|
Motion to suspend Reinvestment Fund payments until the company's bASIC01 arrives has passed. Results are:
434 Yay 0 Nay with 434/471(92.1%) of votes counted.
As a result of this vote I've paid out 100% of earnings over the past 24 hours and will continue to do so until such time as the company's bASIC01 arrives.
Daily dividend is 0.23124148/463 = 0.00049944 per share.
Daily yield = 0.15134595%
Annual Percentage Yield(APY) = 55.241%
Thanks everyone for voting. Enjoy your weekend!
|
|
|
|
|
Nobody expected insurance companies to swallow this loss did they? With all the politicians they've bought and paid for? ...come on. Just like the banking industry, the gains are private, the losses are socialized. Business as usual in a fascist corporatocracy.
|
|
|
|
That would be fantastic, but only if you are sure that you are covered for operating costs, repairs, breakdowns of equipment, and, of course, that you are making enough out of this venture to stay as committed to it.
I must say it's a pleasure to see someone running things so well, professionally and with so much attention to the wellbeing of their shareholders.
As you well know, others around here are not!
Thanks. Thank you for the kind words. It's a learning experience, so I'm likely to gaff here and there. Operating expenses are deducted from my shares, so an increase in dividends would actually increase reimbursement of power costs and breakdowns. The reinvestment fund belongs to us all and is simply there to ensure that bASIC-MINING can continue to grow to keep up with the growth of the BTC network, rather than stagnating like a fixed rate mining bond. The contributions are rather small just now however as there's only so much juice that can be squeezed out of six GPUs.  I think the funds are probably better allocated rewarding early investors and encouraging more investors at this juncture. Encouraging more investors could help us generate a larger bulk ASIC purchase and potentially lower purchase prices and/or increase future hashrate, thus increasing contributions to dividends and the reinvestment fund...etc. In the future I expect the reinvestment fund to be a vital working part of our company's structure, but just now it's not enough to really justify the reduction in dividends. I'm going to open a motion so we can all weigh in on this, thanks for the input. |
|
|
|
I'm considering raising a motion, probably something I should've had the foresight to write into the contract anyway. The motion would simply be to suspend contributions to the reinvestment fund until the bASIC01 pre-order arrives and to instead distribute the funds as daily dividends. This would increase daily dividends by 30%. Thoughts? It's a little tough to see a downside for shareholders on this issue, but I thought I'd ask prior to initiating a vote. |
|
|
|
|
It seemed to me as though Lowery simply misunderstood and equating your listings as having granted you moderator voting rights. Let's not escalate the drama in BTC-TC's thread.
|
|
|
|
Thank you for investing! We've already raised enough to fund a second bASIC01. This is great news! Indeed! I appreciate the trust my fellow shareholders have placed in me, I won't let you guys down. I hope bASIC makes good. Yeah, the waiting is tough, and I'm a pretty patient feller. I scan their forums regularly for any scraps of information. I spoke with Dave Carlson of BTCFPGA about preferential treatment for hardware purchases in bulk prior to creating bASIC-MINING and was assured we'd get some form of VIP treatment depending on the size of the order we can generate. He and Tom are good eggs, very affable gents. |
|
|
|
The shares are equitable and owned by me.
They are considered considered active for growth and maintenance with the dividends received on them contracted to the expansion of the BAKEWELL company after covering BAKEWELL expenses. So Ian Bakewell's stake in BAKEWELL is actually 50% of outstanding shares + whatever he's purchased on the market? Everytime 5 shares of bakewell were sold an equal portion was given to Ian Bakewell FOR FREE? That is not what BAKEWELL's contract says. |
|
|
|
Do you have any kind of Estimated projection of an increase of the BTC/Share payout once the BASIC hardware gets shipped? There's no way to do that - as to do that would need to know network hash rate then. And that depends on if BFL and ASIC-MINER ASICs are already going and how many of their units are in operation. It's exactly so. I can tell you what projected hashrate bASIC-MINING will be at when our pre-order arrives(73.6 Gh/s), but as I do not know what future network difficulty will be, I'm unable to tell you what payouts will look like. Since bASIC-MINING's hashrate will increase by a factor of 45, it's reasonable to conclude that daily dividends will be significantly higher than they are at this time. |
|
|
|
Thank you for investing! We've already raised enough to fund a second bASIC01. |
|
|
|
|
The risk of BFL running off with your money is low, but their released specs and shipping dates should be viewed with skepticism. Their track record of meeting shipping dates is abysmal.
|
|
|
|
I could even be persuaded to vote towards a contract change where those shares must vote abstain.
It is apparent that this is a good idea -- Let's make it happen. Not good enough. There is no proof that those shares are being voted any particular way. I suggested they be returned to the treasury because then anyone can see that the shares outstanding has been reduced. I'm saddened that you've chosen to go this route Ian. I'll be selling my remaining shares...likely at a loss. I no longer trust you. |
|
|
|
|
You've set a precedent alright and trust once lost can be difficult to regain. The shares in question do not belong to you, they belong to the company, IOW they belong to all shareholders collectively. By treating those shares as though they were your own personal shares to vote you've proven you cannot or will not honor that distinction. You simply cannot negate the vote of a shareholder with a G&M share they own in part as well.
|
|
|
|
How did BAC fare in 2008?  This has been a rhetorical question. Politicians cutting spending? Surely you jest. They'll simply decrease the rate of spending growth marginally and pass it off as a spending cut, just as they've done countless times in the past. IOW we're going over the fiscal cliff. The question is when. |
|
|
|
Quick heads up. Things continue to progress slowly with Usagi's assets. In addition to the usual holiday commitments there has been a death in the family. I'll be traveling the next couple of days.
I'll work on it as I can, but wanted to make sure that everyone knows not to expect much progress for a few days.
Cheers. Sad news indeed, you have my condolences. I'm sure everyone will understand your absence to be with your family during this difficult time. |
|
|
|
Update: Daily dividend of 0.16041962 paid! I've updated the OP with some figures. Also I found this post on Xmas eve by BTCFPGA PR frontman Dave Carlson on BTCFPGA's forum: In any case I wanted to update you all on progress. Since you didn't get your bASICs for Christmas, the least we could do is get you some good news.
Tom has been pushing hard - nothing but riding the engineers to the finish line. We will be in production very soon. I have also seen the hashing performance stats on a working pre-prod unit!
I hope to have more solid info next week - Tom says we will be in great shape by Jan 1. We are *almost* there folks!
Tom especially wants to extend his thanks to all of you who have stood by us, and to wish you a Merry Christmas and Happy Holidays! https://www.btcfpga.com/forum/index.php?topic=680.0Sounds like things are going well and we should see our bASIC01 next month. |
|
|
|
I don't think it was intentional to give a limited-time-asset issuer "voting" rights against other assets, and thereby another platform upon which to barf his foolish rage. Everything else about the BTC-TC platform is quite professional; let's kick this other insanity to the curb, please. If you're referring to usagi, he likely bought ten shares of LTC-Global stock and exercised his right to vote as a moderator. He has every right to do as much. This likely has nothing to do with burnside assisting to close down usagi's assets on BTC-TC. |
|
|
|
|
Nearly everyone dislikes them. They just keep trying them over and over.
If they went back to issuing silver dollar coins that actually contained a dollar worth of silver I'd be delighted to use them. Instead they try to find the cheapest crud they can stamp into a coin and assign a $1 value to it. Presidential dollars and Sacagawea dollars have an appallingly low $.06 worth of metal in them. SBAs had a whopping $.07. Welcome to Rome.
|
|
|
|
|
I believe the idea behind the $1 coins is to reduce the expense of having to print and subsequently destroy all the $1 bills in circulation regularly.
|
|
|
|
|
6770s are the coolest running cards I own. They aren't powerhouses, but they are power efficient and reliable.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
