|
Dave and Labrat had lunch the other day. What incentive would Dave have to fly to Labrat if Dave didn't have hardware to deliver?
|
|
|
|
You seem to live in the illusion that the US governs the world, while it seems that they can't even govern themselves. Havelock nor their operators are based in the US, so the SEC can go fuck themselves.
There's a reason exchanges exist, I don't think it's a good development that each stock wants to start its own internal/direct exchange.
Who is fucking who here? LRM is in the USA and is governed by US law. SEC is in charge of anything IN THE USA that might be construed as a public stock offering. So, perhaps you would like to take a breath and check your shit before you spout FUD like a troll. If Havelock is making what might be construed as a public offering of shares available for purchase directly by USA citizens they most certainly will have something to say about it. Bitfunder is in Australia and a lot of good that did. Bottom line is that LRM is working on it. If you do not trust him to sort it out let me know and I would be happy to buy your bonds from you at current rates. And you think creating a separate exchange would solve that problem? Doesn't that just create another attack vector for the SEC? Just btw, I'm totally cool here. You on the other hand seem a bit nervous, attacking me for raising a few concerns, maybe you should take a deep breath next time you rage around here. There are some semantic questions that probably should be answered first, before people get excited about SEC relevance. Such as: Is LRM even issuing legitimate bonds or shares? How is being a group purchase of hardware different than either of these? Personally, I don't think the "bonds" qualify as shares because those buying "bonds" have no equity in LRM - i.e. they are not owners of the hardware purchased by LRM. That's despite the fact that Labrat even called it more like a group purchase of hardware. So, that leaves the question, are the "bonds" actual bonds. |
|
|
|
This seems interesting enough to note. For two reasons. (1) price/volume action and (2) shifts in exchange popularity. The weekly volume last week on BitStamp was apparently it's highest on record, and this is accompanied with new highs since mid/late-April. The same isn't true of volume on MtGox (which has had problems):   |
|
|
|
Hey guys when sending e-mail to Lab_rat for conforming shares , is e-mails body suppose to be the message that I need to sign , or can I use any message of my own.
That's my understanding. You sign the message of the body of the email, and avoid any extra spaces in the body on the start or end of each line of the body. That means it is probably best to not have a empty line above the body. So, if your bitfunder identifying address (a valid bitcoin address) were "1exampleJgoWFJT7eRWWXwaTpSfpGwe3Tz", the email subject line would be "1exampleJgoWFJT7eRWWXwaTpSfpGwe3Tz". But I think the bitcoin address in the body can be any valid address you have. The below is an example of the body, where the red text is the part of the body that is signed:
Bonds: 50
Name: your_sending_email_address @ yahoo_or_whatever.com
BTC Address: 1exampleJgoWFJT7eRWWXwaTpSfpGwe3Tz[copy/paste the valid signature below that, and send the email]
|
|
|
|
BTC is going crazy. I wonder if Labrat already made the payment for new hardware.
Ive been wondering the same thing.. heck, its gone up by about 20-30 percent, thats a lot more hashing power..... I guess it depends on when you start. So, it could be a lot more than 20 percent... Only caveat is, difficulty has also went up in that period of time. This is why I hope Labrat get's a better price than he was expecting a few weeks ago. He was expecting to be mining with new equipment already. |
|
|
|
|
BTC is going crazy. I wonder if Labrat already made the payment for new hardware.
|
|
|
|
I just assume Lab_rat has his hands full... Thanks!
Maybe true. But imagine telling that to anyone that doesn't get the memo, and their bonds get "absorbed". I assume that when the timing gets close he will announce the bondholders that haven't confirmed with him giving them even another chance to do so. Yes I will be making a public list that will contain the address in one column and either ( Verified, Failed Verification, or Not Received ) so no personal info will be public ie. email addresses or anything else. Right now I've been going 12 hours and now I get to start going through 170 verification emails from people and trying to update as much as I can. So to anyone who wishes they'd hear more from me, I apologize, but it's not currently feasible to make forum posts constantly when I'm working 18-20 hour days. In short I will say that everything went great today including the highlight of the day, having a lunch/business meeting with Dave. EDIT: about the name in the message, it's more of an identification method as I recognize a lot of names from the forums. If you do not use the forums, you may just input the email you're sending from. Thanks Labrat for updating the website! This alleviates some concern. And sorry if I come off as overly critical, especially while you're busy. Forum lacks inflection like in emails, and silence is just as bad. What did you eat guys eat for lunch? |
|
|
|
I just assume Lab_rat has his hands full... Thanks!
Maybe true. But imagine telling that to anyone that doesn't get the memo, and their bonds get "absorbed". |
|
|
|
I just assume Lab_rat has his hands full... Thanks!
PM sent (hopefully correctly!!!)
By PM did you mean you sent him an email? There was an email address to send it to. |
|
|
|
Sure would make sense to put that information on the Labrat Mining website. I rest my case.  |
|
|
|
While I don't mind giving him my username here, I dont see how that is prevalent at all. If the bitcoin address matches the signature, thats all the proof that one should need. Maybe there are other reasons, but signing an address should be proof enough... Maybe he wants to figure out who all the dissenters are, lol....When GLBSE shut down, I know of many people that gave up their bonds because they didn't want to give up their identity. May sound silly to me or you, but some people have their reasons and its not our job to question them.
Agree. Seems very odd to ask for it, on top of posting in the forum a warning in one comment in this nearly 70 page thread. Commence the conspiracy theories. Side note: I'd bet you probably meant relevant, not prevalent.  |
|
|
|
Due to issues with people not having THEIR OWN bitcoin addresses on BitFunder, I will be postponing this weeks dividends in an attempt to help give people more time to get their address situated. This means the dividends due to go out Oct. 19th and Oct. 26th will BOTH go out on Oct. 26th. Tuesday, Oct. 22nd, I will be freezing LRM on BitFunder and taking the final asset list. At this time I am requesting that all individuals send a signed message in the format detailed below between Tuesday, Oct. 22nd Noon and Thursday, Oct. 24th 11:59 PM Eastern Standard Time. If you fail to send a signed message via email to labrat@labratmining.com by the end of the time specified, your dividends will be rolled over to the following week. Thursday, Oct. 31st will be the cut off for the week following. If you do not verify ownership of your bonds via this method by Thursday, Nov. 7th, your bonds and accrued dividends will be absorbed by LRM. I am giving everyone plenty of warning, so make sure your address on BitFunder is one of your own. Format for signed message must be as follows: EMail Title: BTC address (must be the address on the bitfunder asset list which is the same one you signed the message with) EMail Body: Bonds: # owned Name: (Name on BitCoinTalk or BFL Forums, not your real name) BTC Address: (Preferred address, may keep the same or change) Message Signature: xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx The information in the body should be copy pasted from the signed message to your email, no leading or following spaces other than to separate the message signature from the message. No additional information necessary. Labrat. This very important message should be posted on the official Labrat Mining website. Anyone that's not a regular reader of the forums - or simply following the official Labrat website - could end up having their bonds being taken by Labrat.I like your personality from what I have gathered. But on a different facet, I have to kind of agree with one person a few pages of posts ago, that critiqued this as unprofessional. And it's this exact kind of thing, which may seem small, that will degrade your credibility. Bond prices will reflect that by falling in times like now. Please, correct that for the sake of bond holders that are highly vested in life outside the forum. Similarly, why is it required to send "Name on BitCoinTalk or BFL Forums"? How is this actually used? It may create a problem for some bond holders, because not everyone with bonds needed to have a bitcointalk or BFL Forums account. It was never a requirement to to buy bonds. The only accounts all bond holders have in common are Bitfunder accounts (which do have account names associated with them). Another obvious alternate, perhaps better option, is for the person to use the email they send this message to you with instead of an obscure forum name. These are simply some thoughts that seem to be reasonable concerns. |
|
|
|
|
Labrat. Are you going to ask Dave for a better price because of the delays that are apparently occurring as a result of his supplier? Dave or whoever sets prices already recognizes the principal for such hardware price reduction over time, as evident in the price difference of August versus October deliveries. And because his supplier has these delays in shipping, then further price reduction seems should be applied. Bitfury sources might as well call this November hardware (not October).
You thought you would would have been mining with new hardware by now, but by no fault on your part it seems, there is no mining with new hardware going on. The order hasn't even been placed according to your recent post above. There was a bit higher expectations from Bitfury on the delivery times. So, hopefully they aren't expecting to sell at the same higher prices that were worked out with them three weeks ago.
|
|
|
|
Hey Lab_Rat:
I don't know how the numbers crunch for this, but would it make sense for you to spend some of the BTC we've earned, instead of on new hardware, to buy up some of the cheap bonds in the name of LRM?
That is, you could create some virtual hardware (a virtual bondholder who splits his dividends with us all) that would have the effect of concentrating dividends to the bondholders who do not sell.
I've actually proposed a similar idea, but not to pay higher dividends. My suggestion was to buy up cheap bonds and send ALL proceeds to buying more hardware (or increase the percentage cut). For example, if LR could buy up 1000 bonds at, for example, BTC0.07, that would mean he could permanently increase re-investment funds by about +2% for a 'mere' BTC7. It follows that 2000 bonds would be about +4%, 3000 bonds would be about +6%...etc... I posted this earlier in this thread, but Labrat hasn't responded to the idea. |
|
|
|
One bit of good news is the price of bitcoin is going up with a bit of strength. This will allow for Labrat to buy more hardware with the LRM bitcoins he's been holding. Also, it will give the coins mined from the two weeks withholding - whenever that happens this month - more buying power. So far, about 15% higher bitcoin value. Time will indicate.
