-

[Ashitank]

Does anyone believe that LabRat will ever deliver this so called "bonus"??

Not even Gandhi would fall for such trickery.

[1714790370]

1714790370

[1714790370]

1714790370

[DemocraticRepublicOfDave]

Hi All,

My first thoughts.  I found it interesting that at the AMA LabRat refused to answer any legal questions, despite the Lawyer being present (wasn't this what he/she was there to do)?

Also we still can't nail down the exact hashing figures for now, plus (rough) estimated projections for next week/month/3 months.

Won't be able to fully digest the new contract until early next week, and it may take a while as I am used to English Law contracts, not US law ones (but I'm a quick learner).  However on the face of it, it looks like a much more professional contract than the one previously offered (regardless of the content - re. contract reorganisation).

EDIT : Whether I agree to the new contract is another matter however.

Cheers

Dave

[Ashitank]

With whos permission was the original contract modified ?  Doesn't Lab_Rat need share holder consent to do so, Please advise if otherwise stated so any where.

[PoUpA]

I should have been greedy too and didn't return the extra dividends and sold my "contracts" directly ...
Lab_rat can you give a a way to go out of this mess ? are you planning to buy back contracts something like IPO price - dividends ? (if you don't got the BTC refund your BFL crap)

I got BFLed, goxxed and now lab_rated...

[Ashitank]

I should have been greedy too and didn't return the extra dividends and sold my "contracts" directly ...
Lab_rat can you give a a way to go out of this mess ? are you planning to buy back contracts something like IPO price - dividends ? (if you don't got the BTC refund your BFL crap)

I got BFLed, goxxed and now lab_rated...

lol , +1 same here , ahahhaah

[mmmerlin]

On a more serious note this situation is a false dichotomy.

Zach is creating the illusion that there are only 2 options for bondholders to chose between. He has named his recent contract change to capped bonds "the original contract" and is claiming that we must chose between the new contract where we have zero guarantees of any sort and the "original" contract which is NOT the original contract.

The refusal to justify any of his scammy behavior by claiming he does not provide legal advice is just comical.

As is already evident by his previous lack of accountability with the 2 week mining for hardware period being extended to pretty much whatever he pleased despite what was agreed upon, unnecessary complete lack of communication, affiliation with BFL, false claims of moving the asset to an exchange, not posting the new contract until the AMA had already started, complete lack of transparency and refusal to answer any meaningful questions it's becoming obvious to almost all of us that Zach cannot be trusted.

As time is progressing Zach is somehow finding him self in control of more and more of our money and we bondholders are finding ourselves in control of less and less of our original investment.

Do we really want to hand over absolute power to this thus far very flaky unreliable person with the knowledge that accepting this false dichotomy may very well be the last we ever see of our money and the beginning of a new very wealthy life for the person that has been deceiving us?

As more and more people are realising and pointing out, this is the pertinent point here. Some have called it the "bait and switch", but I think that the phrase "false dichotomy" describes it very accurately. This new contract is being offered to obscure the previous unilateral change to fixed rate contracts which broke the spirit of the original agreement.

The fact that bonds were going to be proportional was represented until very recently, and saying that the original contract never guaranteed that is disingenuous at best, and criminal at worst.

On top of everything else, ask yourself this: if the contracts were always going to be fixed to 100MH/s (or 300MH/s) , why would he expect that anyone would consent to hold back mined coins for reinvestment if rates are fixed? Clearly this is money comes out of investors' pockets, and a fixed rate contract guarantees that it will never be recouped, by definition. At the time, a poll was taken and a >50% majority decision was reached where this was considered a good idea for everyone, but not a single one of those people would have thought that to be a good idea if bondholders were not going to profit from that reinvestment.

This is just one of numerous examples showing that Zach, many months after the "IPO", knew what the spirit of the original agreement was and was intending to keep to that. Then suddenly something changed, and now we are being offered a "choice" to mask the fact that this was ever the case, along with the option to waive any rights we had under the actual original agreement.

