|
Can we dream that he's too busy because he's setting up new equipment?
|
|
|
|
|
No, it was just open market on bitfunder.
|
|
|
|
Okay, I just emailed Lab_Rat for clarification.
Assuming 100 "original" contracts:
Option 1:
They get converted to 300 "original" contracts with 100 MH/s each and not a hash more.
Option 2:
They get converted to 300 "new" contracts with 100 MH/s each with potential variable growth on top of the guaranteed hash rate.
This is keeping in mind that before the change, contracts were getting roughly 300 MH/s apiece on average based on the proportional rate (75%/25% split). So this is effectively a clarification change and nothing more, with option 2 being the better option. I agree that there should be a lot more than that amount of hash rate by now, but there have been a lot of unfortunate manufacturer delays. The outlook right now is a little bleak but I am hopeful that one day my investment will still pay off.
Yeah you got it right. |
|
|
|
|
I am not sure what all the fuss is about.
The original contact was 100 plus more if growth allowed. It was intended the company would grow for the benefit of shareholders.
The new contract is 100 plus bonus as growth allows. It is intended the company will grow for the benefit of shareholders.
Neither contract was ever more than 100, and neither contract guarantees more over 100 other than "intention".
The march hardware arrived late, plus facility problems, plus the 2 week hold to buy more hardware, means we get paid from this hardware starting in about 2 weeks. I know everyone hates the phrase 2 weeks, but still...what has changed from the old contract?
Am I wrong?
|
|
|
|
Isn't it about 150TH, not ~5-7?
Nope. Labrat said that 55% of the BitFury gear is up and running already. The current total hashrate is only 17TH, half of which is BFL gear. So that must mean that about 5-7TH of Bitfury gear is left to install. I think Labrat bought 100 Monarchs. I think you are taking statements too literally and not thinking creatively. Could be wrong though. I suspect LR has exactly 17.7 TH pointed at CEX.io to create that ticker. The rest is pointed elsewhere. Note the readout we see matches the "17.7 TH contracted" bit in LR's signature. I think originally when all this started, LR received a minirig, some singles, and maybe some other stuff for a total of about 1 - 1.5 TH, then we received a bunch of bitfury equipment in Dec I think that brought us up to 23 and change TH, which is where we have "been" since. That is the hardware (minus 25%) that has been pointed at CEX.io to generate that ticker we see on LRM's site. Unless LR got royally screwed over, 150TH or more should have been inbound from bitfury, and half of it is online somewhere judging by comments from today. And if the above is true... thats Bitfury gear WE PAID FOR that LRM is mining with all to himself. Labrat said that equipment starts paying out in two weeks. |
|
|
|
I thought the whole point of the "bonus" was so he could pay out the new equipment?  |
|
|
|
|
Isn't it about 150TH, not ~5-7?
|
|
|
|
7.)a What have you been doing with the new hardware you've had for months?b When can we expect to receive those dividends?
7a. The BitFury hardware I believe you're referring to has been in just over A month, not months. The hardware is still in the process of being put online as there have been multiple delays. These delays include but are not limited to, AC failure, transformer explosions, fiber cuts, etc. 7b. We expect the distributions payable on the equipment to the current contract-holders in approximately two weeks from tomorrow. |
|
|
|
So to clarify, holders of original bonds are locked at 300Mh now? Then if "upgraded" to new contract they get 3 for 1 split at 100Mh each plus bonus which is depending on how much mine is costing to run and expand etc.
Yes this is confusing. Does that mean there will be two different bond types now? So when we trade bonds, we need to pay attention to what type of bond it is? We really need to land in a place where all bonds have the same practical valuation. |
|
|
|
Did the 3 to 1 split happen or not? I don't see anything in the new contract that makes a 3 to 1 split beneficial or necessary. When people start trading again, it will be very important to know if the number of outstanding bonds has tripled or not. Edit: Rewording since a good answer just appeared above. It sounds like we did incur the 3to1 split and the number of outstanding bonds has tripled. |
|
|
|
For some reason, Friday seems like a long time from now...
50.5 hrs till LRM D-Day. Is that decision, discovery, or doom?  |
|
|
|
|
Are we able to review the contract before the AMA, or is the contract being revealed during the AMA?
|
|
|
|
I get what you're saying, but that's nonsense. Then every single business would be a money transmitting business and be required to file for a license. That's not how it works.
I was just clarifying your post because it contained some inaccuracies, but it's nothing to get defensive about. MT can happen between two parties exclusively. I have Marco under retainer for the handling of MT businesses, and I trust his assessment about MT. Aside from that, I am not trying to claim labrat has MT issues. I just didn't want people to have misinformation about the handling of MT in the USA.  |
|
|
|
@labrat I know you are trying to hold everything together. Why not give us a completion percentage estimate? I know you can't give out dates yet, but posting a reply like The lawyer is 20% done with the contract. or The lawyer is 80% done with the contract. would go a long way to helping people feel informed about this issue and progress. That means we can at least get an idea if this contract will be done in September vs May. Or April.  |
|
|
|
|
Money transmission is not limited to third parties. A transaction between two parties can be money transmission if the company is moving money. For example, think of a bitcoin atm where you exchange bitcoin for money. If you stand at the machine, send the bitcoin, and then cash out, no transmission has occurred (assuming the atm company is not depending on a 3rd party.) But if you send the bitcoin from your house (so you don't have to wait for confirmations), and then drive across town to get your cash, then that IS money transmission. The atm company just transmitted your money across town.
