*^*Potential SCAM WARNING*^* [HAVELOCK] New IPO'S Suspect

[RiverBoatBTC]

I noticed a bunch of IPO's coming up on HAVELOCK with common factors
1. they all end in .CO
2. they all are private whois
3. the people are highly qualified in the area's
4. the people should be able to find investors if they are who they say they are
5. background checks do no match what is said on IPO
6. havelock announces the IPO, followed by a noob account. This protects the noob account from getting blasted with negative trust.

will list sites and add info as I figure out the extent of this.

AlcheMiner.com

Provenance ASIC
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=642116.0

SHAT... its the projects real name
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=647360.new#new


Havelock IPO vetting is SERIOUSLY flawed, before you invest in any security on that site I suggest you check to see if you can find the owners, background check on them.

[1715457017]

1715457017

[1715457017]

1715457017

[1715457017]

1715457017

[1715457017]

1715457017

[havelock]

Thanks for the warning, but we do a background check on all of our Funds. Any one that has applied to be listed on our exchange has submitted extensive information before getting approved to be listed.

Again we understand your concern, however anyone that has worked with us over the past couple of years knows we do not list any of our Funds lightly. If they are successful and able to raise the capital that falls on the merit of the company, not the exchange.

Havelock Investments

[RiverBoatBTC]

Your background checks suck or are ineffective, I just ran a US background check on one of your funds and found major problems.
1 owner is a criminal 3 charges
1 owner is using a spoof site and email to a site he does not own
a-2.com to a2.com

Called the owner of a2.com the phone to confirm employment, guy said he had no clue who he was or how he got the email. Then was very worried about the site a-2.com being used.

If you would like to have real background reports done you can pay me, otherwise I would have to say your reports are on level with the IPO SHAT's name and are ineffective if not a joke.

[RiverBoatBTC]

Lets start with this one
Private website
IPO posted by Havelock

The head of the company's own website does not work
http://www.chou-co.com/cgi-sys/suspendedpage.cgi


http://www.zoominfo.com/p/Sophia-Chou/378088701

Employment History
Director of Marketing and Business Development
Alchip Technologies Inc       <-----------Why do you need the funding? http://www.zoominfo.com/c/Alchip-Technologies-Inc/1557113

Co-founder and Board Director and Vice President of Business Development
iLuminate Technology, Inc.
Co-Founder, Board Director, Vice President of BD
iLuminate Technology, Inc.

-------------------------------------
She has or does work at a ASIC company, why do you need money to make asic chips? Did you all vet that?

[RiverBoatBTC]

Did you check their work history or backgrounds?
1 Person on the about us page has 3 criminal hits returned.
Offense Description:WATERCRAFT / PROHIBITED AREA, NEGLIGENT OPERATION OF ANY VESSEL WITHIN
Offense Description:SALTWATER STAMPS
Offense Description:D.U.S. 1ST

1 Property 4 plex owned

a-2.com now look at a2.com I called the owner he said he has no clue who Mr. Thorpe is and will give me a call back.
I explained exactly to the owner what I was doing and I felt that fraud might be happening due to the a-2 site.

UPDATE: Owner of a2.com called back said Mr. Thorpe has never worked for him, and was worried about the sites being so similar.


https://www.linkedin.com/in/rogerthorpe
The email registered to Roger Thorpe for both sites but one is owned by a different person
rxxx@a2.com   Roger Thorpe
19421 Sierra Lago Rd
Irvine, CA 92603
949-854-xxxx    

http://provasic.co/about.html
"Custom system to detect dangerous contaminant in military AC systems
System critical to team that earned the 2013 Secretary of Defense Environmental Award"
http://www.denix.osd.mil/awards/upload/2013-FY-2012-Environmental-Awards-Brochure.pdf
Ms. Dorenda Coleman, the Sustainability Manager for the Arizona
Army National Guard (AZARNG).

Nothing about AC in that award....


This thing Reeks!
                                  
Why has no one hit a noob asking for IPO with negative trust yet?

Free background check provided by me Smiley
Want due a background report on IPO's use my service! Its 1 more layer of protection

[havelock]

Her other work was not related to SCRYPT mining. Have you thought about that?

Edit:Ok just read your last post. We'll see our way of out of this thread!

[RiverBoatBTC]

Her other work was not related to SCRYPT mining. Have you thought about that?

Have you asked? Do you know this?  you should have been able to answer that with you background checks and cleared this all up.

I called havelock a while about about listing a IPO, I know what it takes. You took my word for it and only asked if I had control of the website. Nothing about my personal background was ever asked, so you can try to act like you "vet" but you really do not. You are asking investor to invest in very very suspect IPO's. My guess is you know 0 about these people or actual history which makes your site a very large danger to investors.

If anyone else can attest to what it takes to list on havelock that would be grand.

[havelock]

Her other work was not related to SCRYPT mining. Have you thought about that?

Have you asked? Do you know this?  you should have been able to answer that with you background checks and cleared this all up.

I called havelock a while about about listing a IPO, I know what it takes. You took my word for it and only asked if I had control of the website. Nothing about my personal background was ever asked, so you can try to act like you "vet" but you really do not. You are asking investor to invest in very very suspect IPO's. My guess is you know 0 about these people or actual history which makes your site a very large danger to investors.

If anyone else can attest to what it takes to list on havelock that would be grand.

You never actually applied for Funding through us, you called in and said you own RiverBoat casino and that you want to raise Funds, it ended there.

[RiverBoatBTC]

Ok, I can prove my background checks lets see if yours pass muster?

Do you care to explain how you background check your IPO's or is it a super classified from the bitcoin world. I am sure all the investors on your site would love to know.

[RiverBoatBTC]

One of your IPO's other business ventures what a great rating 
http://www.bbb.org/myrtle-beach/business-reviews/beauty-supplies-and-equipment/the-sylvan-company-in-myrtle-beach-sc-90004460

[jonsi]

Havelock what was the background check for Neo???
You are a disgrase for Bitcoin!
PEOPLE, STOP GIVING YOUR MONEY TO CRIMINALS!

[TheSmackDown]

Great work people. Keep it up and expose any wrong doers.

[Lizzardis]

You people make me so proud. If I could only do a small amount of investigating that you people do, I would seriously use those skills.

[twentyseventy]

Ok, I can prove my background checks lets see if yours pass muster?

Do you care to explain how you background check your IPO's or is it a super classified from the bitcoin world. I am sure all the investors on your site would love to know.

No top-secret clearance needed.

I can confirm that Havelock requires name, physical address, Commercial Reference Letter (Lawyer, Accountant, Doctor, Corporate Entity), Bank Reference Letter, Passport (and/or DL, I provided both), employer information, and bank account information / TIN information.

They really do require all of this to have a listing approved; it took me a couple of weeks back in January to get approval.

EDIT: Also, your points 1 and 2 don't mean anything.

Finally, regarding 6 - who care about trust rating? Unless it comes directly from a default trust member, it doesn't matter. The accounts are new because, I'm assuming, they were created directly for the purpose of being PR for that company.

[damiano]

Very impressive river

Havelock hmm

[RiverBoatBTC]

Ok, I can prove my background checks lets see if yours pass muster?

Do you care to explain how you background check your IPO's or is it a super classified from the bitcoin world. I am sure all the investors on your site would love to know.

No top-secret clearance needed.

I can confirm that Havelock requires name, physical address, Commercial Reference Letter (Lawyer, Accountant, Doctor, Corporate Entity), Bank Reference Letter, Passport (and/or DL, I provided both), employer information, and bank account information / TIN information.

They really do require all of this to have a listing approved; it took me a couple of weeks back in January to get approval.

EDIT: Also, your points 1 and 2 don't mean anything.

Finally, regarding 6 - who care about trust rating? Unless it comes directly from a default trust member, it doesn't matter. The accounts are new because, I'm assuming, they were created directly for the purpose of being PR for that company.

Oh yea the IPO kit that havelock gives you.... I have a copy it is nothing really it could all be faked. How does this attest to the character of running a security? I have talked to 3 different security holders who told me they just printed the bank account and reference letter off.

[twentyseventy]

Ok, I can prove my background checks lets see if yours pass muster?

Do you care to explain how you background check your IPO's or is it a super classified from the bitcoin world. I am sure all the investors on your site would love to know.

No top-secret clearance needed.

I can confirm that Havelock requires name, physical address, Commercial Reference Letter (Lawyer, Accountant, Doctor, Corporate Entity), Bank Reference Letter, Passport (and/or DL, I provided both), employer information, and bank account information / TIN information.

They really do require all of this to have a listing approved; it took me a couple of weeks back in January to get approval.

EDIT: Also, your points 1 and 2 don't mean anything.

Finally, regarding 6 - who care about trust rating? Unless it comes directly from a default trust member, it doesn't matter. The accounts are new because, I'm assuming, they were created directly for the purpose of being PR for that company.

Oh yea the IPO kit that havelock gives you.... I have a copy it is nothing really it could all be faked. How does this attest to the character of running a security? I have talked to 3 different security holders who told me they just printed the bank account and reference letter off.

I'm not here to get into a back and forth argument about it; I'm just telling you what I know. I don't handle fiat funds, so I was exempt from the bank letter and bank account information / TIN information. I have a good working relationship with Havelock and I've been happy with how they operate.

The underperforming IPOs have been unattractive offerings (to investors), not scams. I think that Havelock is learning from the experience.

[RiverBoatBTC]

Still does not change the fact that their process is a fail, and boarders on negligence.

[nwfella]

Sounds like at least havelock is doing a fair share more than kumala over at crypto::stocks at least.  Yeah, there have been many terrible asset's on havelock as well, and it's down sometimes but all and all one of the better sites I've used.

[RiverBoatBTC]

crypto stocks has increased verification standards that's why we have seen a sudden drop in new IPO's opening. Not saying its anything fantastic or actually usable but you can see on the verification pages of securities where they have started to verify information and such.
The simple fact of the matter is both require more vetting to be taken seriously. I found criminals hosting stocks on both today one being quintobtc on crypto and the other being a new one on havelock.

[germanjew]

My 2c: If RiverBoatBTC wasn't trying to sell his services I would take him much more seriously. Statements like

I found criminals hosting stocks on both today one being quintobtc on crypto and the other being a new one on havelock.

don't really help your case, why name quintobtc on CS and not the company on Havelocks?

Don't get me wrong, I do expect to be paid for doing work, but I don't think starting a thread and giving vague hints about who might be criminals is sending the correct message. You aren't doing the community any service that way.

All that said, raising awareness about scams is extremely important! There is much and much more to be done on this front and I believe this is the correct direction to move in:

Do you care to explain how you background check your IPO's or is it a super classified from the bitcoin world. I am sure all the investors on your site would love to know.

Why doesn't Havelocks and CS make more of the info they use to do background checks public? Think about a company listed on the NYSE and how much information is publicly available on their directors/execs?

[AcoinL.L.C]

I think Havelock is a trustable exchange. Use a bit of common sense and only purchase shares in reputable business's, unless your willing to throw a crapshoot 

[RiverBoatBTC]

I think Havelock is a trustable exchange. Use a bit of common sense and only purchase shares in reputable business's, unless your willing to throw a crapshoot 

This is my problem with the whole thing about exchanges, they take a fee for their service but it is substandard. They could do more and should do more they are just to lazy to do something about it.

@germanjew I guess when your hungry and hear a McDonalds commercial you think "fuck McDonalds I can not take them seriously when I am hungry and hear a commercial"

Just because I am proving a need for my service does not make what I am saying any less true.

[joele]

What I notice to new market today is every IPO price is already the peak price.

[NotLambchop]

I think Havelock is a trustable exchange...

According to Havelock's latest "financial statement," it is operating at a loss.  IPOs are a great way to increase trading volume, hence the latest series of IPOs.  
~Happy investing

[RiverBoatBTC]

I think Havelock is a trustable exchange...

According to Havelock's latest "financial statement," it is operating at a loss.  IPOs are a great way to increase trading volume, hence the latest series of IPOs.  
~Happy investing

BOOM and we have it

[RiverBoatBTC]

UPDATE on cbcm.co

This is what the large picture looks like

cbcm.co wanted to start a mining operation
havelock is increasing IPO's for more funds to offset the negative income
spoolies was also looking for funding

anyone care to connect the dots here, I can tell you the picture it will draw.
havelock, spoolies and cbcm.co with smiles. Investors with tourches chasing cbcm.co for funds back.

[RiverBoatBTC]

cbcm.co
https://www.linkedin.com/pub/taras-lanovyk/8/99a/38a

Another highly qualified person in the field. He has worked for many, many capital and funding partners but can not get funded for his own projects.

Anyone else see something wrong here?

[Branny]

From my own personal dealings with havelock as a issuer, they have been good overall and required a pretty significant deal of documents/research about your company to even be considered for a listing.

The real problem is where to set the bar at for funds - Too high and there isn't much diversity in investment, too low and too many bad apples get in.

You could let scammy companies in and make a quick buck, but you'll be out of the game pretty quickly. Havelock from what I have seen wants to play the long game and it would bode well for them to highly research their companies, which I do believe they are doing. The nature of bitcoin investment though makes it riskier than many public stocks, and then the return also is much greater potentially.

[RiverBoatBTC]

From my own personal dealings with havelock as a issuer, they have been good overall and required a pretty significant deal of documents/research about your company to even be considered for a listing.

The real problem is where to set the bar at for funds - Too high and there isn't much diversity in investment, too low and too many bad apples get in.

You could let scammy companies in and make a quick buck, but you'll be out of the game pretty quickly. Havelock from what I have seen wants to play the long game and it would bode well for them to highly research their companies, which I do believe they are doing. The nature of bitcoin investment though makes it riskier than many public stocks, and then the return also is much greater potentially.

If they did even a simple background check, the fact they have criminals running IPO's would have shown up.
How is that highly researched?

[RiverBoatBTC]

What it takes to list on Havelock the EXACT IPO kit they send, Thanks to my source 



http://www.pdf-archive.com/2014/06/11/application-form/
http://www.pdf-archive.com/2014/06/11/havelock-corporate-account-requirements/
http://www.pdf-archive.com/2014/06/11/havelock-investments-compliance-forms-kyc-form/
http://www.pdf-archive.com/2014/06/11/registration-statement-form/
http://www.pdf-archive.com/2014/06/11/vipo-kit/


All great information to have, but if you do not check it, it is worthless.

[AcoinL.L.C]

How is havelock operating at a loss? Don't get generate 1BTC from each issued share per month + any initial entrance fees + trading fee's? They must be pulling in $5-6,000 a month, I don't understand how thats not an operatable budget at this point :O

[NotLambchop]

How is havelock operating at a loss? Don't get generate 1BTC from each issued share per month + any initial entrance fees + trading fee's? They must be pulling in $5-6,000 a month, I don't understand how thats not an operatable budget at this point :O

Err...  Perhaps you should ask Havelock?  https://docs.google.com/file/d/0BxnW49twNMNbX0tic1N6VVpaV28/edit

[RiverBoatBTC]

Interesting, to me it looks like the most of the profit is from new IPO's and the initial trading. When no new IPO's are released trading comes to a slugish pace, for the fact the investors who wanted to invest in the company already have.

This is kinda validation for what was previously said, Havelock is letting in more IPO's to bump up profits. Who cares about the quality right as long as they get the profit from the trading.

[NotLambchop]

There's also all the grossly devalued assets (HIF being one of them) and delisted offerings that must be replaced (NEOBEE[Q] and COG come to mind).

[RiverBoatBTC]

There's also all the grossly devalued assets (HIF being one of them) and delisted offerings that must be replaced (NEOBEE[Q] and COG come to mind).

I have suspected that the HIF is a way to make IPO's look like they are trading at a good clip to start. I think HIF invests in the IPO in a couple of good chunks, gets people excited about them, then DUMPS them. It makes it appear as if people are actually buying them and they are a good security.

Now they are going to argue that this is what the fund is for is to start up new business womp, womp, and more womp. But I really think it is a way to lure investors to new securities, then dump them for a profit. Pretty much making their own markets.


I have not found the financials on HIF to prove any different.

[crypto977]

All documents can be faked, so one requisite must be a webcam conference with the issuer.

A conference call with potential investors is the normal rule in any real IPO.

[NotLambchop]

^Not sure what you mean by "real IPO," but the appeal of an unlicenced Panamanian exchange is precisely the lack of such intrusive due diligence.

[RiverBoatBTC]

All documents can be faked, so one requisite must be a webcam conference with the issuer.

A conference call with potential investors is the normal rule in any real IPO.

Not only that but some basic background questions to confirm identity would be great. Name some previous addresses at what times did you live there? What was the phone number when you lived there? Do you have a criminal record if so what, explain. Then they actually verify and check it. List of email addresses tied to your name then randomly message one. Just simple things to increase security.

[mgio]

Thanks for the warning, but we do a background check on all of our Funds. Any one that has applied to be listed on our exchange has submitted extensive information before getting approved to be listed.

Again we understand your concern, however anyone that has worked with us over the past couple of years knows we do not list any of our Funds lightly. If they are successful and able to raise the capital that falls on the merit of the company, not the exchange.

Havelock Investments

Yeah right, what about Neobee which you so heavily promoted?

[MrWDunne]

Her other work was not related to SCRYPT mining. Have you thought about that?

Have you asked? Do you know this?  you should have been able to answer that with you background checks and cleared this all up.

I called havelock a while about about listing a IPO, I know what it takes. You took my word for it and only asked if I had control of the website. Nothing about my personal background was ever asked, so you can try to act like you "vet" but you really do not. You are asking investor to invest in very very suspect IPO's. My guess is you know 0 about these people or actual history which makes your site a very large danger to investors.

If anyone else can attest to what it takes to list on havelock that would be grand.

I'm going to disagree with you there. We went part way through the process, for other reasons and it was fairly intense. Whatever methods they used brought back a list of the people who reside in my house. I can only imagine they had access to thinks like criminal charges.

Also, the only charge shown was for irresponsible usage of a boat. Hardly concerning. (The one mentioned on page one, I myself have never been convicted/charged of anything)

[Aahzman]

I trust Havelock. They've always treated me well, with respect and great customer service.  However, the SHA-T IPO from CBCM stinks to high heaven, and I won't be plunking down my hard-earned BTC on it.

[RiverBoatBTC]

Her other work was not related to SCRYPT mining. Have you thought about that?

Have you asked? Do you know this?  you should have been able to answer that with you background checks and cleared this all up.

I called havelock a while about about listing a IPO, I know what it takes. You took my word for it and only asked if I had control of the website. Nothing about my personal background was ever asked, so you can try to act like you "vet" but you really do not. You are asking investor to invest in very very suspect IPO's. My guess is you know 0 about these people or actual history which makes your site a very large danger to investors.

If anyone else can attest to what it takes to list on havelock that would be grand.

I'm going to disagree with you there. We went part way through the process, for other reasons and it was fairly intense. Whatever methods they used brought back a list of the people who reside in my house. I can only imagine they had access to thinks like criminal charges.

Also, the only charge shown was for irresponsible usage of a boat. Hardly concerning. (The one mentioned on page one, I myself have never been convicted/charged of anything)

If security is increasing that is good and I applaud them. he had 3 criminal hits, But your right the boat thing is not that big. But continued criminal misbehavior, could be seen as a disregard for the law  and security by some. This is not my belief but it is the belief of others, I just report the facts not interpret them for people.

[MrWDunne]

Her other work was not related to SCRYPT mining. Have you thought about that?

Have you asked? Do you know this?  you should have been able to answer that with you background checks and cleared this all up.

I called havelock a while about about listing a IPO, I know what it takes. You took my word for it and only asked if I had control of the website. Nothing about my personal background was ever asked, so you can try to act like you "vet" but you really do not. You are asking investor to invest in very very suspect IPO's. My guess is you know 0 about these people or actual history which makes your site a very large danger to investors.

If anyone else can attest to what it takes to list on havelock that would be grand.

I'm going to disagree with you there. We went part way through the process, for other reasons and it was fairly intense. Whatever methods they used brought back a list of the people who reside in my house. I can only imagine they had access to thinks like criminal charges.

Also, the only charge shown was for irresponsible usage of a boat. Hardly concerning. (The one mentioned on page one, I myself have never been convicted/charged of anything)

If security is increasing that is good and I applaud them. he had 3 criminal hits, But your right the boat thing is not that big. But continued criminal misbehavior, could be seen as a disregard for the law  and security by some. This is not my belief but it is the belief of others, I just report the facts not interpret them for people.

If its increased it would be even tighter. We did so 6 months ago.

What were the others, if I may ask?

[RiverBoatBTC]

I can not disclose the date due to it being narrowed down by such.

[MrWDunne]

I can not disclose the date due to it being narrowed down by such.

I just meant the charges, not the dates

[RiverBoatBTC]

they never asked about residents in the same house hold.

[MrWDunne]

they never asked about residents in the same house hold.

My guess would you didn't get far enough.

We weren't asked to give information, they gave it to us.

[NotLambchop]

they never asked about residents in the same house hold.

My guess would you didn't get far enough.

We weren't asked to give information, they gave it to us.

Wait, you didn't meet Havelck's stringent listing requirements?  loo.

[MrWDunne]

they never asked about residents in the same house hold.

My guess would you didn't get far enough.

We weren't asked to give information, they gave it to us.

Wait, you didn't meet Havelck's stringent listing requirements?  loo.

No, thats not why we didn't go through with it. We still talk to them but on different matters.

[RiverBoatBTC]

they never asked about residents in the same house hold.

My guess would you didn't get far enough.

We weren't asked to give information, they gave it to us.

I was told by someone who listed a IPO with them step by step the process they went through, they even gave me the IPO kit.

[NotLambchop]

they never asked about residents in the same house hold.

My guess would you didn't get far enough.

We weren't asked to give information, they gave it to us.

Wait, you didn't meet Havelck's stringent listing requirements?  loo.

No, thats not why we didn't go through with it. We still talk to them but on different matters.

Did you go through such an extensive and intrusive ordeal and then decided not to list?  What do you guys have left to chat about, now that Havelock knows all there is to know about you?

[MrWDunne]

they never asked about residents in the same house hold.

My guess would you didn't get far enough.

We weren't asked to give information, they gave it to us.

Wait, you didn't meet Havelck's stringent listing requirements?  loo.

No, thats not why we didn't go through with it. We still talk to them but on different matters.

Did you go through such an extensive and intrusive ordeal and then decided not to list?  What do you guys have left to chat about, now that Havelock knows all there is to know about you?

Obviously who we are is not what the conversation is about.

As for why, there were various reasons. None of which are of anyones concern but our own.

[NotLambchop]

You are soliciting money through every avenue available to you, including absurdities like Bitcoinburse (well, you did 'til they decided to charge you moar).  Of course your choice to avoid the exchange with a medicum of listing requirements is my concern.  Did you get a nice new shower cap for your friend the developer?

[MrWDunne]

You are soliciting money through every avenue available to you, including absurdities like Bitcoinburse (well, you did 'til they decided to charge you moar).  Of course your choice to avoid the exchange with a medicum of listing requirements is my concern.  Did you get a nice new shower cap for your friend the developer?

Not quite the reasoning. We met the requirements.

And I'm not sure, he may have got himself a new one.

[NotLambchop]

You are soliciting money through every avenue available to you, including absurdities like Bitcoinburse (well, you did 'til they decided to charge you moar).  Of course your choice to avoid the exchange with a medicum of listing requirements is my concern.  Did you get a nice new shower cap for your friend the developer?

Not quite the reasoning. We met the requirements.
...

The only thing left is ...couldn't afford the listing fee?

[MrWDunne]

You are soliciting money through every avenue available to you, including absurdities like Bitcoinburse (well, you did 'til they decided to charge you moar).  Of course your choice to avoid the exchange with a medicum of listing requirements is my concern.  Did you get a nice new shower cap for your friend the developer?

Not quite the reasoning. We met the requirements.
...

The only thing left is ...couldn't afford the listing fee?

That wasn't it either.

[RiverBoatBTC]

Looks like SHAT will not fund, wonder why 

[RiverBoatBTC]

SHAT delisted    the great mining adventure comes to a end.

[AcoinL.L.C]

SHAT delisted    the great mining adventure comes to a end.

Does SHAT Issuer have anything they would like to say about this