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

[jimmothy]

3$ per Gh/s is a bargain, especially with all that PETA is doing for us

I lol'd

If you are interested in buying hardware for twice what its worth I may have a deal for you.

Selling bitmain s1s for 0.9btc each. High price is only because I care about you. (Still actually cheaper than peta at double the msrp price ($2/gh))

[Morguk]

Yes, cryptx what's going on with the media/advertising for this IPO?

[rdyoung]

Yes, you are right, BTC price would drive the difficulty up. However what happens when difficulty raises and btc prise dont follow? Like every 10 days difficulty goes 10-14% but the prices stay the same. Is it still profitable?

Yes, this is a constant dilema, mine or HODL.  Its unlikely for the hash rate to climb over the roof and for the btc price not to follow. Otherwise every single mining project and mine is a loss no matter how cheap  the chips can get. ...

Not if you sell hosting and gear to yourself.  The farm will show losses, but that's OK -- your other companies, the ones that sell to the mine, will show profit.
If you're "buying" from yourself with investors' coin, you make a nice profit.
That's how things work

So its a negative that we can get cheaper electricity from Cryptx own plant? It is negative that we pay less for Crytpx to produce boards than we would pay in a market? Is it negative that by paying Cryptx for the board production we insure our selves from manufacturers delays?  At current 450$ per  BTC, the only winners are manufacturers not the miners.
And how come the current state of the PETA is worse for the older investors than it was before? I would agree, maybe for the new comers it could be not very appealing, but for people who got into PETA for less than 0.07 the current sittuation is better.

It is dependent on your point of view and your end goal.
If your wanting to drive the price the down so you can buy cheap shares, then everything is a negative.
If your either confident in the company and want them to succeed, OR your pumping/dumping, then everything is a positive.

[cryptx]

We are deleting posts from members who are active on this thread with multiple aliases.

So all posts of NotLambshop will be deleted (one of his other aliases = Fatherbob)

[cryptoconomist]

Share price is way above the original IPO prices.
Dividends are larger than ever.
In ~2 weeks, the mine hash rate will triple.
The worst case scenario for the short term is that if the new share sale is a bust, in order to pay for the new hardware (which will cause our hash rate to triple), unit holders won't receive dividends for a couple weeks -- maybe as few as 2 weeks -- while those dividends are reinvested.

So what the heck are people complaining about? There is nothing bad here. This is all fantastic news.

There is no other mine doing anywhere near this well -- growing, adapting, communicating, and paying. Unless you unluckily bought on the one spike above .1 BTC, every single unit holder is doing measurably, provably great.

+1

[Korbman]

[...]

3$ per Gh/s is a bargain, especially with all that PETA is doing for us

This was a bit painful to read, but it does highlight some glaring issues with how some people view mining. $3 per GH/s was a fair deal 4 months ago when BTC/USD was $700-800 a coin and network difficulty was under 2.5B.

As Jimmothy started to touch on, current hardware has fallen well below that mark. A BitMain AntMiner S2 (1TH/s) is being sold for BTC5.065, the equivalent of ~$2.27 per GH/s at today's exchange rate. It's predecessor, the AntMiner S1, is being sold for BTC0.439, the equivalent of ~$1.09 per GH/s at today's exchange rate, though not as energy efficient. As newer hardware is introduced and competition increases, it's expected that the price per GH/s will continue to fall.

[Anonymousg64]

3$ per Gh/s is a bargain, especially with all that PETA is doing for us

I lol'd

If you are interested in buying hardware for twice what its worth I may have a deal for you.

Selling bitmain s1s for 0.9btc each. High price is only because I care about you. (Still actually cheaper than peta at double the msrp price ($2/gh))

sure you can get cheaper, thats not the point, you are getting more then just Gh/s

i cant execute reinvestment's as efficiently as PETA can

its actually 2.875$/Gh/s

[Anonymousg64]

[...]

3$ per Gh/s is a bargain, especially with all that PETA is doing for us

This was a bit painful to read, but it does highlight some glaring issues with how some people view mining. $3 per GH/s was a fair deal 4 months ago when BTC/USD was $700-800 a coin and network difficulty was under 2.5B.

As Jimmothy started to touch on, current hardware has fallen well below that mark. A BitMain AntMiner S2 (1TH/s) is being sold for BTC5.065, the equivalent of ~$2.27 per GH/s at today's exchange rate. It's predecessor, the AntMiner S1, is being sold for BTC0.439, the equivalent of ~$1.09 per GH/s at today's exchange rate, though not as energy efficient. As newer hardware is introduced and competition increases, it's expected that the price per GH/s will continue to fall.

so will PETA's cost/Gh/s go down as they increase the corresponding GH/s per share


look at butterflylabs, 10.83$/Gh/s cloud hosting

cloudhashing best plan is 8$/Gh/s



mikemikemike
the two were unrelated, i dont consider someone buying contracts or shares a miner

[Korbman]

This was a bit painful to read, but it does highlight some glaring issues with how some people view mining. $3 per GH/s was a fair deal 4 months ago when BTC/USD was $700-800 a coin and network difficulty was under 2.5B.

As Jimmothy started to touch on, current hardware has fallen well below that mark. A BitMain AntMiner S2 (1TH/s) is being sold for BTC5.065, the equivalent of ~$2.27 per GH/s at today's exchange rate. It's predecessor, the AntMiner S1, is being sold for BTC0.439, the equivalent of ~$1.09 per GH/s at today's exchange rate, though not as energy efficient. As newer hardware is introduced and competition increases, it's expected that the price per GH/s will continue to fall.

so will PETA's cost/Gh/s go down as they increase the corresponding GH/s per share


look at butterflylabs, $10.83/Gh/s cloud hosting

They should, theoretically. Right now, PETA is at about $5.64 per GH/s (~7.55 GH/s per share @ BTC0.095). Assuming full deployment of 1.5PH/s, current share value (BTC0.095) puts it at ~$1.88 per GH/s (at 66,371 outstanding shares)...but the more shares there are, the higher the 'price per GH/s' will be.

Until full deployment happens, though, CoinTerra's new hosting plans range from $4.99 down to $2.75. And I'm not sure what KnC's plans are for hosting...

[Anonymousg64]

This was a bit painful to read, but it does highlight some glaring issues with how some people view mining. $3 per GH/s was a fair deal 4 months ago when BTC/USD was $700-800 a coin and network difficulty was under 2.5B.

As Jimmothy started to touch on, current hardware has fallen well below that mark. A BitMain AntMiner S2 (1TH/s) is being sold for BTC5.065, the equivalent of ~$2.27 per GH/s at today's exchange rate. It's predecessor, the AntMiner S1, is being sold for BTC0.439, the equivalent of ~$1.09 per GH/s at today's exchange rate, though not as energy efficient. As newer hardware is introduced and competition increases, it's expected that the price per GH/s will continue to fall.

so will PETA's cost/Gh/s go down as they increase the corresponding GH/s per share


look at butterflylabs, $10.83/Gh/s cloud hosting

They should, theoretically. Right now, PETA is at about $5.64 per GH/s (~7.55 GH/s per share @ BTC0.095). Assuming full deployment of 1.5PH/s, current share value (BTC0.095) puts it at ~$1.88 per GH/s (at 66,371 outstanding shares)...but the more shares there are, the higher the 'price per GH/s' will be.

Until full deployment happens, though, CoinTerra's new hosting plans range from $4.99 down to $2.75. And I'm not sure what KnC's plans are for hosting...

we are currently guaranteed the 15Gh/s++ per share
the current increase in shares will not have any diluting affect

[Korbman]

so will PETA's cost/Gh/s go down as they increase the corresponding GH/s per share


look at butterflylabs, $10.83/Gh/s cloud hosting

They should, theoretically. Right now, PETA is at about $5.64 per GH/s (~7.55 GH/s per share @ BTC0.095). Assuming full deployment of 1.5PH/s, current share value (BTC0.095) puts it at ~$1.88 per GH/s (at 66,371 outstanding shares)...but the more shares there are, the higher the 'price per GH/s' will be.

Until full deployment happens, though, CoinTerra's new hosting plans range from $4.99 down to $2.75. And I'm not sure what KnC's plans are for hosting...

we are currently guaranteed the 15Gh/s++ per share
the current increase in shares will not have any diluting affect

You are guaranteed >15GH/s, for now anyway, but an increase in the outstanding shares does have a diluting effect:
1,500,000 GH/s spread over 66,375 shares is ~22.6GH/s per share.
1,500,000 GH/s spread over 76,206 shares (selling out the current IPO) is ~19.68GH/s per share.

Which would you rather have?

[Anonymousg64]

Hi guys, redditor here. Saw a post in there and I've been doing my research as I have some BTC to invest.

Most of it looks legit apart from well, apart from a few things.

1) is it true that the team that runs this project makes money from the electricity fees?

Does that not seem completely counter productive considering its completely against investor interests?

2) why is the reinvestment strategy set so poorly? It makes no sense at all to reinvest like that unless your trying to build up electricity no?

3) Also, my numbers are pretty poor, but is it actually 3$/GHs? Last time I checked you could buy hardware directly from the manufacturer for 1.5$/GH and they would even host it for you including costs for an extra 0.2$/GHs. How come the price difference is so huge, if your buying the best machines, where is all the extra funds going?

1)
their solar project only provides 1-6% of the power used by the operation
its not counter productive ,its beneficial if they can reduce their power costs

2)
its not set poorly, their strategy will guarantee better ods of successful long term operation and larger dividends

3)
if you want to manage hardware, electricity, bandwidth, reinvestments, deals, board assembly and other things required to maintain a large scale operation, you could, but i prefer leaving that to a company that has more experience and purchasing power
the ipo is going towards funding the 1Ph purchase

[Anonymousg64]

so will PETA's cost/Gh/s go down as they increase the corresponding GH/s per share


look at butterflylabs, $10.83/Gh/s cloud hosting

They should, theoretically. Right now, PETA is at about $5.64 per GH/s (~7.55 GH/s per share @ BTC0.095). Assuming full deployment of 1.5PH/s, current share value (BTC0.095) puts it at ~$1.88 per GH/s (at 66,371 outstanding shares)...but the more shares there are, the higher the 'price per GH/s' will be.

Until full deployment happens, though, CoinTerra's new hosting plans range from $4.99 down to $2.75. And I'm not sure what KnC's plans are for hosting...

we are currently guaranteed the 15Gh/s++ per share
the current increase in shares will not have any diluting affect

You are guaranteed >15GH/s, for now anyway, but an increase in the outstanding shares does have a diluting effect:
1,500,000 GH/s spread over 66,375 shares is ~22.6GH/s per share.
1,500,000 GH/s spread over 76,206 shares (selling out the current IPO) is ~19.68GH/s per share.

Which would you rather have?

no we are only getting a total hashrate according to how many ipo shares are sold, but it comes out as 15Gh/s per share
they are putting up their own money, as a loan, to guarantee that regardless if any ipo shares are sold

[vaguhs]

So if the IPO does not raise the needed funds , the old shareholders will pay with reduction in the  dividend?

[cryptx]

We suggest to read the Prospectus in detail, depending on how many shares are sold in IPO, we can deploy a certain amount of hardware.

Depending on the quantity of units sold, one of the following scenarios will unfold:

[Anonymousg64]

So if the IPO does not raise the needed funds , the old shareholders will pay with reduction in the  dividend?

well its going to impact future size of reinvestment's which will have an impact on how efficiently we can maintain network share.
IPO not raising all funds impacts all shareholders


dividend will correspond to 15Gh/s no matter what, its only when considering long term impact we can see the negative impact, this will manifest in slower Gh/s per share increase

[Korbman]

we are currently guaranteed the 15Gh/s++ per share
the current increase in shares will not have any diluting affect

You are guaranteed >15GH/s, for now anyway, but an increase in the outstanding shares does have a diluting effect:
1,500,000 GH/s spread over 66,375 shares is ~22.6GH/s per share.
1,500,000 GH/s spread over 76,206 shares (selling out the current IPO) is ~19.68GH/s per share.

Which would you rather have?

no we are only getting a total hashrate according to how many ipo shares are sold, but it comes out as 15Gh/s per share
they are putting up their own money, as a loan, to guarantee that regardless if any ipo shares are sold

Ah, I see what you're saying. I apologize, I misunderstood before.

Since that's the case, price per GH/s starts at ~$2.84 (@$448 per BTC) and varies from there based on share price & BTC/USD fluctuations. Compared to other hosting plans, $2.84 isn't so bad...but compared to actually purchasing and running the hardware it's terrible

[vaguhs]

I'm not an expert in any of your numbers game , but let me tell you something about selling a stock.
You better start increasing the hash rate now so people can get more shares.

I bought into this stock looking for a %1 a week return on investment!

Everything above that is a bonus.

For all of you crying here go find me a better return on investment anywhere! on any other market!

[nwfella]

My prediction for this week's upcoming dividend payout: 0.00000000/share

:p  (sorry, couldn't resist)

[jimmothy]

Has petamine considered using AM chips to make their own miners? They could get 2ph instead of 1ph for 3700btc (assuming they could match hashratio production costs)

Or they could just buy about 1.7ph from hashratio for 3700btc.