Topic: PAJKA.BOND - 100% PPS 15Mhash mining bond - page 5. (Read 24989 times)

Ah, I see...

I'm not sure about the history prior to BTCT listing, but keep in mind that this is essentially a loan and paying more for a loan rarely makes sense to the issuer. If the issuer needs to borrow more money, it makes more sense to just issue a new bond than to increase payments for the previous lenders.

I've written far more about this in the article in my sig (or http://coin.furuknap.net/understanding-mining-bonds/ if I've expired that sig now).

As to the future, I obviously have no idea what goes through the issuers' mind :-)

.b

Thank you.

Sure...good luck....

SOSLOVE, can you stop posting in this topic please. You've sold your bonds, so stop the spam. We all can read ourselves about TAT and ASICminer, but it is irrelevant to this bond. Thanks.

TAT.ASICMINER : Update from ASICMINER, 100TH on the Way, Hardware Sales Strong
Posted: 2013-06-08 00:27:16 - Written by TATInvestments
 ( Click to Hide ) 

Update from ASICMINER:

The wafer of the first half (100TH/s) of next batch of 200TH is coming from the fab.

More than 4,000 USB mining devices have been sold.

The demand for Block Erupter mining blades is surprisingly long-lasting and still high.

Written by: TATInvestments

No,upgrade ,if BFL not delivery, Even that AM going to 100TH, before BFL shipment, that PAJKA still 3M bond...

Another assumption here, if you do not have personal contact with the issuer, you would no way to confirm whether issuer received the shipment or not...he could mining for him self for couple of months ,then release out the information that BFL has delivered his order...

It just seems that historically, xkrikl has upgraded the bonds for free. I'm asking if this trend will continue.

Please make sure you read and understand the contract as well as the asset type before you invest.

.b

Are there any plans to increase hashing power past 15MH/s per bond after BFL delivers (if they do)?

The 'trick' here is that PAJKA isn't a 3mhs bond, it is a 15mhs bond. People buying now bets that BFL will deliver; simple as that.

Further, a sustained 30% per month is impossible for a few reasons.

1) Technology doesn't move that fast. Even if ASICs are way behind CPU chips for size, the Swedes are already working on 28nm ASICs. You can't go much below that currently, meaning distribution and commoditization must take over.
2) Increase in difficulty must long-term be funded by profitability; if/when difficulty increases beyond profitability, difficulty will not increase further.
3) Mining must compete with holding coins; this is possible only as long as Bitcoin/USD remains steady or falls.

Based on this, sure, we'll see a massive rise in difficulty, maybe we hit 1PH/s this year, maybe we'll have 10 PH/s next year. However, at that time or some point, buying ASICs won't make sense anymore because of 1, 2, and 3. New technology won't keep up, profitability will make it a loss to buy more hardware, and Bitcoins may have fallen further (in which case buying hardware won't beat buying coins, should the price come back up again).

It's very dangerous to extrapolate the future based on a short period of data, and by short here, I mean this year. For example, if we take the previous four days, the hashrate has dropped from 138 to 131 TH/s, meaning if we extrapolate that, mining will stop in roughly two months.

On the other hand, if we look at the rate from February to now, it's around 700% increase (over four months) indicating that we'll hit 6,5PH/s next February and 107,884 PH/s by next block halving, or around 300 million Jupiters (which is the most powerful scheduled miner today) or roughly 10 billion block erupter blades.

Even if someone comes up with 14nm ASICMiners this summer, and assuming those will be twice as powerful, we're still looking at every 1 in every 60 persons on the planet shelling out $7K for mining Bitcoins...

I'm sure KnCMiner wouldn't mind, but hey, I'm not sure it's very realistic.

PMBs lose value in massive difficulty rises, sure. So does mining equipment and it certainly doesn't seem like it's slowing down willingness to invest.

However, like I've mentioned before, PAJKA has been operating for over a year during which time it has paid out the principal plus significant profit in interest. I can't understand why anyone will claim that this must have been the plan from the issuer all along; it would be the worst theft in the history of mankind when the thief ends up with less money than before they committed their theft.

.b

It is a bit of a silly bet the only way for him to loose the bet is for himself to go Bankrupt ...but then again if that happens he wont be able to pay the bet anyway

Just be careful with the those TAT.VM contracts...with the current numbers, TAT could buy back the bonds at any time for anywhere from a 0.0005-0.001 loss per bond to the investor because of the 200x coupon buyback clause.  Again, I think the asset is more of a reputation-building tool for TAT (TAT's a good guy - when I first got into BTC, he took time to talk to me on the BitFunder IRC), so I doubt he would do that and stick it to investors that way, but I'm not in the game to take that risk right now.

