Topic: Gigamining / Teramining - page 43. (Read 216456 times)

Just a clarification, how do you now plan to handle the perpetuity of Gigamining without the buyback feature? Should a Gigamining bondholder choose to continue their 5MH/s bond in perpetuity rather than upgrading to Teramining, how will you handle the closure of the company should you want to fold VPS in 20 years?

All right, maybe I'll come up with something before I am too old to mess with this. Thanks for the answer.

Hi nebulus,

At this time, there is no cut off date for claims. All accumulated BTC will be held in cold storage. Since the Gigamining contract is perpetual, coins will keep accumulating in the cold storage wallets until they are claimed.

This is the only way to insure that I will be able to cover the liability at any point in the future.

Best,
James

Can you gives us a definition of a "Gigaminer"? From your posts, it seems like you are not sure what to do with those who have not submitted their info. Maybe, you have not really thought about it yet but for heaven's sake just say so.

Going forward, I do not plan to submit any documents to claim what I had invested.
However, I am interested to know what is going to become of my shares/dividends.

Thanks!

I'm guessing you've come up with some magical way to create legally binding documents in all countries for free?

I am treating everyone equally which is the only proper way to handle where we are at. There are no beneficial assignees on the Gigamining contract that was hosted on GLBSE.

I have also proven my willingness to continue with those who see what I am trying to do and agree with it. It does no one any good if VPS gone like GLBSE now is.

I'm not a lawyer - nor have I ever claimed to be one.

I wouldn't suggest guaranteeing anything - and didn't do so.  Though I can see how you got that impression.  What I'd suggested was that the contract end after 6 months if total dividends exceeded initial investment - but continued if they hadn't.  At that stage they would continue until either initial investment was repaid OR there was no longer any production (which would happen eventually anyway - as your new contract doesn't guarantee fixed payments).

Obviously you could add some other clause - such as being able to liquidate the hardware if mining became unprofitable and making a final payment.

The key really is whether your goal is either:

a) To guarantee significant profit for yourself,
b) To try to ensure minimal chance of loss for investors and no loss for yourself.

Obviously those two sets of objectives aren't compatible in some scenarios (e.g. where the first wave of deep price-cuts on ASICs occur early leading to heavy new influx of ASICs with smaller capital costs to recoup, driving difficulty up and profitability down).  I'd argue your current contract is very heavily weighted in favour of a) - making sure you get to keep the hardware after a period of time irrespective of how well/badly investors have done.  You CAN reduce risk to investors without exposing yourself to risk of loss - but at the risk of significantly lower profit for yourself if things go badly.

As for "My plans include all Gigaminers" - whether that's true or not depends on what you consider to be Gigaminers.  Nothing in your plans so far includes those who bought a few contracts on GLBSE where the value of those contracts is less than the cost to them of obtaining Apostille.  Are those people Gigaminers? 

Fine. Let's do some maffs.

In my WORST CASE SCENARIO, where both asicMINER and Avalon deliver 100% of what they have announce, I show a return of .0323 BTC per each 600k contracts available.

So.... below is an example with a gigaminer owning 504 contracts.


So, as we can all see now, Teramining, according to my worst case estimates has the potential to take in 11.6k BTC and pay out 19.38k BTC.

That is a net loss of a 7.78k BTC and could be much higher if network conditions are better than my worst case estimates. But of course, not everyone will take the paid upgrade.

So then you might ask, "why the hell are you even doing this?". Because I said I would.

Now, on to guaranteeing things.... since you have said you are a lawyer in the UK, would you advice your client to guarantee anything with a contract such as this? If you are any type of good lawyer, I'm sure you would say no.

My plans include all Gigaminers and I am offering a free upgrade for those who don't want to pay.

Well you could make a pretty simple change to ensure noone actually makes loss.

Make the duration of it the LONGER of X months (currently 6) and the time taken for investors to receive back their initial investment in dividends.

So if it gos well and they make a profit eearly then contracts end after X months.  If it doesn't go well you keep paying dividends until they've received back their initial investment. 

