[ANN] Spondoolies-Tech - carrier grade, data center ready mining rigs

[Finksy]

http://biz.yahoo.com/e/150814/btcs10-q.html

I'm sure SP know what they are doing, but I would be very interested in what that 2.3M bought them in April other than shares.

Edit: They have ramped up mining power by over 350% between Q1 and Q2, so clearly things are happening.

[1713562311]

1713562311

[1713562311]

1713562311

[1713562311]

1713562311

[1713562311]

1713562311

[dogie]

Edit: They have ramped up mining power by over 350% between Q1 and Q2, so clearly things are happening.

To 140k revenue in 3 months, while also losing 1.3 million in 3 months. They've lost 14 million since starting, never ever made a profit.

[p3yot33at3r]

To 140k revenue in 3 months, while also losing 1.3 million in 3 months. They've lost 14 million since starting, never ever made a profit.

Can you provide proof/links that verify this statement?

[TheRealSteve]

Can you provide proof/links that verify this statement?

See the financial statements section of their SEC filing (also referenced in the article); http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1436229/000149315215003734/form10-q.htm#a_002

[dogie]

Can you provide proof/links that verify this statement?

See the financial statements section of their SEC filing (also referenced in the article); http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1436229/000149315215003734/form10-q.htm#a_002

If you just want the raw financials they're here, p&l, balance sheet and cash flow: http://finance.yahoo.com/q/is?s=btcs. In the 3 months to March 2015 they had $38,000 revenue while their costs were $3,380,000.

[p3yot33at3r]

Can you provide proof/links that verify this statement?

See the financial statements section of their SEC filing (also referenced in the article); http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1436229/000149315215003734/form10-q.htm#a_002

Ah, you were referring to BTCS - for a moment there I thought you meant SP-Tech - my bad 

[Minor Miner]

Can you provide proof/links that verify this statement?

See the financial statements section of their SEC filing (also referenced in the article); http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1436229/000149315215003734/form10-q.htm#a_002

Ah, you were referring to BTCS - for a moment there I thought you meant SP-Tech - my bad 

Dogie;

Can you summarize this company and what it has to do with Spons?   Sorry I am out of loop.

[Unacceptable]

Can you provide proof/links that verify this statement?

See the financial statements section of their SEC filing (also referenced in the article); http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1436229/000149315215003734/form10-q.htm#a_002

Ah, you were referring to BTCS - for a moment there I thought you meant SP-Tech - my bad 

Dogie;

Can you summarize this company and what it has to do with Spons?   Sorry I am out of loop.

I believe BTCS is buying & hosting the majority (if not all) of the next gen miners from SPT 

[TheRealSteve]

Can you summarize this company and what it has to do with Spons?   Sorry I am out of loop.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=521520.msg11222700#msg11222700

Arlington, VA – (Marketwired – April 28, 2015) – Bitcoin Shop, Inc. (OTCQB: BTCS) (“BTCS” or the “Company”), a blockchain technology company that engages in transaction verification services, announced today that it has signed a Letter of Intent (“LOI”) to merge with Spondoolies-Tech Ltd (“Spondoolies”), a digital currency server manufacturer.

[dogie]

Can you provide proof/links that verify this statement?

See the financial statements section of their SEC filing (also referenced in the article); http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1436229/000149315215003734/form10-q.htm#a_002

Ah, you were referring to BTCS - for a moment there I thought you meant SP-Tech - my bad 

Dogie;

Can you summarize this company and what it has to do with Spons?   Sorry I am out of loop.

tldr they signed a letter of intent to merge [buy and integrate] Spondoolies with various terms, such as a 3 year exclusivity agreement on Spondoolies products, the transfer of staff (Guy, the CFO etc). BTCS made a small % purchase of Spondoolies stock in order to give them enough cash to tide them over while the formalities get done. Either party could theoretically cancel the transaction although there are some pretty harsh cancellation terms. For example, if Spondoolies wanted to "be bought out" by someone else, BTCS would be due $1M IIRC.

The thing is, BCTS don't appear to have enough cash to make this deal work at the crazy valuation they previously put on Spondoolies even if it was a falsely high one. It appears that they were hoping to raise even more money (on top of the $15M they've burnt through), or issue a tonne of shares. Either way, Spondoolies owes me money and isn't paying.

[vpn1]

Second miss-step this time with irrevocable repercussions. First was that failed attempt to sponsor the Russian character and his Havelock IPO where checks and balances were not in place.

The second and now catastrophic is this BCTS bullshit. Having dealt with them before at the top level, I can assure there exists a slimy rot, slick fast car salesman aspect to their operation. In other words, big hat no cattle.

They early on tested the waters in acquiring used Spondoolies - other machines, saturating these and other forums with marked shills and 'established' traders in used equipment's.  All under the pretense of buying your used equipment outright. At the end of the day the sales pitch would be after an agreed price was set and sales mechanism, to introduce the highfalutin "CEO" penny stock company man you dawdle and hum and hawed like he was some sort of mega business man, only to turn around at the end of the day to offer shares in his make believe company for the hardware you have. Not a penny to their name. Trade your hardware for their shit shares.

Guy is unfortunately and fortunately a straight shooter yet naïve. They are in going to be in a world of hurt getting wrapped up in this educated penny stock company. All goodwill, honesty and all straight shooting will go crooked. In fact I would bet money the silence you see right now is Spondoolies sitting around their conference table saying "is he a drayer or what"/:

[Searing]

Can you provide proof/links that verify this statement?

See the financial statements section of their SEC filing (also referenced in the article); http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1436229/000149315215003734/form10-q.htm#a_002

Ah, you were referring to BTCS - for a moment there I thought you meant SP-Tech - my bad 

Dogie;

Can you summarize this company and what it has to do with Spons?   Sorry I am out of loop.

tldr they signed a letter of intent to merge [buy and integrate] Spondoolies with various terms, such as a 3 year exclusivity agreement on Spondoolies products, the transfer of staff (Guy, the CFO etc). BTCS made a small % purchase of Spondoolies stock in order to give them enough cash to tide them over while the formalities get done. Either party could theoretically cancel the transaction although there are some pretty harsh cancellation terms. For example, if Spondoolies wanted to "be bought out" by someone else, BTCS would be due $1M IIRC.

The thing is, BCTS don't appear to have enough cash to make this deal work at the crazy valuation they previously put on Spondoolies even if it was a falsely high one. It appears that they were hoping to raise even more money (on top of the $15M they've burnt through), or issue a tonne of shares. Either way, Spondoolies owes me money and isn't paying.

owes you money? if it is not in a NDA or something could you elaborate? If this is not to personal a guestion..if so disregard it.    ... (after seeing KNC go from a good company in 2013 to the dark side ie NUN to PORN STAR in a flash ethics wise... in 2014...kinda concerned about spondoolies falling to the zombie ASIC apocalypse due to greed as well ..probably not but just saying)

[notlist3d]

Can you provide proof/links that verify this statement?

See the financial statements section of their SEC filing (also referenced in the article); http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1436229/000149315215003734/form10-q.htm#a_002

Ah, you were referring to BTCS - for a moment there I thought you meant SP-Tech - my bad 

Dogie;

Can you summarize this company and what it has to do with Spons?   Sorry I am out of loop.

tldr they signed a letter of intent to merge [buy and integrate] Spondoolies with various terms, such as a 3 year exclusivity agreement on Spondoolies products, the transfer of staff (Guy, the CFO etc). BTCS made a small % purchase of Spondoolies stock in order to give them enough cash to tide them over while the formalities get done. Either party could theoretically cancel the transaction although there are some pretty harsh cancellation terms. For example, if Spondoolies wanted to "be bought out" by someone else, BTCS would be due $1M IIRC.

The thing is, BCTS don't appear to have enough cash to make this deal work at the crazy valuation they previously put on Spondoolies even if it was a falsely high one. It appears that they were hoping to raise even more money (on top of the $15M they've burnt through), or issue a tonne of shares. Either way, Spondoolies owes me money and isn't paying.

owes you money? if it is not in a NDA or something could you elaborate? If this is not to personal a guestion..if so disregard it.    ... (after seeing KNC go from a good company in 2013 to the dark side ie NUN to PORN STAR in a flash ethics wise... in 2014...kinda concerned about spondoolies falling to the zombie ASIC apocalypse due to greed as well ..probably not but just saying)

I'm sure it is within a NDA.  Sadly some information that is not made public is due to them.   They are a pain.  I suggest anyone avoid NDA's at all costs.

I can say I don't have one with SP so I'm just speculating here.   But most likely Dogie would like to tell us much more, but cannot due to an NDA.

[TheRealSteve]

I'm pretty sure dogie had posted some minor details, but either that's deleted, or edited away.  I only remember because I thought "... why hasn't Bicknellski commented on this yet?", and it's then that I realized Bick had not been around for a while.

Anyway, you can still piece together a few things:

I'm owed $134.50 in commission for a couple of sales while running their signature but because I signed up to the hardware option he's not prepared to offer me it in btc or cash even though there isn't a hardware option and probably never will be.

Its a shame, I'm owed at least 400x more than you and still also $0 from them.

400 * $134.50 = $53,800.  And they say there's little profit in Bitcoin

[dogie]

I'm pretty sure dogie had posted some minor details, but either that's deleted, or edited away.  I only remember because I thought "... why hasn't Bicknellski commented on this yet?", and it's then that I realized Bick had not been around for a while.

Anyway, you can still piece together a few things:

I'm owed $134.50 in commission for a couple of sales while running their signature but because I signed up to the hardware option he's not prepared to offer me it in btc or cash even though there isn't a hardware option and probably never will be.

Its a shame, I'm owed at least 400x more than you and still also $0 from them.

400 * $134.50 = $53,800.  And they say there's little profit in Bitcoin

As I've said in other threads, its far more money than Bitmain has ever, ever, ever paid and yet the trolls will claim I'm biased against Spondoolies because Bitmain contracted me for work . Its also worth noting that both CanaanCreative and Bitmain paid their invoices on time, Spondoolies has not paid a penny.

Its not under NDA (both a non confidential activity and pre-exists the NDA which was signed for a very specific purpose). tldr they received a huge sale from my affiliate link, retrospectively changed the terms from a much higher tiered commission rate down to a flat %, then retrospectively changed the amount to be store credit, both of which breached their original agreement. The ~$50k is just what they admit to (but won't pay).

[Tigggger]

Its not under NDA (both a non confidential activity and pre-exists the NDA which was signed for a very specific purpose). tldr they received a huge sale from my affiliate link, retrospectively changed the terms from a much higher tiered commission rate down to a flat %, then retrospectively changed the amount to be store credit, both of which breached their original agreement. The ~$50k is just what they admit to (but won't pay).

That's pretty scummy of them, 50k is surely worth involving lawyers.

[notlist3d]

Its not under NDA (both a non confidential activity and pre-exists the NDA which was signed for a very specific purpose). tldr they received a huge sale from my affiliate link, retrospectively changed the terms from a much higher tiered commission rate down to a flat %, then retrospectively changed the amount to be store credit, both of which breached their original agreement. The ~$50k is just what they admit to (but won't pay).

That's pretty scummy of them, 50k is surely worth involving lawyers.

Yea but were talking international laws.   Will be a pricey battle and lawyers don't come cheap.  And add a specialization of international sounds like a pricey case.

But holy cow on amount.   Did you use links that you can show all this or counting on Spondoolies on data?

[edgar]

Some of you may recall how long and exhausting it was for me to squeeze a few shekels out of them.

Genuinely sorry for dogie, cant see them coughing up even a % of that much ever if not by now.

[dogie]

Its not under NDA (both a non confidential activity and pre-exists the NDA which was signed for a very specific purpose). tldr they received a huge sale from my affiliate link, retrospectively changed the terms from a much higher tiered commission rate down to a flat %, then retrospectively changed the amount to be store credit, both of which breached their original agreement. The ~$50k is just what they admit to (but won't pay).

That's pretty scummy of them, 50k is surely worth involving lawyers.

Yea but were talking international laws.   Will be a pricey battle and lawyers don't come cheap.  And add a specialization of international sounds like a pricey case.

But holy cow on amount.   Did you use links that you can show all this or counting on Spondoolies on data?

They locked me out of the system when they went through they "disown dogie he's bad for bitcoin" phase, as if I was the bad guy. [Because I asked for payment and was refused]. They've sent plenty of data, there is no question from either side that they owe a commission for this (and lots of other) sales. This is with the manually set 5%, but I was actually on a tiered commission as follows:

Code:

    5% for conversions of up to $100,000 in one quarter
    10% for conversions between $100,000 and $500,000 in one quarter
    15% if you cross the $500,000 bar in one quarter

Approaching June 2014 I had met the first $100k of sales, and so was already on the 10% rate. The actual commission for that sale is therefore $96,100, which along with lots of smaller ones exceeds $100,000 that is unpaid.

[quakefiend420]

Its not under NDA (both a non confidential activity and pre-exists the NDA which was signed for a very specific purpose). tldr they received a huge sale from my affiliate link, retrospectively changed the terms from a much higher tiered commission rate down to a flat %, then retrospectively changed the amount to be store credit, both of which breached their original agreement. The ~$50k is just what they admit to (but won't pay).

That's pretty scummy of them, 50k is surely worth involving lawyers.

Yea but were talking international laws.   Will be a pricey battle and lawyers don't come cheap.  And add a specialization of international sounds like a pricey case.

But holy cow on amount.   Did you use links that you can show all this or counting on Spondoolies on data?

They locked me out of the system when they went through they "disown dogie he's bad for bitcoin" phase, as if I was the bad guy. [Because I asked for payment and was refused]. They've sent plenty of data, there is no question from either side that they owe a commission for this (and lots of other) sales. This is with the manually set 5%, but I was actually on a tiered commission as follows:

Code:

    5% for conversions of up to $100,000 in one quarter
    10% for conversions between $100,000 and $500,000 in one quarter
    15% if you cross the $500,000 bar in one quarter

Approaching June 2014 I had met the first $100k of sales, and so was already on the 10% rate. The actual commission for that sale is therefore $96,100, which along with lots of smaller ones exceeds $100,000 that is unpaid.

Wow, I'd be suing them if I were you.