Gigamining / Teramining

[MrTeal]

But you will be mining with that hardware forever while the 1st batch of Investors only mines for 6 months and fully paid your "New" equipment.

It has never been the case that any offering would go on in perpetuity. That was the whole reason for the buy back clause.

Then perhaps you should rename the title of this thread. "Gigamining - Perpetual mining contract" doesn't seem appropriate anymore.

[jamesg]

But you will be mining with that hardware forever while the 1st batch of Investors only mines for 6 months and fully paid your "New" equipment.

It has never been the case that any offering would go on in perpetuity. That was the whole reason for the buy back clause.

Then perhaps you should rename the title of this thread. "Gigamining - Perpetual mining contract" doesn't seem appropriate anymore.

Gigamining is perpetual. There is no getting around that.

Teramining is not.

[Audriux9]

But you will be mining with that hardware forever while the 1st batch of Investors only mines for 6 months and fully paid your "New" equipment.

It has never been the case that any offering would go on in perpetuity. That was the whole reason for the buy back clause.

Then perhaps you should rename the title of this thread. "Gigamining - Perpetual mining contract" doesn't seem appropriate anymore.

Gigamining is perpetual. There is no getting around that.

Teramining is not.

What happens to my earnings or my shares  after 6 months has passed? Do the shares become invalid and not earning anything or do they get back to 5Mhash/s earnings?

[MrTeal]

But you will be mining with that hardware forever while the 1st batch of Investors only mines for 6 months and fully paid your "New" equipment.

It has never been the case that any offering would go on in perpetuity. That was the whole reason for the buy back clause.

Then perhaps you should rename the title of this thread. "Gigamining - Perpetual mining contract" doesn't seem appropriate anymore.

Gigamining is perpetual. There is no getting around that.

Teramining is not.

That's quite the kick in the gut for those who purchased Gigamining after you announced the upgrade path back when there was no indication that it would not be a perpetual mining bond.

Perhaps it was stupid of people to buy Gigamining with the intention of converting it to Teramining before the contract was finalized, but that doesn't make it right to substantially change the offerings and just casually wave your finger at GLBSE and say "It's their fault".

[jamesg]

That's quite the kick in the gut for those who purchased Gigamining after you announced the upgrade path back when there was no indication that it would not be a perpetual mining bond.

We are in a fluid environment. I'm doing the best I can with the cards I have been dealt. Since you seem to be driving the point home, maybe you can suggest an alternative idea.

Perhaps it was stupid of people to buy Gigamining with the intention of converting it to Teramining before the contract was finalized, but that doesn't make it right to substantially change the offerings and just casually wave your finger at GLBSE and say "It's their fault".

Where am I waiving my finger at GLBSE? I am simply trying to keep my word, as best as I can, and make an offering that I feel, through months of research, will be a winner for my clients.

The individuals who I have run the contract past before now, who are large stake holders in Gigamining, are quite happy with my approach.

[Audriux9]

That's quite the kick in the gut for those who purchased Gigamining after you announced the upgrade path back when there was no indication that it would not be a perpetual mining bond.

We are in a fluid environment. I'm doing the best I can with the cards I have been dealt. Since you seem to be driving the point home, maybe you can suggest an alternative idea.

Perhaps it was stupid of people to buy Gigamining with the intention of converting it to Teramining before the contract was finalized, but that doesn't make it right to substantially change the offerings and just casually wave your finger at GLBSE and say "It's their fault".

Where am I waiving my finger at GLBSE? I am simply trying to keep my word, as best as I can, and make an offering that I feel, through months of research, will be a winner for my clients.

The individuals who I have run the contract past before now, who are large stake holders in Gigamining, are quite happy with my approach.

Of course they are relatively happy (better something than nothing) But what will happen after 6 months to your investors who helped you to build the whole mining operation? Everyone will just forget about Gigamining, and you will offer another shortsighted mining contract?

[2GOOD]

So you are sayin' in plain text that I first have to pay 50-70 euros for getin' back my own shares and then pay some more to have the chance to mine for ONLY 6 months - this ROI is close to impossible. Actually most of us bought more gigamining shares just because of the teramining contract and when you announced it here on the first post it was perpetual - so in the end all is just a lie... please don't come out with GLBSE issue because now it's not on the table. And don't forget that the hardware you are upgrading with BFL is bought from our money...

IMO a time limited contract is OK, because nothing is 4ever, but 6 months... please this is nonsense

really sad I had faith at least in you around here....

[jamesg]

Of course they are relatively happy (better something than nothing) But what will happen after 6 months to your investors who helped you to build the whole mining operation? Everyone will just forget about Gigamining, and you will offer another shortsighted mining contract?

There will not be any offers after Teramining.

[BurtW]

Depending on how I model the timing of the arrival and bringup of the Teramining ASIC hardware relative to the arrival and bringup of hardware for everyone else on the network my calculations show profit anywhere from a loss on the deal to a very high profit - enough to more than cover my losses on the Gigamining contracts.  

Assuming the following:  Teramining gets ASIC rigs very close to the front of the pack (very early pre-orders), Giga can set them up, get and keep them running in short order and with more skill than the rest of the pack (I trust his technical abilites), my contracts kick in right off the bat (up to me really to get the upgrade done asap), other ASIC vendors are slower to build out or fail totally to deliver at all (good news on that front!!!) - I show a very good profit on the deal.

In all highly profitable models most all of the profit will be found in the front of the curve and a 6 month deal seems reasonable given reasonable assumptions about network build out and growth once ASICs begin to ship to everyone else.

I believe my calculations are correct given my assumptions.  Assumptions are just that.

[jamesg]

IMO a time limited contract is OK, because nothing is 4ever, but 6 months... please this is nonsense

What do you suggest? I've offered an outline, if you feel it needs to be changed, tell me how long you think it should be.

I am a practical person but most of the revenue to be made with Teramining is going to be made in the first 6 months.

[MrTeal]

That's quite the kick in the gut for those who purchased Gigamining after you announced the upgrade path back when there was no indication that it would not be a perpetual mining bond.

We are in a fluid environment. I'm doing the best I can with the cards I have been dealt. Since you seem to be driving the point home, maybe you can suggest an alternative idea.

Perhaps it was stupid of people to buy Gigamining with the intention of converting it to Teramining before the contract was finalized, but that doesn't make it right to substantially change the offerings and just casually wave your finger at GLBSE and say "It's their fault".

Where am I waiving my finger at GLBSE? I am simply trying to keep my word, as best as I can, and make an offering that I feel, through months of research, will be a winner for my clients.

The individuals who I have run the contract past before now, who are large stake holders in Gigamining, are quite happy with my approach.

I was referring to your assertion that now that you can't buy back the bonds using the buyback clause, you'll just change the bond from perpertual+buyback@105% to a 6 month contract. Up until the time that GLBSE closed the contract was still referring to the Teramining bonds as perpetual.

To all Gigaminers:

Below is the Teramining contract. Please have a once over and leave any constructive comments in the thread.

Best,
gigavps

The holder of this bond (“THE BONDHOLDER”) will receive as coupons a number of bitcoins equivalent to 100% PPS output of TWENTY TWO AND ONE HALF MILLION HASHES PER SECOND (22.5Mh/s) for as long as they hold the bond. Coupons are to be paid every Monday for the previous 7 days by THE ISSUER or an assigned agent of THE ISSUER. Coupons are not pro-rated; you must hold the bond at the time the coupon is paid.

GUARANTEED MINIMUM VALUE

THE ISSUER will guarantee a minimum value of 0.02 BTC per bond.

BUYBACK

THE ISSUER has the right to buy back any bond at any time at a price equivalent to 105% of the highest price the bond was traded on GLBSE over the previous 15 days (360 hours).

INITIAL RELEASE

The only way to initially own the bond is through the upgrade from GIGAMINING. There are two ways to upgrade GIGAMINING bonds:

• FREE UPGRADE: This is a one for one swap of GIGAMINING for the bond.
• PAID UPGRADE: This is a one to four swap of GIGAMINING for the bond. A payment of .29 BTC per GIGAMINING bond is also required.

