Unfortunately, I will not be able to personally sell on my power seller ebay account / verified business paypal because someone just initiated a charge back on a Single I sold on ebay.
Now I am happy to facilitate the selling (I.E pack+ ship etc etc) if the GB's decide to go that way. However before the shareholders get paid out, The S+H, and a 3% fee would be charged for the service. Its a pain in the ass to ship these things, let alone in a safe maner (IE NOT how KnC shipped them to us). Keep this in mind, but otherwise I dont really care either way. UPS store is only... 1000ft from my warehouse.
Topic: [CLOSED]R5: KnC Jupiter, BELOW-COST+Host! $78+Bonuses! Hashing, 1st payouts sent - page 2. (Read 30689 times)
November 09, 2013, 03:07:29 PM
November 09, 2013, 03:03:36 PM
lets try to get back as many btc as possible , USD matters but , nothing like earning retunrs in BTC
November 09, 2013, 12:53:36 PM
If we sold one for 8-8.5 k spilt it among the r5-r6 buyers.
keep the better one as one hashes higher then the other. we would have more then 150% of money paid in in terms of usd.
right now buy 5 has made a cash usd profit of 2600 .. assuming you held the coins. sell one knc for 8500 and each buy 5 and 6 get 4000 added to the 2600 profit puts us 6600 ahead for each buy and still own the better knc machine.
keep the better one as one hashes higher then the other. we would have more then 150% of money paid in in terms of usd.
right now buy 5 has made a cash usd profit of 2600 .. assuming you held the coins. sell one knc for 8500 and each buy 5 and 6 get 4000 added to the 2600 profit puts us 6600 ahead for each buy and still own the better knc machine.
November 09, 2013, 12:38:38 PM
November 08, 2013, 09:24:54 PM
OT: I decided to grow one of my trademark dirty 'staches for Movember. Sadly had a young friend succumb to testicular cancer earlier this year (mentioned it once before here even). So, if I've generated any goodwill here with my silly plugin I'm using it up to ask for any small donation. Movember takes Credit card/Paypal and I have a BTC address through the link I'll either match or dump into fiat. (Standard warnings about not giving bitcoin to random people like myself for charity apply, but I'm sure there's enough personal info on that page for a lynch mob to find me if something untoward were to happen.)
Cheers!
http://mobro.co/moetinator
Cheers!
http://mobro.co/moetinator
November 07, 2013, 03:11:02 PM
I vote for modifying the terms so we can keep hashing.
I also see people reselling Knc miners for 7000-8500, this could be a nice ROI option if the difficulty kept rising and btc stalled (right now it is up to $316!)
I also see people reselling Knc miners for 7000-8500, this could be a nice ROI option if the difficulty kept rising and btc stalled (right now it is up to $316!)
if we could sell our knc miners today for 8k each we should consider doing it. we paid 7k each and we mined a shitload of coins already.
November 08, 2013, 12:35:09 PM
I vote for BTC Guild never having a long streak of bad luck again.
November 08, 2013, 04:10:00 AM
I vote for changing the terms with my 10 shares.
November 08, 2013, 12:31:57 AM
As long as hashfast has delayed product shipment we are looking ok & should consider selling only when hashfast is close to delivering their product as then dificulty will go to moon & Jupiters value will start to take a fall , but if BTC continues going-up as it is now , then we may have to re-think I guess.
November 07, 2013, 07:40:42 PM
Vote with my 2 shares for the $200 flat hosting fee. As for selling, I think they are worth about $7000 each, and we should keep them for now.
November 07, 2013, 06:08:08 PM
I vote for modifying the terms also. But reselling would even be better and apparently there is demand.
November 07, 2013, 01:12:51 PM
I vote for modifying the terms so we can keep hashing.
I also see people reselling Knc miners for 7000-8500, this could be a nice ROI option if the difficulty kept rising and btc stalled (right now it is up to $316!)
I also see people reselling Knc miners for 7000-8500, this could be a nice ROI option if the difficulty kept rising and btc stalled (right now it is up to $316!)
November 07, 2013, 12:35:24 PM
It's not really intended as an increase as much as it is to just fix something that wasn't thought through completely. I don't think that 6 weeks ago anyone expected the kind of difficulty increases we have been seeing, and they expected the 2.75% to cover hosting costs for a much longer period of time.
By switching it to a fixed cost instead of a percentage, we should be able to hash for several months longer and actually make more of a return as a result of doing it. My estimate is that by doing this, we should be able to mine at least an extra 30 BTC before having to shut down due to not meeting expenses...
By switching it to a fixed cost instead of a percentage, we should be able to hash for several months longer and actually make more of a return as a result of doing it. My estimate is that by doing this, we should be able to mine at least an extra 30 BTC before having to shut down due to not meeting expenses...
