[BTC-TC][ASICMINER-100PT] - Public trading of 1% Interest in ASICMINER shares

[tolan77]

I am very interested in this solely because you will be allowing transfer of fractional shares to PT/Real shares which TaT doesn't.Definitely understand a small fee though.The only reason I haven't bought any of his yet. Will be watching this closely.

[1715067955]

1715067955

[Rodyland]

I am very interested in this solely because you will be allowing transfer of fractional shares to PT/Real shares which TaT doesn't.Definitely understand a small fee though.The only reason I haven't bought any of his yet. Will be watching this closely.

Glad to hear it. I too think that share transfer is a valuable feature.

I am still waiting for the owners of btc-tc to vote to approve my listing.

[Deprived]

I am very interested in this solely because you will be allowing transfer of fractional shares to PT/Real shares which TaT doesn't.Definitely understand a small fee though.The only reason I haven't bought any of his yet. Will be watching this closely.

Glad to hear it. I too think that share transfer is a valuable feature.

I am still waiting for the owners of btc-tc to vote to approve my listing.

I think you still need to address the issue raised - that you were trying to sell shares in the pass-through without owning any shares of ASICMINER.  If that's been resolved then you need to amend your contract to reflect the change.  Last update you gave here was that you were looking for an escrow - if one was found that it could be a good idea to say so (and have them confirm it).

As far as I can tell that's the only stated reason why anyone hasn't voted yes - so maybe if you address it you'll get the votes you need.

[Rodyland]

I am very interested in this solely because you will be allowing transfer of fractional shares to PT/Real shares which TaT doesn't.Definitely understand a small fee though.The only reason I haven't bought any of his yet. Will be watching this closely.

Glad to hear it. I too think that share transfer is a valuable feature.

I am still waiting for the owners of btc-tc to vote to approve my listing.

I think you still need to address the issue raised - that you were trying to sell shares in the pass-through without owning any shares of ASICMINER.  If that's been resolved then you need to amend your contract to reflect the change.  Last update you gave here was that you were looking for an escrow - if one was found that it could be a good idea to say so (and have them confirm it).

As far as I can tell that's the only stated reason why anyone hasn't voted yes - so maybe if you address it you'll get the votes you need.

Please reread the offer.  The ownership issue has been addressed, some time ago.

It was never my intention to sell shares without already having the necessary backing. It was my intention to find extra shares to back the IPO to avoid selling my personal holdings. At all times i had my personal holding as a fallback**. And since I have been unable to secure alternatives, these personal shares are now committed to the IPO should it eventually happen.

Furthermore i have committed to making the address holding the PT shares public - something none of the other PTs I'm aware of have done.

If you can point out where in my offering the language used isn't clear I would be very appreciative.

**EDIT: The transaction history on the address shows that I've owned those shares some time before I announced the launch of this PT.

[ThickAsThieves]

I am very interested in this solely because you will be allowing transfer of fractional shares to PT/Real shares which TaT doesn't.Definitely understand a small fee though.The only reason I haven't bought any of his yet. Will be watching this closely.

Glad to hear it. I too think that share transfer is a valuable feature.

I am still waiting for the owners of btc-tc to vote to approve my listing.

I think you still need to address the issue raised - that you were trying to sell shares in the pass-through without owning any shares of ASICMINER.  If that's been resolved then you need to amend your contract to reflect the change.  Last update you gave here was that you were looking for an escrow - if one was found that it could be a good idea to say so (and have them confirm it).

As far as I can tell that's the only stated reason why anyone hasn't voted yes - so maybe if you address it you'll get the votes you need.

Please reread the offer.  The ownership issue has been addressed, some time ago.

It was never my intention to sell shares without already having the necessary backing. It was my intention to find extra shares to back the IPO to avoid selling my personal holdings. At all times i had my personal holding as a fallback. And since I have been unable to secure alternatives, these personal shares are now committed to the IPO should it eventually happen.

Furthermore i have committed to making the address holding the PT shares public - something none of the other PTs I'm aware of have done.

If you can point out where in my offering the language used isn't clear I would be very appreciative.

Sorry for hijacking, but I wanted to be clear that TAT asserts ownership of all shares it sells (and more). At the moment I do so on request, but on Wednesday I will be issuing a full report of all holdings I have on all exchanges, and with Friedcat, and how anyone can verify what I sell.

[Rodyland]

Last update you gave here was that you were looking for an escrow - if one was found that it could be a good idea to say so (and have them confirm it).

Realised I didn't address this specific point in my previous reply.

After discussion with multiple escrow providers, it was concluded by me that this is not an option.  One of the points of the PT is to provide the escrow.  One of the not-insignificant pieces of work is managing shares into and out of the escrow (especially in a PT like mine that supports transfers), and managing distribution of dividends from the escrow to the shareholders.  To contract (and pay for) a 3rd party to provide share escrow on behalf of the PT is just not a feasible option.

As a backup for disaster recovery I will be providing a copy of the PT's private key to a trusted 3rd party - details are still to be decided, it's not worth even discussing if the IPO doesn't happen.

If providing my own shares into the IPO, making the address holding the PT's shares public, and providing my personal IRL contact details (including phone number) to burnside is not enough transparency, then so be it - I can't think of anything else that I would be willing to offer that would change your mind.

[Deprived]

Last update you gave here was that you were looking for an escrow - if one was found that it could be a good idea to say so (and have them confirm it).

Realised I didn't address this specific point in my previous reply.

After discussion with multiple escrow providers, it was concluded by me that this is not an option.  One of the points of the PT is to provide the escrow.  One of the not-insignificant pieces of work is managing shares into and out of the escrow (especially in a PT like mine that supports transfers), and managing distribution of dividends from the escrow to the shareholders.  To contract (and pay for) a 3rd party to provide share escrow on behalf of the PT is just not a feasible option.

As a backup for disaster recovery I will be providing a copy of the PT's private key to a trusted 3rd party - details are still to be decided, it's not worth even discussing if the IPO doesn't happen.

If providing my own shares into the IPO, making the address holding the PT's shares public, and providing my personal IRL contact details (including phone number) to burnside is not enough transparency, then so be it - I can't think of anything else that I would be willing to offer that would change your mind.

Would have thought providing the address linked to the ASIC-MINER shares (to prove you have them) and signing a message with the address (to prove it's yours) would be fine.

I tend to agree that having an escrow is pretty pointless - if people don't trust you at all then they should just not buy your shares.  Proving you actually have ASICMINER shares (rather than just promising to buy some - as was initially the case) was the more serious issue in my view : pass-throughs should own the underlying assets before selling them on.

[Rodyland]

Would have thought providing the address linked to the ASIC-MINER shares (to prove you have them) and signing a message with the address (to prove it's yours) would be fine.

I tend to agree that having an escrow is pretty pointless - if people don't trust you at all then they should just not buy your shares.  Proving you actually have ASICMINER shares (rather than just promising to buy some - as was initially the case) was the more serious issue in my view : pass-throughs should own the underlying assets before selling them on.

I am glad we're on the same page.

The lack of proof of ownership was pointed out on day 1, and fixed promptly (although it seems I failed to record the specifics of when that change was made).