. I think he believed he was helping stupid people as well.

Scary what Bitcoin does to people eh?  

[lewicki]

Back on track please. We were doing so well.

[Vbs]

Back on track please. We were doing so well.

+1

[kslaughter]

Just one quick question, how would he handle the holdouts.  Surely, there will be a few who decide not to trade in 100% of their AMC for VMC.  Would they eventually become liquidated at a certain time, and the funds would then be sent to the holder's account?

I asked this question about uh, oh, 3 pages ago.

I don't want to force any AMC shareholders into any thing they don't want and I won't.  I may twist there arms a little. 

[kslaughter]

Great work tonight guys!  I think we are finally on the way towards where we need to be.  While we are waiting to hear back from Ken, could someone with a legal background look at the current AMC offering on Bitfunder to see if there is any possibility and or loophole that would allow an acquisition of VMC by AMC?  Ken has insisted that as it currently stands, there is no way for that to be done, but it would not hurt to run over it to be sure.  This would certainly be the easiest way to move forward on getting everything under one roof, but if Ken can legally not modify the contract, then we will have to go about it a different way.  Currently, the plan that is being drawn up is as following:

Ken will create a VMC offering at some point (when is anyone's guess).
Trading will continue on both offerings, AMC and VMC.
At some point, AMC holders will have the option to trade AMC shares in for an equal number of VMC shares.
We can assume that when the trade options are made available, Ken will officially announce VMC's acquisition of AMC, and will set a closing date.

Ken is still looking for feedback and suggestions from the community, so please keep them coming.  Great job guys!

I think I explained the loophole already. There are two issues, one pertaining to real life money and the other to us as bitcoin investors.

The real life situation is easy to resolve, Kenneth owns both VMC and AMC so to combine them into one entity should be relatively easy.

On the bitcoin end, Kenneth can claim that AMC no longer has any profit because it was bought out, thus he can stop paying dividends. Then, he can offer users a 1-1 swap of AMC shares for VMC shares followed by freezing of the AMC asset. This will make everyone with shares in AMC swap their shares for VMC, finishing the elimination of AMC.

How this would be accomplished fairly for shareholders and at a profit for Ken has been outlined by myself in previous posts, which Kenneth seems to give approval for.

Very good!  FM, I mean this wholeheartedly when I say that I am thrilled you have come on board.  It's apparent that Ken is going to need all the help he can get from posters like you if we are going to see this succeed at the end.  Just one quick question, how would he handle the holdouts.  Surely, there will be a few who decide not to trade in 100% of their AMC for VMC.  Would they eventually become liquidated at a certain time, and the funds would then be sent to the holder's account?

From a shareholder point of view, it would make no sense to be a holdout. But lets say a few unknowing people out there do not exchange their AMC shares to VMC.

1.) They would be stuck with AMC shares but cannot do anything with them because Kenneth has frozen the AMC asset
2.) They would realize their AMC share by itself is worthless because dividends are no longer coming in
3.) They CAN (and should) swap their shares at any time for VMC shares

If they do not swap, then they would be the only ones that are negatively impacted. Neither Kenneth, you, nor I have any incentive in forcing these people to swap for VMC shares. Thus nothing actually needs to be done with people who hold out.

1.) Let me clear this up for AMC shareholders, I will never freeze the shares.  I may twist your arm to trade your shares for VMC, but I will never force anything on you.
2.) Dividends will continue for AMC unless VMC owns 100% of the shares of AMC.
3.) There might be a time limit on swapping shares.

Let me know what you think about the above.  I think the above would be fair to everyone, those that want to be part of VMC and those that want to stay in AMC.

[kslaughter]

So, great news today!

Offering a 1-for-1 share swap looks good, provided there is enough time to do it (2-3 months?), as I'm sure there are a lot of people who bought AMC options already.

Most likely we don't have 2-3 months to do anything in this fast paced Bitcoin manufacturing world.

[kslaughter]

This is an interesting development, but how quickly can all of this take place?  I personally believe btc is headed to around $20-30 in a few months, so the timing is important.  I'm happy to see this thread turn into something constructive.

I think I can get it done quick, we need to, due to the eASIC deal, they are going to want a lot of money soon.  I have already been working on a standalone VMC offering.  So, It will not take to much more time to add the swap rules into the offering.  What takes a lot of time is the projection of sales, expenses, and the resultant profit.

[kslaughter]

The general feeling I am getting is that most people including myself are getting past the "AMC might be a scam" point to more of a "The way Kenneth Slaughter has set these 2 companies up is not optimal for the shareholder" viewpoint.

Few (paid) shills and dozen of really dumb investors got the lead but that does not mean scam is scam no more. I'm losing interest in helping a lot
of stupid people not got skinned here. How easily most can be persuaded into beliving anything and switch sides is disturbing. You people still have
no clue even who is Ken but it takes not much more than him posting "I'm not scammer" for you to belive it.

Sweet dreams!

Nice, to have you back in the thread.

[SoylentCreek]

So, my proposal for the VMC shares would be:

• 9 to 10M for investors at 0.0025
• 10M for Ken

For a total of 19-20M. If more funds are needed in the future, more shares can be issued as needed, as means to increase the capital of VMC.

Ken did/is doing the hard work on everything, so he should get a nice amount of shares, and it's only thanks to him that there's an ASIC coming (one year of work already on optimizing Xilinx code).

Thoughts?

These numbers look sensible to me!

Would this number be viable for a 1 to 1 share swap?  How many shares have currently been issued and are owned by the public.  If that number is or will exceed 9,000,000, then that will not work.  Here's my suggestion for issuing shares.

10,000,000 Total (if possible)

4,500,000 are issued to the public all at once
2,000,000 are held by VMC to pay overhead, Ken's salary, etc.
3,500,000 are also held by VMC and all dividends that are paid to these will be reinvested into the company.

At no point or time should Ken or VMC be able to increase shares, or sell to the public any of the 5.5M that are held by VMC.

[zxyzxy]

The general feeling I am getting is that most people including myself are getting past the "AMC might be a scam" point to more of a "The way Kenneth Slaughter has set these 2 companies up is not optimal for the shareholder" viewpoint.

Few (paid) shills and dozen of really dumb investors got the lead but that does not mean scam is scam no more. I'm losing interest in helping a lot
of stupid people not got skinned here. How easily most can be persuaded into beliving anything and switch sides is disturbing. You people still have
no clue even who is Ken but it takes not much more than him posting "I'm not scammer" for you to belive it.

Sweet dreams!

[SoylentCreek]

So, my proposal for the VMC shares would be:

• 9 to 10M for investors at 0.0025
• 10M for Ken

For a total of 19-20M. If more funds are needed in the future, more shares can be issued as needed, as means to increase the capital of VMC.

Ken did/is doing the hard work on everything, so he should get a nice amount of shares, and it's only thanks to him that there's an ASIC coming (one year of work already on optimizing Xilinx code).

Thoughts?

These numbers look sensible to me!

Would this number be viable for a 1 to 1 share swap?  How many shares have currently been issued and are owned by the public.  If that number is or will exceed 9,000,000, then that will not work.  Here's my suggestion for issuing shares.

10,000,000 Total (if possible)

4,500,000 are issued to the public all at once
2,000,000 are held by VMC to pay overhead, Ken's salary, etc.
3,500,000 are also held by VMC and all dividends that are paid to these will be reinvested into the company.

At no point or time should Ken or VMC be able to increase shares, or sell to the public any of the 5.5M that are held by VMC.

I should also mention that it should be made clear in the offering that dividends will be based on all revenue generated by the company (Chips, hardware sales, royalties, etc).

[Vbs]

So, my proposal for the VMC shares would be:

• 9 to 10M for investors at 0.0025
• 10M for Ken

For a total of 19-20M. If more funds are needed in the future, more shares can be issued as needed, as means to increase the capital of VMC.

Ken did/is doing the hard work on everything, so he should get a nice amount of shares, and it's only thanks to him that there's an ASIC coming (one year of work already on optimizing Xilinx code).

Thoughts?

These numbers look sensible to me!

Would this number be viable for a 1 to 1 share swap?  How many shares have currently been issued and are owned by the public.  If that number is or will exceed 9,000,000, then that will not work.  Here's my suggestion for issuing shares.

10,000,000 Total (if possible)

4,500,000 are issued to the public all at once
2,000,000 are held by VMC to pay overhead, Ken's salary, etc.
3,500,000 are also held by VMC and all dividends that are paid to these will be reinvested into the company.

