Indeed pages 3-4 suggest that's part of the purported strategy, retiring the BTC debt at the low price (during "Part 1"). But I initially read p. 7 as proposin

Indeed pages 3-4 suggest that's part of the purported strategy, retiring the BTC debt at the low price (during "Part 1"). But I initially read p. 7 as proposing something that would work to attract needed money (including traders) over time, since it's labelled "Support from Bitcoin big players and core community - long term, high leverage". That would imply they're getting something of value in return, like equity or redeemable coins. But of course the new money, as investors or traders, can't get real coins cheap, because cheap coins don't exist. Perhaps I've misread – and p. 7 is only another restatement of the short-term gambit, to extinguish Goxcoins via buybacks while at panic discount prices. But then the "cash injections" are just a 100% donation to help unwind Gox debts, and the crazy part becomes: who'd want to throw fresh money into that wood-chipper? I suppose it might make internal sense if the audience was deeply committed to the idea of Gox's resurrection – existing investors, or people entangled facing personal liabilities. Prior recipients of in-retrospect fishy distributions, maybe?