7 ms·
From reading that article, it looks like TradeHill claims they are missing about $100k in revenue, and maybe up to $200k. Why are they suing for $2MM? Even tre
by mhp 15y ago
From reading that article, it looks like TradeHill claims they are missing about $100k in revenue, and maybe up to $200k. Why are they suing for $2MM? Even treble damages (x3) plus lawyer costs wouldn't add up to 2MM in the most optimistic case. Can anyone explain the discrepancy?
- angersock 15y agoThey're bitcoin loonies and need to find a way to make real money?
- tjoozeylabs 15y agoGood get these pimps out of Des Moines for good!
- vsviridov 15y agoIt does mention that the cost of acquiring the bitcoin.com domain cost them "about $1M in equity"...
- noduerme 15y agoThis is one of the real mysteries of the article. AFAIK, and anyone in the bitcoin forums knows, and unless something changed in the last 12 hours, the bitcoin.com domain is still owned by Tradehill's CEO who's promising and planning to develop it into a prime piece of real estate. Which betabeat doesn't mention. So the only thing I can take from this is that he traded his equity in the dying company for the domain, and valued the equity at $1M, then wrote it off as a loss for the company and blamed Dwolla for it...? Go figure that one out...
- noodle 15y agolooks like a large chunk of the claim is wrapped up in the losses involved in the business closing down.
- mark_up 15y agoGo back and finish reading the article.
- csomar 15y agoSo if I have a $25K/month business and you destroy it, you should only refund for a month (or two) revenue? $2MM seems right for me considering potential future revenue, brand loss, lawsuit time and cost...