I don't think the 33K "new" shares will sell without new buyers. Right now, anyone can buy PETA units for .091-.093 which are the same as the units that will be selling for .095-.1 in a few days. It looks like roughly 1400 shares have sold in the past 18 hours.
SCRYPT-X was partly a success because enthusiastic PETA investors diversified into it, but in this case, existing PETA holders who can buy more shares now at .091 aren't going to be buying them in a few days at .095. Anyone paying attention here on the forums likewise has the same opportunity, and I imagine that accounts for most of the Havelock userbase.
So who is going to buy them? It looks like the market is just too shallow, and we are going to go a few weeks without dividends. I still think we are in a great position, and it may only be a short time before we are back with massive dividends.
New users are the only way to sell those units, though. I think cryptx knows this, and thus the website redesign and subtle repositioning as "cloud-mining" seem to point to the notion of a marketing push. There are a lot of people in the broader bitcoin community who aren't here on the forums, and we'll need to reach them somehow: stories, posts, ads.
Topic: [HAVELOCK] PETAMINE - 1,150 TH/S HASH RATE (1GH/S per Unit) - page 133. (Read 565833 times)
This spreadsheet is showing a simple increase of 6 PH per period, which is unconscionable. The calculations should take into account at least a 15% increase per period.
So instead of 6,000 TH being added to network every 10 days, you propose a perpetual 15% every 10 days
so for example
start @ 76,000 TH
10 days later 87,400 TH
10 days later 100,509 TH,
10 days later 115,586 TH
10 days later 132,924 TH
10 days later 152,862 TH
10 days later 175,791 TH
10 days later 202,159 TH
(2 months passed)
and so on and so forth till sometime in not so distant future we'll be in exahashes adding god knows how many PH daily?
This is the same argument I have been making. Very few seem to understand how even 10% is not sustainable over the long term.
I am confident we have hit the wall with 28nm. I don't see any 25%+ difficulty increases in our future until the next gen.
Guess what? Bitfury BF3500 operates 0.78 Watts/GH at 55nm nodes. Which means all 28nm rigs we see right now have a great room for improvement. And that's why difficulty will continue to increase at 15% for a while. Admit that current chip designs are bad designs, and we don't need 14nm or further to improve the mining efficiency, just redesign the chip and all be fine.
Cryptx,
I'm sure not correct. But after not delivering the promised hashing power at the promised time, you purchased in bulk a large quantity of shares that should have been sold on the market instead. Then you decide what is going to be the price of a new ipo, manipulating marketprice again. You also decide to sell at this new convinient price that you established, more shares.
The above halting the dividend payout to pay for additional hashing power.
And while your loyal long term shareholders were temporary disinvesting Peta to jumpstart Scryptx (that was the additional benefit on reducing maintenance fees for Peta).
Of course, each one makes his own decisions, but apparently I'm not the only one that is now facing the consequences of that decisions, based on lack of transparancy and unidirectional decision making from your side.
This is quite annoying for me. I've invested in Scyptx and now it would be impossible to sell all the shares I have without a huge loss, to the purchase back Peta at 20/25% higher price.
I've missed the train. But your way of communicating to us had a part in it.
Do you want to buy all my scrytx shares at what I spent for them?
I'd rather cash out and go.
I'm sure not correct. But after not delivering the promised hashing power at the promised time, you purchased in bulk a large quantity of shares that should have been sold on the market instead. Then you decide what is going to be the price of a new ipo, manipulating marketprice again. You also decide to sell at this new convinient price that you established, more shares.
The above halting the dividend payout to pay for additional hashing power.
And while your loyal long term shareholders were temporary disinvesting Peta to jumpstart Scryptx (that was the additional benefit on reducing maintenance fees for Peta).
Of course, each one makes his own decisions, but apparently I'm not the only one that is now facing the consequences of that decisions, based on lack of transparancy and unidirectional decision making from your side.
This is quite annoying for me. I've invested in Scyptx and now it would be impossible to sell all the shares I have without a huge loss, to the purchase back Peta at 20/25% higher price.
I've missed the train. But your way of communicating to us had a part in it.
