T

[Nefario]

The demo version of GLBSE2.0 has been updated.

Since this is going to be the system you guys will be using it very soon please go over to http://dev.glbse.com and give it a try.

Create a new share, sell them (create a fake account to test buying them), create some new motions, pay dividends and play around in general.

2.0 is a big step away from the current system, and it's important that you're ready for the change over.

Here's the release notes
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=60489.msg781561#msg781561

[sadpandatech]

Am I reading correctly that the electricty usage went up ~30% in order to gain 2GH? I realize hash rate increased 20% but it seems hardly worth it at 30% higher elec cost.

[sadpandatech]

Am I reading correctly that the electricty usage went up ~30% in order to gain 2GH? I realize hash rate increased 20% but it seems hardly worth it at 30% higher elec cost.

No, I did not have a killawatt and that first number was a guess (I stated so). The second number is what the rigs pull from the wall.

ouch, so in other words you were overpaying us pretty well before the kill-a-watt?

cheers

[gewure]

i want to stress the fact, that we need an expansion plan.
most other mining corporations now invest into FPGAs which save them quite alot of electricity costs.

how can we finance this? i guess if we raise some capital for investing in e.g. BFL singles the shareprice would be a lot higher, cause ppl like to see that there is a positive, not stagnating outlook. thought tygrrs dividends are quite nice, i think investors like me, who own 1.5% of tyggr would rather like to see a steady slow growth and good dividends. at the moment it looks rather like goat is not as motivated as we would like him to be.. have you sold to many shares?

btw, how many shares do you still hold goat? and how many does kluge have?

greets

[Kluge]

i want to stress the fact, that we need an expansion plan.
most other mining corporations now invest into FPGAs which save them quite alot of electricity costs.

how can we finance this? i guess if we raise some capital for investing in e.g. BFL singles the shareprice would be a lot higher, cause ppl like to see that there is a positive, not stagnating outlook. thought tygrrs dividends are quite nice, i think investors like me, who own 1.5% of tyggr would rather like to see a steady slow growth and good dividends. at the moment it looks rather like goat is not as motivated as we would like him to be.. have you sold to many shares?

btw, how many shares do you still hold goat? and how many does kluge have?

greets

If anything, he hasn't sold enough shares. I was able to purchase all the remaining shares a couple months ago @ IPO price because there weren't enough buyers (oddly enough, when I made the buy-in, people were paying significantly more on GLBSE to buy aftermarket shares while Goat was selling cheaper IPO shares which would've benefited TyGrr. FPGA returns are quite low, though you get a higher % profit, obviously. If Goat had taken the $ I sold to him months ago and purchased BFL units, we could still be waiting a 2-5 months for them to ship anything, tying up those funds and making TyGrr pretty illiquid. If Goat were to close up shop with unshipped BFL units, we'd basically all get a few $ from the hardware he had, and a claim on BFL units which might materialize in a few months.

TyGrr stagnates by design because dividends are paid out almost entirely to shareholders. That's not a growth model -- it's an income model. It can only grow if people buy more IPO shares (which are currently being offered above aftermarket price), Goat issues bonds on behalf of TyGrr and people buy those, or Goat eliminates dividends and reinvests those into more hardware (converting TyGrr into an aggressive growth stock, where returns come only in the form of share price). Alternately, he could halve dividends, giving high BTC returns to shareholders and allowing slow growth. Goat has the means to allow the BTC effectively held by TyGrr to earn interest, too -- the BTC doesn't have to sit around doing nothing. I'd be interested in a vote on it, though I'd vote against eliminating dividends entirely. I do believe GPU miners who pay reasonable electricity rates will be pushed out within a year, and it would be nice to see some FPGAs to reassure us TyGrr will be around long-term.

For the sake of disclosure, I currently hold 272 shares.

[brendio]

i want to stress the fact, that we need an expansion plan.
most other mining corporations [...]

If most other mining companies jump off a cliff, does that mean that we should too?

I prefer allowing the investor decide on what to do with earnings by paying out dividends. If the investor wants to expand his investment, he can buy more shares on market. If he doesn't, he can use that bitcoin elsewhere. An expansion plan funded by earnings takes away some of that choice.

Maybe you could ask Nefario to build that ability to offer dividend reinvestment plans into GLBSE 2.0 to allow companies to expand their capital base with reinvested dividends while still supporting income investors.

[Nefario]

I'm just after getting back from London(gone since Tuesday), charts.glbse.com is not showing any updates since the 12th.

For the moment, all the latest trades for GLBSE can be found on it's twitter feed here.

I'm contacting the operator of charts to find out what the story is.

