You must have missed the nice conversation about one of the speakers we had few days back.
You must have missed my :grinning: face ->
Topic: GAW ZenCloud ZenPool Hashlet - does it really exist? ALWAYS MAKE MONEY :-) - page 4. (Read 262934 times)
November 12, 2014, 06:26:10 PM
You must have missed my :grinning: face ->
November 12, 2014, 05:59:49 PM
I have been reading a book on the history of public finance over the last 3,000 years (A free nation deep in debt) and I must admit that josh has done a brilliant job in taking out short term high interest loans, which have been increasing parleyed into long-term low interest loans through his slashing of interest rates (zenpool), 10% surcharge on the market value of each traded loan (via the marketplace), and now our present state of complete deferment of interest by using hashcoins.
All coupled with a 33% debasement of the currency in which the loans will always be repaid (btc was above 600 when this started).
GAW must be quite heavily in the black due to these time honored financial double-dealings that have for so long characterized sovereign borrowing. If events continue in this fashion, then GAW will soon have the majority of its debt converted into its own sovereign currency which it can then debase to the point that all will be "repaid," but in worthless hashcoins. They will have a tremendous financial incentive to do so.
Remember the well-reasoned hashtalk post worried than HC's need for 10 million USD/day was too high? Well, if he is correct in his mathematical analysis then it is hardly a flaw, but in GAW's best interest to keep their absurdly high level of coin generation at launch mixed with impossible market cap--it will make the fall all the swifter and GAW's profits all the greater as they pay off the remainder of their debts. No doubt there will be another buy back offer after the fiasco, but at below face value again.
Sorry for the wandering post, but anyone interested in financial history should read this book. It has intriguing arguments regarding decentralization, democratization, and public debt.
All coupled with a 33% debasement of the currency in which the loans will always be repaid (btc was above 600 when this started).
GAW must be quite heavily in the black due to these time honored financial double-dealings that have for so long characterized sovereign borrowing. If events continue in this fashion, then GAW will soon have the majority of its debt converted into its own sovereign currency which it can then debase to the point that all will be "repaid," but in worthless hashcoins. They will have a tremendous financial incentive to do so.
Remember the well-reasoned hashtalk post worried than HC's need for 10 million USD/day was too high? Well, if he is correct in his mathematical analysis then it is hardly a flaw, but in GAW's best interest to keep their absurdly high level of coin generation at launch mixed with impossible market cap--it will make the fall all the swifter and GAW's profits all the greater as they pay off the remainder of their debts. No doubt there will be another buy back offer after the fiasco, but at below face value again.
Sorry for the wandering post, but anyone interested in financial history should read this book. It has intriguing arguments regarding decentralization, democratization, and public debt.
@jimmothy +1
@MOB - Excellent book and insight - although I believe the high-interest loans were immediately parleyed from the beginning in to long-term deferred interest transactions. Why? Because GAW/Zen effectively has 100% control over the terms of every transaction and we all know - whomever has control over the terms has control over the $$.
Scott-
November 12, 2014, 05:53:19 PM
Haa.. It's interesting how he uses a webinar others
November 12, 2014, 05:35:04 PM
Something doesn't quite add up.
$12m worth of hashlets at $15/mh is 800 GH/s.
By "producing $8m of profit" I assume they are basing that on the increase in $/mh. Since vaultbreakers were sold at ~$10/mh and could be sold for up to $50/mh that makes a max profit of $40/mh. $8m profit at $40/mh is another 200 GH/s worth of primes.
800 GH/s + 200 GH/s = 1000 GH/s.
On October 2nd the entire litecoin network was 1036 GH/s so I suppose only ~36 GH/s is not controlled by GAW.
This doesn't even take in to consideration boosts, double pool mining, red rockets, and whatever magically made their pool payout more than any other litecoin pool.
The reason it doesn't add up is that you are assuming that they mine scrypt.
