http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775 In forum SL Wallet Public Forum en-us Fri, 09 Jan 2009 17:38:38 -0800 Fri, 09 Jan 2009 17:38:38 -0800 http://slcapex.com/forums/ Kudang SQL2RSS admin@slcapex.com webmaster@slcapex.com 60 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775
I think it would be a good idea to record the questions here that people want to ask who cant be at the shareholder metting then someone who will be there can ask them.

Manuela

in topic A sugestion how Arb could Fair by Manuela DeVinna ]]> Fri, 09 May 2008 01:49:38 -0700 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775/12808 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775
in topic A sugestion how Arb could Fair by Stryker Yoshikawa ]]> Tue, 06 May 2008 12:13:09 -0700 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775/12738 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775
Just thought about something, if i got it right, the last interest rate was 0.1%, what actually means, 3% or 3.1% interest monthly. So, if 85.000.000 Shares are out, wouldn't that equal a monthly buyback being worth about 2.550.000 L$ - 2.635.000 L$ (depends on the days the month actually has)and shouldn't this already equal at least 4.000.000 More shares to be bought back VERY SOON ? I never thought i will, but recently i start to doubt the announced regular buyback (which should actually happen monthly without being given a fixed date).

It seems very clear that more and more forced to be shareholders are getting angry, selling all they have and lowering the price even to sub .40 level which hurts the ones waiting more and more.

I suggest to present results and further guidance ASAP as this whole waiting and buying thing to somehow accomodate the loss is get boring and just stupid. Many have now lost big time in SLW and the Leaders should do something about that coz a wallet is meant to be keeping the money safe, not get money in the wallet and lose it coz there's a hole somewhere.

Regards,
Angi

in topic A sugestion how Arb could Fair by Angi Fargis ]]> Tue, 06 May 2008 08:20:35 -0700 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775/12725 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775
in topic A sugestion how Arb could Fair by Shaggy Yer ]]> Tue, 06 May 2008 07:48:13 -0700 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775/12722 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775
The trouble with good faith is that once spent, it is hard to get back.

in topic A sugestion how Arb could Fair by Nobody Fugazi ]]> Tue, 06 May 2008 06:51:24 -0700 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775/12714 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775
nya ;o)

in topic A sugestion how Arb could Fair by Nyazcawi Perway ]]> Sun, 04 May 2008 16:17:07 -0700 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775/12641 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775
in topic A sugestion how Arb could Fair by Arbitrage Wise ]]> Sun, 04 May 2008 11:31:15 -0700 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775/12637 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775 Sean

in topic A sugestion how Arb could Fair by Sean4you Shepherd ]]> Sun, 04 May 2008 00:04:27 -0700 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775/12626 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775
Yes, I brought up bonds in response to Jadge's statement that he had "not encountered any publicly traded IOUs", by pointing out that RL bond markets only trade in IOUs (they just call them "bonds").

A little Bonds 101 here:

Bond = IOU. Period. It's just one "with a diploma". An IOU holds just as much legal status as a debt obligation as a bond. You can take an IOU issuer to court and demand payment if the terms of the IOU haven't been fulfilled.

As far as remedies for bond holders, it depends. History is rife with examples of governments reneging on bond debts, with no recourse for the bond holders. Most commonly, if a company defaults on a bond or coupon payment, the bond holders are entitled to a share of the company's liquidated assets as specified in the company's articles of incorporation (or similar authoritative document).

But generally you wouldn't want this to happen, because the law requires many people to get paid before you: the company employees, the state (for whatever taxes are owed), the attorneys... then the preferred bond holders get all their money back before the average bond holder even sees a penny. Often there isn't even a penny left to share.

So there's really no difference.

in topic A sugestion how Arb could Fair by Revolvo Rotaru ]]> Sat, 03 May 2008 23:45:23 -0700 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775/12625 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775 I'll pass the message along Manuela...

in topic A sugestion how Arb could Fair by Bogart Beck ]]> Sat, 03 May 2008 18:14:01 -0700 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775/12619 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775
in topic A sugestion how Arb could Fair by Spm Aviatik ]]> Sat, 03 May 2008 15:26:26 -0700 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775/12616 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775 It seams you have a good contact to Arb.
Could you may be persuade him to show up and realy answer some questions ?
1- why dont we get a timeframe about the buyback (no exact dates but does he plane to buy all shares back within the next month or will it take years ? )

2- What about my first question about a fair mode of buyback ?

3- Why didnt we have a shareholders meeting yet where we decide about more then how much shares are given out to a new partner ?

I would realy appreciate answers to that questions because slowly i think the guys here who called me moron because i trusted in what he was saying are right.

Manuela

in topic A sugestion how Arb could Fair by Manuela DeVinna ]]> Sat, 03 May 2008 14:58:30 -0700 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775/12614 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775 You brought up Bonds.
Everybody else spoke about IOU.

Ohh yes. Almost forgot. Those who bought bonds have some legally rights dont they ?

Owner of SLW-shares havent any legally rights at all. That is a huge difference.
I suggest we get up on the road again or we will be lost.

in topic A sugestion how Arb could Fair by Sean4you Shepherd ]]> Sat, 03 May 2008 10:45:17 -0700 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775/12610 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775 Can I get fries with that Cheeseburger? ;-)

in topic A sugestion how Arb could Fair by Bogart Beck ]]> Sat, 03 May 2008 10:38:22 -0700 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775/12608 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775
Stocks and bonds come in all sorts of colors and flavors and the line between them can be quite fine and meander drastically. With the introduction of options and derivatives over recent decades, it may be pointless to try to classify them beyond a "security".

