[BTC-TC] Deprived Mining Speculation (DMS)

[Deprived]

NAV/U and the selling price of PURCHASE rose very slightly due to decent sales of more PURCHASE and the LTC-ATF.B1 dividend payment.

[Deprived]

I just transferred 2500 LTC-ATF.B1 into the fund.

In return I received 377 each of SELLING and MINING plus .0618 BTC in change.

I'll take LTC-ATF.B1 in return for shares from anyone else as well (you get SELLING + MINING or PURCHASE equal to the full face-value price of the LTC-ATF.B1) - so long as it's 500+ (5 BTC worth) at a time.  PM if you want to do this - as I'll need your LTC-Global AND BTC-TC usernames before you transfer to make sure I send to right person.  Any such trades will be disclosed - but not the name of the person trading in (that's only disclosed if it's me).

That brings our total LTC-ATF.B1 to 12500 - which will generate slightly over 0.75 BTC per week for the fund.

Votes on (two) other assets for investment will go up later today.

[alexius89]

one more question..

If the Dividend of SELLING is 0.01   then the Value of the SELLING share Decrease by 0.01 after the Dividend was paid?

[Deprived]

one more question..

If the Dividend of SELLING is 0.01   then the Value of the SELLING share Decrease by 0.01 after the Dividend was paid?

Yes.  Payment of a 0.01 dividend to SELLING definitely means that SELLING is worth 0.01 less immediately after payment of the dividend than it was worth before it.  The same will also be true for PURCHASE.

That doesn't mean that the market prices will change in the same way - they would if everyone was acting in an entirely rational manner but it isn't safe to assume that will be the case.

It's likely that the current very large wide spread on SELLING reflects people being cautious about not placing Bids if they aren't certain they'll be around to cancel them before the dividend payment.

Note that the dividend is NOT necessarily going to be .01 - but it'll certainly be somewhere of that general size unless something major happens in the next few hours.

[Birdy]

one more question..

If the Dividend of SELLING is 0.01   then the Value of the SELLING share Decrease by 0.01 after the Dividend was paid?

Yes.  Payment of a 0.01 dividend to SELLING definitely means that SELLING is worth 0.01 less immediately after payment of the dividend than it was worth before it.  The same will also be true for PURCHASE.

That doesn't mean that the market prices will change in the same way - they would if everyone was acting in an entirely rational manner but it isn't safe to assume that will be the case.

It's likely that the current very large wide spread on SELLING reflects people being cautious about not placing Bids if they aren't certain they'll be around to cancel them before the dividend payment.

Note that the dividend is NOT necessarily going to be .01 - but it'll certainly be somewhere of that general size unless something major happens in the next few hours.

There has to be a mistake, because otherwise by this defintion you couldn't get more out of your Selling purchase than you've invested in it.
Aka the dividends would be exactly the selling price -> selling would be worthless after that.
This would be in total oblivion of the price of Mining shares and if they were priced exactly the right spot, disregarding other growth and new DMS.Purchase purchases.

[Rannasha]

one more question..

If the Dividend of SELLING is 0.01   then the Value of the SELLING share Decrease by 0.01 after the Dividend was paid?

Yes.  Payment of a 0.01 dividend to SELLING definitely means that SELLING is worth 0.01 less immediately after payment of the dividend than it was worth before it.  The same will also be true for PURCHASE.

That doesn't mean that the market prices will change in the same way - they would if everyone was acting in an entirely rational manner but it isn't safe to assume that will be the case.

It's likely that the current very large wide spread on SELLING reflects people being cautious about not placing Bids if they aren't certain they'll be around to cancel them before the dividend payment.

Note that the dividend is NOT necessarily going to be .01 - but it'll certainly be somewhere of that general size unless something major happens in the next few hours.

There has to be a mistake, because otherwise by this defintion you couldn't get more out of your Selling purchase than you've invested in it.
Aka the dividends would be exactly the selling price -> selling would be worthless after that.
This would be in total oblivion to the price of Mining shares.

I don't expect SELLING to drop in price as much as the dividend payment. And I expect the price to rise in anticipation of the next dividend payment (and consequently the price of MINING going down). In fact, the SELLING price has already risen a bit in anticipation of tomorrows payment.

edit: But yes, in a fully rational market where there is no growth of capital, MINING and SELLING would be at exactly the right price-point and the value of both assets would get eaten up by its dividend payments. But since the market isn't fully rational and we don't know the right price-point for both assets, there are gains to be had.

[Deprived]

one more question..

If the Dividend of SELLING is 0.01   then the Value of the SELLING share Decrease by 0.01 after the Dividend was paid?

Yes.  Payment of a 0.01 dividend to SELLING definitely means that SELLING is worth 0.01 less immediately after payment of the dividend than it was worth before it.  The same will also be true for PURCHASE.

That doesn't mean that the market prices will change in the same way - they would if everyone was acting in an entirely rational manner but it isn't safe to assume that will be the case.

It's likely that the current very large wide spread on SELLING reflects people being cautious about not placing Bids if they aren't certain they'll be around to cancel them before the dividend payment.

Note that the dividend is NOT necessarily going to be .01 - but it'll certainly be somewhere of that general size unless something major happens in the next few hours.

There has to be a mistake, because otherwise by this defintion you couldn't get more out of your Selling purchase than you've invested in it.
Aka the dividends would be exactly the selling price -> selling would be worthless after that.
This would be in total oblivion of the price of Mining shares and if they were priced exactly the right spot, disregarding other growth and new DMS.Purchase purchases.

No mistake.

Change in the price of SELLING should occur through trading.

You're confusing price with value.  Let me give an entirely different scenario.

Say there's an IPO selling shares at 1 BTC each.

Those shares HAVE a fixed value - noone likely knows what it is but they have one.

When you buy a share, the share hasn't changed in value.  But immediately after the IPO sells out (or fails to sell out and the remaining Ask is taken down) the price at which they trade will often change - even though there has been NO change in value.

Value is what something is worth.
Price is the point which a seller and a buyer decide to agree represents a definition of value that they'll both accept for the purpose of conducting a transaction.

You make a profit on SELLING by buying it (or buying a PURCHASE and selling the MINING from it) at a PRICE which is below its VALUE.

Over time, if you bought it at below VALUE then the market PRICE will adjust to reflect the real VALUE (as dividends are paid - either to MINING or to SELLING) and narrow the range in which VALUE can actually lie.

Those changes occur due to a change in the perception of those involved in the market (which CAN be a real change in value or CAN be just a better understanding of what an unchanged value actually is).  Dividend payment (the actual payment of one) SHOULD have no impact on that perception - other than changing where a portion of that value is held (and hence causing an immediate drop in price in the PRICE of the security receiving the dividend post-dividend).

EDIT: The above is slightly simplified and intended to be a general description of a concept (how value and price are distinct things and shouldn't be confused).  There ARE circumstances where a change in price DOES cause a change in value (rather than just reflect a changed view of value - but there's no point discussing those if the fundamental difference between the two isn't understood.

[Birdy]

Ok, I get what you are saying, the return from investments would still increase the real value.
I know the dividend of 0,01x doesn't mean that this is your profit, the return will be from the Btcs DMS.Mining doesn't get due to difficulty increase + returns of any investments. So you will only profit, if you haven't paid too much for DMS.Selling.

[Deprived]

So you will only profit, if you haven't paid too much for DMS.Selling.

Yes - and that's true for EVERY SINGLE SECURITY (other than scams where ANY price is too much).

The price you buy for is what determines whether it's a good move buying it or not.  It's not a Good investment or a Bad one or a Profitable one or an unprofitable one unless you talk about at a specific price.  The WORST question I see asked regularly is "Is X a good investment?"  Without a price it's totally impossible to answer - yet the forum is full of idiots who will proclaim something as good without stating the price at which that claim applies (it's fine during an IPO where there's a fixed price).

[Deprived]

I know the dividend of 0,01x doesn't mean that this is your profit,

On SELLING you can only safely assume it to be profit if the total dividends you've received exceed what you paid for your SELLING.  In theory at any point difficulty can fall, stop rising (or rise by less than about 3% per change) meaning no dividend for SELLING.  That won't happen in the medium-term (unless you believe BFL will never ship, Avalon chips won't arrive, batch 3 Avalon won't be sent AND none of the other ASIC manufacturers will deliver).  In the short-term (next dividend or two) it's possible - as ASICMINER aren't shipping at present.  In the long-term it likely WILL happen (when ASICs reach saturation point) unless BTC rises vs USD significantly.

Only realistic scenarion in which SELLING receive no more dividends ever is if there's some massive problem with BTC causing the exchange-rate to fall to the level where it's not profitable to mine with ASICs other than with cheap power.  That scenario is one of the few where PMBs WOULD pay (a LOT - in that case) more than MINING (assuming the operator paid out even when he couldn't mine) - but that would be little comfort if BTC was basically dead.

[eltopo]

PMBs are NOT inherently a bad investment by design.  They're a bad investment if bought at too high a price.  Nearly all PMBs have been sold at prices where investors will not ever make back what they paid.

I really like to know what someone, who buys MINING for > 0.03 (or e.g. TAT.VM for 0.007), estimates about the average rise in difficulty in the next months. It has to be < 10% per change, otherwise there'd be a very little chance he will ever make back what he paid IMHO. And right now we have changes > 20%, without having some other big players beside Asicminer to enter the market. I guess as soon as this happens, difficulty will rise even more and all the PMBs will implode...

[Deprived]

PMBs are NOT inherently a bad investment by design.  They're a bad investment if bought at too high a price.  Nearly all PMBs have been sold at prices where investors will not ever make back what they paid.

I really like to know what someone, who buys MINING for > 0.03 (or e.g. TAT.VM for 0.007), estimates about the average rise in difficulty in the next months. It has to be < 10% per change, otherwise there'd be a very little chance he will ever make back what he paid IMHO. And right now we have changes > 20%, without having some other big players beside Asicminer to enter the market. I guess as soon as this happens, difficulty will rise even more and all the PMBs will implode...

If you want to wonder what people are thinking, consider the ones paying double or more what TAT.VM costs (and an even bigger markup compared to MINING) per MH for 'real' PMBs - that's ones where they have to rely on hardware not failing for the operator to be able to afford to pay ANYTHING out.  Think the absolute worst ones (for value) are on Bitfunder - PMBs which aren't even mining yet lol.

For that matter you can even compare MINING to shares with reinvestment - reinvestment doesn't work that much differently to buying more MINING with your dividends (with a good manager the shares will perform slightly better).  And if PMBs are bad value there's some shares which are actually WORSE value (at the prices they currently trade at) - as the majority of their real value was lost by holding their capital as USD in pre-orders for BFL machines whilst BTC rose.

The absolute worst (in terms of value per hash) are ones where you buy a share of actual fixed hardware.  Those act like PMBs - except they stop paying when the hardware fails and they don't have any guaranteed payments at all (so they're even less perpetual and even further from being bonds).  Those should sell for LESS than PMBs per hash - but somehow manage to get away with selling for more sometimes.

[Birdy]

DMS.Mining will most likely get to be the best-priced PMB there is, because there is more pressure to find a fair price for it.
This also makes it very difficult to predict. How many people will drop their PMB for this one?
The very long description and unusual structure will scare of some of them.

[Rannasha]

Lets assume that the difficulty increases by a factor X every 2016 blocks (so X = 0.1 would mean +10% difficulty). An increase of X means that the last 2016 blocks were done in 14 / (1 + X) days (target is 14 days per readjustment, and the new difficulty is calculated based on the actual elapsed time to solve the previous 2016 blocks).

Starting with the first day after a readjustment, say MINING has a dividend of D, which is paid daily until the next readjustment at which point it is updated. So we have 14 / (1 + X) days of a payout of D. After that, the payout becomes D / (1 + X) as the dividend scales inversely with difficulty. Again 14 / (1 + X) days later, payout drops to D / (1 + X)^2. And so forth. Our total payout for MINING (or any PMB without reinvestment or other special properties) is:

14 / (1 + X) * D + 14 / (1 + X) * D / (1 + X) + 14 / (1 + X) * D / (1 + X)^2 + ...
= (14 / (1 + X)) * D * Sum_N=0^infinity 1 / (1 + X)^N
The summation is actually the sum of a geometric series and a convenient closed formula exists for it:
Sum_N=0^infinity r^N = 1 / (1 - r)
(for 0 < r < 1)
So in our case, the summation part of the equation adds up to:
1 / (1 - (1 / (1 + X))) = (1 + X) / X
which makes our final value of MINING dividend from now until the end of time:
14 * D / X
where D is the initial dividend payment per day and X the factor with which the difficulty goes up every 2016 blocks.

If we plug in some actual numbers... Assuming that the difficulty goes up to 19,000,000 tonight (which is a reasonabe, possibly conservative estimate), D = 0.132344 mBTC (I use mili-bitcoin or mBTC, because numbers close to unity are easier to work with mentally for most people). That means that with a 20% difficulty jump every readjustment moment, the total payout from MINING will be:
14 * 0.132344 mBTC / 0.2 = 9.26408 mBTC.

And that is all you should pay for MINING if you believe that 20% increase per period is what'll happen. In fact, you don't want to get MINING for this amount, because it'll take forever (literally) to earn it all back and you'll end up with no profit in the end. The NAV/U of the fund will be approximately 54 mBTC after tonights adjustment and the dividend payment to SELLING, so the price for SELLING should be roughly 45 mBTC *after* the dividend payment.

If you take the very conservative estimate of a 10% increase in difficulty, the same calculation gives us a lifetime payout for MINING of 18.53 mBTC.

Now these calculations assume exponential growth of the difficulty, which in the long term is not very realistic. However, it doesn't matter that much, because for the short to mid term this exponential growth is a decent enough assumption and by the time the growth of the difficulty will flatten, the expected payouts from MINING will already be very low. With a depleting asset such as a PMB, the largest gains are had at the start, so the behavior of the difficulty on the short to mid term is important right now, while long term is mostly relevant if there's anything left after the dust clears.

Since the start of the year, the difficulty has increased by 15% every increment on average if you assume an exponential growth. However, the %-growth seems to have picked up recently.

[Deprived]

DMS.Mining will most likely get to be the best-priced PMB there is, because there is pressure to find a fair price for it.
This also makes it very difficult to predict. How many people will drop their PMB for this one?
The very long description and unusual structure will scare of some of them.

It won't acutally end up the cheapest as there's one or two PMB-like things around (shares paying out based on a fixed amount of promised hashing) where the issuer has either scammed in the past or is believed to be a scammer.  Those will always be the cheapest.

MINING will stay cheaper than most - largely because, as you pointed out, people can be sellers as well as buyers here.

Someone gos to a PMB and believes it'll never return capital at the current price all they can do is make a post in the thread.
Someone looks at MINING and believe's it'll never return capital they can buy a PURCHASE, convert it and sell the MINING part to someone else.

Obviously they have to believe there's enough of a margin to cover my fee and to justify tieing up their cash.  And they can, of course, be wrong - and be donating to whoever buys MINING from them.

There's also a few other reasons why MINING will stay cheaper than comparable PMBs.  One of the big ones is psychological.  MINING is explicitly referred to by me as speculation - I don't pretend it's a bond and I don't ever claim investing in it will make a profit at any specific price.  So people read thread - or even just the title - and think "this is risky".  And rightly so - it IS risky.  But they'll then go to some PMB which gives the same returns and buy it for more - as it gives the misleading impression of being some sort of bond where capital is safe and they just sit back and get dividends for free that the issuer is (for whatever charitable reason) throwing in their general direction.  Being honest about the speculative and risky nature of MINING (you buy at the wrong price you make a loss) is definitely something which will keep its price below comparable PMBs.

Whether it's profitable or not at any price point isn't something I'm ever going to comment on (other than that I've explicitly capped its maximum value at the price of a PURCHASE - and it should never trade above 365 days dividend).  But I can safely say that it'll make more profit or lose less than an equivalent amount of hashing from a PMB bought at a large markup in terms of cost per MH/s.

[Deprived]

Lets assume that the difficulty increases by a factor X every 2016 blocks (so X = 0.1 would mean +10% difficulty). An increase of X means that the last 2016 blocks were done in 14 / (1 + X) days (target is 14 days per readjustment, and the new difficulty is calculated based on the actual elapsed time to solve the previous 2016 blocks).

Starting with the first day after a readjustment, say MINING has a dividend of D, which is paid daily until the next readjustment at which point it is updated. So we have 14 / (1 + X) days of a payout of D. After that, the payout becomes D / (1 + X) as the dividend scales inversely with difficulty. Again 14 / (1 + X) days later, payout drops to D / (1 + X)^2. And so forth. Our total payout for MINING (or any PMB without reinvestment or other special properties) is:

14 / (1 + X) * D + 14 / (1 + X) * D / (1 + X) + 14 / (1 + X) * D / (1 + X)^2 + ...
= (14 / (1 + X)) * D * Sum_N=0^infinity 1 / (1 + X)^N
The summation is actually the sum of a geometric series and a convenient closed formula exists for it:
Sum_N=0^infinity r^N = 1 / (1 - r)
(for 0 < r < 1)
So in our case, the summation part of the equation adds up to:
1 / (1 - (1 / (1 + X))) = (1 + X) / X
which makes our final value of MINING dividend from now until the end of time:
14 * D / X
where D is the initial dividend payment per day and X the factor with which the difficulty goes up every 2016 blocks.

If we plug in some actual numbers... Assuming that the difficulty goes up to 19,000,000 tonight (which is a reasonabe, possibly conservative estimate), D = 0.132344 mBTC (I use mili-bitcoin or mBTC, because numbers close to unity are easier to work with mentally for most people). That means that with a 20% difficulty jump every readjustment moment, the total payout from MINING will be:
14 * 0.132344 mBTC / 0.2 = 9.26408 mBTC.

And that is all you should pay for MINING if you believe that 20% increase per period is what'll happen. In fact, you don't want to get MINING for this amount, because it'll take forever (literally) to earn it all back and you'll end up with no profit in the end. The NAV/U of the fund will be approximately 54 mBTC after tonights adjustment and the dividend payment to SELLING, so the price for SELLING should be roughly 45 mBTC *after* the dividend payment.

If you take the very conservative estimate of a 10% increase in difficulty, the same calculation gives us a lifetime payout for MINING of 18.53 mBTC.

Now these calculations assume exponential growth of the difficulty, which in the long term is not very realistic. However, it doesn't matter that much, because for the short to mid term this exponential growth is a decent enough assumption and by the time the growth of the difficulty will flatten, the expected payouts from MINING will already be very low.

Since the start of the year, the difficulty has increased by 15% every increment on average if you assume an exponential growth. However, the %-growth seems to have picked up recently.

One comment on this - and any similar posts which claim to calculate a value for MINING that's significantly different to market price.

IF you're sure you're right then why are you telling everyone rather than using that knowledge to make some profit?

I don't have a problem with anyone posting their calculations here - just don't expect any feedback from anyone who believes you're wrong and is actually investing.  The +EV thing for them is to agree with you if they believe you're wrong - hope other people believe you - and bet against them in the market (doesn't matter which way they think you're wrong - they can bet against you).

[Rannasha]

One comment on this - and any similar posts which claim to calculate a value for MINING that's significantly different to market price.

IF you're sure you're right then why are you telling everyone rather than using that knowledge to make some profit?

I've taken the position that I want to take in the securities so I'm good for now. My BTC investments are basically just play-money (only ~2 BTC that I got mining some crappy altcoins for 2 afternoons). If I invest a significant amount of my savings (and not get murdered by my wife ), it could shift the price significantly (since volume is quite low) and potentially ruin most of my profits (not to mention that I prefer not to put too much into something as volatile as BTC, since the life of me and my family still runs on euros, not BTC).

Also, I'm a mathematician, I like the puzzle more than the what I can do with the result

[Deprived]

One comment on this - and any similar posts which claim to calculate a value for MINING that's significantly different to market price.

IF you're sure you're right then why are you telling everyone rather than using that knowledge to make some profit?

I've taken the position that I want to take in the securities so I'm good for now. My BTC investments are basically just play-money (only ~2 BTC that I got mining some crappy altcoins for 2 afternoons). If I invest a significant amount of my savings (and not get murdered by my wife ), it could shift the price significantly (since volume is quite low) and potentially ruin most of my profits (not to mention that I prefer not to put too much into something as volatile as BTC, since the life of me and my family still runs on euros, not BTC).

Also, I'm a mathematician, I like the puzzle more than the what I can do with the result

That's fair enough - my own investments/holdings mainly came from solo-mining LTC for a few days then trading it up.  I think you'd find there's a lot more resistance to a significantly lower MINING price than you anticipate.

Part of the motivation for developing DMS was to see whether I could (and what happened when it was used) - when I paid the 15 BTC to register the assets I was by no means certain there'd be enough interest to even recoup that (though obviously I hoped to get that back in management fees and make some change trading it myself).

I'd love to debate your conclusions - but I can't as:

a) I DO have some reasonable-sized investment in MINING and SELLING (the 125 BTC is exchanged in for LTC-ATF.B1 plus some more I bought with cash) - so last thing I want to do is convince everyone to agree with me
b) It would ruin the experiment from my perspective.
c) My views may well get given more credibility because I run the fund - which would be wrong (as the math of how everything works is transparent - so I have no advantage in knowledge) but understandable.  If people get it wrong they must do so based on their own (or other people's) predictions - not mine.

[Rannasha]

One comment on this - and any similar posts which claim to calculate a value for MINING that's significantly different to market price.

IF you're sure you're right then why are you telling everyone rather than using that knowledge to make some profit?

I've taken the position that I want to take in the securities so I'm good for now. My BTC investments are basically just play-money (only ~2 BTC that I got mining some crappy altcoins for 2 afternoons). If I invest a significant amount of my savings (and not get murdered by my wife ), it could shift the price significantly (since volume is quite low) and potentially ruin most of my profits (not to mention that I prefer not to put too much into something as volatile as BTC, since the life of me and my family still runs on euros, not BTC).

Also, I'm a mathematician, I like the puzzle more than the what I can do with the result

That's fair enough - my own investments/holdings mainly came from solo-mining LTC for a few days then trading it up.  I think you'd find there's a lot more resistance to a significantly lower MINING price than you anticipate.

I don't mind people being resistant to lowering the price of MINING. In fact, I expect that people will value MINING higher than its actual value. I know I did at first, when I just strolled in and went "hey, 5 MHash PMB for cheap, cool" without looking further. I had some coins invested in LTC PMBs, which are a lot more stable in a way since the LTC difficulty isn't spiking in quite the same way. So I just extrapolated that to BTC without giving it further thought. I expect that many people will still see MINING as a lucrative "PMB", when compared to other BTC PMBs.Time will tell.

I'd love to debate your conclusions - but I can't as:

a) I DO have some reasonable-sized investment in MINING and SELLING (the 125 BTC is exchanged in for LTC-ATF.B1 plus some more I bought with cash) - so last thing I want to do is convince everyone to agree with me
b) It would ruin the experiment from my perspective.
c) My views may well get given more credibility because I run the fund - which would be wrong (as the math of how everything works is transparent - so I have no advantage in knowledge) but understandable.  If people get it wrong they must do so based on their own (or other people's) predictions - not mine.

Understandable reasons, but I wouldn't have minded some debate either

Anyway, 4 blocks away from the diff-readjustment, so it's extremely likely to happen before midnight GMT. I'm very curious to what happens tomorrow and the days after with the prices of the securities. My compliments for making this security, since regardless of whether I win or lose, it's been fun thinking about it and running some numbers.

[Deprived]

The below is NOT an actual report - it's an estimate of what tomorrow's report will look like

If the report were produced now this is what it would look like.  In practice it's likely more PURCHASE will sell - so starting NAV/U will be very slightly higher and the dividend to SELLING slightly higher.  That difference will likely be very tiny.

Sold   1056 (377 trade-in for LTC-ATF.B1 and 679 market sales)
Price   0.066149
Total   69.853344
Less Fee   69.71363731
Man Fee   2.091409119

Management fee of 2.0914 BTC paid.

BTC Balance (BTC-TC)    797.31840000
12500 LTC-ATF.B1    125.00000000
TOTAL ASSETS    922.31840000
   
Outstanding MINING   14176
Outstanding SELLING   14176
Outstanding PURCHASE   446
Effective Units   14622
   
Block reward   25
Difficulty   19,339,258
Hashes per MINING   5000000
   
Daily Dividend    0.00013002
50 days (Min Liquid)    0.00650111
100 days (Forced Close)    0.01300222
365 days (Buyback)    0.04745810
405 days (IPO)    0.05265898
400 days (Post SELLING div)    0.05200887
410 days (Pre SELLING div)    0.05330910
   
NAV Post MINING Div    920.41721561
NAV/U Post MINING Div    0.06294742
Days Dividend Post Div   484.13
SELLING Dividend    0.01093855
NAV Post SELLING Div    760.47375584
NAV/U Post Selling Div    0.05200887
PURCHASE selling price    0.05460932
PURCHASE buy-back price    0.05096870

This is provided for guidance - it is not necessarily the actual payments (MINING should be correct).  No management fee has actually been transferred.