|
Rannasha
|
 |
September 22, 2013, 07:05:58 AM |
|
Is the new warning from burnside lower key or higher?
It's mostly more formal and official sounding. The old warning spoke of "a lot of controversy", which is very subjective. The new warning is much more professional in that matter. I don't think Burnside has changed his stance. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
|
|
|
|
KCBitcoin
|
|
September 22, 2013, 07:06:02 AM |
|
Is the new warning from burnside lower key or higher?
that should give some legal pressure to the team |
|
|
|
|
|
demzie
|
|
September 22, 2013, 07:06:59 AM |
|
Is the new warning from burnside lower key or higher?
It's mostly more formal and official sounding. The old warning spoke of "a lot of controversy", which is very subjective. The new warning is much more professional in that matter. I don't think Burnside has changed his stance. Indeed the first one was like if he was holding shares, well i hope they fix it soon! |
|
|
|
|
|
Ytterbium
|
|
September 22, 2013, 07:09:31 AM |
|
Maybe burnside sold his shares and changed the wording of the warning hoping to buy back cheap  Anyway "Flagged for potential violations - wtf does that mean?" Flagged how? What violations? Serious ones? Minor ones (like not locking shares) what? |
|
|
|
|
demzie
|
|
September 22, 2013, 07:10:13 AM |
|
Maybe burnside sold his shares and changed the wording of the warning hoping to buy back cheap Anyway "Flagged for potential violations - wtf does that mean?" Flagged how? What violations? Serious ones? Minor ones (like not locking shares) what? Indeed and the word "potential" not proven  |
|
|
|
|
BitThink
Legendary
 Offline
Activity: 882
Merit: 1000
|
|
September 22, 2013, 07:11:18 AM |
|
Is the new warning from burnside lower key or higher?
It's mostly more formal and official sounding. The old warning spoke of "a lot of controversy", which is very subjective. The new warning is much more professional in that matter. I don't think Burnside has changed his stance. But to me the previous one is just warning the investors. The current one is also a formal warning towards the issuer, cause proven violation leads to delisting. That's pretty scaring. |
|
|
|
|
|
Anotheranonlol
|
|
September 22, 2013, 07:12:09 AM |
|
Why don't you haters put your money where your mouth is and buy some of the put options?
today will make new bet that labcoin do not have any working ASICS and will be unable to adequately provide proof or ship a single unit will we see same situation as before..again so called confident investors scared to put their money down |
|
|
|
|
demzie
|
|
September 22, 2013, 07:12:16 AM |
|
Any way the next 48 hours will be good for the fudsters and unbelievers to get OUT for once and FOR all.. And after that; when the hashing speaks; maybe we will get a normal thread with only happy customers  |
|
|
|
|
|
demzie
|
|
September 22, 2013, 07:12:50 AM |
|
Why don't you haters put your money where your mouth is and buy some of the put options?
today will make new bet that labcoin do not have any working ASICS and will be unable to adequately provide proof or ship a single unit will we see same situation as before..again so called confident investors scared to put their money down hahahaha whats next anotheranonlul? |
|
|
|
|
|
Ytterbium
|
|
September 22, 2013, 07:13:18 AM |
|
Any way the next 48 hours will be good for the fudsters and unbelievers to get OUT for once and FOR all.. And after that; when the hashing speaks; maybe we will get a normal thread with only happy customers Yeah, but the question is whether the price will go down enough to make money selling and buying back in. Why don't you haters put your money where your mouth is and buy some of the put options?
today will make new bet that labcoin do not have any working ASICS and will be unable to adequately provide proof or ship a single unit will we see same situation as before..again so called confident investors scared to put their money down The money is already down, dumbass. Another bet whether or not labcoin does something they never promised to do (like distribute chips to 5 forum members other then TheSwede by September 12th) |
|
|
|
|
demzie
|
|
September 22, 2013, 07:14:10 AM |
|
Any way the next 48 hours will be good for the fudsters and unbelievers to get OUT for once and FOR all.. And after that; when the hashing speaks; maybe we will get a normal thread with only happy customers Yeah, but the question is whether the price will go down enough to make money selling and buying back in. hahaha no, no buying back in for those people screw them |
|
|
|
|
burnside
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1106
Merit: 1004
Lead Blockchain Developer
|
|
September 22, 2013, 07:16:29 AM |
|
The day before Lehman Bros collapsed the CEO told investors in a conference call that the company was in no danger of insolvency. He knew exactly what was happening.
His defense was that if he had told investors the true state of the company that it would have immediately collapsed due to share selling.
You are correct and I agree 100%. The exchange does not know the facts behind the situation and made a public statement. Statements should be coming from LabCoin. -Ukyo The statement the exchange made was 100% factual. Though it could have been worded differently, the warning needed to be made. Attempts at communication prior to the issuance of the warning had not been successful. I have updated the warning. For those that are curious about what we are currently trying to figure out, it's this clause: General shareholder contract and IPO information
Labcoin.com aims to raise 7.000 Bitcoin (BTC) through the issue of 7.000.000 shares in the IPO. The shares will be issued at a price of 0.001 BTC per share. The total amount of shares in labcoin.com will be 10.000.000 shares, with labcoin employees, representatives and owners will hold 30% of outstanding shares.
We have asked for verification of the withholding of 30% of the shares. Some other users have pointed out, correctly, that other issues have had contract violations. This is true, but I should point out a couple of things. First, the ability to put notices on individual assets is a relatively new feature in the site code. Second, we've also recently placed warnings on other issues elsewhere and we have documented these. Third, we can only place warnings where we are aware of the contractual issues. That is to say that we have to get notice from people familiar with the particular issue and then look into it ourselves. We'll refine and improve on the process as we have done with most things. Cheers. |
|
|
|
|
|
demzie
|
|
September 22, 2013, 07:19:00 AM |
|
Why don't you haters put your money where your mouth is and buy some of the put options?
today will make new bet that labcoin do not have any working ASICS and will be unable to adequately provide proof or ship a single unit will we see same situation as before..again so called confident investors scared to put their money down hahahaha whats next anotheranonlul? you are one of biggest cheerleaders, however you're still scared to put your money where your mouth is on a bet.. because it is 100% chance of loss once you put it down, no chance to recover portion of money, unlike shares where you can offload them to bigger idiot I have to much bets open; i have labcoin shares Dont care about your ego.. |
|
|
|
|
|
demzie
|
|
September 22, 2013, 07:19:35 AM |
|
The day before Lehman Bros collapsed the CEO told investors in a conference call that the company was in no danger of insolvency. He knew exactly what was happening.
His defense was that if he had told investors the true state of the company that it would have immediately collapsed due to share selling.
You are correct and I agree 100%. The exchange does not know the facts behind the situation and made a public statement. Statements should be coming from LabCoin. -Ukyo The statement the exchange made was 100% factual. Though it could have been worded differently, the warning needed to be made. Attempts at communication prior to the issuance of the warning had not been successful. I have updated the warning. For those that are curious about what we are currently trying to figure out, it's this clause: General shareholder contract and IPO information
Labcoin.com aims to raise 7.000 Bitcoin (BTC) through the issue of 7.000.000 shares in the IPO. The shares will be issued at a price of 0.001 BTC per share. The total amount of shares in labcoin.com will be 10.000.000 shares, with labcoin employees, representatives and owners will hold 30% of outstanding shares.
We have asked for verification of the withholding of 30% of the shares. Some other users have pointed out, correctly, that other issues have had contract violations. This is true, but I should point out a couple of things. First, the ability to put notices on individual assets is a relatively new feature in the site code. Second, we've also recently placed warnings on other issues elsewhere and we have documented these. Third, we can only place warnings where we are aware of the contractual issues. That is to say that we have to get notice from people familiar with the particular issue and then look into it ourselves. We'll refine and improve on the process as we have done with most things. Cheers. So in short; its a locked shares issue? |
|
|
|
|
|
Bitcycle
|
|
September 22, 2013, 07:20:39 AM |
|
General shareholder contract and IPO information
Labcoin.com aims to raise 7.000 Bitcoin (BTC) through the issue of 7.000.000 shares in the IPO. The shares will be issued at a price of 0.001 BTC per share. The total amount of shares in labcoin.com will be 10.000.000 shares, with labcoin employees, representatives and owners will hold 30% of outstanding shares.
We have asked for verification of the withholding of 30% of the shares. This doesn't say they will withhold 30%. It says they will hold 30%. Which means at the time of offering. Nothing in this implies that they will continue to hold them. Now, they've said in a different venue that they will not sell 75% of their holdings, but that's a different thing altogether. If this is your basis, it's wrong. |
|
|
|
|
|
Ytterbium
|
|
September 22, 2013, 07:21:46 AM |
|
I don't think the locked shares thing is a big deal, but that warning needs to be cleared up ASAP.
|
|
|
|
|
Anotheranonlol
|
|
September 22, 2013, 07:23:06 AM |
|
I have to much bets open; i have labcoin shares Dont care about your ego.. a typical and unsurprising response from loudest barker |
|
|
|
|
Ytterbium
|
|
September 22, 2013, 07:23:16 AM |
|
General shareholder contract and IPO information
Labcoin.com aims to raise 7.000 Bitcoin (BTC) through the issue of 7.000.000 shares in the IPO. The shares will be issued at a price of 0.001 BTC per share. The total amount of shares in labcoin.com will be 10.000.000 shares, with labcoin employees, representatives and owners will hold 30% of outstanding shares.
We have asked for verification of the withholding of 30% of the shares. This doesn't say they will withhold 30%. It says they will hold 30%. Which means at the time of offering. Nothing in this implies that they will continue to hold them. Now, they've said in a different venue that they will not sell 75% of their holdings, but that's a different thing altogether. If this is your basis, it's wrong. Yeah, it was pretty clear at the time that "Holding 30%" meant that when the shares were issued, 30% would go to labcoin staff. It was later that they said they would lock their shares. They later said they wouldn't sell more then 75%, and then TheSwede said he was working on a solution to lock those shares down. |
|
|
|
BitThink
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 882
Merit: 1000
|
|
September 22, 2013, 07:23:31 AM |
|
General shareholder contract and IPO information
Labcoin.com aims to raise 7.000 Bitcoin (BTC) through the issue of 7.000.000 shares in the IPO. The shares will be issued at a price of 0.001 BTC per share. The total amount of shares in labcoin.com will be 10.000.000 shares, with labcoin employees, representatives and owners will hold 30% of outstanding shares.
We have asked for verification of the withholding of 30% of the shares. This doesn't say they will withhold 30%. It says they will hold 30%. Which means at the time of offering. Nothing in this implies that they will continue to hold them. Now, they've said in a different venue that they will not sell 75% of their holdings, but that's a different thing altogether. If this is your basis, it's wrong. The point is they have not told burnside which are their accounts yet. |
|
|
|
|
burnside
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1106
Merit: 1004
Lead Blockchain Developer
|
|
September 22, 2013, 07:23:50 AM |
|
Maybe burnside sold his shares and changed the wording of the warning hoping to buy back cheap Anyway "Flagged for potential violations - wtf does that mean?" Flagged how? What violations? Serious ones? Minor ones (like not locking shares) what? I have not sold any of my shares. I do not intend to. I couldn't do it with a clear conscience until things are less controversial. So in short; its a locked shares issue?
They don't have to be locked. Use of the public portfolio feature would be sufficient I would think. |
|
|
|
|
|