It has been a long wait but the cards are finally down, all that remains to be seen is how the dust settles.

[drdops]

Ok, after all this BS that we got forced to read and see.

Who's starting the lawsuit to dismantle LRM and prosecute Mr. Lab_Rat for fraud, breaching of contract, and any other goodies he put himself into?

I'm in.

This was the original offering:
Of the hardware bought, 25% will be for the company, and mine for expenses and new hardware acquisitions. The remaining 75% will pay customer dividends.-

Any way to twist wording to make it appear like you're the saint and saviour offering 300mhz its just a shovel of dirt in your head.

+1 for lawsuit unless:

LabRat im not asking you to return my BTC but i'd like to get the equivalent amount of bitfury mining gear, so i have 162 shares and i bought them @ 0,15 per pc, that makes 24,3 BTC. Taking todays Bitstamp rate its approx 11k dollars which when looking at bitfuryin price in EU would be about 2,5TH worth of mining gear so you would only have to send me 6 bitfury full kits (H-cards x16, motherboard, rasp, sd card) x6.

Please contact me as soon as possible.

also +1 for lawsuit unless above . ( I too have 160 shares- so I will take approx 2.5TH bitfury gear).
He really did come across as a genuine guy- it felt like such a sound investment. I guess greed got the better of him. You let us down Zach.

[Lab_Rat]

With whos permission was the original contract modified ?  Doesn't Lab_Rat need share holder consent to do so, Please advise if otherwise stated so any where.

The original contract was not modified.  It will be posted shortly.  The payout structure was modified to fit to the original contract.

A quick cover in plain English rather than Legal terminology.

Dividends -> Distributions
Bonds -> Contracts
Investors -> Contract Holders or Customers

Original Contract (was never changed):
Vague
100MH/s minimum
Does not allow for anything more

New Contract:
Clear
Structured
Payout explained in detail
100MH/s + bonus (which allows for growth)
Added refund policy for new purchases


I have not taken any rights away from anyone.  Nothing at all has changed except the Original Contract has been cleaned up and clarified in the New Contract.  This payout has ALWAYS been trust based... I never have legally been obligated to pay more than 100MH/s, and you will clearly see that in the Original Contract when posted shortly.  I'm running out to check up on the hardware hashing for you (the Contract Holders) which I find much more important than arguing with trolls spreading FUD on the forums.

PS The dividends will be a few hours late but will be paid out in a few.  Just a warning so no one accuses LRM of not paying them out.

[mboehler]

On a more serious note this situation is a false dichotomy.

Zach is creating the illusion that there are only 2 options for bondholders to chose between. He has named his recent contract change to capped bonds "the original contract" and is claiming that we must chose between the new contract where we have zero guarantees of any sort and the "original" contract which is NOT the original contract.

The refusal to justify any of his scammy behavior by claiming he does not provide legal advice is just comical.

As is already evident by his previous lack of accountability with the 2 week mining for hardware period being extended to pretty much whatever he pleased despite what was agreed upon, unnecessary complete lack of communication, affiliation with BFL, false claims of moving the asset to an exchange, not posting the new contract until the AMA had already started, complete lack of transparency and refusal to answer any meaningful questions it's becoming obvious to almost all of us that Zach cannot be trusted.

As time is progressing Zach is somehow finding him self in control of more and more of our money and we bondholders are finding ourselves in control of less and less of our original investment.

Do we really want to hand over absolute power to this thus far very flaky unreliable person with the knowledge that accepting this false dichotomy may very well be the last we ever see of our money and the beginning of a new very wealthy life for the person that has been deceiving us?

As more and more people are realising and pointing out, this is the pertinent point here. Some have called it the "bait and switch", but I think that the phrase "false dichotomy" describes it very accurately. This new contract is being offered to obscure the previous unilateral change to fixed rate contracts which broke the spirit of the original agreement.

The fact that bonds were going to be proportional was represented until very recently, and saying that the original contract never guaranteed that is disingenuous at best, and criminal at worst.

On top of everything else, ask yourself this: if the contracts were always going to be fixed to 100MH/s (or 300MH/s) , why would he expect that anyone would consent to hold back mined coins for reinvestment if rates are fixed? Clearly this is money comes out of investors' pockets, and a fixed rate contract guarantees that it will never be recouped, by definition. At the time, a poll was taken and a >50% majority decision was reached where this was considered a good idea for everyone, but not a single one of those people would have thought that to be a good idea if bondholders were not going to profit from that reinvestment.

This is just one of numerous examples showing that Zach, many months after the "IPO", knew what the spirit of the original agreement was and was intending to keep to that. Then suddenly something changed, and now we are being offered a "choice" to mask the fact that this was ever the case, along with the option to waive any rights we had under the actual original agreement.

It has been a long wait but the cards are finally down, all that remains to be seen is how the dust settles.

Agreed...

Lab_Rat has stated that he will not honor the intention of the original agreement.  Therefore, here's what I see coming:

Since Lab_Rat will not honor the original agreement from Page 1 of this thread, then he needs to buy back "contracts" from any investor who so desires.  By original agreement, I mean the one from page 1 of this thread, pertinent information is quoted below), NOT the falsely stated 100 MH/s LOCKED contracts Lab_Rat has tried to get us to accept.  If he does not offer this, or other acceptable compensation, I believe he will see a law suit.  I for one am very interested to see who all is inclined to join this lawsuit.

It's sad really.  We all wanted and hoped that Zach would honor the original agreement so that we could all profit from this venture.  It is very sad that he has basically forced us all into this position.

ORIGINAL Agreement from Page 1 of This Thread.

Lab Rat Data Processing, LLC

LabRatMining

Official Announcement

Lab Rat Data Processing, LLC, a NJ company, operating under the trade name, LabRatMining is a company that will be operating as a mid to large scale miner for Bitcoins paying out dividends/returns to bondholders.  Each bond in the company represents a portion of the overall hashrate owned and managed by LabRatMining.  LabRatMining plans to expand mining operations to maintain a presence in the mining community for years to come.

Bond Structure – It is intended 100,000 bonds will be sold during the IPO.  These bonds represent the hashrate that these machines produce rather than the hardware itself.  This allows for control of the company without taking mining profits from investors and bondholders.  Future bond offerings of the company will be funded by intended additional sales in increments of 50,000 bonds.

Dividends/Bond Value – Each bond will receive a minimum of 100MH/s* worth of mining profit in dividends/returns (all dividends are intended as contractual returns based on investments and may simply be referred to as dividends for future purposes) on a weekly basis.  The first payout will be at the end of the second full week mining.  If the entire 100,000 bond IPO is not sold immediately, bonds will represent an equivalent portion of the processing power included in the operation at that time.  If it occurs that multiple installments of hardware are required to fulfill the IPO’s expected hardware, the earnings of each installment will begin to be paid out in dividends on the second full week of each installment.  Dividends will be paid out on Saturdays ~12 noon Eastern Time(UTC -0500.)

*Plans for Expansion – It is intended the IPO will result in at least 10TH/s being controlled and paid out by LabRatMining on a weekly basis.  The 10TH/s current estimate is subject to increase depending on the speed at which the IPO is completed allowing for further expansion.

The next installment will be offered up in bonds at the beginning of the week following completion of the IPO.  This set of 50,000 bonds will be put up for sale @0.25BTC/bond or market value +-5% at the time of the bonds being issued, whichever is of greater value.  This installment will add at least 15TH/s to the companies mining operation, and with it will follow an increase in dividend payout to a minimum of 166.67MH/s per bond (this may increase depending on company expansion).  This not only gives the new investors an increase in dividend payment, but gives greater benefits to the initial and early investors.

It is intended the third installment will likely mimic the second installment thereby potentially increasing the company’s total hashrate to 40+TH/s which will in turn bump the dividend payout to 200+MH/s per share.  All the forgoing and following estimates presume a fully sold out bond/contract offering and returns for mining based on certain historical data for returns of similar operations.

It is intended installments in the operation will continue to occur which will provide more value to the company as well as more value to each individual bond as the company matures.  These expansions, if they occur, will likely grow the company and our mining capacity in size which will provide further expanded payouts in the form of dividends (or increased dividends to investors).  It is currently intended a portion of the money the company receives in revenue from bond sales and mining will be used to expand the operation which will further increase dividends per bond.  It is currently intended the company will be adding to the bondholders hashrate on a regular basis as the company expands so one should expect to receive greater dividends than those explained above.

Highlighted by me.

MODIFIED Agreement from Page 166 of This Thread.

CHANGE IN PAYOUT RATE STRUCTURE

Cryptocurrencies, which includes Bitcoin, are relatively new to the world economic communities and its governments. Worldwide there continues to be almost daily announcements from governments regarding crypto currencies. Lab Rat Data Processing, a Limited Liability Company in the state of New Jersey, continues to monitor those announcements and the ever-changing laws and economic environments and how those laws impact cryptocurrencies, including Bitcoin, and in particular Lab Rat Data Processing. Most important to Lab Rat Data Processing are the ever-changing laws and/or announcements from the United States and its governmental agencies and the state of New Jersey and its governmental agencies.

Based upon recent developments in US and local laws, Lab Rat Data Processing, and their legal representatives, have determined a potential current or future problem with its current rate structure, which was originally intended as a variable rate payout. Therefore, Lab Rat Data Processing is amending its variable rate payout with a set rate payout of 100 MH/s per contract. This rate payout shall be for all current contract-holders and all future contract-holders.  Contemporaneous with the change from a varying rate payout to a set rate payout Lab_Rat will triple the amount of contracts held by all contract holders as of the date of March 8, 2014.  Therefore, for all current contract holders on their current contracts, the effective rate will be permanently set at 300 MH/s per contract.  All future contracts purchased will be at the new rate of 100MH/s.

Lab Rat Data Processing will continue to monitor developments for cryptocurrencies and Bitcoin in particular, seeking to maintain its current status as a leader in the Bitcoin community and to maintain compliance with US and New Jersey laws.

More information to come.

Highlighted by me.

[mrstef]

I was just about to post that very thing...

The company line from the AMA has been (as I understand it) : "Choose to take the new contract, or choose to keep the original contract, no legal advice will be provided to inform that decision."

But the original contract is no longer available, considering it's been modified to reflect the capped 100MH/s hash rate... so really, we're only able to choose between contract v1.5 and contract v2...

How do we, as investors/clients reconcile this choice? It hardly seems like one at all.

The original contract (v1) clearly states that individual bond hashrate will increase as new hardware is available. Stop saying we have a choice of our contracts. As far as I understand, we only have the choice between the recently modified contact, and the new contract.
 

50,000 bonds will be put up for sale @0.25BTC/bond or market value +-5% at the time of the bonds being issued, whichever is of greater value.  This installment will add at least 15TH/s to the companies mining operation, and with it will follow an increase in dividend payout to a minimum of 166.67MH/s per bond (this may increase depending on company expansion).  This not only gives the new investors an increase in dividend payment, but gives greater benefits to the initial and early investors.

It is intended the third installment will likely mimic the second installment thereby potentially increasing the company’s total hashrate to 40+TH/s which will in turn bump the dividend payout to 200+MH/s per share.  All the forgoing and following estimates presume a fully sold out bond/contract offering and returns for mining based on certain historical data for returns of similar operations.

It is intended installments in the operation will continue to occur which will provide more value to the company as well as more value to each individual bond as the company matures.  These expansions, if they occur, will likely grow the company and our mining capacity in size which will provide further expanded payouts in the form of dividends (or increased dividends to investors).  It is currently intended a portion of the money the company receives in revenue from bond sales and mining will be used to expand the operation which will further increase dividends per bond.  It is currently intended the company will be adding to the bondholders hashrate on a regular basis as the company expands so one should expect to receive greater dividends than those explained above.
Source: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=251423.0

Let's find a different solution here, or call it what it is and stop pretending we have a choice at all.

[maqifrnswa]

1) LRM as a public company is dead. LRM needs external funds to grow, and no one will buy new contracts anymore. Even before this, when LRM tried to raise funds selling AT ABOVE market rates, only a few fools purchased.
2) I'm sorry you see your customers as trolls spreading FUD.
3) Simple corporate accounting, you don't need to respond to this but this will help you prepare for the lawsuit defence:
What percentage of the total funds raised came from contract sales? What percentage of funds did LR contribute/raise via VC?
What percentage of total hashrate is returned to contract holders? What percentage are retained earnings for LRM?

If those percentages do not line up, you might be running a scam.

4) If you're response to "3" above is "but IPO was a property transfer, so I only account for it in $. All other growth are unrealized gains on assets until I traded them for goods."
The easy response to that is:
a) Fine, I'm sure you reported those gains as taxes (you probably have a passthrough LLC, so taxes may be up to 30%)
b) The money you collected for the "managed group buy" should have gone to purchase hardware, you instead invested it in a volatile and risky asset? That is financial negligence, and in violation of the contract. That's the equivalent of "Hey, I'll sell you a bike for $100." You then take that $100 and gamble it on red in vegas, turning it into $200. Then you give the guy the bike, after you make sure you got your profit, then go out and buy yourself a new bike. If you lost, you would have said "sorry dude, the value went down - here's a big wheels."

  Dividends will be paid out on Saturdays ~12 noon Eastern Time(UTC -0500.)

If I buy the bonds on Wednesday when will the first dividend be paid?  Saturday the 20th of July 2013?  

If so I will buy 100 BTC worth of bonds.

You don't get any dividends until the machines arrive.  After that you get 85% of what the machines you paid a 200% markup for mine.

If you don't want to wait you can achieve the same result faster - just send 2/3 of your BTC to an address you don't have the key for.

Where do you see a 15% fee included? It will be a zero fee company with all running costs covered by the company for life... As well as that, the hashrate per bond will be increasing over time.  In fact Dave from BitFury has agreed to fly out to meet me in order to present a working prototype to me.  I will likely be investing in BitFury a significant amount which will increase the hashrate per bond significantly.

Sorry - was confusing this with one of the other offerings trying to sell on hardware/pre-orders at a big markup.

Make up your mind whether you're running a bond or a share.

If it's a bond then fix in stone what gets paid.
If it's a share then add accountability in - and take your cut via a defined management fee.

This vague "it's sort of a bond but I'll try to give a bit more than X but without any guarantees and I'll keep whatever I feel like" approach just isn't one or the other.  Investors should know what they're entitled to from the contract.  If it's a bond then they're entitled to some fixed payment.  If a share then they own the output of everything bought with funds raised - less costs and management fee.

Hmm, this reminds me of people coming and viewing your belongings for sale on craigslist, yet spend the duration of the time kicking tires, and questioning its worth.
Its a very simple concept, either invest, or don't.

Actually the dude has a point.  A bond has a fixed rate coupon (interest rate) and share pays out after company costs and retentions are met.  This is nether a bond or a share and now I have concerns that this operation was not well thought out.

This bond/share creates market confusion when people want to unload it and I don't see how you can run this operation without taking operational costs.

RatLab need to be fair to himself  and keep some of the value he has created.

I'm sorry you feel as though it wasn't thought out, maybe I didn't like either a bond or a share scheme.  One the investors are locked in at a certain hashrate even if new tech comes out meaning their dividends are constantly shrinking.  The other, I would have to keep shares as to maintain ownership of my own company which gets messy if I want to issue new shares...

I just wanted something that could reward both parties and increase in worth over time instead of deteriorate in value.

Also thank you for being understanding of the fact that I should not run a high scale mining company and put myself in the hole while doing it.  I have already sunk hundreds of hours and thousands of dollars into this company before I took a dime from anyone.  I didn't even take money from the few individuals I let pledge initial investments to me.  They were only there to see if there would be interest in my starting up a company.

I said it earlier in this thread and I'll say it again:

I find it very hard to imagine a scenario in which investors actually profit from this offering. This is merely a method for the issuer to re-sell BFL pre-orders at a large markup to profit while revealing themselves of the majority of the risk. Outside of the facts, the rest of the contract is mostly filler language used to entice potential investors.

It is the day for LabRat Mining to celebrating its IPO...and a day that naive investors get pay for their lessons.

Personally, I think this really a good business ,whether you have orders in hand or not ,just seat at home typing few thousand words and it will soon become few thousand BTCs....  

Great Business model.....

[Lab_Rat]

I was just about to post that very thing...

The company line from the AMA has been (as I understand it) : "Choose to take the new contract, or choose to keep the original contract, no legal advice will be provided to inform that decision."

But the original contract is no longer available, considering it's been modified to reflect the capped 100MH/s hash rate... so really, we're only able to choose between contract v1.5 and contract v2...

How do we, as investors/clients reconcile this choice? It hardly seems like one at all.

The original contract (v1) clearly states that individual bond hashrate will increase as new hardware is available. Stop saying we have a choice of our contracts. As far as I understand, we only have the choice between the recently modified contact, and the new contract.
 

50,000 bonds will be put up for sale @0.25BTC/bond or market value +-5% at the time of the bonds being issued, whichever is of greater value.  This installment will add at least 15TH/s to the companies mining operation, and with it will follow an increase in dividend payout to a minimum of 166.67MH/s per bond (this may increase depending on company expansion).  This not only gives the new investors an increase in dividend payment, but gives greater benefits to the initial and early investors.

It is intended the third installment will likely mimic the second installment thereby potentially increasing the company’s total hashrate to 40+TH/s which will in turn bump the dividend payout to 200+MH/s per share.  All the forgoing and following estimates presume a fully sold out bond/contract offering and returns for mining based on certain historical data for returns of similar operations.

It is intended installments in the operation will continue to occur which will provide more value to the company as well as more value to each individual bond as the company matures.  These expansions, if they occur, will likely grow the company and our mining capacity in size which will provide further expanded payouts in the form of dividends (or increased dividends to investors).  It is currently intended a portion of the money the company receives in revenue from bond sales and mining will be used to expand the operation which will further increase dividends per bond.  It is currently intended the company will be adding to the bondholders hashrate on a regular basis as the company expands so one should expect to receive greater dividends than those explained above.
Source: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=251423.0

Let's find a different solution here, or call it what it is and stop pretending we have a choice at all.

Please tell me where I've said you will not receive benefits of new hardware?

Also please read these statements that were highlighted:

It is intended installments in the operation will continue to occur which will provide more value to the company as well as more value to each individual bond as the company matures.  These expansions, if they occur, will likely grow the company and our mining capacity in size which will provide further expanded payouts in the form of dividends (or increased dividends to investors). It is currently intended a portion of the money the company receives in revenue from bond sales and mining will be used to expand the operation which will further increase dividends per bond.  It is currently intended the company will be adding to the bondholders hashrate on a regular basis as the company expands so one should expect to receive greater dividends than those explained above.

Therefore, Lab Rat Data Processing is amending its variable rate payout with a set rate payout of 100 MH/s per contract. This rate payout shall be for all current contract-holders and all future contract-holders.  Contemporaneous with the change from a varying rate payout to a set rate payout Lab_Rat will triple the amount of contracts held by all contract holders as of the date of March 8, 2014.  Therefore, for all current contract holders on their current contracts, the effective rate will be permanently set at 300 MH/s per contract.  All future contracts purchased will be at the new rate of 100MH/s.

*** The payout was never put in detail in the original contract ***

Please note that even without these guarantees I've still been paying out as much or more than I've voiced.  You are looking for negative when there is none to be found.  I've always gone above and beyond what the contract promised.  All I've done is clean up the new contract, provided additional benefits, and better explain the payout structure.

[countduckula]

You're seriously stealing from us 130 TH of mining power, FUNDED by this proyect you managed and just paying for barely 18th, try to fancy your words, twist facts and offers. Sorry for me, i believed in a serious person who turned to be this one, forced to be hidden in the shadows for weeks.

Lawsuit incoming, hope we can dismantle your proyect, sell everything and return all the proceeds to us, why not some behind bars vacation, this could set a precedent on future companies to be much more serious.

[tempestb]

This is only going to get solved in a court room.  LabRat can modify contract terms at will, so until there is a legal motion to prevent him from doing so, it's just money poured down a black hole.  Lawyer up...  It's time to sue.

[pontikis13]

According to the Labrat-Merriam-Webster dictionary:

troll noun    \ˈtrōl\

Definition of TROLL:
An annoying person who resists attempts to hustle him by using rational discourse. A troll will usually ask logical questions after having funded an operation without receiving what he/she was promised in return. Trolls react to getting ignored for months.

Example:
-BFL_Josh: I'm getting really tired of those damn trolls we sold pre-orders to, they are complaining about not having yet received the hardware we promised them 2 weeks™ 1 year ago!


Synonyms:
bondholder, prey, victim, benefactor

[Lab_Rat]

You're seriously stealing from us 130 TH of mining power, FUNDED by this proyect you managed and just paying for barely 18th, try to fancy your words, twist facts and offers. Sorry for me, i believed in a serious person who turned to be this one, forced to be hidden in the shadows for weeks.

Lawsuit incoming, hope we can dismantle your proyect, sell everything and return all the proceeds to us, why not some behind bars vacation, this could set a precedent on future companies to be much more serious.

Where am I stealing anything? Please explain?

EDIT: I believe you're assuming, and not reading...

[PoUpA]

So if i understand well... to be legal the continual increase of hashrate has to be a "bonus" and only the new contractors will benefit from it?
But ... this bonus is not tide with anything as in the contract so we just have to trust you that its the added hashpower ?

[Lab_Rat]

So if i understand well... to be legal the continual increase of hashrate has to be a "bonus" and only the new contractors will benefit from it?
But ... this bonus is not tide with anything as in the contract so we just have to trust you that its the added hashpower ?

Something close to what you describe here will likely be the case, but it was not specified in the original contract either.

[countduckula]

I read you pay us for 17.7th, when it was more close to 30th, and according to your vague and sporadic reports of hardware purchases, there's 150th wich you claim some already arrived, and yet, still paying for lets say 18. you systematically refuse to address the incoming hardware, and now you claim you do not have to share anything with us, plus you now added 2 weeks of mining with the new equipment to do what? you're not going to pay for that to us and we paid for that equipment.

Anything above 17TH WAS PAID by our 25% and 2 weeks of mining with OUR PAID equipment, if you dont pay us for what we purchased, then you're stealing the equipment and the proceeds you obtain from them, plain and simple, you expect me to believe you just have 18th running? you ALWAYS claimed that cex.io was just a part of all.

Trying to force us to believe you just offered 100mhz bonds and out of your kindness you end up giving 300mh after 2-3 months ago you were speaking of 2-3Gh share will not work at all, it will not.

[countduckula]

So if i understand well... to be legal the continual increase of hashrate has to be a "bonus" and only the new contractors will benefit from it?
But ... this bonus is not tide with anything as in the contract so we just have to trust you that its the added hashpower ?

Something close to what you describe here will likely be the case, but it was not specified in the original contract either.

It wasnt needed in the original contract wich still hasnt been shown, guess you're twisting some sentences there, adding some over and maybe deleting others to build your fantasy land of the fixed 100mhz.

The contract was for a variable part of the mining power, thats what you sold to all of us.