It does say "$12M in sales within weeks of release."
Genesis hashlet was released 3 weeks after launch, would you consider that "within weeks"?
Even if ~10-20% of sales went to genesis hashlets I don't think their claims would be any less ridiculous.
November 12, 2014, 05:33:33 PM
Something I'm missing in ZenCloud btw (just thought of this) is an option to add an order for something at a certain low price. There is only a sellers market.
I'd be willing to scoop up 100 Gh/s Genesis for 3USD per 10 if someone is offering for example. Now price is dictated by the lowest price that hasn't sold yet.
I'd be willing to scoop up 100 Gh/s Genesis for 3USD per 10 if someone is offering for example. Now price is dictated by the lowest price that hasn't sold yet.
November 12, 2014, 05:30:49 PM
... some elaborate scheme ... good job 
I might agree if it was any other company, but I have some doubts that such complex financial moves are within GAW's capabilities. I guess we'll see within the next couple of weeks how far does it actually go.
This came up on my twitter today:
https://twitter.com/gawceo/status/532652698051821569
I'm sure he won't be bored, you know what I mean
I wouldn't be.
https://twitter.com/gawceo/status/532652698051821569
I'm sure he won't be bored, you know what I mean
I wouldn't be.
Save your innuendos for HT, this is a family-friendly forum
November 12, 2014, 05:16:29 PM
This came up on my twitter today:
https://twitter.com/gawceo/status/532652698051821569
I'm sure he won't be bored, you know what I mean
I wouldn't be.
Went to coinwarz today to check something and they have a nice hashcoin background. Much wow.
https://twitter.com/gawceo/status/532652698051821569
I'm sure he won't be bored, you know what I mean
I wouldn't be.
Went to coinwarz today to check something and they have a nice hashcoin background. Much wow.
November 12, 2014, 05:15:12 PM
I have been reading a book on the history of public finance over the last 3,000 years (A free nation deep in debt) and I must admit that josh has done a brilliant job in taking out short term high interest loans, which have been increasing parleyed into long-term low interest loans through his slashing of interest rates (zenpool), 10% surcharge on the market value of each traded loan (via the marketplace), and now our present state of complete deferment of interest by using hashcoins.
All coupled with a 33% debasement of the currency in which the loans will always be repaid (btc was above 600 when this started).
GAW must be quite heavily in the black due to these time honored financial double-dealings that have for so long characterized sovereign borrowing. If events continue in this fashion, then GAW will soon have the majority of its debt converted into its own sovereign currency which it can then debase to the point that all will be "repaid," but in worthless hashcoins. They will have a tremendous financial incentive to do so.
Remember the well-reasoned hashtalk post worried than HC's need for 10 million USD/day was too high? Well, if he is correct in his mathematical analysis then it is hardly a flaw, but in GAW's best interest to keep their absurdly high level of coin generation at launch mixed with impossible market cap--it will make the fall all the swifter and GAW's profits all the greater as they pay off the remainder of their debts. No doubt there will be another buy back offer after the fiasco, but at below face value again.
Sorry for the wandering post, but anyone interested in financial history should read this book. It has intriguing arguments regarding decentralization, democratization, and public debt.
All coupled with a 33% debasement of the currency in which the loans will always be repaid (btc was above 600 when this started).
GAW must be quite heavily in the black due to these time honored financial double-dealings that have for so long characterized sovereign borrowing. If events continue in this fashion, then GAW will soon have the majority of its debt converted into its own sovereign currency which it can then debase to the point that all will be "repaid," but in worthless hashcoins. They will have a tremendous financial incentive to do so.
Remember the well-reasoned hashtalk post worried than HC's need for 10 million USD/day was too high? Well, if he is correct in his mathematical analysis then it is hardly a flaw, but in GAW's best interest to keep their absurdly high level of coin generation at launch mixed with impossible market cap--it will make the fall all the swifter and GAW's profits all the greater as they pay off the remainder of their debts. No doubt there will be another buy back offer after the fiasco, but at below face value again.
