Topic: [HAVELOCK] PETAMINE - 1,150 TH/S HASH RATE (1GH/S per Unit) - page 109. (Read 565833 times)

YOu clearly have not thought this through. Reinvestement is not different from a regular investment, the only difference is the source of the funds. If reinvesting makes sense than so does investing. But guess what, its not always smart to invest in mining, and certainly it will not always be, and most certainly not at price points and conditions you have no control over. What hardware will cryptx buy, at what price and when? You have no idea, you are just guessing he makes the smart move (and doesnt pocket the kickbacks).


If cashing out weekly does not recover your initial investment and running costs, plunging in more money will not make it better, it will make it worse. The only difference is that the "amateur" may be able to recoup at least a part of his original investment while the professional idiots who throw all their revenue back in to mining gear time and again, no matter what the market conditions are, may well ultimately be left with basically nothing from their original investment. You are making the gamble bigger, but you are not changing the odds. If you dont grasp this concept, try your reinvesment strategy on Satoshi Dice, let me know how it works out.

Re-investing portion of profits from mining into purchase of new hardware in an attempt to offset the mining curve is a logical move, in fact it's the only sensible move in an operation like this. Bitcoin mining is an arms race, a zero sum game & we're a greyhound chasing a lure,  I guess some will say we are topping up generator powering the life support machine with jerrycan or whatever shitty analogy

A mining offering with fixed hashrate has a hardcoded lifespan. It'll suffer an inevitable decline in dividends, subsequently a collapse of shareprice to it's true value- which over time is 0. to consider investing in something which is offering each share a fixed hashrate said gh/ share better be as skyhigh, and the price better be damn low- you hop in then hop out hopefully whilst there is still suckers investors left to take your place. What's supposed to happen in your example, issuer keeps releasing new shares onto market at lower prices?

Any expansion at any price does not a good investment make. Right. If Re-investments are being spent on asicminer cubes or used jalapenos off ebay then we have a problem, for now, they are spent on the most suitable hardware on the market at the time. Generally the larger the amount of re-investments accrued, the bigger the order & the more of a discount you can negotiate, this is why group buys make sense over single orders.  so you although you lose out with the hosting fees you gain an edge with b2b relationship cryptx can have with mining machine supplier.

no it is a good thing, calling it a myth doesn't make it a myth
what you describe, you can actually get from BFL if you wish
sensible miners reinvest, otherwise you fall behind and end up with almost valueless hardware (or shares in this case)
its the number 1 mistake amateur miners make, they expect the returns to just make themselves by cashing out weekly and running their rig indefinitely or until the electricity costs become prohibitive.
with a doubling difficulty, all hardware is set to make a maximum return, which it will never go over unless the doubling rate of difficulty changes.

the larger the operation, the more efficiently you can execute reinvestment's and grow despite steep difficulty changes.

Time to bust a myth; reinvestment is not a good thing for investors, its a very bad thing. It does little more than locking in future revenue for additional purchases that may or may not make sense at that time. If you were paid out all profits in dividends, you would be free to determine at any future point if it makes financial sense to purchase more, newly issued shares and at what price. Being robbed of that choice is a liability, not an asset. You seem to assume that any expansion at any price and any point in the future is automatically a good investment.

What's the rationale behind the expectation of a plateau at this point, anyway? The biggest diff. increase on a percentage basis in the last year was 46% on Oct 26. That translates to +881,882 GH/s. Compare that to the +6,102,749 GH/s on the last 10% diff. increase. We added another +11,610,074 GH/s since then.



Yes hardware effiency/performance increase will slow down, but production volume of mining hardware will probably increase at the same time?

Eh...more of a straw man, since you presented a new absurd statement that was similar instead of showing absurdity in the statements already made.

Applying a Latin label doesn't necessarily make a post true, beneficial, or a good contribution to the thread—in other words, it can still come across as trollish, Latin label or no.

+1

Too much Pi isn't good for you  

Reductio ad absurdum is not trolling.  What's really sad is the reasoning in this thread is already absurd.  Reductio ad absurdum passes for just another helpful post--barely raises an eyebrow.

Yup - troll   

How to tell when you should move along to another thread: when legitimate critical thinking and skepticism are traded for trolling.

So tell cryptx to issue more shares, have more IPOs, and withhold all the divs 'til PETA controls 200% of the network.
If it makes sense this time, it makes 3.14 times as much sense to do it again.

Bonus: Keep increasing the hashrate 'til hosting fees start getting negative -- moar profit.

Did you do the calculation?
If we send all the dividends back to Cryptx, we can just merely catch up with the difficulty grows since the reinvestment  ghs/$ is not cheap...
what i'm saying is with enough hashrate we could reduce hosting fee and become more competitive. Did you get that point?

Here's an idea:  If everyone just sends all their dividends back to cryptx, PETA will be able to grow its hashrate faster than network difficulty increase, and eventually will control 200% of the network.

Yeah, I think up smart stuff like this all the time.  Mom wasn't kidding when she told me I'm one of God's special chosen ones.

IMO, we are not going to see the plateau period of difficulty in a short period of time. Yes, I'm saying we might keep 15%+ difficulty rising for months. So, in order to make PETA more competitive, I think we should increase our hashrate as fast as we can. So that Cryptx is able to reduce hosting fee further. Let's say PETA hit 3 PH/s or more, maybe hosting fee will reduce to $0.2/kWh or something. So I totally agree Cryptx expands our hashrate at full speed. Maybe some of us didn't see that point and sell their shares too early. For long term profit, I support dividends/reinvestment adjusts to 10%/90% until we can reduce hosting fee further.
Though that might crush the yield and share price?

+++++

we will know better when we start getting hardware online and after the ipo

when can we expect dividends?

How stable is the future of peta-mine?

I ask because a few days ago people were selling and leaving and there was a lot of talk that peta was a waste of time.

I held my shares, but can someone explain how peta will sustain itself in say 6 months?

Food for thought:

With BTC rising, would it be possible to deploy a little more hardware, as delivery contracts are probably in USD?
I mean, cryptx should be raising more money than initially anticipated, which could be passed on to investors for slightly more GH/share.