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

[realtime]

35 div / 65 reinv

[cesmak]

50%/50%

[EdoBcn]

35% div 65% reinv

[altoidmintz]

To have a better view about current unit holders dividend / reinvestment preference, we are opening a vote where every unit holder can submit their preferred ratio. The vote will only be valid for current unit holders and held until Thursday, June 5th 2014 - 12:00 GMT. Votes will be weighted based on the amount of units of each individual unit holder. Based on outcome, we will adapt reinvestment/dividend strategy.

AWESOME! Even though it may produce little to no effect, THIS IS TRANSPARENCY and we appreciate it.

For myself, I'm content with any reinvestment amount under 60%. I'll be voting to reinvest 50%, even as a vote of confidence, but also because it falls in my acceptable range.

[howardb]

To have a better view about current unit holders dividend / reinvestment preference, we are opening a vote where every unit holder can submit their preferred ratio. The vote will only be valid for current unit holders and held until Thursday, June 5th 2014 - 12:00 GMT. Votes will be weighted based on the amount of units of each individual unit holder. Based on outcome, we will adapt reinvestment/dividend strategy.

AWESOME! Even though it may produce little to no effect, THIS IS TRANSPARENCY and we appreciate it.

For myself, I'm content with any reinvestment amount under 60%. I'll be voting to reinvest 50%, even as a vote of confidence, but also because it falls in my acceptable range.

To succeed PETA MUST grow faster than the difficulty. Now that may take more efficient kit and/or greater re-investment percentage or a host of other things, but if we do not outpace difficulty, we end up a forgotten footnote and a failed investment.

[mikemikemike]

To have a better view about current unit holders dividend / reinvestment preference, we are opening a vote where every unit holder can submit their preferred ratio. The vote will only be valid for current unit holders and held until Thursday, June 5th 2014 - 12:00 GMT. Votes will be weighted based on the amount of units of each individual unit holder. Based on outcome, we will adapt reinvestment/dividend strategy.

AWESOME! Even though it may produce little to no effect, THIS IS TRANSPARENCY and we appreciate it.

For myself, I'm content with any reinvestment amount under 60%. I'll be voting to reinvest 50%, even as a vote of confidence, but also because it falls in my acceptable range.

To succeed PETA MUST grow faster than the difficulty. Now that may take more efficient kit and/or greater re-investment percentage or a host of other things, but if we do not outpace difficulty, we end up a forgotten footnote and a failed investment.

Reinvestment will never keep up with difficulty. It's a sad fact but its true. The sooner you get the divs out the better off investors are.

If I owned any shares, 65% divs would be ideal, it would prolong the project slightly and at the same time pay investors a good return. And all in all, when the projects lifetime starts to come to an end, you can just reIPO the remaining shares and buy new units then.

[howardb]

To have a better view about current unit holders dividend / reinvestment preference, we are opening a vote where every unit holder can submit their preferred ratio. The vote will only be valid for current unit holders and held until Thursday, June 5th 2014 - 12:00 GMT. Votes will be weighted based on the amount of units of each individual unit holder. Based on outcome, we will adapt reinvestment/dividend strategy.

AWESOME! Even though it may produce little to no effect, THIS IS TRANSPARENCY and we appreciate it.

For myself, I'm content with any reinvestment amount under 60%. I'll be voting to reinvest 50%, even as a vote of confidence, but also because it falls in my acceptable range.

To succeed PETA MUST grow faster than the difficulty. Now that may take more efficient kit and/or greater re-investment percentage or a host of other things, but if we do not outpace difficulty, we end up a forgotten footnote and a failed investment.

Reinvestment will never keep up with difficulty. It's a sad fact but its true. The sooner you get the divs out the better off investors are.

If I owned any shares, 65% divs would be ideal, it would prolong the project slightly and at the same time pay investors a good return. And all in all, when the projects lifetime starts to come to an end, you can just reIPO the remaining shares and buy new units then.

You do understand that as a self declared none shareholder we have to take your motivation for comments like that with a HUGE pinch of salt.

[Elvis Trout]

Well this should be interesting. Please bear in mind that trying to keep up with difficulty is impossible for the foreseeable future, vote for dividends, the mine will pay out more with 0% reinvestment than it ever would if we tried to keep it alive.

[Puppet]

You do understand that as a self declared none shareholder we have to take your motivation for comments like that with a HUGE pinch of salt.

I wonder, are shareholders barred from using their brain as a motivation?
Here is a hint: if you get 100% dividends you will have the choice at any point in the future to "reinvest" as much or as little of your dividend as you want. Be it in cryptx, be it whatever looks best at that point.
By voting for automatic reinvestement, you are simply depriving yourself of that choice.


I wonder how many of you would buy a miner if it comes with a contract that states or firmware that forces 50% of the mining revenue to  be used to buy or 'reinvest' in additional mining equipment from the same company (at whatever price they deem fair).

[mikemikemike]

To have a better view about current unit holders dividend / reinvestment preference, we are opening a vote where every unit holder can submit their preferred ratio. The vote will only be valid for current unit holders and held until Thursday, June 5th 2014 - 12:00 GMT. Votes will be weighted based on the amount of units of each individual unit holder. Based on outcome, we will adapt reinvestment/dividend strategy.

AWESOME! Even though it may produce little to no effect, THIS IS TRANSPARENCY and we appreciate it.

For myself, I'm content with any reinvestment amount under 60%. I'll be voting to reinvest 50%, even as a vote of confidence, but also because it falls in my acceptable range.

To succeed PETA MUST grow faster than the difficulty. Now that may take more efficient kit and/or greater re-investment percentage or a host of other things, but if we do not outpace difficulty, we end up a forgotten footnote and a failed investment.

Reinvestment will never keep up with difficulty. It's a sad fact but its true. The sooner you get the divs out the better off investors are.

If I owned any shares, 65% divs would be ideal, it would prolong the project slightly and at the same time pay investors a good return. And all in all, when the projects lifetime starts to come to an end, you can just reIPO the remaining shares and buy new units then.

You do understand that as a self declared none shareholder we have to take your motivation for comments like that with a HUGE pinch of salt.

I got a couple of my friends to invest in this project, they still own shares as the reinvestment percentage changed and I've told them to hold, I don't even trade securities anymore I'm just here trying to keep up with the world.

And anyways, all I've said is you can't keep up with difficulty, which is a known fact. From there onwards your only choice is to pump out dividends early because of diminishing returns. And also, why reinvest now at a loss of ROI when you can just use the remaining shares to buy new machines later?

Ugghhhhh. It's honestly how I would want it. My days of securities trading is over. If I wanted to play you guys I'd be here asking for a 100% dividends payout so investors would get an increased shareprice then I could sell the shares at a 20% ROI within a week. But I'm not, I honestly believe 65/35 is the best policy.

Good luck.

[Aireun]

50%/50%. A safe bet. Expansion is crucial to any investment and if they can pop out weekly increases of Hashing Power then I'm all for it. If they can't be trusted with the reinvestments then I would like to see it be 65/35 like before. However, I'm giving them all my trust that cryptx will deliver on the 50% reinvestment each week. Hoping for the best!

[howardb]

To have a better view about current unit holders dividend / reinvestment preference, we are opening a vote where every unit holder can submit their preferred ratio. The vote will only be valid for current unit holders and held until Thursday, June 5th 2014 - 12:00 GMT. Votes will be weighted based on the amount of units of each individual unit holder. Based on outcome, we will adapt reinvestment/dividend strategy.

AWESOME! Even though it may produce little to no effect, THIS IS TRANSPARENCY and we appreciate it.

For myself, I'm content with any reinvestment amount under 60%. I'll be voting to reinvest 50%, even as a vote of confidence, but also because it falls in my acceptable range.

To succeed PETA MUST grow faster than the difficulty. Now that may take more efficient kit and/or greater re-investment percentage or a host of other things, but if we do not outpace difficulty, we end up a forgotten footnote and a failed investment.

Reinvestment will never keep up with difficulty. It's a sad fact but its true. The sooner you get the divs out the better off investors are.

If I owned any shares, 65% divs would be ideal, it would prolong the project slightly and at the same time pay investors a good return. And all in all, when the projects lifetime starts to come to an end, you can just reIPO the remaining shares and buy new units then.

I'd be interested to see any mathematical or economic proof you can back that statement up with.

[Anotheranonlol]

I voted 50/50, providing re-investments are transparent.

Anyone can keep an eye out to see if there is too much slippage with PETA's share of the pie relative to global hashrate. Actually it's attractive even operating on assumption they maintain even half of their projections in mid term. Although global hashrate increase shows no sign of slowing down anytime soon it's fairly obvious there are certain limits to production, distribution, hosting etc which will be reached eventually causing a bit of a plateu. (even temporarily)

The public vote should not be a one time thing,should be open for adjustment depending on market conditions
With the amount of hashpower this project has, 50% of mined earnings less hosting fees should allow cryptx good position to leverage with manufacturers, something which small scale home miners don't have the luxury of being able to do.

Ultimately it's a case of buying hardware at X BTC and looking to dig back X+ BTC. If this project did not re-invest it would of been dead long ago.It's come a long way considering the amount of shares that were sold at BTCT.co (just a fraction of what was intended)

 Most home miners are not re-investing, only seeking to make a positive ROI over time- they will be gradually relegated out of the game in the coming years, Cloud mining will become much larger, and we see a competition mostly between warehouses and datacentres. Definitely big money can go into the key players there-  who knows, perhaps there could be a big private injection of $ or outright buyout if the mining scene matures over time. PETA is starting early to represent itself as one of the few large scale expanding mining operations open for public investment and a quick cashout 100% dividend would kill the project off in no time

[Puppet]

I'd be interested to see any mathematical or economic proof you can back that statement up with.

Not sure if serious.
IN case you are serious, assume reinvesting would somehow increase your share of the network. Keep doing that, see what happens. You would end up with >100% of the network. The same logic dictates that if several competing mining companies reinvest their revenue, on average, everyone loses. Well everyone except the network itself. Welcome to the zero sum game.

[_biO_]

Well this should be interesting. Please bear in mind that trying to keep up with difficulty is impossible for the foreseeable future, vote for dividends, the mine will pay out more with 0% reinvestment than it ever would if we tried to keep it alive.

How do you reconcile that with the fact that we had a tenfold increase in difficulty since PETA-MINE started about 7 months ago (at least on havelock), yet the shareprice during that timeframe increased by more than 50% and is about to increase again with the recent deployment of new hardware?

edit: voted 50/50

[_biO_]

Here is a hint: if you get 100% dividends you will have the choice at any point in the future to "reinvest" as much or as little of your dividend as you want. Be it in cryptx, be it whatever looks best at that point.
By voting for automatic reinvestement, you are simply depriving yourself of that choice.

At any point in the future? Only during (I)POs, you mean? (regarding reinvestment in cryptx)

[howardb]

I'd be interested to see any mathematical or economic proof you can back that statement up with.

Not sure if serious.
IN case you are serious, assume reinvesting would somehow increase your share of the network. Keep doing that, see what happens. You would end up with >100% of the network. The same logic dictates that if several competing mining companies reinvest their revenue, on average, everyone loses. Well everyone except the network itself. Welcome to the zero sum game.

I'm very serious. I get, but don't accept your argument, simply because not everyone re-invests. In fact your argument supports the empirical pattern we see in other high growth industries of consolidation to the point of only a few mega players being left (Pharma for example). PETA's game is to be one of those final few players.

Edit: I voted 50/50 but would happily go up to 100% to play the long game and be in the final pack.

[Anonymousg64]

Voted 35/65

it is possible to counter difficulty and grow, especially for a large operation

[Puppet]

At any point in the future? Only during (I)POs, you mean? (regarding reinvestment in cryptx)

You could just buy more existing shares at market price at any point, but indeed for peta to grow, they should simply issue new shares representing new hashrate regularly. "Reinvesting" is simply the equivalent of being forced to buy these new shares at prices you have no control over.

[NotLambchop]

... the empirical pattern we see in other high growth industries of consolidation to the point of only a few mega players being left (Pharma for example). PETA's game is to be one of those final few players.
...

Play your cards right, and you'll control 100% of the network. <==♬ And you'll sit and grin/the money will roll right in ♬