Now I know it sounds ridiculous, but that is the law. MT laws were never designed with bitcoin in mind, so some "stupid" scenarios exist where MT is happening per the letter of the law, even though it doesn't make sense in real life. It's plausible that labrat got ensnared in a similar "stupid" MT scenario, although there is no basis to assert it is a MT issue.
MT Source: Marco Santori
|
|
|
|
Is there any specific regulation forbidding market manipulation on Havelock? Is it a Havelock rule? It is a panama rule? I mean, I get the common sense idea that market manipulation isn't allow... and I haven't looked into this so I don't know, but is there really anything forbidding market manipulation here?
Exactly and what the hell the 'Xfr' feature (on Havelock) is for anyway? Transfer is to move shares between accounts. Havelock forbids email changes, so you actually have to sign up for a new account to change the email. Then you need a way to transfer your own shares to yourself. It's also useful in a private sale if you know and trust your customer. You could avoid havelock fees in that case, but not sure it's worth the extra trouble. |
|
|
|
Time for a reality check. Most of the questions have been answered by labrat already.
Thanks for compiling that contactmike. You are welcome. I should note that I selected the responses that were relevant to many of the questions. There are a number of responses I did not post. |
|
|
|
Time for a reality check. Most of the questions have been answered by labrat already. The issues at hand are both on a state and federal level regarding multiple topics. The specifics of these statutes will be presented in a timely manner.
There are multiple issues, local and federal. The main issue is specifically pertaining to variable payout though. I'm not a lawyer so I'm waiting for my legal rep to put it all in legal terminology before laying it out there.
I was out today, but tomorrow is a full day I will be speaking with my lawyer, as well as the other legal advisers who had input on this matter. None of which see anything LRM to be working with to be an SEC or FinCEN issue if the transition is made, which is why I made this choice. How to handle the specifics of the payout moving forward is being worked on.
CEX.io is on a different boat than LRM, although they are definitely breaching MSB issues within the US whether they operate in or out of the country.
EDIT: also going to be flying out to meet with a well respected business lawyer rather soon who has also handled Bitcoin.
There are issues with a percentage being considered shares and a contract being considered a sale. I will attempt to clarify more over the course of next week when I have more legal documentation to explain.
Also, I've done the math and liquidating the company's assets will turn out worse for the contract-holders as well as myself (rather than paying out "dividends").
Hardware just doesn't sell for what it did in may 2013......
I'm working on doing so and all I have done is provide an immediate fix that does fit into the original contract promises, with the intent to find a way to benefit early contract purchasers as more hardware comes in.
I am taking advice of many folks and stopping answering any questions. I'll poke my head in at least once a day or two to say "Still here" and that is all. The next time you receive anything of substance it will be a full report on the subject which will take time to produce. There are 94 pages of NJ Laws that pertain to this matter, let alone the federal laws. Contained in this report will be all legal matter as well as a pheonixed contract. If you don't like it, sue LRM. But I must warn you, that you will lose, and cost yourself money twice because the money used to fight the legal battles will be that of the company's. This is the last thing any of us want, but it seems to be a trend in Bitcoin lately to sue over everything.
I'm looking out for my interests, as well as those of the company and all those involved. To those of you who have known me going on 2 years now, you know I'm not some evil thief. I'm doing what's necessary and I believe that the end result will be something everyone can live with.
I will make an attempt to clarify #4 in one quick sentence but the rest you can read a little more for. Everyone who has contracts at this point in time is an "early purchaser" of contracts. The company is still young and people should not be looking at this like it's all going to end in 3-4 months. I can't count how many times I've stated Bitcoin is not a sprint it's a marathon. For over 2 years people said that graphics cards were not profitable and in 4-6 months people will stop mining so much, but every time someone said that the price went up and they remained profitable. Change =/= Death.
I can't provide reassurance without giving information that I can't give until things are in place. All I can say is that I'm working on the permanent solution and believe I have found a reasonable and legal way to provide over 300MH.
OK. Just out of a meeting with my lawyer and things look very very good in respect to how they have looked. I can't give time frames as things in the real world operate 9-5 m-f (NOT INCLUDING LUNCH HOURS) and my lawyer stated this loud and clear to me. When I asked for an estimate on time he said it will come when it's done and it's a priority.
What he specified I can share is that there will be an announcement that will provide some clarification followed by a contract to be presented. More info will come when it is available and no sooner. It is the intention of LRM to provide further than 300MH/s per contract and is apparent that the way this will be done is legal.
All your questions about current and future hardware including the March hardware will be answered upon completion of the new contract. If labrat speculates early, before the contract, then people will scream bloody murder as soon as the contract changes a single word. Labrat is smart for not giving "what ifs" and "could be's". It only leads to trouble. [Edit:] Updated CEX quote per grnbrg's suggestion. |
|
|
|
I don't care about your weird US laws...i want some update regarding this invest  Expect Lab rat to declare LRM bankrupt insolvent shortly due to tax liability. In the next chapter, can you have Lab_Rat being controlled by CIA mind rays? That would be *awesome*. grnbrg. There you go again. Entertaining us... I'd rather see a decrease in difficulty in the next chapter... |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
