Topic: [CentiMine] Anonymous mini-mining contracts on GLBSE (CM400) - Final payout! - page 4. (Read 11262 times)

If you do not have enough funds to make the payment it will fail as payment is carried out right away, so it will check your account to see if you have enough funds.

If you had enough funds in your account to make the payment then it would pay 100btc to the single external share.

The system doesn't do rounding, it will try to divide the amount by the number of shares, and give an integer. If it's not exact then the remainder will be left in your account, so you don't need to worry about making an exact payment, you just tell the system what you want to pay and it will do it's best so that everyone gets the same with the remainder being left in the account.

Generally the system tends to return errors when state is not as expected (for example you try to pay 100btc but only have 1btc in your account).

Just to make sure:

If I have 100 shares in total issued, 1 single share sold and 1 BTC on my GLBSE account:

Will "bmc.py pay [SHARENAME] [100 BTC]"

a) fail, because I don't have 100 BTC in my account to split amongst all shareholders (me and the holder of the 1 external share)
b) send the 1 BTC to the holder of the 1 external share, setting my account balance to 0
c) try to send 100 BTC to the holder of the 1 external share and fail

My expected behaviour would be b), but better be safe than sorry!
[edit: or a), though that could be (nearly) circumvented by sending 100 times 1 BTC (as I would only need a second BTC on my account then), so it would only spam your platform with no different outcome]

Also, how is rounding done?
I might just only send out amounts that are divisible by [amount of total shares] to be sure...

Now tested, you can pay shareholders with:
bmc.py pay CM400 AMOUNT

With AMOUNT being the total amount (full 64bit integer) that will be split over all shares issued.

Payment won't be made to shares that are in the account of the issuer, so only those who have been given or purchased shares will get the payment.

Any questions please let me know, Nefario.

Ok, I'll count "not yet tested" also as "not to be used".
I really don't want to risk loosing/destroying 3.3 BTC and will wait until I hear from you that it's safe to use.

Thanks for the heads-up and good luck for the web client!

The payout functionality is there but not tested (I would seriously recommend not using it, do so at the peril of your own soul).

We've had a breakthrough on the web client so we'll have one to use in about 1-2 weeks.

Sorry for the lack of other updates, this is what has been keeping me busy.

Small update:

Everything is running smoothly, 361 shares have already been sold.

Unfortunately the payout function of GLBSE is still not in place, so the 3.3 BTC that would have been paid out today, will be paid out in one week from now (and so on, until the payout function is implemented).

Also nefario said he wants to implement a basic webinterface to GLBSE very soon. If you find the current interface too difficult to handle, just wait a little - help might be just around the corner!

Well, actually there is nothing to vote upon - as no voting rights are specified anyways (and I am still the full owner + contact person of that contract).
I would use the vote just for input to take into consideration, but this can also be done here on the forums as you did. Additionally it is not possible for shareholders currently to give other opinions than "yes" or "no" and I want to deal with this issue as fast as possible, as it is an important point that very well could scare away customers.
[Edit: Also I'm giving away my own money in addition to what will be paid out from the contract, not the other way round - and I think I can decide myself how and where to spend it]

I recalculated everything, and since the contract did cost converted to Bitcoin ~100 BTC when bought, I personally think a margin of 50 BTC should be ok. This is given the unique product, time to be and already invested from my side and (especially!) the volatility of the BTC <--> USD prices plus my plans for expansion/resale in the future. I do not want to set a margin in USD and then convert that on the last day into BTC, as it seems a bit arbitrary to me and also would make this more of a gamble than contract-mining currently is. A system like that actually could even lead to me taking ALL BTC mined and the shareholders owing me money, should one BTC become worth much less than it currently is. Also this would then lead again away from using BTC as real currency in my opinion.

The way I'm going to handle this, is that I will keep the prices as they currently are, but deposit 250 BTC into the "pot" (= the 5/7 payout at the end of the contract) from my own money to reduce the effective prices of shares to a more sane level. This means each share has a guaranteed payout of additionally 0,00625 BTC, but also means that in the end I am "borrowing" from the shareholders up to 250 BTC (if all shares are sold) until the contract expires. I promise however to not use that money/ressources for any personal gains or speculative ventures (like buying shares/cashing out), as it belongs to the shareholders - not me. As I would have had that money on my GLBSE account anyways with the previous price too, there is nothing that current shareholders wouldn't have already agreed to.

Also I promise to calculate share values + margin again earlier next time I issue such a contract to prevent unpleasant discoveries like this one. I was even shocked myself, when I entered the current rates in my spreadsheet I used for calculations!

My apologies for any inconvenience caused - the spreadsheet has been updated accordingly and there is also a link to this post as an explanation.

Okay - I've setting notifications on for this thread. I'm hoping that eventually you'll work out your pitch (clear offer) and have margins that I'm okay with. At that point I'll reconsider investing.

If you're going to change things on present shareholders then consider making the options clear then using the voting feature on GLBSE. Good luck to you.

