[ne0n]

If MtGox only had enough funds to cover 15% of deposits, and they paid back each creditor 15% of their claim a year ago, the creditor could have bought Bitcoin with what was refunded and be in the same situation now. Instead, they seem to be dragging it out. I think most creditors would rather have something last year than nothing right now. Additionally, there's no upside for creditors if Bitcoin becomes $5,000.

[otoburb]

>>Additionally, there's no upside for creditors if Bitcoin becomes $5,000.

It's funny you mention this, because from what I can understand of Japanese bankruptcy proceedings[1], any excess assets remaining after paying off creditors would probably be given to the MtGox shareholders, which primarily consists of Mark Karpeles[2] alone. I believe the term surfacing in other circles is "unjust enrichment"[3][4].

[1] I am not a lawyer.

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Karpel%C3%A8s

[3] http://blogs.lawyers.com/attorney/bankruptcy/recovering-thro...

[4] http://scholarship.law.cornell.edu/facpub/1/

[h1d]

He showed up on Reddit saying he's finding ways to return the excess back to creditors in case price stays over 100% claims at the time of distribution.

https://www.reddit.com/user/MagicalTux/

[fjdlwlv]

After paying back creditors what they are owed, or after paying back a discounted amount?

[ne0n]

"what they are owed" == fixed rate of $440/BTC.