|
What's the minimum deposit?
|
|
|
|
|
The very wealthy pay less tax by a percentage of their income than the workers. The main tax that effects the rich is capital gains tax and which is much lower than income tax.
|
|
|
|
I think the GLBSE needs a panel of existing CEO's to vote on adding new company's to the market like this - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=79890.0 - so they can protect there own market. They are even looking to lend the 8BTC to registrar which isn't that bad but there trying to list a company valued at $500,000.00 and not using the funds raised on the GLBSE to buy anything of value. That could be sold to compensate shareholders in the event of them going bust. Maybe CEO's of high Cap company's have a higher vote ratio on high Cap IPO's and CEO's of small Cap company's have a higher vote ratio on adding other small Cap IPO's. Due to each type of CEO having more experience in each type of IPO. I want to see the GLBSE expand and into different boards/exchanges as well. Maybe like a FSTE 100, a FSTE 250, a mining only board and so on. Although it is of great concern not just to Nefario but also each listed company that fraud and bad businesses on the exchange are kept to an absolute minimal to help keep the exchange looking trustworthy for investors. |
|
|
|
I think the GLBSE needs a panel of existing CEO's to vote on adding new company's to the market like this - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=79890.0 - so they can protect there own market. They are even looking to lend the 8BTC to registrar which isn't that bad but there trying to list a company valued at $500,000.00 and not using the funds raised on the GLBSE to buy anything of value. That could be sold to compensate shareholders in the event of them going bust. Maybe CEO's of high Cap company's have a higher vote ratio on high Cap IPO's and CEO's of small Cap company's have a higher vote ratio on adding other small Cap IPO's. Due to each type of CEO having more experience in each type of IPO. |
|
|
|
I think the GLBSE needs a panel of existing CEO's to vote on adding new company's to the market so they can protect there own market.
Yes there should be some filter. So that at least the most obvious (what do you call it) get blocked. (what do you call it) It might not be a scam, but it is not a very well presented business model. I know how are they going to compensate investors because they have gone bust after running out of other peoples money and got board with it all? |
|
|
|
I think the GLBSE needs a panel of existing CEO's to vote on adding new company's to the market so they can protect there own market.
I've posted this in one of Nefario's threads - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=74049.0 - to bring it and this new IPO to his attention. |
|
|
|
I think the GLBSE needs a panel of existing CEO's to vote on adding new company's to the market like this - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=79890.0 - so they can protect there own market. They are even looking to lend the 8BTC to registrar which isn't that bad but there trying to list a company valued at $500,000.00 and not using the funds raised on the GLBSE to buy anything of value. That could be sold to compensate shareholders in the event of them going bust. |
|
|
|
|
I think the GLBSE needs a panel of existing CEO's to vote on adding new company's to the market so they can protect there own market.
|
|
|
|
if I rent a VPS to mine the litecoin, will the VPS service provider ban my account? It's using KVM.
I good provider shouldn't ban you maybe if you was taking up too many resource's on the VPS? Anyway it probably makes a lot more sense to use the money you would spend on the VPS to buy litecoin at an exchange. You'd probably get more LTC at the moment. |
|
|
|
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panic_of_1907Primary causes of the run include a retraction of market liquidity by a number of New York City banks and a loss of confidence among depositors, exacerbated by unregulated side bets at bucket shops. Again, 1907 still had those issues I mentioned. Fractional reserve banking, and laws which prevented banks from branching. Even regardless of this, let's assume such panics can happen in a free banking environment. So what? If you don't like banks that are prone to runs, don't bank with fractional reserve banks! In a free market, vulnerable institutions go away, because people don't like risk when they bear it themselves. Today instead, the Federal Government bails out banks meaning everyone has to pay for their failures. If a bank is so vulnerable that a panic/run ensues, then that bank shouldn't exist and the market will get rid of it in due time. Here you go again. Blind to the reality. The overall issue is the retraction of market liquidity; it always is when there is a recession. And then again moving on to issues with the Fed which are irrelevant. The Fed didn't exist in 1907 broseph. Stop going off on tangents. When did I praise the FRB (I assume this stands for Federal Reserve Board?)? The Fed was created in 1913... and I was referring to the 19th century, which is the 1800's, as a time of massive economic growth that occurred without the Fed. lol wtf now I know you're just a troll. the fkin link talked about fractional reserve banking. Which did exist during the 1800s. Oh and by the way, most European countries already had a central bank by that point and experienced the same growth. Free market banking = capitalism. Capitalism refers to the absence of state coercion in the marketplace, meaning a free market in everything. Meaning that free market banking is a subset of capitalism, not capitalism. Capitalism is not the issue at hand, so you again try to conflate instead of making any real point. Bitcoin is not "the most extreme form of banking regulation." Bitcoin is not regulation... regulation means mandates which come from the State. Uh, the hell it does. "2. A principle, rule, or law designed to control or govern conduct." There is no "state" in there. You just decided to, once again, exclude information that does not suit your view. Bitcoin has the most strict rules possible when it comes to money. It cannot change in supply and the supply cannot expand to meet demand. These are rules that are laid down and enforced by the protocol. That is regulation. The supply is highly regulated. You need to work on your terminology I think. No, actually, I don't. Post 666 mark of the beast ban him! Going on about the early 20th centuary pfft. As any good Jehovah's Witness will tell you that's when Satan returend to earth FFS! Sorry been missing all the trolling on bitcointalk.org recently  |
|
|
|
I'm not an economist but if deflation becomes a problem won't they just add a a few digits to the eight bitcoin has already got?
Separate issues. "Deflation" deals with the supply of money. The eight (or more) decimals of Bitcoin deals with notation. Adding zeros doesn't increase or decrease supply, it just changes the way it's notated, allowing smaller pieces (of the same supply) to be transferred. Yeah so if there was deflation then smaller amounts would be more valuable and therefore more desired to be transferred. I'm not saying it's the answer to deflation but it's very likely due to deflation. |
|
|
|
|
I'm not an economist but if deflation becomes a problem won't they just add a a few digits to the eight bitcoin has already got?
|
|
|
|
Summary
A new FPGA company with an aggressive growth strategy the first round of the IPO consisted of 1600 shares at 0.3BTC each to purchase two ~800MH/s@~40W FPGA boards the second round consists off 700 shares at 0.4BTC to purchase FPGA board #3 to take the weekly dividend to over 0.0040000BTC
Once we have board #3 2.4GH/s@125W over 2300 shares the weekly dividend will be over 0.00400000BTC per shares even tho I stated that after we are operating over 2.4GH/s 2% of profits or 1BTC a month [whichever is greater] is going to be used by RSM to buy back its own shares to increase the price and help expand the company. Apart from that move to expand the company once 2300 shares have sold and we have board #3 I plan on putting forward the motion to issue more shares to purchase board #4 to increase the weekly dividend again. After that I plan then to put forward the motion for board #5, then #6 and so on each time to increase the weekly dividend.
Can I assure you your investment is fully protected unlike some of our competitors. In the event of the company folding all the hardware will be sold and paid in one big dividend to all shareholders.
The first weekly dividend of 0.00209389BTC per share has been paid. 3.42560434BTC over 1636 shares. They are 664 shares left to sell at 0.40BTC as the second part of the IPO to pay for board #3. Board #2 should ship within the next two weeks. Expect your next weekly dividend by 00:00am 2012-05-11.
Only 600 shares remain at 0.40BTC each after they have sold I will be putting forward the motion to issue more shares at an inflated price above 0.40BTC for the purchase of board #4 to raise the weekly dividend again.
Updated the OP. |
|
|
|
stay at mtred no polmine
or maybe same pool as MergedMining
We'd make more money with Polmine. Who do MergedMining mine with? |
|
|
|
|
So you are selling $100,000.00 shares and can increase the volume at any time without a motion plus you promise a immediate 2% weekly return on any shares purchased. All without showing a definite place all your profits are coming from or where the IPO money is going to be spent. I wish you luck in your venture but I think you'd have to be mad to invest in it.
|
|
|
|
And how much would that respected individual have taken with?
I've read $100,00.00 of BTC was quoted but I doubt it. |
|
|
|
|
I heard from someone that read that a well known SR seller called "tony" was getting out of the game and decided to rip everyone off by using his well known status as a good seller.
|
|
|
|
Can I make a 1BTC deposit for sixteen weeks?
PM'D information. Thanks. Will my deposit auto be paid to the address supplied after sixteen weeks or will it go into your weekly "No Lockin" deposits? |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