On the one hand it's an anonymity service, which usually come with higher margins - on the other hand there is by far no guarantee how price and difficulty of Bitcoin might turn out (the two biggest factors for mining).

As I intend to sell 100% of the contract, I had to settle with a value that I would be comfortable with. Also when I initially planned this, BTC were worth quite a bit less than now and the recent difficulty increases also were a bit higher than expected, so I see that currently it does not look that attractive to (in the end) bet that 10 Kilohashes/s will generate more than 1 Bitcent within 3 months.

I'm still thinking how to solve these issues in the future (probably even also with this contract) and how to be able to give a price reduction to make it a bit more fair also on the payout side without me risking to loose money.

I initially calculated that a contract like this would cost ~200-300 BTC and would generate ~500 BTC, so I decided to set my price in the middle (also I liked the simplicity of having 1 MH/s for 3 months = 1 BTC). The recent growth in hash rate makes the current pricing look less attractive though.


A possible solution to reduce the margin to a more sane level would be to keep 50% of the shares for "myself" but pay out twice the dividend all the time - so in the end this simulates having 20 000 shares@20KH/s but keeps the initial price in the system.

As this might confuse people quite a bit (and be against the initial share contract) I'm still hesitant if I shouldn't instead "refund" 50% of the initial share cost via the payout function as soon as it's available (to not penalize current early investors) and then re-sell shares at half the price (0,5 Bitcent/share). This might however confuse/scare current investors, if they suddenly see that all their shares are only worth half the money and don't check their balance first.

A third option would be to just manually place 5/7 of the reduction into the "pot" and pay out 2/7 of it as soon as the first weekend payout is possible. Depending on how the payout function works out, it might currently be tough for me to have these 57,14... BTC on GLBSE (even though currently I would get back most of it anyways immediately) or if the system is smart enough to just consider shares other than mine to be paid.


In the end price adaptations are fortunately possible at nearly any point in time (especially with the second/third option) and I'll think of a more attractive price model that still allows me to have a certain margin, but is also more attractive to you guys.

I have questions:

What exactly are we buying? 40K bitcents is 400 bitcoins. At today's exchange rates that's over $2,800USD. That should buy about 1400 MHash/s worth of 3 month rentals from BitCoinRigs.com and still leave you plenty for you trouble. (By comparison the 400MHash/s rental contract is $840USD leaving you a tidy profit of about $2000USD. That margin is just too great!)

Is there something I'm missing here? I might invest if I knew what margin you're taking because it's fair you take a profit but it can't be exorbitant.

Otherwise - what a great idea!

Exactly, that's the plan.

Oh, great! Then I should also get/reserve a more "general" ticker symbol for the future...

Thanks for the heads-up!

Just a short question.
Will it then work like this, assuming I own the ticker symbol "CentiMine" already?:

I will be introducing sub asset-id's, so if you have the asset id CM400, you can then have the asset id CM400.q1 at (what will be) no extra cost.

So the format will be
ASSETID.*

So you can have
CM400.2011.Q1 and that will be ok.

Not implemented but working on it, also will implement some payment features during the next few days.

Exactly.  The asset ID is used by the black market client, therefore it would have been useful to mention the asset ID in the original announcement.

Cheers,

Well, the asset ID on GLBSE is "CM400" - so if you want to buy 100 shares at 1 Bitcent (not Bitcoin!) each, you would type:

But that's not the asset name on GLBSE, is it?

Well, yes...

I just linked it, but realized now I didn't write the asset name in the start post (until now) - Thanks!

It would be useful for potential investors if you published the name of your asset…

Cheers,

Alright, the first income rolled in on the account - so I spread out the first 5000 shares as planned.

I hope until next friday the payout function in GLBSE gets implemented - otherwise the weekend payout will be added to the next weekend payout (and so on, until the function or a viable substitute is provided).

Thanks to the holder(s) of the first 197 shares that were sold already for your trust and patience.

May the trading begin!

The good, the bad and the not-so-good:

Good news: The order finally got set on "delivered", so I expect the first payment(s) to roll in very soon

Bad news: It took a bit longer than anticipated to get this whole project started, sorry for that - however as there were no shares handed out for buying yet (for exactly that reason and to ensure everything is properly done BEFORE people start investing), no damage other than maybe to my image has been done.

Not-so-good news: The function to pay out dividends on GLBSE is not yet implemented (the "btc.py pay" function) - so currently it's not possible to pay out the weekly income. However this is expected to change within ~the next two weeks and I'll see how it goes from there. I also requested to have it possible to specify a time in advance for dividend payouts, so I can already during the week issue the payout command and it will be processed exactly in time on Friday then. Nefario liked the idea and said he will look into implementing it, when he starts with the payout stuff.

As soon as the first payout from the contract is received (probably tomorrow), I will start with handing out the first batch of shares as planned.

Thanks for waiting and have a nice weekend!