Sorry for the wandering post, but anyone interested in financial history should read this book. It has intriguing arguments regarding decentralization, democratization, and public debt.
November 12, 2014, 04:16:44 PM
Keep in mind although customers have part to blame its hard for the customers not to have mined HP with all the propaganda and advertisement GAW is selling about hashpoints and there worth as well as them severely crippling zenpool (seriously they said they would renegotiate the rates but how long do these negotiations actually take if they put a decent effort into it). Zenpool might not have those crazy high payouts it once did but it definitely should be the top pool compared to the others.
Not tying to say that everything is the customers fault but if there is only two things that prime customers gets to control in this whole system it would be the pool they chose to mine and at what point they want to sell if they chose to, almost everything else is out of their control. Someone who follow this thread made an informed decision as far as I'm concerned.
If someone decides to mine HP to get HC later they have to live with their decision, the opposite is also true. I sold out and may have lost out if HC has a great start but I'm fine with that.
I agree with the rest.
November 12, 2014, 03:52:19 PM
The fact is BTC is up almost $100 in the past week, so how much has GAWS cost its customers by diverting their BTC miners to this new "plan"?
I hate to point out the obvious... but GAWS has cost people alot of money, who paid for a certain mining service.
I hate to point out the obvious... but GAWS has cost people alot of money, who paid for a certain mining service.
I can't say that I agree with you in this case... if GAW customers want to mine the ZenPool or any other pool they are free to do so, almost everybody switched to HP but had they stayed on something that yields BTC they may have benefited from that increase in some way. If we say for sake of conversation that someone's maintenance was BTC0.03 at $300 it would be BTC0.0225 at $400 and it may make sense to mine towards BTC at this point. The user gets to chose if they want to mine HP or not.
I know there is more to this than my previous statement but all the BTC pools are still there to use, users can still sell for decent money and they made the conscious decision to switch to HP themselves. Many will argue that it was the only decision that made sense (to switch) but the bottom line remains that at some point users have to take part of the blame, they signed up (myself included) for an $0.08 maintenance fee and payouts tied to pool returns, difficulty and BTC prices did the rest. We can debate everything that happened and led to this (Zenpool and everything else) but at some point users have to take some responsibility for their actions / decisions.
So for this specific comment I can't say that I agree with you, if I decide to mine HP for a week and BTC skyrockets I have only myself to blame.
Keep in mind although customers have part to blame its hard for the customers not to have mined HP with all the propaganda and advertisement GAW is selling about hashpoints and there worth as well as them severely crippling zenpool (seriously they said they would renegotiate the rates but how long do these negotiations actually take if they put a decent effort into it). Zenpool might not have those crazy high payouts it once did but it definitely should be the top pool compared to the others.
November 12, 2014, 03:23:23 PM
The fact is BTC is up almost $100 in the past week, so how much has GAWS cost its customers by diverting their BTC miners to this new "plan"?
I hate to point out the obvious... but GAWS has cost people alot of money, who paid for a certain mining service.
I hate to point out the obvious... but GAWS has cost people alot of money, who paid for a certain mining service.
I can't say that I agree with you in this case... if GAW customers want to mine the ZenPool or any other pool they are free to do so, almost everybody switched to HP but had they stayed on something that yields BTC they may have benefited from that increase in some way. If we say for sake of conversation that someone's maintenance was BTC0.03 at $300 it would be BTC0.0225 at $400 and it may make sense to mine towards BTC at this point. The user gets to chose if they want to mine HP or not.
I know there is more to this than my previous statement but all the BTC pools are still there to use, users can still sell for decent money and they made the conscious decision to switch to HP themselves. Many will argue that it was the only decision that made sense (to switch) but the bottom line remains that at some point users have to take part of the blame, they signed up (myself included) for an $0.08 maintenance fee and payouts tied to pool returns, difficulty and BTC prices did the rest. We can debate everything that happened and led to this (Zenpool and everything else) but at some point users have to take some responsibility for their actions / decisions.