Yes, and it's going to be in the next couple days I make payment to BitFury so this helps a lot. It will at least counteract the Bitfury delay (and vice versa). For that reason, I'm not so sure it will put LRM ahead of what was already expected, if you could sum up the long term dividends in either scenario. It may keep it at par with the expected scenario. However, if bitcoin stays higher, it will put LRM ahead with any November purchases. And Dave should be dropping the price of hardware with difficulty increase. |
|
|
|
|
One bit of good news is the price of bitcoin is going up with a bit of strength. This will allow for Labrat to buy more hardware with the LRM bitcoins he's been holding. Also, it will give the coins mined from the two weeks withholding - whenever that happens this month - more buying power. So far, about 15% higher bitcoin value. Time will indicate.
|
|
|
|
Unless you have reason to think these one or two people selling a lot of shares has insider information, then don't worry about why they are selling.
These events that have happened lately - like Bitfunder - are not changes in the basic fundamentals of Labrat.
what are the fundamentals of LRM? have you seen a balance sheet or income statement? Of course I'm not thinking about fundamentals in that sense of detail or transparency. I would assume most of everyone here knew that Labrat wasn't transparent on financial data. I was making the point that there is no special new information about fundamental information - that could affect revenue - that we already know or have been told. For example: Labrat hasn't changed any projections in the past couple weeks. Ordered hardware has had no good or bad updates. Difficulty is going up as always expected. Bitcoin is on the incline, but still in the same ball park as it has been for the past month. So..in THAT SENSE.. fundamentals haven't really changed (much). And seeing a lot of selling doesn't mean any of these (or one's we are not aware of) have necessarily changed - which is why I made that comment. So, if a person was happy about LRM potential, by what they knew a week ago, then I'd say there is no obvious significant changes to cause one to feel any different now about potential. They'd more likely have to form a new different opinion from the same information. |
|
|
|
My thought is that the lack of liquidity is the primary reason for a depressed bond value.
The US people were heavy buyers and since they can no longer buy on bitfunder, the market
has no buoyancy.
In two weeks, we have close to 30TH coming on line. Our dividends are going to jump very
substantially. I'm looking forward to finally seeing what kind of buying power LabRat was able
to muster with our investment.
The key is for LRM to set up some way to (relatively easily) buy/sell bonds through direct share
transfer. Give us some liquidity back and the bond will float once again.
I agree. The Bitfunder blocking US bids is almost certainly the main reason for the bond price being depressed. If/when LR get's a new platform for trading, this will change. Especially, if it works at least as well as Bitfunders platform - the less clumsy the better. Like I said before, I think there is an opportunity there for any good programmers. Make a kind of halfway decentralized trading platform. Do for trading shares/bonds/etc.. what bitcoin did for currency. |
|
|
|
2 x 500 shares sell O_o Some big players sell out..  1000 Shares isn't nothing. If big players start losing faith... But i can understand. Look in what mess we are. New extra fee, postponing dividends, no visibility in new hardware/futur hashrate... Even an USB Asicminer is a better deal at the moment....i'm furious.  I bought 242 bonds at introducing price, for the moment it's only a big loss The bonds are cheaps...but do they worth it ? Unless you have reason to think these one or two people selling a lot of shares has insider information, then don't worry about why they are selling. These events that have happened lately - like Bitfunder - are not changes in the basic fundamentals of Labrat. For your own health, don't be furious that you could buy USB asicminers. The stress won't add anything to your life. Besides, the reason people buy Labrat is so they don't have to do the mining themselves. Can a USB miner reboot itself when it crashes or order new hardware for you or pay the electric bill for you? |
|
|
|
Guys come on!
The Hashrate skyrocketing won't be this way all the time.
Whenever a major ASIC Player releases their batch of units the Hashrate will jump, then when it does it will level off as they finish sending out the units, until the next one does it or they release another batch.
We probably won't see TOO much of a change from this difficulty to the next.
Also as we get to a higher difficulty it becomes that much harder to maintain that percentage of raise in difficulty.
KnC just released >0.5PH on the network within two weeks.
We don't have to worry about KnC releasing a ton more like that until November (and Hashfast will be releasing theirs as well then)
We might see a huge jump when they release but that's still 1 or 2 difficulty jumps away and we will be mining the whole time.
Everyone is expecting ~8PH on the network by the end of the year, that means difficulty will be somewhere around 960 Million. But you better be mining now when it is low (like Lab_Rat is doing).
I agree, but ' when?' is the question. It will eventually shift into a more linear incline - that will be a relief. And maybe even drop a little some time after that. But that linear incline still seems pretty far off. Far meaning: many months out. Keep in mind, when you are discussing these mining hardware companies, that there are at least four major players. So, one ships a bunch, then another ships a bunch... it's hard to predict. And I doubt they are running accurate models on how to keep hardware profitable for customers (Butterfly Labs as a classic case). I don't know that they even can. The advantage of GPU's is that graphics card companies didn't have an incentive to lower the price of the GPU's. So, you hit your natural curve. Mining hardware manufacturers have an incentive to lower prices... this will keep the hardware coming online (see how that is different than the GPU era?). |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