At no point or time should Ken or VMC be able to increase shares, or sell to the public any of the 5.5M that are held by VMC.

The total number of shares does not matter much, as the price per share will fall in accordingly. Offering more shares to the public if needed is a benefit to VMC, not a drawback. What if VMC needs more capital now, but don't has enough dividends to cover it?

- The public holds around 6M AMC shares, with around 3-4M more to be sold at .0025 for the NRE.
- Ken should be intitled to around 50-70% of the total shares, for all the work he has done so far and continues to do.
- VMC should hold no shares. Reinvestment cash should be taken as a cut from profits before issuing dividends. Having always a fixed % for reinvestment doesn't make sense in the long term.

[kslaughter]

So, my proposal for the VMC shares would be:

• 9 to 10M for investors at 0.0025
• 10M for Ken

For a total of 19-20M. If more funds are needed in the future, more shares can be issued as needed, as means to increase the capital of VMC.

Ken did/is doing the hard work on everything, so he should get a nice amount of shares, and it's only thanks to him that there's an ASIC coming (one year of work already on optimizing Xilinx code).

Thoughts?

These numbers look sensible to me!

Would this number be viable for a 1 to 1 share swap?  How many shares have currently been issued and are owned by the public.  If that number is or will exceed 9,000,000, then that will not work.  Here's my suggestion for issuing shares.

10,000,000 Total (if possible)

4,500,000 are issued to the public all at once
2,000,000 are held by VMC to pay overhead, Ken's salary, etc.
3,500,000 are also held by VMC and all dividends that are paid to these will be reinvested into the company.

At no point or time should Ken or VMC be able to increase shares, or sell to the public any of the 5.5M that are held by VMC.

The total number of shares does not matter much, as the price per share will fall in accordingly. Offering more shares to the public if needed is a benefit to VMC, not a drawback. What if VMC needs more capital now, but don't has enough dividends to cover it?

- The public holds around 6M AMC shares, with around 3-4M more to be sold at .0025 for the NRE.
- Ken should be intitled to around 50-70% of the total shares, for all the work he has done so far and continues to do.
- VMC should hold no shares. Reinvestment cash should be taken as a cut from profits before issuing dividends. Having always a fixed % for reinvestment doesn't make sense in the long term.

My thinking right now is to reduce my ownership from 100% down to 60%

[SoylentCreek]

So, my proposal for the VMC shares would be:

• 9 to 10M for investors at 0.0025
• 10M for Ken

For a total of 19-20M. If more funds are needed in the future, more shares can be issued as needed, as means to increase the capital of VMC.

Ken did/is doing the hard work on everything, so he should get a nice amount of shares, and it's only thanks to him that there's an ASIC coming (one year of work already on optimizing Xilinx code).

Thoughts?

These numbers look sensible to me!

Would this number be viable for a 1 to 1 share swap?  How many shares have currently been issued and are owned by the public.  If that number is or will exceed 9,000,000, then that will not work.  Here's my suggestion for issuing shares.

10,000,000 Total (if possible)

4,500,000 are issued to the public all at once
2,000,000 are held by VMC to pay overhead, Ken's salary, etc.
3,500,000 are also held by VMC and all dividends that are paid to these will be reinvested into the company.

At no point or time should Ken or VMC be able to increase shares, or sell to the public any of the 5.5M that are held by VMC.

The total number of shares does not matter much, as the price per share will fall in accordingly. Offering more shares to the public if needed is a benefit to VMC, not a drawback. What if VMC needs more capital now, but don't has enough dividends to cover it?

- The public holds around 6M AMC shares, with around 3-4M more to be sold at .0025 for the NRE.
- Ken should be intitled to around 50-70% of the total shares, for all the work he has done so far and continues to do.
- VMC should hold no shares. Reinvestment cash should be taken as a cut from profits before issuing dividends. Having always a fixed % for reinvestment doesn't make sense in the long term.

Then in that case, 15M go to overhead and 5M remain on reserve (or something to that nature) to be issued to the public on an "as needed" basis only.  Once those 5M are issued, that's it, no more.  Otherwise, Ken will eventually be called out again for trying to manipulate the market again.