Sounds like a plan to me!
November 07, 2013, 12:31:14 PM
It's not really intended as an increase as much as it is to just fix something that wasn't thought through completely. I don't think that 6 weeks ago anyone expected the kind of difficulty increases we have been seeing, and they expected the 2.75% to cover hosting costs for a much longer period of time.
By switching it to a fixed cost instead of a percentage, we should be able to hash for several months longer and actually make more of a return as a result of doing it. My estimate is that by doing this, we should be able to mine at least an extra 30 BTC before having to shut down due to not meeting expenses. (And if Hashfast really bombs out, we might be able to pull in an extra 50 BTC or so before the difficulty increases cause the expenses to overtake the income.)
By switching it to a fixed cost instead of a percentage, we should be able to hash for several months longer and actually make more of a return as a result of doing it. My estimate is that by doing this, we should be able to mine at least an extra 30 BTC before having to shut down due to not meeting expenses. (And if Hashfast really bombs out, we might be able to pull in an extra 50 BTC or so before the difficulty increases cause the expenses to overtake the income.)
November 07, 2013, 12:09:15 PM
In USD terms, we're at about +5% ROI. I wonder if we'll see Bitcoin at $300 next week? w00t !!
The next payout is scheduled for Friday November 15th. That will be the first payout that hosting fees will need to come out of. And speaking of hosting fees, I need to call a vote on making a correction to the original terms of the GB which states that hosting fees are 2.75%.
The problem here is that hosting costs are in USD, not BTC, and the electricity, internet, rent, utilities, maintenance fees, and all the other hosting expenses need to be paid in USD. In US Dollar terms, the hosting fee is $200 per month, or $100 every payout. (That's a special GB reduction from the $220 per month that I originally paid for hosting these machines.)
This amount is almost 50% less than KnC charges for hosting, and about 30% less than CoinTerra plans to charge for hosting. In short, it's a very good deal at $200 per month. Paid this way we can continue operating the machines until they aren't mining approximately 0.3 BTC every two weeks - probably well into next year.
On the other hand, as difficulty rises, 2.75% probably won't cover the hosting costs past the next payout - it drops below the cost of hosting when the machines don't return at least 11 BTC every two weeks. So, the bottom line is this, either we modify the original 2.75% terms to be $200 per month, or we have to shut down the machines much earlier than we really need to.
I vote my 5 shares of R5 and R6 for modifying the terms of the GB to change the 2.75% to be $200 per month so we can continue hashing longer.
Votes, please?
The next payout is scheduled for Friday November 15th. That will be the first payout that hosting fees will need to come out of. And speaking of hosting fees, I need to call a vote on making a correction to the original terms of the GB which states that hosting fees are 2.75%.
The problem here is that hosting costs are in USD, not BTC, and the electricity, internet, rent, utilities, maintenance fees, and all the other hosting expenses need to be paid in USD. In US Dollar terms, the hosting fee is $200 per month, or $100 every payout. (That's a special GB reduction from the $220 per month that I originally paid for hosting these machines.)
This amount is almost 50% less than KnC charges for hosting, and about 30% less than CoinTerra plans to charge for hosting. In short, it's a very good deal at $200 per month. Paid this way we can continue operating the machines until they aren't mining approximately 0.3 BTC every two weeks - probably well into next year.
On the other hand, as difficulty rises, 2.75% probably won't cover the hosting costs past the next payout - it drops below the cost of hosting when the machines don't return at least 11 BTC every two weeks. So, the bottom line is this, either we modify the original 2.75% terms to be $200 per month, or we have to shut down the machines much earlier than we really need to.
I vote my 5 shares of R5 and R6 for modifying the terms of the GB to change the 2.75% to be $200 per month so we can continue hashing longer.
Votes, please?
+1 With my 11 shares in R5 i vote yes for increase in hosting fees to make GB run longer.
November 07, 2013, 12:02:27 PM
Haha my mistake! Thanks for the detailed answer
Sorry about that!
Sorry about that!
No problem! We try to keep everything honest, fair, and transparent. So, please feel free to ask if you have questions about something like that. There should be a rational and straight answer!
November 07, 2013, 11:56:11 AM
Haha my mistake! Thanks for the detailed answer
Sorry about that!
Sorry about that!
November 07, 2013, 11:13:52 AM
Hey guys,
I was just comparing bitcoins I got and the mootinator plug-in
I have 8 shares in R5
For R5 I received: 0.94845919+0.98760885=1.94
If I look at the mootinator plugin =0.28634808*8 = 2.29
So a 0.3547166 difference.
I know we had a little bit of management fees and transfers fees but .35? That's almost a 100$ in usd.
Where is that coming from?
