[GLBSE] BDK -- LIQUIDATING UNDER NEGATIVE EQUITY PROVISION --

[Kluge]

I have few questions.

IPO: An initial public offering (IPO) or stock market launch, is the first sale of stock by a company to the public.

Why do you keep calling it IPO? You do not offer any stock to investors. To me it looks like you are borrowing money for your operations without giving up a slice of your company. Those are not bonds either, because you are not offering a fixed return from the investment.

...These shares are non-voting and do not represent equity

Why do you keep calling it "shares"? Shares usually mean share of stock aka slice of a company's equity. Shares of what? Share of outstanding loans with no guaranteed interest nor maturity date? As I understand, you are not required to buy them back so you can just lift your hat and "say thank you". Did I misunderstood something?

Until after August 2nd, I will be issuing up to 5,000 shares on the second day of each month. Up to 4,000 of those shares can be pre-purchased early. The remaining 1,000 will be sold on the open market through an ask order at the IPO price I determine before-hand. ...

Every time I offer profit shares to the public, equity and (ideally) dividends increase. Each month, this means 4.5% of BDK's profits are more valuable than the previous month's.

  What you are saying is when this "soup" gets watered down every month, a spoonful of it will be worth more? This makes no sense at all.
Every month you ask for more money to pay out dividends to previous owners of "buttons" and make it look like the value of those "buttons" has gone up?

If I have misunderstood how this works, please explain in more detail.
Thank you

As for IPO & shares -- that's a misrepresentation on my part. I've tried to clarify it, and had trouble when originally naming it which is why it's a "hybrid instrument." They're more of a floating bond where the variable interest is determined by net operating profits.

As for the "soup" getting watered down - it's really being thickened. Previous BDK investment money is used to lend and purchase shares in bulk, either to flip or hold for dividends. Normally, this should result in increased profits, usually within 30 days, though sometimes it takes longer to "cycle" money. The 4.5% of BDK net operating profit increases in value as investment because investing in BDK increases assets without creating fixed-rate debt - BUT, it doesn't dilute the value of previous offerings. Those who got in last month paid ~.055/unit and have already received >10% of what they put in. For instance - this month's offering is the second wave of bonds/shares/whatever being issued. While it's also for 4.5% of BDK's monthly profits, that doesn't dilute the previous buyers' investment - they still will hold 4.5%, and that wave of investors always will while they hold BDK units - future offerings only increase the value of BDK unit holdings because BDK *should* be increasing profits with increased money invested in BDK. What's being diluted is my own cut of the profits each time I make a new offering, so I need to make up for that by bringing in enough money for my own "monthly split" to increase in value as well.


Cheers,

Ben

[Kluge]

Sorry - had meatspace stuff to do. I'm assuming I won't be selling the 1k units reserved for IPO today (.185/unit minimum). Regardless, here's a 3-minute warning.

ETA: 1k units reserved for IPO not sold. Current outstanding units = 8.1% BDK monthly profit. Distributing units to pre-IPO buyers.

Cheers!

[EskimoBob]

As for IPO & shares -- that's a misrepresentation on my part. I've tried to clarify it, and had trouble when originally naming it which is why it's a "hybrid instrument."

Thank you for clarifying this. I did not want to make your life harder or discredit you in any way. I guess GLBSE needs to add some new fancy securities to its list.

They're more of a floating bond where the variable interest is determined by net operating profits.

Yes and no. FRNs have a variable interest but it has nothing to do with net operating profits of the issuer. FRNs interest rate is a combination of so called spread (%) and some reference rate like LIBOR in the US. LIBOR+spred = rate you get from your FRN.

If you keep the new pile of BTC working as hard or better as the previous pile, we will be fine. Lets hope you understand the limits and do not get greedy.
Cheers and thank you for clarifying this.

[Kluge]

As for IPO & shares -- that's a misrepresentation on my part. I've tried to clarify it, and had trouble when originally naming it which is why it's a "hybrid instrument."

Thank you for clarifying this. I did not want to make your life harder or discredit you in any way. I guess GLBSE needs to add some new fancy securities to its list.

They're more of a floating bond where the variable interest is determined by net operating profits.

Yes and no. FRNs have a variable interest but it has nothing to do with net operating profits of the issuer. FRNs interest rate is a combination of so called spread (%) and some reference rate like LIBOR in the US. LIBOR+spred = rate you get from your FRN.

If you keep the new pile of BTC working as hard or better as the previous pile, we will be fine. Lets hope you understand the limits and do not get greedy.
Cheers and thank you for clarifying this.

Thanks & right. I'm at the point where I'm denying CDs requests, now. Not running into scaling issues, yet, but I need to correct my judgment before taking on more liabilities. For example, putting $20k into Hermes so soon was a mistake. That's ~1/3 of BDK funds. Way too large a % of funds for a project too far off, and opening a dialogue with GLBSE about it was a near-fatal mistake. I over-committed myself, gave away too much too soon (I did this with the Kronos bond deal, too -- most of that should have been handled privately before starting a forum thread), and am kicking myself for it, now.

I tend to do well with loans, but I really shouldn't be allowing myself to buy equity in startups I don't fully understand in and out (and that means I'm due for learning some programming languages with emphasis on security -- I should be able to do code-review personally), especially not with such a huge % of funds. That was a mistake I won't repeat. It's effectively costing BDK ~$1k (between paying depositors & opportunity cost) every month until the product launches, and that's too expensive when it's compromising BDK's diversification. I'm definitely not blaming the dev team or JRO - I think both Kronos and Hermes will both be great products for the community and net equity-holders a boat-load of cash - but it was definitely an over-commitment by me to tie up such a relatively large amount of funds in it, and I & other investors are paying for it now.

Good learning opportunity, though. BDK should be better for it in the future. After I pay bondholders tomorrow, I need a break for 2-4 days. I'll make sure I have all my chips on the tables, then make up for neglecting family - maybe go watch a movie or something. Cheers!

[Kluge]

Before I take a break from the Internet for a few days, starting tomorrow - does anyone want to have a dialogue with me over the 0BTC dividend I'll be paying tomorrow, or anything else?

As to why BDK took a loss this week, it's due to CDs reaching maturity around the same time. I foresaw problems like this, and is why I originally wanted to do monthly dividends (and still do later down the road when BDK is ("I am") better-trusted), so stuff would have time to "balance out." As-is, the current shareholder dividend is calculated to be -4.86BTC, ~-5.5BTC after I pay dividends to BDK.BND-holders. This "debt" will be wiped using BDK funds, but I will not always be wiping debt, especially if "unit"-holders own >30% or so of BDK. There will very likely be a dividend paid on June 11th, particularly because I have no CDs due in that timespan, so the only expenditure will be ~27BTC to holders of BDK.BND.

I think it'd be a good temporary solution use amortization when calculating CD expenditure - and loan income, too. Instead of suddenly accounting for a 100BTC loss due to CD maturation, make it weekly. It would be easy to account for on the spreadsheets... Give a gain/loss per week column in the loan sheet, then in monthly I/O reports, use the sum of that column, and add a static amount I "paid on paper" for previous weeks to the current weekly amount lost/gained from interest each week. This seems like much more sound accounting to me, allow less volatile dividend returns, and would give me a better idea of how I'm doing, but am open to other ideas. Cheers!

[Kluge]

June 4 UPDATE
Dividend/share paid: 0.0BTC/share
Total dividend paid: 0BTC (-6.99BTC negative liability to shareholders being wiped)
Running total dividends paid in June: 0BTC

May 2012 Net Income Expectations
Optimistic estimate: 400BTC
Reasonable estimate: 100BTC
Pessimistic estimate: -150BTC
(Guesstimated weekly dividend payouts -- June 4th: 0.0BTC/share Actual: 0.0BTC/share, June 11th - .00063BTC/share, June 18th - .00018BTC/share, June 25th - .00036BTC/share)

* Kluge heads over to the scenic vacation destination of the deck.

[Sturmvogel]

BDK down to 0.11

[rdponticelli]

BDK down to 0.11

Panic selling, surely. I was expecting something like this, due to the lack of dividends, and the general low returns expected this month.