By THE BONDHOLDER upgrading their GIGAMINING bonds they are giving up all rights to the GIGAMINING contract at (https://glbse.com/asset/view/GIGAMINING) and are returning the GIGAMINING bonds to THE ISSUER.

The right to the upgrade is proportional to the number of GIGAMINING bonds held. The PAID UPGRADE is not transferrable.

TRANSFERABILITY

The bond may only be transferred through direct sale on the GLBSE platform. The transfer functionality for this bond has been disabled.

BUYER BEWARE

Though THE ISSUER will use all reasonable efforts to ensure value for the holders of the bond, they are provided on a best effort basis and as with any investment there is risk involved. Please do not invest what you cannot afford to lose. This bond does not represent ownership of any company.

Even though GLBSE no longer exists, making such a major change to the contract unilaterally borders on fraud, IMO.

[2GOOD]

Depending on how I model the timing of the arrival and bringup of the Teramining ASIC hardware relative to the arrival and bringup of hardware for everyone else on the network my calculations show profit anywhere from a loss on the deal to a very high profit - enough to more than cover my losses on the Gigamining contracts.  

Assuming the following:  Teramining gets ASIC rigs very close to the front of the pack (very early pre-orders), Giga can set them up, get and keep them running in short order and with more skill than the rest of the pack (I trust his technical abbilites), my contracts kick in right off the bat (up to me really to get the upgrade done asap), other ASIC vendors are slower to build out or fail totally to deliver at all (good news on that front!!!) - I show a very good profit on the deal.

In all highly profitable models most all of the profit will be found in the front of the curve and a 6 month deal seems reasonable given reasonable assumptions about network build out and growth once ASICs begin to ship to everyone else.

I believe my calculations are correct given my assumptions.  Assumptions are just that.

All said here is true, but atleast an year seems more reasonable. And what happens IF BFL have some problems with the chips (again)....

IMO a time limited contract is OK, because nothing is 4ever, but 6 months... please this is nonsense

What do you suggest? I've offered an outline, if you feel it needs to be changed, tell me how long you think it should be.

I am a practical person but most of the revenue to be made with Teramining is going to be made in the first 6 months.

Double it... ie 1 full year

[jamesg]

Depending on how I model the timing of the arrival and bringup of the Teramining ASIC hardware relative to the arrival and bringup of hardware for everyone else on the network my calculations show profit anywhere from a loss on the deal to a very high profit - enough to more than cover my losses on the Gigamining contracts.  

Assuming the following:  Teramining gets ASIC rigs very close to the front of the pack (very early pre-orders), Giga can set them up, get and keep them running in short order and with more skill than the rest of the pack (I trust his technical abbilites), my contracts kick in right off the bat (up to me really to get the upgrade done asap), other ASIC vendors are slower to build out or fail totally to deliver at all (good news on that front!!!) - I show a very good profit on the deal.

In all highly profitable models most all of the profit will be found in the front of the curve and a 6 month deal seems reasonable given reasonable assumptions about network build out and growth once ASICs begin to ship to everyone else.

I believe my calculations are correct given my assumptions.  Assumptions are just that.

All said here is true, but atleast an year seems more reasonable. And what happens IF BFL have some problems with the chips (again)....

If BFL has problems, we wait. Looks to me like they are being a lot more informative of late which is a very good sign.

[jamesg]

I was referring to your assertion that now that you can't buy back the bonds using the buyback clause, you'll just change the bond from perpertual+buyback@105% to a 6 month contract. Up until the time that GLBSE closed the contract was still referring to the Teramining bonds as perpetual.

Without a buyback clause, the contract cannot be perpetual. How exactly would you like to come to a buyback price with GLBSE existing?

I'm not complaining or waiving my finger, these are simple facts.

[BurtW]

If BFL has problems and other vendors do not gives us the less profitable to no profit to loss scenarios.  Buying Teramining is a bet on BFL.  You can also bet on BFL against Micon - but that is another thread.

[mrdavis]

Depending on how I model the timing of the arrival and bringup of the Teramining ASIC hardware relative to the arrival and bringup of hardware for everyone else on the network my calculations show profit anywhere from a loss on the deal to a very high profit - enough to more than cover my losses on the Gigamining contracts.  

Assuming the following:  Teramining gets ASIC rigs very close to the front of the pack (very early pre-orders), Giga can set them up, get and keep them running in short order and with more skill than the rest of the pack (I trust his technical abilites), my contracts kick in right off the bat (up to me really to get the upgrade done asap), other ASIC vendors are slower to build out or fail totally to deliver at all (good news on that front!!!) - I show a very good profit on the deal.

In all highly profitable models most all of the profit will be found in the front of the curve and a 6 month deal seems reasonable given reasonable assumptions about network build out and growth once ASICs begin to ship to everyone else.

I believe my calculations are correct given my assumptions.  Assumptions are just that.

From the contract

2.3    The Commencement Date for the initiation of data processing services contemplated hereunder shall be ten (10) business days following the receipt of specialized processing equipment from an outside vendor.

[jamesg]

From the contract

2.3    The Commencement Date for the initiation of data processing services contemplated hereunder shall be ten (10) business days following the receipt of specialized processing equipment from an outside vendor.

Yes. 10 business days is to give me time to make sure I don't loose my ass and don't start trying to deliver on something that is yet to be working. There are still a lot of variables yet to be nailed down including mining software.

That said, if it takes 6 hours to get things up and running, the 10 days will not be needed.

[SAC]

From the contract

2.3    The Commencement Date for the initiation of data processing services contemplated hereunder shall be ten (10) business days following the receipt of specialized processing equipment from an outside vendor.

Yes. 10 business days is to give me time to make sure I don't loose my ass and don't start trying to deliver on something that is yet to be working. There are still a lot of variables yet to be nailed down including mining software.

That said, if it takes 6 hours to get things up and running, the 10 days will not be needed.

There are no worries if it does not benefit you the contract will change again.

[boonies4u]

From the contract

2.3    The Commencement Date for the initiation of data processing services contemplated hereunder shall be ten (10) business days following the receipt of specialized processing equipment from an outside vendor.

Yes. 10 business days is to give me time to make sure I don't loose my ass and don't start trying to deliver on something that is yet to be working. There are still a lot of variables yet to be nailed down including mining software.

That said, if it takes 6 hours to get things up and running, the 10 days will not be needed.

Since I don't own Gigamining shares, I did not vote in the poll. I think the longevity of Teramining should not be determined until we (the community) have a better idea how the network will be affected since bASIC out of the picture.

[mrdavis]

Yes. 10 business days is to give me time to make sure I don't loose my ass and don't start trying to deliver on something that is yet to be working. There are still a lot of variables yet to be nailed down including mining software.

That said, if it takes 6 hours to get things up and running, the 10 days will not be needed.

Sorry for the troll post, I must have hit "post" instead of "preview" before I got up. I was going to follow the quotes with (hopefully) constructive comment/questions, but it seems you have already answered, to a point. It is certainly reasonable to cover yourself against unforeseen problems.

If your intent is to begin the contract as soon as you are setup and have things in order, that is excellent. However, the way I currently read the sentence in the contract you could be up and running full force in six hours, and rake it in for yourself for the next 10 business days (and included weekends) before we get a taste and still be well within the terms of the contract. Also, you don't seem to be protected if it takes longer than 10 days, which is not an impossible situation. Perhaps the commencement date should be based on a certain percentage of the hardware becoming operational. I fully trust you'll get things running as fast as possible, if for no other reason, it will profit you more to do so.

Since I don't own Gigamining shares, I did not vote in the poll. I think the longevity of Teramining should not be determined until we (the community) have a better idea how the network will be affected since bASIC out of the picture.

So, there should be a signed contract with an unknown end date to be determined later by who? By what means? I really don't understand what you are trying to solve.