I was just comparing bitcoins I got and the mootinator plug-in
I have 8 shares in R5
For R5 I received: 0.94845919+0.98760885=1.94
If I look at the mootinator plugin =0.28634808*8 = 2.29
So a 0.3547166 difference.
I know we had a little bit of management fees and transfers fees but .35? That's almost a 100$ in usd.
Where is that coming from?
There have been no fees deducted from the first two payouts.
EDIT: I take that back. There was a 0.0001 transaction fee charged to each GB for each of the two transfers done so far.
The plug in keeps a running total since the start of hashing- you have to subtract out previous payouts. That total will also be showing an additional 8 days worth of hashing past where the last payout was made.
If you subtract the 24.196 that was paid out in the first two rounds from the current total, you'll see that we've hashed 4.44 BTC since the last payout.
If you multiply your shares (8/100) times what was paid out in the first two payouts (24.196) you come up with 1.93568 BTC, which would seem to match what was paid out to you.
If you multiply out the 4.44 that we've hashed since the last payout by your number of shares, you come up with what you are calling the "missing" 0.3552 BTC. What you've actually done is to calculate how much you have coming to you so far in the NEXT payout.
-R-
November 07, 2013, 10:52:56 AM
In USD terms, we're at about +5% ROI. I wonder if we'll see Bitcoin at $300 next week? w00t !!
The next payout is scheduled for Friday November 15th. That will be the first payout that hosting fees will need to come out of. And speaking of hosting fees, I need to call a vote on making a correction to the original terms of the GB which states that hosting fees are 2.75%.
The problem here is that hosting costs are in USD, not BTC, and the electricity, internet, rent, utilities, maintenance fees, and all the other hosting expenses need to be paid in USD. In US Dollar terms, the hosting fee is $200 per month, or $100 every payout. (That's a special GB reduction from the $220 per month that I originally paid for hosting these machines.)
This amount is almost 50% less than KnC charges for hosting, and about 30% less than CoinTerra plans to charge for hosting. In short, it's a very good deal at $200 per month. Paid this way we can continue operating the machines until they aren't mining approximately 0.3 BTC every two weeks - probably well into next year.
On the other hand, as difficulty rises, 2.75% probably won't cover the hosting costs past the next payout - it drops below the cost of hosting when the machines don't return at least 11 BTC every two weeks. So, the bottom line is this, either we modify the original 2.75% terms to be $200 per month, or we have to shut down the machines much earlier than we really need to.
I vote my 5 shares of R5 and R6 for modifying the terms of the GB to change the 2.75% to be $200 per month so we can continue hashing longer.
Votes, please?
The next payout is scheduled for Friday November 15th. That will be the first payout that hosting fees will need to come out of. And speaking of hosting fees, I need to call a vote on making a correction to the original terms of the GB which states that hosting fees are 2.75%.
The problem here is that hosting costs are in USD, not BTC, and the electricity, internet, rent, utilities, maintenance fees, and all the other hosting expenses need to be paid in USD. In US Dollar terms, the hosting fee is $200 per month, or $100 every payout. (That's a special GB reduction from the $220 per month that I originally paid for hosting these machines.)
This amount is almost 50% less than KnC charges for hosting, and about 30% less than CoinTerra plans to charge for hosting. In short, it's a very good deal at $200 per month. Paid this way we can continue operating the machines until they aren't mining approximately 0.3 BTC every two weeks - probably well into next year.
On the other hand, as difficulty rises, 2.75% probably won't cover the hosting costs past the next payout - it drops below the cost of hosting when the machines don't return at least 11 BTC every two weeks. So, the bottom line is this, either we modify the original 2.75% terms to be $200 per month, or we have to shut down the machines much earlier than we really need to.
I vote my 5 shares of R5 and R6 for modifying the terms of the GB to change the 2.75% to be $200 per month so we can continue hashing longer.
Votes, please?
If it allows us to keep hashing longer, then I guess my lonely one vote is behind you.
November 07, 2013, 10:50:45 AM
Hey guys,
I was just comparing bitcoins I got and the mootinator plug-in
I have 8 shares in R5
For R5 I received: 0.94845919+0.98760885=1.94
If I look at the mootinator plugin =0.28634808*8 =2.29
So a 0.3547166 difference.
I know we had a little bit of management fees and transfers fees but .35? That's almost a 100$ in usd.
Where is that coming from?
I was just comparing bitcoins I got and the mootinator plug-in
I have 8 shares in R5
For R5 I received: 0.94845919+0.98760885=1.94
If I look at the mootinator plugin =0.28634808*8 =2.29
So a 0.3547166 difference.
I know we had a little bit of management fees and transfers fees but .35? That's almost a 100$ in usd.
Where is that coming from?
Jump to: