As a manager, this is actually a good idea. As was noted, I already have access to everyone's email address, but some of those addresses are corporate (or domain) based, some are typical yahoo/gmail, and others just seem random. If a user's email is compromised, deleted, or their access is otherwise forfeited, I'd have no other way to get in touch with them. Having the option for a user to tie a Bitcoin address they control (outside of Havelock) to their account could make life a bit easier.

Fairly high, but even though I do my own due diligence I still take everything with a grain of salt. Cointerra has a solid team behind them, and so far as I can tell they're legitimately working on developing an ASIC. The position they're in now is sort of the same as where KnC was a couple months ago.

I’ve got a bit of good news…or at least better news by comparison to my recent updates.
If there’s one thing I’ve learned in all this, it’s that diversification is almost a necessary aspect of any equipment portfolio. Achieving this was a lot harder months ago, but not so much anymore.

As it stands right now, I’ve sold one of the Company’s January orders (#16100) for BTC41, which came out to BTC40.59 after escrow fees. With this funding, I’ve placed an order for a Cointerra 2TH/s TerraMiner IV [order #1234], scheduled for early January shipping, costing BTC51.1706.

This was done primarily to help give us an edge against the coming wave of more efficient and more powerful mining devices, as compared to ASICs developed by Butterfly Labs.
At this point, equipment owned by the Company is as follows:
--- 4 x BFL Single SCs – 240GH/s
--- 1 x KnCMiner Jupiter – 400GH/s
--- 1 x Cointerra TerraMiner IV – 2000GH/s
Totaling: 2,640GH/s [2.64TH/s]

This is quite a step up from the previous 880GH/s, and we should be in a better position over the course of the next 6 months.

I’m expecting our second batch of BFL Singles [#16252] to be arriving soon, given BFL has managed to ship four months of orders in the past two weeks. Let’s hope they can maintain the pace for just a bit longer.

As always, if you have any questions don’t hesitate to ask.

I find it interesting that the brunt of criticism for the situation is stemming from accounts created in the past 9 months...meaning they weren't around for the uproar that was GLBSE. Therefore, I understand their anger, but it's misplaced.
As was noted previously, focus your action and words against the regulators, not against someone who has worked their ass off making one of the best Bitcoin (and Litecoin) exchanges out there.

To those of you shocked by the recent turn of events, my suggestion is to peruse the 'Legal' subforum for a bit. It's quite clear none of you are understanding the risks you're taking when you go to invest your coins. Every Exchange (from Havelock, to BitFunder, to any other) is at risk of a shutdown or government intervention...they're just at varying degrees.

@Burnside -- It's been a long fight I bet. Best of luck, both in this situation and in any future endeavors!

PM sent!

Since BFL seems to be moving along now, I figured it may be worth it to put up one of my company's batches of 4 x Single SCs.

These aren't in hand yet, so the transfer would take place from my Butterfly Labs account to the buyer's. Ordered and paid January 8th, 2013. The 4 Singles are all part of one order, so I'm not sure I can break it up.

I'm fine with escrow, and it can be done through BTCrow.com, or through any number of reputable people here on the forums.

Serious offers only please, and let's try to keep it civil.

I can't say for sure, but if you want to know where you are on the list PM me the email you used on Havelock. I can trace it back from there.

In regards to distributing revenues, I'm still leaning towards the lottery idea I posted before, but with additional weighting added to long term investors. I'll need to play around with the numbers a bit more though.


I see no need to sugarcoat it at this point; you're precisely correct. Between the consistent equipment delays and the newer, vastly more efficient, hardware coming to market, it is impossible to break even (when calculated in Bitcoin) with our *current* orders.

 

And this is why I usually bet big on IPOs like this. People value them vastly higher than they should be, regardless of the information presented to them. It's to the point where not only have I just about tripled (and cashed out) my original investment, but now I've got free shares sitting waiting to earn money. Thanks guys!

This happens with just about any hyped up offering out there. It's seems I don't have to do nearly as much due diligence as I used to...all I have to do is browse through the thread, look for the groups of newbie accounts going "watching!", "Great idea!", "I'll invest", etc, buy up shares during the offering, and then offer them back at insane prices...prices which are reached days to a week later.

Nothing against CasinoBitco of course, since this isn't their doing. I'm actually rooting for them, and I like my casino investments

You are, but my goal with the previous post was to sort of imply that my sights for repayment are set on you (among other large investors), without the need to divulge who owns what.


Actually, the opposite. I've sold 2 of my shares at an extreme discount (.259 I believe it was) to cover another personal investment, and other people seem to be buying and selling at whatever prices they see fit. If I had the money to spend, I could certainly see the value in buying shares at a lower price, but that's not my focus. The vast bulk of everything I've made (from prior investments to fiat conversions) has been tied up in paying monthly interest, and I don't plan on moving it.

Awesome, thanks for the response. Going back to my original question:
How long has this site been operational?
I noticed the detailed statements go from July-August, but other Google docs files note starting back in May or so.

Next small round of questions:
Who is your primary competition? What do you offer that they don't?

As traffic to your site increases, why launch an offering at all?
If a gambling website is fun, profitable, and offers gaming variety, it'll grow on its own over time. When that happens, you'll have earned enough money to increase the maximum bets on your own instead of using raised funds to subsidize this part.

Just a quick couple of questions from my end:

How long has this site been operational?
I noticed the detailed statements go from July-August, but other Google docs files note starting back in May or so.

What is the purpose of valuing the company at BTC5,400? Was this value intentional?
Most of the time, people usually randomly generate how many shares their company will have (i.e. 1,000,000 units, 5,000,000, etc) and then throw in a per unit initial value they thought was good enough (i.e. BTC0.001, 0.5, 0.00001, etc). Then, as if magic, they're suddenly valuing their ideas at thousands of BTC.

How will any raised funds be spent? Say hundreds of random people jump on board and give you the $60,000 in BTC you're looking for. Then what?


These are just a few 'feeler' questions, and I've got a few more depending on how the above are answered. Overall, I like casino investments...when built properly (and secured properly as well) the house always wins, and that's good for investors

Not that drilled down, no.
I can only break down unit holders based on their email addresses and the amount held, not any specific dates unfortunately. I've got an older list of unit holders, and on top of that I recognize quite a number of original holders (November/December time period) since I look at their addresses regularly.

I suppose saying the "longest holders" is a bit misleading, so I'll try to clarify:
I won't be paying out to one person at a time based on how long they've been with the fund. It's not only quite difficult to do this, but it's also only fair to a select few people, which I'm uncomfortable with.

Instead, I need to figure out a way to distribute, say, BTC20 (if that was what the equipment generated in a week) among not only the largest holders, but the longest as well. Trouble is, the top 10 people (out of quite a few) own 80%+ of the Notes...so obviously my focus will be on them regardless of how long they've been invested.

In short, it gets complicated quite quickly when you try to break down the numbers and figure out how to properly repay people at the right rate.
One idea I had was to do sort of a lottery (obviously ignoring the longevity aspect for now). Each holder has 'xx' number of entries (based on how vested they are), and if I generated BTC20 in the first week, I'd pick out (or generate) 19 "winners" (BTC20 / BTC1.005) to have Notes repurchased that week.

And to bring in the crowdsourcing aspect (with fake numbers by the way):
Imagine you have 500 units that need to be bought back. Randomly spread those units out over 25 people, but make sure that 5 people own 80% of the total. Try not to focus around repayment based on percentage owned

Ah, how I love irrational hype. Buy into an IPO, and within an hour or two I can sell for a 50-100% profit

@Creativex, Freedomno1 – Thank you for your understanding and your comments. It means more to me than you may think.


Hi Acorcos,

My current repurchasing plan is to focus on Investors who have been with the fund the longest (excluding myself of course). Buybacks happen from the Management interface I work in, so there won’t be anything listed on the Exchange for people to sell at a loss to. The tricky part, in this case anyway, is determining how to distribute the mining revenue, since each Note repurchased will cost BTC1.005. That’s something I’m still working to figure out.

Regarding the repurchasing timeframe, at this point it’s hard to say for sure which route I’ll take, since it largely depends on how quickly I can get the equipment up and running, and from there map out projected revenues based on network growth and difficulty. After everything I’ve seen and tried to work out so far, my best guess is that I’ll never be able to fully repurchase all outstanding Notes. I responded to someone recently with a similar question, and here’s how I framed it:

My assumption so far has been an October delivery for my personal BFL order (from August 2012) and the Company-ordered KnC Jupiter. With that in mind, we'd have about 460GH/s online if all went well in October, which would mean about 47BTC in revenue since we wouldn’t be able to mine the entire month.

If we manage to get the rest of the equipment by December:
Month (total hashrate) -- projected revenue for the month  ---  source

October (460GH/s) -- 47      --------  http://mining.thegenesisblock.com/a/ed893004c2
November (520GH/s) -- 53   --------  http://mining.thegenesisblock.com/a/419523d9ee
December (1000GH/s) -- 72   ---------  http://mining.thegenesisblock.com/a/66c25768c2
January (1000GH/s) -- 50
February (1000GH/s) -- 35
[....]
September (1000GH/s) -- 1
Total: 322 BTC

Obviously there's a lot to take into consideration in all this, the most prominent item being that the established 40%+ monthly network increase used in the calculations isn't likely to be sustained. There will be a point when network speed will plateau until newer tech comes along. 12,000 TH/s of mining equipment has been predicted through the next 6-8 months thus far, which is a difficulty of about 1.5 billion. At that rate, we'd still be earning around BTC10 per month, though over time this will decrease.

To fully repurchase all outstanding units, I’d need to mine BTC912, or nearly 3x the amount mined in a year. If the changes we’ve seen over the past 12 months continue for the next 12, it’s a safe assumption that making Investors completely whole will never happen. When it’s apparent that this is starting to happen (e.g. mining no longer generates a profit), the equipment will be sold to the highest bidder, and those funds will be distributed to Investors as well.

Quick question(s): What happens when you partner with a large Exchange where they're required to disclose where money is coming from? Wouldn't they state your actual name and company info?

It's a fairly good list, though my qualm lies with this last part...mainly since an 'informed' decision today isn't the same as an 'informed' decision next week/month/quarter/etc. That's the hardest part about purchasing mining equipment. You may be making the best purchase (in terms of $/GH, or kWh/GH) in this very moment, but what's to stop Company X from developing 22nm (or 14nm, 10nm, etc) ASIC technology that makes your purchase obsolete?

It all comes down to how quickly you receive your mining equipment and whether or not that company is working towards better tech. And if not, determining your next (and most cost effective) option becomes the goal.

Hello Everyone,

As we reach the end of August, I’ve felt it’s time for a serious update on where we stand and what to expect going forward. For those of you that follow mining news as carefully as I do, I trust you’ll understand where this is coming from, and that you’ll understand what comes next.

As it stands in this very moment, KCIM Notes are no longer a sustainable asset based on the current interest rate and repurchasing schedule. Starting September 1st, 2013, Note Interest will be decreased to 0.5%. As there have been a number of extraordinary and unforeseen circumstances (thanks to a certain Third Party), Note repurchasing will begin the moment I have ASIC equipment in hand, regardless of vendor. The new repurchasing is currently set to 1.005x the Note’s Par Value, but is no longer set to a structured schedule and will instead happen as dependent on mining revenue.

For those of you who are surprised by this announcement, I’ll do what I can to explain our current situation and the circumstances leading up to it:

-------------------------------------------------

What I’ve always wanted to do was to run a small investment portfolio; something like a mix between the securities we know now as ‘Sandstorm’ and ‘Smidge’, but vastly more open and structured. Plans for this have always been in development, and have been tweaked as time goes on. After quite a bit of consideration, in September 2012 I decided I didn’t want to launch just another sketchy asset on GLBSE. With this in my mind, I purchased preordered 2 BFL 60GH/s Single SCs with the intent of mining to establish a revenue stream for the Company. It seemed like a good plan at the time; acquire assets and a revenue stream, build up a small portfolio, and then begin trading.

But that plan seemed too small. With the massive funding many organizations received on GLBSE, I determined I could structure something that would completely outshine other securities and receive the funding needed to expand my small operation to the next level. To an extent, this is exactly what happened.

When this Note was conceived last August, there were really only a small handful of companies looking to develop ASIC mining hardware. Butterfly Labs was the leader, bASIC was next, and ASICMiner and Avalon had just started forming their plans. When it came to potential chip efficiency and speed, BFL seemed to be ahead of the curve. All eyes were on them to deliver.

With the funding raised by the Notes throughout November and December, the object became to buy as much equipment as was manageable by the Company. Of course, this was when BFL was “shipping” in January. When this date was pushed back, scheduling adjustments were made, and then they were made again.

To make matters worse, since January we’ve been swarmed with new chip development companies. So many, in fact, that most people receiving equipment now are beginning to doubt their return on investment. We've not only got Butterfly Labs, Avalon, and ASICMiner, but also BitFury, KnCMiner, HashFast, BitMine, Cointerra, IceDrill, Labcoin, and a number of others. As the number of companies grows, so does the hashrate, or at least the guesstimates of where we’ll be in the next 6 months.

Now here I sit; continually paying for equipment 8+ months overdue, with no prospect of sticking with my original plan. What am I left to do?

I’ve pondered over a number of options these past few weeks, specifically regarding how to move forward.
--- I could try getting a refund from BFL (unlikely given the orders were paid for through BitPay, but could be worth a shot), and then use the money towards KnC or Cointerra (best $/GH/s).
--- I could declare insolvency, which would mean either getting a refund, or waiting until the equipment arrives, selling off the assets to the highest bidder, and distributing the proceeds among all Investors.
--- I could push forth and receive the equipment, start mining and pay Investors as if this was a group buy (obviously no management fee or other nonsense).

There might be another option, but I haven’t come up with anything feasible enough to work. In the end, I’ve settled on pushing forward. The reason for this is twofold; 1) I won’t have to try and fight a losing battle with BFL to get a refund, and 2) it’s a better option for Investors since they’ll get much more of their investment back than if we moved to liquidate instead.

I’ve already subsidized my personal equipment to help increase the Company’s total hashrate, but even at 1TH/s the outlook seems bleak.

-------------------------------------------------

So that’s where we’re at, and that’s how we got here. Undoubtedly, there will be a number of you who are shocked, appalled, and/or genuinely upset. Given I am also an investor in my Notes, I understand your resentment.

My goal at this point is to pay the accumulated debt, no matter what. Investors have had enough faith in me to help get this venture started. The least I can do is help them get some sort of return, even if it means squandering and distributing any mining net income over the next few years.

As always, comments, questions, and criticisms are welcome, and let’s try to keep them civil as best we can. If anyone has spotted a scenario I haven’t taken into account, please let me know.

After waiting 2 months for a wire from Gox, I canceled, converted, and switched over to Coinbase. So far they've been very prompt, both with buy and sell orders. I can usually see transfers in my bank within about 2-3 business days, so my guess is this is about on par with CampBX.

No problem, it's usually something easy to miss.


It's not baffling at all if you've read through the thread and all the provided documentation (or even emailed them). CFIG didn't provide nearly the much information to the public, and any serious questions regarding operations, financials, background, etc were either avoided, answered using doublespeak, or just copy/pastes from the business plan or prospectus.

Contrary to popular belief, there aren't nearly as many stupid people investors on the forums as there are made out to be. In most cases, the more practical information you provide to inform and involve the public, the more you'll end up raising in funding.


Couldn't agree more.