Nefario

[antirack]

Nefario, didn't they mention a system upgrade to a new version a few days ago?

[marked]

Nefario, didn't they mention a system upgrade to a new version a few days ago?

That's for the dev version of 2.0 which is currently being tested, so far it has been upgraded several times this week.

marked

[gewure]

i would like to raise two motions, but first discuss them in advance:

1. Motion about reserve building a certain % of all earnings after costs. I suggest 30% right now. the Reserve serves the purpose of hedging Tygrr techs value, building reserves for future expansions or unconsidered costs.

2. Motion about a new IPO to finance some FPGA boards. 100 - 200 Shares a BTC 3 for the aquisition of some FPGA boards from one of the FPGA-producers. which boards to buy and how much capital is needed is to be evaluated shortly.

greets

[gewure]

i would like to raise two motions, but first discuss them in advance:

1. Motion about reserve building a certain % of all earnings after costs. I suggest 30% right now. the Reserve serves the purpose of hedging Tygrr techs value, building reserves for future expansions or unconsidered costs.

2. Motion about a new IPO to finance some FPGA boards. 100 - 200 Shares a BTC 3 for the aquisition of some FPGA boards from one of the FPGA-producers. which boards to buy and how much capital is needed is to be evaluated shortly.

greets

I'm okay with both. However do you think we can sell new shares at 3BTC? Maybe I sell them directly then transfer them to the share holders accounts?

Right now I think the price is a bit low because early share holders just want to diversify for safety. There are many more options out there right now.

honestly, i don't know.

i myself plan on doubling my position, if both this motions pass. means i would buy 20 shares.

my thought is the following: if it is possible, to raise 600 BTC in a short period of time and straight exchange them to buy BFL-singles with it, the overall return of tygrr will increas significant, making a share worth ~3BTC at near-future exchange courses. maybe 2.9 to 2.7 is more adequate, but since FPGAs do mine good and need only very less energy, they drive down overall costs per coin mined, and therefore make the company more valuable.

i think offering all shares to the public at BTC 3 on GLBSE is to be favored instead of selling them on your own. please discuss this matter. who is willing to finance tygrrs expansion at what price?! ..

i myself can only participate with a relative tiny capital (~60 BTC) since i simply can't afford more bitcoin

[zapeta]

honestly, i don't know.

i myself plan on doubling my position, if both this motions pass. means i would buy 20 shares.

my thought is the following: if it is possible, to raise 600 BTC in a short period of time and straight exchange them to buy BFL-singles with it, the overall return of tygrr will increas significant, making a share worth ~3BTC at near-future exchange courses. maybe 2.9 to 2.7 is more adequate, but since FPGAs do mine good and need only very less energy, they drive down overall costs per coin mined, and therefore make the company more valuable.

i think offering all shares to the public at BTC 3 on GLBSE is to be favored instead of selling them on your own. please discuss this matter. who is willing to finance tygrrs expansion at what price?! ..

i myself can only participate with a relative tiny capital (~60 BTC) since i simply can't afford more bitcoin

I'd like to address the reserve idea first.  I think it would be a good idea to build some reserves for future expansion.  If we had considered that from the start, we might not need to consider issuing additional shares to fund a FPGA expansion.  25-30% seems like a reasonable amount.

Goat, if you are willing to handle a direct transfer type offering, you can probably find buyers although I'm sure it will be a pain in the ass to manage the sale.  I'm sure many of us would be willing to buy direct so that the funds go to TyGrr for expansion.  Does the company have any shares available to sell, or would we need to issue more shares?  If we need to issue shares, how many and what FPGA solution would we want to buy?  BFL looks good but we do know that shipping will probably take a long time.

[Nefario]

Notice:GLBSE2.0 launching on Monday.

[gewure]

honestly, i don't know.

i myself plan on doubling my position, if both this motions pass. means i would buy 20 shares.

my thought is the following: if it is possible, to raise 600 BTC in a short period of time and straight exchange them to buy BFL-singles with it, the overall return of tygrr will increas significant, making a share worth ~3BTC at near-future exchange courses. maybe 2.9 to 2.7 is more adequate, but since FPGAs do mine good and need only very less energy, they drive down overall costs per coin mined, and therefore make the company more valuable.

i think offering all shares to the public at BTC 3 on GLBSE is to be favored instead of selling them on your own. please discuss this matter. who is willing to finance tygrrs expansion at what price?! ..

i myself can only participate with a relative tiny capital (~60 BTC) since i simply can't afford more bitcoin

I'd like to address the reserve idea first.  I think it would be a good idea to build some reserves for future expansion.  If we had considered that from the start, we might not need to consider issuing additional shares to fund a FPGA expansion.  25-30% seems like a reasonable amount.

