Mods Please Delete

[GoWest]

Mods please delete.

[1715068759]

1715068759

[1715068759]

1715068759

[1715068759]

1715068759

[usagi]

I encourage discussion in this thread to assist in the determination of a fair IPO price.

What about GIGAMINING? Why is it that we can't get our GIGAMINING without AML or KYC, nor transfer beneficial ownership despite provisions under the law, yet you are being allowed to operate a TERAMINING passthrough?

Given the nature of what is going on I think we need to see proof you are authorized to run this from GigaVPS, or else I'd unfortunately have to conclude this is a scam.

[🏰 TradeFortress 🏰]

Because a time limited mining bond is a good idea...

[GoWest]

I encourage discussion in this thread to assist in the determination of a fair IPO price.

What about GIGAMINING? Why is it that we can't get our GIGAMINING without AML or KYC, nor transfer beneficial ownership despite provisions under the law, yet you are being allowed to operate a TERAMINING passthrough?

Given the nature of what is going on I think we need to see proof you are authorized to run this from GigaVPS, or else I'd unfortunately have to conclude this is a scam.

I am awaiting response from Gigavps as to whether he has an issue with this passthrough, but I don't see why he would, as it will operate independent of my legal agreement with Teramining.

I will ask him to comment in this thread.

[GoWest]

Because a time limited mining bond is a good idea...

Even a time-limited bond will earn revenue over time.  I hope it is abundantly clear to investors that all Westera shares will be worth exactly ZERO after nine months. The point is that each share will hopefully earn the holder enough in dividends to cover the purchase price (and more) of the shares.

[PsychoticBoy]

Or are you just copying the dividends Teramining delivers, thus without owning 1:1 ratio of shares?

[GoWest]

Or are you just copying the dividends Teramining delivers, thus withoout owning 1:1 ratio of shares?

It will be 1:1.  I own enough Gigamining shares to covert to 10,000 Teramining shares.

[🏰 TradeFortress 🏰]

Because a time limited mining bond is a good idea...

Even a time-limited bond will earn revenue over time.  I hope it is abundantly clear to investors that all Westera shares will be worth exactly ZERO after nine months. The point is that each share will hopefully earn the holder enough in dividends to cover the purchase price (and more) of the shares.

Absolutely. This is effectively predicting the network difficulty because of the way it is set up however. ASICs are designed to be mass produced, and only a portion of those who want ASICs have preordered.

You might want to buy the coinBr difficulty futures too if you are buying teramining, depends in the price of both

[Sukrim]

In the end you're just betting on the difficulty development in the next 9 months with this (no matter if you buy or sell) - a LOT of unknown factors in there and honestly not something I would recommend to ANYONE besides gambling.

Why mirror Teramining by the way? You could offer shorter (1 month?) contracts that might be easier to price with that hash power in your pocket as well.

[Deprived]

Why mirror Teramining by the way? You could offer shorter (1 month?) contracts that might be easier to price with that hash power in your pocket as well.

Because he can't sell his original Giga shares - so this is only way to dump some of the losses onto other people.

If they're priced below 0.04 then they may actually be a reasonable investment.

I wouldn't take Giga's 'worst-case' scenario too seriously.  Did he preduct the original giga investments would make a loss?

If so, then he misled investors by portraying a donation as an investment.
If not (and he thought the original investment was a good one), then why should his prediction THIS time be any better?

Hashing power will increase until it's barely profitable to mine - the barrier of entry to mining is too low to stop that.  Once it becomes barely profitable, hasing power will STILL rise due to those who can't do math and those who can mine without risk of loss (mining company operators).  Something barely profitable can't make a profit for investors with a 100% markup applied to it (his markup MAY be under 100% now - haven't recalculated recently).

Pricing will be the key - if the shares are going to be worthless in return for 0.04-0.15 BTC then what's a  reasonable price to pay?  If you assumed an even spread over the range then somewhere near the middle (0.095) would be the break-even point (where there'd be 0% expectation on average if you totally ignored the various counter-party risks).  So the price would have to be significantly under that to make them at all attractive to anyone other than gamblers (or donators).  And that's IF you believe the predictions.

[Sukrim]

These "predictions" are also just pulled out of someone's ...behind!

Difficulty also follows the BTC exchange rate - if Bitcoin tanks hard vs. the USD a few miners might stop their rigs and diff could go down as well, so buying limited time hash rate is also a bit of a hedge. Still I wouldn't advise anyone to buy hashrate for 9(!) months at once.

What I meant is keep the teramining shares but sell e.g. 3 3months contracts. These can be paid from the Teramining income but are not that long and thus limit the uncertainty a bit.

[PsychoticBoy]

Why mirror Teramining by the way? You could offer shorter (1 month?) contracts that might be easier to price with that hash power in your pocket as well.

Because he can't sell his original Giga shares - so this is only way to dump some of the losses onto other people.

If they're priced below 0.04 then they may actually be a reasonable investment.

I wouldn't take Giga's 'worst-case' scenario too seriously.  Did he preduct the original giga investments would make a loss?

If so, then he misled investors by portraying a donation as an investment.
If not (and he thought the original investment was a good one), then why should his prediction THIS time be any better?

Hashing power will increase until it's barely profitable to mine - the barrier of entry to mining is too low to stop that.  Once it becomes barely profitable, hasing power will STILL rise due to those who can't do math and those who can mine without risk of loss (mining company operators).  Something barely profitable can't make a profit for investors with a 100% markup applied to it (his markup MAY be under 100% now - haven't recalculated recently).

Pricing will be the key - if the shares are going to be worthless in return for 0.04-0.15 BTC then what's a  reasonable price to pay?  If you assumed an even spread over the range then somewhere near the middle (0.095) would be the break-even point (where there'd be 0% expectation on average if you totally ignored the various counter-party risks).  So the price would have to be significantly under that to make them at all attractive to anyone other than gamblers (or donators).  And that's IF you believe the predictions.

So botttomline, Investors will get screwed AGAIN!

[burnside]

Sure, limited time is great, but usually limited time comes with recovery of your principal at the end.  I don't think any limited-time bonds should be purchased without a clause saying that they don't terminate until the bond holders at least get their principal back via the divs.

[GoWest]

I will not be going forward with the launch of the fund.

[PsychoticBoy]

Good!

Don't drag more people into gigavps's crap.