 Show Posts
|
|
Pages: « 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 »
|
Well this should be interesting. Please bear in mind that trying to keep up with difficulty is impossible for the foreseeable future, vote for dividends, the mine will pay out more with 0% reinvestment than it ever would if we tried to keep it alive.
How do you reconcile that with the fact that we had a tenfold increase in difficulty since PETA-MINE started about 7 months ago (at least on havelock), yet the shareprice during that timeframe increased by more than 50% and is about to increase again with the recent deployment of new hardware? edit: voted 50/50 You're linking share price and difficulty? Weird but ok, the share price went up because Cryptx bought new hardware. But this wasn't keeping up with the difficulty, if anything it is proof that we can't keep up. Our reinvestment fund didn't buy the new hardware, Cryptx loaned the money to Peta, we are in the red at the moment because we couldn't keep our network share with our reinvestment so we were forcefully lent money to try and stay in the game a bit longer. What's weird about it? Your argument is that you can't keep up with difficulty, meaning the investment will lose value, since mining yields less and less. Yet the shares gained value, way above 50%. All the while dividends were paid. Yes, we are in the red, but after 2 weeks auf 100% reinvest (or rather payback) not by much, I guess? At least not compared to the hashing power we gained. Anyone got numbers? The shares gained value when it was announced the hash rate was tripling. This was paid for NOT by our reinvestment but by a loan. This was an engineered rise in share price influenced by outside factors. Cryptx won't always be able to loan Peta a huge amount of money, and even if they are always willing to do that the amount they can loan will eventually be dwarfed by the difficulty. |
|
|
|
Well this should be interesting. Please bear in mind that trying to keep up with difficulty is impossible for the foreseeable future, vote for dividends, the mine will pay out more with 0% reinvestment than it ever would if we tried to keep it alive.
How do you reconcile that with the fact that we had a tenfold increase in difficulty since PETA-MINE started about 7 months ago (at least on havelock), yet the shareprice during that timeframe increased by more than 50% and is about to increase again with the recent deployment of new hardware? edit: voted 50/50 You're linking share price and difficulty? Weird but ok, the share price went up because Cryptx bought new hardware. But this wasn't keeping up with the difficulty, if anything it is proof that we can't keep up. Our reinvestment fund didn't buy the new hardware, Cryptx loaned the money to Peta, we are in the red at the moment because we couldn't keep our network share with our reinvestment so we were forcefully lent money to try and stay in the game a bit longer. |
|
|
|
|
Well this should be interesting. Please bear in mind that trying to keep up with difficulty is impossible for the foreseeable future, vote for dividends, the mine will pay out more with 0% reinvestment than it ever would if we tried to keep it alive.
|
|
|
|
|
Someone just bought up everything under 0.03!
|
|
|
|
In the May 30th update: "Dividend payout will resume next Friday (June 6th), we propose to alter the dividend / reinvestment ratio to 50/50. So 50% of net mining revenue will be paid out as dividend."
How and when will this proposal be voted on by shareholders? In the original contract it is stated:
"CryptX will not change the direction or goal of the PETA-MINE without shareholder votes"
"The percentage of the net revenue paid in dividends can change if shareholders vote to change it."
"While the reinvestment percentage is subject to change via shareholder vote, such action will only occur if the state of the Bitcoin mining space demands it."
Shareholders were, as far as I am aware, not given a chance to vote on the IPO, or on revisions to the prospectus. What is my position as a shareholder?
We found out recently that 'shareholders' in the prospectus means 'shareholders with more than a 5% share', so they obviously voted for this already we just don't get to hear about it. Hope it's ok for me to request some references for this. Thanks. Errr read further back in the thread, sorry it's late and I need to sleep rather than trawl the thread for where havelock posted |
|
|
|
In the May 30th update: "Dividend payout will resume next Friday (June 6th), we propose to alter the dividend / reinvestment ratio to 50/50. So 50% of net mining revenue will be paid out as dividend."
How and when will this proposal be voted on by shareholders? In the original contract it is stated:
"CryptX will not change the direction or goal of the PETA-MINE without shareholder votes"
"The percentage of the net revenue paid in dividends can change if shareholders vote to change it."
"While the reinvestment percentage is subject to change via shareholder vote, such action will only occur if the state of the Bitcoin mining space demands it."
Shareholders were, as far as I am aware, not given a chance to vote on the IPO, or on revisions to the prospectus. What is my position as a shareholder?
We found out recently that 'shareholders' in the prospectus means 'shareholders with more than a 5% share', so they obviously voted for this already we just don't get to hear about it. |
|
|
|
|
Why not invest in some x11 targeted machines to take advantage of darkcoin?
|
|
|
|
Inspired by having just finished a marathon session of Columbo - The Complete First Season and few glasses of Stolichnaya I came up with a genius solution to benefit all shareholders credit to a deflated member of frycats fan club for original idea. We stick together in these tough times because it's what makes us strongSince 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  This is a great idea. Message sent. So in short - I am starting a Pass-thru on havelock. together we can own 5% and put and end to this womanly games Of course we canot retroactively verify these dubious claims but we can proof in future whether we do or do not receive voting rights which we the people entitle to simply transfer shares to the following address in havelock system: cryptx@peta-mine.co the rest is handled automatically. This sounds like a great idea, anyone else want to do this? I have 200 shares, 1/25th of the way there. |
|
|
|
|
I really don't think we need to claim that havelock is lying, I guess they could be, but it doesn't seem like the kind of thing they'd do. What is annoying is that the 5% voting right was never publicly stated, else I would have invested everything in Peta in a bid to get 5% instead of being more conservative. And secondly the prospectus was misleading. All that being said there isn't much we can do about it now so lets just celebrate the new hashrate and try and drum up support for the IPO.
