empowering
Legendary
 Offline
Activity: 1078
Merit: 1441
|
 |
December 08, 2014, 05:30:58 PM |
|
Maybe they had the 100k BTC in an address, and the idea was going to be to send 50K split to the new winners, and 50K to a new storage address..... maybe one of the 2000 blocks did not sell? and so is being returned with the 50 k to a storage address?
(who knows though, i have not looked at this, nor thought about it very hard tbh ^ just first thing that comes to mind + I kinda lean towards thinking the lots would all sell, so probably some other explanation, actually thinking out loud here, but what is with the 4999.95 BTC amounts, if they were all going to be distributed to winners, would that mean that winners all won 5K ie 2k+3k bids? if that is the case then seems all very symmetrical to me)
I thought of that, but did not want to come across as a permabear troll FUD spreader! Like you, I also think it is unlikely. Why hold back 2k? Yeh, the distribution is also wierdly symmetrical  hah... do you read this thread very closely ? I am certainly not a perma bear, nor a fud spreader lol... but then I am not here to fanfare either, if there is a chance a 2K block did not sell (or did not get paid for) then that would be interesting , is all.. and yes I know it sooooundsss FUD like/perma-bear talk, but it ain't , just speculation bro. Like I said, I tend to lean towards the blocks all selling. Did the US marshalls say they had 144K of Bitcoins from Ross himself? so the 99,999 just split into 11 lots (there were 11 bidders!?) could have been split 52K back to storage , and 48k sent to winners (the 11 addresses + the 52 K , add up to is the 100k and then the 44 K in the address 12pfPVkSNPb49Ez6GDuc4DuDdw4WCDCVef is the remaining of the 144k from Ross??) I dunno,pure speculation tbh |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"This isn't the kind of software where we can leave so many unresolved bugs that we need a tracker for them." -- Satoshi
|
|
|
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
|
|
|
|
phoenix1
|
|
December 08, 2014, 05:31:39 PM |
|
I can't imagine that they sold 50k extra just like that. Draper must be late on his payment.
Agreed re 50k ... just putting it out there. Draper late on payment lol. Having tantrum cos didn't get enough hehe Or can't be arsed cos he's out on a yacht and it's pocket change. Meh, the FED's know I'm good for it  |
|
|
|
|
Fatman3001
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1526
Merit: 1013
Make Bitcoin glow with ENIAC
|
|
December 08, 2014, 05:32:04 PM |
|
Something not right about that. Wierd ... all the lots of about 5k and 3k have small amounts deducted for miner fees. That 52 k is odd tho ... Maybe someone made them an offer they could not refuse for an extra 50k over the weekend (Draper ... 2k + 50k = 52k) Still does not explain why the total is over 52k and not under as you would expect after fees Could they even do that, without auctioning them? Do they not have some sort of fiduciary duty ? Answers on a postcard ... I can't imagine that they sold 50k extra just like that. Draper must be late on his payment. somebody didnt pay for his lot? such demand, so bullish. Maybe they don't take bitcoin. That would have been faster.[insert relevant emoticon] |
|
|
|
|
|
nakaone
|
|
December 08, 2014, 05:32:22 PM |
|
Maybe they had the 100k BTC in an address, and the idea was going to be to send 50K split to the new winners, and 50K to a new storage address..... maybe one of the 2000 blocks did not sell? and so is being returned with the 50 k to a storage address?
(who knows though, i have not looked at this, nor thought about it very hard tbh ^ just first thing that comes to mind + I kinda lean towards thinking the lots would all sell, so probably some other explanation, actually thinking out loud here, but what is with the 4999.95 BTC amounts, if they were all going to be distributed to winners, would that mean that winners all won 5K ie 2k+3k bids? if that is the case then seems all very symmetrical to me)
I thought of that, but did not want to come across as a permabear troll FUD spreader! Like you, I also think it is unlikely. Why hold back 2k? Yeh, the distribution is also wierdly symmetrical hah... do you read this thread very closely ? I am certainly not a perma bear, nor a fud spreader lol... but then I am not here to fanfare either, if there is a chance a 2K block did not sell (or did not get paid for) then that would be interesting , is all.. and yes I know it sooooundsss FUD like/perma-bear talk, but it ain't , just speculation bro. Like I said, I tend to lean towards the blocks all selling. Did the US marshalls say they had 144K of Bitcoins from Ross himself? so the 99,999 just split into 11 lots (there were 11 bidders?) could have been split 52K back to storage , and 48k sent to winners (the 11 addresses add up to is the 100k and then the 44 K in the address 12pfPVkSNPb49Ez6GDuc4DuDdw4WCDCVef is the remaining of the 144k from Ross??) I dunno,pure speculation tbh draper said he won a lot with 2k - do not find in the transaction - but I also assume we have more than 1 winner |
|
|
|
|
|
phoenix1
|
|
December 08, 2014, 05:35:00 PM |
|
hah... do you read this thread very closely ? I am certainly not a perma bear, nor a fud spreader lol...
Yup, close enough to know that's absolutely true bro. I have however been quite vocal in my bearishness recently tho, so I held back - a stuck record can get a bit boring |
|
|
|
|
|
janos666
|
|
December 08, 2014, 05:35:59 PM |
|
Maybe they had the 100k BTC in an address, and the idea was going to be to send 50K split to the new winners, and 50K to a new storage address..... maybe one of the 2000 blocks did not sell? and so is being returned with the 50 k to a storage address?
(who knows though, i have not looked at this, nor thought about it very hard tbh ^ just first thing that comes to mind + I kinda lean towards thinking the lots would all sell, so probably some other explanation, actually thinking out loud here, but what is with the 4999.95 BTC amounts, if they were all going to be distributed to winners, would that mean that winners all won 5K ie 2k+3k bids? if that is the case then seems all very symmetrical to me)
I thought of that, but did not want to come across as a permabear troll FUD spreader! Like you, I also think it is unlikely. Why hold back 2k? Yeh, the distribution is also wierdly symmetrical What bug me is that it seems like they deducted the relatively fat txfree from the winners instead of paying it from their own pockets...? |
|
|
|
|
Fatman3001
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1526
Merit: 1013
Make Bitcoin glow with ENIAC
|
|
December 08, 2014, 05:36:13 PM |
|
I can't imagine that they sold 50k extra just like that. Draper must be late on his payment.
Agreed re 50k ... just putting it out there. Draper late on payment lol. Having tantrum cos didn't get enough hehe Or can't be arsed cos he's out on a yacht and it's pocket chance. Meh, the FED's know I'm good for it That might be a bad move for him. Auctioneers don't take it lightly if you mess with payments, and FED auctioneers have marksmen available. |
|
|
|
|
|
JorgeStolfi
|
|
December 08, 2014, 05:36:28 PM |
|
Something not right about that. Wierd ... all the lots of about 5k and 3k have small amounts deducted for miner fees. That 52 k is odd tho ... Maybe someone made them an offer they could not refuse for an extra 50k over the weekend (Draper ... 2k + 50k = 52k) Still does not explain why the total is over 52k and not under as you would expect after fees Could they even do that, without auctioning them? Do they not have some sort of fiduciary duty ? Answers on a postcard ... From the USMS announcement: Transfer Fees. Any transfer fees associated with the transfer of the bitcoins will be paid by the buyer. The buyer will be given an opportunity to select the amount of fees charged in the transfer. They seem to use a 0.001 0.0501 BTC or 0.05 BTC fee. So, someone who bought 3000 BTC will get 1999.999 1999.959 and 0.001 0.0501 will go to the miners. Note that only 48'000 of the 50'000 BTC were split (into nine 5000 BTC chunks and one 3000 BTC chunk). That is why the leftover of the 100'000 BTC is 52'000 BTC. Does that mean that the USMS thought that the bids were too low? Or that one of the bidders defaulted on the payment? EDIT: fixed fee amount |
|
|
|
|
empowering
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1078
Merit: 1441
|
|
December 08, 2014, 05:38:44 PM |
|
Something not right about that. Wierd ... all the lots of about 5k and 3k have small amounts deducted for miner fees. That 52 k is odd tho ... Maybe someone made them an offer they could not refuse for an extra 50k over the weekend (Draper ... 2k + 50k = 52k) Still does not explain why the total is over 52k and not under as you would expect after fees Could they even do that, without auctioning them? Do they not have some sort of fiduciary duty ? Answers on a postcard ... From the USMS announcement: Transfer Fees. Any transfer fees associated with the transfer of the bitcoins will be paid by the buyer. The buyer will be given an opportunity to select the amount of fees charged in the transfer. They seem to use a 0.001 BTC fee. So, someone who bought 3000 BTC will get 1999.999 and 0.001 will go to the miners. Note that only 48'000 of the 50'000 BTC were split (into nine 5000 BTC chunks and one 3000 BTC chunk). That is why the leftover of the 100'000 BTC is 52'000 BTC. Does that mean that the USMS thought that the bids were too low? Or that one of the bidders defaulted on the payment? oh christ I see what you mean phoenix1 ..... the shame ..... the shame <cries self to sleep>  |
|
|
|
|
|
phoenix1
|
|
December 08, 2014, 05:40:36 PM |
|
I hear ya Jorge, loud and clear Yeh, that 52k + change does not fit the pattern. oh christ I see what you mean phoenix1 ..... the shame ..... the shame <cries self to sleep> I lasted 30 seconds |
|
|
|
|
|
NotLambchop
|
|
December 08, 2014, 05:43:09 PM |
|
... Maybe a brony would.