Without getting into needless detail, in general, bonds do have a maturity date. Most pay interest in the form of redeemable coupons attached to the original bond, each with a defined payment and date of payment (those that don't are called "zero-coupon" bonds). Fluctuating interest rates and the perceived strength of the bond affects the rise and fall of the bond's price (as opposed to it's value, which is promised to be $1,000, etc.).

Anyone who employs the right attorney and financial consultant can issue a bond. There are regulations, but they are essentially a formality - they create an opportunity for the investor to do their due diligence, by investigating the prospectus. If you skip the regulatory step and don't issue a prospectus, then it's an IOU. A bond isn't any better than an IOU, it just has more paperwork, like an "IOU with a diploma"; it's not a guarantee.

Just like with SLW, the investor is not always given a choice. During the huge buyout epidemic of the eighties, Drexel-Burnham looted trillions from investors by buying out their companies using bonds as leverage - essentially, "we bought your shares at a high price! Here's some bonds as your payment." They'd use whatever the companies had in easily-liquidatable assets (research funds, retirement accounts, buildings, land) to pay themselves... thus creating "junk bonds" that often became worthless when the company faltered.

Given that Arb has followed CapEx rules for issuing SLW stock and has issued a propectus, you could call it a stock with no dividends or a bond with no dividends or a cheeseburger with no dividends (yet)... but we all know it's an IOU. :)




in topic A sugestion how Arb could Fair by Revolvo Rotaru ]]> Sat, 03 May 2008 10:11:01 -0700 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775/12605 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775 Also Bonds usually have fixed dates when they mature and probably pay some interest.

Is it different in US ?

If i got this right its a huge difference between IOU and Bonds.


in topic A sugestion how Arb could Fair by Sean4you Shepherd ]]> Sat, 03 May 2008 00:53:41 -0700 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775/12597 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775
in topic A sugestion how Arb could Fair by Revolvo Rotaru ]]> Fri, 02 May 2008 22:52:32 -0700 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775/12593 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775
in topic A sugestion how Arb could Fair by Jill Clary ]]> Fri, 02 May 2008 14:26:10 -0700 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775/12582 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775
in topic A sugestion how Arb could Fair by Jadge Jacobus ]]> Fri, 02 May 2008 11:06:35 -0700 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775/12574 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775


in topic A sugestion how Arb could Fair by Revolvo Rotaru ]]> Fri, 02 May 2008 08:33:50 -0700 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775/12563 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775
in topic A sugestion how Arb could Fair by Jill Clary ]]> Thu, 01 May 2008 14:09:55 -0700 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775/12545 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775
in topic A sugestion how Arb could Fair by Revolvo Rotaru ]]> Thu, 01 May 2008 12:02:04 -0700 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775/12543 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775
in topic A sugestion how Arb could Fair by Jadge Jacobus ]]> Thu, 01 May 2008 08:21:50 -0700 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775/12541 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775 for example my sugestion for a fair way to do buybacks in future. Up to now i still hope he will do and show some interest in serious questions and sugestions that are made to him.

Manueal

in topic A sugestion how Arb could Fair by Manuela DeVinna ]]> Thu, 01 May 2008 00:11:13 -0700 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775/12534 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775
in topic A sugestion how Arb could Fair by Sean4you Shepherd ]]> Mon, 28 Apr 2008 11:08:25 -0700 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775/12391 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775
Somebody tried to explain it to me about how to force the price down by having a lot of shares and putting them up at a low price, requiring others wanting to sell to go lower then that and then having the original large order get cancelled once the smaller and lower priced orders start stacking up. I would hope this could be seen and wouldn't work all the time as the low sellers get eliminated... but then we don't know if it is even happeneing OR we are actually seeing market forces.

I am suspicious myself.

in topic A sugestion how Arb could Fair by Shaggy Yer ]]> Mon, 28 Apr 2008 09:55:56 -0700 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775/12388 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775
First of all, the people who are forcing the price down are screwing everyone. I would suggest putting their heads on a plate. Who are these mysterious traders that are keeping prices so low that when people are forced to cash out due to the length of time necessary for the buyback they are shortchanged? Who are these traders that simply hate to see people get the value of 2 buybacks so far, and continue to not only screw the people forced into SLWallet but also prolong the buyback time due to their trading?

I mean - fair is fair, trading is OK, but after 2 buybacks the share price should be substantially higher. Or is it that the decreased communication has plunged the faith in SLWallet so low that even the nickel and dime day traders can't manage to get the price of the stock up?

Rather pitiful situation, you see. Before you know it, it will all be traders getting the buyback and all the people who lost money in JT Financial will have a bad taste in their mouth.

