ASICMINER: Entering the Future of ASIC Mining by Inventing It

[szmarco]

It's not difficult to trade with exchanges in china right now. Every Exchange has found some ways to avoid the bank issues. I'm in china.

[necro_nemesis]

Just keep fishing for reasons to justify what amounts to unjustifiable behavior.

Go back to the start of this thread and review to see how profoundly different things have become wrt relations.

[JoTheKhan]

Just keep fishing for reasons to justify what amounts to unjustifiable behavior.

Go back to the start of this thread and review to see how profoundly different things have become wrt relations.

Not really unjustifiable though.

For one, Friedcat never said anything about a forum announcement. He told Board members that he had an announcement on May 27th.. Maybe for the board members? Also note that we received this information from someone who is not Friedcat.

Also note that just because some hardware has shipped to some companies does not mean that all companies received all of their chips. I believe it was stated that dividends won't be going out until all shipments have been made so that they don't have to save money for refunds.

Lastly, the post from Jut that contained all this information said "Subject to change."

Maybe the dates have changed?

No reason to get pitchforks after a missed deadline, that wasn't even concrete.

I think FC at least deserves this much, and definitely deserves to not be compared to Neo & Bee.

[aahzmundus]

Just another note... If you do not like what is going on, no one is forcing you to hold your shares!  Sell them off and be done with it if you like.

[nycgoat]

I think the simple fact is that the newer shareholders haven't taken the time to properly educate themselves. 

During the last round of hardware sales, AM priced and sold in BTC.  All hardware sales were easily tracked through the blockchain using the addresses that the group sales used to collect money, and it was all traced to AM and their "hardware" wallet.  The "mining" wallet has been known forever. 

Because Bitcoin can move value around the world almost instantaneously, it was quite easy to collect and pay dividends.  There was NEVER the issue of converting (what would seem to be quite a bit of) fiat into BTC.  Yes, the Chinese exchanges have found "workarounds", somehow I don't see Friedcat standing in front of a Bitcoin ATM/"vending machine" with all the cash from hardware sales, nor do I see him wiring the money to the personal bank account of a CEO from a non-transparent exchange.

[triptamine]

I think the simple fact is that the newer shareholders haven't taken the time to properly educate themselves. 

During the last round of hardware sales, AM priced and sold in BTC.  All hardware sales were easily tracked through the blockchain using the addresses that the group sales used to collect money, and it was all traced to AM and their "hardware" wallet.  The "mining" wallet has been known forever. 

Because Bitcoin can move value around the world almost instantaneously, it was quite easy to collect and pay dividends.  There was NEVER the issue of converting (what would seem to be quite a bit of) fiat into BTC.  Yes, the Chinese exchanges have found "workarounds", somehow I don't see Friedcat standing in front of a Bitcoin ATM/"vending machine" with all the cash from hardware sales, nor do I see him wiring the money to the personal bank account of a CEO from a non-transparent exchange.

There's that logic again! We'll have none of that!

[_mr_e]

If it's so damn troublesome there in China then why didn't he just continue pricing in btc like before? Now we could be receiving our divs after the price rises and receive less... No good. Now he has to try and time the market... If he even cares to.

[hdbuck]

i think fc dont mind exchanges nor regulations, he'll probably convert the fiat with his personal, his buddies or the company's coinz to have some pocket money to spend for some well-deserved ice creamz this summer.

[bitsalame]

It is tiring to see so many people whining.
I am disappointed as well like everyone else, but becoming crybabies will not make it happen sooner.
If you truly feel this is a critical sign of untrustworthiness, please sell your shares and stop coming by.

[bitcoiner49er]

Divs were typically on Wed and not until after around 4-5:00 GMT. Sooooo, what's the problem? 

[server]

It is tiring to see so many people whining.
I am disappointed as well like everyone else, but becoming crybabies will not make it happen sooner.
If you truly feel this is a critical sign of untrustworthiness, please sell your shares and stop coming by.

I agree with you that it's really hard to keep us posted once a month... very time consuming... much inconvenient.

[SaintFlow]

Since a boardmember requires 5000 shares and it is stated nowhere
that a boardmember is required to be a natural person I suggest
that minority shareholders with sufficient stake agree to pool
their shares into a groupentity.

There should be more then enough people that have 100 or more
direct shares to also get one seat together. I suggest that the
person to become boardmember shall be elected representitive
for this group by votes per direct shares per group member.

Your control of your shares shall not leave you, all that will be
required is a signed message to agree to form the group and
give boardmemberstatus to group by proxy.

Anyone interested can contact me.

Editing: Grammer and spelling

Second edit:  Maybe 50 shares is fine, too?
Also 1/5th of required shares are allready interested 

[prancing_around]

Since a boardmember requires 5000 shares and it is stated nowhere
that a boardmember is required to be a natural person I suggest
that minority shareholders with sufficient stake agree to pool
their shares into a groupentity.

There should be more then enough people that have 100 or more
direct shares to also get one seat together. I suggest that the
person to become boardmember shall be elected representitive
for this group by votes per direct shares per group member.

Your control of your shares shall not leave you, all that will be
required is a signed message to agree to form the group and
give boardmemberstatus to group by proxy.

Anyone interested can contact me.

Editing: Grammer and spelling

Second edit:  Maybe 50 shares is fine, too?
Also 1/5th of required shares are allready interested  

This is a great idea, unfortunately I am short about 20 shares to be involved. I still think this should be attempted though.

[Chris_Sabian]

Since a boardmember requires 5000 shares and it is stated nowhere
that a boardmember is required to be a natural person I suggest
that minority shareholders with sufficient stake agree to pool
their shares into a groupentity.

There should be more then enough people that have 100 or more
direct shares to also get one seat together. I suggest that the
person to become boardmember shall be elected representitive
for this group by votes per direct shares per group member.

Your control of your shares shall not leave you, all that will be
required is a signed message to agree to form the group and
give boardmemberstatus to group by proxy.

Anyone interested can contact me.

Editing: Grammer and spelling

Second edit:  Maybe 50 shares is fine, too?
Also 1/5th of required shares are allready interested 

This is a great idea.  Message sent.

[kibblesnbits]

https://i.imgur.com/ssBZhCs.gif

[jdany]

Since a boardmember requires 5000 shares and it is stated nowhere
that a boardmember is required to be a natural person I suggest
that minority shareholders with sufficient stake agree to pool
their shares into a groupentity.

There should be more then enough people that have 100 or more
direct shares to also get one seat together. I suggest that the
person to become boardmember shall be elected representitive
for this group by votes per direct shares per group member.

Your control of your shares shall not leave you, all that will be
required is a signed message to agree to form the group and
give boardmemberstatus to group by proxy.

Anyone interested can contact me.

Editing: Grammer and spelling

Second edit:  Maybe 50 shares is fine, too?
Also 1/5th of required shares are allready interested 

This is a great idea.  Message sent.

I'd be willing.  75

[bitfair]

Since a boardmember requires 5000 shares and it is stated nowhere
that a boardmember is required to be a natural person I suggest
that minority shareholders with sufficient stake agree to pool
their shares into a groupentity.

There should be more then enough people that have 100 or more
direct shares to also get one seat together. I suggest that the
person to become boardmember shall be elected representitive
for this group by votes per direct shares per group member.

Your control of your shares shall not leave you, all that will be
required is a signed message to agree to form the group and
give boardmemberstatus to group by proxy.

Anyone interested can contact me.

Editing: Grammer and spelling

Second edit:  Maybe 50 shares is fine, too?
Also 1/5th of required shares are allready interested 

I'm sorry to poop on this parade, but this is a horrible idea.

Firstly, the "group entity" would have to hold all shares in one address, suggesting one person would be the actual owner as far as FC would be concerned and all "group member" would have to trust this person entirely to manage their shares, transfer the shares in and out of the "group address", and to pass on the dividends. In other words, the group would have to include one person that would accept to do a lot of accounting work and that everybody could trust. Such a person can be hard to find (and/or expensive, although more expensive if an untrustworthy person is chosen)!

Secondly, it's not obvious that any more information would be made available. Jutarul (and other board members) usually post updates when there is new, relevant information. The board meetings don't occur that often, and the chances are that the board members have no more information than we have at this point anyway.

[Franktank]

Since a boardmember requires 5000 shares and it is stated nowhere
that a boardmember is required to be a natural person I suggest
that minority shareholders with sufficient stake agree to pool
their shares into a groupentity.

There should be more then enough people that have 100 or more
direct shares to also get one seat together. I suggest that the
person to become boardmember shall be elected representitive
for this group by votes per direct shares per group member.

Your control of your shares shall not leave you, all that will be
required is a signed message to agree to form the group and
give boardmemberstatus to group by proxy.

Anyone interested can contact me.

Editing: Grammer and spelling

Second edit:  Maybe 50 shares is fine, too?
Also 1/5th of required shares are allready interested  

I would ask for those who wish to be involved to be very careful in doing this. To be considered as a board member, all 5000 shares must be under one bitcoin address. When the group shares are collectively gathered under one address, the "representative" is considered the sole owner of ALL the shares (to friedcat) and will be treated similarly to the Havelock Passthru. Keep in mind as well that should friedcat be willing to go through with this during this busy time, it will require agreement from all parties before the group is able to split the shares back to the rightful owners again. We all want information on AM's current status and the next incoming dividend but understand the potential consequences (and headache) from this endeavor.

EDIT: Bitfair has already posted similar thoughts already. Jutarul has been forthcoming with all available information; as tough as it is, it's best to sit tight for now.

[JoTheKhan]

Would it not be possible to have 5K Shares add up from multiple different signed addresses?

Then designate a specific address holder as representative for a specific duration.

I don't plan to be a part of this as my shares are on HL and under 100 total. But I think there is a safe work around, that by all means would only add 15 minutes to the amount of time it would take to verify whatever information needs to be verified.

[SaintFlow]

@ bitfair

why would it have to be all owned in one address?

Say for example i would actually own 10 000 shares,
but for safety i would have them split to 100 wallets
in different cold storage places - since each is quite valluable.

As long as i have one signed message from each wallet that
states the same thing, i am one person!
Can you prove the opposite?

Regarding information trust within the group is an unproven
assumption.