Do you want to buy all my scrytx shares at what I spent for them?
I'd rather cash out and go.
+1 +2 +3
To those who completely missed last jump: don't regret too much. Instead watch carefully what happens with the new IPO.
To those who are stuck in SCRYPT and feeling luck of liquidity: when bitcoin price starts a new uptrend then altcoins related securities should outperform those mining bitcoins. For the moment be patient, and collect your dividends. Try to divest on enthusiasm - when it comes.
Cryptx,
I'm sure not correct. But after not delivering the promised hashing power at the promised time, you purchased in bulk a large quantity of shares that should have been sold on the market instead. Then you decide what is going to be the price of a new ipo, manipulating marketprice again. You also decide to sell at this new convinient price that you established, more shares.
The above halting the dividend payout to pay for additional hashing power.
And while your loyal long term shareholders were temporary disinvesting Peta to jumpstart Scryptx (that was the additional benefit on reducing maintenance fees for Peta).
Of course, each one makes his own decisions, but apparently I'm not the only one that is now facing the consequences of that decisions, based on lack of transparancy and unidirectional decision making from your side.
This is quite annoying for me. I've invested in Scyptx and now it would be impossible to sell all the shares I have without a huge loss, to the purchase back Peta at 20/25% higher price.
I've missed the train. But your way of communicating to us had a part in it.
Do you want to buy all my scrytx shares at what I spent for them?
I'd rather cash out and go.
I'm sure not correct. But after not delivering the promised hashing power at the promised time, you purchased in bulk a large quantity of shares that should have been sold on the market instead. Then you decide what is going to be the price of a new ipo, manipulating marketprice again. You also decide to sell at this new convinient price that you established, more shares.
The above halting the dividend payout to pay for additional hashing power.
And while your loyal long term shareholders were temporary disinvesting Peta to jumpstart Scryptx (that was the additional benefit on reducing maintenance fees for Peta).
Of course, each one makes his own decisions, but apparently I'm not the only one that is now facing the consequences of that decisions, based on lack of transparancy and unidirectional decision making from your side.
This is quite annoying for me. I've invested in Scyptx and now it would be impossible to sell all the shares I have without a huge loss, to the purchase back Peta at 20/25% higher price.
I've missed the train. But your way of communicating to us had a part in it.
Do you want to buy all my scrytx shares at what I spent for them?
I'd rather cash out and go.
+1 +2 +3
Cryptx,
I'm sure not correct. But after not delivering the promised hashing power at the promised time, you purchased in bulk a large quantity of shares that should have been sold on the market instead. Then you decide what is going to be the price of a new ipo, manipulating marketprice again. You also decide to sell at this new convinient price that you established, more shares.
The above halting the dividend payout to pay for additional hashing power.
And while your loyal long term shareholders were temporary disinvesting Peta to jumpstart Scryptx (that was the additional benefit on reducing maintenance fees for Peta).
Of course, each one makes his own decisions, but apparently I'm not the only one that is now facing the consequences of that decisions, based on lack of transparancy and unidirectional decision making from your side.
This is quite annoying for me. I've invested in Scyptx and now it would be impossible to sell all the shares I have without a huge loss, to the purchase back Peta at 20/25% higher price.
I've missed the train. But your way of communicating to us had a part in it.
Do you want to buy all my scrytx shares at what I spent for them?
I'd rather cash out and go.
I'm sure not correct. But after not delivering the promised hashing power at the promised time, you purchased in bulk a large quantity of shares that should have been sold on the market instead. Then you decide what is going to be the price of a new ipo, manipulating marketprice again. You also decide to sell at this new convinient price that you established, more shares.
The above halting the dividend payout to pay for additional hashing power.
And while your loyal long term shareholders were temporary disinvesting Peta to jumpstart Scryptx (that was the additional benefit on reducing maintenance fees for Peta).
Of course, each one makes his own decisions, but apparently I'm not the only one that is now facing the consequences of that decisions, based on lack of transparancy and unidirectional decision making from your side.
This is quite annoying for me. I've invested in Scyptx and now it would be impossible to sell all the shares I have without a huge loss, to the purchase back Peta at 20/25% higher price.
I've missed the train. But your way of communicating to us had a part in it.
Do you want to buy all my scrytx shares at what I spent for them?
I'd rather cash out and go.
At 0.1 btc/15gh they are asking $3/gh... Not very good considering what is available.
hashratio is selling miners using asicminer chips for $1.4/gh.
edit: looks like they are buying hardware for around $1.5/gh as per the prospectus.
hashratio is selling miners using asicminer chips for $1.4/gh.
edit: looks like they are buying hardware for around $1.5/gh as per the prospectus.
Waaahooo!! Cryptx you have just made my day! Fantastic update! 
PETA is currently the fund with highest volume on Havelock. 
With this recent news why would anyone be selling their shares below IPO value? Unless they 'need' out obviously.
A lot of happened this last Friday.
If at least 10k units of the new IPO are sold then PetaMine as a project could be strengthened.
There are significant differences between previous and latest Prospectus but no motion. IMHO it's never a good idea to try to build something by dodging the rights of others - regardless of intentions.
Good luck to all.
If at least 10k units of the new IPO are sold then PetaMine as a project could be strengthened.
There are significant differences between previous and latest Prospectus but no motion. IMHO it's never a good idea to try to build something by dodging the rights of others - regardless of intentions.
Good luck to all.
I strongly disagree with many of the points that you've made here.
Yes, it is much easier to do use a static PH hashrate increase over a percentage increase, but if you would have done this any time since January 2013 (predict less than 8% increases, as the spreadsheet does), you would be dead wrong. Past performance is not necessarily indicative of future results, but I believe that it's there is a strong link in this case. It's easier but it's lazy and, to me, shows a lack of respect to the shareholders.
I don't disagree that a wall will come for difficulty. But now? With so many companies pumping out their new ASIC generations? And, if you're long BTC like most of us are, you simply can't ignore that a rising BTC price over the next 1-3 years will only make the mining space more crowded and competitive.
My issue here is not with cryptx's profitability or business model - they very well may be able to forge many beneficial manufacturing contracts. My issue is simply lazy / downright irresponsible forecasts of the difficulty. I don't have any stake in any cryptx ventures, I simply point out inaccuracies when I see them. This one is glaring.
Yes, it is much easier to do use a static PH hashrate increase over a percentage increase, but if you would have done this any time since January 2013 (predict less than 8% increases, as the spreadsheet does), you would be dead wrong. Past performance is not necessarily indicative of future results, but I believe that it's there is a strong link in this case. It's easier but it's lazy and, to me, shows a lack of respect to the shareholders.
I don't disagree that a wall will come for difficulty. But now? With so many companies pumping out their new ASIC generations? And, if you're long BTC like most of us are, you simply can't ignore that a rising BTC price over the next 1-3 years will only make the mining space more crowded and competitive.
My issue here is not with cryptx's profitability or business model - they very well may be able to forge many beneficial manufacturing contracts. My issue is simply lazy / downright irresponsible forecasts of the difficulty. I don't have any stake in any cryptx ventures, I simply point out inaccuracies when I see them. This one is glaring.
actually yes thats pretty reasonable. I also don't see any reason why we'd go down in diff increases all of a sudden (short term) with so much hashrate on the horizon waiting to be deployed. didn't realise anyone paid attention to the spreadsheets because they're usually not accurate, the ones I've seen previously had never made any sense. I think plugging numbers into the last one resulted in a gain of about 23,000 btc which I would of been happy with
.. would say to anyone to do your own calculations rather than rely on any given indications.This spreadsheet is showing a simple increase of 6 PH per period, which is unconscionable. The calculations should take into account at least a 15% increase per period.
So instead of 6,000 TH being added to network every 10 days, you propose a perpetual 15% every 10 days
so for example
start @ 76,000 TH
10 days later 87,400 TH
10 days later 100,509 TH,
10 days later 115,586 TH
10 days later 132,924 TH
10 days later 152,862 TH
10 days later 175,791 TH
10 days later 202,159 TH
(2 months passed)
and so on and so forth till sometime in not so distant future we'll be in exahashes adding god knows how many PH daily?
This is the same argument I have been making. Very few seem to understand how even 10% is not sustainable over the long term.
I am confident we have hit the wall with 28nm. I don't see any 25%+ difficulty increases in our future until the next gen.
Yes. I personally think there will be some big diff jumps ahead, but of course it does things do have to slow down at some point.
I guess can't really argue to much if you look at historical data of diff increases. and say why would anything change now when it hasn't in the past.
it's easier to just operate under set assumptions about likelihood of being able to maintain a percentage of the global hashrate. (although where you get the assumptions from is the leap of faith part) There's no crystal ball about what exactly the difficulty would be at x point in future, but data is out there about some projects which are coming online. cryptx can forge relationships with manafacturers. there's no reason with that relationship they can't obtain even off the shelf hardware in bulk that will earn more BTC than was spent to purchase it, despite it being tried before with incompetents like icedrill.
you can be pessimistic. Imagine cryptx can only ever attain 1% of global hashrate or half what they state and still see what, 70% yield based on pretty much peak price thus far.
Assuming peta's hashrate % in relation to global hashrate is steadily maintained over a long period of time (say 6 months) if not increased I see no reason why market wouldn't self-adjust to a lower yield being acceptable.
I strongly disagree with many of the points that you've made here.
Yes, it is much easier to do use a static PH hashrate increase over a percentage increase, but if you would have done this any time since January 2013 (predict less than 8% increases, as the spreadsheet does), you would be dead wrong. Past performance is not necessarily indicative of future results, but I believe that it's there is a strong link in this case. It's easier but it's lazy and, to me, shows a lack of respect to the shareholders.
I don't disagree that a wall will come for difficulty. But now? With so many companies pumping out their new ASIC generations? And, if you're long BTC like most of us are, you simply can't ignore that a rising BTC price over the next 1-3 years will only make the mining space more crowded and competitive.
My issue here is not with cryptx's profitability or business model - they very well may be able to forge many beneficial manufacturing contracts. My issue is simply lazy / downright irresponsible forecasts of the difficulty. I don't have any stake in any cryptx ventures, I simply point out inaccuracies when I see them. This one is glaring.
Our official press release:
...
To continue building a sustainable mining operation, CryptX will retain the weekly dividend it pays to unit holders until the end of the IPO. Dividends will instead be invested in additional hardware so that unit holders enjoy a much higher yield per unit. Currently, each unit represents 7.55 GH/s of total hash power. After deploying the additional 1,000 TH/s, each unit will represent 15 GH/s of hash power. Weekly dividends will be restored after IPO. Through these measures, CryptX plans to mine a total of nearly 25,000 BTC in just one year.
...
...
To continue building a sustainable mining operation, CryptX will retain the weekly dividend it pays to unit holders until the end of the IPO. Dividends will instead be invested in additional hardware so that unit holders enjoy a much higher yield per unit. Currently, each unit represents 7.55 GH/s of total hash power. After deploying the additional 1,000 TH/s, each unit will represent 15 GH/s of hash power. Weekly dividends will be restored after IPO. Through these measures, CryptX plans to mine a total of nearly 25,000 BTC in just one year.
...
Very happy about this! More than satisfied regarding my previous comment.
This spreadsheet is showing a simple increase of 6 PH per period, which is unconscionable. The calculations should take into account at least a 15% increase per period.
So instead of 6,000 TH being added to network every 10 days, you propose a perpetual 15% every 10 days
so for example
start @ 76,000 TH
10 days later 87,400 TH
10 days later 100,509 TH,
10 days later 115,586 TH
10 days later 132,924 TH
10 days later 152,862 TH
10 days later 175,791 TH
10 days later 202,159 TH
(2 months passed)
and so on and so forth till sometime in not so distant future we'll be in exahashes adding god knows how many PH daily?
This is the same argument I have been making. Very few seem to understand how even 10% is not sustainable over the long term.
I am confident we have hit the wall with 28nm. I don't see any 25%+ difficulty increases in our future until the next gen.
Yes. I personally think there will be some big diff jumps ahead, but of course it does things do have to slow down at some point.
I guess can't really argue to much if you look at historical data of diff increases. and say why would anything change now when it hasn't in the past.
it's easier to just operate under set assumptions about likelihood of being able to maintain a percentage of the global hashrate. (although where you get the assumptions from is the leap of faith part) There's no crystal ball about what exactly the difficulty would be at x point in future, but data is out there about some projects which are coming online. cryptx can forge relationships with manafacturers. there's no reason with that relationship they can't obtain even off the shelf hardware in bulk that will earn more BTC than was spent to purchase it, despite it being tried before with incompetents like icedrill.
you can be pessimistic. Imagine cryptx can only ever attain 1% of global hashrate or half what they state and still see what, 70% yield based on pretty much peak price thus far.
Assuming peta's hashrate % in relation to global hashrate is steadily maintained over a long period of time (say 6 months) if not increased I see no reason why market wouldn't self-adjust to a lower yield being acceptable.
This spreadsheet is showing a simple increase of 6 PH per period, which is unconscionable. The calculations should take into account at least a 15% increase per period.
So instead of 6,000 TH being added to network every 10 days, you propose a perpetual 15% every 10 days
so for example
start @ 76,000 TH
10 days later 87,400 TH
10 days later 100,509 TH,
10 days later 115,586 TH
10 days later 132,924 TH
10 days later 152,862 TH
10 days later 175,791 TH
10 days later 202,159 TH
(2 months passed)
and so on and so forth till sometime in not so distant future we'll be in exahashes adding god knows how many PH daily?
This is the same argument I have been making. Very few seem to understand how even 10% is not sustainable over the long term.
I am confident we have hit the wall with 28nm. I don't see any 25%+ difficulty increases in our future until the next gen.
This spreadsheet is showing a simple increase of 6 PH per period, which is unconscionable. The calculations should take into account at least a 15% increase per period.
So instead of 6,000 TH being added to network every 10 days, you propose a perpetual 15% every 10 days
so for example
start @ 76,000 TH
10 days later 87,400 TH
10 days later 100,509 TH,
10 days later 115,586 TH
10 days later 132,924 TH
10 days later 152,862 TH
10 days later 175,791 TH
10 days later 202,159 TH
(2 months passed)
and so on and so forth till sometime in not so distant future we'll be in exahashes adding god knows how many PH daily?
Have any of you actually checked the forecast?
You know the reinvestment percentage starts at 90% and only gets down to 50% by the end of September?
I will secure the long term future of the project, but this is a LONG term investment
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/lv?key=0AjI5bgsiFJAidHgwa0UyTHNEVG1lbDdvN2FMTExvOHc&usp=drive_web
You know the reinvestment percentage starts at 90% and only gets down to 50% by the end of September?
I will secure the long term future of the project, but this is a LONG term investment
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/lv?key=0AjI5bgsiFJAidHgwa0UyTHNEVG1lbDdvN2FMTExvOHc&usp=drive_web
I just did naive calculations like this
Quote
maintaining 1.5% of global hashrate = ~19723 mined in total yearly
-4536 hosting fees*, 15187 remaining.
35% (5315 btc) towards re-investments to at least maintain steady 1.5 %,
65% towards dividends -- total amount of dividends 9871.875
9871 / 100,000 = 0.09871. Based on last market price now- 105% yield.
-4536 hosting fees*, 15187 remaining.
35% (5315 btc) towards re-investments to at least maintain steady 1.5 %,
65% towards dividends -- total amount of dividends 9871.875
9871 / 100,000 = 0.09871. Based on last market price now- 105% yield.
Quote
maintaining 2% of global hashrate = 26298 mined in total yearly
-6048.54 hosting fees, 20250 remaining
35% (7087btc) towards re-investments to (at least maintain) steady 2 %,
65% towards dividends -- total amount of dividends 13162.5
13162.5 / 100,000 = 0.1316. Based on last market price now- 140% yield.
-6048.54 hosting fees, 20250 remaining
35% (7087btc) towards re-investments to (at least maintain) steady 2 %,
65% towards dividends -- total amount of dividends 13162.5
13162.5 / 100,000 = 0.1316. Based on last market price now- 140% yield.
