Topic: SkepsiDyne Integrated Node - The Bitcoin Mining Company - page 46. (Read 104288 times)

I'm not so testy, but I agree that it would be nice to see the three rigs purchased. Some photos and receipts might go a long way here; I bet additional shares get picked up more quickly, too.

so let me rephrase that:

you have money for 3 of your rigs already now, 4 if you would take a more optimized build, capable of give or take 1gh/s. you could already be mining with 3 rigs taking in, given current valuation, a few hundret bucks. instead, it seems part of your plan to let this go waste, the money of your investors. if ROI if your investors is a concern for you, why arent the first btc already there? we are looking at anything between 40 to 60 btc not mined just since the week started.

Absolutely: so far, 594 shares have sold.  At the current exchange of 7.82USD/BTC, that's $3483.81USD.  I have changed the rigs I will be buying, with each rig costing $960 and capable of 1065 Mhash/sec.  I will be starting when enough funds have been raised to purchase 4 rigs.  Only 61 more shares need to be sold.  I am confident this will happen before the end of the week.

Speaking of which, hey Tawsix, got an update for us?

Smart contracts would be able to control the number of shares issued, voting(for example a shareholder being able to put forward a motion), whether funds raised can be released or not to the issuer, and other actions.

Of course they can't go after someone after they've run off with the bitcoin.

By what mechanism? It seems you are limited to stopping specific shrares trading in case of a dispute.

Unless you have a private police force somewhere?

With regards enforcing anything, GLBSE wont be able to do that until I implement smart contracts, and then it will enforce whatever the rules in the contract are.

Even if we could raise a vote (according to the terms 30% would be required for that - I doubt that the GLBSE has rules for that in place though yet) - he owns 50%+1 share (+ a few thousand more shares) of the company and could easily deny the request.

Also as it looks you have to be the asset owner to raise votes, at least according to the documentation.

With the suggested 30 rigs @ 700MH/s a single share represents btw. 2.1 MH/s - at current difficulty that's 0.01341733 BTC/day - until that is reached however, it still might take a while, as these rigs have yet to be set up.

OK, I bit (and bought). One issue; the IPO is so large that initial liquidity for investors is tough.

Can anyone raise a vote? I'd like to vote that you limit the IPO to 1,000 shares to start; that's more than enough to get building and generating. We could then vote on a secondary capital raise.

How does GLBSE manage stuff like this? Nefario?

As a note, this 'half +1 share for me' is really confusing. Typically corporations issue a bunch of shares for cheap to founders, then go and sell extra shares; the ownership changes as the corporation sells more shares.

You are doing something hard to understand which is saying 'I will borrow enough from the corporation to  just barely keep control, and try and quickly pay it back.'

Better would be 'I have 5,000 shares, and I'll pay 3,800 BTC for them, later, I swear. I'm selling shares, up to 4999 of them (or I now suggest 1000) at .75BTC per and will dividend out everything over run-rate costs plus withholdings for miner growth.' Instead, we have a world in which your putative shares owned change as more are sold; confusing!

Doing it my way means, for instance, that early "angel" funders will get a better bite, that is, in a later capital raise, the price will hopefully go up, meaning the angels will get some equity appreciation. Also, people will understand and be able to debate whether or not you have priced the company fairly and properly. Right now, that calculation is sort of tough. As a side note, I would say a fair price for this sort of activity would be a fund-manager style price: 2% of gross capital utilized/20% of earnings, since you bring no capital to the picture. But, I bought anyway, so I hope you're successful!

Also, I feel bound to warn you that doing this in the US is without a doubt, highly illegal without filing a Reg. D, and the SEC will probably require you return any losses you incur to investors. I'm not a lawyer, just a startup entrepreneur.

Thanks for clearing that up.

This is the plan, the dividends will always be split such that I am getting 1 share more worth of dividends than the investors.  I had this extrapolated to its conclusion of having all shares sold, I did not intend to keep 95% of dividends and distribute the rest.

Stock update: 496 shares have been sold so far, which means that only ~250 more are needed before operations begin.  I project that this will be met by the end of the week, especially if the current rate of selling continues.

