Topic: Lab Rat Data Processing, LLC (LabRatMining) Official Announcement - page 207. (Read 452224 times)
October 17, 2013, 05:42:14 PM
I would be in favour of buying up bonds
October 17, 2013, 03:52:42 PM
Hey Lab_Rat:
I don't know how the numbers crunch for this, but would it make sense for you to spend some of the BTC we've earned, instead of on new hardware, to buy up some of the cheap bonds in the name of LRM?
That is, you could create some virtual hardware (a virtual bondholder who splits his dividends with us all) that would have the effect of concentrating dividends to the bondholders who do not sell.
I don't know how the numbers crunch for this, but would it make sense for you to spend some of the BTC we've earned, instead of on new hardware, to buy up some of the cheap bonds in the name of LRM?
That is, you could create some virtual hardware (a virtual bondholder who splits his dividends with us all) that would have the effect of concentrating dividends to the bondholders who do not sell.
I've actually proposed a similar idea, but not to pay higher dividends. My suggestion was to buy up cheap bonds and send ALL proceeds to buying more hardware (or increase the percentage cut).
For example, if LR could buy up 1000 bonds at, for example, BTC0.07, that would mean he could permanently increase re-investment funds by about +2% for a 'mere' BTC7. It follows that 2000 bonds would be about +4%, 3000 bonds would be about +6%...etc...
I posted this earlier in this thread, but Labrat hasn't responded to the idea.
October 17, 2013, 03:03:47 PM
Hey Lab_Rat:
I don't know how the numbers crunch for this, but would it make sense for you to spend some of the BTC we've earned, instead of on new hardware, to buy up some of the cheap bonds in the name of LRM?
That is, you could create some virtual hardware (a virtual bondholder who splits his dividends with us all) that would have the effect of concentrating dividends to the bondholders who do not sell.
I don't know how the numbers crunch for this, but would it make sense for you to spend some of the BTC we've earned, instead of on new hardware, to buy up some of the cheap bonds in the name of LRM?
That is, you could create some virtual hardware (a virtual bondholder who splits his dividends with us all) that would have the effect of concentrating dividends to the bondholders who do not sell.
October 17, 2013, 01:02:54 PM
This means the dividends due to go out Oct. 19th and Oct. 26th will BOTH go out on Oct. 26th.
Maybe I'm blind and is said anywhere but what happens to dividends of Oct. 12th, last thing I've read is that will be paid this week and today is thursday.
Regards
grnbrg.
Regards
October 17, 2013, 01:01:32 PM
yes thats great. ive followed LRM developement from start, bought shares sold shares, not large amounts, but its been developing and getting better over the months, which is better than bigger companies and setups have done, we know who they are, it feels comfortable and genuine and the whole business idea is good. but other factors can affect the plan which are out LRM control, thats business. especially in bitcoins.
i dont knowLRM personally and not getting anything for this post. just airing some thoughts, giving him a chance and having some patience, for the longer haul.
i dont knowLRM personally and not getting anything for this post. just airing some thoughts, giving him a chance and having some patience, for the longer haul.
October 17, 2013, 12:55:44 PM
It only worked out that way last week, and a sendmany automated payout system is underway which will result in no fees from here on out.
nice work, thank you!
October 17, 2013, 12:26:42 PM
This means the dividends due to go out Oct. 19th and Oct. 26th will BOTH go out on Oct. 26th.
Maybe I'm blind and is said anywhere but what happens to dividends of Oct. 12th, last thing I've read is that will be paid this week and today is thursday.
Regards
grnbrg.
Plus you got to have a minimum of 20 shares to get dividends
It only worked out that way last week, and a sendmany automated payout system is underway which will result in no fees from here on out.
October 17, 2013, 11:51:18 AM
This means the dividends due to go out Oct. 19th and Oct. 26th will BOTH go out on Oct. 26th.
Maybe I'm blind and is said anywhere but what happens to dividends of Oct. 12th, last thing I've read is that will be paid this week and today is thursday.
Regards
grnbrg.
Plus you got to have a minimum of 20 shares to get dividends
October 17, 2013, 11:49:20 AM
This means the dividends due to go out Oct. 19th and Oct. 26th will BOTH go out on Oct. 26th.
Maybe I'm blind and is said anywhere but what happens to dividends of Oct. 12th, last thing I've read is that will be paid this week and today is thursday.
Regards
grnbrg.
October 17, 2013, 11:45:00 AM
This means the dividends due to go out Oct. 19th and Oct. 26th will BOTH go out on Oct. 26th.
Maybe I'm blind and is said anywhere but what happens to dividends of Oct. 12th, last thing I've read is that will be paid this week and today is thursday.
Regards
October 17, 2013, 10:18:54 AM
But it sounds like we have some good news coming... Man, we are over 2 petahashes already.. i hope it slows down....(yea, right)
I have been emphasizing this , I see trouble all over because 35% difficulty jump every 2 weeks , its like LRM is riding motorbike & trying to out do difficulty riding dragster on drag strip.
The main reason is knc and bitfury have released. I think we will start to see a semi slow down or it will come in waves, but i dont expect a 30 percent jump every 10 days..
Even if you have only 20% jump every 10 days, I do not see how it works out. Assuming this and deployment of 700Mhash per share (LR's best projection) in mid November would mean that each share gets only 0.04 btc altogether if the rig is run infinitely long (in practice most of this comes in the first couple of months). This means that each bond makes less than a quarter of the IPO price. So the only way this can work out is if
1) btc price shoots up (but then it is better just to hold btc)
2) LR can deploy a much higher (4x) hash rate than the best projection
3) the difficulty increase significantly slows down
October 17, 2013, 10:09:54 AM
But it sounds like we have some good news coming... Man, we are over 2 petahashes already.. i hope it slows down....(yea, right)
I have been emphasizing this , I see trouble all over because 35% difficulty jump every 2 weeks , its like LRM is riding motorbike & trying to out do difficulty riding dragster on drag strip.
The main reason is knc and bitfury have released. I think we will start to see a semi slow down or it will come in waves, but i dont expect a 30 percent jump every 10 days..
October 17, 2013, 09:53:39 AM
Casascius manages it as well for funding the coins:
http://casascius.wordpress.com/
Check the top blog post. Massive transaction for standard fee. I am sure he would give advice to Lab_Rat if he experiances problems.
http://casascius.wordpress.com/
Check the top blog post. Massive transaction for standard fee. I am sure he would give advice to Lab_Rat if he experiances problems.
October 17, 2013, 09:51:51 AM
But it sounds like we have some good news coming... Man, we are over 2 petahashes already.. i hope it slows down....(yea, right)
I have been emphasizing this , I see trouble all over because 35% difficulty jump every 2 weeks , its like LRM is riding motorbike & trying to out do difficulty riding dragster on drag strip.
October 17, 2013, 09:26:22 AM
With bitcoin QT, I can sit there and add recipients all day long and i believe the system now charges .0001btc per 1kb of info. the last time I sent 2 bitcoins, i used about 300 bytes, so, by using bitcoinqt and sending everyones at the same time will save money in the long run. Granted, .0005 is nothing really (12 cents, i think), but it adds up if you do hundreds a week...(yea it turns into 12 dollars, lol) but its the concept, not really the money. Im a large bond holder, so I couldn't care less about the .0005btc fee, but if i were a small share holder, i might care...
But it sounds like we have some good news coming... Man, we are over 2 petahashes already.. i hope it slows down....(yea, right)
But it sounds like we have some good news coming... Man, we are over 2 petahashes already.. i hope it slows down....(yea, right)
October 17, 2013, 06:50:59 AM
In addition to that math (disclosed hashrate projects and difficulty increases) there are big fundamental changes that make people feel different about the potential:
1) people less than 20 shares no longer receive dividends. that is temporary, but such a decision caused a large loss of confidence in management. The shares are worthless without reliable dividends.
2) everyone else has to pay a new fee of a minimum 0.025 per account, perhaps as much as 0.075 per account. again temporary, but investors think it is outrageous and no longer want to be a part of it.
3) transaction fees now have to paid for by investors, and are projected to be 0.0005 per account per week. Small, but investors are losing faith.
1) people less than 20 shares no longer receive dividends. that is temporary, but such a decision caused a large loss of confidence in management. The shares are worthless without reliable dividends.
2) everyone else has to pay a new fee of a minimum 0.025 per account, perhaps as much as 0.075 per account. again temporary, but investors think it is outrageous and no longer want to be a part of it.
3) transaction fees now have to paid for by investors, and are projected to be 0.0005 per account per week. Small, but investors are losing faith.
Blowing a lot of this out of proportion. Last week was THE ONLY week you'll see a 0.025 fee, and BTC0.0005 is about $0.07. If you think 7 cents on a transaction up to ~$1000 (approx what the highest bondholder was paid last week) is high. Go back to PayPal.
EXACTLY! 7 cents on a transaction of 17 cents is insane (a single share)! Is the official policy of LRM that investors only count if you have >$1000 invested? If so, are there plans to merge shares to reduce dust payments?
Another option, see:
Another thing nastyfans does that could be good to emulate: dividends are paid out once a week in one transaction with minimal transaction fees, essentially shared by everyone. Charging every account .0005 for transaction fees is ridiculous when you can make a single transaction with fees a few times bigger than that.
Example:
https://blockchain.info/tx/7c4d0999406c28ca71f67bd6c6b0d73ba75f43a565513b5d54ffe0ce480c7cb1
total fees for 20,000 "shares" and smaller dividends than LRM: 0.0035 BTC. I don't see how .0005 per account per week is at all reasonable when others are doing 0.00000018 per share per week (for a similar number of shares as LRM).
Example:
https://blockchain.info/tx/7c4d0999406c28ca71f67bd6c6b0d73ba75f43a565513b5d54ffe0ce480c7cb1
total fees for 20,000 "shares" and smaller dividends than LRM: 0.0035 BTC. I don't see how .0005 per account per week is at all reasonable when others are doing 0.00000018 per share per week (for a similar number of shares as LRM).
Why not use Iputs.io for off block transactions. Micropayments with zero fees.
WeExchange was enough of a pain. Let's not get another middle man involved.
There is no reason that every individual dividend recipient needs to worry about the 0.0005 transaction fee. If dividend payments are not using multi-recipient transactions (where 100s of payments can go out in a single transaction with a single transaction fee), then you're doing it wrong. LabRat, if you want to do it wrong, more power too you, but you should pay for that yourself, since there is an viable and easy alternative that doesn't have the same cost.
'sendmany' transactions have been standard operating procedure for a long time. Get on board, please.
October 16, 2013, 11:54:05 PM
In addition to that math (disclosed hashrate projects and difficulty increases) there are big fundamental changes that make people feel different about the potential:
1) people less than 20 shares no longer receive dividends. that is temporary, but such a decision caused a large loss of confidence in management. The shares are worthless without reliable dividends.
2) everyone else has to pay a new fee of a minimum 0.025 per account, perhaps as much as 0.075 per account. again temporary, but investors think it is outrageous and no longer want to be a part of it.
3) transaction fees now have to paid for by investors, and are projected to be 0.0005 per account per week. Small, but investors are losing faith.
1) people less than 20 shares no longer receive dividends. that is temporary, but such a decision caused a large loss of confidence in management. The shares are worthless without reliable dividends.
2) everyone else has to pay a new fee of a minimum 0.025 per account, perhaps as much as 0.075 per account. again temporary, but investors think it is outrageous and no longer want to be a part of it.
3) transaction fees now have to paid for by investors, and are projected to be 0.0005 per account per week. Small, but investors are losing faith.
Blowing a lot of this out of proportion. Last week was THE ONLY week you'll see a 0.025 fee, and BTC0.0005 is about $0.07. If you think 7 cents on a transaction up to ~$1000 (approx what the highest bondholder was paid last week) is high. Go back to PayPal.
Go to PayPal? Go to HELL!
You are speaking almost like Inaba. You are breaking own rules and dont like ppl dint like it?
October 16, 2013, 08:50:38 PM
One bit of good news is the price of bitcoin is going up with a bit of strength. This will allow for Labrat to buy more hardware with the LRM bitcoins he's been holding. Also, it will give the coins mined from the two weeks withholding - whenever that happens this month - more buying power. So far, about 15% higher bitcoin value. Time will indicate.
Yes, and it's going to be in the next couple days I make payment to BitFury so this helps a lot.
It will at least counteract the Bitfury delay (and vice versa). For that reason, I'm not so sure it will put LRM ahead of what was already expected, if you could sum up the long term dividends in either scenario. It may keep it at par with the expected scenario. However, if bitcoin stays higher, it will put LRM ahead with any November purchases. And Dave should be dropping the price of hardware with difficulty increase.
October 16, 2013, 08:18:49 PM
In addition to that math (disclosed hashrate projects and difficulty increases) there are big fundamental changes that make people feel different about the potential:
1) people less than 20 shares no longer receive dividends. that is temporary, but such a decision caused a large loss of confidence in management. The shares are worthless without reliable dividends.
2) everyone else has to pay a new fee of a minimum 0.025 per account, perhaps as much as 0.075 per account. again temporary, but investors think it is outrageous and no longer want to be a part of it.