So for this specific comment I can't say that I agree with you, if I decide to mine HP for a week and BTC skyrockets I have only myself to blame.
November 12, 2014, 03:19:07 PM
Barry Silbert @barrysilbert
I'm participating in "Bitcoin: Beyond the Currency" at @Bloomberg's NYC HQ on Nov 17th
Request an invite via [email protected]
I wonder if Josh was invited. He did say he was meeting with the Media in NYC this week didn't he?
I'm participating in "Bitcoin: Beyond the Currency" at @Bloomberg's NYC HQ on Nov 17th
Request an invite via [email protected]
I wonder if Josh was invited. He did say he was meeting with the Media in NYC this week didn't he?
November 12, 2014, 03:09:38 PM
Fair enough KC6TTR,
On the underlying question... Not going to have nearly as firm an answer, I think that it is a bit more tricky. Alot of conflicting interests, as the point of any advertisment is to entice and draw people in. I never noticed having more sexy scantily clad women around me when I was drinking bud, as opposed to corona, or iced tea. So any ad must do what it can to achieve its objective and pulling people in.
Ethical behavior in such things is a bit of a muddy area for me. If they put a tiny * in the ad with all relevant disclaimers, most consumers are going to ignore such information anyways, but according to some standards and practices, that would make said ad "ethical".
So really, I dunno KC6TTR, I tried, but I really can't give you an answer on that one that would be appropriate.
On the underlying question... Not going to have nearly as firm an answer, I think that it is a bit more tricky. Alot of conflicting interests, as the point of any advertisment is to entice and draw people in. I never noticed having more sexy scantily clad women around me when I was drinking bud, as opposed to corona, or iced tea. So any ad must do what it can to achieve its objective and pulling people in.
Ethical behavior in such things is a bit of a muddy area for me. If they put a tiny * in the ad with all relevant disclaimers, most consumers are going to ignore such information anyways, but according to some standards and practices, that would make said ad "ethical".
So really, I dunno KC6TTR, I tried, but I really can't give you an answer on that one that would be appropriate.
November 12, 2014, 03:02:32 PM
Eh KC6TTR I don't really have issues with most of your posts. There is alot of validity to warnings and such not, and since you have a much longer experience with GAW then me? I give them some credence and have made some moves based on this thread and some of the more rational skeptics.
However this post, isn't up to snuff. I'm not a lawyer, so I could not spout the proper legalese on this, but we can do part of your questions from common sense layman terminology, I would think.
A. If a company gives you free mining power? You have "mining power" Which is active, that generates.. or lets use the word "earns" btc from said mining actions for no upfront cost, or even out of pocket cost to you? Then yes.. earn bitcoin for free seems to be not the craziest statement ever made.
B. An account that doesn't require a fee or cost to sign up for? Reasonable definition of a free account. I use some gmail/hotmail accounts.. and they get some fiscal rewards via ads and tracking data, but I personally don't pay for the service. Again.. Free is a pretty fair descriptive word.
C. Magical miner that may or may not be real, and gives coins and has a daily maintaince fee- This requires 2 criteria. The "free" miner from the "free" account, that never involves me having to buy anything from, and whose's maintance fee's never exceed the daily payout? That remains free in perpetually. If GAW runs the miners and maintaince exceeds the cost of the miner, and they deduct the funds from my balance? Then it's not free. When it happens? Then this particular question gains alot of validity.
If I don't have to pay for the product, and am free to withdraw earnings from said miner? It's free.
Alot of your posts are very good and solid.. This one? Much more nitpicky and irrational then your typical fare.