Any of these schemes would be much more beneficial to him as well, he'd get real payouts into his pocket much sooner than it wall take now, where he needs to mine at least 4000 coins before seeing Satoishi 1.

I don't have a problem with him getting half the returns either.  I do have a problem with him getting +95 initially.  I also don't like the idea (or maybe I do) that I can buy the 4,999th share at the same price as the people who bought the first hundred, months down the road when I'll be taking much less risk than the initial investors.  I also think it's understandable that he wants to hold a majority of stock, but I'm not sure if that's best for investors.  A vote could be taken to cancel dividends at any time.

Investment-wise, I'd prefer a scheme like DISHWARA where he expected to sell out his IPO shortly.  Or I would prefer a series of rounds of investment, expected to sell out, to fund growth.  Start with 1000 shares, release 500.  Once that's profitable and stocks are in demand, create another 1000 and release another 500 at a higher price.  etc.  Or use different preferred stocks, but I don't think GLBSE supports that.

I'm not in the scammer camp, I just don't see why hist time is worth so much more than my BTC, especially at a high risk Angel/VC stage of investing.

Of course, i never ever disputed that he is making his cut either way. Food for thought: wouldnt he make much more actually building the rig and scamming at the same time?
Also, with 150BTC already invested as someone in the other thread pointed out, one has to ask where the first two rigs are. After all shareholders are already now losing out, after all two 500$ rigs are at least 10BTC per day, so with each day that passes with these rigs not running shareholders lose their cut of say 60$ per day due to a bad management of the entrusted investments . This of course assuming that the two rigs are not already up. Given the way communication is done i am certain we would have seen the first SEE IT WORKS PR postings of the rigs if any existed, hence i assume its safe to say they are not up yet.

My point was NEVER that it was a bad idea for the original poster, my point is the risk of community damage. There are already dozens of issues where people lost BTC, its detremential to the community as such. "Investment Schemes" that offer negligible benefit with great risk to everyone except the person who collects the coin are always highly suspicious, lets not forget that BTC is at a point where its a business about hard $. In such an environment, you ought to expect scrutiny when offering business services. Given that the OP has done certain effort to ensure he is using blank accounts for everything but has not even paid enough scrunity to his numbers that his simple calculations add up, all red flags go off unless you are guillible.

+1

I wan't to be able to manage my bitcoins in a similar way of what I'm doing with my non-virtual currency.
Since 7 years back, I've been feeding my money making machine and making a very good return from it, the basic idea is to put all my money to work.
With you suggestion this makes this possible.

Yeah, I hope someone picks that up...

Investing in a whole business and having theoretical voting rights there etc. is not interesting anyways for me at least, if I'm just interested in a mini-mining contract (which in the end of the day the SIN stocks are). I don't even want to go through hassles on voting on motions or waiting 30 days for the next dividend. My few daily millibitcents for my .50 BTC share would be much cooler - and also the shares would be far more attractive to others and might shoot up in price very quickly.

A clever miner would even first hand out just a few % of shares of an existing rig, wait until they are sold out and under great demand and then slowly release the rest of the shares until the desired grade of distribution netting (now in the startup days) probably ENORMOUS profits!

Edit:
I'm even thinking of doing that myself, however my ~280MH/s machine is a bit too weak for that and operating a proper 24/7 rig is currently not in my focus (as it would need to be silent --> watercooled which drives prices up).

Great stuff

On a related note, do have a look at the terms on our site http://glbse.com/terms.html

Sukrim, that's a great idea for an asset contract, would work great on the exchange.

I'd love to see such a project from a more reputable community member.

Handing out shares for mining rigs is actually a great way to rent mining capacity imho and would also be much better for "micropayment" and short term contracts than the current usual 1000+USD contracts.

Promise to build a rig and keep it operational, create shares for that, keep 5-10% of the shares (or whatever you calculate and what is competitive amongst the market) to keep your business running and cover electricity costs etc. and sell the rest of the shares to investors while paying the dividend daily. 50% overhead and a full business is a bit too much imho... These SIN shares would rather be used for speculation than for actual dividend income, as the expected income is far too low compared to for example Vladimir if he would start handing out shares for one rig as an experiment.

We're(BitcoinGlobal) working on that.