*based on last hosting fees. ~450$/btc amounted to ~23% of BTC mined. new HW is energy efficient
If $/btc rises, hosting fees go down and total dividends increase.. if re-investment equipment can be acquired and setup competitively in comparison to difficulty increases there's a chance at not only maintaining % of global, but increasing peta's % share.
AM never really peaked much above 25% from what I remember and investors were jumping in whilst they were paying well below that.
As long as petas share of global hashrate % can be maintained without slipping, which is entirely achievable, even with commodity hardware, there's no reason whatsoever this project can't be profitable long into the future
This spreadsheet is showing a simple increase of 6 PH per period, which is unconscionable. The calculations should take into account at least a 15% increase per period.
Have any of you actually checked the forecast?
You know the reinvestment percentage starts at 90% and only gets down to 50% by the end of September?
I will secure the long term future of the project, but this is a LONG term investment
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/lv?key=0AjI5bgsiFJAidHgwa0UyTHNEVG1lbDdvN2FMTExvOHc&usp=drive_web
You know the reinvestment percentage starts at 90% and only gets down to 50% by the end of September?
I will secure the long term future of the project, but this is a LONG term investment
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/lv?key=0AjI5bgsiFJAidHgwa0UyTHNEVG1lbDdvN2FMTExvOHc&usp=drive_web
I just did naive calculations like this
Quote
maintaining 1.5% of global hashrate = ~19723 mined in total yearly
-4536 hosting fees*, 15187 remaining.
35% (5315 btc) towards re-investments to at least maintain steady 1.5 %,
65% towards dividends -- total amount of dividends 9871.875
9871 / 100,000 = 0.09871. Based on last market price now- 105% yield.
-4536 hosting fees*, 15187 remaining.
35% (5315 btc) towards re-investments to at least maintain steady 1.5 %,
65% towards dividends -- total amount of dividends 9871.875
9871 / 100,000 = 0.09871. Based on last market price now- 105% yield.
Quote
maintaining 2% of global hashrate = 26298 mined in total yearly
-6048.54 hosting fees, 20250 remaining
35% (7087btc) towards re-investments to (at least maintain) steady 2 %,
65% towards dividends -- total amount of dividends 13162.5
13162.5 / 100,000 = 0.1316. Based on last market price now- 140% yield.
-6048.54 hosting fees, 20250 remaining
35% (7087btc) towards re-investments to (at least maintain) steady 2 %,
65% towards dividends -- total amount of dividends 13162.5
13162.5 / 100,000 = 0.1316. Based on last market price now- 140% yield.
*based on last hosting fees. ~450$/btc amounted to ~23% of BTC mined. new HW is energy efficient
If $/btc rises, hosting fees go down and total dividends increase (and of course the opposite if btc drops, although if you beleived btc was gonna fall sharply you shouldn't be tying funds up on any securities).. if re-investment equipment can be acquired and setup competitively in comparison to difficulty increases there's a chance at not only maintaining but increasing peta's % share.
AM never really peaked much above 25% from what I remember and investors were jumping in whilst they were paying well below that.
As long as petas share of global hashrate % can be maintained without slipping, which is entirely achievable, even with commodity hardware, there's no reason whatsoever this project can't be profitable long into the future, this isn't factored in, nor is earnings from any potential sales of HW
Could someone clarify the dividends to invest after IPO fields?
That's how much of our dividends will go to pay the new hardware, if all units are sold hardware is paid for, if only 10k units are sold we will not see dividends for a few weeks until 1007 bitcoins are generated in dividends so the hardware can be paid for.
hero member
Activity: 617
Merit: 509
Crypto Card - https://platinum.crypto.com/r/28cz7d
Off topic guys, this is not the place for BTC price speculation. If there was an "article" on coindesk or cryptonews how cool we are, it would certainly attract people. Recently there was an "article" about KNC (dont remmeber correctly) future cloud hashing, which in a sense is unprofitable. While PETA being trully promising project and one of the few (if not sole) profitable cloud mining entities.
Jump to: