An update on my order...
Placed the order 2 weeks ago today, it then took me 2 days to initiate the bank transfer and then presumably 3 days for the funds to land in the US.
I haven't had confirmation that funds were received but my order status is "preparation in progress"
I will let you know more when I know more myself.
Topic: [ActiveMining] Official Shareholder Discussion Thread [Moderated] - page 141. (Read 629902 times)
April 29, 2014, 07:57:14 AM
April 29, 2014, 12:53:53 AM
Ken, can you please provide a useful update on what happened with eAsic - how much did we (are we) getting back?
April 28, 2014, 05:55:39 PM
What's the frequency Kenneth.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jWkMhCLkVOg
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jWkMhCLkVOg
April 28, 2014, 05:22:07 PM
I was only ok with 100% reinvest because I assumed share trading was around the corner. Now we know an investigation can take 12 months I am sure many people will back me in at least getting 25% - 40% of profit paid out direct as a dividend to our addresses. Many of us would like the dividend now instead of next year.
I am in agreement for 60% - 75% of profits being reinvested however.
Who agrees with me?
I am in agreement for 60% - 75% of profits being reinvested however.
Who agrees with me?
Doesnt matter. Ken has already agreed to do 50/50 long ago and that cant change
edit: have these cards been sold?
http://virtualminingcorp.com/shop1/index.php?id_product=41&controller=product
April 28, 2014, 05:17:15 PM
Ken, do you think it unreasonable that shareholders ask these questions? Do you think we deserve answers?
April 28, 2014, 05:15:31 PM
Kenneth please
April 28, 2014, 05:13:58 PM
Ken how much are we paying per KW in the DC.
April 28, 2014, 04:33:44 PM
Ken can you let us know about the financials of the company? It is hard to make a decision on the dividends when shareholders don't know current and future projections for the return on invested capital so far.
April 28, 2014, 03:22:13 PM
The X% reinvestment idea is an interesting one and if it were implemented I would suggest it only makes sense for it to be 100%. Anything less would be self defeating. I'm not convinced it would be wise to attach conditions to such an agreement but think it more important to have an expiry date where the IPO's 50% payout/reinvestment be reintroduced.
Personally I think we are barking up the wrong tree at this time with this idea and that we shareholders should focus our efforts on pressuring Ken in aspects of the business that 1) we are able to wield influence, and 2) are relatively easy for Ken to implement.
Which brings me to the website. This is such an easy thing to remedy and yet isn't being sorted out. When you consider the negative effect this is having on the business in terms of lost revenue and reduced reinvestment, it puts the charitable offer of letting Ken spend our mining divs into perspective. If the company is to maximise its reinvestment funds it's needs to sell more hardware rather than take money from the shareholders profits.
Ken please;
Remove the out dated hardware from the website.
Reduce the price of the Prospector to reflect the higher performing and currently lower priced Gold Rush.
Amend the listing to display the correct hash rate of the Gold Rush.
How difficult can these three simple tasks be?
Personally I think we are barking up the wrong tree at this time with this idea and that we shareholders should focus our efforts on pressuring Ken in aspects of the business that 1) we are able to wield influence, and 2) are relatively easy for Ken to implement.
Which brings me to the website. This is such an easy thing to remedy and yet isn't being sorted out. When you consider the negative effect this is having on the business in terms of lost revenue and reduced reinvestment, it puts the charitable offer of letting Ken spend our mining divs into perspective. If the company is to maximise its reinvestment funds it's needs to sell more hardware rather than take money from the shareholders profits.
Ken please;
Remove the out dated hardware from the website.
Reduce the price of the Prospector to reflect the higher performing and currently lower priced Gold Rush.
Amend the listing to display the correct hash rate of the Gold Rush.
How difficult can these three simple tasks be?
April 28, 2014, 03:18:18 PM
Without even waxing philosophical about shareholders owning shares or having say, I was just pointing out that it is hard to allocate funds when:
A) We have no cost data
B) No idea what profits can be allocated (or even if ActM is profitable!)
At least the discussion regarding the website is dealing with something tangible that we can see. My point is, Ken needs to get financials out.
Now THAT is asking the CEO for something specific about the company strategy.
A) We have no cost data
B) No idea what profits can be allocated (or even if ActM is profitable!)
At least the discussion regarding the website is dealing with something tangible that we can see. My point is, Ken needs to get financials out.
Now THAT is asking the CEO for something specific about the company strategy.
...
We could sit here bitching all day about the company as some seem to love to do or we can ask the CEO specific questions about company strategy. I know which has the higher chance of actually achieving anything.
...
We could sit here bitching all day about the company as some seem to love to do or we can ask the CEO specific questions about company strategy. I know which has the higher chance of actually achieving anything.
...
I agree 100% I have been asking for a Financial report for awhile now. (For months). It's been 28 Days since his most recent deadline was missed too.
April 28, 2014, 03:17:05 PM
Are we still on track for ~170TH by the end of the week?
Edit:
Edit:
April 28, 2014, 01:57:55 PM
Without even waxing philosophical about shareholders owning shares or having say, I was just pointing out that it is hard to allocate funds when:
A) We have no cost data
B) No idea what profits can be allocated (or even if ActM is profitable!)
At least the discussion regarding the website is dealing with something tangible that we can see. My point is, Ken needs to get financials out.
Now THAT is asking the CEO for something specific about the company strategy.
A) We have no cost data
B) No idea what profits can be allocated (or even if ActM is profitable!)
At least the discussion regarding the website is dealing with something tangible that we can see. My point is, Ken needs to get financials out.
Now THAT is asking the CEO for something specific about the company strategy.
...
We could sit here bitching all day about the company as some seem to love to do or we can ask the CEO specific questions about company strategy. I know which has the higher chance of actually achieving anything.
...
We could sit here bitching all day about the company as some seem to love to do or we can ask the CEO specific questions about company strategy. I know which has the higher chance of actually achieving anything.
...
April 28, 2014, 01:56:04 PM
sorry now i did my research - they are real but IMO not a very good method of cicuit overload protection when the key safety component can be adjusted to higher/lower sensitivity.
What happening is that under load the voltage was going down to 115 which caused the overload. Our electrician came over on Sunday morning and adjusted the voltage up to 130 which under load went down to 122 and solved the problem.
makes sense.
however, why are you not using 208V power? almost every 12V power supply is 3-6% more efficient when drawing 200+ volts, and you can virtually double the amount of equipment without hitting the same amperage off the circuit panel
April 28, 2014, 01:36:35 PM
It feels pointless to debate percentages of reinvestment when Ken hasn't released any profit projections.
It is pure fantasy to debate or provide advice for anything about the workings of this business when the reality of it is that none of us have any say whatsoever.
with or without our shares/dividends.
It's common knowledge that none of us have a say in this company. Doesn't hurt to state our opinions though.
April 28, 2014, 01:28:32 PM
It is pure fantasy to debate or provide advice
To debate and offer someone advice can't by the nature of the meaning of the word be 'fantasy'.
However if you mean it's fantastical to think Ken might listen to his shareholders views, well that might be your opinion but it been proven wrong by past events when Ken has listened.
I don't see a problem with speaking up about how we want the company to be run and/or pre-empting whatever decision is going to be made about these new proceeds from online sales.
We could sit here bitching all day about the company as some seem to love to do or we can ask the CEO specific questions about company strategy. I know which has the higher chance of actually achieving anything.
April 28, 2014, 01:13:47 PM
It feels pointless to debate percentages of reinvestment when Ken hasn't released any profit projections.
It is pure fantasy to debate or provide advice for anything about the workings of this business when the reality of it is that none of us have any say whatsoever.
with or without our shares/dividends.
April 28, 2014, 12:55:38 PM
It feels pointless to debate percentages of reinvestment when Ken hasn't released any profit projections.
April 28, 2014, 12:31:37 PM
I am with 100% Reinvestment after a Good Faith event has been proven with our shares. By this I mean we have our shares and some Dividend has been paid out for it. Specifically I am with 100% reinvestment if these things happen:
I am a long time shareholder, plan to stay a long time shareholder, and I doubt my views line up with everyone here. If anyone disagrees with me please let me know I am always willing to listen/learn.
- Shareholders get access to our shares on a exchange the majority has accepted. Whether it be some Decentralized Exchange/Havelock/(Whatever)
- A legitimate Financial Audit happens (I don't want Ken to just reinvest 100% if it isn't going to help anything)
- Ken lays our a plan for the realistic plan for the foreseeable future. By this I mean that Ken lays out a path, really any path that can hold up to criticism about where he wants to take this company over the next 6-9 Months.
I am a long time shareholder, plan to stay a long time shareholder, and I doubt my views line up with everyone here. If anyone disagrees with me please let me know I am always willing to listen/learn.
I would most certainly be ok with 90% reinvestment after such a "good faith" event. If we are trading and getting the 10% dividend for example.
The reason why I am no longer ok with super high reinvestment is because many of these investigations have taken 12 months, and thats a very long time in the world of Bitcoin to get access to our property. Essentially the investigation has taken our very shareholder rights away and we are awaiting the US Government in being allowed to have our property returned to us. Because of this I would love to get the dividend so if the investigation forces Ken to shut down and lose our investment, we still make off with a little amount of our original invested amounts.
Even if I can get one bitcoin returned from the dividend it's better than zero for my 400-500 bitcoin investment in this company.
April 28, 2014, 12:17:25 PM
Hi Ken,
So we have these One Gold Rush boards on the site now and the listing says they are 512GH/s but the details section ('Board Highlights') says they are 750TH/s. You also said they were typically 750 so must be a typo in the listing?
It also says under availability - 'more coming soon'. So does that mean we have sold a bunch of these? If so can you say how many roughly and where the profit from these boards will go? Are you doing a 100% reinvest into the company or are you setting some aside for the shareholders?
btw I think the majority on here have said they are happy with the idea of a 100% reinvest for now as we get the business going.
Thanks man.
So we have these One Gold Rush boards on the site now and the listing says they are 512GH/s but the details section ('Board Highlights') says they are 750TH/s. You also said they were typically 750 so must be a typo in the listing?
It also says under availability - 'more coming soon'. So does that mean we have sold a bunch of these? If so can you say how many roughly and where the profit from these boards will go? Are you doing a 100% reinvest into the company or are you setting some aside for the shareholders?
btw I think the majority on here have said they are happy with the idea of a 100% reinvest for now as we get the business going.
Thanks man.
I was only ok with 100% reinvest because I assumed share trading was around the corner. Now we know an investigation can take 12 months I am sure many people will back me in at least getting 40% of profit paid out direct as a dividend to our addresses. Many of us would like the dividend now instead of next year.
I am in agreement for 60% of profits being reinvested however. But I cannot get behind 100% because it's likely the funds will be misspent at some point.
Who agrees with me?
I am with 100% Reinvestment after a Good Faith event has been proven with our shares. By this I mean we have our shares and some Dividend has been paid out for it. Specifically I am with 100% reinvestment if these things happen:
- Shareholders get access to our shares on a exchange the majority has accepted. Whether it be some Decentralized Exchange/Havelock/(Whatever)
- A legitimate Financial Audit happens (I don't want Ken to just reinvest 100% if it isn't going to help anything)
- Ken lays our a plan for the realistic plan for the foreseeable future. By this I mean that Ken lays out a path, really any path that can hold up to criticism about where he wants to take this company over the next 6-9 Months.
I am a long time shareholder, plan to stay a long time shareholder, and I doubt my views line up with everyone here. If anyone disagrees with me please let me know I am always willing to listen/learn.
Jump to: