4 ms·

True, but by essentially forcing creditors to hold their bitcoins instead of allowing them to sell, it's likely that MtGox has actually done most of their credi

True, but by essentially forcing creditors to hold their bitcoins instead of allowing them to sell, it's likely that MtGox has actually done most of their creditors a perverse favor, and they will end up with more money than if they had received their full bitcoin balance in 2014 and sold some of it since then. Assuming they are actually allowed to distribute the full value to creditors in the end, either as bitcoin or yen (the bankruptcy is in Japan).

Scoundreller 6y ago
The funny thought is that once the creditors are paid off in dollars/yen, the remainder goes to the shareholders that usually get wiped out in a bankruptcy, but not this one.
- modeless 6y ago
  In this case the majority shareholder is advocating for the money to be distributed to creditors rather than given to him. https://www.ccn.com/mt-gox-ceo-mark-karpeles-tells-creditors-im-on-your-side/ https://www.ccn.com/mt-gox-ceo-mark-karpeles-tells-creditors...
ineedasername 6y ago
But bitcoin is a currency. If I lost $100,000 to something like this and it took a few years to resolve, I would expect to get back $100,000, not some other form of currency that was worth $100,000 at the time. What I'm saying is that MtGox can't claim they're making people "whole" from their losses by giving them what their money was worth at the time. Plenty of those people would have held on to the bitcoins and had their full value. Sure, I don't expect MtGox to be able to make everyone whole. I just don't think it's accurate to say they're doing so by giving them their 2014 dollar equivalents.
- modeless 6y ago
  The creditors' claims were converted to yen at the time of bankruptcy by court. MtGox has no say in the matter. Neither I nor MtGox are claiming that they are going to make people 'whole' in terms of the bitcoin balances they had. But MtGox (Mark Karpeles) is trying to get the court to allow them to pay creditors a whole lot more than their claim value, instead of distributing the excess to shareholders, and to do it in bitcoin instead of yen. All I'm saying is if you compare a hypothetical scenario where the bitcoin was distributed to creditors in 2014 to the hypothetical scenario where they receive it today, it's practically certain that creditors' aggregate wealth is astronomically higher in the latter scenario, because very few would have held the bitcoin long enough or sold at the right time to realize all of the 15x+ appreciation that has happened in that time.

Scoundreller 6y ago

The funny thought is that once the creditors are paid off in dollars/yen, the remainder goes to the shareholders that usually get wiped out in a bankruptcy, but not this one.

modeless 6y ago
In this case the majority shareholder is advocating for the money to be distributed to creditors rather than given to him. https://www.ccn.com/mt-gox-ceo-mark-karpeles-tells-creditors-im-on-your-side/ https://www.ccn.com/mt-gox-ceo-mark-karpeles-tells-creditors...

ineedasername 6y ago

But bitcoin is a currency. If I lost $100,000 to something like this and it took a few years to resolve, I would expect to get back $100,000, not some other form of currency that was worth $100,000 at the time. What I'm saying is that MtGox can't claim they're making people "whole" from their losses by giving them what their money was worth at the time. Plenty of those people would have held on to the bitcoins and had their full value. Sure, I don't expect MtGox to be able to make everyone whole. I just don't think it's accurate to say they're doing so by giving them their 2014 dollar equivalents.

modeless 6y ago
The creditors' claims were converted to yen at the time of bankruptcy by court. MtGox has no say in the matter. Neither I nor MtGox are claiming that they are going to make people 'whole' in terms of the bitcoin balances they had. But MtGox (Mark Karpeles) is trying to get the court to allow them to pay creditors a whole lot more than their claim value, instead of distributing the excess to shareholders, and to do it in bitcoin instead of yen. All I'm saying is if you compare a hypothetical scenario where the bitcoin was distributed to creditors in 2014 to the hypothetical scenario where they receive it today, it's practically certain that creditors' aggregate wealth is astronomically higher in the latter scenario, because very few would have held the bitcoin long enough or sold at the right time to realize all of the 15x+ appreciation that has happened in that time.