[AMC]-The Official Active Mining Cooperative Discussion

[auto2nr1]

Lets do a straight 50/50 relationship. 50% shares for investors and the public. 50% goes to fund goes to Ken and the management team as well as the reinvestment fund. 10m shares for the public, 5m for reinvest and 5m for managment and operations.

[1715092170]

1715092170

[1715092170]

1715092170

[1715092170]

1715092170

[1715092170]

1715092170

[Exocyst]

There was some obvious some gaps with share structure & business side of things, which leaves much room for improvement. If Ken's talent is "engineering" & structuring the company is not then all that is left is improvement from the business side of things, which in my mind is not a massive hurdle.

The point was clear - BFL have not one (self proclaimed) tech expert like Ken but a room full. And they have STRUGGLED for how long in this market? How many missed deadlines and non-shipping of goods promised are people going to take from AMC before the shares you all paid good money for nose dive? What happens then? Does VMC fold?

Lets face it - everyone is looking at the upside potential of these shares and that's natural as everyone wants to be wealthy. But just stop for a minute and think about how the hell one guy is going to do what BFL couldn't do. BFL are coming round now but if Ken takes that long VMC will fail. If he's twice as quick to the market he might do well. CAN HE BE TWICE AS QUICK TO THE MARKET AS BFL? WITH ALL THEIR EXPERTISE THEY COULDN'T DO WHAT KEN IS PROMISING.

That's the logistical concern and it's a massive one ontop of the legal side of this, let's face it, farce.

I don't think BFL is the poster child for successful ASIC entry. Look instead at Avalon or ASICMINER. Certainly there are lessons from BFL to be learned, but remember that BFL has been mimicking those manufacturers of late both in terms of increased pricing and bulk chips sales.

[steveioio]

You hear that?  It's the sound of no one caring.

Don't fool yourself - you don't talk for everyone on this thread.

I think a majority of us who have a stake in this company, put in no more than we were willing to lose.

You really think so? Incredible.

Now, we are working to try to get this company in a position where we will hopefully see some decent ROI at some point.

You still don't get it do you? Us doubters have given you the chance at success. A slim one but now there is a glimmer - which could well be a false dawn.

Now, if you have nothing else to add, please run along sweet child.

How patronizing. Is there any need to get personal here?

[SoylentCreek]

Lets do a straight 50/50 relationship. 50% shares for investors and the public. 50% goes to fund goes to Ken and the management team as well as the reinvestment fund. 10m shares for the public, 5m for reinvest and 5m for managment and operations.

Ken has already expressed that he's thinking of reducing his ownership down to 60%.  I highly doubt that he is willing to go any lower (maybe 55% would be likely).  If I went through the process of trying to startup a business such as this, I would want to retain majority ownership for as long as it is necessary.

[SoylentCreek]

Guys, just ignore the troll! Please do not let this thread derail back into the shit pile it has been over the last few days.

[Vbs]

Lets do a straight 50/50 relationship. 50% shares for investors and the public. 50% goes to fund goes to Ken and the management team as well as the reinvestment fund. 10m shares for the public, 5m for reinvest and 5m for managment and operations.

No reinvestment fund using shares please. Any reinvestment "fund" is just taken out from the revenue. Deprived has already made this point clear many times.

We can't have a fixed amount of shares for paying expenses, as those will vary from month to month. VMC needs proper accounting.

Shares are just a means to distribute the profits, after all expenses are paid.

[steveioio]

Guys, just ignore the troll! Please do not let this thread derail back into the shit pile it has been over the last few days.

Anyone who has been reading the past two pages will see the only off-topic statements and personal insults have been entirely from you. Ironic isn't it. Maybe they would do better ignoring you?

[auto2nr1]

Once again lets look at ASICMINER's business model. BitFountain has a little over 50% shares and investors have about 50% of the shares. The management team controls those shares to operate and reinvest. AMC investors should have 50% of the shares and AMC's management team (VMC) should have the other half and they can do what they seem is fit for operations and growth. More reinvestment would be wanted as a shareholder. Maybe 30-35% which would leave 15-20% for managements expenses. What do you guys think? It sounds fair right?

[lewicki]

We can't have a fixed amount of shares for paying expenses, as those will vary from month to month. VMC needs proper accounting.

Shares are just a means to distribute the profits, after all expenses are paid.

+1

Maybe 30-35% which would leave 15-20% for managements expenses. What do you guys think? It sounds fair right?

This should be left up to the internal accounting of VMC

[auto2nr1]

Lets do a straight 50/50 relationship. 50% shares for investors and the public. 50% goes to fund goes to Ken and the management team as well as the reinvestment fund. 10m shares for the public, 5m for reinvest and 5m for managment and operations.

No reinvestment fund using shares please. Any reinvestment "fund" is just taken out from the revenue. Deprived has already made this point clear many times.

We can't have a fixed amount of shares for paying expenses, as those will vary from month to month. VMC needs proper accounting.

Shares are just a means to distribute the profits, after all expenses are paid.

Got it. I understand where you are coming from. So 50% for AMC and 50% for VMC. VMC can use what they feel is necessary to pay bills and reinvest what is necessary to continue to grow. So there is no exact designation of shares on a monthly basis.

[SoylentCreek]

Lets do a straight 50/50 relationship. 50% shares for investors and the public. 50% goes to fund goes to Ken and the management team as well as the reinvestment fund. 10m shares for the public, 5m for reinvest and 5m for managment and operations.

No reinvestment fund using shares please. Any reinvestment "fund" is just taken out from the revenue. Deprived has already made this point clear many times.

We can't have a fixed amount of shares for paying expenses, as those will vary from month to month. VMC needs proper accounting.

Shares are just a means to distribute the profits, after all expenses are paid.

Got it. I understand where you are coming from. So 50% for AMC and 50% for VMC. VMC can use what they feel is necessary to pay bills and reinvest what is necessary to continue to grow. So there is no exact designation of shares on a monthly basis.

I certainly think this is the best approach.  I just do not think Ken will be willing to relinquish more than 40% of the company.

[Vbs]

Once again lets look at ASICMINER's business model. BitFountain has a little over 50% shares and investors have about 50% of the shares. The management team controls those shares to operate and reinvest. AMC investors should have 50% of the shares and AMC's management team (VMC) should have the other half and they can do what they seem is fit for operations and growth. More reinvestment would be wanted as a shareholder. Maybe 30-35% which would leave 15-20% for managements expenses. What do you guys think? It sounds fair right?

BitFountain has 236,038 (59%), shareholders have 163,962 (41%). When they need to hold dividends for reinvesting, everyone gets a cut. Fair game.

[auto2nr1]

We can't have a fixed amount of shares for paying expenses, as those will vary from month to month. VMC needs proper accounting.

Shares are just a means to distribute the profits, after all expenses are paid.

+1

Maybe 30-35% which would leave 15-20% for managements expenses. What do you guys think? It sounds fair right?

This should be left up to the internal accounting of VMC

Yes, that sounds good. My main point was the 50/50 split to make things fair between the shareholders and management/reinvestment. Management/accounting can use the funds appropriately for operations and reinvestment. This sounds like a plan guys. Let's do it!

[zxyzxy]

Everyone is getting really excited over nothing of substance. Please hold out until you see real evidence and get the contractual certainty you need before taking this seriously.

AM shares jumped up by over 0.5 BTC just because some guy here with 9 posts translated some slides from a presentation in chinese to english, no official word was out yet AFAIK.. who knew if he was a native speaker, if the translation was ok.. nobody. bitcoin shares trading does not behave as the fiat one, deal with it.

[lewicki]

We can't have a fixed amount of shares for paying expenses, as those will vary from month to month. VMC needs proper accounting.

Shares are just a means to distribute the profits, after all expenses are paid.

+1

Maybe 30-35% which would leave 15-20% for managements expenses. What do you guys think? It sounds fair right?

This should be left up to the internal accounting of VMC

Yes, that sounds good. My main point was the 50/50 split to make things fair between the shareholders and management/reinvestment. Management/accounting can use the funds appropriately for operations and reinvestment. This sounds like a plan guys. Let's do it!

Correct me if I'm wrong but it should be:

• Recieve money
• Use some profits towards reinvestment(reduce business expense i believe)
• Distribute VMC's allocated % from the remaining profit (further reduce business expense i believe)
• Pay taxes
• Distribute Shareholder's allocated % from the remaining profit

[ronaldlee0917]

Once again lets look at ASICMINER's business model. BitFountain has a little over 50% shares and investors have about 50% of the shares. The management team controls those shares to operate and reinvest. AMC investors should have 50% of the shares and AMC's management team (VMC) should have the other half and they can do what they seem is fit for operations and growth. More reinvestment would be wanted as a shareholder. Maybe 30-35% which would leave 15-20% for managements expenses. What do you guys think? It sounds fair right?

I agree.
There is no shame to copy and already proven successful business model.

[kslaughter]

We can't have a fixed amount of shares for paying expenses, as those will vary from month to month. VMC needs proper accounting.

Shares are just a means to distribute the profits, after all expenses are paid.

+1

Maybe 30-35% which would leave 15-20% for managements expenses. What do you guys think? It sounds fair right?

This should be left up to the internal accounting of VMC

VMC will have a 7 member board of directors to run the company, this will be setup just like a normal corporation.  Each share will represent ownership in
the company.

[Thalum]

Once again lets look at ASICMINER's business model. BitFountain has a little over 50% shares and investors have about 50% of the shares. The management team controls those shares to operate and reinvest. AMC investors should have 50% of the shares and AMC's management team (VMC) should have the other half and they can do what they seem is fit for operations and growth. More reinvestment would be wanted as a shareholder. Maybe 30-35% which would leave 15-20% for managements expenses. What do you guys think? It sounds fair right?

BitFountain has 236,038 (59%), shareholders have 163,962 (41%). When they need to hold dividends for reinvesting, everyone gets a cut. Fair game.

Yes yes yes, this. I get that with the TAT.AM shares, each share is then 'diluted' into 100 shares and that the huge amount of shares for AMC is basically the same as that (thanks for pointing that out VBS), but I still think that up into the millions of shares makes it difficult to derive any value out of the company. I'm new at this though, and VBS seems to be putting forward some decent suggestions, but ASICminer has already shown a tried-and-tested model, why not emulate it?

[auto2nr1]

Once again lets look at ASICMINER's business model. BitFountain has a little over 50% shares and investors have about 50% of the shares. The management team controls those shares to operate and reinvest. AMC investors should have 50% of the shares and AMC's management team (VMC) should have the other half and they can do what they seem is fit for operations and growth. More reinvestment would be wanted as a shareholder. Maybe 30-35% which would leave 15-20% for managements expenses. What do you guys think? It sounds fair right?

BitFountain has 236,038 (59%), shareholders have 163,962 (41%). When they need to hold dividends for reinvesting, everyone gets a cut. Fair game.

Yes yes yes, this. I get that with the TAT.AM shares, each share is then 'diluted' into 100 shares and that the huge amount of shares for AMC is basically the same as that (thanks for pointing that out VBS), but I still think that up into the millions of shares makes it difficult to derive any value out of the company. I'm new at this though, and VBS seems to be putting forward some decent suggestions, but ASICminer has already shown a tried-and-tested model, why not emulate it?

+1

I agree. Let's try to keep the amount of shares issued at a lower number. Let's follow in the footsteps of the the market leader. If anything this will put us at #2 in the mining company race hopefully in the next few months.

[SoylentCreek]

Once again lets look at ASICMINER's business model. BitFountain has a little over 50% shares and investors have about 50% of the shares. The management team controls those shares to operate and reinvest. AMC investors should have 50% of the shares and AMC's management team (VMC) should have the other half and they can do what they seem is fit for operations and growth. More reinvestment would be wanted as a shareholder. Maybe 30-35% which would leave 15-20% for managements expenses. What do you guys think? It sounds fair right?

BitFountain has 236,038 (59%), shareholders have 163,962 (41%). When they need to hold dividends for reinvesting, everyone gets a cut. Fair game.

Yes yes yes, this. I get that with the TAT.AM shares, each share is then 'diluted' into 100 shares and that the huge amount of shares for AMC is basically the same as that (thanks for pointing that out VBS), but I still think that up into the millions of shares makes it difficult to derive any value out of the company. I'm new at this though, and VBS seems to be putting forward some decent suggestions, but ASICminer has already shown a tried-and-tested model, why not emulate it?

+1

I agree. Let's try to keep the amount of shares issued at a lower number. Let's follow in the footsteps of the the market leader. If anything this will put us at #2 in the mining company race hopefully in the next few months.

Hear hear!  Ken, any thoughts?