Well I'm going to call the US attorney's office anyways and we will see if they are filing the proper paperwork with the government to ask for 36 million.  There is a BIG difference between letting miners mine a coin and buy and sell in a marketplace and advertising an IPO that requests up to 36 million with ZERO transparency.  I would bet every bitcoin that I have that these guys are breaking a ton of laws in US and Canada.

Why am I so upset?  Because, I'm pretty sure these guys are breaking a ton of laws.  When you are asking the joe public for 36 million dollars, I don't care if its in equity or coins and advertising it as an IPO.  There better be a ton of transparency as to where who and how and what. Every detail should not go uncovered and you are lackadaisically saying that its ok, there is nothing wrong with that, these are good devs they should be paid....something something revolution blah blah blah.  Well, I think there is something entirely wrong with that.

Stop saying "you guys" to random users. I told you, I'm not part of this project. I'm a user on a damn forum who is looking at a project just like you are. You're on here making legal threats (against this project) and physical threats (you told me to kill myself). When you call, make sure you mention Mastercoin, Nextcoin, and every other project that has taken money from people. By your definition, all of these criminals need to go to jail. Also tell them we don't know who Satoshi Nakamoto is, so he could be a terrorist. And thanks for scaring the shit out of everyone, probably even people who work or want to work on Ethereum ideas. You're an awesome human being. Maybe go get a job where you can bully people all day.

Under the proposed SEC rules, issuers who intend to conduct a crowdfunding offering are required to file certain information with the SEC and provide this information to investors, potential investors and the crowdfunding intermediary that they'll be using — there are many vying for dominance, but Kickstarter is a popular example.

In addition, an issuer — for our purposes, let's think of them as a startup company, but other groups will get involved — is required under the proposed rules to prepare and file a Form C on EDGAR (the Electronic Data-Gathering, Analysis, and Retrieval system, which is used by those required by law to file forms with the SEC) before the offering commencement. Among other things, Form C requires the reporting to the SEC of the following:

information on the issuer, directors and officers, owners (if they own 20 percent or more of the issuer),
business plan,
intended use of proceeds,
targeted offering amounts,
offering price and how it was determined,
information about the intermediary being used,
and additional information set forth in the proposed rules.
The implementing rules also require disclosure of certain information not required by the JOBS Act, such as the number of current employees of the issuer, risk factors relating to the offering, the issuers of debt position and related party transactions, among other information.

The SEC's implementing rules follow the original statutory framework and require an equity crowdfunding issuer to provide the following financial information:

For offerings of $100,000 or less, US GAAP (generally accepted accounting principles) financial statements for the two most recently completed fiscal years or shorter period during which the issuer has been operating as well as filed income tax returns for the most recently completed fiscal year.
This is the minimum information and filing that is required for companies requiring up to one million dollars only.  These guys are asking for 36 million.  LOL you have to file with the SEC and register as an IPO with all the proper disclosures to even think about it.  You all should be asking MINIMUM the following questions US law requires for a minute one million dollar request of crowdfunding.  Where is all this information? Something something devs revolution, they deserve to get paid for hard work is not going to cut it.  These rules and laws are in place to prevent fraud and exactly this type of thing they are trying to pass onto everybody with zero transparency.

For offerings between $100,000 and $500,000, CPA reviewed US GAAP financial statements along with the CPA's review report; and for offerings over $500,000, CPA audited US GAAP financial statements.
An issuer, like a tech startup, would also be required to provide a narrative discussion of its financial condition covering, among other things, historic results of operations and liquidity and capital resources. In many respects, this is similar to a MD&A (Management Discussion and Analysis, which provides a narrative explanation, through the eyes of management, of how an entity has performed in the past, its financial condition, and its future prospects), but is not intended to be as lengthy or detailed.

The proposed regulations also require each issuer to do the following:

file with the SEC and post to its website an annual report within 120 days of the end of each fiscal year that discloses information about ongoing business and capital-raising activities.
In addition, issuers are restricted in their ability to advertise their crowdfunding offering only through a print or electronic notice containing specific limited information.
The notice must direct potential investors to the crowdfunding intermediary platform being utilized, where these investors could then access additional information about the offering.
However, under the proposed rules, there would be no restriction on an issuer's ability to communicate with investors or potential investors on the intermediary's platform, or make communications that do not refer to the terms of the offering. For example, an issuer can advertise its products or services so long as it does not refer to its crowdfunding offering in the advertisement.
The SEC's proposed rules clarify issues arising from the $1 million capital raise maximum prescribed by Congress in Title III of the JOBS Act as well as the per investor maximums. Under the proposed rules, only securities sold in the crowdfunding offering would count toward an issuer's $1 million capital raise maximum. The proposed rules also permit crowdfunding issuers to rely on the efforts of crowdfunding intermediaries to determine whether an investor has reached the per investor limits prescribed by Title III of the JOBS Act.

i think today was the announcement date along with the Miami conf.

Donations...lol the way you are carefully choosing select choice words make it seem like they are trying the best they can to appear legal.  I'm very confident they are breaking a ton of laws, I don't care how you want to phrase the investments.  We all know what they are doing, what I'm asking anyone who wants to invest is where is all the transparency and why have they not filed with the SEC?  There is a lot of suspicious behaviour and commenting going on in this message board.  If someone came to your home and asked you to invest 200,000 and showed you a youtube video and a message board ad would you give it to him?  No, fawk no you wouldn't, you want financials, business plan. background checks the whole nine yards. That's the minimum,. forget the fact that this is just another coin and there will be hundred more like this popping up every month until the crypto hype dies.  What I want to know is why would anybody be against more disclosure, more information, detailed business plan, financials, background checks on these individuals.  Who would argue against that for an entity that is trying to raise up to 36 million?  Who would question the need for more transparency and compliance with regulations? Weird shit going on here.

So how can i make money fast on this if i have to make every year to take out 1/3 of my investment?

wow ... I was excited at first, but too many red flags for me.

To me it just seems Ethereum is some glorified software platform, with all these promises
and ideas on how it can be used, smart property, replace ICANN, file storage, 'thousands of applications' etc... but the catch seems they want you to develop that on their platform with fees of course, sounds like a bank's business model ironically.

Im sure the founders are genius programmers, no doubt.  But it doesnt warrant the hype and initial investment in my opinion.

50% premine  ... dont try to hide it with algebra .5X just say 50%

Name dropping Goldman Sachs ... wow, cryptos have come a long way!

I'll sit this round out, good luck everybody!

The ETH team

Let me put this simply, if it was your 36 million they were asking from you, would you just hand it over to them based on a youtube video and message board on Bitcointalk?  Hell no, nobody would and if you did even consider it you would hire a consulting company to go through every individual , financials,business plan with a fine tooth comb.  And then you would probably pass anyways.

What I ask you is this, why should you expect less from the entire Bitcoin community? Is it because you are only planning to invest a hundred dollars and who cares if I lose that?  You should care because an investment of this size sets a precedent.  Original Bitcoin had no pre-sell, no pre-mine it was truly a revolution and changed the world.  You went from no pre-mine to a small pre-mine but no pre-sell,, then you wen to small pre-mine and small pre-sell, then small pre-sell and large pre-mine.  Now these guys are going for the homerun, huge pre-sell and huge pre-mine.  

We have been conditioned slowly and surely to accept larger penalties bit by bit and now they just expect us to roll over and hand them money to become millionaires before they even launch,  Thats seriously fuked up.  Bitcoin was meant to be free and these guys are just making slightly different versions of it to capitalize on making money.  Which is fine UNTIL you flat out ask for 36 million in capital.  That is where you have to draw the line and I believe they cross boundaries from having people mine coins and trade them on an exchange to a full blown attempt at monetizing from the bitcoin hype.  But here is where they cross the line with the government and SEC...they are now entering a whole new ballgame and trying to pass it on as just another coin.

NOT.  When you start asking for 36 million up front, thats not a coin anymore, you have to register with the proper agencies in all the countries you do business with.  If you are going to make 36 million without even launching there HAS to be due diligence and proper procedures to prevent fraud.

No, you are 100% percent entirely wrong on this matter.  Just because this is a free market does not give an entity the right to raise 36 million without any transparency.  Your type of thinking allowed millions of regular people, seniors who know nothing about financing get scammed into buying or investing in crap and basically get scammed.  Free market is great as long as there is COMPLETE transparency for people to make up their own mind.  When transparency is hidden or avoided, it allows people a free rein to manipulate and use you.  So yeah free market and freedom of choice is great, as long as we know wtf we are buying,  You want to give these guys 36 million dollars based on a youtube ad and 2 for 1 sale? Yea right you would never do it, you are only saying this because ts not your money so you could give a shit.  Let people blow their money if they want, but with full disclosure and transparency, why is that such a hard concept to grasp?