[CLOSED]R5: KnC Jupiter, BELOW-COST+Host! $78+Bonuses! Hashing, 1st payouts sent

[thomas_s]

I was actually looking at the BTCGuild API (last night) to see if it could give me a clue as to why the plugin stopped updating, and came across this data:

{"worker_name":"DZgb5_1","hash_rate":0.00,"valid_shares":124801770,"stale_shares":168066,"dupe_shares":219840,"unknown_shares":420,"valid_shares_since_reset":124801770,"stale_shares_since_reset":168066,"dupe_shares_since_reset":219840,"unknown_shares_since_reset":420,"valid_shares_nmc":0,"stale_shares_nmc":0,"dupe_shares_nmc":0,"unknown_shares_nmc":0,"valid_shares_nmc_since_reset":0,"stale_shares_nmc_since_reset":0,"dupe_shares_nmc_since_reset":0,"unknown_shares_nmc_since_reset":0,"last_share":7394}

last_share = 7394 seconds ~ 1.8 hours ago. Seems to be hashing just fine now though.

If we started trying to set up more group buys on it, it's possible the new ones are failing/causing the rest to fail as a result. I didn't think to have it fail nicely.  Worst case the short burst of updates is triggering DDOS protection on BTCGuild. That would be (slightly) harder to deal with.

Hmm we only put the 2 R5/R6 on the site, was just about to add the BA rounds address to it.

[1715092820]

1715092820

[1715092820]

1715092820

[1715092820]

1715092820

[1715092820]

1715092820

[-Redacted-]

I've started cashing out the NMC we've accumulated on btc-e.  Selling them for BTC is going rather slowly, but as they are sold, I'm sending the money to the R5/R6 GB wallets.  204 NMC should net us about 0.4 BTC - every little bit helps!

-R-

[bbxx]

hi, when will be next payout ?

[Ashitank]

15th or 16th of this month , cant wait

[-Redacted-]

In USD terms, we're at about +5% ROI.   I wonder if we'll see Bitcoin at $300 next week?   w00t !!

The next payout is scheduled for Friday November 15th.  That will be the first payout that hosting fees will need to come out of.  And speaking of hosting fees, I need to call a vote on making a correction to the original terms of the GB which states that hosting fees are 2.75%.

The problem here is that hosting costs are in USD, not BTC, and the electricity, internet, rent, utilities, maintenance fees, and all the other hosting expenses need to be paid in USD.  In US Dollar terms, the hosting fee is $200 per month, or $100 every payout.  (That's a special GB reduction from the $220 per month that I originally paid for hosting these machines.)  

This amount is almost 50% less than KnC charges for hosting, and about 30% less than CoinTerra plans to charge for hosting.   In short, it's a very good deal at $200 per month.  Paid this way we can continue operating the machines until they aren't mining approximately 0.3 BTC every two weeks - probably well into next year.  

On the other hand, as difficulty rises, 2.75% probably won't cover the hosting costs past the next payout - it drops below the cost of hosting when the machines don't return at least 11 BTC every two weeks.  So, the bottom line is this, either we modify the original 2.75% terms to be $200 per month, or we have to shut down the machines much earlier than we really need to.

I vote my 5 shares of R5 and R6 for modifying the terms of the GB to change the 2.75% to be $200 per month so we can continue hashing longer.  

Votes, please?

  

[Tiennou74]

Hey guys,

I was just comparing bitcoins I got and the mootinator plug-in
I have 8 shares in R5

For R5 I received: 0.94845919+0.98760885=1.94
If I look at the mootinator plugin =0.28634808*8 =2.29

So a 0.3547166 difference.
I know we had a little bit of management fees and transfers fees but .35? That's almost a 100$ in usd.

Where is that coming from?

[floatyfish]

In USD terms, we're at about +5% ROI.   I wonder if we'll see Bitcoin at $300 next week?   w00t !!

The next payout is scheduled for Friday November 15th.  That will be the first payout that hosting fees will need to come out of.  And speaking of hosting fees, I need to call a vote on making a correction to the original terms of the GB which states that hosting fees are 2.75%.

The problem here is that hosting costs are in USD, not BTC, and the electricity, internet, rent, utilities, maintenance fees, and all the other hosting expenses need to be paid in USD.  In US Dollar terms, the hosting fee is $200 per month, or $100 every payout.  (That's a special GB reduction from the $220 per month that I originally paid for hosting these machines.)  

This amount is almost 50% less than KnC charges for hosting, and about 30% less than CoinTerra plans to charge for hosting.   In short, it's a very good deal at $200 per month.  Paid this way we can continue operating the machines until they aren't mining approximately 0.3 BTC every two weeks - probably well into next year.  

On the other hand, as difficulty rises, 2.75% probably won't cover the hosting costs past the next payout - it drops below the cost of hosting when the machines don't return at least 11 BTC every two weeks.  So, the bottom line is this, either we modify the original 2.75% terms to be $200 per month, or we have to shut down the machines much earlier than we really need to.

I vote my 5 shares of R5 and R6 for modifying the terms of the GB to change the 2.75% to be $200 per month so we can continue hashing longer.  

Votes, please?

If it allows us to keep hashing longer, then I guess my lonely one vote is behind you.

[-Redacted-]

Hey guys,

I was just comparing bitcoins I got and the mootinator plug-in
I have 8 shares in R5

For R5 I received: 0.94845919+0.98760885=1.94
If I look at the mootinator plugin =0.28634808*8 = 2.29

So a 0.3547166 difference.
I know we had a little bit of management fees and transfers fees but .35? That's almost a 100$ in usd.

Where is that coming from?

There have been no fees deducted from the first two payouts.  
EDIT:  I take that back.  There was a 0.0001 transaction fee charged to each GB for each of the two transfers done so far.

The plug in keeps a running total since the start of hashing- you have to subtract out previous payouts.  That total will also be showing an additional 8 days worth of hashing past where the last payout was made.

If you subtract the 24.196 that was paid out in the first two rounds from the current total, you'll see that we've hashed 4.44 BTC since the last payout.

If you multiply your shares (8/100) times what was paid out in the first two payouts (24.196) you come up with 1.93568 BTC, which would seem to match what was paid out to you.    

If you multiply out the 4.44 that we've hashed since the last payout by your number of shares, you come up with what you are calling the "missing" 0.3552 BTC.  What you've actually done is to calculate how much you have coming to you so far in the NEXT payout.

-R-

[Tiennou74]

Haha my mistake! Thanks for the detailed answer
Sorry about that!

[-Redacted-]

Haha my mistake! Thanks for the detailed answer
Sorry about that!

No problem!  We try to keep everything honest, fair, and transparent.  So, please feel free to ask if you have questions about something like that.  There should be a rational and straight answer!

[Ashitank]

In USD terms, we're at about +5% ROI.   I wonder if we'll see Bitcoin at $300 next week?   w00t !!

The next payout is scheduled for Friday November 15th.  That will be the first payout that hosting fees will need to come out of.  And speaking of hosting fees, I need to call a vote on making a correction to the original terms of the GB which states that hosting fees are 2.75%.

The problem here is that hosting costs are in USD, not BTC, and the electricity, internet, rent, utilities, maintenance fees, and all the other hosting expenses need to be paid in USD.  In US Dollar terms, the hosting fee is $200 per month, or $100 every payout.  (That's a special GB reduction from the $220 per month that I originally paid for hosting these machines.)  

This amount is almost 50% less than KnC charges for hosting, and about 30% less than CoinTerra plans to charge for hosting.   In short, it's a very good deal at $200 per month.  Paid this way we can continue operating the machines until they aren't mining approximately 0.3 BTC every two weeks - probably well into next year.  

On the other hand, as difficulty rises, 2.75% probably won't cover the hosting costs past the next payout - it drops below the cost of hosting when the machines don't return at least 11 BTC every two weeks.  So, the bottom line is this, either we modify the original 2.75% terms to be $200 per month, or we have to shut down the machines much earlier than we really need to.

I vote my 5 shares of R5 and R6 for modifying the terms of the GB to change the 2.75% to be $200 per month so we can continue hashing longer.  

Votes, please?

+1 With my 11 shares in R5 i vote yes for increase in hosting fees to make GB run longer.

[-Redacted-]

It's not really intended as an increase as much as it is to just fix something that wasn't thought through completely.  I don't think that 6 weeks ago anyone expected the kind of difficulty increases we have been seeing, and they expected the 2.75% to cover hosting costs for a much longer period of time.  

By switching it to a fixed cost instead of a percentage, we should be able to hash for several months longer and actually make  more of a return as a result of doing it.  My estimate is that by doing this, we should be able to mine at least an extra 30 BTC before having to shut down due to not meeting expenses.  (And if Hashfast really bombs out, we might be able to pull in an extra 50 BTC or so before the difficulty increases cause the expenses to overtake the income.)

[unknown.usr]

It's not really intended as an increase as much as it is to just fix something that wasn't thought through completely.  I don't think that 6 weeks ago anyone expected the kind of difficulty increases we have been seeing, and they expected the 2.75% to cover hosting costs for a much longer period of time.  

By switching it to a fixed cost instead of a percentage, we should be able to hash for several months longer and actually make  more of a return as a result of doing it.  My estimate is that by doing this, we should be able to mine at least an extra 30 BTC before having to shut down due to not meeting expenses...

Sounds like a plan to me!

[Tiennou74]

I vote for modifying the terms so we can keep hashing.
I also see people reselling Knc miners for 7000-8500, this could be a nice ROI option if the difficulty kept rising and btc stalled (right now it is up to $316!)

[drduck]

I vote for modifying the terms also. But reselling would even be better and apparently there is demand.

[Cantrip]

Vote with my 2 shares for the $200 flat hosting fee.  As for selling, I think they are worth about $7000 each, and we should keep them for now.

[Ashitank]

As long as hashfast has delayed product shipment we are looking ok & should consider selling only when hashfast is close to delivering their product as then dificulty will go to moon & Jupiters value will start to take a fall , but if BTC continues going-up as it is now , then we may have to re-think I guess.

[baros008]

I vote for changing the terms with my 10 shares.

[mootinator]

I vote for BTC Guild never having a long streak of bad luck again.

[mootinator]

OT: I decided to grow one of my trademark dirty 'staches for Movember. Sadly had a young friend succumb to testicular cancer earlier this year (mentioned it once before here even). So, if I've generated any goodwill here with my silly plugin I'm using it up to ask for any small donation. Movember takes Credit card/Paypal and I have a BTC address through the link I'll either match or dump into fiat. (Standard warnings about not giving bitcoin to random people like myself for charity apply, but I'm sure there's enough personal info on that page for a lynch mob to find me if something untoward were to happen.)

Cheers!

http://mobro.co/moetinator