Well, unlike some, I do appreciate your input and you explained your view well. Call me nitpicky - I'm not proud.. but in my defense, I believe I have an excuse in the face of others being nitpicky with my printed words. However this post, isn't up to snuff. I'm not a lawyer, so I could not spout the proper legalese on this, but we can do part of your questions from common sense layman terminology, I would think.
A. If a company gives you free mining power? You have "mining power" Which is active, that generates.. or lets use the word "earns" btc from said mining actions for no upfront cost, or even out of pocket cost to you? Then yes.. earn bitcoin for free seems to be not the craziest statement ever made.
B. An account that doesn't require a fee or cost to sign up for? Reasonable definition of a free account. I use some gmail/hotmail accounts.. and they get some fiscal rewards via ads and tracking data, but I personally don't pay for the service. Again.. Free is a pretty fair descriptive word.
C. Magical miner that may or may not be real, and gives coins and has a daily maintaince fee- This requires 2 criteria. The "free" miner from the "free" account, that never involves me having to buy anything from, and whose's maintance fee's never exceed the daily payout? That remains free in perpetually. If GAW runs the miners and maintaince exceeds the cost of the miner, and they deduct the funds from my balance? Then it's not free. When it happens? Then this particular question gains alot of validity.
If I don't have to pay for the product, and am free to withdraw earnings from said miner? It's free.
Alot of your posts are very good and solid.. This one? Much more nitpicky and irrational then your typical fare.
Again, my underlying question regarding where the line is drawn between guerilla and... well... whatever one may consider baiting, unreasonably assumptive, or deceptive, if not false, advertising still holds some foundation in my opinion. Not all consumers are obviously as smart as you come across and may present the same query I did. Even if no laws are broken, what responsibility does any business have to maintain a reasonable level of marketing ethics?
Scott-
November 12, 2014, 02:19:40 PM
Eh KC6TTR I don't really have issues with most of your posts. There is alot of validity to warnings and such not, and since you have a much longer experience with GAW then me? I give them some credence and have made some moves based on this thread and some of the more rational skeptics.
However this post, isn't up to snuff. I'm not a lawyer, so I could not spout the proper legalese on this, but we can do part of your questions from common sense layman terminology, I would think.
A. If a company gives you free mining power? You have "mining power" Which is active, that generates.. or lets use the word "earns" btc from said mining actions for no upfront cost, or even out of pocket cost to you? Then yes.. earn bitcoin for free seems to be not the craziest statement ever made.
B. An account that doesn't require a fee or cost to sign up for? Reasonable definition of a free account. I use some gmail/hotmail accounts.. and they get some fiscal rewards via ads and tracking data, but I personally don't pay for the service. Again.. Free is a pretty fair descriptive word.
C. Magical miner that may or may not be real, and gives coins and has a daily maintaince fee- This requires 2 criteria. The "free" miner from the "free" account, that never involves me having to buy anything from, and whose's maintance fee's never exceed the daily payout? That remains free in perpetually. If GAW runs the miners and maintaince exceeds the cost of the miner, and they deduct the funds from my balance? Then it's not free. When it happens? Then this particular question gains alot of validity.
If I don't have to pay for the product, and am free to withdraw earnings from said miner? It's free.
Alot of your posts are very good and solid.. This one? Much more nitpicky and irrational then your typical fare.
However this post, isn't up to snuff. I'm not a lawyer, so I could not spout the proper legalese on this, but we can do part of your questions from common sense layman terminology, I would think.
A. If a company gives you free mining power? You have "mining power" Which is active, that generates.. or lets use the word "earns" btc from said mining actions for no upfront cost, or even out of pocket cost to you? Then yes.. earn bitcoin for free seems to be not the craziest statement ever made.
B. An account that doesn't require a fee or cost to sign up for? Reasonable definition of a free account. I use some gmail/hotmail accounts.. and they get some fiscal rewards via ads and tracking data, but I personally don't pay for the service. Again.. Free is a pretty fair descriptive word.