However, if prices continue to fall, you'll probably want to re-think your entire investing strategy anyway because the entire game could change if the network hashing power falls down enough...

I thought about it overnight and here's my last point.  Yes, I think everyone in this thread has obviously made valid points concerning the PMB's. 

Consider one more thing though.  With BTC/fiat prices falling over the past week, it is possible given this circumstance that many current mining operations will become infeasible and will shut down.  The network hashing power has already dropped from 132 TH/s to around 117 Th/s just since last night - more than a 10% decrease from yesterday's total.  While your portfolio should obviously not be entirely comprised of PMB's (and it should be a diversified basket of PMB's at that), they're a decent hedge against falling prices.  And they don't have any fees to use the service. 

But yes, if you expect difficulty to rise or if you're looking for higher returns, then don't buy them/sell off slowly (seriously, don't take any big hits you don't need to).

PaJKa also invested in AM, TAT.V will live short term, and most or some of those investors will invest again to PAJKA, I believe I will see a rebound in couple of days or weeks, thus I'm holding my shares, selling today is like giving up to a game that you never know the result yet. While holding I'm earning daily dividend.

once,TAT.V start trading on the market...you will not able to sell those PAJKA bond contracts...

Just throwing it out there...if I were trying to pump PMB's why would I bother including the drawbacks of buying such an asset?  I've also never argued that difficulty will fall...for reasons that I fond pretty obvious at this point.  Don't put words in my mouth.

And TradeFortress, your bet is akin to saying "I bet you 100 BTC that the sky will be blue tomorrow."  Yes, obviously your CD offers a better rate of return, I think that goes without saying.  Some of us just like to stick with well-established bonds because we're trading for the experience, not for serious gain.  

In any case, caveat emptor, people.  Do your research and make sure you know what you're buying, what the liquidity of such an asset is, and plan ahead to make sure you're not robbing yourself when the time comes to cash out.

TF,

The entire argument here wasn't whether they were the best investment out there, it was whether they're worth anything at all.  Any asset that pays dividends/coupons and has resale liquidity has value, and that's what I've been saying on here.

And I haven't exactly been spamming this info everywhere...my only posts regarding PMB's have been in this thread, TAT's VM thread, and one more on the glossary thread I started.  I can see how pro-PMB posts annoy you, as PMB's are a direct (albeit not the best) substitute for your service, but its not like I've been pumping PMB's by bad-mouthing any alternative service.

Sorry, edited too late, my bad...

EDIT: And I should've mentioned it again, but PMB's are a terrible long-term investment, yes.  My argument is based on short-term storage, not long-term gains.

Don't get me wrong, investors should know what they're dealing with with PMB's.  However, because they're listed on the same exchanges as other assets, you don't have to pay mining fees upon transfer to get into an interest-paying situation.  I'm still not selling my PMB's either, because they're in my portfolio to balance out risk from other assets I hold.  I'm not trying to pump them by any means, just making sure people know what they are and what the risks associated with them are (I only hold 3 PMB's, all PAJKA, and I do have BTC spread out in other places as well).

jjdub, as one of the vocal pumpers of PMBs which are causing people to lose money (while you probably try to sell your own PMBs), I'd like to offer you a wager.

I send 100 BTC to John. You send 100 BTC to John. If PAJKA.BOND (dividends - capital loss) outperforms CoinLenders (1.06123x) over 90 days, you get 198 BTC. If not, I get 198 BTC.

If you are not willing to put your money where your mouth is, kindly stop misleading people with misleading investment advice.


No it is not, you are losing money. If I pay you 1% of interest a week, but my bonds go down in value by 1.5% a week, that's called losing money.

TF, again, the issue isn't that the bonds lose value - they're not "worth" anything themselves.  But consider situations like we have right now with US treasuries with interest rates near zero...as the interest rate approaches zero, treasuries and cash essentially become the same thing conceptually.  For people with "loose" BTC in their wallets and no liquidity constraints, the PMB is the better option because its still earning interest (no matter how small the interest is).

EDIT: And I should've mentioned it again, but PMB's are a terrible long-term investment, yes.  My argument is based on short-term storage, not long-term gains.