Not necessarily, 100% pure PoS coins are not as favorable because of the possibility for abuse, not to mention by pre-mining 51% of Amber and then opening a small PoW phase in conjunction with PoS it deflects initial suspicions of being anything other then legit. While still allowing a massive generation of AMBER from the 51% held by the company to continually sell off to investors at an inflated rate or to pass off as "Dividends" when BTC from the ponzi scheme that is "open financial rounds" of the company direct selling AmberCoins at inflated rates dries up.

Now is all of this pure conjecture and a bit of a stretch? YES IT IS. BUT it also would not be the most sophisticated scam theres ever been so is therefore still within the realm of possibility.

AGAIN THERE IS NO 100% SOLID PROOF ANY OF THIS IS TRUE/CORRECT BUT THERE IS ALSO NO 100% SOLID PROOF IT ISN'T. I AM JUST PRESENTING THE ARGUMENT FOR THE WORST CASE SCENARIO AS I AM ALSO A SHAREHOLDER SO AMBER BEING A SCAM WOULD HURT ME AS WELL.

Dividend Voting was manipulated, and i knew it.

"Investment protection"
"Backed by AMBER"
"BUY, HOLD @ GET DIVIDENDS in BTC/$"

Yeah right, my A$$. Nothing is protected, nothing is backed, and NO dividends in BTC/$.


This was well planned from the beginning.

It´s sad that so many people losing their hard earned money here, thinking it´s legit and they would get dividends in BTC/$.

Instead they get AMBER coins which they not even can sell w/o crashing the market.

ARE THERE REALLY THAT MANY PEOPLE SO STUPID as a leaf of bread here , voting for AMBER payout as dividends?

No, of course not !!!!!!!!!!. Voting was manipulated, and it was easy to do for the company with all their fake shit.

Everyone with even just a half braincell would vote for BTC payout.

wallet updated but 3000 Amber missing: Generated but not accepted mined

Status: conflicted
Date: 1/15/2016 17:28
Source: Generated
Debit: 0.00 AMBER
Net amount: -26.81 AMBER
Transaction ID: 9cd42672f6b50a6f32f42c4654cfcd96a9c72087954bef8fcd3f0403cdcffa5c

Generated coins must mature 50 blocks before they can be spent. When you generated this block, it was broadcast to the network to be added to the block chain. If it fails to get into the chain, its state will change to "not accepted" and it won't be spendable. This may occasionally happen if another node generates a block within a few seconds of yours.


anyone this some

How hard would it be for them to "sell" those coins to themselves to have permanent control of the top 3-5 wallets (selling to yourself is Free) and win any vote they would need to.
Pretty smart setup if they did it like that.
Anyone here want to ownup to owning some of the top 5 accounts or should I assume those are all just freely gotten company shills?

Maybe he was referring to Alpinist???

We have checked all transactions.
Voting result in Google Doc is final.

Payouts will be completed within 3 days (19.01-22.01)

Q4 2015 financial results should be available on 27.01.16.
Our financial department asked for an additional week to finish it.

Fitzy must be AmberCoinDev    *ironie off

it's true. on january 19th i saw them both online at the same time. fitzy even uses 1 space between words just like DEV!


edit: i'm stopping for now because i don't want to bury info dev posted. i'm glad there are others who are as fed up with the psychotic baseless claims as i am. have a great day gentlemen.

So out of 161 Shareholders we had a total of 40 Votes for BTC and 22 votes for AMBER.

That's a total of 62 Votes out of 161 possible voters = 38.5% of the voting population actually voted.

40 people  out of 161 = 25% of the populace wants BTC

However the vote was decided by
22 People out of 161 = 13.6% of the populace wanted AMBER.

I can't believe that 13% of the people made the decision for all of us.

I hate elitists, I hate that you counted one person's vote as more valuable than someone else's.