Topic: [HAVELOCK] PETAMINE - 1,150 TH/S HASH RATE (1GH/S per Unit) - page 95. (Read 565833 times)

No it isn´t, as the new hardware can be deployed at record prices, whereas "new" mining bonds are nearly always overpriced.

The reinvestment is the real strength of this bond, as it allows it to basically be cumulative.

Hey, something we agree on. Except you think if only you would reinvest enough of the underwhelming dividends from those fixed mining bonds in to more fixed mining bonds (be it the same or other), then somehow "magic". Because that is exactly the same as what cryptx offers.

Dude I appreciate your new here so I'm going to say this politely. You have no idea what your talking about.

The reason we have kept up with difficulty was because the hardware that was paid for at the last IPO was supossed to be delivered in the first six weeks but ended up taking nearly four months, this caused a slow and steady increase in hashing over the four month period after that, pretty much devoid of reinvestment.

This won't happen this time. Your first two dividends will be the largest, you won't see another dividend that high again.

Ill say this for the last time, but all of you arguing for a higher reinvestment percentage really need to run the numbers. Your much better off from a ROI perspective getting the dividends out early, there is no valid argument against this because unless you can bring in twenty percent more machines every twelve days after hosting fees your just prolonging a losing battle, where each week you will be worse off than the last. It's allot better just to admit defeat and bleed the returns as quickly as you can.

Edit: quoted the wrong post.

You have to take it seriously, because it still sells!! Therefore by definition it's a market price. Though I agree it's massivly expensive, clearly most people are buying based on emotion rather than logic.

Except CEX.IO is hilariously over-priced. It shouldn't be cited as a legitimate measure of hashpower value.

I didn't say less regulated, I said "less draconian", as in the way the US shoots first, calls them a terrorist later!

Edit: Interesting poll I came across: https://polldaddy.com/poll/8095662/?view=results&msg=voted

i agree with Anotheranonlol

reinvestments of the mined revenue is essential and makes use of one of the points of having a large operation, purchasing power.

Growth in meaningless numbers is your point of view. So far cryptx has delivered. You and all other shareholders were made aware of the reinvestment strategy and numbers to keep this mining fund successful over the long haul from the very beginning. Through trial and error some of us have come to realize that the bigger sacrifice we make now will ensure our highly probably success in future. I'm not in a hurry or looking for a get rich quick scheme that's going to die in the ass as time goes by. I prefer to be involved in a fund that gets larger and larger over time. I bought in at 0.05 per share and can sell out now for a good profit. I don't want that. With a proper reinvestment strategy I do not see why the price per share cannot grow higher. I would much rather see an increase in gh and thus price per share if we can keep up with difficulty as opposed to higher divs now leading to a share price of next to nothing.

Investing is nowhere even remotely the same as re-investing, how is this such a tricky concept to understand? When the operation is fixed at 10GH/share we can pour in thousands of BTC, pump the shareprice to exorbitant levels yet we aren't going to get any richer (in dividends) because 1) shares in fixed mining operations are losing propositions no matter how they are dressed up,  and 2) being that we've pumped the price up, it becomes even harder to see a positive ROI (from dividends) the only chance you have there is hoping you'll come across people that are easily impressed by large dividends and you sell shares at a profit. In that case the shares are hot potatoes, the mines operating on borrowed time. Even Mining now with re-investment is operating on borrowed time, we don't need that pointing out. Reinvesting means, for example shares that were before as high as 0.12 when PETA was less than 500TH are now at 0.07 when PETA has increased to 1.2PH, yet difficulty has not increased 240%

I suspect vast majority of investors would withdraw their funds in a heartbeat if reinvestment wasn't a large factor in this project, hell I wouldn't have put a satoshi in if that was the case.

I'm perfectly happy about re-investing earnings from mining into purchasing new hardware.


Shareholders are not forced. Majority votes these things through. You wouldn't be aware from the sidelines.

Lol, you think Belgium of all places is less regulated than any US state? You cant fart there without a government license.

Yeah i'm pretty sure that if Cryptx was in US I would not be risking investing in PETA, thankfully other states are not quite as draconian, that being said, it's totally unregulated so caveat emptor.

You prefer growth in meaningless numbers over BTC denominated profitability ? Or you think profitability would not lead to growth? If you are so sure cryptx will do or continue to do a good job, why would it not grow and be able to sell more shares, representing more hashrate,  without its current shareholders being forced to increase their investment over time on terms they can not dictate, in circumstances they can not foresee?

+1

I agree!

I would support a higher reinvestment percentage, as it is the biggest advantage of this fund.

As a group with substantial buying power, we will have even better access to top-of-the-line mining hardware, beating competitors with our high efficiency, cheap hardware prices and low hosting costs.

At cex every GH is trading for around 0.07 and each of our shares represent atleast 15GH. We also have a much lower hosting cost than cex AND the big advantage of continous reinvestment.

Therefore, the shares are currently undervalued imo.

Agreed! What's the point of this mining fund if we aren't growing? If you want max return now then buy gh from cex or similar. If cryptx can secure well priced contracts for mining chips and have its own development team working on making these miners at a price that will most definitely find ROI and then some then that is what will keep this fund being successful. I really don't think it is hard to do and if that means sacrificing most of my divs to be successful in future then I vote all for it.

Doesn't the lack of choice make it more predictable? If I knew it would be a good investment if they'd at least raise some amount X (to get a good deal with the supplier, hosting, etc.), but cannot know if they're able to hit that target, I'm more inclined to stay away? Potentially killing a good investment opportunity?

You must admit, so far it worked. I don't think the project will survive any kind of difficulty increase, but so far so good?

It gained value way before the announcement and was rarely below IPO price since launch. I'd also say we did a bit more than just "keeping up with the difficulty" in the last upgrade.

The shares gained value when it was announced the hash rate was tripling. This was paid for NOT by our reinvestment but by a loan. This was an engineered rise in share price influenced by outside factors. Cryptx won't always be able to loan Peta a huge amount of money, and even if they are always willing to do that the amount they can loan will eventually be dwarfed by the difficulty.

I dont understand how this is so hard for almost all of you. Investing is the exact same thing as reinvesting, all that differs is the source of the funds, and the choice you no longer have. If reinvesting is a good move, then so is investing. And if investing (in new shares) isnt a good move and doesnt happen because the market thinks its a bad move, just how happy will you be that a large part of your revenue is being "re"-invested anyway?

Seriously IM going to start selling "100% reinvesting mining rigs" with a custom firmware. They wont produce a single BTC for you, but once in a while, whenever I say you mined 5 BTC for me, I will send you another miner at whatever hashrate I decide is reasonable at that time. Mind you, not that the new rigs will earn you a single satoshi, but you will be able to glance at the statistics and feel rich. After a few years, you may well have 5 mining rigs all from buying just one. All of them generating just bitcoin dust, but what a deal!

Lol, OK.  Seems the second initial public offering killed teh demand  
In other news, Active Mining gets B& and V&:  http://www.news-leader.com/story/news/local/ozarks/2014/06/02/secretary-state-halts-springfield-bitcoin-business/9871263/