[HAVELOCK] PETAMINE - 1,150 TH/S HASH RATE (1GH/S per Unit)

[qwertyqwerty]

Contract clearly was made for devices to be delivered in December. A significant premium was paid for this. It was not delivered. January, and then mid February came before any news of shipments. End users had notified that they had received orders placed In January (At a greatly discounted rate) prior to CryptX operation starting with Cointerra. Again, such a thing is clear breach of contractual obligation by Cointerra.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/02/03/cointerra_ships_bitcoin_miners/

Everyone who received a late "Batch One" machine will get another box (expected to be fully specced) free of charge, says the company.

I had contacted the company to confirm this statement, as I have also ordered a batch one machine outside of this operation. I have confirmed every client (regardless of order size) who placed a DEC batch order will be receiving replacement hardware amounting to additional 100% of the original order within the period of March as compensation, and this is as directly advised by their legal partners.

As shareholders it does not appear that we will be getting that extra 100% applied toward our mining farm. Plus there is the double whammy of missing a 20% increase because a small fraction of mining began one day before mid-Feb.

Absolutely we will. Could you suggest a reason why we would not?
Otherwise, as shareholders we will have been defrauded on a huge scale. This is not a joking matter or something to treat lightly.

For sure there is grounds for legal proceedings should it not be honored. As above, contract stipulates an order placed for December. This was falsely represented. A significant savings could of been made by ordering a Jan or February batch instead. Supplier is well aware of this hence the proceedings to compensate with additional hashrate

PS: you forgot the triple-whammy of ~25% underperforming hardware currently. This will add up to ~$200,000 of lost revenue on a yearly basis on Cointerra shipment alone. (Factoring in a 20% perpetual difficulty increase) Cointerra is directly liable for shipping the full amount of TerraHash-per-second stated in the contract. They also must ship either: Firmware increase amounting to 25% unaccounted orders, replacement hardware, monetary compensation in the form of vouchers, or denominated in BTC or USD.

[1715439524]

1715439524

[1715439524]

1715439524

[1715439524]

1715439524

[spartan82]

Contract clearly was made for devices to be delivered in December. A significant premium was paid for this. It was not delivered. January, and then mid February came before any news of shipments. End users had notified that they had received orders placed In January (At a greatly discounted rate) prior to CryptX operation starting with Cointerra. Again, such a thing is clear breach of contractual obligation by Cointerra.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/02/03/cointerra_ships_bitcoin_miners/

Everyone who received a late "Batch One" machine will get another box (expected to be fully specced) free of charge, says the company.

I had contacted the company to confirm this statement, as I have also ordered a batch one machine outside of this operation. I have confirmed every client (regardless of order size) who placed a DEC batch order will be receiving replacement hardware amounting to additional 100% of the original order within the period of March as compensation, and this is as directly advised by their legal partners. Orders placed for shipment in Months of Jan, Feb will receive a store coupon.

This!
I'm going to hold out to hear exactly what cryptx has to say about this because these numbers aren't good. Everyone with December batch orders is clearly being compensated so why should we miss out? This will not go down well at all. Even the 20% increase at this rate won't do miracles for us but hey it's something

[michaelGedi]

will/might/should...

take a deep breath guys and stop jumping to binary conclusions, seriously

[qwertyqwerty]

will/might/should...

take a deep breath guys and stop jumping to binary conclusions, seriously

When you sign a contract on the dotted line, the beauty is you have submitted yourself to a binary outcome should you fail to honor it.

[MonkeyBear68]

Contract clearly was made for devices to be delivered in December. A significant premium was paid for this. It was not delivered. January, and then mid February came before any news of shipments. End users had notified that they had received orders placed In January (At a greatly discounted rate) prior to CryptX operation starting with Cointerra. Again, such a thing is clear breach of contractual obligation by Cointerra.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/02/03/cointerra_ships_bitcoin_miners/

Everyone who received a late "Batch One" machine will get another box (expected to be fully specced) free of charge, says the company.

I had contacted the company to confirm this statement, as I have also ordered a batch one machine outside of this operation. I have confirmed every client (regardless of order size) who placed a DEC batch order will be receiving replacement hardware amounting to additional 100% of the original order within the period of March as compensation, and this is as directly advised by their legal partners.

As shareholders it does not appear that we will be getting that extra 100% applied toward our mining farm. Plus there is the double whammy of missing a 20% increase because a small fraction of mining began one day before mid-Feb.

Absolutely we will. Could you suggest a reason why we would not?
Otherwise, as shareholders we will have been defrauded on a huge scale. This is not a joking matter or something to treat lightly.

For sure there is grounds for legal proceedings should it not be honored. As above, contract stipulates an order placed for December. This was falsely represented. A significant savings could of been made by ordering a Jan or February batch instead. Supplier is well aware of this hence the proceedings to compensate with additional hashrate

PS: you forgot the triple-whammy of ~25% underperforming hardware currently. This will add up to ~$200,000 of lost revenue on a yearly basis on Cointerra shipment alone. Cointerra is directly liable for shipping the full amount of TerraHash statedt in the contract. They also must ship either: Firmware increase amounting to 25% unaccounted orders, replacement hardware, monretary compensation in the form of vouchers, or denominated in BTC or USD.

I agree. This is not looking that good at the moment.

[michaelGedi]

will/might/should...

take a deep breath guys and stop jumping to binary conclusions, seriously

When you sign a contract on the dotted line, the beauty is you have submitted yourself to a binary outcome should you fail to honor it.

well there you go, stop worrying about what should/might/could happen be happening etc, you'll know soon enough and then you'll have something to talk about and be happy or sad

[MonkeyBear68]

will/might/should...

take a deep breath guys and stop jumping to binary conclusions, seriously

As a programmer, I think in binary.  

[EdoBcn]

Even forgetting (!) for a moment the insurance and how we've been screwed by starting mining 1 day before cut-off. I still have a doubt.

2.88 per share, with 100.000 shares = 288 TH/s
Only 80674 shares available... but the initial order to both providers will (?) be fulfilled. 
So, does this mean that:

A) each share will have 3.569923 GH/s
or
B) we will only get enough mining power to cover 2.88 * 80674 = 232.341 TH/s

Where are the 19326 shares? Who is owning them? 

Also, and this is disturbing for me, if all machines were delivered (or confirmed so), where are them? Are maybe mining already for something else?

If people (shareholders) are screaming here... I assume that if those 19326 shares are in Cryptix wallet, he should be the most concerned about mining at full power, receiving the 100% additional power and so on. I understand he may not want to scare us, but ... why do we get answers on a bloody excel and not on all other questions?

[IamNotSure]

Even forgetting (!) for a moment the insurance and how we've been screwed by starting mining 1 day before cut-off. I still have a doubt.

2.88 per share, with 100.000 shares = 288 TH/s
Only 80674 shares available... but the initial order to both providers will (?) be fulfilled.  
So, does this mean that:

A) each share will have 3.569923 GH/s
or
B) we will only get enough mining power to cover 2.88 * 80674 = 232.341 TH/s

Where are the 19326 shares? Who is owning them?  

Also, and this is disturbing for me, if all machines were delivered (or confirmed so), where are them? Are maybe mining already for something else?

If people (shareholders) are screaming here... I assume that if those 19326 shares are in Cryptix wallet, he should be the most concerned about mining at full power, receiving the 100% additional power and so on. I understand he may not want to scare us, but ... why do we get answers on a bloody excel and not on all other questions?

I think that the unsold share shouldn't be taken into account. CryptX won't buy Gh/s for those share, they were removed as soon as the mining as started, meaning that no mining power will be bought for those. (at least that ho I understand it)

About the 20% for feb, no statement has been done by CryptX, but if they don't give the 20% for Feb, it could be seen as little abusive from them. Meanwhile, if we we are far from hashing @ 2.88/share today, so let's wait we reach that number and then we'll discuss/complain.

[ujka]

Even forgetting (!) for a moment the insurance and how we've been screwed by starting mining 1 day before cut-off. I still have a doubt.

2.88 per share, with 100.000 shares = 288 TH/s
Only 80674 shares available... but the initial order to both providers will (?) be fulfilled. 
So, does this mean that:

A) each share will have 3.569923 GH/s
or
B) we will only get enough mining power to cover 2.88 * 80674 = 232.341 TH/s

Where are the 19326 shares? Who is owning them? 

Also, and this is disturbing for me, if all machines were delivered (or confirmed so), where are them? Are maybe mining already for something else?

If people (shareholders) are screaming here... I assume that if those 19326 shares are in Cryptix wallet, he should be the most concerned about mining at full power, receiving the 100% additional power and so on. I understand he may not want to scare us, but ... why do we get answers on a bloody excel and not on all other questions?

There are 80674 shares sold, havelock confirmed this sometimes ago. Nobody is owning the rest of the shares, CryptX removed them.
80674 * 2.88 = 232.341 th/s
CryptX bought 340 th/s, so there is 110th/s for reinvestments already secured. If fulfilled by bitmine.

[michaelGedi]

I think if you were around prior to GLBSE and seen some of the things that have happened in bitcoin securities in the past you probably would have such relaxed outlooks.

EDIT...naive

you are most likely correct, although, my point of view is that if one decides to play this game they have to accept the massive risk/reward ratios and remove expectation of success, then they will be more than pleasantly surprised when the rewards pay out.

EDIT.... naive is a strong word, but while I don't much care about defending my character, I'd rather my posts weren't misunderstood. When I say relax or wait and see, I mean, worrying yourself and posting incessantly negative comments is not going to make YOUR situation any better. I think one can stay rational and sceptical while posting in a more productive manner, some of the assumptions that get spammed around come across as almost childish in tone.

EDIT 2... qwerty you have posted that it is most likely that Cointerra will deliver the compensation in march time. This information is valid and useful, thank you. To assume that cryptx would do anything other than put that hardware online for the operation I think is not helpful personally. To me I think that is the ONLY choice and once there is comment on that hardware from cryptx I may or may not make that statement.

[XliptTit]

more miners arrived, we are mining at 30 Th/s now

It would be really nice if criptx laid a reinvestment plan  and adress the issue of +20% of february and the extra units cointerra is shipping because of the underperformed units

I understand that things are probably rushy with the miners coming in, so it doesnt need to happen now but is is important to have a clearly laid down plan.It would help everyone and the prices of the shares would probably stabilize in the "fair value", just look how it jumped only because we started hashing.There is a communication/trust problem, it isnt groundbreaking but it is certainly there

[trek27]

This time around it really seems that Bitmine is very close to start shipping

I can give you some definitive ones from the SW side:

• CoinCraft Desk
  
  • done: the driver got integrated in upstream cgminer just today (check git repository)
  • done: all remaining FW parts (UI, sensors, actors) passed long term testing over night
  • done: with that, FW is ready for deployment
• CoinCraft Rig
  
  • done: IAP bootloader to reflash STM32 over SPI in the field
  • done: initial hashing proxy tunneling SPI comms between host and 2 chip chains
  • done: Initial cgminer driver
  • WIP: sensor and actors (temperature, voltage regulator, etc.)
  • WIP: self-optimization, long-term stability

Essentially, the FW for the Desk was done before time (devices are assembled / tested while I type), while the SW for the Rig will be ready just in time.

  This would be really good news - Bitmine represents more than 80% of pre-ordered hardware.

[Foebar]

@ Cryptx

The current machines seem unstable, lots of fluctuations in performance (between 25Th and 30Th).
Is there a problem with the hardware / firmware, or are you just playing with settings to find optimal performance?

[cryptx]

@ Cryptx

The current machines seem unstable, lots of fluctuations in performance (between 25Th and 30Th).
Is there a problem with the hardware / firmware, or are you just playing with settings to find optimal performance?

18 Terraminers are hashing at about 28 TH/s. Fluctuations in the stats at Eligius are normal, it is nothing to worry about.
 

[cryptx]

Fantastic progress. Any word from Bitmine?

We always wait to release information until the moment we have 100% confirmation. Thank you for the patience.

[Aireun]

Crpytx,

Can you let us know if we are entitled to the 3.45gh/share. Or are we only entitled to the 2.88gh/share.

Thanks

[kcl5038]

Crpytx,

Can you let us know if we are entitled to the 3.45gh/share. Or are we only entitled to the 2.88gh/share.

Thanks

From the peta-mine website, start date insurance:
http://www.peta-mine.co/peta-mine/

START DATE INSURANCE

PETA-MINE start of deployment is scheduled early January, 2014. The CryptX management team is well aware of the importance of timing the mine’s deployment. It is also aware of the very poor track record of meeting time schedules in the Bitcoin mining space and recognize that potential sources of such delays include chip failure, PCB failure, or chip delivery problems. CryptX will protect PETA-MINE shareholders against such delays by adding 20% additional hash power for each 30 days the company exceeds its target deployment date.

For example, if CryptX ultimately deploys the mine after mid January, 2014, an additional 30 TH/s of power will be added to the PETA-MINE completely free of charge to shareholders, and each share will be entitled to 2.88 GH/s of hash power. If the company starts deployment after mid February, 2014, it will add an additional 20% on top of the previous 20%. In that case, each share would be entitled to 3.45 GH/s of hash power.

EDIT: The deployment of the PETA-MINE has started the 13th of February. This means each share is entitled to 2.88 GH/s of hash power.

So far I've backed petamine, but this is just straight up shady imo.

[JstnPwll]

START DATE INSURANCE

PETA-MINE start of deployment is scheduled early January, 2014. The CryptX management team is well aware of the importance of timing the mine’s deployment. It is also aware of the very poor track record of meeting time schedules in the Bitcoin mining space and recognize that potential sources of such delays include chip failure, PCB failure, or chip delivery problems. CryptX will protect PETA-MINE shareholders against such delays by adding 20% additional hash power for each 30 days the company exceeds its target deployment date.

For example, if CryptX ultimately deploys the mine after mid January, 2014, an additional 30 TH/s of power will be added to the PETA-MINE completely free of charge to shareholders, and each share will be entitled to 2.88 GH/s of hash power. If the company starts deployment after mid February, 2014, it will add an additional 20% on top of the previous 20%. In that case, each share would be entitled to 3.45 GH/s of hash power.

EDIT: The deployment of the PETA-MINE has started the 13th of February. This means each share is entitled to 2.88 GH/s of hash power.

I've emboldened the vague/conflicting phrases of this section.

• "Exceeds its target deployment date": depending on the definition of 'deployment', one could definitely say that deployment date has been exceeded. Is the mine technically 'deployed' if only a fraction of it is operational?
• "Ultimately deploys the mine": this language, as above, certainly implies that 'deployment' is an ultimate, final, one-time event, not the beginning of a process.
• "Starts deployment": this statement conflicts with the two phrases above. It would be acceptable if there were definite and different terms specified for each month, but this is given as an example (grouped in the same paragraph with the example for January, see phrase above).

I think it would be hard to deny that the mine has not been deployed as of mid-February.

[Aireun]

What was the date the exact date/time the mine started? And what was the exact date/time the mine was last late? This imo is very important to know. Also, it would be nice to have cryptx say/confirm yes/no.

Edit: I see that they have said on there website "Deployment has started mid February." However, what was the exact time and what was the exact time the mine was last seen as being late.