I don't read that at all. It possibly will be less than the 100Mh minimum per share until fully operational. Look at the 2nd Sentence. " If the entire 100,000 bond IPO is not sold immediately,bonds will represent an equivalent portion of the processing power included in the operation at that time." Dividends/Bond Value – Each bond will receive a minimum of 100MH/s* worth of mining profit in dividends/returns (all dividends are intended as contractual returns based on investments and may simply be referred to as dividends for future purposes) on a weekly basis. The first payout will be at the end of the second full week mining. If the entire 100,000 bond IPO is not sold immediately, bonds will represent an equivalent portion of the processing power included in the operation at that time. If it occurs that multiple installments of hardware are required to fulfill the IPO’s expected hardware, the earnings of each installment will begin to be paid out in dividends on the second full week of each installment. Dividends will be paid out on Saturdays ~12 noon Eastern Time(UTC -0500.)
It should be noted that the number of bonds sold does not make a huge difference in the per-bond hash rate. If the entire 100k issue sells out, there will be 4x as much hardware available as now, but also 4x the number of bonds to distribute them to. The issue here is that there is a lag between when all the hardware is ordered, and when it arrives. And all the hardware is not going to arrive at once. grnbrg. |
|
|
|
So what is the hashing rate per share right now with Lab_Rat mining @ 95 Gh/s.
There are currently just shy of 26,000 bonds sold, to which dividends will be payed. LRM takes 25% for costs and reinvestment (See the bond calculator for details) so the hashrate per bond is currently ((95,000 Mh/s * 0.75) / 26,000) or 2.74 MH/s per bond. There are still hardware orders that are outstanding right now. From the official announcement: Dividends/Bond Value – Each bond will receive a minimum of 100MH/s* worth of mining profit in dividends/returns (all dividends are intended as contractual returns based on investments and may simply be referred to as dividends for future purposes) on a weekly basis. The first payout will be at the end of the second full week mining. If the entire 100,000 bond IPO is not sold immediately, bonds will represent an equivalent portion of the processing power included in the operation at that time. If it occurs that multiple installments of hardware are required to fulfill the IPO’s expected hardware, the earnings of each installment will begin to be paid out in dividends on the second full week of each installment. Dividends will be paid out on Saturdays ~12 noon Eastern Time(UTC -0500.) More hardware is coming. Current estimates are for around 350 MH/s per bond. grnbrg. |
|
|
|
I don't see the stats on EMC. Does it require an account to view? Did you consider using Bitminter yet? It's super easy to get going, and stats appear to be available for non users to see. LRM's hashing is fast enough to be in the top 50. See here: http://bitminter.com/livestats/bigStats aren't public on EMC, but I think what Lab_Rat is saying is that he/we should be on the high-scores list soon, which is public  Correct: (.....) the Eclipse Mining Consortium stats will show up here once enough hashrate is secured. (Emphasis mine.) Although Eclipse's pages are "sort of" public. EMC requires you to have an account to look at anything but the front page, including the "Top Miners" page. Easy enough to get one, though. The miner at the bottom of that list is currently hashing at 88 GH/s. @Lab_Rat reports that LRM will be hashing above that level on Wednesday or Thursday (Aug 7th or 8th) and will therefore appear on the list. grnbrg. |
|
|
|
|
About an hour ago, a purchase through BitFunder put the number of bonds sold from the IPO over 25,000.
25% of the initial issue has been sold in a little over 2 weeks.
grnbrg.
|
|
|
|
How many, and what kinds of orders, have been placed so far? The initial contract still only mentions Butterfly Labs. Have BFL orders been placed already (& how many)? I've read that LRDP has made some kind of arrangement with Bitfury. Can we get some clarity on that?
Lab_Rat and buzzdave have confirmed hardware availability early in the October queue. I will be surprised if more detail than that is released. There is some work being done to finalize more immediate hardware. Once details have been finalized (within the next day or so) they will be announced. grnbrg. |
|
|
|
if no one bid up the bonds above 0.16 , then after 12 weeks, according to that BITFURY will delivery its products at earliest on October.
You guys will be burned at 12 weeks later.
We assume network difficulty will continues increase 15% per each adjust date. this equal to 12*7/10=8.4 times
the current 1 Mega/hash is about 0.003 ,recording to DMS.MINING . assume contract value will be decrease upon with the adjustment.
Then it will be 0.003 X (1-0.15)8.4times =0.000766. for 100 M/hash should only worh 0.000766*100=0.0766
P.S: if look back the recent trends of difficulty, it indicated about 20% increase each ten days... Thereby the above calculation is very conservative.
From what you're stating, my bonds at a current minimum value of 300MH/s per bond would pull in at least 0.0766 * 3 = 0.2298 BTC on an investment that costs 0.15 BTC. If the quantity of bonds sold increases, the hashrate per bond follows, but the later purchasers pay slightly more. This would allow for early investors to make more profit, but also increase the company's hashrate maintaining that same profitability through new purchases of bonds. There will also be a sizable re-investment made regularly by LabRatMining further increasing your hashrate. This will in turn increase profitability. So on a worse case scenario according to you, you would make a minimum of your money back +50% and still have the bond in hand to sell at a later date. I don't see anything negative in what you just said. Bitcoin is not a sprint to get rich, it's a marathon to make a profit. If 100000 shares isn't totally sold ,then it only worth 100 millions per bond..Am I right? No, at the current level of 17,000 bonds sold, the estimated hashrate per bond is 313 MH/s. grnbrg. |
|
|
|
Well... A guaranteed 300MH/s / share sweetens the deal a LOT! Heh. Only another 3k or so left in the initial 20,000 bonds at 0.15... grnbrg. |
|
|
|
|
I'll point out that, due to some of the inter-page references, the spreadsheet doesn't seem to play nice with Libre Office or Google Docs. Looks like Excel is required.
grnbrg.
|
|
|
|
Both isn't reliable at all.....be lucky, folks....
 grnbrg. |
|
|
|
|
Stay tuned... @Lab_Rat just got off the phone with Dave from BitFury. Both will be posting announcements tonight.
grnbrg.
|
|
|
|
Oh, so he doesn't even have the equipment mining right now? If I bought a bond right now, would I even be paid in the next week or so?
Not as yet, nor has that fact been hidden. Lab_Rat has some early BFL orders that will be used, some users have offered early orders in exchange for bonds, and orders will be placed with multiple ASIC vendors. Mining is expected to start within 3-6 weeks. grnbrg. |
|
|
|
Lab Rat, I'm a little confused.
If I buy one of the 100,000 bonds, that will grant me 100Mh/s. If only 20,000 bonds are sold before the first pay period, would I get 500mh/s worth of pay since the 80,000 wasn't sold?
Aside from the fact that 100 Mh/s is a conservative estimate.... Each bond is rated at 100 Mh/s. If the full 100k bonds are sold, then there is money to buy ~10 Th/s of gear. If onky 20k bonds are sold, then there is only money to buy 2Th/s, but also fewer bonds to distribute dividends to, so you'll still see 100 Mh/s per bond. Again, 100Mh/s appears to be a conservative guess. Once negotiations with BitFury are done, firmer and higher numbers are likely. grnbrg. |
|
|
|
EDIT: 20% for start up expenses? 20,000 shares sold is $270,000. 20% is $54,000 - that seems quite high for one month work of work (even for a lawyer), especially since the company owns the hardware assets. Unless some management fee is included in that, but you haven't shown what you get out of it yet - which is important for you to be sustainable.
Good question. I just got a note from Lab_Rat that he's working on a statement on this. It should be posted later today. grnbrg. |
|
|
|
@BitSugar: Point taken. I do need to work on my delivery. I expect to do largely what I have done with BFL: Consolidate official information on the LRM_News twitter feed, and answer questions where I can find them about the mining company. I don't yet have all the answers on hand, but that will change. I don't yet have much history on this forum, but I've built a very good reputation on BFL's forum of honesty and accuracy. I intend to continue in that vein. grnbrg. |
|
|
|
|
I've been exchanging some email with Lab_Rat...
He indicates that of the current capital from bond sales, around 80% will go into hardware purchases. The rest for overhead and expenses. (Secure data centre, lawyers, etc)
Of the hardware bought, 25% will be for the company, and mine for expenses and new hardware acquisitions. The remaining 75% will pay customer dividends.
The 100MH/s hash rate posted was intended to be seen as a minimum. The actual hash rate associated with a bond may in fact end up considerably higher, depending on what deals can be made. The initial numbers were based on a conservative estimate, and BFL gear. Given that BitFury is in the picture, it is possible that that this number may be much higher, depending on what that 80% of bond sales will buy.
Lab_Rat is meeting with (I think) the BitFury rep right now. He will be back later to confirm the above.
grnbrg.
|
|
|
|
@grnbrg, no offense, but we do need to hear these responses directly from Lab_Rat; seeing how he responds, how often he responds, his tone, his transparency, attention to detail, whether he tends to change his mind over time, whether he addresses all concerns in a timely manner or if he sidesteps ones he doesn't want to deal with ... these all help paint a picture of who he is, what kind of company this will likely be, and the sort of service investors can expect in future dealings with him.
Until he provides some tangible information about himself, these indirect 'tells' are really all we have to go on to build some sense of "trust". He really needs to deal with this directly and personally; it is just part of trying to advertise one's business to potential investors. Nothing more than common sense and business etiquette, really.
Asking someone else to be a mouthpiece because he doesn't want to take the time to do it himself does not make a particularly good impression.
I understand. And I'm also still feeling out what I've been asked to do (and shoehorn in beside my day job).... With BFL, my role was pretty straightforward - just consolidate what news was posted in various places into one location for people to monitor, and answer questions with "BFL said this, here." rather than speculate. Lab_Rat has asked me to represent him publicly and officially, and I need to figure out what that role is. That said, I know he's busy doing the behind-the-scenes stuff, meeting with lawyers and vendors to make sure his endeavour gets off the ground. And I know from watching the attacks on BFL (deserved or otherwise) that if a question is unanswered for more than a couple of hours, it gets a very negative appearance.... I think I can answer some stuff promptly, and Lab_Rat will confirm (or overrule) when he gets time. grnbrg. |
|
|
|
Question for LabRat - I have a concern regarding your answer to question 4 above. The problem is this could allow you to run as a Ponzi Scheme (which I am absolutely not suggesting you are doing). Could you have a think about that problem, because as an investor in LabRatMining (hey, hi, congrats, I have faith in you man) - I want more people to invest so we can get up to those 150mh/share figures :-)
At the moment, Lab_Rat has been considering creating a private pool for the mining company -- he said as much above. It makes sense in some ways: Harder to attack and DDOS. But definitely less transparent. If the people who are putting money in feel that it's a problem, then he could always do as other mining companies do, and mine on several public pools. More transparency, but also more risk. I'll let him weigh in on it. grnbrg. |
|
|
|
@Lab_Rat has offered to pay me to answer questions... There goes my credibility.   (For the record, I've risked around $5k (dollars) with LRM. Not a lot, but not an insignificant amount, either.) I've watched him work the BFL forums since October last year, answering questions and helping out. I've also talked directly to him for quite a bit in the last month or two, both before and after he started working on this mining project. From what I can see, he is sincere in what he is doing, and is taking pains to do it correctly and transparently. I will see if I can get some more information to post to answer some more questions. From my point of view, the company is legitimate, and there is a good chance that I will profit from what I have invested. That said: Yes, there is risk. No one is forcing anyone to invest, though. grnbrg. |
|
|
|
I say we need competition.
I guess the OP is the same as the labrat on BFL forums. can you please confirm this?
------- I can confirm that this is, in fact Lab_Rat from the BFL forums. (And I've signed this message with the donations address I've used on the BFL forums, and BFL_News twitter feed.) ------- Signature: G71LEVhESloznQ97mZwNsLBAdThDgfX65gjvAQZONdDXK5kBvQO2nHnImIhdGId22ULqjMrGkPZuYWg UhciOql8= Address: 1grnbrg3Ea4t6bxHvQKRvorbBeLNDXv2N grnbrg. |
|
|
|
You do realize that was not "Hur, hur, hur, get a refund, then!", right? You were talking about calculating your potential earnings from November 2012 to the present. My point is that you could have asked for a refund at any time within that period, but didn't. So I don't think you would be entitled to "damages" within that timeframe. And that those damages would be zero in any respect. I suspect that earnings calculated for a 12 month period after you would have received your orders would still be quite substantial, and are a much more justifiable target for damages. And lastly (and as a non-lawyer), while I personally think BFL probably has the legal right to act as they have, it was a shitty thing to do, and they should not have. But on the other hand, you appear to have worked very hard to make it happen. grnbrg. PS: Ivan says "Hi." back. Or something like that. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