[exahash]

BDK down to 0.11

Panic selling, surely. I was expecting something like this, due to the lack of dividends, and the general low returns expected this month.

Bids are there, but no actual trades at that price.  You really have to check the ticker before saying its panic selling.

Anyone who wants to dump a lot of shares without moving the price can PM me.

[Kluge]

BDK's been traded @ practically nothing three times in the past couple weeks. I'd be willing to call those panic sells -- I believe those were moreso over the GLBSE drama than from no dividends being paid today. Someone saw enough opportunity in those sells to keep up some small bidwalls, now, so probably won't happen again. Anyhoo - will have to just wait it out for BDK to market to re-evaluate BDK once some solid dividends come out. At this time, I'm not intending to offer more than 500 units next month. 500 "pre-IPO", none reserved for offering date - but I'll wait to make a more firm commitment for 2-3 weeks when I can have a better gauge of the market on July 2nd. Should have a solid month in July, so will likely offer maximum amount again in August.

* Kluge heads back out to vacation, which is actually just another Chrome tab with a non-business spreadsheet.

[Kluge]

I'm alive! Kicked caffeine while on "vacation." 8 cups coffee per day -> no caffeine intake. - And I didn't kill myself!

Will place some phone calls today, see how everything's going, roll out the "amortization" update on the spreadsheet (not sure why I thought it'd be "easy" at first -- once everything's updated, it should be easy, though), add fees & profits from GLBSE trades to the spreadsheet (I've been getting lazy with that), then get to the PM backlog tomorrow. Also working on mechanics for "BDK-BLoC." "LoC" may be a giveaway.  

ETA: Noticed some other things I really need to fix on spreadsheet. "Amortization" update may need to be put off until tomorrow.
ETA2: I also bought back 10k BDK.BND units @ face value a day or two ago, so profits will likely be a bit higher than originally estimated.
ETA3: May have a defaulter. Need to check on it. Two weeks without dividends would be pretty shitty.

[Kluge]

I'm alive! Kicked caffeine while on "vacation." 8 cups coffee per day -> no caffeine intake. - And I didn't kill myself!

Will place some phone calls today, see how everything's going, roll out the "amortization" update on the spreadsheet (not sure why I thought it'd be "easy" at first -- once everything's updated, it should be easy, though), add fees & profits from GLBSE trades to the spreadsheet (I've been getting lazy with that), then get to the PM backlog tomorrow. Also working on mechanics for "BDK-BLoC." "LoC" may be a giveaway.  

ETA: Noticed some other things I really need to fix on spreadsheet. "Amortization" update may need to be put off until tomorrow.
ETA2: I also bought back 10k BDK.BND units @ face value a day or two ago, so profits will likely be a bit higher than originally estimated.
ETA3: May have a defaulter. Need to check on it. Two weeks without dividends would be pretty shitty.

Very likely default of 110BTC. I won't count this loss immediately, but space it out throughout next month assuming I don't receive payment. Loss = principal - amt. recovered selling to debt-collector.

Spreadsheet has been prettied up a bit. I'm still debating how to handle accounting for the "liability" of BDK in the event of a forced buyback. It's really "my" liability, not BDK's, but these two entities are so much connected, it takes some thought... I mean... if I file for bankruptcy, I wouldn't cede my BTC holdings. BDK would still operate. OTOH, if BDK had negative equity, I would not bail it out by further increasing my BTC holdings.


... I've also been thinking about splitting BDK up further. Since BDK has transformed dramatically from what it was at the time of the IPO, and become much more an investment bank than a "lending operation," and I'm a bit more comfortable with issuing securities... I think I want to create "subsidiary funds" of BDK. My idea is to create 5 or so securities, each with a specific investment category: BDK.FND.MINING (self-explanatory), BDK.FND.BTCSEC (investment in non-mining industrial and commercial Bitcoin-related ventures such as Kronos, BitVPS, and GPUMoney), BDK.FND.USDSEC (investment in industrial and commercial ventures unrelated to Bitcoin -- there were some interesting loan requests in the business loan form I posted a while back -- I was expecting more stuff along the lines of BitVPS, but instead found requests from people opening "deluxe" massage parlors in Canada, and a fellow doing something with lasers which was way over my head), BDK.FND.INTERESTFREE (gratuity-based loans to reputable individuals, with no gratuity required), and BDK.FND.ABNORMAL (the weird shit. Satoshis Daemon, IMPACT, Bioethanol -- I'm sure I could find odder [and profitable!] investments if someone gave me the funds to do so - though that's certainly not encouragement to do so ).

Anyhoo, BDK would take 10% off the TOP of these funds' net profit. No profit, nothing for BDK from that fund. However, by splitting everything up, BDK also minimizes its potential reportable losses (less the security revaluations I post, and need to do again soon). Additionally, investors are able to invest in the sector they choose, or they may continue to invest directly in BDK so they're exposed (for better or worse) to all the different sectors BDK's currently in. BDK will likely keep interest-bearing loans to itself, and BDK-BLoC is expected to bring a lot of new, safe, profitable business that way. BDK would do equity-swaps with these funds, but this can only be done before the IPO, with the deals posted publicly, to ensure I am not allowed to do any scammy nonsense where BDK receives more than FMV for its holdings. For what BDK invests using securities, it would receive fund units and receive dividends as any other normal unit-holder. From that point on, if BDK wants to invest in one of these funds, it must send that fund BTC. Wallets would be kept totally separated.

To summarize that, BDK would be split up 6 ways. Five "subsidiary funds," with interest-bearing loans staying with BDK, the parent company. BDK will swap securities with these various subsidiary funds, receiving, for example, 500BTC worth of BDK.FND.MINING for 500BTC worth of YABMC. BDK's profits will remain exactly the same, except it will also collect an additional 10% off the top of these various funds' net profits. So... say 50% of total BDK.FND.MINING units are held by BDK, 50% by others. In that scenario, BDK will effectively receive 55% net profits (50% it owns + [10% of 50% others own]). I think, this way, I'd be much more willing to take on liabilities than currently, where I'm turning down potential CD-holders and buying back bonds.

(.... .... If I keep writing like this, I'll develop schizophrenia for sure.)

I'll talk about BDK-BLoC some other time. I have papers written on it as well as on the benefits of setting some general interest rates in collaboration with the lending syndicate. Eventually, we will need credit agencies, too. I think the community's still tight-knit enough where we probably don't need independent audits... though eventually, that will become a necessity - but for now, analysis of company's income statements would be adequate and a huge step up from now.... BDK-BLoC will have an auxiliary objective of prodding BTC businesses to open up their finances to the public. (rambling, again -- sorry)

[guruvan]

So - in all this rambling, I'm really kind of not sure where BDK stands.

I understood above that the GLBSE contract for BDK was to be changed - it's not changed on GLBSE.
(changing the buyback numbers, in particular) - so this is not very clear - and certainly affects traders who are not present in this thread.

It seems confusing what the plans are above. It's not very clear if these funds are supposed to produce revenue for BDK holders or not.

It's especially disturbing to see some comment about your bankruptcy? What's going on? Comments like that are very discouraging on top of news that there is essentially no revenue.

[Kluge]

So - in all this rambling, I'm really kind of not sure where BDK stands.

I understood above that the GLBSE contract for BDK was to be changed - it's not changed on GLBSE.
(changing the buyback numbers, in particular) - so this is not very clear - and certainly affects traders who are not present in this thread.

It seems confusing what the plans are above. It's not very clear if these funds are supposed to produce revenue for BDK holders or not.

It's especially disturbing to see some comment about your bankruptcy? What's going on? Comments like that are very discouraging on top of news that there is essentially no revenue.

Just throwing stuff out, seeing if anyone has any opinions/ideas. I can get my head in the clouds sometimes, waste time on pointless hypotheticals. Obviously, I have no intent to declare bankruptcy, and am not at any risk of it. There have been decent revenues this month (~160BTC after I account for securities sold for a gain today), but losses have been pretty hefty, too, due to having to account for 130BTC in losses to pay interest on CDs and bonds due within the first week of the month. Additionally, $20k of BDK funds are still tied up in Hermes, largely sitting there at the moment. That's being sorted out within a few hours, so they can find a nice, productive home, and start earning money instead of just costing money to maintain. It's not reasonable to look at week-to-week performance, and is why I initially did not want to have BDK dividends paid every week, but I worried there wasn't enough trust for me to pull that off. Ironically, it turns out having a week without dividends has created its own dent in trust, even if only temporary. I have the formula ready to have loan/deposit interest spread out over time, but this will only affect loans/deposits made after I made the change this morning.

I'm pretty certain I asked for the contract on GLBSE to be changed many weeks ago and was told it was. I'll prod people to get that corrected (Issuers aren't allowed to change the contract on GLBSE -- Nefario has to do it manually, and that's why I frankly don't consider it valid). I know I talked about that with Nef in IRC, but I believe I have email logs about the contract changes. I'll post it if I find it when I get to main PC. The contract in the OP of this thread is *the* contract, and the contract I will abide by. I'd send a message to shareholders through GLBSE were it possible.

The funds would be targeted at providing investors options instead of just getting the current two options - one a bit bland (BDK.BND), and one with pretty broad involvement in various sectors (BDK). BDK would effectively be the parent company of these "funds" - and these funds aren't something concrete - just probing for comments. As I posted, BDK would receive dividends from these subsidiary funds just like any other security-holder, so BDK profits on what it contributes to these funds would earn revenues as they currently do. Rather, BDK would receive exactly what it currently does on investments, plus take 10% of net profits from non-BDK investors in these subsidiary funds as a management fee. However, I think BDK would benefit beyond that 10% in that I'd be willing to take on liabilities if BDK is not liable for more than it puts in were, say, "BDK.FND.ABNORMAL" to invest in an alpaca farm that goes bust. Having more OPM (Other Peoples' Money) is extremely important because that's how I get access to the backroom deals, where huge chunks of securities can be bought at dramatically reduced rates. I'm struggling a bit to do this now with so many funds committed. There's a bit of a scaling issue going on. I have access to the deals now, but I'm uncomfortable having BDK directly take on more liabilities than there is equity (which is why I bought back 1kBTC worth of BDK.BND and turned down some interested in buying CDs).

Long-term, I believe the best way to go forward (again, not set in stone) is to do a forced buyback toward the end of the year, own all of BDK without buyback liability (I think creating "BDK" may've been a mistake on my part thinking now of all the other ways I could've gone about this), then have anyone with interest in investing with me either buy BDK.BND or one of the "funds."


Any other questions - throw 'em at me while I'm up. Cheers!

ETA: And now I'm down. See y'all tomorrow.

[Kluge]

June 11 UPDATE
Dividend/share paid: 0.00121358BTC/share
Total dividend paid: 9.83BTC
Running total dividends paid in June: 9.83BTC

June2012 Net Income Expectations
Optimistic estimate: 300BTC
Reasonable estimate: 125BTC
Pessimistic estimate: -75BTC
(Guesstimated weekly dividend payouts -- June 4th: 0.0BTC/share Actual: 0.0BTC/share, June 11th - .00063BTC/share Actual: 0.00121358BTC/share, June 18th - .00014BTC/share, June 25th - .00036BTC/share)

[brendio]

Sounds like BDK is thinking about adopting the Macquarie model.

[guruvan]

OK. Thanks for clarifying all that I definitely noted the better than expected earnings this week.

I'm personally not really wild about the way the contract situation works @ GLBSE, so I'm only concerned really about the potential effect it has on people who read nothing but that. (the numbers on the contract do not support the current market price)

I also am not hugely in favor of weekly dividends - it lessens the degree of trust needed by the investor, thus decreases the investors risk, and therefore decreases the potential reward in the long run. But - this is what the market has chosen in the short term

Knowing that, indeed, BDK will hold some of those newly created securities is good, however, I do share some of the concern expressed by brendio, above. It's a lot of debt, with not a lot of tangible equity. While most investors are shying away from equity deals, IMO, any one entity with too many debt deals, and no equity offering is starting to look  more risky. Even more concerning if you continue to release additional shares of existing offerings also. In reality, if done correctly,

From other discussions, it seems like a 10% management fee for the funds is a little high. YMMV, of course

Long-term, I believe the best way to go forward (again, not set in stone) is to do a forced buyback toward the end of the year, own all of BDK without buyback liability (I think creating "BDK" may've been a mistake on my part thinking now of all the other ways I could've gone about this), then have anyone with interest in investing with me either buy BDK.BND or one of the "funds."

There are several paths this could take - currently this looks like a pretty significant liability (at the august buyback price) or, really, significant risk for shareholders at later prices if share prices do not significantly increase. So - the date of the buyback is probably very significant.

[Kluge]

For the sake of clarity, the price I'll pay when I initiate a buyback (assuming it's after August 2nd, which it almost certainly will be) is ((.32+5daywtdavg)/2), so even if the 5-day weighted average trade price of BDK some time in October were .1, I'd be buying back @ .21BTC/share. I wouldn't be too willing to listen to unitholders' complaints at that price given I've earned ~.11BTC/share from issuing and selling BDK so far. 


With that in mind, I'd like to state it's very possible I will not be issuing an IPO on July - possibly August, too, and want to point out that I'm not contractually obligated to actually issue and sell shares on the 2nd day of each month until August 2nd. There will be an IPO when I believe the price justifies the time and buyback liability (noting an offering can only occur on July 2nd or August 2nd, until August 3rd, when I can issue & sell whenever I please). I have also reconsidered the multiple funds idea, and will not be going forward with it. I doubt, even with a 10% fee off the top, there's enough potential profit to justify the time.

I will be a bit less talkative in this thread and with unit-holders. I'm at my peak workload right now and have a backlog of PMs I need to get to again. I will not be reducing my commitment to BDK operations, but I promise to spend much less time thinking about new securities to issue. 

[brendio]

[...] however, I do share some of the concern expressed by brendio, above. [...]

It's a moot point now that the satellite fund model is off the table, but I would like to clarify my above post. The Macquarie model was highly profitable for Macquarie during the boom and the reasoning behind it is similar to Ben's thoughts using it with BDK. It segregates the risk, while still benefiting from some of the upside. The ones getting the rawer deal is the investors in the satellite funds, but Macquarie found plenty of takers for their funds and I think there are plenty of suckers willing investors in the bitcoin world to fuel the model here for a while yet. 

[Kluge]

Finally got around to finding the email I sent to GLBSE about the contract change:

From: "B.R." <benjm00@gmail.com>
To: "GLBSE Support" <support@glbse.com>
Subject: Re: Contract Changes
Date: Wednesday, May 09, 2012 4:00 PM

Oh. While you're poking around in the DB - any chance I could have BDK.BND
launch ASAP? I think it's supposed to go live in ~6 hours, but I'd like to
get to barking for it before going to sleep.

Cheers & thanks always for the help.

On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 3:55 PM, B.R. <benjm00@gmail.com> wrote:

> Howdy. I'd like to have two contract changes committed. First, the BDK.BND
> contract should be updated to read as follows:
>
>
> ----
> BDK.BND pays 1% of face value every week (Monday). Percentage will remain
> at 1%/week until the bond is bought back by the bond-issuer ("Ben Malec").
> Bonds will be issued @ .1 BTC each. Thus, each share will pay .001BTC every
> week. There is no limit on how many bonds may be issued nor when they may
> be issued. Bonds can be issued and sold without warning by the bond-issuer
> at any price he wills. Bonds cannot be sold back to the bond-holder except
> in case of a buyback. BDK.Bond does not have a set date of maturity.
>
> "Buyback" -- The bond-issuer may buy back all bonds at a price of
> .101BTC/share at any time he wills, without warning. In this case, the
> bond-issuer will use GLBSE's forced buyback feature to pay .101BTC/share.
>
> "Contract Changes" -- The bond-issuer is not permitted to change this
> contract at any time under any circumstance. To "change the contract," a
> buyback must be placed and a new bond asset listed on GLBSE.
> ----
>
>
>
> While it states there should be no contract change, the IPO has not yet
> occurred. No pre-IPO shares have been issued, and potential bond-purchasers
> have been alerted to the change on the forum (yesterday, I believe). The
> only change was made to the "Buyback" provision to account for the new
> forced buyback feature. If you really need a (meaningless, since it can be
> postponed) date for it to mature, it can be set to 5/10/12. It's so soon
> because IIRC, I can't do a forced buyback until the present is beyond the
> set date of maturity.
>
>
> The second contract change I'd like is for BDK. Since the contract was
> issued, multiple changes to values (all beneficial to shareholders) and
> some clarifications were made. While I state in the contract that 60 days
> must elapse after I've made the change public, since the changes are all
> beneficial for share-holders and nobody has objected to the changes being
> committed immediately. Understand if you insist on waiting for these
> changes to be committed to GLBSE. However, I will be honoring the
> shareholder-favorable changes whether the GLBSE contract is updated or not.
> The modified contract is as follows:
>
> ----
> Ben Malec (referred to within this contract as "me," "myself," "I," and
> "operator") will issue 100,000 shares of "BDK Hybrid Instrument." Each
> share not controlled by the operator represents .0009% of BDK's monthly
> profit.  Dividends will be paid every Monday, starting May 7th, 2012.
> Dividends will not be paid on the first of the month unless that happens to
> be on a Monday. 100,000 shares will be issued. Up to 5,000 shares are to be
> sold on the second day of each month for four months, starting on the month
> of May, 2012. After that time, shares may be issued at will of the operator.
>
> Additional provisions
> "Operator Equity" - The operator holds all equity of BDK. Shares are not
> tied to equity, and represent only .0009% of BDK monthly profits.
>
> "Shareholder Votes, Non-binding Motions" - While motions may be
> introduced, they are non-binding. They exist only so the operator may gauge
> opinion of those invested in BDK's success.
>
> "Change of Contract" - The operator is fully permitted to change the
> contract at will, without consent of shareholders. However, the modified
> contract is not permitted to go into effect until sixty days after the
> changes are made public. When the contract is changed, the operator will
> honor the ability for shareholders to sell shares back to him at a price of
> .125 Bitcoins per share between the time a change is made and the time 60
> days have elapsed since the change was made public.
>
> "Buyback" - At any time, the operator is permitted to buy back shares
> issued. The operator will pay .64 Bitcoins per share if the operator buys
> back BDK shares prior to August 3rd, 2012. If August 3rd, 2012 or later,
> the operator will pay ((.32 Bitcoins + GLBSE 5 day weighted average of
> trade transaction amount per share of BDK shares)/2)
>
> "Share Value Protection" - If shares trade for less than ?.01 on GLBSE for
> at least 168 hours continuously, the operator MUST issue a bid order of
> ?.05 in an amount which equals 50% of shares issued not controlled by the
> operator. The "168-hour timer" does not again reset for 26 weeks after the
> "Share Value Protection" provision was last called to action.
>
> "Negative Equity and Operator Liability" - BDK is permitted to operate
> while having negative equity so long as BDK has not had negative equity for
> 90 consecutive days. On the 90th day of having negative equity, the
> operator will be held personally liable to pay shareholders $.10/share (or
> ?.02/share, whichever value is lesser). In cases where BDK is unable to
> achieve due to reasons unrelated to BDK experiencing prolonged negative
> equity (operator experiencing imprisonment, debilitating illness, GLBSE
> being hacked and made unusable, EMP strikes, police raid, or death, for
> example), the operator is not liable.
>
> "IPO Value Preservation, Operator Trading" - The operator is not permitted
> to ever sell shares for less than he previously sold them for. However, he
> may sell shares for an amount equal to or greater than the amount he
> previously sold them for at will.
> ----
>
>
> Cheers,
>
> Ben
>

Nef PMd me on IRC after I sent those, but I don't have logs of what he said (I don't remember, either, except that he said he's uncomfortable having the BDK.BND IPO launched before schedule). Sent another email to GLBSE about it. Fwiw, 60 days hasn't elapsed from when I stated that change would take effect, which may be why Nef didn't change it. It was stated on April 28th, so 60 days would be June 27th.