Goat, if you are willing to handle a direct transfer type offering, you can probably find buyers although I'm sure it will be a pain in the ass to manage the sale.  I'm sure many of us would be willing to buy direct so that the funds go to TyGrr for expansion.  Does the company have any shares available to sell, or would we need to issue more shares?  If we need to issue shares, how many and what FPGA solution would we want to buy?  BFL looks good but we do know that shipping will probably take a long time.

yes, i also think that the public offering is better..

the hassle with BFL is the delivery time, the hassle with the others is simply that they do not have the same price/profit ratio than BFL.

i think if we can finance each BFL for 100 BTC, we should do it, althought we may have 2 months waiting time for delivery.

[mila]

Notice:GLBSE2.0 launching on Monday.

beware!
seems no worky

// I'm not going to post in every asset forum to reply in each copy of nefario's post but be cautious in coming days
some elementary stuff seems not to work and transferring accounts from 1.0 to 2.0 is nowhere properly described and we don't know what shi*storm may come from that.

[Nefario]

Notice:GLBSE2.0 launching on Monday.

beware!
seems no worky

// I'm not going to post in every asset forum to reply in each copy of nefario's post but be cautious in coming days
some elementary stuff seems not to work and transferring accounts from 1.0 to 2.0 is nowhere properly described and we don't know what shi*storm may come from that.

I'm hurt 

GLBSE2.0 test version, here is working now (caused by differences between my local setup and the test server).

Transferring accounts from 1.0 to 2.0 should be smooth without any issues. All assets(that are live on GLBSE 1.0), asset accounts, and bitcoin will be transfered. History and such records will not, but will be made available in the coming weeks after launch.

The transfer process will be simple, a switch will be flipped, and every action using GLBSE1.0 will return a transfer code. After creating an account on GLBSE2.0 you can then reclaim all your bitcoin and assets by entering the transfer code.

Simples.

[mila]

@nefario don't be. it's more or less friendly teasing.

my worries are
- untested interface to bitcoin (we did nothing with testnet bitcoins, only dev.glbse which uses dummy coins)
- short testing of the 'final' release, some nasty bugs still inside might be hiding
- unannounced changes (trading fees?)
- really nefarious transition from 1.0 to 2.0

this will affect all shareholders that's why I post it here and don't think it would be completely off topic in TyGrr's thread, since he has 2 big products on the exchange.
I really like what you do (both, goat and nefario) and just bitch a bit about how unreasonably fast deployment of glbse 2.0 might spoil something.

[Nefario]

@nefario don't be. it's more or less friendly teasing.

my worries are
- untested interface to bitcoin (we did nothing with testnet bitcoins, only dev.glbse which uses dummy coins)
- short testing of the 'final' release, some nasty bugs still inside might be hiding
- unannounced changes (trading fees?)
- really nefarious transition from 1.0 to 2.0

this will affect all shareholders that's why I post it here and don't think it would be completely off topic in TyGrr's thread, since he has 2 big products on the exchange.
I really like what you do (both, goat and nefario) and just bitch a bit about how unreasonably fast deployment of glbse 2.0 might spoil something.

Things have moved on since this comment, we've delayed the release for another week. We're going to have more testing to ensure 2.0 works smoothly.

There will be fee changes, in 2.0 you can see what's there.

[Kluge]

Yea votes: 97

Nay votes: 43

On holding the 50% of the income for hardware.  Closer than I would like, but not many votes in yet.



Also new motion

Should TyGrr Tech create and sell 150 new shares at 3BTC each to raise capital for either FPGAs or 7990s. Second vote to be had later if this one is successful.

5 or so days to vote. I do wonder what Kluge thinks about this as he owns a significant amount.

Voted. Was putting off voting on cutting dividends. Instead voted to try issuing more IPO shares. Hopefully, it goes well.

ETA: When someone asks why the opposite happened -- I changed my mind, but am too tired to explain what I was thinking right now. For my own referral: Mentions in the marketplace, stocks need growth strategy. To feel confident, should be built in, not unknown sudden bursts of growth. Personally, I disagree. I'd prefer to have a voice in when TyGrr grows, but my preference is irrelevant -- TyGrr is its own entity, and ensuring a larger tent of people are satisfied enough to place bid orders is ultimately all that matters to me, a share-holder.

[Nefario]

We'll be switching over to 2.0 in the next few hours, this means GLBSE will be down for one or two hours.
Assets,shares and bitcoin will be carried over, history (for the moment) will not.

Nefario