10 ms·

Mt. Gox Bankruptcy Wasn't Really a Bust

114 points by rb808 9y ago

pegasuscollins 9y ago
So what happens when Karpeles needs to sell all of those bitcoins to make the creditors whole in yen? And also: when will this happen?
- kencausey 9y ago
  If a creditor can be found who is willing to assign some value to the asset and then provide a loan secured by said asset then at least in the short term it is not a problem. I believe this is fairly common and is not likely to be difficult to find. Of course any such deal would likely include a detailed plan for the sale of at least as much of the asset as would be needed to repay the loan.
  - otoburb 9y ago
    At the time "early" in the proceedings, there was an attempt[1] to go through what is called Civil Rehabilitation[2] under Japanese restructuring and insolvency law, but this was denied by the Tokyo District Court handling the MtGox bankruptcy. Fast forward now several years, perhaps this is another option on the table for another creditor willing to try again. [1] http://www.reuters.com/article/us-bitcoin-mtgox/mt-gox-set-to-liquidate-as-court-denies-rehabilitation-idUSBREA3F09U20140416 http://www.reuters.com/article/us-bitcoin-mtgox/mt-gox-set-t... [2] https://content.next.westlaw.com/Document/I2030ee371cb611e38578f7ccc38dcbee/View/FullText.html?contextData=(sc.Default)&transitionType=Default&firstPage=true&bhcp=1 https://content.next.westlaw.com/Document/I2030ee371cb611e38...
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
runeks 9y ago
> After accounting for smaller amounts of nonbitcoin assets and liabilities, Mt. Gox has a surplus on paper of ¥111 billion, or $977 million, that could go to its shareholders, according to a calculation by The Wall Street Journal. So the shareholders of an incompletely run company should have dibs on the capital gains of assets they failed to secure properly? To me, this seems neither fair nor societally beneficial. If someone lends a company their property, after which the company loses it, and the price of this property goes up, it just implies that the creditors need more money to get back the property that belongs to them - regardless of whether we’re talking about bitcoins, gold or lambs wool. Surely, the goal of bankruptcy must be to make creditors whole, not enrich shareholders of the company that failed to live up to its promises.
- jstanley 9y ago
  Agreed. The only reason MtGox has that paper $1b is because they didn't allow anyone to access their money. They lost a bunch of everyone's money, then kept hold of what they had left and waited for the Bitcoin price to rise. Surely they don't get to keep the extra. It wasn't even theirs in the first place!
  - otoburb 9y ago
    If anybody wants the full sordid history from an investigative standpoint, check out Kim Nilsson's great writeups[1][2] and presentation[3]. [1] http://blog.wizsec.jp/2017/07/breaking-open-mtgox-1.html http://blog.wizsec.jp/2017/07/breaking-open-mtgox-1.html [2] http://blog.wizsec.jp/2017/07/comments-on-mark-karpeles-trial.html http://blog.wizsec.jp/2017/07/comments-on-mark-karpeles-tria... [3] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l70iRcSxqzo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l70iRcSxqzo
  - modeless 9y ago
    It's not theirs anymore either. It is now overseen by the bankruptcy court, and the bankruptcy court is deciding what to do with it according to Japanese bankruptcy law. Unfortunately the law is extremely slow, strict, and conservative. They may not reach a resolution for many years, during which time the value of Bitcoin could spike 10x or crash to zero. The resolution eventually reached may or may not make any rational sense. It's a fascinating situation from the outside, though surely maddening for anyone involved.
avs733 9y ago
>Someone will sue Mark Karpelès until he doesn't have a billion dollars' worth of bitcoins any more. The bankruptcy estate might only owe the customers $500 per bitcoin, but they -- and regulators, etc. -- might have a case that Karpelèsowes them the remainder, due to negligence or unjust enrichment or general come-on-man I...and perhaps I'm being to glib...find it highly amusing that the same people making the argument of rejecting states and fiat currency and regulation and structure are frustrated that their attempts to use those structures requires them to adopt all the parts of it, not just the parts they need to recoup their losses from a con man.
- giobox 9y ago
  > find it highly amusing that the same people making the argument of rejecting states and fiat currency and regulation and structure are frustrated that their attempts to use those structures requires them to adopt all the parts of it... This holds true for so many Bitcoin related disputes. I also find it highly amusing when bitcoin using champions of rejecting regulation and structure mysteriously seem to need a great deal of it when heaven forbid things don't go as they hoped.
  - pmorici 9y ago
    There is a pretty big difference in my mind between the kind of over regulation people dislike and simple enforcement of basic fraud and theft laws.
    - DannyBee 9y ago
      Could you explain, in detail, that difference?
      - Analemma_ 9y ago
        Whether or not they profit him, obviously.
        9y ago
chollida1 9y ago
