This is great news.



This is even better news! 

I'm glad to see the operation continuing. And I will offer my help with the transition, if you need it (I'm sure you won't).

On a personal note, it was "not cool" when you locked the thread. With the history of open communication that you have had here, I was surprised that you would just give up, and quit.....


... instead of continue your open dialogue here.


Anyway, keep us informed on the progress. And thanks for looking out for all your shareholder's interests.

Well, I stand corrected. And that is awesome.

I don't think those are mined coins. I think that is just an actual donation to the website creator - nonnakip

No, but we got another BFL FPGA.

Yep, got my email.

BUT, I honestly do not remember how many shares seats I had, so I rounded to the nearest 10 seats when creating my account. I'm sure the list you have also has the correct number.

Nasty has created a "Fan Club" of Nasty Mining. There's no "securities" here. Only "seats" in the fan club.

Every once in a while... maybe every week, a special donation will be made to everyone who has seats in the fan club. The biggest fans "probably, maybe, sort of, .etc" get more donations. The biggest fans are measured solely on how many seats they have in the fan club.

Check in on the fan club and make changes to your seats at the website set up by nonnakip.

I hope that clears up any confusion of what happened to your part Nasty Mining.

---

By the way, I am still waiting for my email. And I also don't particularly like how the Nasty Fan Club is progressing, but its better than nothing.

Great news.

Thanks for working on this.

Shares outstanding are shares sold on the open market (or otherwise in the hands of share holders).
Shares issued are the total number of shares the stock exchange granted to the asset manager.

Here is a scenario: If you manage an asset and plan to sell 1000 shares, but want the opportunity to sell more in the future, you setup your contract with 1000000 shares. And then only sell what you need. Then as the asset grows (more equipment, hash/s, etc.) you can sells more share with out having to re-structure the whole contract.

So to answer your question, you dividend should be based on the number of shares outstanding.

I would still like more input on the issue of grams versus troy ounces.

And to make it easier, I will put it up to a sudo vote.

Here are the two options:

Grams
Currently, the default would be to release the shares in grams where 100 shares = 1 gram.
At current BTC/USD prices, each share would be about 0.035 - 0.060 BTC (price subject to change based on a number of factors).
The minimum number of shares to withdraw physical bullion would be 500 shares = 5 grams (plus fees, shipping, etc.)

Troy Ounces
If we go with troy ounces, 1000 shares = 1 troy ounce.
At current BTC/USD prices, each share would be about 0.13 - 0.16 BTC (price subject to change based on a number of factors).
The minimum number of shares to withdraw physical bullion would be 250 shares  = .25 ounces (plus fees, shipping, etc.)



As you can see, going with troy ounces would make the share price much higher. Bullion overhead at 1/4 ounce is still pretty high (and already include in the share prices). The bullion overhead drops significantly at 1 ounce bars/rounds AND at 10 gram bars; but this might exclude some (casual) investors from ever being able to take physical delivery. Should the withdraw quota be 1 troy ounce OR 10 grams?

Again, I still have time to revise the asset contract. These changes can be implemented. But I need to know if there will be enough interest to justify making any of the proposed changes. I want to provide an asset that makes affording gold bullion accessible to everyone.

Please make you opinion matter. Increase you post count and let me know what you think.

I'm sure 98.15% would vote to move forward, but I can wait a bit longer. We've already waited this long.

Many miners (predicatively) switched to Litecoin when the Bitcoin reward halved.
This, in turn, skyrocketed the Litecoin diff to more than double--overnight. As miners found out that Litecoin is not profitable because of the high Diff, they are now leaving.

The Litecoin community is a up-and-coming scene (full disclosure, again: I am a Global Mod at LitecoinTalk forums).

To be honest though, the few mining assets on the Litecoin Global Exchange are not performing well. BUT this is for the same reason that Bitcoin mining bonds stopped performing well... they are mining bonds.

BAKEWELL-LTC would be the first Litecoin mining company in which shareholders own the equipment as well. This would be a boon to investors.
 
The fact that BAKEWELL can mine with free electricity is a huge benefit. It allows for mining possibilities that other setups couldn't possibly consider.

I would definitely consider BAKEWELL-LTC. Numbers would have to be run to see potential profits and the ability/feasibility to expand operations. But I have a good feeling overall. If you were to do a BAKEWELL-LTC I would keep everything LTC. Burnside might even have a way to "import" shareholders from BAKEWELL if you plan to spin-off operations.

I thought 50BTC (ironic name now) is a straight PPS pool. Wouldn't this make calculating daily payouts easier as a there is no variance on PPS pools?

Remember, shares will always be in the unit of measure. Meaning each share will be 1/100 gram with gram bullion or 1/1000 ounce with ounce bullion. I won't mix ounce bullion with gram shares.



The price per share will always reflect the USD/BTC price per unit of bullion. I expect share prices to be bitcents.

The nice thing is, I have a 5 gram bar to ready to go, but I can also have troy ounce bullion (or fractional ounce) delivered as well.
I have time to change the contract to ounces or keep using grams all the way up until the first share is sold. I don't mind buying one way or the other.

And yes, each share will always be a fraction of the unit of measure.


0.01 grams OR perhaps 0.001 troy ounces.
Having each share = to 1/1000 of an ounce still achieves my goal of affordable shares.


Any other opinions out there? Is troy ounces a good idea? Do you not care at all? Feedback is welcome.

Thank you.



Absolutely. This is addressed in the FAQs section (second post). The BTC and LTC assets will maintain separate bullion deposits and will never intermix.

The BTC-GOLD bullion deposit and shares released spreadsheet is maintained here:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AqLxDN0JzEUNdE9vNG1zZWlrUTIwbFhrZzVtSUowc3c


This was a tough decision to make. One of the goals of this fund is to make owning gold bullion affordable to the masses. I had to find out a way to make share prices that are easy enough for the "average" person to afford, while at the same time maintaining a unit that is easy to figure out exactly how much bullion you own according to the share you have.

Making a share affordable:
With the price of gold so high, dividing one troy ounce even by a factor of 100 makes the individual share price higher than I was planning for.
With each share being .01 grams, each share price is about 31 times less expensive (or 31 times more affordable, if that's how you look at it).

Less confusing:
Troy ounces are the world's standard in precious metals. But like imperial measurements, ounces are just weird to people unfamiliar with it. And troy ounces are different from the avoirdupois ounce (which is used in the USA) just to make things more confusing.

However, I would like to hear more opinions on this issue. If you (yes you! anyone reading this post) find this fund intriguing, but would rather have ounces over grams; please reply and voice your thoughts.
There is still time to change the asset contract.

After months of glbse garbage. I am finally able to release this asset on btct.co.

After approval and shipment of the first bar of gold bullion, shares will be released.

I would be very happy to see BAKEWELL continue on https://btct.co/




I know how btct.co works, because I manage an asset on burnside's Litecoin Global's exchange (and btct.co is just a copy-n-paste of that).

It's true the when a new asset is listed on btct.co, your asset is approved by umm.. lets call them "asset moderators" (full disclosure: I am one).
Here's how it works:

• You sign up, list your asset.
  
• The moderators take a look at your asset contract, your history (from forums, irc, whatever) and then give a YES or NO vote.
• Once you get 5 YES votes, your asset is approved and trading can begin.

Burnside did this so that assets approvals are not in his hands (although I'm sure he is a moderator as well).



Other benefits of btct.co:

• Speed. Burside developed the exchange with speed in mind and continues in that direction.
• Community Involvement. Burnside is actively involved with the community. He listens to all suggestions and implements the best ones
• Registered as an actual company in Beleize
• As a asset issuer/manager, you will be emailed all shareholder info (as of right now) at least twice a day. This email includes the email address of all shareholders and how many shares they own--just in case.
• I heard burnside is "going easy" on previous GLBSE asset issuers and might reduce or even refund the asset creation fee.

Once Nefario has released all the shareholder info,
I would rather the pass through be moved to burnside's https://btct.co
OR liquidate the assets.

Of course, I'm speaking as someone who does not have an MPEX account (or else why would I use a pass through?).

Well let's not get crazy here!

I'd pay 4.9% to get the pool back up on it's feet.

I hope it comes soon.


If you plan on continuing operations with a new exchange, I would highly recommend https://btct.co/
burnside has spent a lot of time on the Litecoin version of his exchange (where I manage an asset), and has now just released the BTC side.
Burnside got a lawyer, and registered it in Belize.
As a standard feature, you will be emailed all shareholder information on a routine basis--just in case. And, it's not slow!