 Show Posts
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 »
|
|
rJRtMmXz24BZNSiCubRHENhizizwsH8Q6J
|
|
|
|
What do you think I should value V.HRL at in NYAN's portfolio? Thanks.
Right under OP you can find the dividend history with the NAV updated based on 5 day average price. |
|
|
|
|
I have to admit that V.HRL is in a very bad shape and IF no further losses will occur it will need 4 years get back the NAV to 1.0
I was trading on GLBSE for few month when I decided to start on my own. Things was looking all right but right after I spent the money I got from investors everything gone south immediately. Nearly every security collapsed. Bad times.
I want to explain why there are not so many angry investors on this topic.
277 V.HRL sold
I bought 37 myself.
I sold 40 to 3 different person who I know for long time and to whom I introduced bitcoin as a good opportunity to keep some of their savings. They took my advise and it turned out to be good so far. Then I told them if they buy some V.HRL for the fraction of their savings it might be profitable. They are all right. I talked to them and it did not hit them hard compare to the gain thanks to bitcoin itself.
And finally 160 is at NYAN.B
The point is that there are not so many V.HRL out there so no angry investors.
I will try to keep the asset running at lower NAV but will not sell any new asset below 1.0
I will not take any fee until the NAV gets back to at least 0.8 even if it takes a very long time.
|
|
|
|
Good question... price continued to tank
I guess I have understood what's happening. Look at the number of shares paid, it increases rapidly. Moparguy apparently sells shares at ever-decreasing prices. He uses that money to expand mining, so that the total payout increases in spite of difficulty -but having to split between an ever increasing number of shares, the payout, and thus the price, decreases just about as if this was a mining bond. Moparguy, please, this should stop now. You are destroying early investor's value; price is already going absurdly low. Selling bonds under IPO price should never happen, in my opinion. Pay upgrades with dividends, reduce them from 2,5% to 1%, even 0,5% if needed -at least it will be a gain, and not a total loss as it is now! Agree! Stop selling below IPO price. You destroying the value of the asset. Pay less dividend rather. |
|
|
|
|
Market analysis and further strategy.
As I see now the market is very depressed. Nearly all of my holdings lost value in the last couple of weeks so the NAV now stands at 0.91. But the main reason for the recent drop is the uncertainty around OBSI so the five day average price gone from 0.102 to 0.093 in days. I decided apply a more aggressive reinvesting strategy in the next few weeks to stabilize the value of V.HRL
The general prices are low and going south although the incoming dividends not affected as much so there is money coming in to get the NAV back to 1.0 again. There is 277 outstanding bonds and the total value of holding is 252. Now 25 btc needed.
Incoming weekly dividend: 9.9
At 1% rate total dividend to pay out: 2.77
Money for reinvestment each week: 7.13
It will take about 4 weeks to regenerate.
I do not think there is a imminent risk of OBSI default as he stated he will not issue new bonds till the market calms down. But I do not want to get more OBSI then the 900 which is already in the portfolio under any circumstances.
For further stabilisation of the asset I will extend the period not taking fee from 8 weeks to 10 weeks.
|
|
|
|
I don't know why smoothie and eskimobob seem so angry all the time. Maybe if they would calm down they would realize that the price for the gigamining upgrade is lower than other bonds, such as bitbond.
Why aren't they ranting and raving in the bitbond thread? I think this is personal. They must have some sort of grudge against gigavps, or maybe they are just nuts. I hope they don't own any guns.
They're both nuts. Just ignore them. Just for the defense of those two. Correct me if I don’t remember well, but not Smoothie was the one who kept screaming pirate is a scammer and it turned out to be true, or not Eskimobob who keeps saying perpetual mining bonds will loose more in value then the dividends they pay out which also seems very true to me. I did not look it up so my memory could cheat me. |
|
|
|
when did a loan become an investment fund. In my mind, you should pay out 3% until you pay the money back regardless of circumstances.
I think he adequately disclosed that this is "sort of" a loan and "sort of" an investment fund. "This is a High Risk Loan with a face value of 1 BTC. Each bond will pay up to 0.03 BTC on every Wednesday. The nature of the recipient of the loan will not be discussed. This loan is not guaranteed and is provided on a best effort basis." Having the value of the bond track the actual value of the assets is the responsible thing to do. That prevents investors from thinking everything is fine until there's a sudden, complete default. The reduced payout is a signal to you of the actual condition of the investment that allows you to decide whether it still makes sense for you to invest in it. If everyone insists that every investment vehicle pay out unrealistic returns, all that will be left are the worst of the scams. +1 Great perspective on this. Also, keeping the asset backing at the valuation allows for higher returns in the long run (instead of letting little losses slowly add up and whittle away at the worth of the share). If you're not expecting returns to be too poor, you may be able to space it out over more than two weeks. While that's the fastest it can be done reasonably, it can be done over say five weeks to still keep immediate returns high. I may rename it as I use the loan to invest into various high risk glbse instruments. High Risk Leverage sounds better? I did look it up in the dictionary: "Definition of 'Leverage' 1. The use of various financial instruments or borrowed capital, such as margin, to increase the potential return of an investment." I found out that if I will not discuss the nature of my investment then I will not earn trust at all and also I will be missing some very important feedback so I am not up to the contract in this case, but it was a clear demand from the members of the forum. The NAV is 0.962 now from 0.964 in about 4 hours. That is because the 5 days average does not follow the market in the instant. The main reason for this drop is NYAN.C which takes up about 10% of the portfolio. I will need to allocate more money for reinvesting purposes if I want to make sure the value of V.HRL will be maintained at or above 1.0. Since I reduced my holding of OBSI from the initial 50% to 34% there is less left to reinvest and pay high dividends. I am planing to reduce it even further for the sake of security. I decided to pay 2.4% dividend at least until the NAV regenerated. Assuming no large drop in assets value and incoming dividends, it can be back at 1.0 in about five weeks. I still allow some devaluation due to the 5 days average that’s why I will not pay 2.8%. An other reason for it is my aim to reduce OBSI to a level when it will go from one day to another, will not cause serious damage to V.HRL. Thanks for you both for your useful feedback. |
|
|
|
|
I have done a quick calculation. The NAV/bond ratio is 0.964 now, based on 5 day average. It lost value mostly because the NYAN.C and TEEK.B price drop. I would like to get it back to 1.0
Total outstanding bond: 261
Total NAV: 251
So 10 BTC missing.
Projected weekly incoming dividend is 9.44 BTC. If I want the NAV to be 1.0 within 2 weeks I am only able to pay out 4.44 BTC as dividend which makes 0.017 BTC per share for 2 weeks.
I really would like to do that, because In my opinion it is better to have a bond which keeps it's value although from time to time pays less then the maximum of 3% weekly. Than have a bond which pays 3% but keep loosing it's value.
As at the first 8 weeks I will not take any fees so I don't need to involve it in this calculation.
Please let me know what do you suggest.
|
|
|
|
To all Gigaminers: I mentioned a couple days ago that I would be proposing some changes to the Teramining upgrade. - I would like to propose that the Teramining offering would be at 90% PPS. I have done a lot of thinking about this and I believe that Teramining would be unsustainable over the long term without it.
- I would like to change the fee structure. The new fee structure would be tiered.
- 1-100 bonds = .40 BTC per bond
- 100-999 bonds = .35 BTC per bond
- >= 1000 bonds = .30 BTC per bond
Post your constructive questions or comments in the thread and I'll make sure to answer them in a timely fashion. Best, gigavps I do not think many people willing to spend 0.4 BTC for an upgrade. Now GIGAMINING 5 day average price is 0.67 And it will keep dropping if you will not change that. BITBOND will do for 0.25 BTC the same thing if you want a large competitor. But for those who not willing to invest much I would suggest HYDRO.BONDS. They will do exactly the same thing for free, and not charge you 0.4 BTC neither 0.25. I agree with the statement that as the difficulty grows perpetual mining bond price will sink, so I only hold FPGAMINING and JTME apart from HYDRO.BONDS which has a promising upgrade path. |
|
|
|
That said, regarding marking things down: right now I just mark everything according to the last trade price. If I did it any differently, then everything would just become subjective and I don't want to go down that rabbit hole. We will take losses when they occur, but I don't want to mark anything down based on a speculation or guessing because that's unfair to my shareholders.
Last trading price could be 10 percent different within hours or even minutes. Have you considered to mark according to 24 hours average or 5 days average? I think 5 days average at most cases represent better the value of a given asset, unless there is a default. Since you do your calculation weekly 5 days average would work fine for you I think. |
|
|
|
|
Quick update.
OBSI is 35% now. I try to update the portfolio soon for you to have a careful look. I am accepting further criticism.
|
|
|
|
At 40 percent if OBSI become worthless overnight, I still be able to pay out 1% weekly. Now we are at 40% but I planing to drop it even further down.
If anyone invests with you after seeing you write this, they are dumber than a box of rocks. If you take a loss of 40% of value, you can't continue to pay out dividends. You would have to distribute the losses to your investors. In order to pay out dividends, you have to have assets that exceed the value of your investment. Otherwise, you are a Ponzi scheme, your principal will dwindle as you continue to make dividend payments, and you will collapse. If you have a look at the portfolio below the OP you can see that the weekly incoming dividend is 7.2 btc. 4.5 out of it from Obsi. If it goes to zero the remaining will be 2.7. Divide it with the number of outstanding bonds and you will get. 0.016 btc per bond weekly. If 0.01 goes into dividends 0.006 left to get the NAV growing slowly. This calculation does not takes into account my fee which I will not take the first eight weeks anyway. You also lose your principal, destroying your NAV and resulting in a huge loss to investors. It's not all about dividends. The NAV would go to 0.6 which would be a big loss that's right. That's why is called High Risk. But I am not agree at all it is a ponzi. It would be if I would use the money from investors to pay out dividend. But every single coin went to GLBSE assets and I paying the dividends from the income coming from them. I can not deny OBSI is ponzi, it might be. But my operation based on it at 40% and continuously decreasing. The parallel with the mortgage is very misleading. A single house is not generating income V.HRL does. If a house burns down it become useless but if V.HRL loose 40% of its value it still valued at 0.6 so the investment did not go to zero, and still able to pay dividend at 0.01 BTC per bond. The current value of bonds paying 0.01 weekly are close to 1 BTC on GLBSE even if people does not now anything about their backings. It is more like if you have mortgage on 10 house and 4 burns down you would be able to pay the dividends on the remaining 6. It is sad that those houses were burnt down where the best tenants used to live. But the rest of the tenants are paying well too average 1.6 percent of the value of your newly built properties. In real life for a house which worth 100.000 dollar you cant get 1600 rent weekly. But for properties on GLBSE you can. That's a big difference. Although at a cost of high risk. So the question is when OBSI will default. If it does right after you bought this bond then it is bad but you "only" lost 40 percent of your invested money so you still better off then if you would put it straight to OBSI. And you got the 0.01 afterwards weekly. But if it will does after two months, when it will be less then 30% in my portfolio, your loss is significantly less. Nearly zero, because you took 0.27 BTC per bond as dividend by then. That is the risk what involved here. If I have a strong demand from investors to drop OBSI in short amount of time, let say within couple of weeks to 20 percent I will do that. What comes with it I will have to drop the weekly dividend to 2 percent. If investors prefer less risk with less income I am okey to go that direction. I am willing to drop down it to 20 percent anyway but in few month not in few weeks. If it happens that way there would be no reason to lower the dividend. |
|
|
|
At 40 percent if OBSI become worthless overnight, I still be able to pay out 1% weekly. Now we are at 40% but I planing to drop it even further down.
If anyone invests with you after seeing you write this, they are dumber than a box of rocks. If you take a loss of 40% of value, you can't continue to pay out dividends. You would have to distribute the losses to your investors. In order to pay out dividends, you have to have assets that exceed the value of your investment. Otherwise, you are a Ponzi scheme, your principal will dwindle as you continue to make dividend payments, and you will collapse. If you have a look at the portfolio below the OP you can see that the weekly incoming dividend is 7.2 btc. 4.5 out of it from Obsi. If it goes to zero the remaining will be 2.7. Divide it with the number of outstanding bonds and you will get. 0.016 btc per bond weekly. If 0.01 goes into dividends 0.006 left to get the NAV growing slowly. This calculation does not takes into account my fee which I will not take the first eight weeks anyway. |
|
|
|
Regarding to OBSI.HRPT. At the beginning I will maintain an approximate 50% or even above, just to get the NAV/bond ratio high. I am aiming at 1.05 by the time the first 8 week reinvesting period is over. If I manage to keep it higher I will. It will give an overall security for this bond in the long term, but increasing the risk in short term.
Wow, 50% in one of the riskiest assets available on GLBSE, which many are claiming must be a ponzi or scam? It is almost to the level that this is a pass-through to OBSI, which is silly since anybody could just buy OBSI if they want to take that risk. I would suggest diversifying more, even if it does mean a lower return. I will take your suggestion as a good advise and will drop down the percentage to 40 in the very near future. In this case I have to lower my aim to have a 1.05 NAV at the end of 8 weeks to between 1.03 - 1.04. Until the initial 500 bond not sold it will be difficult to grow the NAV because with new money coming in I have a pressure on me to buy assets to pay 0.03 for each bond. After 500 is sold then the NAV could grow slowly. With less OBSI in the portfolio the grow rate will be slower but V.HRL will be more secure so I accept your point. I am planing to drop Obsi below 40 percent in the long run, but getting down to 40 will enjoy priority now. 40% is still huge. You are essentially freerolling OBSI.HRPT with your investors' money. What value do you add? It appears to me that your only role is to take a share of the potential gains but expose investors to the entire risk of losses. At 40 percent if OBSI become worthless overnight, I still be able to pay out 1% weekly. Now we are at 40% but I planing to drop it even further down. |
|
|
|
Regarding to OBSI.HRPT. At the beginning I will maintain an approximate 50% or even above, just to get the NAV/bond ratio high. I am aiming at 1.05 by the time the first 8 week reinvesting period is over. If I manage to keep it higher I will. It will give an overall security for this bond in the long term, but increasing the risk in short term.
Wow, 50% in one of the riskiest assets available on GLBSE, which many are claiming must be a ponzi or scam? It is almost to the level that this is a pass-through to OBSI, which is silly since anybody could just buy OBSI if they want to take that risk. I would suggest diversifying more, even if it does mean a lower return. I will take your suggestion as a good advise and will drop down the percentage to 40 in the very near future. In this case I have to lower my aim to have a 1.05 NAV at the end of 8 weeks to between 1.03 - 1.04. Until the initial 500 bond not sold it will be difficult to grow the NAV because with new money coming in I have a pressure on me to buy assets to pay 0.03 for each bond. After 500 is sold then the NAV could grow slowly. With less OBSI in the portfolio the grow rate will be slower but V.HRL will be more secure so I accept your point. I am planing to drop Obsi below 40 percent in the long run, but getting down to 40 will enjoy priority now. |
|
|
|
|
