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

[Puppet]

Yeah i'm pretty sure that if Cryptx was in US I would not be risking investing in PETA,

Lol, you think Belgium of all places is less regulated than any US state? You cant fart there without a government license.

[Anotheranonlol]

But then you don't know who's going to invest how much and how much hardware that buys. Then it becomes too risky to reinvest at all. Knowing upfront how much reinvestment we'll have is key to success?

I dont understand how this is so hard for almost all of you. Investing is the exact same thing as reinvesting, all that differs is the source of the funds, and the choice you no longer have. If reinvesting is a good move, then so is investing. And if investing (in new shares) isnt a good move and doesnt happen because the market thinks its a bad move, just how happy will you be that a large part of your revenue is being "re"-invested anyway?

Seriously IM going to start selling "100% reinvesting mining rigs" with a custom firmware. They wont produce a single BTC for you, but once in a while, whenever I say you mined 5 BTC for me, I will send you another miner at whatever hashrate I decide is reasonable at that time. Mind you, not that the new rigs will earn you a single satoshi, but you will be able to glance at the statistics and feel rich. After a few years, you may well have 5 mining rigs all from buying just one. All of them generating just bitcoin dust, but what a deal!

Investing is nowhere even remotely the same as re-investing, how is this such a tricky concept to understand? When the operation is fixed at 10GH/share we can pour in thousands of BTC, pump the shareprice to exorbitant levels yet we aren't going to get any richer (in dividends) because 1) shares in fixed mining operations are losing propositions no matter how they are dressed up,  and 2) being that we've pumped the price up, it becomes even harder to see a positive ROI (from dividends) the only chance you have there is hoping you'll come across people that are easily impressed by large dividends and you sell shares at a profit. In that case the shares are hot potatoes, the mines operating on borrowed time. Even Mining now with re-investment is operating on borrowed time, we don't need that pointing out. Reinvesting means, for example shares that were before as high as 0.12 when PETA was less than 500TH are now at 0.07 when PETA has increased to 1.2PH, yet difficulty has not increased 240%

I suspect vast majority of investors would withdraw their funds in a heartbeat if reinvestment wasn't a large factor in this project, hell I wouldn't have put a satoshi in if that was the case.

I'm perfectly happy about re-investing earnings from mining into purchasing new hardware.

Agreed! What's the point of this mining fund if we aren't growing?

You prefer growth in meaningless numbers over BTC denominated profitability ? Or you think profitability would not lead to growth? If you are so sure cryptx will do or continue to do a good job, why would it not grow and be able to sell more shares, representing more hashrate,  without its current shareholders being forced to increase their investment over time on terms they can not dictate, in circumstances they can not foresee?

Shareholders are not forced. Majority votes these things through. You wouldn't be aware from the sidelines.

[spartan82]

Agreed! What's the point of this mining fund if we aren't growing?

You prefer growth in meaningless numbers over BTC denominated profitability ? Or you think profitability would not lead to growth? If you are so sure cryptx will do or continue to do a good job, why would it not grow and be able to sell more shares, representing more hashrate,  without its current shareholders being forced to increase their investment over time on terms they can not dictate, in circumstances they can not foresee?

Growth in meaningless numbers is your point of view. So far cryptx has delivered. You and all other shareholders were made aware of the reinvestment strategy and numbers to keep this mining fund successful over the long haul from the very beginning. Through trial and error some of us have come to realize that the bigger sacrifice we make now will ensure our highly probably success in future. I'm not in a hurry or looking for a get rich quick scheme that's going to die in the ass as time goes by. I prefer to be involved in a fund that gets larger and larger over time. I bought in at 0.05 per share and can sell out now for a good profit. I don't want that. With a proper reinvestment strategy I do not see why the price per share cannot grow higher. I would much rather see an increase in gh and thus price per share if we can keep up with difficulty as opposed to higher divs now leading to a share price of next to nothing.

[Anonymousg64]

i agree with Anotheranonlol

reinvestments of the mined revenue is essential and makes use of one of the points of having a large operation, purchasing power.

[howardb]

Yeah i'm pretty sure that if Cryptx was in US I would not be risking investing in PETA,

Lol, you think Belgium of all places is less regulated than any US state? You cant fart there without a government license.

I didn't say less regulated, I said "less draconian", as in the way the US shoots first, calls them a terrorist later!

Edit: Interesting poll I came across: https://polldaddy.com/poll/8095662/?view=results&msg=voted

[twentyseventy]

I would support a higher reinvestment percentage, as it is the biggest advantage of this fund.

As a group with substantial buying power, we will have even better access to top-of-the-line mining hardware, beating competitors with our high efficiency, cheap hardware prices and low hosting costs.

At cex every GH is trading for around 0.07 and each of our shares represent atleast 15GH. We also have a much lower hosting cost than cex AND the big advantage of continous reinvestment.

Therefore, the shares are currently undervalued imo.

Except CEX.IO is hilariously over-priced. It shouldn't be cited as a legitimate measure of hashpower value.

[howardb]

I would support a higher reinvestment percentage, as it is the biggest advantage of this fund.

As a group with substantial buying power, we will have even better access to top-of-the-line mining hardware, beating competitors with our high efficiency, cheap hardware prices and low hosting costs.

At cex every GH is trading for around 0.07 and each of our shares represent atleast 15GH. We also have a much lower hosting cost than cex AND the big advantage of continous reinvestment.

Therefore, the shares are currently undervalued imo.

Except CEX.IO is hilariously over-priced. It shouldn't be cited as a legitimate measure of hashpower value.

You have to take it seriously, because it still sells!! Therefore by definition it's a market price. Though I agree it's massivly expensive, clearly most people are buying based on emotion rather than logic.

[mikemikemike]

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

You're linking share price and difficulty? Weird but ok, the share price went up because Cryptx bought new hardware. But this wasn't keeping up with the difficulty, if anything it is proof that we can't keep up. Our reinvestment fund didn't buy the new hardware, Cryptx loaned the money to Peta, we are in the red at the moment because we couldn't keep our network share with our reinvestment so we were forcefully lent money to try and stay in the game a bit longer.

What's weird about it? Your argument is that you can't keep up with difficulty, meaning the investment will lose value, since mining yields less and less. Yet the shares gained value, way above 50%. All the while dividends were paid. Yes, we are in the red, but after 2 weeks auf 100% reinvest (or rather payback) not by much, I guess? At least not compared to the hashing power we gained.

Anyone got numbers?

The shares gained value when it was announced the hash rate was tripling. This was paid for NOT by our reinvestment but by a loan. This was an engineered rise in share price influenced by outside factors. Cryptx won't always be able to loan Peta a huge amount of money, and even if they are always willing to do that the amount they can loan will eventually be dwarfed by the difficulty.

It gained value way before the announcement and was rarely below IPO price since launch. I'd also say we did a bit more than just "keeping up with the difficulty" in the last upgrade.

Dude I appreciate your new here so I'm going to say this politely. You have no idea what your talking about.

The reason we have kept up with difficulty was because the hardware that was paid for at the last IPO was supossed to be delivered in the first six weeks but ended up taking nearly four months, this caused a slow and steady increase in hashing over the four month period after that, pretty much devoid of reinvestment.

This won't happen this time. Your first two dividends will be the largest, you won't see another dividend that high again.

Ill say this for the last time, but all of you arguing for a higher reinvestment percentage really need to run the numbers. Your much better off from a ROI perspective getting the dividends out early, there is no valid argument against this because unless you can bring in twenty percent more machines every twelve days after hosting fees your just prolonging a losing battle, where each week you will be worse off than the last. It's allot better just to admit defeat and bleed the returns as quickly as you can.

Edit: quoted the wrong post.

[Puppet]

shares in fixed mining operations are losing propositions no matter how they are dressed up,

Hey, something we agree on. Except you think if only you would reinvest enough of the underwhelming dividends from those fixed mining bonds in to more fixed mining bonds (be it the same or other), then somehow "magic". Because that is exactly the same as what cryptx offers.

[Collider]

shares in fixed mining operations are losing propositions no matter how they are dressed up,

Hey, something we agree on. Except you think if only you would reinvest enough of the underwhelming dividends from those fixed mining bonds in to more fixed mining bonds (be it the same or other), then somehow "magic". Because that is exactly the same as what cryptx offers.

No it isn´t, as the new hardware can be deployed at record prices, whereas "new" mining bonds are nearly always overpriced.

The reinvestment is the real strength of this bond, as it allows it to basically be cumulative.

[Puppet]

No it isn´t, as the new hardware can be deployed at record prices, whereas "new" mining bonds are nearly always overpriced.

If you "reinvest" your own divs, you can pick whatever mining bond/share that is cheapest at that time (or pick none at all). Having cryptx reinvest for you as you are all so keen on, is just like handing over all your divs to cryptx and let him invest them for you. Whether that is always going to be cheaper/better is anyone's guess and seems very unlikely at best, particularly compared to the hashrate mining OEMs can bring online. But if you are convinced cryptx somehow can always bring hashrate online cheaper than anyone else, why would you then worry he wouldnt be able to expand by issuing new shares?

The reinvestment is the real strength of this bond, as it allows it to basically be cumulative.

Sure, and martingale bots are the real strength of satoshidice. even though the odds are against you at every bet, if you just keep playing them in the end, surely you will win :/

[Anonymousg64]

basicly dont invest in any form of mining at all, you can never ROI according to NotLambChop, mikemikemike, Puppet, anyone im missing?


if you can ROI, you should use those profits towards a larger round, and so on until you reach a large enough scale to make it worth taking out the profits. ofcourse you dont need to wait until you fully ROI to reinvest. you can grow, this is what PETA will do. those who argue against reinvestment should not even be here, go to  KNC, ButterlyLabs... and buy their fixed cloud contracts.

dont give me bullshit of reinvestment is same as you taking your investments and choosing, bla bla bla.
you fail to understand the power of PETA, go away.


it might be true that i wont ROI for my monarch but PETA has enough purchasing power to get really good deals on available hardware rather then risky pre-orders.

[dhenson]

The funny thing is that I've already received 50% of my initial btc investment back in dividends and the share price is almost 2x what I initially paid. Yeah.. real bad investment. /sarcasm

[mikemikemike]

The funny thing is that I've already received 50% of my initial btc investment back in dividends and the share price is almost 2x what I initially paid. Yeah.. real bad investment. /sarcasm

And I have too. That doesn't mean the next chosen strategy shouldn't be debated on.

basicly dont invest in any form of mining at all, you can never ROI according to NotLambChop, mikemikemike, Puppet, anyone im missing?


if you can ROI, you should use those profits towards a larger round, and so on until you reach a large enough scale to make it worth taking out the profits. ofcourse you dont need to wait until you fully ROI to reinvest. you can grow, this is what PETA will do. those who argue against reinvestment should not even be here, go to  KNC, ButterlyLabs... and buy their fixed cloud contracts.

dont give me bullshit of reinvestment is same as you taking your investments and choosing, bla bla bla.
you fail to understand the power of PETA, go away.

Dude. You know your here trying to kill a project you say you love right?

Every argument I've seen you post is beyond flawed. Believe it or not but me and puppet are trying to teach you guys some important facts about business and finance. If you want to keep thinking you can just magically buy miners at a total cost well above the market rate and make a profit reinvesting the income then I just simply don't know what to say to you.

If the miners were manufactured and deployed at a price of around 1.4$/GH your idea might work, MIGHT. But it doesn't, these arn't the prices you are getting. Thinking your going to beat difficulty is honestly suicidal.

The difference between the two strategies only gives two outcomes.

