|
No news?
Starting to suspect we've been had...
|
|
|
|
So is there absolutely no indication so far of who bought the coins and for how much? Will this information ever be revealed or is it up to the buyer to come forward? I very much doubt it was Karpales though.
The coins were "bought" by a three letter agency that simply has priority in these auctions. Only a symbolic amount of USD changed hands, and coins were transferred to a different arm of the US government. Lol hey tin man take your foil hat off for a second and read this http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/breaking/sns-rt-us-usa-bitcoin-20140701,0,4038036.storyYeah, that's the perfect cover story. Notice how that story suddenly appeared just an hour or so after my post? |
|
|
|
So is there absolutely no indication so far of who bought the coins and for how much? Will this information ever be revealed or is it up to the buyer to come forward? I very much doubt it was Karpales though.
The coins were "bought" by a three letter agency that simply has priority in these auctions. Only a symbolic amount of USD changed hands, and coins were transferred to a different arm of the US government. |
|
|
|
|
So when is the launch planned?
|
|
|
|
Can someone help me understand what "Exchange" means on lines 4 & 8 of the cash flow document?
BTC sold (listed as "expense") for USD (listed as "income"). |
|
|
|
What the fuck is this ? ? ? is this a joke ? FUCKING SCAM
where are all the millions money from gen3 sales ? what is that -4164 BTC and - 4M CNY on exchange ? did you play with company money on day trading, or its frozen or what ?
Dividends per share : - 0.0081 /share <<< is this that "aggressive dividend" ?
so is AM bankrupt, tunneled by you, divided to your private companies or what ?
You apparently have a poor grasp of accounting. The cash flow shows negative income per share in BTC since last report because they spent more BTC than they earned since last report. Which is not really surprising, since they have had to pay for the chip production. The millions from gen3 sales are there, under "Income - Chip sales". Please ask more questions if you are still confused, hope that clears up a little bit for you. |
|
|
|
|
About 30 PH bought and paid for so far, according to my estimates.
Many may disagree, but I find it reassuring that AM is feeding the revenue back into the company - it is a healthy sign.
|
|
|
|
this looks like terrible news
Yes, indeed. It looks like AM is working on a longer term business model than most were imagining, using revenues to fund further growth rather than pay dividends... |
|
|
|
Anyone knows what the Exchange position in cashflow sheet is?
Looks like they sold BTC in order to pay the fab or cover other expenses: BTC is on the expense "exchange" side, USD is on the income "exchange" side... |
|
|
|
I guess you would have mentioned it if you knew... but, any estimate on when the next dividend payments would be? Looking at the balance sheet, I wouldn't expect dividends any time soon: the company assets are in inventory/materials, not in cash. However, it means that AM has planned a whop-ass expansion! |
|
|
|
(...) to prevent people from doing what has been done here.
What exactly has been done here? As far as I know, something special was maybe going to happen on the 27th of May. "Subject to change" and other qualifiers were used passionately. Then 27th of May came and went, nothing special happened. Is it such a big deal? |
|
|
|
|
It's actually quite entertaining seeing people here spazz out. It's so fun, in fact, that I hope dividends are not paid out for a long time still!
|
|
|
|
if {the group}TM gets to the board -
and i only count 1400-1500/5000 shares
interested right now, by definition IT IS
part of the board with all duties and benefits.
Can i ask the most critical person in this place with
better facility of buisness language write a preliminary
draft of agreement that does not require any transfer
of shares?
Ownership of the shares would probably have to be transferred to "the group", otherwise "the group" would not be the owner of the shares and thus not entitled to a board seat. Any other arrangement, I believe, would be at the discretion of the current board. |
|
|
|
@ bitfair
why would it have to be all owned in one address?
Say for example i would actually own 10 000 shares,
but for safety i would have them split to 100 wallets
in different cold storage places - since each is quite valluable.
As long as i have one signed message from each wallet that
states the same thing, i am one person!
Can you prove the opposite?
Regarding information trust within the group is an unproven
assumption.
I can't see the rest of the board agreeing to such a solution. But good luck, though. |
|
|
|
Since a boardmember requires 5000 shares and it is stated nowhere that a boardmember is required to be a natural person I suggest that minority shareholders with sufficient stake agree to pool their shares into a groupentity. There should be more then enough people that have 100 or more direct shares to also get one seat together. I suggest that the person to become boardmember shall be elected representitive for this group by votes per direct shares per group member. Your control of your shares shall not leave you, all that will be required is a signed message to agree to form the group and give boardmemberstatus to group by proxy. Anyone interested can contact me. Editing: Grammer and spelling Second edit: Maybe 50 shares is fine, too? Also 1/5th of required shares are allready interested  I'm sorry to poop on this parade, but this is a horrible idea. Firstly, the "group entity" would have to hold all shares in one address, suggesting one person would be the actual owner as far as FC would be concerned and all "group member" would have to trust this person entirely to manage their shares, transfer the shares in and out of the "group address", and to pass on the dividends. In other words, the group would have to include one person that would accept to do a lot of accounting work and that everybody could trust. Such a person can be hard to find (and/or expensive, although more expensive if an untrustworthy person is chosen)! Secondly, it's not obvious that any more information would be made available. Jutarul (and other board members) usually post updates when there is new, relevant information. The board meetings don't occur that often, and the chances are that the board members have no more information than we have at this point anyway. |
|
|
|
Was responding to this one technical question really of greater importance?
YES! |
|
|
|
Everyone is too busy making puns... |
|
|
|
2. Power supply 1600W included. Power consumption about 0,75 Watt per Gh If accurate, this is by far the most efficient miner we've seen made with the gen3 chips. It's great they have managed improve the performance - this device beats Spoondoolies' performance (approx. 0.85-0.95 J/GH). Let's hope they can deliver on spec... Edit: What's that website what has a comparison of all them miners? You can get 0,7W/GH on spondoolies sp10, but you need to clock it slower. So no, not really that much of an improvement. I'm sure you can get 0,0 J/GH if you hand-crank it, but isn't that really besides the point? It's better to compare rated performance, i.e. the "normal" operating mode. |
|
|
|
2. Power supply 1600W included. Power consumption about 0,75 Watt per Gh If accurate, this is by far the most efficient miner we've seen made with the gen3 chips. It's great they have managed improve the performance - this device beats Spoondoolies' performance (approx. 0.85-0.95 J/GH). Let's hope they can deliver on spec... Edit: What's that website what has a comparison of all them miners? |
|
|
|
However, by that measure bitcoin has already achieved success. The bitcoin network currently mediates between 50 and 60 thousand transactions every day, transferring an estimated 70 million USD every day.
As far as bootstrapped nascent currency experiments go, bitcoin should certainly fulfill many criteria for "success" already.
Curioulsy the number of transactions per day and their total BTC volume have increased very little, or not at all, since September last year. So, either commercial e-payments are a small fraction of those numbers, or they are not increasing (and their USD volume is actually decreasing, since the BTC price has fallen considerably in that period). Has not grown since a date arbitrarily chosen by you? (Or perhaps deliberately chosen by you in order to make a point?) Well, I guess it's a failure, then... Facts: (1) Bitcoin is moving large sums around every day. (2) It is very useful for "many" (tens of thousands/hundreds of thousands?) people. (3) The usage has increased - maybe not steadily, but consistently. I guess it's OK to be skeptical, and it's quite correct to be wary of speculating in the bitcoin price. But to claim it is anything other than a resounding success is disingenuous. It's already successful and is making life easier for a large number of people. And since you are from Brazil, let me ask you: have you ever tried receiving payments from abroad? It is exceptionally expensive and time-consuming to send money to Brazil from a foreign country by regular banking channels. Bitcoin facilitates this tremendously, and is used by many. Is that not enough to be considered successful? |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
