I never mentioned bankrupt at all. But i can account for 30m us$ worth of transfers out to exchanges, so we know steemit inc is not bankrupt. We are asking you to be transparent. Simple. No need to cloak it with off topic replies. You either have something to hide or you don't.

I am on STEEMs side and have spent many hours talking down unhappy users. So let me be as clear as you were, I am an auditor, CPA accountant and have a keen interest in data. I have an investment and stake in the blockchain and don't want an investment in a company like yours. With or without due diligence.  The request for a list of accounts is simple, not complex.

Posted using [Partiko Android](https://steemit.com/@partiko-android)

Well, Trump did not share his taxes either... how did that lack of transparency come across to you?? He does not own the US like you do not own steem but he kind of runs the country.  A little transparency goes a long way

> Requests for books simply show that the dichotomies aren't clear enough. So let this be the clarity for anyone who thinks they own a piece of Steemit, Inc. They do not.

They certainly do not show that. Someone engaging in or considering engaging in any sort of collaborative relationship entirely outside of ownership may very well be completely justified in looking for financial transparency. You are entitled to not provide it, but doing so does not encourage such collaboration, which indeed is the reason that private companies are often (though certainly not always) transparent with partners, affiliates, vendors, customers, and other sorts of non-owners about their finances. It is not out of obligation, but in pursuit of opportunity.

That's what the comments about alienation are about. It is certainly not about a CPA and auditor (nor other intelligent and well-informed members of the Steem community making similar inquiries) not understanding the distinction between a company shareholder and non-shareholder. That deflection is frankly insulting.

>  The Steem community will thrive whether we are here or not

I beg to differ. The 80% ninja-mining entity doing an exit scam either explicitly or implicitly would be a terrible blow, certainly not conducive to 'thriving' and quite possibly fatal. Likewise for simply mismanaging the resources. 

People in the community, as collaborators with Steemit in pursuing the success of Steem, have a very legitimate interest in undrestanding whether this is a situation where Steemit is making the best of limited resources in a manner that is likely to be beneficial to both Steemit and Steem,  is cutting its spending on Steem development and marketing to the bone in order to pocket more of the money for its own benefit instead, or is just squandering the money foolishly. The best (or perhaps only) way to understand that distinction is to open your books. If you don't, many people will assume the worst, and not unjustifiably so.

What we most certainly don't need is another lecture on the legal and structural distinction between Steem and Steemit. Believe me, we are all most acutely aware of it, and indeed that is a good part of the reason for these requests, rather than being any sort of reason not to make them.

> The Steem community will thrive whether we are here or not. 

Hi Ned. Now that you mentioned this, can you further elaborate on a possible exit strategy? Is "we" = Steemit, Inc - or would that also include your new business, the one that is (was?) supposed to develop the application *Destiny* ? In case Steemit, Inc withdrew from operating on the Steem blockchain, would you consider using the company's stake for a new investment - e.g. executed by that other company you're running? Or would an exit rather include a sell off, and the new business would need to rebuy the tokens then?

I pretty much agree that Steem could live without Steemit, Inc - we'd only need to know if/when this scenario is supposed to set in to get prepared for it. Steemit.com is still the most used application on the Steem blockchain with a widespread reputation on the internet. In case it was shut down, we'd need to try moving the userbase gradually towards other dApps with the largest lead time possible.

We've already lost so many users, we shouldn't dare to loose even more just for not having been planning things accordingly.

*Steem on* 🤙

>Sorry, no -- the company isn't bankrupt. It laid off a large staff who were working on R&D of new assets to avoid bankruptcy over several months.

  I was interested in buying steem, almost did yesterday before bitcoin popped up 10%.  The rewards for our blogging activities are becoming quite insignificant absent an investment in ourselves.   Today I been waiting for bitcoin, and thus steem, to tank a bit more before buying.   Then I see this.  I am not sure I want to buy now. keeping your business relationships propietary is one thing, a more open dialog about the financials is another.  I understand the legal distinction in denying that these coins are a security, but they certainly are investments.

  So who or what is the fudiciary of steem? Should we ask the SEC or a federal court that question, or would you provide us the candor we need?

  If there had been more openness, you might not have brought up the topic of bankrupcy.  It could have been adverted if there were dialogs about creative revenue streams.  If you listened to concerns about these SMTs, you might have limited such research instead of going full throttle.  Was the company hit hard from the crypto nuclear winter, perhaps someone could have recommended diversification.  Are your offices in a major city?  Why not a rural part of the world, or a rural part of the US is the USA added to legitimacy.

  I believe heard reports that the layoff was 70% of the staff.  I doubt that they were bringing home big money compared to the executives.  So these cuts that was suppose to stave off bankruptcy that could of happened in a few months, will delay bankruptcy for much longer?  Especially during this crypto nuclear winter.  Is not keeping an open book part of a legal strategy to deal with some creditors in hopes they will accept a lower percent on the dollar prior to discovery?