VIRTUAL MINING COIN [VMC] | OUR MINED 410 PAYCOINS [XPY] IS ARRIVED!!!

[tertius993]

First let me say I am not questioning the coin, which I think is very interesting and I do plan to invest.  However, there is some questionable mathematics going on ...

I tried to write this last night, but bitcointalk was down and in the end I went to bed ...

So some math to Bitcoinblues:

Which is the bigger number? 28.9 or 37.6?

My friend, please read carefully our first post.... and join the IPO

Though you need to remember they are percentages so if it were ... for example ... 28.9 % of 100 or 37.6% of 5 ... which is larger?

No i think not. You talk about amounts but we talk about percentages.

Quite - and percentages are percentages OF something, so in order to compare 28.9% and 37.6% (which is what was asked) you need to know what they are percentages of?

In this case not only are they starting from different values, they are also using different units - 28.9% of the price of GH/s and 37.6% of the quantity of GH/s; you cannot simply say 37.6 is bigger than 28.9 and leave it at that.

So we come to:

I don't dispute that; but merely question the maths.

Really? So if value of gold drops by 20%, but in the end, you have 30% more of it, its a loss because now you need more gold for the same value? Special kind of logic  
(gold is just an example because most people understand things better if they talk about something they know.)

This is actually a slightly different question - as you need to know HOW you got  the 30% more of it and allow for that.  It won't have appeared by magic, most likely the price fell and you thought "ah, I'll buy some more."

So let's work an example:

1. For simplicity assume gold costs $100/ounce and you buy one ounce.
Position:
Spent: $100
Hold: 1 ounce
Value: $100
Net position (value-spent): $0

2. Gold Falls by 20% (now $80/ounce)
Position:
Spent: $100
Hold: 1 ounce
Value: $80
Net position (value-spent): -$20

3. Buy 30% (0.3 oz) more gold at $80/ounce, cost $24
Position:
Spent: $100+$24 = $124
Hold: 1.0 + 0.3 = 1.3 ounce
Value: $104 (1.3 x 80)
Net position (value-spent): -$20

So yes, you have more gold but you are still DOWN $20 (in cash value) because your initial investment has lost $20.  You will only get ahead if the value goes up again.

Clear?

[1715488445]

1715488445

[1715488445]

1715488445

[1715488445]

1715488445

[1715488445]

1715488445

[Mohabmw]

First let me say I am not questioning the coin, which I think is very interesting and I do plan to invest.  However, there is some questionable mathematics going on ...

I tried to write this last night, but bitcointalk was down and in the end I went to bed ...

So some math to Bitcoinblues:

Which is the bigger number? 28.9 or 37.6?

My friend, please read carefully our first post.... and join the IPO

Though you need to remember they are percentages so if it were ... for example ... 28.9 % of 100 or 37.6% of 5 ... which is larger?

No i think not. You talk about amounts but we talk about percentages.

Quite - and percentages are percentages OF something, so in order to compare 28.9% and 37.6% (which is what was asked) you need to know what they are percentages of?

In this case not only are they starting from different values, they are also using different units - 28.9% of the price of GH/s and 37.6% of the quantity of GH/s; you cannot simply say 37.6 is bigger than 28.9 and leave it at that.

So we come to:

I don't dispute that; but merely question the maths.

Really? So if value of gold drops by 20%, but in the end, you have 30% more of it, its a loss because now you need more gold for the same value? Special kind of logic  
(gold is just an example because most people understand things better if they talk about something they know.)

This is actually a slightly different question - as you need to know HOW you got  the 30% more of it and allow for that.  It won't have appeared by magic, most likely the price fell and you thought "ah, I'll buy some more."

So let's work an example:

1. For simplicity assume gold costs $100/ounce and you buy one ounce.
Position:
Spent: $100
Hold: 1 ounce
Value: $100
Net position (value-spent): $0

2. Gold Falls by 20% (now $80/ounce)
Position:
Spent: $100
Hold: 1 ounce
Value: $80
Net position (value-spent): -$20

3. Buy 30% (0.3 oz) more gold at $80/ounce, cost $24
Position:
Spent: $100+$24 = $124
Hold: 1.0 + 0.3 = 1.3 ounce
Value: $104 (1.3 x 80)
Net position (value-spent): -$20

So yes, you have more gold but you are still DOWN $20 (in cash value) because your initial investment has lost $20.  You will only get ahead if the value goes up again.

Clear?

Yes, thank you. But:
your exame is different, because after that the gold value falls 20%, you have to buy gold, and you spend your money from your wallet.
When the value of the GHS falls, you have buy more GHS, BUT you will spend the BTC which is produced by your GHS, so the amount of your investment not changed.
Isn't it?

[Mohabmw]

Follow us on Facebook and Twitter

[tertius993]

Yes, thank you. But:
your exame is different, because after that the gold value falls 20%, you have to buy gold, and you spend your money from your wallet.
When the value of the GHS falls, you have buy more GHS, BUT you will spend the BTC which is produced by your GHS, so the amount of your investment not changed.
Isn't it?

Well, yes but now you are really discussing the coin which I agree is different and I only used gold because that was the example proposed earlier.  Plus of course it is a little bit easier to work an example!

In the case of the coin and the GH/s vs BTC; I agree the GH/s you have will generate BTC; and you can use that BTC to buy more GH/s.

However:

1. you are still spending actual BTC
2. the reason for the fall in the GH/s price is most likely because the difficulty is increasing and, therefore, the GH/s you buy will generate less BTC

Really it is going to be very interesting to see if the rate at which GH/s can be acquired (and the resultant return of BTC) will be sufficient to maintain a strong value for the coin.  I don't know the answer and I'm not really sure how to go about working it out, though I may give it some thought - it is an interesting problem!

Moreover, it is only one element in determining the success of the coin and as pointed out one that most other coins don't have.

[Mohabmw]

I like the idea, but cloud mining is ridiculously overpriced. This coin would be better off if you bought real rigs with the premined coins, way more profit.

1. Now the value of the GHS is about 3.7USD. Which is nearly the cheapest ASICs price. But we can buy ASICS from the manufacturers in pre-order.
2. The value of the Hashing power 3.3 USD/GH (KNC Neptune) without VAT and Duty. The cost of all together is more than the cloud mining, and the GHS in the cex.io is instantly, and not need 24/7 support, no bills, ect.
So I think this is a better idea.

[somogyipeti]

I like the idea, but cloud mining is ridiculously overpriced. This coin would be better off if you bought real rigs with the premined coins, way more profit.

1. Now the value of the GHS is about 3.7USD. Which is nearly the cheapest ASICs price. But we can buy ASICS from the manufacturers in pre-order.
2. The value of the Hashing power 3.3 USD/GH (KNC Neptune) without VAT and Duty. The cost of all together is more than the cloud mining, and the GHS in the cex.io is instantly, and not need 24/7 support, no bills, ect.
So I think this is a better idea.

Yes, absolutely.

No hardware errors, power cost, and no other problems.

[Mohabmw]

Yes, thank you. But:
your exame is different, because after that the gold value falls 20%, you have to buy gold, and you spend your money from your wallet.
When the value of the GHS falls, you have buy more GHS, BUT you will spend the BTC which is produced by your GHS, so the amount of your investment not changed.
Isn't it?

Well, yes but now you are really discussing the coin which I agree is different and I only used gold because that was the example proposed earlier.  Plus of course it is a little bit easier to work an example!

In the case of the coin and the GH/s vs BTC; I agree the GH/s you have will generate BTC; and you can use that BTC to buy more GH/s.

However:

1. you are still spending actual BTC
2. the reason for the fall in the GH/s price is most likely because the difficulty is increasing and, therefore, the GH/s you buy will generate less BTC

Really it is going to be very interesting to see if the rate at which GH/s can be acquired (and the resultant return of BTC) will be sufficient to maintain a strong value for the coin.  I don't know the answer and I'm not really sure how to go about working it out, though I may give it some thought - it is an interesting problem!

Moreover, it is only one element in determining the success of the coin and as pointed out one that most other coins don't have.

Yes I understand your example.
I have started testing this system 2 month ago, and we waited for this time because:
You can see, the increasing of the difficulty is is smaller time after time. (I mean it in percentage)
I see, I can increase the amount of my GHS about 12-14%/difficulty so the last diff. increase was not bad. Later, because the increasing is slowing we can mining more BTC at the start of every diff. level, than at the start of the before level.

[schoschi12]

I like the idea, but cloud mining is ridiculously overpriced. This coin would be better off if you bought real rigs with the premined coins, way more profit.

If you think so, just visit http://scrypt.cc?ref=baanv once. ROI at about 160 days, constant payout.

[Mohabmw]

I like the idea, but cloud mining is ridiculously overpriced. This coin would be better off if you bought real rigs with the premined coins, way more profit.

If you think so, just visit http://scrypt.cc?ref=baanv once. ROI at about 160 days, constant payout.

Yes, we know this site, but we prefer remain in the original plan.
Thank you

[jamieb81]

Way cheaper to cloud mine at PBmining check my signature link.

[somogyipeti]

Way cheaper to cloud mine at PBmining check my signature link.

Thanks, but we prefer remain in the original plan.

[jamieb81]

Way cheaper to cloud mine at PBmining check my signature link.

Thanks, but we prefer remain in the original plan.

no problem

[somogyipeti]

Way cheaper to cloud mine at PBmining check my signature link.

Thanks, but we prefer remain in the original plan.

no problem

Thank you! 

[schoschi12]

No problem here either, I was just responding to turtlehurricane. I can completly understand you can't change your Cloudminer.

[somogyipeti]

No problem here either, I was just responding to turtlehurricane. I can completly understand you can't change your Cloudminer.

Thank you!

[somogyipeti]

Last week before launch.

[tertius993]

Why do you keep re-posting the same thing?

[somogyipeti]

We started today a Google Adwords campaign for the coin.

[somogyipeti]

We started today a Google Adwords campaign for the coin.

[Mohabmw]

Follow us on Facebook and Twitter