Well in addition to Mt. Gox being in bankruptcy proceedings right now, Mark Karpelès is also going through a personal bankruptcy process as is his holding company , Tibanne, which holds an 88% share of Mt. Gox. I've got to imagine that he wants the Mt Gox situation handled ASAP so he can get any funds from it to solve his own bankruptcy issues. I'd imagine that this provides a pressure point for the Mt Gox stakeholders where they might be willing to play ball and let the bankruptcy proceedings work at a much faster pace in return for a much larger portion of the remaining Mt Gox assets. Having said that, according to the WSJ... > "The customary period in which creditors may dispute the trustee’s decisions on claims has ended." ...so perhaps Mark Karples may decide to play hard ball and hope that the creditors just want the coins sold and money disbursed before bitcoin has another chance to collapse? Lots of fun game theory to think about here.
- otoburb 9y ago
  One of the sticking points holding up the bankruptcy process is the outstanding CoinLabs lawsuit[1]. There's not much room for Karpeles to maneuver due to the cascading bankruptcy proceedings against both MtGox and Tibanne. A small number of MtGox ex-customers cottoned on quickly to the possibility that any excess surplus might accrue to the shareholders and filed claims directly against Tibanne. The rest of the claimants have been left to organize amongst themselves. One such effort recently organized is MtGoxLegal[2]. The current sentiment is to try to convince the Japense court trustee that the principle of unjust enrichment[3] should apply, but nobody knows if this will hold under Japanese bankruptcy law in this situation. Fun times abound. [1] https://themerkle.com/mtgox-phoenix-rises/ https://themerkle.com/mtgox-phoenix-rises/ [2] https://www.mtgoxlegal.com/ https://www.mtgoxlegal.com/ [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unjust_enrichment https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unjust_enrichment
jcoffland 9y ago
> Mt. Gox . . . suffered the fate of all bitcoin exchanges, and had its bitcoins stolen. Wow. This is an embarrassing demonstration of the authors ignorance of the current state of the cryptocurrency market. It is appalling that former CEO Mark Karpeles may benefit from the exchange collapse he caused through either incompetence or thievery. But it's hardly different from the rewards paid out to those who caused the US economic melt down in 2008.
- skybrian 9y ago
  That's a joke, not ignorance.
  - jcoffland 9y ago
    It's an ignorant joke designed to deligitimize cryptocurrency in the eyes of the reader.
    - jff 9y ago
      Simply observing cryptocurrency users and exchanges in action does enough to delegitimize them, I'd think.
- wakamoleguy 9y ago
  Matt Levine has a history of ribbing on bitcoin exchanges. He doesn't really lay it out in this post, though, so here is a quote from an earlier one[1]: > The other reason not to trade bitcoin is that, as far as I can tell, the fate of any bitcoin exchange/wallet/bank/custodian is to be hacked. That is just how bitcoin works: You buy bitcoins on an exchange, and you store them at the exchange because it's a pain to keep your private key yourself, and then the exchange gets hacked and your bitcoins get stolen. ("There have been at least three dozen heists of cryptocurrency exchanges since 2011," Reuters noted[2] last week.) In general, his Money Stuff commentary tends to have a sort of sarcastic reductionist vibe to it. Whether the ignorance is true or feigned for effect really depends on the reader's perspective, I guess. [1] https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2017-10-03/bitcoin-traders-and-index-funds https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2017-10-03/bitcoin-t... [2] https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/bitcoin-exchanges-risks/ https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/bitcoin-...
modeless 9y ago
Mark Karpeles is quite active on Reddit and has been very open about the whole bankruptcy process. You can read all about it in his comments: http://reddit.com/u/magicaltux http://reddit.com/u/magicaltux and in the subreddit http://reddit.com/r/mtgoxinsolvency http://reddit.com/r/mtgoxinsolvency His preference would be for the bankruptcy trustee to directly distribute the bitcoins to claimants, which would actually be a much faster and easier way to distribute the money than the traditional banking system, and has the added advantage that the bitcoins wouldn't need to be sold. However, the Japanese bankruptcy process is extremely unlikely to allow this. Also the effect of 200k bitcoins suddenly being distributed to thousands of people around the world might be to crash the bitcoin price, as some will sell immediately and more will probably sell when the price declines. He realizes that if he receives any money after the bankruptcy he will immediately be tied up in even more lawsuits which will drag on for years if not decades. He has said that in this scenario he would try to distribute the money to claimants rather than keeping it in an attempt to avoid these lawsuits, but it seems unlikely to work. He may be cursed to receive hundreds of millions and have it tied up in lawsuits for the next decade, ultimately ending up in personal bankruptcy again.
- tryingagainbro 9y ago
  In theory, why are lawsuits after this possible? Doesn't the bankruptcy court asks all debtors to come ahead until x date and after that the court decides? I know you can sue for everything but why would they have any chance? edit: Thanks for the asnwers. So, Karpeles will have assets and he'll have to answer for his negligence or failure to manage his corp properly. Maybe he'll file for personal bankruptcy before getting any money :)
  - DangerousPie 9y ago
    Because he is also on trial for embezzlement. Bankruptcy just clears away regular debt owed by the company, but he can still be sued individually for illegal actions he (may have) committed.
    - charlesdm 9y ago
pmorici 9y ago
In 2014 when MtGox went bankrupt it took the Bitcoin market price down with it into a multi year bear market. One wonders if the sale of these $1.5 billion in coins won't bring about a second Goxing so to speak if they spook the market by selling off such a massive number of coins.
antiffan 9y ago
I recall that https://bitcoinbuilder.com https://bitcoinbuilder.com allowed people to purchase locked up GOX coins during this fiasco. This would be a good time to check up on those accounts.
Overtonwindow 9y ago
Another great piece by Matt Levine. I think legally the customers are only entitled to what they invested, but at the same time, Mt. Gox should not get that as it was profits from nefarious gains. So I think that money should go to the government as a penalty. Make the customers whole, zero out Mt Gox debt and obligations, and rest to the government.
- panarky 9y ago
  I'm curious if the same bankruptcy principles apply outside of cryptocurrency exchanges. Let's say I owned 1000 shares of Google five years ago, and my broker went bankrupt. At the time, Google was trading at $333 per share. Today the court liquidates the broker's assets to distribute to creditors, and Google is trading at $1050 a share now. The court wouldn't use Google's five-year-old share price and let the broker keep the rest. Instead, the court would distribute the actual proceeds of the liquidation. Why is it any different with Mt. Gox? Why wouldn't the court sell the bitcoin at current market prices and distribute the proceeds among the creditors?
  - umanwizard 9y ago
    > Naturally, the court wouldn't use Google's five-year-old share price, they'd use the actual proceeds upon liquidation. Do you have a citation? I'm not an expert on Japanese bankruptcy law so it's not obvious to me.
  - avs733 9y ago
    That is also the underlying problem, they DON'T have enough bitcoin to do exactly that... More importantly (note: IANAL), the bitcoins converted, by law, to a specific valuation on a set date when the assets are frozen. Per the court, years ago, the amount owed to each creditor was set in the court's working currency (i.e., the Yen) and the court doesn't deal in Bitcoins. In your example, during the bankruptcy process, they would set a date of valuation and you would be entitled to the value of the shares on the date when the bankruptcy was set. Future lost profits are not the purview of the bankruptcy court.
  - kens 9y ago
theadamp 9y ago
"Again, the main function of a bitcoin exchange is to get its bitcoins stolen..." Really?
- random023987 9y ago
  > "Again, the main function of a bitcoin exchange is to get its bitcoins stolen..." > Really? Really. Is there any other reason to open a bitcoin exchange other than to have fools give you eTuplips that you can abscond with at a whim? I mean you might think that running an exchange helps further dreams of a bankless future, but in the real world, most cryptocurrency exchanges went poof, either to steal bitcoins or because they couldn't convince fools to part with enough bitcoins to steal. But the heady days of an exchange being hacked or closed by fraud every weeks are over. If you want your bitcoins stolen, I recommend investing in ICOs.
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]
inDigiNeous 9y ago
So, I had bitcoins stored at MtGox at the time all of them were stolen or "disappeared". Can anybody tell me if there is some action I can take to claim them back ? Do I have to take legal action ? Thank you!
- joshschreuder 9y ago
  I think, and I could be wrong, that you have to have lodged a claim years ago [1] Users, who are bankruptcy creditors, were eligible to make bankruptcy claims against MTGOX regarding Bitcoin or cash through this system until at 12 noon July 29, 2015 (Japan time). After 12 noon on July 29, 2015 (Japan time), the only things that a User will be able to do using the Online Method will be to (i) view bankruptcy claims that he or she has filed himself or herself and (ii) transfer his or her bankruptcy claims to another person. However, nearer the time of distribution, the bankruptcy trustee is planning to give Users an opportunity to use this system again to make changes to the details of their bankruptcy claims, other than increasing the amount of the bankruptcy claims that Users have filed (for example, changes in their addresses or company names). Users will not be able to file new bankruptcy claims or increase the amount of the bankruptcy claims that they have filed. [1] https://claims.mtgox.com/assets/index.html#/ https://claims.mtgox.com/assets/index.html#/