IPO ends 31st May so open market trading should be soon after that, havelock is usually pretty quick.
|
|
|
|
For anyone missing brain cells, which is apparently a large number of people on this thread:
-VIRTUAL SHARES ARE DEREGULATED, EXTRALEGAL SECURITIES, NOT SUBJECT TO RULES GOVERNING TRADITIONAL INVESTMENT.
... Cap lock = TRUTH. Virtual shares have little in common with IRL securities. But we are forever indebted to those fooled by these recreational simulacra--without believers, who'd buy our ersatz sharez? Correct, however contracts are still legally binding and the prospectus we read when purchasing the shares was our contract with Cryptx. The prospectus did not say 'shareholders with 5% will get a vote' it said that shareholders would get a vote. |
|
|
|
Well seeing as the price is plummeting doesn't seem like I'll be able to get rid of my shares any time soon, so I'm in for the long haul  Hopefully LTC is just lagging behind bitcoin a bit but will pick up once people stop selling LTC to get on the BTC bubble train. |
|
|
|
We would like to inform you that a vote was cast for every change made by cryptx since they have been listed on Havelock. The votes were cast by unit holders that collectively own more than 60% of the Fund. If you did not get to vote on changes and you personally own over 5% of the Fund please contact us. Cryptx did not need to bring the vote to a public one when the majority of the unit holders of the Fund voted for those changes. So even if a public vote has taken place the same result would have been voted on. So if you currently own more than 5% of the Fund and you were not contacted to cast a vote for a change please PM or email us at Funds@havelockinvestments.comThere was no breach of contract, all decisions were made by majority shareholders that were monitored by us prior to public release of decisions. To take the vote public and get the same result would have been a waste of time and cause more confusion. We believe that PETA is on the right track and has made the right choices to keep the company viable over the past year. If you do not agree with the decisions made by PETA we are always looking for great companies to list their Fund on Havelock apply today! Havelock Investments Excellent! That's just what we needed to hear, thank you Havelock for clearing that up, perhaps some transparency and greater clarity in the prospectus would have avoided this but I am certainly satisfied now. It just seemed strange to all use lowly <5%ers that voting rights were mentioned but we never heard anything about it. Sorry for getting all antsy, and thanks again for responding. |
|
|
|
|
Cryptx by not allowing a vote on the change in div/reinvestment and the new IPO you have breached the terms of our contract, please at least apologise for this and acknowledge fault or our trust in you will be broken. I know you have to react quickly to take advantage of opportunities in a dynamic marketplace but if you say you will give us a vote you should stick to that. I would also like to hear from a havelock representative on what their policies for dealing with share issuers who breach contracts is.
|
|
|
|
Why is the price of each share below IPO when it's earning 80% APY right now? That is one of the best investments there are, and if the project will swap over to a new coin should LTC no longer be as profitable, it could sustain that. Am I missing something here?
Diminishing returns. Well we have yet to see what the reinvestment will be like, but as for the current returns they are actually increasing. Sure the amount in btc is decreasing but the actual value of the dividend is increasing. |
|
|
|
If the payment will be in LTC How many people sell right away, and how many people will be holds.
the success of the currency in the price. More people selling then the price falls to the bottom. less people selling price goes up.
cryptx sell very large amounts. Normally people do not sell after mining out.
This way we reduce the price, fill the buyer wytch altcoins
Actually most mining operations sell rather than hold, 1 to pay costs and 2 because most miners are in it for profit so they want to cash out asap. As I have already mentioned Cryptx responded to questions about the price being affected by selling ltc when this project started, their response was that they were using an exchange that had sufficient volume that our coins could be sold without affecting the price, if you want your payout to be in ltc buy ltc with the bitcoin dividend you receive. |
|
|
|
Hallo. I have a small suggestion to do not sell currencies, it kills the price. Personally would like to receive LTC or DOGE particular Litecoin. I'm not sure if it will be technically possible. on the older market cryptostocks.com was possible. They have already said that they spread the sales out so as to not affect the price too much, havelock only has a bitcoin payout system, but you are welcome to transfer your divs into altcoins should you wish. |
|
|
|
How do you know they arenīt using multipool?
Multipool isnīt this magic *200% increase of dividens machine, you know that, right?
We know what pool they are using, and sure a multi pool isn't magically 200% but it is probably worth a few %, worth trying anyway. |
|
|
|
|
Hey I've basically had enough of this, anyone looking to buy over 1000 shares pm me an offer.
|
|
|
|
Yea why not manicminer?
Yes can you tell a bit more about the longterm strategy. At the moment I feel I gave money to a project to buy miners. But the strategy behind the mining is not clear for me. +1 for this |
|
|
|
|
