[ActiveMining] The Official Active Mining Discussion Thread [Self-Moderated]

[ffssixtynine]

Q. What was delivered?
A. No Miners were delivered, he made no such statements about miners being delivered, and it was simply products which he didn't disclose to me.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=297543.msg3782916

We have this last week shipped our first products to customers.

If true, that is intentionally misleading information. Ken has been asked about it time and again so there are no excuses. You cannot blame this on people reading too much into it, or poor communication.

It's 'properly' illegal, not an understandable grey area like the shares, Belize company and so on like crumbs used to barf on about. This is exactly the sort of thing the SEC are concerned with because it's potentially securities fraud on top of all the grey stuff.

Even if the company are on the right path now, the above just put them in serious trouble in my book. If I were still a shareholder, this would be with my lawyer and the SEC given everything else and that they apparently still have plenty of cash.

I am so disappointed. Ken, why did you not just come clean? Non delivery happens, people would moan but deal with it. You can't mislead investors or buyers this way.

[JoTheKhan]

Q. What was delivered?
A. No Miners were delivered, he made no such statements about miners being delivered, and it was simply products which he didn't disclose to me.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=297543.msg3782916

We have this last week shipped our first products to customers.

If true, that is intentionally misleading information. Ken has been asked about it time and again so there are no excuses. You cannot blame this on people reading too much into it, or poor communication.

It's 'properly' illegal, not an understandable grey area like the shares, Belize company and so on like crumbs used to barf on about. This is exactly the sort of thing the SEC are concerned with because it's potentially securities fraud on top of all the grey stuff.

Even if the company are on the right path now, the above just put them in serious trouble in my book. If I were still a shareholder, this would be with my lawyer and the SEC given everything else and that they apparently still have plenty of cash.

I am so disappointed. Ken, why did you not just come clean? Non delivery happens, people would moan but deal with it. You can't mislead investors or buyers this way.

Agreed. We're gonna find out about it eventually. Just communicate properly the first time. Right now we're worrying about RTL and shares and stuff, all problems from 2013, who knows what new problems have arisen in 2014. There is a loop Ken, keep us in it.

[minerpart]

Q. What was delivered?
A. No Miners were delivered, he made no such statements about miners being delivered, and it was simply products which he didn't disclose to me.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=297543.msg3782916

We have this last week shipped our first products to customers.

If true, that is intentionally misleading information.

Nope it's just PR. People assumed it was miners - but Ken didn't say it was.

Personally I think it was chips.

Actually instead of being misleading to shareholders (for what reason there are no new shares being sold?) Ken is actually just creating 'good PR' for the company in order to keep online customers confidence levels up. He's doing what every CEO must do, and that is project confidence and put a positive spin on any news. It's for the good of the company and the good of the shareholders. It's not lieing, he didn't lie, he's just making the best of the situation. It's smart and we should be glad he can put a positive spin on news when we were clearly delayed.

[ffssixtynine]

Actually instead of being misleading to shareholders (for what reason there are no new shares being sold?) Ken is actually just creating 'good PR' for the company in order to keep online customers confidence levels up. He's doing what every CEO must do, and that is project confidence and put a positive spin on any news. It's for the good of the company and the good of the shareholders. It's not lieing, he didn't lie, he's just making the best of the situation. It's smart and we should be glad he can put a positive spin on news when we were clearly delayed.

So very wrong. Speak to a lawyer and they will put you right. The CEO is not allowed to mislead shareholders or buyers. The law is very strict on this.

He will have done it to try and protect the company but it doesn't change what it is.

Ken must provide an explanation which I hope is good enough.

[interJ]

Nope it's just PR. People assumed it was miners - but Ken didn't say it was.

Actually instead of being misleading to shareholders (for what reason there are no new shares being sold?) Ken is actually just creating 'good PR' for the company in order to keep online customers confidence levels up. He's doing what every CEO must do, and that is project confidence and put a positive spin on any news. It's for the good of the company and the good of the shareholders. It's not lieing, he didn't lie, he's just making the best of the situation. It's smart and we should be glad he can put a positive spin on news when we were clearly delayed.

Disagree. When you're running a MINING company and you say you've shipped product: you've loaded up that sentence more than enough for everyone to make the assumption it's a miner you've shipped. For it to now come out (apparently flippantly as if it never mattered at all) that it wasn't a miner at all, I can't see that as anything OTHER than misleading.

I'm at the point where I don't care what was shipped. I think that this is speaking in volumes to Ken's approach to business and communication - and I'm hearing scummy as fuck.

+1 to ff69

[zumzero]

FFS69, could you please clarify your position as I'm struggling to get my head around what you are saying in terms of 'proper' illegal.  I don't know the law that well so could you spell it out for me in layman's terms thanks?

Ken stated that he had shipped the first products to customers and in the same Progress Report stated that the 'chips were going to be late.'  He has never stated that those products were miners and has just confirmed that with Bargraphics.  He still maintains that the statement 'shipped our first products to customers' was correct.
Just because we don't know what those products were, doesn't mean to say we should be phoning the SEC and our lawyers does it?

tl;dr   Ken said he shipped first products to customers quite a while ago.  He maintains that was accurate information.  Somehow we are to believe that he has broken the law because those 'products' weren't what we wanted them to be.


EDiT:  FFS69, did you sell your shares before or after the Board of Advisors resigned and you issued the public statement?

[minerpart]

The CEO is not allowed to mislead shareholders or buyers. The law is very strict on this.

I agree with the law. However I disagree that he has intentionally misled anyone. The language he used is very clear and concise. He said we had shipped 'products'. He did not say we had shipped miners!

Good luck with your court case! I'm sure your lawyer will take your money, I'm even more sure Ken has no case to answer.

When Microsoft say their new OS is 'the best operating system going' yet it turns out to be another load of crap do you think you could take them to court for misleading customers?! No.

[interJ]

Zumzero, minerpart:

I find it misleading to write in an activemining or virtualmining company report that we've shipped product without specifying that it wasn't a miner of any sort preettttttty darn misleading.

[minerpart]

Disagree. When you're running a MINING company and you say you've shipped product: you've loaded up that sentence

I don't think a judge would be brave enough to deem 'product' as a miner and only a miner. ACtM and VMC are free to sell whatever they want and they can and do (as seen on the website) act as resellers of pre-fabbed and bought in expansion cases for VMC mining rigs.

http://virtualminingcorp.com/shop1/index.php?id_product=13&controller=product


Fast-Hash-One Expansion Case  Cyclone PCIe2-2709
PCIe Gen2 x16 Host Bus to Expansion System Bandwidth of up to 80 Gb/s
Sixteen PCIe Slots with Open Back Connectors (four x8, twelve x4)
One or Three Meter Cable to Host
Chassis/Power Supply Options
5U Rack Mount Chassis with 3240  Watt Power Supply in N+1 Configuration
System Monitoring (Optional)



The above is listed on the VMC site under 'Product'. I think that settles this legally. But please keep discussing your personal views. I've said already why this is what CEO's must do to support their company.

[gjpminingco]

Did anyone Stop and think that maybe what had shipped Had been the Expansion Cases that People had Ordered so that All they had to Due Was Drop in the Fast-Hash Modules when the person Received them, No Everyone Jumped to the Automatic Conclusion that it was miners that were shipped



You folks do realize that VMC Sells More then just miners right? ? ?

[gjpminingco]

LoL Minerpart you posted that while i was typing mine

Me and you were thinking along the same lines

[minerpart]

 

[zumzero]

I have to agree with minerpart in saying, "good luck with the court case".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Product_(business)

[zumzero]

Did anyone Stop and think that maybe what had shipped Had been the Expansion Cases that People had Ordered so that All they had to Due Was Drop in the Fast-Hash Modules when the person Received them, No Everyone Jumped to the Automatic Conclusion that it was miners that were shipped



You folks do realize that VMC Sells More then just miners right? ? ?

Exactly, this is typical knee jerk behaviour and to be honest I didn't expect this from FFS69.  Disappointed.  It makes me slightly suspicious of his intentions.  Just goes to show how you can change your opinion of someone over a single post.

[VolanicEruptor]

Did anyone Stop and think that maybe what had shipped Had been the Expansion Cases that People had Ordered so that All they had to Due Was Drop in the Fast-Hash Modules when the person Received them, No Everyone Jumped to the Automatic Conclusion that it was miners that were shipped



You folks do realize that VMC Sells More then just miners right? ? ?

That's like ordering a computer and having them ship the empty tower first.  That makes no sense.  
I would be PISSED if someone sent me an empty case.  
So are these customers supposed to return the empty cases if they requested a refund?  LOL

Your theory is fucked bro

[VolanicEruptor]

It's called deceit.  Simple as that.  Ken did not ship anything to his customers, not even empty cases.

[SebastianJu]

Maybe im missing something but VMC has a variety of products. All products are self developed miners and chips. Since the chips were delayed it couldnt be miners nor chips that shipped.
I dont see other products that could have been it: http://virtualminingcorp.com/shop1/index.php

[superduh]

... so any actual real updates? or just more uncertainty

[minerpart]

See my post above Seb.

My personal view - it was chips from a first batch that were shipped. They would have some value and we clearly don't seem to be hashing with them so Ken filled an early order. If they met the advertised spec the customer will be happy - if not they would have got them at a discount I'm sure.

[zumzero]

... so any actual real updates? or just more uncertainty

Wednesday 2345hrs GMT, recurring weekly.