C. Magical miner that may or may not be real, and gives coins and has a daily maintaince fee- This requires 2 criteria. The "free" miner from the "free" account, that never involves me having to buy anything from, and whose's maintance fee's never exceed the daily payout? That remains free in perpetually. If GAW runs the miners and maintaince exceeds the cost of the miner, and they deduct the funds from my balance? Then it's not free. When it happens? Then this particular question gains alot of validity.
If I don't have to pay for the product, and am free to withdraw earnings from said miner? It's free.
Alot of your posts are very good and solid.. This one? Much more nitpicky and irrational then your typical fare.
November 12, 2014, 01:47:59 PM
There is a process for serious investors and companies called due diligence, a process which GAW could never endure. Anybody care to argue to the contrary?
Careful, GAW/Zen may take legal action against you too. 
Either way, lets all closely ponder this advertisement below, which is still to-this-day plastered all over the web if you have your cookies installed in your browser, which you agreed to accept under all circumstances and conditions if you ever visited a GAW owned site -
I welcome anyone, including GAW/Zen's retained counsel, to explain to me in reasonable and legal terms:
A. How does anything or anyone "earn" Bitcoin for "free"?
B. What specifically defines a "free" account with GAW/Zen?
C. In what dimensional reality does a "free" miner tied to a "free" account that requires and charges a daily "maintenance fee" in order to mine Bitcoin and/or ANYTHING other than a still unknown and unreleased in-house hypothetical coin - - - remain "free"?
In summary, at what point is the line drawn between guerrilla marketing and false-advertising?
Thank you for your time.
Scott-
hero member
Activity: 672
Merit: 500
ADAMANT — the most secure and anonymous messenger
November 12, 2014, 01:29:46 PM
so... back on topic... isn't this the gaw-hater thread? :grinning:
we do take breaks on Tuesdays lol make it random day 
November 12, 2014, 01:08:10 PM
The fact is BTC is up almost $100 in the past week, so how much has GAWS cost its customers by diverting their BTC miners to this new "plan"?
I hate to point out the obvious... but GAWS has cost people alot of money, who paid for a certain mining service.
I hate to point out the obvious... but GAWS has cost people alot of money, who paid for a certain mining service.
November 12, 2014, 01:05:48 PM
There is a process for serious investors and companies called due diligence, a process which GAW could never endure. Anybody care to argue to the contrary?
Not sure GAW can even explain their business model at this point. Everyone on the site is purely trusting they will eventually be paid by ICO. If mining a pool the payouts are dismal. The white paper does not explain or show any demand or appetite for another coin. For anyone to invest without scrutinizing this investment is CRAZY!!
November 12, 2014, 12:24:30 PM
It seems me asking if Zencloud was not bound by contract to be the most profitable pool was a bad idea, i was shadowbaned around november 1st, noticed around the 6th.
Their support says that only the CEO handles shadowbans, and the CEO ignores me
Their support says that only the CEO handles shadowbans, and the CEO ignores me
Tweet him. That's what all cool kids do these days.
https://twitter.com/gawceo
When i mentioned that he ignores me, i meant in twitter
That is hilarious... Quoting that post
"The some weeks will go by and a huge regret annoucement will be made, nay a brand new wesbite and domain will surface with the clown Josh Garza's face pegged all over it ' so sorry guys we were totally misled the investors who gobbled up the first round did not in fact have any money, we are suing them, we are suing our bankers who introduced them' ' we were totally duped'.... but do not fear dear gawfucks. We just created a brand new gawminer, the gashitlets and goofgaw zen dungdropings.......hashing at 850 Mh/s and we will immediately convernt your 10 and 15 dollar hard cash investments in to these !!! I am your saviour, Josh Garza Magic Man of The Crypto Era !!1
*yawn*
same shit different day"
Btw what if we are all wrong? And this turns out to be a success?
Do you still believe in "Santa Claus" ...
ZiG
Jump to: