Then if the dividend is low everyone gets screwed. Didn't seem very fair.
Cheers.
So if the dividend is low when you have fewer shares, then people get more screwed? i.e. if the dividend is low, and your taking 5% Vs. the dividend being low and you taking 0.5% for greater shares. That does not seem very fair. The more people refuse to join due to whatever, the more the current holders get screwed. right? Apparently you are concerned about the dividend payout amount. If we add that to the equation then perhaps the % should be based on dividend ranges instead? Maybe I misunderstood something somewhere. It wouldn't be a first.  You asked why I didn't do a fixed maintenance fee. I didn't because then if ASICMINER doesn't pay out a dividend large enough to cover the maintenance fee, there wouldn't be anything left to pass through. Leaving it percentage based, even when there is a very small dividend, guarantees the shareholders still get the majority of it. Ahh gotchya.  Thanks for that. |
|
|
|
Then if the dividend is low everyone gets screwed. Didn't seem very fair.
Cheers.
So if the dividend is low when you have fewer shares, then people get more screwed? i.e. if the dividend is low, and your taking 5% Vs. the dividend being low and you taking 0.5% for greater shares. That does not seem very fair. The more people refuse to join due to whatever, the more the current holders get screwed. right? Apparently you are concerned about the dividend payout amount. If we add that to the equation then perhaps the % should be based on dividend ranges instead? Maybe I misunderstood something somewhere. It wouldn't be a first. |
|
|
|
I should think it would not be hard to get to 10,000 shares. G.ASICMINER-PT is not too far from it based on pending transfers and it sounds like you are already gaining momentum. You say "I don't get how they can do do that." at 0% yet 0.5% would practically be the same as G.ASICMINER-PT compared to your 5% starting point. 90% decrease. Sounds contradictory. Compared to how you believe things needed to be 5% to work means you do not understand how a possible 90% lower rate your suggesting make any sense, right? Or are you meaning that 0.5% is within perfectly acceptable range, and that 5% was probably overkill to start with since you did not know the shares would be paying out such high rates? There is nothing wrong with making money. Perhaps people should stop and think that paying the 5% might make you a better asset manager to want to grow it as large as possible. Your time is also valuable as the coder/operator of btct among other things. Sometimes quality comes with a price and standard of expectations. Hard to explain I guess without putting together a pretty graph, but the tiered pricing goal was to make the passthru maintenance relatively constant. The simplest example; if it's 1% at 5000 shares and 0.5% at 10000 shares, that means the maintenance fee is the same at 10000 shares as it is at 5000. Cheers Ahh I see. If the goal is to make it a same fee regardless of the number of shares, why not just write it down as a flat fee? Sounds easier rather than dealing with tiers if your just making the tiers to that effect anyways. |
|
|
|
If you put them all up at 0.7, will they get 100% of any future dividends while they are waiting to be sold? And these dividends will, of course come back to GBF.
If that's the case, then I think it's a good idea to put them up for sale. I think it could be a while until they sell at that price.
But can you explain more clearly the "Supplemental dividend plan". What you have written on the Bitfunder profile isn't very clear.
What concerns me is that it seems like you will be getting an ASICMINER board seat and hence an ASIC mining unit, if I understand correctly, through selling off our GBF shares. Or am I wrong? Will this benefit GBF, or just you, or just holders of the G.ASICMINER-PT shares?
If you were to distribute our shares amongst GBF shareholders as G.ASICMINER-PT shares, wouldn't we then get any future ASICMINER dividends, plus the "Supplemental dividend", plus of course any profit if we wished to sell our own shares.
Wouldn't this be a much better deal for GBF shareholders?
G.ASICMINER-PT should already have enough shares for a test board. It just needs Terra to confirm with Friedcat now I think. As for the mining board dividends, it seems that the board will mine on a pool, and pay out 95% of earnings to all held G.ASICMINER-PT shares equally. If the shares are moved to G.ASICMINER-PT, then I would hope that any dividends earned while they are there are passed on to GBF. Not sure where else they would go. Also since there is no dividend fee on G.ASICMINER-PT there should be no loss. As for the rest... that's all I got. |
|
|
|
I completely understand this, especially when there's a very good alternative out there that passes through 100% of the divs. I still don't get how they can do that. It seems like a recipe for trouble, however it does force me to reconsider. What I'm thinking is that a tiered maintenance fee probably makes the most sense. Here is my proposed change: < Each ASICMINER-PT is entitled to 95% of the dividends paid on one ASICMINER share.
> A management fee of X% will be levied on each dividend payment where X is determined by the number of shares currently managed by the pass through. For under 1000 shares, the management fee shall be 3%. For over 1000 shares, the management fee shall be 2%. For over 3000 shares, the management fee shall be 1.5%. For over 5000 shares the management fee shall be 1%. For over 10000 shares the management fee shall be 0.5%.
I should think it would not be hard to get to 10,000 shares. G.ASICMINER-PT is not too far from it based on pending transfers and it sounds like you are already gaining momentum. You say "I don't get how they can do do that." at 0% yet 0.5% would practically be the same as G.ASICMINER-PT compared to your 5% starting point. 90% decrease. Sounds contradictory. Compared to how you believe things needed to be 5% to work means you do not understand how a possible 90% lower rate your suggesting make any sense, right? Or are you meaning that 0.5% is within perfectly acceptable range, and that 5% was probably overkill to start with since you did not know the shares would be paying out such high rates? There is nothing wrong with making money. Perhaps people should stop and think that paying the 5% might make you a better asset manager to want to grow it as large as possible. Your time is also valuable as the coder/operator of btct among other things. Sometimes quality comes with a price and standard of expectations. DeaDTerra's pass through also addresses the possibility of reaching 5000 shares and becoming a board member. Should we reach 5000 shares, and we are granted a seat at the board, the fund will bring motions to decide how to vote on upcoming ASICMINER motions. This is a distinct ability that I do not believe the other platform has. (I don't think they have motions? Do they?)
Well, the asset's don't have options of "Yes with/out votes" or a mention of voting in G.ASICMINER-PT for nothing. I would link it for you but that may not be proper here. With everything being said so far, while acting as a pass-through you should make sure to fully understand the asset you are passing through and all it entails since you are liable for the shares and any possible board member responsibilities/benefits/requirements/expectations expected of ASICMINER board members. |
|
|
|
Last I checked, yep. I've withdrawn BTC from Ripple through them without so much as a hiccup.
All known ripple issues are currently resolved. |
|
|
|
Bitfunder is already trading and at a higher price? Am i understanding what am I am seeing correctly. Sorry for the newbness.
Prices on BitFunder are determined by asicminer holders who have already transferred shared in shares. They are the ones posting asks. |
|
|
|
based on DeaDTerra's recent post, there was mention of using the transaction fees or some other kickbacks to pay DeaDTerra.
I don't have much time at the moment, so a more proper answer will be given later today.
No I am not getting a direct profit from this PT,
It's a favor to Jon (BF owner) for helping me out in the past.
We discussed a potential payment from Jon, in the case where the PT trades larger volumes,
Other then that I am doing it for free.
I have talked to Friedcat, he's aware of what I am doing and what my intention are.
He has said that he has no problem with the PT as long as he only has responsibility to the direct share holders aka Me,
And I then in return have a responsibility to the indirect share holders aka any share holder or G.ASICMINER-PT.
The shares are indeed transferred over to me and then a equal amount of shares are created and sent to that person.
So I have not sold any of GBF shares, nor any of my own.
It's simply a pass through to enable people to sell and buy shares.
//DeaDTerra
As you can see, deadterra stated that should the asset become a burden, a thank you payment (and honestly no amount was ever discussed or promised) MAY be offered as a thank you for agreeing to the management of an asset to help the community. When we began the discussion of creating an ASCIMINER pass-through to assist shareholders due to the lack of an exchange, we both decided that the main focus was to offer a method of trade without concerns of fees to nickle and dime them to use it, so that more users would feel comfortable doing such and relying less on friedcat to have to constantly manage transfers. So as it stands, there are currently no "kickbacks" of any amount promised in regards to BitFunder. You are simply reading more into it than there is. I see no issue with a PT wanting to have a dividends fee on what is expected to be one of the highest paying assets. Although I think transfer fees may be a bit overkill when coupled with that fee, but that is my opinion. I am not sure how I feel about the exchange operator managing assets. This is an issue I currently argue with myself over. If you are buying the shares, i.e. they are your shares to sell, you should be allowed to sell at whatever price you want. You are only competing with other users who might transfer shares shares in. Though, your delay on including transferred shares until March 11th does help that a bit. If you are using 'investor' funds to buy shares and not your own, you probably should sell them at face value without loss unless the exact profit amounts were provided to the investors beforehand. That though, depends on proof of cost. |
|
|
|
I was wondering how long it'd be before another cropped up. How do you get paid long term if you don't hit 5000? This has actually been in the works with friedcat for 2~4 weeks. What do you mean by how do you get paid? Dividends are dispersed. Sorry. 'You' = DeaDTerra If 100% gets paid out of the divs, how does DeaDTerra get paid? Why does he have to proft? This PT was designed weeks ago to be an offer to help asicminer holders have somewhere to trade. Not to be a money making scheme. It was also to help friedcat not worry so much about people who want to trade/exchange their shares, and take some burden off of him to focus on asicminer. What issue do you have with trying to help and support the community? As you should know, making an exchange requires a lot of time and effort to do it right. From selling the shares!  Actually he is not selling any shares. Users are transferring in their shares and they are selling them. Like INAU did. Burnside has a point here. I am also skeptical of anything where the operator has no incentive to continue servicing the asset. Patrick Harnett used the "serving the community" excuse to scam thousands of coins. I wont start with pirate and his "I am bringing 7% a week returns to the community out of the goodness of my heart". Im not saying this is the same thing but when it comes to this "community" it pays to ask questions. I suppose if enough people beg, he can charge a %. That was just not the original goal. The goal was to give people a place to trade asicminer until a permanent exchange is setup and they can choose to move them without charge. |
|
|
|
I was wondering how long it'd be before another cropped up. How do you get paid long term if you don't hit 5000? This has actually been in the works with friedcat for 2~4 weeks. What do you mean by how do you get paid? Dividends are dispersed. Sorry. 'You' = DeaDTerra If 100% gets paid out of the divs, how does DeaDTerra get paid? Why does he have to proft? This PT was designed weeks ago to be an offer to help asicminer holders have somewhere to trade. Not to be a money making scheme. It was also to help friedcat not worry so much about people who want to trade/exchange their shares, and take some burden off of him to focus on asicminer. What issue do you have with trying to help and support the community? As you should know, making an exchange requires a lot of time and effort to do it right. From selling the shares! Actually he is not selling any shares. Users are transferring in their shares and they are selling them. Like INAU did. |
|
|
|
Do either of them have the shares backing them confirmed by friedcat yet?
Soon, 5000 of my shares will be transferred to the Bitfunder PT's official account, but as the manager of the asset is asleep at the moment, I cannot do that yet. Right now, I am prohibited from withdrawing my coins from Bitfunder (Ukyo can confirm) until I transfer the shares. As for the one on BTCTC, I can only comment that it's covered by calls, not shares at the moment. INAU's account has indeed been locked down until Friedcat confirms the actual transfer. And yes, his identity and account was fully verified. He was already confirmed by the dividend test: http://blockchain.info/tx-index/57258028/21ae1a92ff3e288fd97b26a5d2cee8e820419f5c5f08160f7b99a30e9195e0011MDypx was sent .00010081 |
|
|
|
I was wondering how long it'd be before another cropped up. How do you get paid long term if you don't hit 5000? This has actually been in the works with friedcat for 2~4 weeks. What do you mean by how do you get paid? Dividends are dispersed. |
|
|
|
Sorry for this may be being an offtopic. I was wondering what are the possibilities of BitFunder following the same way as GLBSE did. Is it a real possibility ?
First off let me make one thing very clear about the way GLBSE closed. GLBSE was shut down without notice at the operators whim. It was not forced to do so by any third parties. If I ever get a 'bad feeling', I would at offer a bare minimal of 7 days notice, but more likely 30~90 days depending on the reasoning. After shutdown, any BTC held in accounts would be returned to their public BTC address. The public asset list as of time of shutdown would remain live and public. Any issuers who have unclaimed shares from previous incidents will have full detailed information. As for that 'bad feeling', you never know what life may surprise you with. The only way I see anything actually happening, would be some kind of odd government intervention. BitFunder does not currently trade actual shares of ownership of businesses. However you never know how any government may attempt to construe this. With this said, there are some very large plans in the works to ensure BitFunder's survivability. Once the details on this are more finalized I will share the good news. In the mean time, which could be many many months as this will take some time, I see no immediate danger for the site. |
|
|
|
Are there any plans to list weexchange or bitfunder on the platform ?
There are thoughts. But that would be a later day when the numbers are much larger. |
|
|
|
I just wanted to comment on my experience I just had, I was testing out the withdrawal process going from having BTC on Bitfunder, and moving it onto Ripple through WeExchange. The entire process took about 20 seconds, and was very easy. I now see the benefit of integrating with WeExchange for instant withdrawals, and how Ripple can be a nice complement to the bitcoin system; I could have then sent the btc on to one of my contacts in Ripple with another couple clicks and a second of waiting for it to process. Very nice indeed.
Hi Peter and thanks for the review. There is actually some very very large news right around the corner for both WeExchange and BitFunder. This is meant to serve as an official tease notice of "Big things to come". Between both announcements, assuming progress continues as is, I hope to knock the socks off of most everyone. (And yes, a WeExchange site update is in the works.) As for ripple, there are big plans moving for that as well. The guys at ripple have been working very hard and very close with us to make things as smooth as possible. As for instant transfers, this is one of the main benefits of BitFunder being directly connected to WeExchange. I will just say, look forward to this expanding. |
|
|
|
JoelKatz provided me the transaction / meta data for my missing deposit: http://pastebin.com/QvRgVAwpCan someone from WeExchange look into that for me please? Sending you a PM |
|
|
|
Give it a try now. Oh, finally it worked. Thanks for your help, Ukyo! Now let's see if I'm able to withdraw it from Weex to my own wallet.... Np, you shouldn't have any issues with that. hehe |
|
|
|
OK, I get this id by clicking on history entry:
4F6497B82D37CE803E42347830D8F3FC7D6069F0A48FAC68EC00E302A2FA96DC
When I input this into your "Check payment" field, this is the response I get:
'Sorry, that ripple transaction hash is not known by the network.'
But, it is reported as cleared by Ripple network. Now, what do I do?
Give it a try now. |
|
|
|
If you have a missing deposit, you can get your transaction id/hash from the ripple client, and paste it into the box.
Where do you find this id/hash in Ripple client? In Wallet->History, all you see is this: Date Source / Destination Amount Balance Feb 27, 2013 Weex 4BTC 1.0225BTC You can apparently click on the history row in the JS Client on ripple.com. |
|
|
|
Hey Guys, Sorry, I was not aware of this thread or I would have posted sooner. There are two known issues with the rippled server that the ripple guys have been working on for us. 1. The subscription system that notifies our server of payments is not performing its duty. It originally worked, and worked great, and then something broke and its under investigation. Since then to make things easier on people, I added a function to the deposit page so that people can copy/paste in their transaction id/hash of their deposit to WeExchange to manually claim/complete it. 2. Since then people began to report that the ripple server was claiming that their transaction id's/hash were unknown. The ripple guys have found another bug where the server is not maintaining complete records all the time and are working towards figuring that out. I have started manually enacting a procedure every few hours that corrects for the 'unknown' transaction problem. If you have a missing deposit, you can get your transaction id/hash from the ripple client, and paste it into the box. If you need further help, please do not hesitate to pm me here on the forums, or call the WexExchange toll free number! We look forward to seeing Ripple succeed and will help anyone who has problems with ripple. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
