Colombia in Dispute over Shipwreck Treasures

[Darren in NC]

By definition, crypto-currency needs no base. It's value comes from a limited issue created digitally, and distributed via a blockchain. No base is needed. It's ultimate value will be based on its utility - how widespread it will be used between businesses and individuals. Most crypto today will be worthless soon as most dot.coms were worthless after the initial internet boom. Bitcoin and a few others could mature and do well.

I am open and curious, though. How was it presented to you to be used as a base, as a base would limit the currency to the value of the base itself?

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

How to Research for Treasure Hunting and Metal Detecting From Lead Generation to Vetting - Grab it through Amazon!

[ARC]

Ehhh not sure about this "crypto"...

And spell check doesn't even recognize the name / word "bitcoin"...

Why would I recognize it as a currency. heh

 

[Marine Archaeology Int.]

By definition, crypto-currency needs no base. It's value comes from a limited issue created digitally, and distributed via a blockchain. No base is needed. It's ultimate value will be based on its utility - how widespread it will be used between businesses and individuals. Most crypto today will be worthless soon as most dot.coms were worthless after the initial internet boom. Bitcoin and a few others could mature and do well.

I am open and curious, though. How was it presented to you to be used as a base, as a base would limit the currency to the value of the base itself?

Darren, what was curious about these proposals is that they came from separate sources and in a very short period of time (like different people had arrived to the same conclusion, independently of each other, at the same time). I'm certainly no expert in this issue. The issue of electronic currencies having no base, and therefore laking somewhat in value, is exactly why they thought it could be important to associate such currencies to something that is more tangible, will hold value, and cannot be divided. One of the proposals came from a team what was using the same approach with famous work of art as a base for their crypto-currency.

I myself see the value in trying to maintain the integrity of the collection together if at all possible, by not having to sell the artifacts recovered from a certain shipwreck. What I do not see, is the conundrum of how to solve the investor's returns aspects of this dilema. I have heard that Barry Clifford somehow figured out how to reach this balance with his Whidah project, but I do not know the details. I also heard that Tommy Thompson attempted to do the same and ended up half crazy, in jail, and covered with law suites. Tough problem to crack for sure.

 

[marconi beach]

Whydah project

As the first archaeologist on the Whydah project and the guy who identified her in 1984 and still consults on her, Barry Clifford figured out a long time ago that keeping a unique treasure together can generate income indefinitely. His new museum on Cape Cod and traveling exhibits provides income enough to continue excavating since 1984!

Recently a bone found in concretion will undergo lab analysis to determine if it belongs to Sam Bellamy as a relative of his has been located in the U.K. thus we have certain Bellamy DNA to compare it with.

 

[Mackaydon]

When we salvaged the "Capitana" (1654) off Ecuador several years ago, we had the salvage law changed to a 50/50 division. We then divided the treasure and other artifacts into two 'pots'; then gave the Ec. government the first choice. They approved the procedure and everyone was pleased.
Don......

 

[ropesfish]

When we salvaged the "Capitana" (1654) off Ecuador several years ago, we had the salvage law changed to a 50/50 division. We then divided the treasure and other artifacts into two 'pots'; then gave the Ec. government the first choice. They approved the procedure and everyone was pleased.
Don......

and then the Socialists took over.

 

[seekerGH]

Marine....

Whats the word? Been quite a while since the announcement was supposed to be made...

 

[Marine Archaeology Int.]

Marine....

Whats the word? Been quite a while since the announcement was supposed to be made...

Our understanding is that all preliminary issues between the Originator and the Colombian Government have been resolved and that the government is about to publish the details of the upcoming APP (Public-Private Association). Ten days ago the federal court Consejo de Estado finally ruled against a popular petition claiming that the treasure of the San Jose was submerged cultural patrimony of the Sate, and as such, could not be divided. This ruling confirms the 1675 (2013) Law in which certain items, like coins, bars, precious gems and pearls, are specifically not considered submerged cultural patrimony of Colombia and therefore, subject to a division with the Originator of the APP. This was expected, but still, very good news to everybody involved with shipwrecks in Colombian waters.

The ruling seems to have paved the way for the Originator to move forward with their project. The Colombian government still has to publish the details of the APP, and give the public 60 days to comment on the project. Even though technically the government can change his mind at the end of this process, this has never happened in the country before and my sources tell me it is pretty much a done deal. I guess pretty soon we will all know.

SSA still maintains that they are the owners of the the San Jose. They have now stop clamming that their original coordinates were the correct ones, and base their legal case in the concept "immediate vicinity" (or close enough). However, they have three problems to overcome: 1) the distance between the 1982 discovery and the 2015 one is 5.3 miles, 2) the depth is 200 meters more, and 3) the pictures of the target captured in 1983 by a SSA ROV do not match the pictures taken during 2016 by the Originator. As hard it must be to believe for SSA, it looks now like these guys have been fighting an epic 30 year legal battle on a shipwreck that was not the SJ. The latest ruling still validates their rights to 50% of whatever they can recover, but is point-specific to their original coordinates only. Good luck with that.

 

[seekerGH]

Thanks for the update. I did not realize the foundation of law was subject to litigation.

I look forward to the announcement, hopefully this will quiet the claims made by shills about who will be doing the recovery.

Will be back in USVI soon, cant wait to splash again.

 

[Salvor6]

seekerGH can you give us an update on your operation? What are you working on?

 

[seekerGH]

Testing out a design of a variable frequency sub-bottom profiler that adjusts the frequency to sub bottom conditions using the response spectrum. There is a pinpoint mode that focuses the sound to a very narrow area when needed.