-

[mmmerlin]

I really hope LabRat work with more Hardware sellers than Bitfury or BFL...

Bitfury for the moment is OK but LRM should not depend on a single vendor...it can be very hurting...(delays, out of stock, bankruptcy, etc, etc...)

At the moment ~ 5.5 TH/s is 10 KNCminer Jupiter...and i think LabRat underrated KNCminer.

A word from LabRat about futur hardware purchase is more than welcome

Pretty sure CoinTerra are also in the cross-hairs at a very minimum...

[hamburgerhelper]

The purchases did not outpace difficulty. What makes you think second round funding will be any better?

The future expansion plans are outlined specifically in the IPO T&Cs. Any future expansion will not be diluting; the hash-rate per bond will not drop when further new shares are sold. I think it's pretty clear in the initial document, so if we assume that those terms will be stuck to then that's what makes me think that the second round will be "better".

Obviously if they're not stuck to then that's a different story, but for now I'm just working with what is out there. If we assume that those words will be gone back on then we may as well also assume that divs will stop being paid and that the share price will then go to zero... But that is what makes me think there will be no dilution.

In practice, the funding rounds precede the actual arrival of hardware by months. So from the time the new bonds are sold to the time the hardware arrives, there is most certainly dilution of the dividends. Because of the 3x value of Bitcoin since the IPO, LabRat may not need another significant funding round to hit 100TH. But only he knows whether he plans on selling more bonds in the near future (which will dilute current dividends for weeks or months).

When the new BitFury hardware starts paying dividends, I hope that IPO bond holders recognize their contribution (a 3+ month loan to a future bond holder) and build that into their asking price.

[mmmerlin]

The purchases did not outpace difficulty. What makes you think second round funding will be any better?

The future expansion plans are outlined specifically in the IPO T&Cs. Any future expansion will not be diluting; the hash-rate per bond will not drop when further new shares are sold. I think it's pretty clear in the initial document, so if we assume that those terms will be stuck to then that's what makes me think that the second round will be "better".

Obviously if they're not stuck to then that's a different story, but for now I'm just working with what is out there. If we assume that those words will be gone back on then we may as well also assume that divs will stop being paid and that the share price will then go to zero... But that is what makes me think there will be no dilution.

In practice, the funding rounds precede the actual arrival of hardware by months. So from the time the new bonds are sold to the time the hardware arrives, there is most certainly dilution of the dividends. Because of the 3x value of Bitcoin since the IPO, LabRat may not need another significant funding round to hit 100TH. But only he knows whether he plans on selling more bonds in the near future (which will dilute current dividends for weeks or months).

When the new BitFury hardware starts paying dividends, I hope that IPO bond holders recognize their contribution (a 3+ month loan to a future bond holder) and build that into their asking price.

This is a very good point - there is a limit on the rate at which new bonds are released for precisely this reason. Whilst it doesn't fix the problem entirely, it does limit its magnitude considerably, and it also increases demand for the bonds themselves by limiting supply, thus boosting the price and thereby the benefit to current bondholders as well.

[grnbrg]

A Blockchain.info/wallet rant....

I've been running to problems verifying transactions for the last few days.  I finally figured out why people kept signing messages with the wrong keys.  It turns out blockchain.info/wallet chokes on large messages.  Check this out...

Test message.  All one line.

This is a long rambling test message with no other purpose but to run on for a few lines. There may even be some repetition. There may even be some repetition. There may even be some repetition. There may even be some repetition. There may even be some repetition. But that repetition has nothing to do with the issue.

Signature:  HKN4F75obmCWAtL3llCeThwtfSnPgHlGs6Hz5QJv/FDxNHycHSYBTdoSMo3jWq/9+vkD83Ol1pM+fFG3ajRYDfg=

Now, if you're using blockchain.info/wallet to verify the message, you'll need to use 1grnbrg3Ea4t6bxHvQKRvorbBeLNDXv2N as the signing key.

If you're using any other client, you'll need to use 18CytRmXCt8ue7oTVHrsNp2hzymEwG2kJo as the signing key.

Seems to only affect large messages.  Anyone have any guesses?



grnbrg.

(Apologies to anyone who I've frustrated in the last week with "But you signed it with the wrong key!!!"....)

[contactmike1]

If you're using any other client, you'll need to use 18CytRmXCt8ue7oTVHrsNp2hzymEwG2kJo as the signing key. 

Where does 18CytRmXCt8ue7oTVHrsNp2hzymEwG2kJo come from?  Maybe I'm not understanding, but how can a signed message from 18CytRmXCt8ue7oTVHrsNp2hzymEwG2kJo validate you own 1grnbrg3Ea4t6bxHvQKRvorbBeLNDXv2N?

[bittymitty]

Is it about time the website was updated to reflect the current situation? A lot of mis-information on there since Bitfunder went tits up!

http://labratmining.com/Bonds/buyBondsInfo.html

[grnbrg]

If you're using any other client, you'll need to use 18CytRmXCt8ue7oTVHrsNp2hzymEwG2kJo as the signing key. 

Where does 18CytRmXCt8ue7oTVHrsNp2hzymEwG2kJo come from?  Maybe I'm not understanding, but how can a signed message from 18CytRmXCt8ue7oTVHrsNp2hzymEwG2kJo validate you own 1grnbrg3Ea4t6bxHvQKRvorbBeLNDXv2N?

brainwallet.org/#verify takes a message and signature and produces a public address.  In this case it produces 18CytRmXCt8ue7oTVHrsNp2hzymEwG2kJo.  That address works in other clients.



grnbrg.

[countduckula]

I'm in the list of .. You signed with the wrong.. I tried Brainwallet and it indeed tells you that.

Can you please post the link to an updated list of share owners please when you have time?.

[grnbrg]

I'm in the list of .. You signed with the wrong.. I tried Brainwallet and it indeed tells you that.

Can you please post the link to an updated list of share owners please when you have time?.

I'll see if I can beat that out of @Lab_Rat this evening...



grnbrg.

[countduckula]

He needs to make a document available with google docs or any other tool that we can check and he can update easily.

[grnbrg]

He needs to make a document available with google docs or any other tool that we can check and he can update easily.

Yes, but keeping the authoritative spreadsheet online, in a format designed for shared editing is possibly more risk than he is wanting to entertain....



grnbrg.

[countduckula]

Do not drown in a glass of water =)

Just share a copy, you can put one online and keep the real one offline and use copy/paste, Google Docs allows you publish a read only document. That way he doesnt need to share over and over, only needs to remember to c&p the new content on it.

[Jeffrey]

Whats the status on a new location where we can buy/sell shares? I know there's a thread here, but I prefer a website like BitFunder MUCH more (and I'm sure many people with me do)

Any news on this?

[Frankthechicken]

I imagine once Lab_Rat gets the new hardware installed and running and gets a chance to take a breather, we'll get a nice juicy update on future hardware plans.  Especially excited to see what that might get us since LR has been keeping the IPO proceeds as BTC until needed and the value has about tripled since IPO ;-)

Someone mentioned earlier in the thread here what to do with equipment nearing obsolescence or due to be replaced with more efficient hardware.  I don't think this has been covered yet by Lab_Rat.  It was also mentioned in the thread about auctioning them off to buy better hardware.  I like the idea of a private auction among bondholders.  It would be a small bonus to being a bondholder.  When that time comes (probably not until late 1Q2014 I would imagine?) and Lab_Rat gets a bit of spare time, auctioning off one of the BFL singles might be a decent test.  Or just auction it to the general public for a potential greater total return since most bondholders would not benefit from a private auction either because they are outside the US and would possibly have to pay import tax or just are not interested in buying mining hardware.  I can see benefit in either case.

[Doff]

Whats the status on a new location where we can buy/sell shares? I know there's a thread here, but I prefer a website like BitFunder MUCH more (and I'm sure many people with me do)

Any news on this?

I would be one of those people as well.

We need a place to trade.

Kinda disappointing that I may never see the .15 I bought these at again.

[ninthgate]

Whats the status on a new location where we can buy/sell shares? I know there's a thread here, but I prefer a website like BitFunder MUCH more (and I'm sure many people with me do)

Any news on this?

I would be one of those people as well.

We need a place to trade.

Kinda disappointing that I may never see the .15 I bought these at again.

if you assume no additional hardware will be added, you are correct.  that .15 will never be seen again, and a block erupter would've been a better investment.

on the other hand, if you believe that lr will bring the represented bitfury hw online, and he executes on his strategy going into 2014, then we'll be just fine.  you might have difficulty trading the bonds, but the divs may well return the investment and then some.

[rustyh17]

Whats the status on a new location where we can buy/sell shares? I know there's a thread here, but I prefer a website like BitFunder MUCH more (and I'm sure many people with me do)

Any news on this?

I would be one of those people as well.

We need a place to trade.

Kinda disappointing that I may never see the .15 I bought these at again.

I would propose that a trusted member of the community provide a dividend analysis on a weekly
basis to show the cumulative dividend earnings as a percentage of the original bond purchase value.
Last I calculated, we'd received exactly 10% of the 0.15 BTC original price in dividend earnings in the
15 total weeks of this asset's lifespan. We have yet to even begin seeing the large increase in mining
hardware from LRM's Bitfury purchase let alone what 2 weeks of "hardware acquisition mining" will
bring to the table. This asset remains quite promising.

[grnbrg]

Another thing to keep in mind is that the price of Bitcoin has more than tripled since the IPO.  That helps, too.

Edit:  To rephrase that:  At IPO, a bond was worth around $15.  Based on the trades over the last couple of days, a bond is worth... around $17.5.

grnbrg.

[MaxwellsDemon]

Another thing to keep in mind is that the price of Bitcoin has more than tripled since the IPO.  That helps, too.

Edit:  To rephrase that:  At IPO, a bond was worth around $15.  Based on the trades over the last couple of days, a bond is worth... around $17.5.

grnbrg.

That's a relevant consideration only if you keep all your money in fiat and bought coins only momentarily in order to buy LRM bonds.
Otherwise, the useful comparison is to keeping your BTC in your wallet.

[mmmerlin]

Another thing to keep in mind is that the price of Bitcoin has more than tripled since the IPO.  That helps, too.

Edit:  To rephrase that:  At IPO, a bond was worth around $15.  Based on the trades over the last couple of days, a bond is worth... around $17.5.

grnbrg.

That's a relevant consideration only if you keep all your money in fiat and bought coins only momentarily in order to buy LRM bonds.
Otherwise, the useful comparison is to keeping your BTC in your wallet.

As positive as I am about LRM and as much as I usually agree with you grnbrg, I have to say that MaxwellsDemon is correct here in that you can only really make that comparison if you bought btc for the sole purpose of investing in LRM and would not have bought btc otherwise.