3) transaction fees now have to paid for by investors, and are projected to be 0.0005 per account per week. Small, but investors are losing faith.
1) people less than 20 shares no longer receive dividends. that is temporary, but such a decision caused a large loss of confidence in management. The shares are worthless without reliable dividends.
2) everyone else has to pay a new fee of a minimum 0.025 per account, perhaps as much as 0.075 per account. again temporary, but investors think it is outrageous and no longer want to be a part of it.
3) transaction fees now have to paid for by investors, and are projected to be 0.0005 per account per week. Small, but investors are losing faith.
Blowing a lot of this out of proportion. Last week was THE ONLY week you'll see a 0.025 fee, and BTC0.0005 is about $0.07. If you think 7 cents on a transaction up to ~$1000 (approx what the highest bondholder was paid last week) is high. Go back to PayPal.
EXACTLY! 7 cents on a transaction of 17 cents is insane (a single share)! Is the official policy of LRM that investors only count if you have >$1000 invested? If so, are there plans to merge shares to reduce dust payments?
Another option, see:
Another thing nastyfans does that could be good to emulate: dividends are paid out once a week in one transaction with minimal transaction fees, essentially shared by everyone. Charging every account .0005 for transaction fees is ridiculous when you can make a single transaction with fees a few times bigger than that.
Example:
https://blockchain.info/tx/7c4d0999406c28ca71f67bd6c6b0d73ba75f43a565513b5d54ffe0ce480c7cb1
total fees for 20,000 "shares" and smaller dividends than LRM: 0.0035 BTC. I don't see how .0005 per account per week is at all reasonable when others are doing 0.00000018 per share per week (for a similar number of shares as LRM).
Example:
https://blockchain.info/tx/7c4d0999406c28ca71f67bd6c6b0d73ba75f43a565513b5d54ffe0ce480c7cb1
total fees for 20,000 "shares" and smaller dividends than LRM: 0.0035 BTC. I don't see how .0005 per account per week is at all reasonable when others are doing 0.00000018 per share per week (for a similar number of shares as LRM).
Why not use Iputs.io for off block transactions. Micropayments with zero fees.
October 16, 2013, 06:35:23 PM
Unless you have reason to think these one or two people selling a lot of shares has insider information, then don't worry about why they are selling.
These events that have happened lately - like Bitfunder - are not changes in the basic fundamentals of Labrat.
These events that have happened lately - like Bitfunder - are not changes in the basic fundamentals of Labrat.
what are the fundamentals of LRM? have you seen a balance sheet or income statement?
Here are the fundamentals (which aren't real fundamentals since this is based on LRM projections, not released data):
This hashrate per bond value is currently 81MH/s per bond.
Given a 75% difficulty increase per month, and no new hardware purchases: bonds are valued at BTC0.015 minus 0.025 per account
hashrate of 400 MH/s per bond
Given a 75% increase per month, and no new hardware purchases
Hashing starting in november, bonds valued at BTC0.042 minus 0.025 per account
hashrate of 700 MH/s per bond
Given a 75% increase per month, and no new hardware purchases
Hashing starting in november, bonds valued at BTC0.074 minus 0.025 per account
hashrate of 700 MH/s per bond
Given a 50% difficulty increase per month, and no new hardware purchases
Hashing starting in november, bonds valued at BTC0.11 minus 0.025 per account
to get to IPO prices, LRM has to 1) add hardware exceeding difficulty and exceeding 700 MH/s per bond with no dilution, 2) hope for < 75% per month difficulty increases, 3) drop extra dividend fees, and 4) get to full hashrate in < 1 month.
At this point, there is no evidence of these improvements happening. I'm not saying it won't happen, just that there is no evidence besides occasional "we're working on deals" comments.
This is why securities follow certain organizational rules and investors demand transparency.
I do not understand your calculation, I find it too optimistic. If I assume 75% increase in difficulty per month, that translates into 20% increase per 10-day period while diff. is constant. This means that if you had 1Ghash per bond now then it would be about 0.1btc that you would ever mine with that. Note that each one month delay would decrease that by 43%.
So a bond with 700Mhash now would mean 0.07btc and the same hash rate in mid November would be 0.04 btc. And this is not the actual value of the bond since all costs still have to be deducted and some risks factored in and there is still no profit in this calculation, just ROI.
Whether it is worth purchasing any gear at all depends a lot on what sort of a deal LR can get. But spending all the funds and getting 700Mhash/bond online in mid Nov. definitely won't cut it. I also strongly urge more transparency because everything depends on these details.
Jump to: