[HAVELOCK](SFI) Seedcoin Fund I

[seedcoin]

I've highlighted the part here that really matters with regards to my comment. I do understand that you're converting to real equity for over 2,000 shares but I find it unfair that you're excluding this possibility for smaller shareholders.

I can understand but please believe we have tried our best to offer this to all unit holders. There were too many unit holders with small amount of units to be able to do so and we regret this. It was never our intention to deprive unit holders from the opportunity to continue participating to this investment venture but legal and economic constraints eventually prevailed. This is why we have clearly mentioned this constraint in number of units in the consultation poll on October 1st and hoped that traders willing to convert into shares would be able to reach that level between the publication of the results of the consultation poll and yesterday.

[Korbman]

I did not realize we had ceased all activity for a while... oh, sorry you mean we were pretending to do something and then, we ceased pretending we were doing something, which is even more ingenious than 'pretending we are actually doing something'... but all the while we were busy making investors "dump their coins and crash the price"... since we have magical powers no problem we can come back and take advantage of the pretending we were busy doing (apart from that time when we ceased doing that) and 'magically' buy back the units.

After all this non-activity I am anxious to take more days off being busy non-pretending.

If you think my answer does not make sense, please read again your initial statement, that should clarify it.

Oh dear, apparently I struck a chord on this one, and it's resonating well.

It seems your definition of activity is slightly different than mine. After all, if I'm working hard to make something happen, building up a venture capital enterprise in the process, I'd love to show my investors what I've accomplished and how far along the next project is. It's easy to drum up support for your venture if you involve investors from the start. Get them excited for the things you're doing!

From what I've gathered, however, you went offline essentially right after your second round IPO, ceasing all updates (or even hints) on what may be going on in the background. I judge a company by not only how aggressive they are in building a Bitcoin business (and the viability of said business), but also by how they interact with the people who funded their ventures in the first place.

So yes, you've ceased all activity in the community's eyes, regardless of what you say to the contrary. You may be working incredibly hard in the background, but you've got nothing to show for it. No updates. No dividends. No financials. No recent news articles promoting any of the startups you support. There's nothing going on that would lead any of us to believe that you haven't ceased activity.

[Germican]

I did not realize we had ceased all activity for a while... oh, sorry you mean we were pretending to do something and then, we ceased pretending we were doing something, which is even more ingenious than 'pretending we are actually doing something'... but all the while we were busy making investors "dump their coins and crash the price"... since we have magical powers no problem we can come back and take advantage of the pretending we were busy doing (apart from that time when we ceased doing that) and 'magically' buy back the units.

After all this non-activity I am anxious to take more days off being busy non-pretending.

If you think my answer does not make sense, please read again your initial statement, that should clarify it.

So yes, you've ceased all activity in the community's eyes, regardless of what you say to the contrary. You may be working incredibly hard in the background, but you've got nothing to show for it. No updates. No dividends. No financials. No recent news articles promoting any of the startups you support. There's nothing going on that would lead any of us to believe that you haven't ceased activity.

I'm sorry but you are completely wrong on this area.

http://bitcoinmagazine.com/17553/seedcoin-and-startups-btc-sx-bitcoinatm360-bitsim-coinsimple-mexbt-share-exciting-news-this-fall/

Most recent update. Should they have posted it through Havelock probably but they promoted it through Twitter. All of the start up companies, Seedcoin itself and CEO Eddy Travia have been very active in Twitter posting consistent updates. How did you even try looking? Seriously a simple email to them would have provided the information you needed. I've emailed them several times and got replies usually within 24 hours (time zone differences make it difficult to get them right away).

Even beyond that the companies and Seedcoin have spoke at many bitcoin conferences with meXBT just recently announcing developments at money 20/20. About a month and a half ago cryptopay announced their project Jetcoin and sponsorship of a football player.

 The information is easily searchable I don't know why you couldn't find it. If you want to stay up to date get on Twitter and follow them it is by far the easiest way to stay up to date.

[Korbman]

So yes, you've ceased all activity in the community's eyes, regardless of what you say to the contrary. You may be working incredibly hard in the background, but you've got nothing to show for it. No updates. No dividends. No financials. No recent news articles promoting any of the startups you support. There's nothing going on that would lead any of us to believe that you haven't ceased activity.

I'm sorry but you are completely wrong on this area.

http://bitcoinmagazine.com/17553/seedcoin-and-startups-btc-sx-bitcoinatm360-bitsim-coinsimple-mexbt-share-exciting-news-this-fall/

Most recent update. Should they have posted it through Havelock probably but they promoted it through Twitter. All of the start up companies, Seedcoin itself and CEO Eddy Travia have been very active in Twitter posting consistent updates. How did you even try looking? Seriously a simple email to them would have provided the information you needed. I've emailed them several times and got replies usually within 24 hours (time zone differences make it difficult to get them right away).

Even beyond that the companies and Seedcoin have spoke at many bitcoin conferences with meXBT just recently announcing developments at money 20/20. About a month and a half ago cryptopay announced their project Jetcoin and sponsorship of a football player.

 The information is easily searchable I don't know why you couldn't find it. If you want to stay up to date get on Twitter and follow them it is by far the easiest way to stay up to date.

I found that link, yes, but that's the only recent update they've had (outside of twitter apparently, since I don't follow that, but that falls on me). Nothing on their own website.

I misspoke earlier, and thus stand partially corrected. I understand the companies they support have been active. My weight on the word "activity" was directed more toward Seedcoin themselves than the projects / companies they worked with. The way I see it, money was given to Seedcoin...which went somewhere (and you can't assume it went to the companies they supported until they can back it up with data)...and then that was pretty much it. For all I know, Seedcoin may have barely played even a minor role in the development of some of these companies (especially if they had additional outside funding / support besides Seedcoin), even though that may not be the case at all.

I understand and agree with your points, and I understand Seedcoin's point of view as well. I'm just hoping for others to see the other side of it; since when is it appropriate for a company, one that raised a couple thousand Bitcoins, to not make a substantial effort to communicate with the people who funded them? 140 character blurbs every couple days doesn't qualify to me, but perhaps some people find that comforting.

[Germican]

Here's the break down however GoCoin negotiations fell through. Here's a site with an easy to read table

http://bitcoin-betting-guide.com/james-cannings-blog/seedcoin-fund-i-update-no-gocoin-what-next/

Here's a more trustworthy site

http://www.coindesk.com/seedcoin-gives-btc-sx-500-bitcoins-funding/

There still is questions of what was being done with the extra 380 bitcoins however when I emailed asking about it they said they were in talks to further fund their current companies even more. Now that is completely unofficial and have no clue if that actually happened. And I wouldn't mind clarification on this as well.

I really recommend emailing the owners of the start ups and ask them how much Seedcoin has helped them as from everything I've seen Seedcoin has done a ton in providing these companies exactly what they need to grow into good large companies. Seedcoin's leadership seems to have provided the networking, advice and I even think legal help to foster these companies during their early stages.

[mooncake]

Could you offer some possibilities why the price dropped from the initial offer price of 0.001BTC to 0.00015BTC, a whopping -85%? As an investor, it really pained my heart to see the price of such a good security dropping so much.

The price tanked due to the climate of bitcoin and bitcoin securities. From the very beginning this was a long term investment that you couldn't expect anything for at least a few years. But because bitcoin changed so much (ie new investments, the price dropping or new alts ect) people want to constantly move their bitcoins around to the next big thing. The issue is most investors are amateur investors and couldn't properly assess what they were investing in and are very susceptible to hype. This cause people to sink money in at ipo then try pulling it out but there simply wasn't enough buy support to allow for that. There were 2 million shares released but it was rate rare to ever even see 1000 share buy walls when the price was above 0.0005.

That said I completely agree the value is over 0.001 bitcoins per share as the companies are doing great. Plus the value when bitcoin was invested in these companies for equity was when the buying power of bitcoin was 600+ USD. So by today's standards not even factoring in the growth I'd feel the value of the shares would be closer to 0.002 bitcoins. Because of this I have been buying since ipo consistently.

Now I am quite happy to convert to a registered SHL holding however they have not indicated the qualifications required. Currently they have not indicated if US citizens are able to convert. So I'm hoping they can but won't know until those emails are sent out our Seedcoin clarifies on here.

If they don't allow US citizens to convert I won't be taking that lightly. I am completely unwilling to sell back at a major loss when the shares have much much higher value. I do understand why they are deciding to move it off Havelock and I agree with it I simply do not agree with the value they plan on buying back at. I think a full refund is the only acceptable buy back price but even that I personally wouldn't want to sell back at due to my valuation of the shares.

My only question right now is... Has the Seedcoin lawyer identified any thing that may make holders of 2000+ shares unable to convert to SHL.

I am more concerned that the initial 4 blocks were not subscribed fully by retail Havelock investors like you and me. As a result, the unsubscribed blocks were taken by Seedcoin or Seedcoin-related entities. Since they hold huge quantity of securities, they can dump them at any point in time, and cause a dramatic drop in price. And indeed, when you look at the price chart, you will see several huge dumps, causing a huge drop in price, which did not recover.

If the price can be influenced like that, Seedcoin can certainly manipulate the price for the last 30 days, and the eventual buy-back price.

Seedcoin has yet to comment which IMO, they should.

Regarding the condition to convert Seedcoin units to shares, I hope Seedcoin can consider the request for existing unit holders to buy back the units from Seedcoin at the Seedcoin-determined buy-back price of 0.00045BTC so that the unit holders have an opportunity with the conversion. Yes, they did have an opportunity to buy the units during the consultation window but like that Seedcoin mentioned, it was a consultation with no confirmed decisions made. So now when the decisions had been confirmed, it is fair that existing unit holders with less than 2,000 units should have an option for conversion, through buying back of the shortfall.

[Germican]

Where do you have information that the for blocks weren't completely sold and that Seedcoin had large amounts of them to be able to  tank the market? I've watched the market daily for the past few months and there was only ever one really large sell off that decimated the market. The rest were a few thousand here and there. Plus the buy walls were never very big. One larger holder of 5000 to 10000 could easily tank the entire market and according to the poll the average of share holders above 2k was 26k shares. So it's not unrealistic that one of the many large shareholders just decided to get out and sell off everything.

[freedomno1]

Still seems like there should have been more time for market clearing
Out of curiosity how was the share distribution
% of users past the threshold and the % of users below it.

[seedcoin]

Please note that as of November 4, 2014 SF1 trading has been halted on Havelockinvestments.com

Subsequent to a consultation period initiated by Seedco Management Limited on October 1st the results of which have been posted on Havelockinvestments.com, Seedco Management Limited has decided to proceed with a buy-back and unit to share conversion offer.

Subject to holding more than 2,000 SF1 units at the time of this offer, SF1 unit holders may be considered eligible to convert SF1 Units to Shares.

However, since November 4, we have received a few requests by unit holders holding less than 2,000 SF1 units who have expressed interest to buy additional units in order to reach the 2,000 units minimum threshold for conversion into Shares.

After discussion with Havelock Investments we have decided to allow one time single purpose trades at the fixed price of BTC 0.00045 per unit for those unit holders who may wish to reach the threshold of 2,000 units only. If you are a potential buyer or seller of SF1 units at BTC 0.00045 per unit please contact us at info@seedco.in mentioning in the subjet “private transaction of SF1 units” before November 12th 12 noon EST. The private transactions will be brokered via Havelock Investments upon our submission of information to them.

[seleme]

I have not get any mail from you and I had 5 000 shares.

I don't want to be paid half of what I paid for them, I want shares.

Please contact me to do what is necessary about that.

[mooncake]

I have not get any mail from you and I had 5 000 shares.

I don't want to be paid half of what I paid for them, I want shares.

Please contact me to do what is necessary about that.

Yes, this is starting to get worrying. No timeline for share conversion and no communication after 7 Nov.

[gogxmagog]

agreed +100%
we should have some news by now. What are thier strategies even? how are these shares to be issued? when?

I honestly believe this is a legit fund and has promise, but these sort of gaffs with the details do not sit well with me. EVERYBODY is doing it, shabby practices and slovenly PR has been normalized here. Hate to say it, but every single f*** up from all the various securities will lead to the sort of government intervention everyone would not like to see. It will hurt everybody. Way to go, guys.

[seedcoin]

I have not get any mail from you and I had 5 000 shares.

I don't want to be paid half of what I paid for them, I want shares.

Please contact me to do what is necessary about that.

Sorry for the delay with the messages to the unit holders of SF1 who have more than 2,000 units. Havelock had to process more private transactions than expected for some SF1 unit holders to reach the 2,000 units threshold. We also wanted to make sure unit holders had ample time to let us know if they wished to buy more units before initiating the conversion process. We should get the final feedback from our lawyers on Monday Dec 1st and send an email to the unit holders with more than 2,000 units during the week of Monday 1st. Although delayed please rest assured we are working on the logistics of the conversion process and we will proceed with this operation as previously announced. Thank you.

[seedcoin]

reply to AcoinL.L.C

Seedcoin doesn't provide enough capital for the amount of equity they want (15% equity is absurd)
-> equity varies from startup to startup

especially since Seedcoin's management team doesn't have much experience
-> a co-founder of Seedcoin has worked for banks, central banks and IT for the last 20 years (it seems finance and IT are a good combination for identifying startups with potential in the cryptocurrency space), another co-founder has 10 years experience in private equity and VC investments.

 and Seedcoin is unknown to many VC's (i.e. they don't have a network)
-> we know many VCs and investors, and Seedcoin startups have been in contact with many VCs as well

Better companies would apply to better incubator / accelerator programs, such as boost, TechStars, or Y Combinator, among the numerous ones out there that are better established.
-> anyone is free to apply to other incubators or accelerator programs, we respect the ones you mention. Please appreciate we have started an incubator specially focused on Bitcoin startups, obviously it would have been difficult to do so 4 or 5 years ago when bitcoin was unknown to most. We started in Summer of 2013 and in that space we are among the early investing and incubating pioneers. Fyi we have contacts with Silicon Valley based incubators and they respect our work.

CoinSimple has a whopping 16 fans on Facebook, doesn't offer a product that brings much value to vendors. I can't see them signing over 50 vendors.
-> your opinion solely, CoinSimple's team has been working hard to deliver a great product enabling vendors to accept bitcoin very easily and the team includes famous members of the crypto currency world

Hive great product, poor monetization ability and to much competition.
-> should entrepreneurs stop innovating in sectors where there is 'too much competition'?? this kind of arguments would apply to many successful startups

While bitSIM has a solid management team, their products are to techy for the average user. Not to mention open source wallets (such as Bread) destroy bitSIM's market for smartphones.
-> have you ever used BitSIM? your comments demonstrate you are not familiar with the product.

CryptoPay limited market potential. To late to the game, and not enough funding to compete with existing larger players.
-> is market potential for Cryptopay the same that is pushing the valuation of companies like BitPay or Coinbase well above the USD100m mark? funding is an issue for all startups...

BitcoinATM360 leases Bitcoin ATM's. Not a terrible idea, just very limited market. My bet, is that annual profit won't ever break 25k.
-> BitcoinATM360 does more than leasing Bitcoin ATMs. 'My bet' are the key words here... for disclosure BitcoinATM360 is backed by Seedcoin but has not been financed via SF1.

mexbtc as with other providers, limited market with large market share leaders already inplace. The bitcoin economy isn't large enough to support several large companies in each business sector.
-> then let's hope meXBT continues being the leader on its market in Mexico... Mexico and Latin America have a great potential, meXBT is well positioned to benefit from that potential.
I would also like to draw your attention to the fact that the bitcoin economy is still a nascent economy, the volume of transactions for example in one geographical sector may not be sufficient today for a 'large' player today (unclear about the meaning you may give to 'large') but could be in the future, or at least, we and the entrepreneurs hope so.

Btc.sx is their only investment with any realistic promise. However, bitfinex and the chinese exchanges will give them a run for their money. I don't see them surviving long term.
-> here again, speaking without understanding the model of BTC.sx.. Bitfinex is a partner of BTC.sx and chinese exchanges could potentially be partners as well.

This seems like a quickly written, misconstrued view of what we do. We are open to criticism and comments but if you wish to share your analysis of our work, qualifications or the potential of the startups funded via SF1 - please do a proper background work first. We are helping the development of the future leaders of the digital currency economy, this is a long term play that cannot be achieved in a few months.  Entrepreneurs work hard to achieve goals in the ecosystem they envision. Being active and entrepreneurial, and supporting these talented individuals contribute to reaching this vision.

[bitranger]

reply to AcoinL.L.C

Seedcoin doesn't provide enough capital for the amount of equity they want (15% equity is absurd)
-> equity varies from startup to startup

especially since Seedcoin's management team doesn't have much experience
-> a co-founder of Seedcoin has worked for banks, central banks and IT for the last 20 years (it seems finance and IT are a good combination for identifying startups with potential in the cryptocurrency space), another co-founder has 10 years experience in private equity and VC investments.

 and Seedcoin is unknown to many VC's (i.e. they don't have a network)
-> we know many VCs and investors, and Seedcoin startups have been in contact with many VCs as well

Better companies would apply to better incubator / accelerator programs, such as boost, TechStars, or Y Combinator, among the numerous ones out there that are better established.
-> anyone is free to apply to other incubators or accelerator programs, we respect the ones you mention. Please appreciate we have started an incubator specially focused on Bitcoin startups, obviously it would have been difficult to do so 4 or 5 years ago when bitcoin was unknown to most. We started in Summer of 2013 and in that space we are among the early investing and incubating pioneers. Fyi we have contacts with Silicon Valley based incubators and they respect our work.

CoinSimple has a whopping 16 fans on Facebook, doesn't offer a product that brings much value to vendors. I can't see them signing over 50 vendors.
-> your opinion solely, CoinSimple's team has been working hard to deliver a great product enabling vendors to accept bitcoin very easily and the team includes famous members of the crypto currency world

Hive great product, poor monetization ability and to much competition.
-> should entrepreneurs stop innovating in sectors where there is 'too much competition'?? this kind of arguments would apply to many successful startups

While bitSIM has a solid management team, their products are to techy for the average user. Not to mention open source wallets (such as Bread) destroy bitSIM's market for smartphones.
-> have you ever used BitSIM? your comments demonstrate you are not familiar with the product.

CryptoPay limited market potential. To late to the game, and not enough funding to compete with existing larger players.
-> is market potential for Cryptopay the same that is pushing the valuation of companies like BitPay or Coinbase well above the USD100m mark? funding is an issue for all startups...

BitcoinATM360 leases Bitcoin ATM's. Not a terrible idea, just very limited market. My bet, is that annual profit won't ever break 25k.
-> BitcoinATM360 does more than leasing Bitcoin ATMs. 'My bet' are the key words here... for disclosure BitcoinATM360 is backed by Seedcoin but has not been financed via SF1.

mexbtc as with other providers, limited market with large market share leaders already inplace. The bitcoin economy isn't large enough to support several large companies in each business sector.
-> then let's hope meXBT continues being the leader on its market in Mexico... Mexico and Latin America have a great potential, meXBT is well positioned to benefit from that potential.
I would also like to draw your attention to the fact that the bitcoin economy is still a nascent economy, the volume of transactions for example in one geographical sector may not be sufficient today for a 'large' player today (unclear about the meaning you may give to 'large') but could be in the future, or at least, we and the entrepreneurs hope so.

Btc.sx is their only investment with any realistic promise. However, bitfinex and the chinese exchanges will give them a run for their money. I don't see them surviving long term.
-> here again, speaking without understanding the model of BTC.sx.. Bitfinex is a partner of BTC.sx and chinese exchanges could potentially be partners as well.

This seems like a quickly written, misconstrued view of what we do. We are open to criticism and comments but if you wish to share your analysis of our work, qualifications or the potential of the startups funded via SF1 - please do a proper background work first. We are helping the development of the future leaders of the digital currency economy, this is a long term play that cannot be achieved in a few months.  Entrepreneurs work hard to achieve goals in the ecosystem they envision. Being active and entrepreneurial, and supporting these talented individuals contribute to reaching this vision.

+1440!.Well Done Seedcoin

[freedomno1]

Well the dividend change of Dealcoin makes me suspicious of Seedcoin by extension
No notification of an upcoming dividend change and I'm getting the perception of a potential breach of contract and a running away of the funds first with Seedcoin and now slowly moving into dealcoin.

I don't think Havelock is any less reputable than any other exchange. They seem to be quite responsive and are building a nice portfolio.

I haven't gotten too far into the details of this IPO, but I'm surprised at the size of the float. Wouldn't DealCoin be better off self funding, or raising 500BTC privately, and going public once there's a viable business with revenue?

This really seems like more of a seed stage investment, and to compete, aren't you going to need far more capital later on?

Hello Pale Phoenix,

You are correct this is a seed stage investment, I am fully aware that the term IPO is traditionally associated to a later stage 'exit' type of offering but for most of bitcoin startups listing on Havelock or other exchanges IPO rounds are basically seed-stage fund raises. I agree I could have done some private funding and gone public later. But the IPO also gives DealCoin exposure to the bitcoin community, such as in this thread which greatly helps me in explaining Dealcoin. Re. later funding, Dealcoin is part of Seedcoin, a bitcoin startup virtual incubator in which I am involved and I intend to get some funds and other services via Seedcoin for the development of Dealcoin.

Update:
** Dividend Updates
------------------------------------------------------------
The dividend for the next 12 months stays unchanged at BTC0.0001. A typo was made in our dividend payments on November 30th. A payment of BTC0.00005 was issued instead of the expected BTC0.0001. We have now corrected this mistake and a further BTC0.00005 will be issued today December 1st 2014.

[Germican]

The issue is most people viewed this investment as a loan where you put in X and if you get paid less than the value you paid then you are getting scammed. The problem however is that the closest classification of this fund is a growth ETF(I am not a professional investor so if I'm incorrect on something please feel free to let me know and correct me).  This is a fund that provides equity from several companies in the bitcoin sector. Unlike mutual funds which have a NAV 's calculated only daily based on changes from the trade value of each stock. Then the mutual fund can only be sold back after this calculation each day. As well the fund is required to buy back at this price at any time you wish to sell it.

An ETF or growth ETF in this instance trades just like a stock. Because the NAV is based on the market value at that time. As well you sell into the market so on a small market cap like this with very little buy orders compared to the number of units or to the sell pressure then your going down quick.

The NAV is how they calculated the initial value then tripled it. Now is that a good representation of the value of the fund? Absolutely not. Amateur investors being the majority of traders and after SF1 lost it's hype and people realized this was not paying dividend any time soon (they should have realized this at IPO) people got their attention pulled to something new. There is a new listing almost every few days offering better than believable results that gets their attention and the only capital they have is tied up and SF1 is the only thing in their portfolio not really being exciting instead is slowly dropping as buy demand drops.  So they sell which lowers and removes even more buyer demand as people still buying likely know it's long term but expect waiting will let the price drop either further.

At least that's my take and why I invested over time as price dropped. I won't be happy selling back at the given buy back price so I'm hoping I won't have any issues converting my shares.

Edit: Well this was in reply to AcoinL.L.C response however looks like that was deleted

[gogxmagog]

hey guys, there's a little problem with the subscription form you sent out. It states that we have until the 30th DEC 2014 to get the electronic documents to you and then it states that if you get the electronic documents on time we have until the 16th January 2015 to get the physical documents to you. THEN at the bottom of the letter you state that if you do not recieve PHYSICAL documents by 23 DEC 2014 we have not met the requirements??? WTF??

guys, you sent out this forum at the busiest time of the year and then want us to send physical documentation on the 23rd or the 16th January? which one is it? I didn't have a lot of time when I first got the forum so I quickly read over it and saw 30th dec 2014 (electronic doc deadline) AND 16th January (physical doc deadline) I open it today and read it more thoroughly and you put 2 DIFFERENT DEADLINES. I'm sending my electronic documents right now (23rd Dec 2014) and I am getting you the physical ones before jan 16th 2015, but there is no way for me to get you the physical docs by December 23rd THAT IS TODAY!!!!!!!!!!

Guys, I want in on this subscription, I believe that this misunderstanding is not entirely my fault (Im not even sure which dates you meant?) so I hope you are willing to allow me in still.

Please clarify this mess OK???

[gogxmagog]

heres a copy paste of your confusing letter. please clarify which date is which and give a little amnesty to all us people who were understandably confused by it...

If we do not receive an electronic copy of the completed and signed form, copies of your
passport and proof of address from you by the 30th of December 2014, we will assume that
you do not wish to subscribe for Class B Shares in SHL and that you have elected to accept
the offer for bitcoin, whereupon Seedco Ventures Limited will send you the relevant amount
of bitcoin (at a rate of BTC0.00045 for each SF1 unit held) to your account with Havelock
and transfer your units to Seedco Ventures Limited. !
If you do send us electronically the above documentation by the above deadline, then you will
have until the 16th of January 2015 to send us via a courier the original certified copies of
your proof of address and passport or ID. Physical documents should be sent to: !
Seedco Holdings Limited
2305A World Wide House !
!
Office address: 2305A World Wide House, 19 DesVoeux Road, Hong Kong SAR
Registered address: P.O. Box 957, Offshore Incorporations Center, Road Town, Tortola, B.V.I.
P!1
19 DesVoeux road
Central, Hong Kong !
We will not issue the Class B shares in your name until we have received the full documentation
from you. If by the 23rd of December 2014 we have not received the physical documents
then you will have not met the conditions for this subscription process and you will have
deemed to accept the offer for bitcoin. If there is any other reason that makes it impossible for
you to post the documents to the above address by the stated deadline then please contact us
immediately at info@seedco.in. !
Lastly, by subscribing for Class B shares in SHL you accept that any former agreement you
had with Havelock and/or the SF1 Fund will expire and the only contractual relationship you
will have will be with SHL as a shareholder in Class B subject to the terms and conditions set
out in SHL's Memorandum and Articles of Association. !
Yours faithfully,

also, please clarify what you mean by "certified" copies....do you mean notarized by a notary public?
thanks

[seedcoin]

hey guys, there's a little problem with the subscription form you sent out. It states that we have until the 30th DEC 2014 to get the electronic documents to you and then it states that if you get the electronic documents on time we have until the 16th January 2015 to get the physical documents to you. THEN at the bottom of the letter you state that if you do not recieve PHYSICAL documents by 23 DEC 2014 we have not met the requirements??? WTF??

Guys, I want in on this subscription, I believe that this misunderstanding is not entirely my fault (Im not even sure which dates you meant?) so I hope you are willing to allow me in still.

Please clarify this mess OK???

Hi,

Yes, I saw the email message you sent us as well. You are correct there is a typo in the last date, sorry about that. The deadline for the receipt of the physical documents is January 16th 2015. We will resend a message correcting this to the recipient of the original email. Please note you still have time to send this information, no panic...

Thank you.