|
The motion to suspend dividends for three months has passed.
8253 shares voted yea.
914 shares voted nay.
The dividends for August (paid September 1st), September (paid October 1st), and October (paid November 1st) will be recycled to increase NAV.
Unless another motion to continue further suspension of dividends passes, the next dividend will be December 1st for November.
|
|
|
|
Because of the current situation, can you publish DMC portfolio more often that once a month?
Actually, why not make it available "live" on your web site? Update once in 24h is fine by me.
Total shares: 20709 BTC-Mining (370 mhash): 10 (3700 mhash) BTCMC (6 mhash): 951 (5706 mhash) OBSI.1MHS (1 mhash): 5113 (5113 mhash) ASICMINER (30 mhash): 1980 (59400 mhash) Total mhash: 73919 mhash Approximately 3.569 mhash per share |
|
|
|
Hey Diablo.....what is your projected dividend for next month?
Well, thats an interesting question. In a couple minutes I'm putting up a motion up for vote on if we should end dividends until NAV has been sufficiently repaired (3 month maximum, we can vote on it again then). The market is giving us some great deals that we should not pass up. The largest shareholder in DMC has already said he will vote yes with his shares, so unless there is a large vote against it, I'm just going to assume right now the vote is yes with a large margin. So, assuming that the vote will indeed be yes, the next 3 months will pay zero dividend, but will accelerate in mhash/share greatly. If I play my cards right, we could be looking at 25 or more mh/share at the end of these 3 months. I would advise you not suspend the dividend.....but that is just me. I think you will anger an already frustrated shareholder base. They should be frustrated, but not at me. asicminer came in and basically obliterated the market. DMC sits in a good position to end up with a large chunk of the market because of what asicminer did. We need to take advantage of this. 25mh is the new 1 mh. |
|
|
|
New (and our first) motion: https://glbse.com/vote/view/104Diablo Mining Company wishes to suspend dividend payment for a maximum of 3 months until net asset value has been sufficiently restored. Vote yes if you want to restore NAV, vote no if you want to continue dividend payments. You must vote in the next 24 hours. Edit: Bitcoin Mining Fund and Nyancat Financial have voted yes on this motion, thus 7k out of 20.5k shares have voted yes. Unless another 10.6k vote no, the motion will most likely pass. |
|
|
|
Hey Diablo.....what is your projected dividend for next month?
Well, thats an interesting question. In a couple minutes I'm putting up a motion up for vote on if we should end dividends until NAV has been sufficiently repaired (3 month maximum, we can vote on it again then). The market is giving us some great deals that we should not pass up. The largest shareholder in DMC has already said he will vote yes with his shares, so unless there is a large vote against it, I'm just going to assume right now the vote is yes with a large margin. So, assuming that the vote will indeed be yes, the next 3 months will pay zero dividend, but will accelerate in mhash/share greatly. If I play my cards right, we could be looking at 25 or more mh/share at the end of these 3 months. |
|
|
|
Lets see if I understand all this right.
You are offering to swap DMC shares for other mining bonds; I assume those DMC shares come from the almost infinite pool of unsold shares ? And the ratio you use is some arbitrary exchange rate? How is that different from selling those shares at 0.01BTC or whatever (and buying some other turds with the proceeds) thereby further screwing over your investors by lowering DMC share value arbitrarily? Now in practice I guess it doesnt matter, because no one in their right minds is going to swap bonds (let alone asicminer shares) that still have some resale value for DMC shares that pretty much have none. The ratio you put forward is almost as laughable as the 1BTC price for your shares.
Next point; you thought it was a good idea to buy back your shares when they were trading at 0.5 or 0.6 BTC because you thought that was under priced. Now only 2 weeks later they trade 10x lower, but you dont seem to think its wise to buy back? What exactly changed in those 2 weeks?
Not near infinite. There is 200k, and thats all there ever will be unless there is large majority vote by shareholders to issue more. The ratio is based on the near term projected growth. Due to asicminer destroying the bond market and setting a new high water mark in mh per btc, DMC has jumped to 15mh per share for trade. I have not thought it is unwise to buy them back, I just haven't done it yet. |
|
|
|
News Update, ETA is still a fictional October  I am pretty sure October is real - There was an October in 2011. I predict there will be one in 2012. Yeah, but will we have one in 2013? We might skip October altogether. |
|
|
|
|
Hey all.
My VPS is down at the moment, so there goes the trade chart until Enzu is done their LA migration. However, I'm changing the trade requirement from 3.5 mhash to 15 mhash. That means 15:1 for all the 1 mhash bonds, and 1:2 for asicminer.
Price per mhash on GLBSE is crashing, so might as well trade to me while you still can. I'm probably going to continue progressing the trade requirement 1 mhash per month from now on, so you have 16 days until the next increase.
|
|
|
|
I am not sure what is wrong with the market, but at the current GLBSE price, an investor can buy a share of BTCMC for approximately .55 BTC per share when the company has a net asset value of approximately .40 BTC per share. So completely ingoring future earnings (which are still increasing), liquidation value alone is nearly enough to cover any investment.
How people are choosing to pay more for perpetual bonds over equity interest is beyond me. Perhaps I am not spreading the message well enough?
You need to post equivalent mhash based on today's difficulty. People only think in mhash. Good point. We are at nearly 60 GH/s....sometimes just over, but not sustaining yet while we work out a few trouble rigs. Oh man. Lets say its 60 ghash even, and on August 1st you paid out on 3764 shares. 60000 / 3764 = 15.94 mhash. Did I fail at math somewhere along the way? Well every share gets an equal amount of the hashing power.....even those still held by the founders. So you have to divide the 60 GH/s by 10,000. Okay, 6. Still, thats better than the 5 I've been writing them down as. |
|
|
|
I am not sure what is wrong with the market, but at the current GLBSE price, an investor can buy a share of BTCMC for approximately .55 BTC per share when the company has a net asset value of approximately .40 BTC per share. So completely ingoring future earnings (which are still increasing), liquidation value alone is nearly enough to cover any investment.
How people are choosing to pay more for perpetual bonds over equity interest is beyond me. Perhaps I am not spreading the message well enough?
You need to post equivalent mhash based on today's difficulty. People only think in mhash. Good point. We are at nearly 60 GH/s....sometimes just over, but not sustaining yet while we work out a few trouble rigs. Oh man. Lets say its 60 ghash even, and on August 1st you paid out on 3764 shares. 60000 / 3764 = 15.94 mhash. Did I fail at math somewhere along the way? |
|
|
|
|
Luke, let me remind you: I'm a mod. Reporting my own comment to me is not an effective way of protesting my relationship with your mother. I'm not sure why you're complaining, its purely business.
|
|
|
|
Neither of these two examples have the same, copied solution. They were both solved independently in similar ways as they are both soving the same problem. It's no suprise the timing is also similar as these issue are being found at the same time. I don't know why you're defending his obvious theft. They do have the same copied solution, even if Kano made a poor effort to obfuscate it; while the first one might have only had one or two ways it could be fixed, this last one has numerous possible solutions (the most obvious being significantly better than the one I ended up taking except for making merging from cgminer harder if cgminer hadn't adopted it too); yet in both cases Kano used the exact same solution - only trivial/non-substantial changes to the syntax/names were made. Neither of these bugs were in fact found in cgminer: the curlring issue was one I experienced myself personally, spent hours debugging, and finally identified a solution for; the only way Kano would have even known it existed was by reading BFGMiner's commit log; the JSON escaping issue only really affect BFGMiner because its compiled-in prefix on Windows uses backslashes. Look, if you're going to keep this shit up, I and con BOTH will DMCA your existence itself (yes, we will send a DMCA to your mother's womb, the one you presumably slithered out of) if you even think about misrepresenting the copyright or the license of code contained within cgminer. |
|
|
|
I am not sure what is wrong with the market, but at the current GLBSE price, an investor can buy a share of BTCMC for approximately .55 BTC per share when the company has a net asset value of approximately .40 BTC per share. So completely ingoring future earnings (which are still increasing), liquidation value alone is nearly enough to cover any investment.
How people are choosing to pay more for perpetual bonds over equity interest is beyond me. Perhaps I am not spreading the message well enough?
You need to post equivalent mhash based on today's difficulty. People only think in mhash. |
|
|
|
Who is buying the success ones?  Either people who think BFL will succeed, or people who need to insure their non-BFL assets. |
|
|
|
|
24,680 shares sold of DI.BFLSC.Fail
6,390 shares sold of DI.BFLSC.Success
|
|
|
|
|
yochdog, do me a favor: when you do the monthly dividends report, also list the equivalent mhash at that day's difficulty since you do fixed dividend output. For such a big holding of DMC's, I want to keep the mhash equivalent accurate.
Also, when is the full 0.05 dividend starting to be paid?
|
|
|
|
Should the DiabloMiner produce the exact same hashrate with same parameters as CGMINER using Diablo kernel?
Exact same? No. cgminer doesn't use the same exact accounting math, so they might quibble over that last mhash or two. Its close enough to use cgminer as a rough kernel benchmark. Estimate for me is about 2220 with DiabloMiner and 2240 with CGMiner after 12 hours running for CGMiner Thats pretty close. Make sure you're using the same -v and -w options, though. |
|
|
|
Should the DiabloMiner produce the exact same hashrate with same parameters as CGMINER using Diablo kernel?
Exact same? No. cgminer doesn't use the same exact accounting math, so they might quibble over that last mhash or two. Its close enough to use cgminer as a rough kernel benchmark. |
|
|
|
Driver bug, can't fix.
There used to be code to try automatic restarts about a year and a half ago, but all it does is lock up the entire machine.
If you could PM me the offending call that's locking the machine due to a bug, I'll do my best to pass this on to someone on the driver team (friend of a friend so to speak...) There isn't one. It can crash on any call (although, statistically, it will most likely be the kernel execution ones due to the fact they use the most time). The driver fails to restart the GPU properly during high stress conditions (ie, mining for hours). I should be able to run an OpenCL app, have the GPU crash, and have the OpenCL app continue running fine (scrambled results for one kernel execution is acceptable). |
|
|
|
On the screen what do the two mhash represent
i assume the first one current mhash, is the second one highest mhash in 5 minutes? current is about 2000 the 2nd is 2030mhash and has been slowly ticking down
15 seconds and forever. forever that the program has been open or it saves in a status file? its higher than my hash has ever been though Since it started. You may think its higher than your hash ever has been, but its more accurate than a short term meter. Why do miners start off at high speed then it lowers? efficiency goes down after data is inside the processing of the GPU? Inaccuracy in measurement as far as I can tell, theres no way to fix it. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