There's then the issue of calculating what initial investment is.  That's not too hard - just means valuing gigamining shares with a residual value of their IPO cost less dividends paid to date.

Obviously you can only go this sort of route if you genuinely believe investors are likely to make a profit in 6 months and VERY likely to make a profit in a year or so (beyond that there'd be no significant returns anyway).  But that's what you believe, right?

So take the free upgrade.

I'm not putting a gun to anyone's head. 

If I didn't offer the upgrade, you would be complaining that I'm not keeping my word. I try to make an offering that I think works, you complain because I'm might make money or the offer isn't right.

I would rather read ideas about how to make the offer better than to read how you feel I'm doing something wrong.

The latter gets us nowhere.

I've done everything in my power to make sure Teramining will be a huge success. It is of course dependent on BFL making a somewhat timely delivery. That said, I am behind BFL 100% and believe that they are the best manufacturer of mining products. As we have seen with bASIC, not all ASIC manufacturers are created equal.

I agree that this is the most likely reason you won't see any numbers from gigavps.

On the other hand, what use are numbers? Making some calculations is no rocket science, but any numbers that anyone including gigavps can pull out of his ** are only guestimates. There are too many unknown variables for which you have to make an assumption. Changing any of those assumptions will completely skew the outcome. It will be possible to calculate any outcome between highly profitable and catastrophic loss at this moment.

It's just a bet. A very bad bet, but still a bet.

^^^
Giving shareholders the exact numbers would screw your opperation because NO ONE would buy any shares that will NOT, and I repeat NOT be profitable!
The only one who will profit is gigavps.
Mark my words!

Assuming the bASIC news hasn't been put in the equation, doing so would only increase Terramining profitability and shorten the contract duration if all other things remained equal.

My estimates now take into consideration bASIC not being around. Some of these orders will go to BFL, some will go to Avalon, and some will quit in disgust. Also understanding the intricacies of how these hardware projects are operating helps. Especially around time to get more wafers produced, assembly, burn in, etc.

I will not be posting any numbers because others should be doing their own due diligence like BurtW has been doing.

see


We need to find out how long Teramining bonds will bring in sufficient dividends. I would like to see the math taken in consideration, especially considering bASIC hashes won't be hitting the network. While, i'm sure Giga has done ALOT of math regarding the profitability of Teramining, i'm not sure if the 6mo contract took bASIC dropping out into consideration.

As lawyers are writing and advising the initial drafts of the contract, cya is built into everything they do.

As you have pointed out, this is one area in which I intend to under promise and over deliver.

Sorry for the troll post, I must have hit "post" instead of "preview" before I got up. I was going to follow the quotes with (hopefully) constructive comment/questions, but it seems you have already answered, to a point. It is certainly reasonable to cover yourself against unforeseen problems.

If your intent is to begin the contract as soon as you are setup and have things in order, that is excellent. However, the way I currently read the sentence in the contract you could be up and running full force in six hours, and rake it in for yourself for the next 10 business days (and included weekends) before we get a taste and still be well within the terms of the contract. Also, you don't seem to be protected if it takes longer than 10 days, which is not an impossible situation. Perhaps the commencement date should be based on a certain percentage of the hardware becoming operational. I fully trust you'll get things running as fast as possible, if for no other reason, it will profit you more to do so.

So, there should be a signed contract with an unknown end date to be determined later by who? By what means? I really don't understand what you are trying to solve.

Since I don't own Gigamining shares, I did not vote in the poll. I think the longevity of Teramining should not be determined until we (the community) have a better idea how the network will be affected since bASIC out of the picture.

There are no worries if it does not benefit you the contract will change again.

Yes. 10 business days is to give me time to make sure I don't loose my ass and don't start trying to deliver on something that is yet to be working. There are still a lot of variables yet to be nailed down including mining software.

That said, if it takes 6 hours to get things up and running, the 10 days will not be needed.

From the contract