[GLBSE] BFLS - Bitcoin Mining & Sales

[SAC]

Fortunately, since BFLS and BFLS.RIG were never designed as a security, bond or anything of the sort things are fairly easy. 

Really.  That sounds like an admission that you intentionally misled people in your OP.

Initial offering of BFLS @ 0.7 BTC / share.  BFLS is a public offering for stock in an FPGA mining company with the ability to acquire the mining assets at any given time.

I love how everyone who tried to make their offerings sound legitimate by using language which has real world legal meaning now wants to have it both ways and claim that they weren't really offering shares, bonds or other securities, they just called them that.  Either you were offering stock to the public or you misled people by claiming you were making a public offering of shares.  You can't have it both ways.

He always made it clear you were buying share in the hardware less the administrative fees when converted or you could leave the hardware with him and just get the BTC produced minus the administrative fees. Unlike most of the rest that offered these so called bonds at 2-4x cost of hardware with no ownership stake in the hardware once bought.

[1714795689]

1714795689

[1714795689]

1714795689

[Inaba]

Yes, that is exactly right.  It has, from day one, been a proportional ownership in physical hardware and you are free to take that hardware at any time.

[Epoch]

6058 shares is for 1 minirig.  (...)
On another note, I will be exchanging BFLS shares for BFLS.RIG shares for anyone that wants to convert on a 1:1 basis.

I thought the 1:1 ratio was a bit unfair for BFLS assets owners, but we could live with it.

However:

BFLS and BFLS.RIG will be combined into one payment, and BFLS "shares" will be converted into BFLS.RIG "shares" at a rate of 1.21:1, so for every 1.21 "shares" of BFLS you own, you will get 1 "share" of BFLS.RIG - this is because the monetary value of BFLS.RIG is slightly more than BFLS.

If my math is right, the above ratio is even more unfair than 1:1.

Why 1.21?  Is it ($600/200) / ($15000/6058) = 1.2116 ?  But it is in opposite direction: 1 BFLS = 1.2116 BFLS.RIG
Precisely:
1 single worth of $599 gives 200 BFLS shares. One BFLS equals to $599/200 = $2.995
1 minirig worth of $15295 gives 6058 BFLS.RIG shares. One BFLS.RIG equals to $15295/6058 = $2.52476...
So the monetary value of BFLS.RIG is slightly less than BFLS, not "more than".
In effect: 1 BFLS = 1.186251 BFLS.RIG
Or: 0.843 BFLS = 1 BFLS.RIG, so the ratio should be 0.843:1

Maybe I didn't take into account something important, so correct me, please.

I agree with RHA here. 'Shares' of BFLS and BFLS.RIG represent a share of physical hardware. The idea being that one could exchange a sufficient amount of BFLS or BFLS.RIG shares for an actual unit: 400 BFLS shares for a Single, or 6058 BLFS.RIG shares for a MiniRig.

Fundamentally a BLFS share and a BLFS.RIG share do NOT have the same value:

BFLS (1 Single is 200 shares): $600/200 = $3 per BFLS share
BFLS.RIG (1 MiniRig is 6058 shares): $15295/6058 = $2.52 per BFLS.RIG share

Thus it is clear that a BFLS share is worth MORE than a BFLS.RIG share. In fact, 1 BFLS share is worth 1.19 BFLS.RIG shares.

Put another way, if a person were to convert 100 BFLS shares, they should receive 119 BFLS.RIG shares to get equivalent fair hardware value. The 1:1 swap as originally proposed would be unfair to the BFLS share holder.

[server]

Did you receive the glbse data ?

[Inaba]

Negative, I haven't received any GLBSE data as of yet, nor have I received any of the funds I had in GLBSE.

[Inaba]

If you haven't already, you may want to visit GLBSE and put your name in to release the info for the asserts to me. 

If you don't do this, I'm not sure I will be able to verify the number of shares you are holding of BFLS and BFLS.RIG.  I am not recommending you do this, because who knows what they will do with that information, but I've done it and hopefully we'll get some sort of resolution soon.

[server]

2 weeks past, still nothing from GLBSE ?

[Inaba]

Nothing... I'm not sure who to even try to contact at this point.

[RHA]

Nefario by e-mail
He reads e-mails. And answers sometimes. It seems he doesn't read this forum, so writing here is of no help.

[Inaba]

Just sent him an email.

[server]

Just sent him an email.

I assume Nefario / James McCarthy does not answer mail about this subject.

Isn't it about time to do something about this ?

[lumberjack]

What do you propose?

[server]

What do you propose?

[lumberjack]

http://bongrippers.net/media/clap.gif

Your avatar is a perfect combination with that ice cream

[server]

Your avatar is a perfect combination with that ice cream

Thanks, but I want to make clear that I'm not suggesting a bounty to ice him...

Would this be a way to get our data ? By paying Nef something ??

[Inaba]

He responded to me, but said I had to wait.  He didn't say no... just said I had to wait like everyone else.  I'm not sure what else I can do at this point.  Hopefully he will release that information soon.

[Transisto]

Are dividend retained for when we'll have full list of share ownerships ?

[Inaba]

Yes

[RHA]

Seen elsewhere:

To all Gigaminers:
Late yesterday I received an asset holder list from GLBSE. Per the email received, the list may grow some more so it may not be the final list.
This is good news as it means step one is near completion. I will be working with counsel later today and possibly into next week to finalize the next steps and to clarify what has to be done and why.
Best regards,
gigavps

I had a chat with James and he is releasing about 4 assets per day.
Sunshine! 

The list contains email, bond count and btc address. I will probably post the list with the details hashed once we have the final version and counsel has cleared me to do so.

[RHA]

There were 179 assets at GLBSE, part of them inactive.
So we have to wait not more than ~40 days in worst case.