Blitz is really on to something with this shaming bit. Here you go, grampa #1  This old chestnut again?
I'll say the same as I did 6 months ago or a month ago.
We'll probably reach our old ATH by mid summer, and hit anywhere from $7000 to $12,000 before crashing down to $2000-$2500, possibly before year's end.
We should be above $10,000 for good by this time next year.
Unless something comes along to break Bitcoin before then.
|
|
|
|
|
empowering
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1078
Merit: 1441
|
|
December 08, 2014, 05:44:52 PM |
|
I hear ya Jorge, loud and clear
Yeh, that 52k + change does not fit the pattern.
unless 1 lot did not sell, or unless some wise guy has not met payment deadline, then it makes sense... |
|
|
|
|
|
ShroomsKit
|
|
December 08, 2014, 05:46:10 PM |
|
So what's the next deadline?
|
|
|
|
|
|
phoenix1
|
|
December 08, 2014, 05:46:42 PM |
|
I hear ya Jorge, loud and clear
Yeh, that 52k + change does not fit the pattern.
unless 1 lot did not sell, or unless some wise guy has not met payment deadline, then it makes sense... Those do seem like the two most likely options. Late payment most likely IMO 100k deposit required to bid tho I believe. That's a 13% hit on a 2k lot ... if someone simply walked away - not likely TO DA MOON !!! THIS IS BULLISH AS FUCK !! Almost everyone paid for their Bitcoins in the auction! CCMF!! (am I doing it right ?) |
|
|
|
|
empowering
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1078
Merit: 1441
|
|
December 08, 2014, 05:46:51 PM |
|
Something not right about that. Wierd ... all the lots of about 5k and 3k have small amounts deducted for miner fees. That 52 k is odd tho ... Maybe someone made them an offer they could not refuse for an extra 50k over the weekend (Draper ... 2k + 50k = 52k) Still does not explain why the total is over 52k and not under as you would expect after fees Could they even do that, without auctioning them? Do they not have some sort of fiduciary duty ? Answers on a postcard ... From the USMS announcement: Transfer Fees. Any transfer fees associated with the transfer of the bitcoins will be paid by the buyer. The buyer will be given an opportunity to select the amount of fees charged in the transfer. They seem to use a 0.001 0.0501 BTC or 0.05 BTC fee. So, someone who bought 3000 BTC will get 1999.999 1999.959 and 0.001 0.0501 will go to the miners. Note that only 48'000 of the 50'000 BTC were split (into nine 5000 BTC chunks and one 3000 BTC chunk). That is why the leftover of the 100'000 BTC is 52'000 BTC. Does that mean that the USMS thought that the bids were too low? Or that one of the bidders defaulted on the payment? EDIT: fixed fee amount ? otherwise they have been shafted royally |
|
|
|
|
|
NotLambchop
|
|
December 08, 2014, 05:47:37 PM |
|
I hear ya Jorge, loud and clear
Yeh, that 52k + change does not fit the pattern.
unless 1 lot did not sell, or unless some wise guy has not met payment deadline, then it makes sense... I thought defaulting just fills the next highest bid? |
|
|
|
|
DoktorKopf
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 29
Merit: 1
|
|
December 08, 2014, 05:48:22 PM |
|
The 0.05 aren't fees. I think they were test sends to make sure the address and all else was ok. After a couple of confirms the remainder was sent to the confirmed address to bring it (usually) to a round 5k.
Doesn't explain why 5k when that wasn't the lot size.
|
|
|
|
|
|
phoenix1
|
|
December 08, 2014, 05:52:24 PM |
|
I hear ya Jorge, loud and clear
Yeh, that 52k + change does not fit the pattern.
unless 1 lot did not sell, or unless some wise guy has not met payment deadline, then it makes sense... I thought defaulting just fills the next highest bid? That could be the case, but they would have to notify them and give time to pay if that was the case Right, I think we've analysed the shit out of this (I'm certainly bored), meanwhile, price is doing nothing Fuel the thrusters for the next blast through into $380 and lets get this show on the road |
|
|
|
|
|
NotLambchop
|
|
December 08, 2014, 05:53:43 PM |
|
^Gotcha. You're right.
|
|
|
|
|
Fatman3001
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1526
Merit: 1013
Make Bitcoin glow with ENIAC
|
|
December 08, 2014, 05:57:06 PM |
|
The 0.05 aren't fees. I think they were test sends to make sure the address and all else was ok. After a couple of confirms the remainder was sent to the confirmed address to bring it (usually) to a round 5k.
Doesn't explain why 5k when that wasn't the lot size.
Maybe some bidders won several lots and that's how the buyers wanted them. |
|
|
|
|
|
Poll