I'll wait for the next buyback to write about SLWallet on Your2ndplace, but this will be a reference point for what I write... fair is fair, and right now things don't seem too fair.

in topic A sugestion how Arb could Fair by Nobody Fugazi ]]> Fri, 25 Apr 2008 21:32:15 -0700 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775/12328 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775
I am still working on the other answers for questions in this forum, I am getting clarification.

in topic A sugestion how Arb could Fair by Cash Yiyuan ]]> Fri, 25 Apr 2008 16:34:13 -0700 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775/12323 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775

in topic A sugestion how Arb could Fair by Sportsbets Writer ]]> Fri, 25 Apr 2008 15:00:52 -0700 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775/12319 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775
Regards,
Angi

in topic A sugestion how Arb could Fair by Angi Fargis ]]> Fri, 25 Apr 2008 11:36:55 -0700 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775/12318 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775
Hope that make sense. Let me know if you need further clarification."

If SLW consistes of SLCX then why does SLCX trade too?
Because the 4mL$ should appear on SLCX's financials if it belongs to it.

in topic A sugestion how Arb could Fair by Legolas Delgado ]]> Fri, 25 Apr 2008 05:52:33 -0700 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775/12316 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775
in topic A sugestion how Arb could Fair by Cash Yiyuan ]]> Fri, 25 Apr 2008 04:16:31 -0700 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775/12313 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775
Hope that make sense. Let me know if you need further clarification.

in topic A sugestion how Arb could Fair by Cash Yiyuan ]]> Fri, 25 Apr 2008 02:04:28 -0700 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775/12312 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775 But what do the entries in this "Property, Plant And Equipment" realy mean ? may be i am stupide but why does SLW hold this things at all .

for example $4,435,470.00 for
SL CapEx Software Development (carried at Total Development Cost)

What does this mean ? Does it mean SLW payed for the developement of the SLCaex software ? Why does one Company pay for the software another company needs ?
What is the result of this ? Does it mean that SLWallet gets income from this software as it is owned by SLWallet and SLCapex pays for using it?

You see what i mean ? The entry there means nothing if not explained.
I didnt coplain that the conversion was unfair Cash . WHAT i am complaining now is that we forced shareholders are treated as if we would have been willingly bought shares.
Then one could throw such a report at us and tell "If you are not capable to read such a report you should have kept your habds off of the stock marked"
A Fair behaviour would be to finaly bring someone here who can answer this questions about the report and tell us what this means. And if this report would be worth anything this could be anyone who is into this things (like you or Borgart) if not even you two can exactly explain what this entries mean what worth does this report have ?

Manuela

in topic A sugestion how Arb could Fair by Manuela DeVinna ]]> Fri, 25 Apr 2008 01:35:43 -0700 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775/12311 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775
A company asset that is vital to business operations but cannot be easily liquidated. The value of property, plant and equipment is typically depreciated over the estimated life of the asset, because even the longest-term assets become obsolete or useless after a period of time.

Depending on the nature of a company's business, the total value of PP&E can range from very low to extremely high compared to total assets. International accounting standard 16 deals with the accounting treatment of PP&E.

Investopedia Says... An example of a business with a high amounts of PP&E would be a shipping company, because most of its assets would be tied into its fleet of ships and administrative buildings. On the other hand, a management consulting firm would have less PP&E, because a consultant would only need a computer and an office in a building to run its operations.

This item is listed separately in most financial statements because PP&E is treated differently in accounting statements. This is because improvements, replacements and betterments can pose accounting issues depending on how the costs are recorded.

in topic A sugestion how Arb could Fair by Cash Yiyuan ]]> Thu, 24 Apr 2008 07:54:01 -0700 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775/12289 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775
The choice was made to convert due to the timeframe that it would take to bring lindens into SL.

Yes I understand that you say it is not fair, but what would have been more unfair is Arbitrage deciding to pack up and leave the game, or liquidating at a huge loss where no one would have got near to what they are getting at the moment.

As for the no compete, you need to do that because these investments actually do make money over a period.

Arbitrage has previously answered questions. I am doing my best to try and answer your concerns. Let me know if you need any other clarification.

in topic A sugestion how Arb could Fair by Cash Yiyuan ]]> Thu, 24 Apr 2008 07:49:59 -0700 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775/12288 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775
I am in the same boat. I have know clue what half of the things on the page mean. I always had the business mind to keep out of things I don't know about...the stock market is one of them but here I am just awaiting my buy backs. Arb rarely replies to forums, not sure how often he even reads this. When he does reply it is either in language that many people don't understand because again we aren't financial wizards, we are just normal people or he is asking you not to question him about what he is doing. Cash comes on and repeats the same lines 6 lines but does a nice job of changing the words around. Yes, we know...people are working and no one is asking us to sell at below market and yes we know about the term on the no disclosure thing...how about answering the real questions that are actually in the post. No, I am sorry Manuela but they don't seem to come. I am content to just wait it out. The business that I had faultered a lot when I couldn't get my money and I will be damned if I am not going to get my full money back. And no, this doesn't mean I didn't know the risks and blah blah blah about where did I think the money went to get interest on. (those are the other types of answers you will get by the way) It's just sit and wait or allow someone to buy your stocks at too little, too late a price. Will we ever see it. maybe, maybe not. Fair won't come into play until the very end when there are only a few left.

in topic A sugestion how Arb could Fair by Barbie Chaika ]]> Thu, 24 Apr 2008 07:08:03 -0700 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775/12285 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775
i also never really saw a what slw does, i readed the sheet, the prospectures ect... but at the end i see a simple forum platform here... a little bit of land owned there inworld... no really customer relationships... not even a reral imprint here on the page... and i saw only little buybacks of a few mio. L$ here...

the main thing of SLW that i understood was a good idear..
and an idear like this usually needs help for sure...
but i cant see any professional company behind this really...
or even an investing company that supports the development... etc...

so whats up there ?



in topic A sugestion how Arb could Fair by Alfred Kabuki ]]> Thu, 24 Apr 2008 04:56:36 -0700 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775/12277 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775 Do you realy consider it Fair ?
That i lent you money , then you tell me you will give me shares of a company for it that i never waned to be shareholder of. And then you make me sign a contract if i want to know where my money went. A contract that doesn't allow me to inform all others if i would find out that all is a fraud ? If you realy consider THAT fair you and i seam not to live in the same world.
Fair would be to give a Financial report that would be understandable. I for example still have no explenation what the entries under the point
Property Plant and Equipment (Hard Assets carried at Acquisition or Development COST)
mean. Do they mean that SLW owns the software and will get renvenue from it ? I would like to have this questions answered here so all can read the answers. If noone is able to explain this entries i would want to know what kind of transparency such a report provides if noone knows what the enries realy mean.

Borgard Beck sugested i should write a mail to Arbitrage with the questions but he could answer such questions here in the forum for all to see or am i the only one who does not realy know what all the entries realy mean ?

Manuela

in topic A sugestion how Arb could Fair by Manuela DeVinna ]]> Thu, 24 Apr 2008 04:36:17 -0700 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775/12275 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775 Could you please explain to us why we have to sign a no compete and non disclosure contract ?

And could someone send me a contract. I will be happy to sign.

Sean

in topic A sugestion how Arb could Fair by Sean4you Shepherd ]]> Thu, 24 Apr 2008 00:55:45 -0700 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775/12270 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775
in topic A sugestion how Arb could Fair by Cash Yiyuan ]]> Wed, 23 Apr 2008 19:30:44 -0700 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775/12265 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775 I think it's pretty clear by now that they have no intention of telling any of us what they spent all our depostits on or they would have given us a list of them by now. So other then the hints in the meeting minutes, we will never know.

Any hope for any resemblance of transparancey or honesty from these guys is pretty much gone now.

That balance sheet would be a joke in any real world institution that had to abide by transparency laws.

Fist of all, it starts out totally wrong. You don't publish a document like this and say it's for the "PERIOD ENDING" without defining just what is a period! It could be from the begining of when JTF first started for all we know. It obviously includes JTF info. in it because it's showing interest paid out and SLW doesn't pay interest. So the whole thing is worthless to begin with, for that reason alone.

Update, I just noticed that they have added another tab to the spreadsheet which includes more information, so maybe there is still hope. They should have published a closing statement on JTF and a starting statement on SLW and not be mixing the two and we still don't have any idea what "PERIOD ENDING" means. The only thing we should be seeing in statements on SLW are only that which pertains to it from it's start and each statement should be for a specifically difined period. The closing statement for JTF should remain posted and unchanging and only the SLW should be getting updated and republished at the end of each period. I'm still shaking my head in disbalieve that I ever let myself be fooled by these people that they knew anything about money management. I guess a $320.00 US dollar slap on my hands will teach me never to put my money into anything that isn't governed by full accountability laws ever again.

in topic A sugestion how Arb could Fair by Jill Clary ]]> Wed, 23 Apr 2008 10:15:50 -0700 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775/12234 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775 Balance sheat and then may be arb or borgard or who ever has some insight could answer them ?


Manuela

in topic A sugestion how Arb could Fair by Manuela DeVinna ]]> Mon, 21 Apr 2008 09:46:52 -0700 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775/12073 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775

The fancy numbers don't add up to 85million linden in assets, so us halfwits are still wondering where the money really is.

Potential earnings and earnings != assets. In any real exhange it turns into the dividends that are paid out, not used to buy back the shares. this is a negitive intrest lone for arb. Paying back peoples money with earnings off what he can with the profits of a much lower sum of money then what he recieved.

Adds up if remove the 85 million he is in the hole and add in what money people added to slw after it reopened. but it does not account for the 85 million assets that SHOULD be earning money for SLW and paying dividends to its investers.


thats where the problem really is.



Apr 19th, 17:59
Bogart Beck Re: A sugestion how Arb could Fair

Hey folks, don't believe everything you read in these forums - there are certain Halfwits around that refuse to check their facts but would rather spread fear and rumors and half-truths. Makes you wonder what their agenda is, huh?

For anyone else interested in seeing exactly where the JTF (now SLW) Funds were invested it was very clearly and conspicuously itemized in the recently published SLW Income Statement and Balance Sheet. I've done the math myself - sure seems to me to all add up.

Here's the link... enjoy.

http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=pwS3lFnMAI0VNMaaFCYRrRQ


in topic A sugestion how Arb could Fair by Jini Hammerer ]]> Mon, 21 Apr 2008 08:22:37 -0700 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775/12064 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775 Okay, this is off topic. I wont bring it up again in this thread.
My point wasnt whether JTIC are good or bad investment neither if dividents have been payed properly.
I thought i would make ppl reflect like this: if the JTF/ JTIC money was invested similar, the profit for SLW and JTIC would be similar to.

