Topic: T - page 8. (Read 41045 times)

i would like to raise two motions, but first discuss them in advance:

1. Motion about reserve building a certain % of all earnings after costs. I suggest 30% right now. the Reserve serves the purpose of hedging Tygrr techs value, building reserves for future expansions or unconsidered costs.

2. Motion about a new IPO to finance some FPGA boards. 100 - 200 Shares a BTC 3 for the aquisition of some FPGA boards from one of the FPGA-producers. which boards to buy and how much capital is needed is to be evaluated shortly.

greets

That's for the dev version of 2.0 which is currently being tested, so far it has been upgraded several times this week.

marked

Nefario, didn't they mention a system upgrade to a new version a few days ago?

I'm just after getting back from London(gone since Tuesday), charts.glbse.com is not showing any updates since the 12th.

For the moment, all the latest trades for GLBSE can be found on it's twitter feed here.

I'm contacting the operator of charts to find out what the story is.

Nefario

If most other mining companies jump off a cliff, does that mean that we should too?

I prefer allowing the investor decide on what to do with earnings by paying out dividends. If the investor wants to expand his investment, he can buy more shares on market. If he doesn't, he can use that bitcoin elsewhere. An expansion plan funded by earnings takes away some of that choice.

Maybe you could ask Nefario to build that ability to offer dividend reinvestment plans into GLBSE 2.0 to allow companies to expand their capital base with reinvested dividends while still supporting income investors.

If anything, he hasn't sold enough shares. I was able to purchase all the remaining shares a couple months ago @ IPO price because there weren't enough buyers (oddly enough, when I made the buy-in, people were paying significantly more on GLBSE to buy aftermarket shares while Goat was selling cheaper IPO shares which would've benefited TyGrr. FPGA returns are quite low, though you get a higher % profit, obviously. If Goat had taken the $ I sold to him months ago and purchased BFL units, we could still be waiting a 2-5 months for them to ship anything, tying up those funds and making TyGrr pretty illiquid. If Goat were to close up shop with unshipped BFL units, we'd basically all get a few $ from the hardware he had, and a claim on BFL units which might materialize in a few months.

TyGrr stagnates by design because dividends are paid out almost entirely to shareholders. That's not a growth model -- it's an income model. It can only grow if people buy more IPO shares (which are currently being offered above aftermarket price), Goat issues bonds on behalf of TyGrr and people buy those, or Goat eliminates dividends and reinvests those into more hardware (converting TyGrr into an aggressive growth stock, where returns come only in the form of share price). Alternately, he could halve dividends, giving high BTC returns to shareholders and allowing slow growth. Goat has the means to allow the BTC effectively held by TyGrr to earn interest, too -- the BTC doesn't have to sit around doing nothing. I'd be interested in a vote on it, though I'd vote against eliminating dividends entirely. I do believe GPU miners who pay reasonable electricity rates will be pushed out within a year, and it would be nice to see some FPGAs to reassure us TyGrr will be around long-term.

For the sake of disclosure, I currently hold 272 shares.

i want to stress the fact, that we need an expansion plan.
most other mining corporations now invest into FPGAs which save them quite alot of electricity costs.

how can we finance this? i guess if we raise some capital for investing in e.g. BFL singles the shareprice would be a lot higher, cause ppl like to see that there is a positive, not stagnating outlook. thought tygrrs dividends are quite nice, i think investors like me, who own 1.5% of tyggr would rather like to see a steady slow growth and good dividends. at the moment it looks rather like goat is not as motivated as we would like him to be.. have you sold to many shares?

btw, how many shares do you still hold goat? and how many does kluge have?

greets

ouch, so in other words you were overpaying us pretty well before the kill-a-watt?

cheers

Am I reading correctly that the electricty usage went up ~30% in order to gain 2GH? I realize hash rate increased 20% but it seems hardly worth it at 30% higher elec cost.

The demo version of GLBSE2.0 has been updated.

Since this is going to be the system you guys will be using it very soon please go over to http://dev.glbse.com and give it a try.

Create a new share, sell them (create a fake account to test buying them), create some new motions, pay dividends and play around in general.

2.0 is a big step away from the current system, and it's important that you're ready for the change over.

Here's the release notes
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.781561

hi, it's most probably a misunderstanding.

In "Full disclosure wont prevent you from compensating losses out of pocket, should you feel thats wise. "
you don't mean "expect compensation", that was only my misunderstanding.

Where do I say I would expect compensation? The logical thing is not to pay out dividends since there would be no profit.

Still, if Goat for whatever reason, wants to pay out a dividend, he is free to give the company money out of his own pocket and use that to pay for one. But there is no reason that his willingness to do so, would somehow prevent him from providing transparent accounting data of actual revenue and costs to his shareholders. One has nothing to do with the other; goat makes it sound as if shareholders have to chose between a dividend and transparency.

Anyway, it sounds to me like this is not a company owned by shareholders, but more a long term mining contract thats being traded. If thats the case, other terms would be more appropriate.

I'm not getting this. Company earns zero for a given period (p.ex. company is relocating).
Where will dividends come from during that period? No income, no company reserves.
Even death would have problems to take away something in such setup.
So why to expect compensations from the operator?

i suggest the following:

50% of all future dividends are to be put to reserves in bitcoin until a solid reserve is build.we let the next dividend be payed out and then vote for one week.

during the downtime theoretical dividends are not payed out, but put 100% into reserve. how high are they supposed to be? .. since goat is paying i would suggest to rather make a weekly fix price in btc goat is supposed to substitute out of his own pocket, to make loses for him minimal. lets say 20 bitcoin. like a bad mining week. the question is here how much of the downtime is to be covered by the shareholders, how much shall be covered by goat.. how many shares do you own, goat?

however in the sake of the company and all its stakeholders i want goat not to pay to much out of his own pocket. you are running the thing and you shall be payed good for your work, not make losses.

why 50% put to to reserve?

50% growth seems not to aggresive for bitcoin. why not? shareprices will fly if bitcoin prices get higher, and we have maybe good opportunities to invest our bitcoin capital in some months at a good value-gain..

after you settled in your new, hopefully nice, place and the rigs are full running again, we should consider making a motion about a issuing 100 new shares at a price of BTC3 with a aim of buying FPGAS for the 300 Bitcoin + reserves with a goal in july-august-september to organize-order-install the new 'production facilities'

IFRS. GAAP is dying by 2016.

Goat, you seem to be confusing a few things. Mining contracts and company shares for one, and full disclosure with a need for paying for revenue shortcoming as another.

Shareholders should not be forced to chose between full disclosures and you paying for shortcoming out of pocket.
Full disclosure of actual costs and revenue should be a given, its a legal obligation. Its one thing you dont follow all the fine print of GAAP rules, its quite another to not even attempt to follow *any* of its basic underlying principles.

Full disclosure wont prevent you from compensating losses out of pocket, should you feel thats wise.

This is a very solid point.

My 2 cents.

ofcourse i would suggest 3 BTC as the price of eventuall new shares to finance some FPGAs.

what do you finally think about Butterfly labs goat?

greets

I'm not against another PO to add BFL devices, but I would be pissed off if that PO came at below 3BTC per share since that floor was created before I invested, costing me more dollars per share than earlier investors already.  IOW, an additional PO at below 3BTC per share would screw me over two ways (one by the previous floor forcing me to pay more than my fair share, and another by diluting my share value because of the subsequently removed price floor), and I doubt I'm the only one.

I support this idea and would like to hear more on it. $.13KWH is cheaper than many but not cheap enough for future difficulties.