1) start with higher dividends and see higher diminishing returns.
2) start with lower dividends and see lower diminishing returns.

If you can't keep up with network gain, from a statistical perspective, option one is your only choice.

And do you honestly think you'll be able to add 20% more machines every twelve days? After accounting for hosting fees?

Run the numbers. I'm 150% correct. I seriously don't think you understand the importance of hosting fees and how they affect long term reinvestment strategies. Please do some research and run some projections. Numbers don't lie, but your unsubstantiated arguements do.

[Puppet]

basicly dont invest in any form of mining at all,  you can never ROI

Sure you can. You can even make a profit on Satoshidice. There have been times, and there may come times when mining is (very) profitable. Early KnC machines, early Avalons, some AM machines, these where hugely profitable. Same for mining services, people who got in  Gigamining or even ghash.io early enough and got out in time, they made a killing. These are however, the exceptions. Anyone who reinvested these profits in other machines or other bonds/shares, or never got out,  will have seen profits dwindle and ultimately become a big fat loss. Am I not right dhenson, you seem active in just about every mining thread, on average how did your BTC investments fare?

if you can ROI, you should use those profits towards a larger round,

Nonsense. You imply that because the previous round was profitable (if it was, because just receiving dividends doesnt mean profit), then so will the next. In reality the market changes constantly and may change fairly dramatically now that OEMs are getting in the mining game themselves.

you fail to understand the power of PETA, go away.

You fail at logic.

it might be true that i wont ROI for my monarch

LOL. Might ? But hey, no worries, just reinvest your mining revenue in more BFL products, and you'll make a profit for sure!

[Anonymousg64]

i can see through both your bullshit talk  

il leave it to PETA to show you your wrong, 35/65 is most likely what they will go forward with

i stand that PETA can ROI faster then other miners and thus grow with reinvestment's



i paid 3.5BTC for my 600GH/s Monarch, i will still be able to break even, considering the slowdown in difficulty increases. If i buy more hardware at peak BTC value, i can most certainly grow and make even more BTC, especially if this time i instead go for available hardware rather then pre-orders, at which point i can get my ROI sooner and and speed up the cycles by adding hardware as i get revenue instead of at the end of ROI break even.


ive done my own projections, i know for certain they are not reliable, just as yours you feel so confident of


AVOIDING GIViNG the TROLL MORE POSTS with EDIt dialog

i have grown impatient, i will not care to elaborate, if people are investing they should be able to think for themselves. they dont need mikemikemike telling them what is. throwing some fallacy's around i see, hogwash really
im tired of seeing the trio of non-shareholding disrupters coming in trying to saturate this thread with attitudes of holier then thou, we will now call you the divine trinity.


keep blabing and thinking you have the right answer
argumentum ad numerum of high degree of innacuracy

oh no! mikemikemike, pleas dont feel bad for me! lol
take your fake care and sympathy elsewhere

you sure made it personal with all your puppet profiles and the obvious intent of your many posts in something you hold no shares

i will fight against your intent to mislead PETA shareholders into thinking they should be more like CEX.io or cloudhashing or ButterfylLabs or B.MINE. Reinvestment's are critical to PETA purpose and function.

[mikemikemike]

i can see through both your bullshit talk  

il leave it to PETA to show you your wrong, 35/65 is most likely what they will go forward with

i stand that PETA can ROI faster then other miners and thus grow with reinvestment's



i paid 3.5BTC for my 600GH/s Monarch, i will still be able to break even, considering the slowdown in difficulty increases. If i buy more hardware at peak BTC value, i can most certainly grow and make even more BTC, especially if this time i instead go for available hardware rather then pre-orders, at which point i can get my ROI sooner and and speed up the cycles by adding hardware as i get revenue instead of at the end of ROI break even.

Saying run projections isn't bullshit. Numbers don't lie.

Seriously. I think you need to take a step back and readdress your emotional attachment to your opinions. Honestly, you come across as delusional, and when your playing with money people like that are the last ones you want making investment decisions.

Think about what you say and if you honestly, deep down inside believe it, if you do, then seriously, stop. From someone who makes an extremely successful career out of all of this, stop. Buy and hold. Stop mining. Stop investing. Just buy and hold. This is the best piece of advise I can give you. And I'm sorry if it sounds insulting but it is the only viable conclusion left looking at your opinions and their responses. Some people seriously arn't capable of games like this, and they should stop before they lose more and more money. This is allot less a personal attack and allot more my honest belief in my professional capacity. I would say the same to anyone, even my family.

Good luck dude. I honestly wish you the best, but at the moment in time, you really need to step back.

Anyways, good luck.

Ps: I noticed you edited your post. As a retort, I ask that you google the word fallacy, and realise its not a substitute for factual evidence and logical conclusion. Infact, the pure definition of fallacy is the arguments you have posted, not mine. Everything i have said can be backed up by both factual and numerical evidence, while yours cannot, yours is just an opinion backed up by poorly substantive and completely obscure statements.

Anyways, this isn't personal. I honestly wish you the best of luck with the future. I just hope you take into consideration what I've posted above. It's honestly important for your future state of mind. Good luck..

[Elvis Trout]

We might have had a chance if we had a big reinvestment fund waiting for the boom in July. However what cryptx have cleverly done is position it so that we got the loan during the run up to the boom when btc are cheap and we will have just about paid it back by the peak. Cryptx wins PETA loses. I am still holding because cryptx have been very reasonable in the past.

[BiteMyShinyMetalAss]

We might have had a chance if we had a big reinvestment fund waiting for the boom in July. However what cryptx have cleverly done is position it so that we got the loan during the run up to the boom when btc are cheap and we will have just about paid it back by the peak. Cryptx wins PETA loses. I am still holding because cryptx have been very reasonable in the past.

Thats what i am thinking... Like we got a loan in BTC when BTC price is low. and now we are repaying the loan instead of accumulating reinvestment fund for the july. It would be so much better if we could get 50% as divident, 40% as reinvestment and 10% as loan repayment...
With 50% payin a 960BTC, how long will it take us? 3 months? and after 3 months, we have no reinvestment, we are down beloew 1% of the network... Prospects does not seem good... 

I understand that Cryptx are trying the best, but have a feeling their generocity might end up...
Also, i am looking forward for the Friday update with updated prospect.

[howardb]

i can see through both your bullshit talk  

il leave it to PETA to show you your wrong, 35/65 is most likely what they will go forward with

i stand that PETA can ROI faster then other miners and thus grow with reinvestment's



i paid 3.5BTC for my 600GH/s Monarch, i will still be able to break even, considering the slowdown in difficulty increases. If i buy more hardware at peak BTC value, i can most certainly grow and make even more BTC, especially if this time i instead go for available hardware rather then pre-orders, at which point i can get my ROI sooner and and speed up the cycles by adding hardware as i get revenue instead of at the end of ROI break even.


ive done my own projections, i know for certain they are not reliable, just as yours you feel so confident of


AVOIDING GIViNG the TROLL MORE POSTS with EDIt dialog

i have grown impatient, i will not care to elaborate, if people are investing they should be able to think for themselves. they dont need mikemikemike telling them what is. throwing some fallacy's around i see, hogwash really
im tired of seeing the trio of non-shareholding disrupters coming in trying to saturate this thread with attitudes of holier then thou, we will now call you the divine trinity.


keep blabing and thinking you have the right answer
argumentum ad numerum of high degree of innacuracy

oh no! mikemikemike, pleas dont feel bad for me! lol
take your fake care and sympathy elsewhere

you sure made it personal with all your puppet profiles and the obvious intent of your many posts in something you hold no shares

i will fight against your intent to mislead PETA shareholders into thinking they should be more like CEX.io or cloudhashing or ButterfylLabs or B.MINE. Reinvestment's are critical to PETA purpose and function.

Agree, there is certainly a negative troll pattern emerging with certain accounts.