Can we make any conclusions of this ....


in topic A sugestion how Arb could Fair by Sean4you Shepherd ]]> Sun, 20 Apr 2008 01:48:15 -0700 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775/11980 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775
Thank you for the link. Now there are some questions.
The problem i have is , reading the Sheet, i still dont know what SLW Does.
Looking at the Balance sheet for example i see a section
Property Plant and Equipment :
SL CapEx Software Development (carried at Total Development Cost)$4,435,470.00
Does this mean that the SLCapex software belongs to SLWallet and that it is getting some income from it ?


Please be aware that many people who where putting their
money on accounts at JTF Bank are neither natively english speaking nor are they realy familiar with Balnacing. (including me).
I know normaly one would say that people who cant read such a balance sheet should keep their hands off of the stock Markets but in this case it wasn't the decision of this People to be involved in a stock market.

So an explenation that realy tells People what this all means in a reasonable simple englich would help verry much.


Manuela


in topic A sugestion how Arb could Fair by Manuela DeVinna ]]> Sun, 20 Apr 2008 00:45:24 -0700 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775/11978 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775 We read it, so what's your point, it still doesn't answer the questions we all have about where our $250,000 US dollars worth of deposits went and from what I've seen of the talk about SLW, releasing even this much info. was only because Arb was forced to do it.

Most of us already figured out before this was published that these two sources were all the source of income that SLW had, already:
Revenue [1]
Tier Payments $81,125.00
Google Adsense $88,508.75
TOTAL SALES REVENUE $169,633.75

Most of us have also already figured out that there isn't anything left to liqudate to come up with funds to do buy backs with either.

We also read the meeting minutes, that where published.

So now will one of you, in the inner cirle, start answering some of these questions of ours for once and explain where all of our money went too, while you are at it?

in topic A sugestion how Arb could Fair by Jill Clary ]]> Sat, 19 Apr 2008 18:29:55 -0700 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775/11968 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775 Hey folks, don't believe everything you read in these forums - there are certain Halfwits around that refuse to check their facts but would rather spread fear and rumors and half-truths. Makes you wonder what their agenda is, huh?

For anyone else interested in seeing exactly where the JTF (now SLW) Funds were invested it was very clearly and conspicuously itemized in the recently published SLW Income Statement and Balance Sheet. I've done the math myself - sure seems to me to all add up.

Here's the link... enjoy.

http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=pwS3lFnMAI0VNMaaFCYRrRQ

in topic A sugestion how Arb could Fair by Bogart Beck ]]> Sat, 19 Apr 2008 17:59:55 -0700 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775/11967 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775
I was thinking and it occured to me that when JTF existed that it had a steady profit stream which paid interest.
Now it has been converted to SLW and Interest is no longer paid (that was the problem before) Where is that profit stream going now? It should be substantial and be able to buy back the SLW shares. Perhaps thats what is happening.
Or was interest paid on deposits from new deposits? I hope not as Thats Ponzi!

Any way just a thought ..

in topic A sugestion how Arb could Fair by Gumby Roffo ]]> Sat, 19 Apr 2008 16:33:08 -0700 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775/11965 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775 because he still didnt give out detailed infotmation where the money we we had deposited on JTF went ?
This naturaly causes rumors as well as a way to buyback that brings him thousands of USD profit.
So i think that one way to make this rumors die would be transparency . That seams what most people want it seams
and i think it Arb was honest and trying to act in
the best interest of the depositors and now shareholders this would not hurt him.

Manuela


in topic A sugestion how Arb could Fair by Manuela DeVinna ]]> Sat, 19 Apr 2008 02:55:50 -0700 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775/11937 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775
As a JTIC shareholder, I am still getting a monthly dividend, and I can buy or sell the shares now at a pretty fair price and take the Lindens out via the ATM. Within the last couple of days I've seen the price vary between 1.02 and 1.07L/share. I think 1.02 is about right for now since another dividend is expected, then the buyback (which we have no reason to expect to happen at eg. 1.07 instead of 1.0)

Let's hope *I'm* wrong with the latter part of my post and that you're (Sean) not proved correct with your premonition!

Inso>>If, in a few weeks time, JTIC's holders are "cashed out" with SLW shares, then indeed these will be related!

Arb has said before the bank interest ban policy and reaffirmed afterward that he'd be buying JTIC shares back at 1L/share. The assumption is that we shareholders would be responsible for the "2.5% sales commission" to come out of the dividends we've received. We do have a pretty good idea about how JTIC funds were invested for the busy season of "sports betting" (bet arbitrages). JTIC was to provide "working capital" for the Juice Trading or whatever to bet with. Since there have been regular dividends and dialog about the earnings, it appears that this working capital is still "available" to generate these earnings (and hasn't been used to pay off other debts/obligations). What hasn't been said but I'm hoping is that closing out JTIC will be a simple straight forward "into Lindens" process happening on time concluding in a couple more weeks. I guess then we'll see if this has changed (this was all promised before the LL policy change and bank runs.) I must add that at this point I have every reason to expect all is on track for JTIC.

To stay on this thread's topic, Arb would be fair to keep to the agreement. And we would be fair to note there is no reason to start a disparaging rumour or speculation something has gone wrong.

in topic A sugestion how Arb could Fair by Insouciant Yue ]]> Fri, 18 Apr 2008 16:33:35 -0700 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775/11918 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775 You are right, and i was wrong. No forced conversion in JTIC.
However the money might be invested similar to SLW money.
The difference though are JTIC owners still got interest/divident payed every month.

in topic A sugestion how Arb could Fair by Sean4you Shepherd ]]> Fri, 18 Apr 2008 12:40:42 -0700 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775/11912 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775
anyone that NEEDED their money would have already passed the point of deperation and have either replaced it out of pocket. or left sl completly after being screwed out of their money. Only people selling are those sick of the lack of information and facts coming out of the arb camp and do not want to wait 7 years to see their money back.

ARB does not buy enough of the market shares up at a single sitting to even dent the day traders choke hold on the market. My guess is he never even got close to 1.02 last buyout.

Id be willing to put money down that some of the biggest choke holders are the OTHER CAPEX companies.
Why? They help help arb and make a nice profit doing it by choking the market. Not to mention they likey are forwarned when the buyouts are coming and have insider headsups.

in topic A sugestion how Arb could Fair by Jini Hammerer ]]> Fri, 18 Apr 2008 11:54:08 -0700 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775/11910 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775
I'm not disagreeing with you Angi that I'd like to hear more from Arb. Nor am I disagreeing with others who wish that the conversion didn't have to take place with/without their permission -- but I fault LL for that ultimately and the way LL announced the bank interst policy change without any consideration of the legitimate non-scamming banks or their depositors but causing runs really was the most unfair thing in this whole mess. Do you feel "SL financials" have been fairer after the LL ban "to protect"? If you had notice of the coming ban (and maybe another bank customer didn't for a couple of days), would you have exploited that? If you had a bank like Arb, what would be a fairer way to settle? Would having had a few weeks to not make long-term investments but short-term ones have helped the bank have more liquidity? or even a couple of days so a plan of how to restrict runs be put in place and make it fairer for all to get their L$ back (not just the handful who ran to the ATMs minutes after LL announced the change and caught all off-guard.)

in topic A sugestion how Arb could Fair by Insouciant Yue ]]> Fri, 18 Apr 2008 11:08:55 -0700 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775/11903 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775
I am supporting Arb too and hope that this whole mess will turn out good as well. The actual problem that many can't still see is the "announced buyback" thing.

Imagine, an investor is hearing from a buyback. That investor has a bunch of L$ left, buying maybe some hundreds of thousands of shares for let's say 0.60 to 0.70 and places them for sale at 0.90 without having SLW shares before, that would be a huge profit for him and those who Arb really "owes" the money will take a loss of at least 30%. In my opinion, announcing buybacks some days before they occure is not right and should being kept secret for the safety of the peops whose L$ have been converted to SLW shares.

What Arb could do is to talk to us, discuss with us, let us know about the financial situation at the moment. I don't think it would be actually be wise if he discloses all of his investments as there potentially can occure a run on them if they're as profitable what reduces the profit of every single one of us.

I hope this helped a bit with overthinking some soon to be possibilites about what can be done for us (shareholders)

Regards,
Angi

in topic A sugestion how Arb could Fair by Angi Fargis ]]> Fri, 18 Apr 2008 10:19:57 -0700 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775/11899 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775
If, in a few weeks time, JTIC's holders are "cashed out" with SLW shares, then indeed these will be related!

in topic A sugestion how Arb could Fair by Insouciant Yue ]]> Fri, 18 Apr 2008 10:09:20 -0700 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775/11896 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775 I think you overlooked JTIC.

What is different between JTF, JTIC, BCX ?
No need to answer, i just wanted to do a reminder.


in topic A sugestion how Arb could Fair by Sean4you Shepherd ]]> Fri, 18 Apr 2008 09:21:51 -0700 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775/11881 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775
I strongly agree with that statement. Generally, I've been a supporter of Arb and I still hope his endevour will work out. Having your timeline compressed on you (thanks LL) and having your working liquid capital drained at the same time (thanks LL for setting up the run) are pretty serious obstacles to overcome.

There is a precedent for this "conversion" working -- BCX bank. The "long term deposits" were converted into BCXLF and redemption/buyback (and retiring of shares) progresses. It will take a while, but it continues. Yes, if a holder wants out NOW, they can sell at market and take a loss. Yes, if the stock trades under 1L then it is a "bargain" to the whom is doing the buy-back (but that also means that those who are demanding 1 for 1 buyback will be paid off sooner as those willing to settle for less are cleared out more rapidly than if they'd held to 1L/share)

For me the question to ask is what is different between JFT and BCX? Just the amounts/size? Both gave holders a window of time to choose what funds would be converted into (BCX, BCXLF, or BAM IPO vs. SLW or any stock on CapeX). Travis is quite visible, but Arb has been more quiet lately.

I do not think "liquidating and paying EVERYONE a huge loss" would be the way to go, even still for SLW. This might bring "closure" but would also be a total failure.

Disclaimer - I chose to buy other stocks during the window; I never had any funds converted into SLW for me and I haven't bought/held any SLW.

in topic A sugestion how Arb could Fair by Insouciant Yue ]]> Fri, 18 Apr 2008 08:26:58 -0700 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775/11873 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775
I think the first two points are correct
Now that we are shareholders i am missing that there would be a meeting what should happen with slwallet.
There are surely advantages for Arb now that he converted our accounts to shares. For example that he can buy back a big part of the money he owes us for only 50 to 70 cent per dollar. I think it would be legal to do so if he would also accept the disadvantages of it like that HE is not anymore the owner of slw . the shareholders are!! .
So i think if he realy wants to be honest he has to set a shareholder meeting soon where where we could decide about the future of slw.

i only doubt that your third boint would be a good idea if slw should be transfered into a working company . first it will be hard to keep trace how much is still to be payed out on each share so that a lot of people would be making mistakes in selling or buying shares .
Especialy if slw should be transered into a working public company it needs its income to invest and work . We realy should take into account that this mess was not caused by Arb it was caused by LL who where simply throwing out a decision and only giving a verry short time for the change.
Your sugestion would n mean the end of the company even if slw would be a healty company .

And i don't think this is a hypotetical exercise.
Up to now there was only complaining about arbs actions . What i want here is to find people who have better ideas and sugest them. On Arbs reactions to this ideas , his answers (or his faing to answer) we will be able to prove his honesty and good will. if i would be him i as well would not answer t most of the threads here because insulting, preconceived opinion and calling for the FBI is not a fair discussion. I would like him to take part in a fair discussion here.

For me and i hope for a lot of people this will make things clear and show if we should stay with him or better get our money out of everything where he and his frinds have their hands in

Manuela



in topic A sugestion how Arb could Fair by Manuela DeVinna ]]> Fri, 18 Apr 2008 01:31:25 -0700 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775/11851 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775
Honest approach in my opinion would be this:
1. Disclose all of SLW assets and estimate future income.
2. Let shareholders vote: Liquidate or wait for future income. Don't decide this yourself.
3. If they choose to wait: pay everybody every month all income SLW receives proportionally to the number of shares held until L$1 per share is paid back. AW should never have bought below L$ 1 himself, but keeping the SLW market open so that people can get out of SLW if they choose to would be fine for me. You owe linden, you pay linden back. Otherwise distribute liquidation proceeds to shareholders. BTW liquidation should be administered by somebody choosen by SLW shareholders not by AW.

All of this are just hypothetical excersises. Reality is elswhere. More exactly at 0.58 lol

in topic A sugestion how Arb could Fair by Spm Aviatik ]]> Thu, 17 Apr 2008 15:34:12 -0700 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775/11795 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775
With that being said some payback guidance is better then none. The problem is no one has a clue whats going on or what is left of the JTF investments. Lets see if we can get any answers or maybe some more input from the folks around here.

in topic A sugestion how Arb could Fair by Ivan Halfpint ]]> Thu, 17 Apr 2008 12:49:02 -0700 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775/11778 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775
Yes i think he should make clear where the money went.
If he made a bad decisions thats acceptable. But what would this information help ,. Do we have someone here who could check the documents ? He could simply say "i lost the money in a train accident in china " we could not poove it or could we ? So wouldn't this information be useless? And that his friends are defeniding him, if they know he wants to do the best ha can, is not realy something that i would see as to strange.
But i agree that a consistent and plausible list of investemnts would help to build up trust. And if it isn't given i would like some statement form Arbitrage or an other competent person why we dont get this list.

about your second point .
Why would you hold trading ? if someone needs the money now you would only bring a problem to this person . Why not anonce that untill .. lts say end of the Month .. there will be a plan when aproximately the buybacks will come .
Not with exact dates (there seams to be a problem with it i dont realy understand ) but may be if the plan would tell us thet aproximately each month there will be a buyback of a volume of about L$ 1.000.000 then we would have a kind of outlook to the future. And again if this isnt given i would like to have a satisfying explanation for it.

One last point. What do you think about the buy back mode i sugested . would you consider this fair ?


Manuela

in topic A sugestion how Arb could Fair by Manuela DeVinna ]]> Thu, 17 Apr 2008 12:36:40 -0700 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775/11777 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775
Well here are some things that we would need from Mr. Wise as a show off good faith.

#1) Most importantly a complete list of what the JTF deposits were used for. If he is really honest he will have no problem producing this. If he made some bad business decisions then fine – we can see where he went wrong and we can live with this. He is human and simply may not be able to pay everyone back in full because of an investment gone bad. This happens in life – the problem is he refuses to release the complete details of how each of OUR JTF dollars were invested.

Also why do his cronies (no wait I mean honorable business associates) keep defending him and not trying to talk him into providing full disclosure? Can you guys in the OBC (no wait I mean SLCAPEX management and esteemed senior CEO’s) understand that there is a real deep concern here among investors about the way JTF was handled? Do you guys understand that all we are asking for is transparency? That would go such a long way in clearing this whole thing up.

Comrade Bogart (opps I mean Mr. Beck) as chairman of SLCAPEX you have somewhat of a duty here.

Firstly you have begun a campaign for clear and transparent financials for companies listed on the exchange. So you understand the importance of transparency – and although JTF was not listed on SLCAPEX people were still forced to deposit in JTF in order to use SLCAPEX. So should they not also have to be transparent and maybe give some financial guidance considering the circumstances?

Secondly you must surely recognize the JTF ‘incident’ has a very tangible and profound negative impact on investor’s confidence at SLCAPEX. This low confidence has hurt trading volumes and the exchange as a whole and being chairman you have a duty to shareholders to do what is right for SLCAPEX. The right thing in this case would be call for the full disclosure of what happened to JTF funds.

#2) Trading in SLW should be halted immediately and some kind of concrete plan for payback should be set up according to the JTF deposit portfolio. There could be some kind of a staggered approach such as. If you want you money now you get 40c on the dollar – if you wait till fall 65c on the dollar and if you wait till next spring 80c on the dollar (those are totally random dollar figures). We understand if you are not able to pay back 100% of deposits – we just want you to be open and transparent about it.

People have been selling SLW for 55-60c because they don’t know when or if they will ever see anything back from Mr. Wise also because we have no idea what happened to the JTF deposits. I don’t think asking for the details of what happened to the JTF funds is an unreasonable request. If nothing illegal has happened what does Mr. Wise and SLCAPEX management have to hide?

Surely the honorable Mr. Wise – law abiding citizen of the United States of America and Second life metaverse will seize on this opportunity to clear his good name from some of these acquisitions leveled at him. All we ask is for details of what happened to the money. Surely as fellow human beings we will understand if some mistakes were made – all we ask is that the people who run this exchange come clean with us so we can all move on and create a neighborly community that Mr. Beck speaks about filled a spirit of mutual cooperation.

This is not a difficult matter to totally clear up. I think this is why you are seeing so much frustration among investors. Just a little bit of clarity can put this whole issue to rest. That is my uncynical, unjaded opinion. You are likely never to see that again :P

What do you think Manuela? That better?

neighborly regards,

Brother Halfpint


in topic A sugestion how Arb could Fair by Ivan Halfpint ]]> Thu, 17 Apr 2008 12:04:48 -0700 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775/11774 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775 Its too risky. You might never ever be the same..... :) lolol

in topic A sugestion how Arb could Fair by Sean4you Shepherd ]]> Thu, 17 Apr 2008 11:28:40 -0700 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775/11766 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775
in topic A sugestion how Arb could Fair by Ivan Halfpint ]]> Thu, 17 Apr 2008 10:24:44 -0700 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775/11758 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775 Thats exactly the type of answers i didnt want to have here.
Why ?
because if he would simply sell everything as quick as possible this would probably mean a verry big loss and this would not be in the interest of the depositors.
Please Ivan only for a moment assume that Arbitrage was realy Honest . He has invested in things that where able to pay the interest rate he offered us but therefore it had to be long term investments and simply selling them in a hurry would bring a big loss. Then why should a former depositor want this ?
What i want here is to discuss what steps Arb could take if he is realy Honest and wants to act in the best way and interest for the investors and former depositors. If he doesnt take that steps then everyone knows what to think about him . But i dont want to go from the presumption that he isnt honest i want to go from the presumption that he is

Manuela

in topic A sugestion how Arb could Fair by Manuela DeVinna ]]> Thu, 17 Apr 2008 10:10:13 -0700 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775/11756 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775
Since we have no idea what Arb did with the money except 'long term software development project' yadda yadda - we have no idea what can be done.

What IS happining - Honest Arb is paying back people a % of what he owes them. So basically he is going to end up spending 300k of YOUR money and may you pay back 150K over he next few years assuming he continues his buyback. Quite frankly I would have no reason to believe anything that comes out of his mouth. As far as I can see he is just taking the few bucks he is making off SLCAPEX and buying cheap SLW shares with that. With the low trading volumes I wouldn expect much buyback activit in the future. What you can expect are more excuses and the defending of criminal fraud by the OBC.

in topic A sugestion how Arb could Fair by Ivan Halfpint ]]> Thu, 17 Apr 2008 10:02:09 -0700 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775/11753 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775 I wanted to open this thread because i think that there
was one question that was asked verry often "what should Arb have been done and how could a fair buyback look like "

First of all i think that the transfer of the Account value itself to SlWallet shares was ok. It gave people who desparately needed the money a way to get some of it by taking a loss.
What is not ok is how the Buyback is happening right now.
I was reading a post where Arb was telling what ever he would do he would get complains and it would be "lose lose situation" or something like that . So i think i have to say "Congratualtions Arb that you where finding a way in this situation that will bring you some thousand US" Dollar of Profit "

Now my sugestion about a fair way for the buyback:
Evryone who wants his Shares bought back by arb should set them to sell for 1.03. Then when a buyback comes a sum of this offers should be made.
Lets say there are 10.000.000 sell orders for 1.03. Arb wants to do a buyback with a volume of L$1.030.000 he could buy back 10% of the offers . then he could buy 10% of EVERY offer so someone who has set 100.000 shares would get 10.300 for 10.000 shares . leaving him with an open order of 90.000 shares.
This way everyone would slowly see his money coming back . the daytraders would not make the big profit that arb doesnt want to give them and it would be fair especialy towards the people who trusted his word and even bought shares from the others who realy needed the money or didnt trust him.

I would be realy interested in your opinions about this and especialy what Arbitrage thinks about this sugestion.
I know that this is not something that the system could do automaticaly but as slcapex has access to the database it could shurely be done.

Manuela




in topic A sugestion how Arb could Fair by Manuela DeVinna ]]> Thu, 17 Apr 2008 09:32:42 -0700 http://slcapex.com/forums/topic/SLW/1775/11750