114 points by rb808 9y ago

So what happens when Karpeles needs to sell all of those bitcoins to make the creditors whole in yen? And also: when will this happen?

kencausey 9y ago
If a creditor can be found who is willing to assign some value to the asset and then provide a loan secured by said asset then at least in the short term it is not a problem. I believe this is fairly common and is not likely to be difficult to find. Of course any such deal would likely include a detailed plan for the sale of at least as much of the asset as would be needed to repay the loan.
- otoburb 9y ago
  At the time "early" in the proceedings, there was an attempt[1] to go through what is called Civil Rehabilitation[2] under Japanese restructuring and insolvency law, but this was denied by the Tokyo District Court handling the MtGox bankruptcy. Fast forward now several years, perhaps this is another option on the table for another creditor willing to try again. [1] http://www.reuters.com/article/us-bitcoin-mtgox/mt-gox-set-to-liquidate-as-court-denies-rehabilitation-idUSBREA3F09U20140416 http://www.reuters.com/article/us-bitcoin-mtgox/mt-gox-set-t... [2] https://content.next.westlaw.com/Document/I2030ee371cb611e38578f7ccc38dcbee/View/FullText.html?contextData=(sc.Default)&transitionType=Default&firstPage=true&bhcp=1 https://content.next.westlaw.com/Document/I2030ee371cb611e38...

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]

runeks 9y ago

> After accounting for smaller amounts of nonbitcoin assets and liabilities, Mt. Gox has a surplus on paper of ¥111 billion, or $977 million, that could go to its shareholders, according to a calculation by The Wall Street Journal. So the shareholders of an incompletely run company should have dibs on the capital gains of assets they failed to secure properly? To me, this seems neither fair nor societally beneficial. If someone lends a company their property, after which the company loses it, and the price of this property goes up, it just implies that the creditors need more money to get back the property that belongs to them - regardless of whether we’re talking about bitcoins, gold or lambs wool. Surely, the goal of bankruptcy must be to make creditors whole, not enrich shareholders of the company that failed to live up to its promises.

jstanley 9y ago
Agreed. The only reason MtGox has that paper $1b is because they didn't allow anyone to access their money. They lost a bunch of everyone's money, then kept hold of what they had left and waited for the Bitcoin price to rise. Surely they don't get to keep the extra. It wasn't even theirs in the first place!
- otoburb 9y ago
  If anybody wants the full sordid history from an investigative standpoint, check out Kim Nilsson's great writeups[1][2] and presentation[3]. [1] http://blog.wizsec.jp/2017/07/breaking-open-mtgox-1.html http://blog.wizsec.jp/2017/07/breaking-open-mtgox-1.html [2] http://blog.wizsec.jp/2017/07/comments-on-mark-karpeles-trial.html http://blog.wizsec.jp/2017/07/comments-on-mark-karpeles-tria... [3] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l70iRcSxqzo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l70iRcSxqzo
- modeless 9y ago
  It's not theirs anymore either. It is now overseen by the bankruptcy court, and the bankruptcy court is deciding what to do with it according to Japanese bankruptcy law. Unfortunately the law is extremely slow, strict, and conservative. They may not reach a resolution for many years, during which time the value of Bitcoin could spike 10x or crash to zero. The resolution eventually reached may or may not make any rational sense. It's a fascinating situation from the outside, though surely maddening for anyone involved.

avs733 9y ago

>Someone will sue Mark Karpelès until he doesn't have a billion dollars' worth of bitcoins any more. The bankruptcy estate might only owe the customers $500 per bitcoin, but they -- and regulators, etc. -- might have a case that Karpelèsowes them the remainder, due to negligence or unjust enrichment or general come-on-man I...and perhaps I'm being to glib...find it highly amusing that the same people making the argument of rejecting states and fiat currency and regulation and structure are frustrated that their attempts to use those structures requires them to adopt all the parts of it, not just the parts they need to recoup their losses from a con man.

giobox 9y ago
> find it highly amusing that the same people making the argument of rejecting states and fiat currency and regulation and structure are frustrated that their attempts to use those structures requires them to adopt all the parts of it... This holds true for so many Bitcoin related disputes. I also find it highly amusing when bitcoin using champions of rejecting regulation and structure mysteriously seem to need a great deal of it when heaven forbid things don't go as they hoped.
- pmorici 9y ago
  There is a pretty big difference in my mind between the kind of over regulation people dislike and simple enforcement of basic fraud and theft laws.
  - DannyBee 9y ago
    Could you explain, in detail, that difference?
    - Analemma_ 9y ago
      Whether or not they profit him, obviously.
      - 9y ago

chollida1 9y ago

Well in addition to Mt. Gox being in bankruptcy proceedings right now, Mark Karpelès is also going through a personal bankruptcy process as is his holding company , Tibanne, which holds an 88% share of Mt. Gox. I've got to imagine that he wants the Mt Gox situation handled ASAP so he can get any funds from it to solve his own bankruptcy issues. I'd imagine that this provides a pressure point for the Mt Gox stakeholders where they might be willing to play ball and let the bankruptcy proceedings work at a much faster pace in return for a much larger portion of the remaining Mt Gox assets. Having said that, according to the WSJ... > "The customary period in which creditors may dispute the trustee’s decisions on claims has ended." ...so perhaps Mark Karples may decide to play hard ball and hope that the creditors just want the coins sold and money disbursed before bitcoin has another chance to collapse? Lots of fun game theory to think about here.

otoburb 9y ago
One of the sticking points holding up the bankruptcy process is the outstanding CoinLabs lawsuit[1]. There's not much room for Karpeles to maneuver due to the cascading bankruptcy proceedings against both MtGox and Tibanne. A small number of MtGox ex-customers cottoned on quickly to the possibility that any excess surplus might accrue to the shareholders and filed claims directly against Tibanne. The rest of the claimants have been left to organize amongst themselves. One such effort recently organized is MtGoxLegal[2]. The current sentiment is to try to convince the Japense court trustee that the principle of unjust enrichment[3] should apply, but nobody knows if this will hold under Japanese bankruptcy law in this situation. Fun times abound. [1] https://themerkle.com/mtgox-phoenix-rises/ https://themerkle.com/mtgox-phoenix-rises/ [2] https://www.mtgoxlegal.com/ https://www.mtgoxlegal.com/ [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unjust_enrichment https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unjust_enrichment

jcoffland 9y ago

> Mt. Gox . . . suffered the fate of all bitcoin exchanges, and had its bitcoins stolen. Wow. This is an embarrassing demonstration of the authors ignorance of the current state of the cryptocurrency market. It is appalling that former CEO Mark Karpeles may benefit from the exchange collapse he caused through either incompetence or thievery. But it's hardly different from the rewards paid out to those who caused the US economic melt down in 2008.

skybrian 9y ago
That's a joke, not ignorance.
- jcoffland 9y ago
  It's an ignorant joke designed to deligitimize cryptocurrency in the eyes of the reader.
  - jff 9y ago
    Simply observing cryptocurrency users and exchanges in action does enough to delegitimize them, I'd think.
wakamoleguy 9y ago
Matt Levine has a history of ribbing on bitcoin exchanges. He doesn't really lay it out in this post, though, so here is a quote from an earlier one[1]: > The other reason not to trade bitcoin is that, as far as I can tell, the fate of any bitcoin exchange/wallet/bank/custodian is to be hacked. That is just how bitcoin works: You buy bitcoins on an exchange, and you store them at the exchange because it's a pain to keep your private key yourself, and then the exchange gets hacked and your bitcoins get stolen. ("There have been at least three dozen heists of cryptocurrency exchanges since 2011," Reuters noted[2] last week.) In general, his Money Stuff commentary tends to have a sort of sarcastic reductionist vibe to it. Whether the ignorance is true or feigned for effect really depends on the reader's perspective, I guess. [1] https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2017-10-03/bitcoin-traders-and-index-funds https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2017-10-03/bitcoin-t... [2] https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/bitcoin-exchanges-risks/ https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/bitcoin-...

modeless 9y ago

Mark Karpeles is quite active on Reddit and has been very open about the whole bankruptcy process. You can read all about it in his comments: http://reddit.com/u/magicaltux http://reddit.com/u/magicaltux and in the subreddit http://reddit.com/r/mtgoxinsolvency http://reddit.com/r/mtgoxinsolvency His preference would be for the bankruptcy trustee to directly distribute the bitcoins to claimants, which would actually be a much faster and easier way to distribute the money than the traditional banking system, and has the added advantage that the bitcoins wouldn't need to be sold. However, the Japanese bankruptcy process is extremely unlikely to allow this. Also the effect of 200k bitcoins suddenly being distributed to thousands of people around the world might be to crash the bitcoin price, as some will sell immediately and more will probably sell when the price declines. He realizes that if he receives any money after the bankruptcy he will immediately be tied up in even more lawsuits which will drag on for years if not decades. He has said that in this scenario he would try to distribute the money to claimants rather than keeping it in an attempt to avoid these lawsuits, but it seems unlikely to work. He may be cursed to receive hundreds of millions and have it tied up in lawsuits for the next decade, ultimately ending up in personal bankruptcy again.

tryingagainbro 9y ago
In theory, why are lawsuits after this possible? Doesn't the bankruptcy court asks all debtors to come ahead until x date and after that the court decides? I know you can sue for everything but why would they have any chance? edit: Thanks for the asnwers. So, Karpeles will have assets and he'll have to answer for his negligence or failure to manage his corp properly. Maybe he'll file for personal bankruptcy before getting any money :)
- DangerousPie 9y ago
  Because he is also on trial for embezzlement. Bankruptcy just clears away regular debt owed by the company, but he can still be sued individually for illegal actions he (may have) committed.
  - charlesdm 9y ago

pmorici 9y ago

In 2014 when MtGox went bankrupt it took the Bitcoin market price down with it into a multi year bear market. One wonders if the sale of these $1.5 billion in coins won't bring about a second Goxing so to speak if they spook the market by selling off such a massive number of coins.

antiffan 9y ago

I recall that https://bitcoinbuilder.com https://bitcoinbuilder.com allowed people to purchase locked up GOX coins during this fiasco. This would be a good time to check up on those accounts.

Overtonwindow 9y ago

Another great piece by Matt Levine. I think legally the customers are only entitled to what they invested, but at the same time, Mt. Gox should not get that as it was profits from nefarious gains. So I think that money should go to the government as a penalty. Make the customers whole, zero out Mt Gox debt and obligations, and rest to the government.

panarky 9y ago
I'm curious if the same bankruptcy principles apply outside of cryptocurrency exchanges. Let's say I owned 1000 shares of Google five years ago, and my broker went bankrupt. At the time, Google was trading at $333 per share. Today the court liquidates the broker's assets to distribute to creditors, and Google is trading at $1050 a share now. The court wouldn't use Google's five-year-old share price and let the broker keep the rest. Instead, the court would distribute the actual proceeds of the liquidation. Why is it any different with Mt. Gox? Why wouldn't the court sell the bitcoin at current market prices and distribute the proceeds among the creditors?
- umanwizard 9y ago
  > Naturally, the court wouldn't use Google's five-year-old share price, they'd use the actual proceeds upon liquidation. Do you have a citation? I'm not an expert on Japanese bankruptcy law so it's not obvious to me.
- avs733 9y ago
  That is also the underlying problem, they DON'T have enough bitcoin to do exactly that... More importantly (note: IANAL), the bitcoins converted, by law, to a specific valuation on a set date when the assets are frozen. Per the court, years ago, the amount owed to each creditor was set in the court's working currency (i.e., the Yen) and the court doesn't deal in Bitcoins. In your example, during the bankruptcy process, they would set a date of valuation and you would be entitled to the value of the shares on the date when the bankruptcy was set. Future lost profits are not the purview of the bankruptcy court.
- kens 9y ago

theadamp 9y ago

"Again, the main function of a bitcoin exchange is to get its bitcoins stolen..." Really?

random023987 9y ago
> "Again, the main function of a bitcoin exchange is to get its bitcoins stolen..." > Really? Really. Is there any other reason to open a bitcoin exchange other than to have fools give you eTuplips that you can abscond with at a whim? I mean you might think that running an exchange helps further dreams of a bankless future, but in the real world, most cryptocurrency exchanges went poof, either to steal bitcoins or because they couldn't convince fools to part with enough bitcoins to steal. But the heady days of an exchange being hacked or closed by fraud every weeks are over. If you want your bitcoins stolen, I recommend investing in ICOs.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]

inDigiNeous 9y ago

So, I had bitcoins stored at MtGox at the time all of them were stolen or "disappeared". Can anybody tell me if there is some action I can take to claim them back ? Do I have to take legal action ? Thank you!

joshschreuder 9y ago
I think, and I could be wrong, that you have to have lodged a claim years ago [1] Users, who are bankruptcy creditors, were eligible to make bankruptcy claims against MTGOX regarding Bitcoin or cash through this system until at 12 noon July 29, 2015 (Japan time). After 12 noon on July 29, 2015 (Japan time), the only things that a User will be able to do using the Online Method will be to (i) view bankruptcy claims that he or she has filed himself or herself and (ii) transfer his or her bankruptcy claims to another person. However, nearer the time of distribution, the bankruptcy trustee is planning to give Users an opportunity to use this system again to make changes to the details of their bankruptcy claims, other than increasing the amount of the bankruptcy claims that Users have filed (for example, changes in their addresses or company names). Users will not be able to file new bankruptcy claims or increase the amount of the bankruptcy claims that they have filed. [1] https://claims.mtgox.com/assets/index.html#/ https://claims.mtgox.com/assets/index.html#/