I think he is merely trying to get a more accurate sense of your income statement and balance sheet to better judge your credit worthiness and more accurately value the GIGAMINING bonds.
To be totally honest, I think I am one of the most open and honest operators around. I don't see many other operators opening out status pages to their farms for instance.
To better judge your credit worthiness the two material pieces missing are (1) revenue capacity, what PPS% the 160GHs produces, and (2) how many unencumbered bitcoins you have in your possession allocated for building or buying more rigs.
If you would like to judge my credit worthiness, please see Patrick's personal credit rating thread.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=99660.msg1090151#msg1090151You'll notice I'm at the top of the list there.
Obviously, if the 160Ghs produces only 100%PPS and you have only 1,000 BTC in your possession then you will negative cash-flow about 125 bitcoins per week at current difficulty. Assuming a rise in difficulty this would leave about 8-10 weeks until a partial default. However, if you have 10,000 BTC in your possession then credit worthiness would be a lot higher.
First, the 160Gh produces greater than 100% PPS results as it is run on gpumax.com. On average, this month, I have been running about 114% PPS which makes up quite a bit of the short fall. Second, I have spare coins to cover any short falls in the foreseeable future.
Because of your unwillingness to disclose how many BTC are currently in your possession the market does not know whether you have 0 BTC or 5,000 BTC, etc. and has to begin assessing a value on the probability of default and time frame. Markets like information and transparency.
The market should look at my reputation, commitment and credit ratings by others in the community to determine whether they would like to be a part of gigamining or not.
When looking at comparable issues there appears to be only one and it is interesting that
BITBONDS are trading at a
13% discount to GIGAMINING. Why is this? Are they undervalued or is GIGAMINING overvalued?
I find it less than honorable that you would use my thread to pump up a bond which you own the majority of. I have a ton of respect for AmazingRando and I hope your actions to do not reflect upon him.
Since GIGAMINING has only 80% of the equipment to back its commitments and an uncertain amount of liquid reserves to meet debt service therefore does BITBOND lack a significant amount of production capacity it has claims for to result in this material discount in the trading price?
Gigamining has a clear ASIC upgrade path which is already paid for 100%.
I have designed this upgrade path to keep the price of Gigamining up so that current bond holders would not lose significant value over the short term whether they wanted to stay a part of Gigamining or not. They also have the option of upgrading for FREE, which, if you owned BFL equipment, you would not have the luxury of.
Regards,
gigavps
Show Posts
