3 ms·

1. Foundations probably need multiple directors, this depends on the jurisdictions. 2. The people behind the project wanted to sell a US company to the foundat

1. Foundations probably need multiple directors, this depends on the jurisdictions. 2. The people behind the project wanted to sell a US company to the foundation for $20 or $30mm, and I think this Gevers guy basically said that was excessive.

touchofevil 9y ago
I think the foundation probably is legally required to have multiple directors, but you would think that a foundation that raised $500 million from "donors" would give out some information about who two of the three board members are and why/how they were selected. Regarding your second point, can you provide a source for that? What I've read has alleged that Gevers tried to take a bonus from the ICO funds. "The Breitmans said Gevers had sought to pocket a bonus from the ICO proceeds, whose value had swollen to as much as $400 million because of a rise in the value of bitcoin, and then lied about it to his foundation colleagues." [0] [0] https://www.finews.com/news/english-news/29289-tezos-johann-gevers-ico-swiss-foundation-dispute-bonus https://www.finews.com/news/english-news/29289-tezos-johann-...
- charlesdm 9y ago
  http://www.reuters.com/article/bitcoin-funding-tezos/special-report-backroom-battle-imperils-230-million-cryptocurrency-venture-idUSL4N1MT53I http://www.reuters.com/article/bitcoin-funding-tezos/special... PS: What a shitshow. These people are amateurs who have been given $500m, and I wouldn't be surprised this project amounts to nothing. Based on how I'm reading this, I don't think this Gevers character is entirely wrong on how he's acting. But the article doesn't mention any bonus.
  - touchofevil 9y ago
    I didn't see anything in the article you linked to where Gevers says that the amount ($20 million) the Tezos company would sell itself to the foundation for is excessive. As I understand it, that was always the arrangement. The amount the company would sell itself for was a percentage of the ICO funds raised, I believe. I do agree that the situation is a shitshow.
    - charlesdm 9y ago
      Not sure where I read that, can't find it anymore

touchofevil 9y ago

I think the foundation probably is legally required to have multiple directors, but you would think that a foundation that raised $500 million from "donors" would give out some information about who two of the three board members are and why/how they were selected. Regarding your second point, can you provide a source for that? What I've read has alleged that Gevers tried to take a bonus from the ICO funds. "The Breitmans said Gevers had sought to pocket a bonus from the ICO proceeds, whose value had swollen to as much as $400 million because of a rise in the value of bitcoin, and then lied about it to his foundation colleagues." [0] [0] https://www.finews.com/news/english-news/29289-tezos-johann-gevers-ico-swiss-foundation-dispute-bonus https://www.finews.com/news/english-news/29289-tezos-johann-...

charlesdm 9y ago
http://www.reuters.com/article/bitcoin-funding-tezos/special-report-backroom-battle-imperils-230-million-cryptocurrency-venture-idUSL4N1MT53I http://www.reuters.com/article/bitcoin-funding-tezos/special... PS: What a shitshow. These people are amateurs who have been given $500m, and I wouldn't be surprised this project amounts to nothing. Based on how I'm reading this, I don't think this Gevers character is entirely wrong on how he's acting. But the article doesn't mention any bonus.
- touchofevil 9y ago
  I didn't see anything in the article you linked to where Gevers says that the amount ($20 million) the Tezos company would sell itself to the foundation for is excessive. As I understand it, that was always the arrangement. The amount the company would sell itself for was a percentage of the ICO funds raised, I believe. I do agree that the situation is a shitshow.
  - charlesdm 9y ago
    Not sure where I read that, can't find it anymore