Topic: [HAVELOCK] PETAMINE - 1,150 TH/S HASH RATE (1GH/S per Unit) - page 96. (Read 565833 times)

supply > demand happened. let's see what happens when the new dividend shows up on havelock and what that does to demand.

B.but the "value" was increasing before the IPO, and now it's ... decreasing



Whahappened?

Higher dividends after and further increased value?

But then you don't know who's going to invest how much and how much hardware that buys. Then it becomes too risky to reinvest at all. Knowing upfront how much reinvestment we'll have is key to success?

Dividends paid, shares gaining value...  Why would you want to mess with such a winning combination by issuing another IPO and cutting divs?  Or...

*Are you a wizard?

50/50 safest bet imho as well.  Vote cast

What's weird about it? Your argument is that you can't keep up with difficulty, meaning the investment will lose value, since mining yields less and less. Yet the shares gained value, way above 50%. All the while dividends were paid. Yes, we are in the red, but after 2 weeks auf 100% reinvest (or rather payback) not by much, I guess? At least not compared to the hashing power we gained.

Anyone got numbers?

I also voted 35/65 (35 Dividend / 65 Reinvest). I also think this ratio should be reviewed at least every couple of months. I would be open to a floating dividend/reinvestment ratio between 10/90 and 90/10. At least for me, the idea is to maintain a relatively constant dividend per share over time. If this does indeed become zero sum in the future (IE The BTC mined only pays for the electricity and hosting fees), then we would need to think about a vote on liquidating the assets.

Ultimately areas with low electricity costs will be more conducive to Bitcoin mining. As mining farms move to those areas I expect that it could actually cause the price of power to go up in those areas as huge BTC mines eat up surplus power. You can work out the details for yourself, but if hash rate continues to increase at 25 - 30% per month, by the time of the next block reward halving the Bitcoin network will be using the total power output of a medium sized nuclear power plant. 

So what? The hypothetical doesnt work even if you are the only one reinvesting.


Which other zero sum industries would that be?


And what do you think the odds are of a company that has to buy its hardware on the open market to unseat companies that produce their own hardware at cost? Bitfury, Cointerra, KnC, etc are all setting up their mega farms. They will sell their hardware to cryptx, then use the money to grow their own farm by a far larger amount. You dont win that sort of arms race unless you are an arms dealer.

You're linking share price and difficulty? Weird but ok, the share price went up because Cryptx bought new hardware. But this wasn't keeping up with the difficulty, if anything it is proof that we can't keep up. Our reinvestment fund didn't buy the new hardware, Cryptx loaned the money to Peta, we are in the red at the moment because we couldn't keep our network share with our reinvestment so we were forcefully lent money to try and stay in the game a bit longer.

Play your cards right, and you'll control 100% of the network. <==♬ And you'll sit and grin/the money will roll right in ♬

You could just buy more existing shares at market price at any point, but indeed for peta to grow, they should simply issue new shares representing new hashrate regularly. "Reinvesting" is simply the equivalent of being forced to buy these new shares at prices you have no control over.

Voted 35/65

it is possible to counter difficulty and grow, especially for a large operation

I'm very serious. I get, but don't accept your argument, simply because not everyone re-invests. In fact your argument supports the empirical pattern we see in other high growth industries of consolidation to the point of only a few mega players being left (Pharma for example). PETA's game is to be one of those final few players.

Edit: I voted 50/50 but would happily go up to 100% to play the long game and be in the final pack.

At any point in the future? Only during (I)POs, you mean? (regarding reinvestment in cryptx)

How do you reconcile that with the fact that we had a tenfold increase in difficulty since PETA-MINE started about 7 months ago (at least on havelock), yet the shareprice during that timeframe increased by more than 50% and is about to increase again with the recent deployment of new hardware?

edit: voted 50/50

Not sure if serious.
IN case you are serious, assume reinvesting would somehow increase your share of the network. Keep doing that, see what happens. You would end up with >100% of the network. The same logic dictates that if several competing mining companies reinvest their revenue, on average, everyone loses. Well everyone except the network itself. Welcome to the zero sum game.

I voted 50/50, providing re-investments are transparent.

Anyone can keep an eye out to see if there is too much slippage with PETA's share of the pie relative to global hashrate. Actually it's attractive even operating on assumption they maintain even half of their projections in mid term. Although global hashrate increase shows no sign of slowing down anytime soon it's fairly obvious there are certain limits to production, distribution, hosting etc which will be reached eventually causing a bit of a plateu. (even temporarily)

The public vote should not be a one time thing,should be open for adjustment depending on market conditions
With the amount of hashpower this project has, 50% of mined earnings less hosting fees should allow cryptx good position to leverage with manufacturers, something which small scale home miners don't have the luxury of being able to do.

Ultimately it's a case of buying hardware at X BTC and looking to dig back X+ BTC. If this project did not re-invest it would of been dead long ago.It's come a long way considering the amount of shares that were sold at BTCT.co (just a fraction of what was intended)

 Most home miners are not re-investing, only seeking to make a positive ROI over time- they will be gradually relegated out of the game in the coming years, Cloud mining will become much larger, and we see a competition mostly between warehouses and datacentres. Definitely big money can go into the key players there-  who knows, perhaps there could be a big private injection of $ or outright buyout if the mining scene matures over time. PETA is starting early to represent itself as one of the few large scale expanding mining operations open for public investment and a quick cashout 100% dividend would kill the project off in no time

I'd be interested to see any mathematical or economic proof you can back that statement up with.

50%/50%. A safe bet. Expansion is crucial to any investment and if they can pop out weekly increases of Hashing Power then I'm all for it. If they can't be trusted with the reinvestments then I would like to see it be 65/35 like before. However, I'm giving them all my trust that cryptx will deliver on the 50% reinvestment each week. Hoping for the best!