Author Topic: This is the most confusing IPO of all time, wtf am I supposed to do?  (Read 11955 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline AdamBLevine

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 492
    • View Profile
    • Let's Talk Bitcoin!
Re: This is the most confusing IPO of all time, wtf am I supposed to do?
« Reply #75 on: February 23, 2014, 05:18:15 am »
It takes literally a half hour to set up a nice looking branded blog  with tumblr.com
Email me at [email protected]

Offline CryptoN8

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 192
    • View Profile
Re: This is the most confusing IPO of all time, wtf am I supposed to do?
« Reply #76 on: February 23, 2014, 05:22:57 am »
It takes literally a half hour to set up a nice looking branded blog  with tumblr.com

True. Even if it was a placeholder until the new site. It's getting really hard to find info, and going to get worse for another 30 days...

Offline jas

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 7
    • View Profile
Re: This is the most confusing IPO of all time, wtf am I supposed to do?
« Reply #77 on: February 23, 2014, 07:49:42 am »
What a thread!

It has every emotion and information you could hope for from an internet forum, As a newbie, this was a very helpful read, but nobody has really touched on the storm of post-screen cap. Will PST holders need to hold after screen cap to import wallets to BTSx client or should I be going off the advice of what was written in the article recently posted?
Hi Mom! Send PTS: PbqJY6ZLocF9wxnjr4jWaoWgiw8CT85P

Offline bytemaster

Re: This is the most confusing IPO of all time, wtf am I supposed to do?
« Reply #78 on: February 23, 2014, 08:04:02 am »
For the latest updates checkout my blog: http://bytemaster.bitshares.org
Anything said on these forums does not constitute an intent to create a legal obligation or contract between myself and anyone else.   These are merely my opinions and I reserve the right to change them at any time.

Offline jas

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 7
    • View Profile
Re: This is the most confusing IPO of all time, wtf am I supposed to do?
« Reply #79 on: February 23, 2014, 09:22:31 am »

I'm confused, but this AGS/PST BTSx allocation seems ridiculously fare. Maybe I'm misunderstanding it.

Hi Mom! Send PTS: PbqJY6ZLocF9wxnjr4jWaoWgiw8CT85P

Offline eozdem

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 8
    • View Profile
Re: This is the most confusing IPO of all time, wtf am I supposed to do?
« Reply #80 on: February 23, 2014, 11:15:49 am »
if I understood clearly from graphic above, holding PTS is the most profitable choice, because it covers every future DACs, am I right?

Offline eozdem

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 8
    • View Profile
Re: This is the most confusing IPO of all time, wtf am I supposed to do?
« Reply #81 on: February 23, 2014, 11:18:25 am »
I mean will we be getting dividents from all future DACs by just holding our PTS in our own wallet?

sumantso

  • Guest
Re: This is the most confusing IPO of all time, wtf am I supposed to do?
« Reply #82 on: February 23, 2014, 12:21:22 pm »
For future non BTSX DACS, AGS will also give the same as PTS, except that you can't sell AGS. For the BTSX chains, though, AGS is much more profitable as 1 AGS gives you 3.33 BTSXT while 1 PTS gives you only 1.3 BTSXT.

If you are more interested in the future non BTSX DACs, I would suggest you to buy in March. I expect a massive drop in both PTS and AGS price after 28th Feb.
« Last Edit: February 23, 2014, 12:23:13 pm by sumantso »

Offline jae208

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 525
    • View Profile
Re: This is the most confusing IPO of all time, wtf am I supposed to do?
« Reply #83 on: February 23, 2014, 12:37:21 pm »
so by raising this issue hard now means it can be tackled now before it really does progress to a court system which means we all lose and this great experiment is doomed... so its better if they need to take a step back and instead of pushing time and effort on software they put all that effort into sorting out the legalities to ensure this has a future like they are building for... otherwise it will have been for nothing...

 +5% +5% +5% +5% +5% +5% +5% +5% +5% +5% +5% +5%

100% disagree. Better to write the software first. They can put all of I3 in jail and BTS X will still be running on a global scale, invested developers will move to singapore or some shit like that. That said, you should consider how much more I3 cares about not getting in trouble than even you do.

Freedom of speech implies freedom to trade - this is the new reality. I can understand not wanting to take the risk in the short term, but in the long term we either deteriorate into a global totalitarian surveillance state or this becomes unquestionably legal.

Too extreme?
http://bitsharestutorials.com A work in progress
Subscribe to the Youtube Channel
https://www.youtube.com/user/BitsharesTutorials

Offline jae208

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 525
    • View Profile
Re: This is the most confusing IPO of all time, wtf am I supposed to do?
« Reply #84 on: February 23, 2014, 12:37:59 pm »
Well this was a good 5 page read, lots of information and I have to agree with many points made by many people. It will be interesting to see how this all plays out over this next week and into what we all hope will be many successful launches of the various products.

The #1 thing I am hearing through all these posts is the need for a central location for the "official word" on these rules and guidelines. A forum is a great communication tool, but a blog or product FAQ is a more professional way to set these very important factors and descriptions in stone so to speak. There is no doubt that it is all very confusing unless you have the time to dedicate many hours of reading a day to keep up with it. (many don't)

That being said, here is the article that Adam mentioned earlier that was recently posted over on the LTB site.
http://letstalkbitcoin.com/caution-watch-for-falling-pts/
This is a prime example of what should be available on the main Invictus site, specifically the bitshares product page. Utilize a product blog for official statements and updates, use the forums for discussions, update the blog when things change, rinse and repeat.
I'm very much looking forward to earning my +5% on anything.

 +5% +5% +5% +5% +5% +5% +5% +5% +5%
http://bitsharestutorials.com A work in progress
Subscribe to the Youtube Channel
https://www.youtube.com/user/BitsharesTutorials

Offline jae208

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 525
    • View Profile
Re: This is the most confusing IPO of all time, wtf am I supposed to do?
« Reply #85 on: February 23, 2014, 12:39:49 pm »
I'm very much looking forward to earning my +5% on anything.

wasn't +5% dropped from Bitshares XT?

This is exactly why we need this Blog so that this information gets outs quickly and accurately
http://bitsharestutorials.com A work in progress
Subscribe to the Youtube Channel
https://www.youtube.com/user/BitsharesTutorials

Offline CWEvans

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 183
    • View Profile
Re: This is the most confusing IPO of all time, wtf am I supposed to do?
« Reply #86 on: February 24, 2014, 05:01:17 pm »
this leaves more legal questions since they are actually calling us "shareholders" in this announcement...

Considering that the product is called 'BitShares' this should be no more problematic than 'Disney Dollars', 'Dollar Rent-a-Car', 'Dollar General' stores, etc., none of which is controlled by the Federal Reserve System or the US Treasury Department.  Likewise, Federal Express is not operated by the Department of Transportation, and Royal Crown Cola is not produced by the House of Windsor.

which brings into question this whole "donation" thing even more (not just legally with the "stockholders/donators", but what about the IRS come tax time, this is taxable income to them)...

Corporate taxes in the USA are paid on profits. Expenses incurred in the development of BitShares, including salaries, travel, and marketing, are subtracted before taxes are calculated.

...this is a huge can of legal worms that could cause the entire value to be expunged by a large lawsuit or FTC investigation... this is what worries me... they are muddying the waters SO much calling things by different names every step of the way as if they are trying to legally sidestep something to create a legal barrier for which they have flat out broken wide open... I wish they would just call the apple an apple... so we can have clarity about buying oranges here...

If it turns out that the term 'shareholder' should be changed to 'BitShareholder', 'stakeholder', 'sponsor', or whatever, Invictus Innovations can issue a clarification.

With regard to donations to for-profit entities, ten minutes of searching online turned these up:

"For-Profit Charity"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/For-profit_charity

"For-Profit Charities"
http://uchicagolaw.typepad.com/faculty/2006/09/forprofit_chari.html


"Philanthropy Google’s Way: Not the Usual"
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/14/technology/14google.html

"The Reasons for For-Profit Philanthropy"
http://www.brooklaw.edu/newsandevents/blslawnotes/2010-2009/fall/googleforprofitphilanthropy/page3.aspx


"Five Ways to Realize Profits and Missions"
http://blogs.hbr.org/2009/10/five-ways-to-realize-profits-and-missions/


"Canonical Opens Donations for Ubuntu, Lets You Put Money for a Mobile Version"
http://www.phonearena.com/news/Canonical-opens-donations-for-Ubuntu-lets-you-put-money-for-a-mobile-version_id35383
« Last Edit: February 24, 2014, 06:51:43 pm by CWEvans »

Offline Darkbane

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 119
    • View Profile
Re: This is the most confusing IPO of all time, wtf am I supposed to do?
« Reply #87 on: February 24, 2014, 05:14:16 pm »
this leaves more legal questions since they are actually calling us "shareholders" in this announcement...

Considering that the product is called 'BitShares' this should be no more problematic than 'Disney Dollars', 'Dollar Rent-a-Car', 'Dollar General' stores, etc., none of which is controlled by the Federal Reserve System or the US Treasury Department.  Likewise, Federal Express is not operated by the Department of Transportation, and Royal Crown Cola is not owned by the House of Windsor.

which brings into question this whole "donation" thing even more (not just legally with the "stockholders/donators", but what about the IRS come tax time, this is taxable income to them)...

Corporate taxes in the USA are paid on profits. Expenses incurred in the development of BitShares, including salaries, travel, and marketing, are subtracted before taxes are calculated.

...this is a huge can of legal worms that could cause the entire value to be expunged by a large lawsuit or FTC investigation... this is what worries me... they are muddying the waters SO much calling things by different names every step of the way as if they are trying to legally sidestep something to create a legal barrier for which they have flat out broken wide open... I wish they would just call the apple an apple... so we can have clarity about buying oranges here...

If it turns out that the term 'shareholder' should be changed to 'BitShareholder', 'stakeholder', 'sponsor', or whatever, Invictus Innovations can issue a clarification.

With regard to donations to for-profit entities, ten minutes of searching online turned these up:

"For-Profit Charity"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/For-profit_charity

"For-Profit Charities"
http://uchicagolaw.typepad.com/faculty/2006/09/forprofit_chari.html


"Philanthropy Google’s Way: Not the Usual"
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/14/technology/14google.html

"The Reasons for For-Profit Philanthropy"
http://www.brooklaw.edu/newsandevents/blslawnotes/2010-2009/fall/googleforprofitphilanthropy/page3.aspx


"Five Ways to Realize Profits and Missions"
http://blogs.hbr.org/2009/10/five-ways-to-realize-profits-and-missions/


"Canonical Opens Donations for Ubuntu, Lets You Put Money for a Mobile Version"
http://www.phonearena.com/news/Canonical-opens-donations-for-Ubuntu-lets-you-put-money-for-a-mobile-version_id35383


My problem being, their intermixing of the words, does not leave a clear and concise term for what it is you are receiving... are you a donator... are you an earner... are you an investor... are you a shareholder... are you a competitor... they have intermixed all of these terms and each one has different legal liabilities...

absolutely a for-profit company may accept donations... however they are taxable income but being represented as a donations... in MANY of the 50 american states, you MUST follow certain procedures and statement when you make that claim, you must supply notice that is it not deductible on the persons side because they are not a non-profit organization, some states say you must inform people the donation can be taxed by the IRS, and some states have all sorts of other goofy laws... so I am not challenging if they can accept this money, I am challenging the problems that may arise as a result of HOW they have taken this money...

they have left the door wide open to interpretation by not clearly defining within each states regulation what must be stated to people exchanging this "commodity" to them means... they've simply called it 5 different things on their AGS page... thats a serious issue for the community because this was promised to develop our community... which is the premise we all "donated" with... would people donate $20 million dollars if they knew $10 million could be given to the government... which seems to be the very "beast" we are trying to avoid with decentralization... would people donate if they knew their money would not be put towards them... would they donate if they knew this was a for-profit business that has no legal obligation to the community, where-as a non-profit would have stronger regulations preventing some expenses deemed inappropriate that a for-profit is not held to the same standard...

what they SHOULD be doing is saying you are a customer, who is buying this product, and this is the price... by having "donations", "competition", etc etc... they are opening the door to allowing someone else to decide in a court of law what it truely represents versus clearly defining it and protecting our community... thats my issue...

corporate taxes are not purely based solely on profits... there are many taxes they must pay along the way including payroll, healthcare, etc etc that will be taxed irregardless of profit along with state local and other federal taxes... the health affordable care act alone introduces dozens of new taxes you can't escape... and depending how employees are classified as independant contractors or not, even more taxes... they may release "bounties" but even some of those could be taxable depending on the terms of the contract work the individual could be seen as an employee under certain terms... there are a whole host of taxes you can not escape so some WILL be paid no matter what... it also depends how this is structured, is this actually incorporated or are they "doing business as" under the CEO's social security number which opens the door to even more taxes and liabilities...

also the "product" is not bitshares... people are buying/donating/earning/competing for AGS shares, which give a dividend payment of bitshares... you see where that muddies the water between stockholders and investors too now... the only way to obtain AGS is to exchange a commodity of some form for it, and as a result you are given something else that has other meaning and value... that alone very well could be a representation of an IPO under the securities and exchange commission...
« Last Edit: February 24, 2014, 05:18:56 pm by Darkbane »

Offline luckybit

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2921
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: Luckybit
Re: This is the most confusing IPO of all time, wtf am I supposed to do?
« Reply #88 on: February 25, 2014, 10:28:44 am »
When I read Adam's arguments, I realise, even if I consider only my selfish profits, that as a long term PTS holder I may not be getting a better deal. The argument that is rolled out (by me too) is that the jump from 10% to 50% means that PTS holders are getting rewarded.

However, in the original scheme, only 400k BTSX would have been available at the start. In the new scheme, there will be 10 times more. Sure, PTS holders got 5x the original allotment but then they have to contend with 10x the initial supply.

So, not only the initial supply is huge, PTS holders will also have to contend with BTSX owners who have gotten them for even less than 0.0025 BTC in some cases through AGS route. Maybe it doesn't matter in the long run - I dunno.

Personally, I am covered. I have PTS, AGS as well as BTC (to buy cheap PTS and/or BTSX in March); and I do believe that I3 has the best of intentions in all these changes. This is new territorry, and it was difficult to get the right scheme from the start.

Exactly.  Guys like us are fine, this IS a win for those who understand the situation enough to position themselves accordingly, but how to best do that is VERY confusing

Btw, its none of my business, but converting 1 PTS for 0.9 AGS (as has been happening) may not be the best of strategies.

Maybe!  Then again, maybe it's better to buy ALL AGS so you can maximize your BTS, sell half your BTS (still have more left over than just getting BTS from PTS) and use the proceeds to buy your original PTS back at the deflated price.   The whole situation is so confusing I really don't know what the best way to protect yourself is.    It's my understanding that AGS and PTS were being amalgamated into BTS for future-chain purposes because otherwise you have to manage AGS and PTS investors differently.  Am I mistaken?

Here is a solution. Once Invictus fulfills their obligation and releases Bitshares and the associated DACs then the community can take control and also release DACs of our own.

We can release DACs which favor people who held onto PTS and give 35% to PTS and only 10% to AGS for example. So because of this the AGS strategy may not be the wisest long term strategy.

I'm holding PTS and BTC and I will just buy more PTS on the dip. If PTS holders feel like they are being abused or mistreated the truth of the matter is that the long term holders whether it be PTS or AGS will decide how to fulfill the social consensus.

So I hear you're making a DAC? If you want to make PTS owners in your audience who followed Invictus whole then you can offer PTS holders a greater percentage than AGS holders. Appealing to Invictus is not really the answer, take the actions you deem necessary because the social consensus license allows for that.

I know how you feel, and I had the exact same debate on this forum the moment they switched from mining. I still don't know if I missed out not buying enough Angelshares but I'm not willing to give up PTS for Angelshares because I don't think Bitshares will be the most important DAC and I also don't think the most important DAC will be developed by Invictus.

What matters most is the social consensus, not Invictus.
https://metaexchange.info | Bitcoin<->Altcoin exchange | Instant | Safe | Low spreads

Offline luckybit

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2921
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: Luckybit
Re: This is the most confusing IPO of all time, wtf am I supposed to do?
« Reply #89 on: February 25, 2014, 10:49:56 am »
Well this was a good 5 page read, lots of information and I have to agree with many points made by many people. It will be interesting to see how this all plays out over this next week and into what we all hope will be many successful launches of the various products.

The #1 thing I am hearing through all these posts is the need for a central location for the "official word" on these rules and guidelines. A forum is a great communication tool, but a blog or product FAQ is a more professional way to set these very important factors and descriptions in stone so to speak. There is no doubt that it is all very confusing unless you have the time to dedicate many hours of reading a day to keep up with it. (many don't)

That being said, here is the article that Adam mentioned earlier that was recently posted over on the LTB site.
http://letstalkbitcoin.com/caution-watch-for-falling-pts/
This is a prime example of what should be available on the main Invictus site, specifically the bitshares product page. Utilize a product blog for official statements and updates, use the forums for discussions, update the blog when things change, rinse and repeat.
I'm very much looking forward to earning my +5% on anything.

this leaves more legal questions since they are actually calling us "shareholders" in this announcement... which brings into question this whole "donation" thing even more (not just legally with the "stockholders/donators", but what about the IRS come tax time, this is taxable income to them)... this is a huge can of legal worms that could cause the entire value to be expunged by a large lawsuit or FTC investigation... this is what worries me... they are muddying the waters SO much calling things by different names every step of the way as if they are trying to legally sidestep something to create a legal barrier for which they have flat out broken wide open... I wish they would just call the apple an apple... so we can have clarity about buying oranges here...

We are shareholders in the software itself, not in Invictus. In the social consensus license I deliberately suggested the phrase "value supply" be used. Units of value don't have to be owned and in this case are not owned by any centralized entity. Those units of value are shares or are currency units in the sense that value is being exchanged.

But Invictus is not the source of the value. The software itself is the source of the value just as with Bitcoin. So while Bitshares may someday be seen as a commodity like a stock and there might be some sort of tax implications, there is no direct connection between Invictus Innovation and Bitshares beyond the fact that they are writing the software.

This means it can be forked and Invictus wouldn't be able to do anything about it. It's owned by the community and that is why the social consensus exists. The social consensus uses the language of the law to guarantee that the community of shareholders owns Bitshares.

This is why 50% is owned by PTS holders and 50% owned by AGS holders. AGS holders brought more value to the project because they donated money at a critical time. Yes it's a donation and not a payment. The donation is to fund development of the software and Invictus Innovations are more like contractors doing the job of development rather than owners.

I hope this clarifies things.
https://metaexchange.info | Bitcoin<->Altcoin exchange | Instant | Safe | Low spreads