It was simply that the way Meni initially described it, although it was a difference calculation, it wasn't for a set term and still relied on a future price (more like an option actually).
Don't future contracts have a set term? And don't CFDs rely on future price? I'm not sure it's equivalent to options. It could seem at first similar to the two parties exchanging options, put and call respectively, at the current price; but with such an arrangement, each party reserves the right to exercise its own option independently, while in the CFD, one option expires when the other is exercised (and a party can force the other one to exercise its option). My observation and interest was that there wasn't a fixed term. The optionality is around the time of exercise, rather than saying "on 1 July" and I thought that would introduce an interesting tension into the contract. Most CFDs simply settle at expiry, and for simple puts and calls, depending on the wording they can either be auto-exercised or manually exercised. Anyway, as mentioned, watching with interest |
|
|
|
It's more like a futures contract, but CFD will do as a term.
Are you proposing an end time or is it purely exercising the option at any stage (and from either side)?
You do know a CFD is a real thing, right? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contract_for_differenceYes. I used them as a risk management tool for electricity purchasing/sales. They were the normal instrument in my portfolio rather than futures contracts. It was simply that the way Meni initially described it, although it was a difference calculation, it wasn't for a set term and still relied on a future price (more like an option actually). Also, without knowing what they are (CFDs), I wouldn't have been granted a licence for trading in the Australian market. In the NZ market we didn't need to be licensed, but we were trading as principal so the securities regulations applied differently. Been doing them for two decades now, but less in recent years. Still makes bitcoin look nice and flat with limited volatility. |
|
|
|
|
Interesting and a subject dear to my heart. Probably the prices should be below 30 bitcents as we have moved away from the stable $5 prices.
|
|
|
|
|
It's more like a futures contract, but CFD will do as a term.
Are you proposing an end time or is it purely exercising the option at any stage (and from either side)?
|
|
|
|
i must say im not 100% happy with the IPO-expansion, cause i bought some shares for 0.3 like many people did, not knowing that there will be an enourmous ipo at 0.3 again,..
As an observation, did you notice the other enormous expansions (like Giga at the equivalent price), and some other mining bonds/expansions also priced at the same or similar levels? YABMC can not limit the activity of other mining companies that offer basically the same commodity (hashes), nor can we dictate the price that buyers and sellers wish to transact at on GLBSE. |
|
|
|
|
no no, put me back on ignore, I don't mind
given how many other people are on your ignore list, I'm waiting until you don't have anything to read in the entire forum
|
|
|
|
Ignoring the trusted users here is not at all a good way to appear trustworthy
Can you give us a link to the items you are selling / have sold in the past?
Well, as it's my first ignore (as far as I know), I wonder if/when he will get the mods onto ignore too. So, for the benefit of entertainment of those that do not have me on ignore, I was being careful because the post history and behaviour was suspect. The approach was also odd, as most of the more rational have seen. I did, however, suspect LP was going to scam, so asking for the basics in ID was sensible. No reply, and he's run away. I might be a starfish, but he doesn't have my coins. |
|
|
|
as an FYI: I received a pm requesting 25-100 coins from this user. I have offered 25 on the proviso that I receive some basic information to assess and have not received it yet.
Yea, I'm not sending you my address and ID. Too much sensitive information to hand out to a stranger. I am also no longer looking for this. Sensitive - ok, you don't have to do business, but I'm not sending funds to someone without any knowledge of who they are. I expect you'd hate to give the same information when opening a bank or internet account or too - all those strangers all around you providing services. You're not a bank, nor are you an internet account. You are an independent entity with no certificates to your name. You have posted, and I have been nice. You have asked me directly for a loan and I provided the terms that I would be prepared to consider extending such a loan. You have demonstrated that you do not wish to be civil, nor do you understand the requirements of this forum and lending business. You are happy to ask a stranger for a loan, but I am not prepared to give away funds to a stranger. In less than a week, still zero. Bye. |
|
|
|
as an FYI: I received a pm requesting 25-100 coins from this user. I have offered 25 on the proviso that I receive some basic information to assess and have not received it yet.
Yea, I'm not sending you my address and ID. Too much sensitive information to hand out to a stranger. I am also no longer looking for this. Sensitive - ok, you don't have to do business, but I'm not sending funds to someone without any knowledge of who they are. I expect you'd hate to give the same information when opening a bank or internet account or too - all those strangers all around you providing services. |
|
|
|
|
as an FYI: I received a pm requesting 25-100 coins from this user. I have offered 25 on the proviso that I receive some basic information to assess and have not received it yet.
|
|
|
|
Send a Deposit of 10 BTC to my account.
Please confirm.
Greetz
Yes, 10 coins with weekly interest payouts. |
|
|
|
so the minimum deposit is 10BTC? do you ocassionally make any exceptions to that?
For 1% on a small amount of BTC, you should just head over to GLBSE.com and buy some BDK.BND or Tygrr-Bond-B  Yes they could - and when they want to cash out, they need to have liquidity in the bonds to do that. In any event, I offered a second option with higher interest and it's sitting and compounding currently. |
|
|
|
There needs to be separate restrictions on the Marketplace (especially Goods, Currency Exchange, and Lending sub-sections). Seems like every godamn newbie heads straight for one or more of those sections as soon as getting out of the sandbox.
And notice those that do get hammered for it. Might be a harsh "self regulation" but the trolls are waiting for the newbies in lending and other places - that's why doing homework helps. |
|
|
|
Do you feel that will continue? The 5% is heavily influenced by the great dividends on PPT.E when 6000 shares were sold on accident, but since all the other PPT options came out the dividends have been (estimated) to be 0.0246 and ~0.037, and even then Friday's B sale would have been ~0.027 if that 250@1.3 had been entered as 1.03 and the 250 bonds had sold at 1.038 along with the rest of them. That's less than half the returns you can get through the uninsured Pirate passthroughs or the PPT.X shares themselves, but with more risk. My quick back of the napkin calculation shows that to make a consistent 0.05BTC dividend on 3000 shares would take an average sale price of almost 1.1BTC/bond, and I just don't see that happening anymore.
That's a completely fair assessment, and why everyone has to make their own valuation. Without the PPT.E sale and a few other things that happened, including some opportunistic bidding and competing products, we still had between 6k and 8k of bids (not sure of the exact number). Longer term I expect returns will settle down into the 0.05 to 0.07 dividend each week, and even if it was only 0.04 I'd be happy. Do I think it is going to continue to provide good returns, yes and as a result I have been buying (about 500 this week). |
|
|
|
On first page I asked the same question and didn't receive a straight answer. So I guess he doesn't want to answer.
So you did. Patrick's answer sounds like they're payed out to the PPT shares, not to the PPT.DIV shares. That's what I was hoping to hear. Sorry, thought the language in the contract and original posts was sufficiently clear. This was a point we looked at carefully at the beginning. To re-state: 1: PPT.DIV shares get the profits. 2: The insurance funds are not profits. Filharvey has almost set out the steps for a wind-up without a default (ie, BS&T shutting up shop). 1: Pay out all bond holders the 1.28 2: Pay out any profit from the bonds to the PPT.DIV shareholders. That's a final payment. 3: The PPT holders are refunded the deposits used to create the insurance fund. The value in the PPT.DIV shares relates to two key metrics and your assessment of them. First the level of dividend each week currently running around 5%, and second the length of time the PPT bond continues to run. At a simple 5%/week, that gives a 20 week payback and is actually one of the highest paying assets on GLBSE. However, unlike those other assets, people are worried about default and how long it will all last, so that is the unknown. I have a personal view about the value of the shares and that's why I've been buying extra. |
|
|
|
It is not the cost of additional power. It is the cost of renting the space to have that power. Once you max out the power at your panel or in the rack you are done.
So in your specialised scenario, how many people do think are running fpga's in rented racks? Please read what I wrote:
These issues will apply to limited numbers of people, but they do apply for me.
Yes, I got one person so far, yourself. So, who are you really? Looks like you created a special account to come and espouse your particular point of view. |
|
|
|
It is not the cost of additional power. It is the cost of renting the space to have that power. Once you max out the power at your panel or in the rack you are done.
So in your specialised scenario, how many people do think are running fpga's in rented racks? |
|
|
|
Part 4: Dealbreaker #3 and #4: Maximum hashing capacity and incomplete implementations
These issues will apply to limited numbers of people, but they do apply for me.
ET's bitstream increases power consumption significantly in order to gain the higher hashrate. This hurts your return because you are paying for the power, but it has a more subtle effect. If the size of your mining setup is limited by power available, either related to rackspace, or just circuits in your home that can be used, your maximum hashing capacity is decreased running ET's bitstream. For example if the MH/J rate is increased by 20%, then your maximum hash rate is reduced by 25%. Twenty percent for the reduced number of cards you can run in your power envelope, and a further 5% for ET's cut. Your ROI is slightly better, but your cash flow from mining is cut 25%. You can always rent more racks, but this comes out of your pocket, not ET's and will significantly reduce or eliminate your share of the reward for using his bitstream.
If you are at you maximum power draw currently, then this is a constraint self imposed, rather than by ET. If you overall hash rate is going to go down (because you are so close to your limits), then you wouldn't bother. These posts are good "black hat" thinking, but tending to reflect extreme operating positions. If I have 100 FGPA units running 800Mh @ 40W each and can take them to 1000Mhash for 60W each, then sure I'm going from 4kW to 6kW, but if I have 6kW of supply, the extra 2kW (in my case $10/day) in exchange for 20Ghash looks like a nice tradeoff. |
|
|
|
Do you know of any enterprise class PSUs in the 1500w range?
Or phase plasma rifles in 40w range, for that matter?
Hey, just what you see, pal! Sounds like a quote from T1. (And the green 6502 code scrolling in his head.) |
|
|
|
|
Many real-life mining companies pay a royalty to Governments or land owners for the right to exploit a resource.
Also, 20% of the incremental benefit is not huge - as quoted, currently around 5%. No one is forcing you to use it either.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
