Gigamining / Teramining

[jamesg]

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.

As lawyers are writing and advising the initial drafts of the contract, cya is built into everything they do.

As you have pointed out, this is one area in which I intend to under promise and over deliver.

[boonies4u]

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.

see

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.

We need to find out how long Teramining bonds will bring in sufficient dividends. I would like to see the math taken in consideration, especially considering bASIC hashes won't be hitting the network. While, i'm sure Giga has done ALOT of math regarding the profitability of Teramining, i'm not sure if the 6mo contract took bASIC dropping out into consideration.

[jamesg]

We need to find out how long Teramining bonds will bring in sufficient dividends. I would like to see the math taken in consideration, especially considering bASIC hashes won't be hitting the network. While, i'm sure Giga has done ALOT of math regarding the profitability of Teramining, i'm not sure if the 6mo contract took bASIC dropping out into consideration.

My estimates now take into consideration bASIC not being around. Some of these orders will go to BFL, some will go to Avalon, and some will quit in disgust. Also understanding the intricacies of how these hardware projects are operating helps. Especially around time to get more wafers produced, assembly, burn in, etc.

I will not be posting any numbers because others should be doing their own due diligence like BurtW has been doing.

[mrdavis]

We need to find out how long Teramining bonds will bring in sufficient dividends. I would like to see the math taken in consideration, especially considering bASIC hashes won't be hitting the network. While, i'm sure Giga has done ALOT of math regarding the profitability of Teramining, i'm not sure if the 6mo contract took bASIC dropping out into consideration.

Assuming the bASIC news hasn't been put in the equation, doing so would only increase Terramining profitability and shorten the contract duration if all other things remained equal.

[PsychoticBoy]

We need to find out how long Teramining bonds will bring in sufficient dividends. I would like to see the math taken in consideration, especially considering bASIC hashes won't be hitting the network. While, i'm sure Giga has done ALOT of math regarding the profitability of Teramining, i'm not sure if the 6mo contract took bASIC dropping out into consideration.

My estimates now take into consideration bASIC not being around. Some of these orders will go to BFL, some will go to Avalon, and some will quit in disgust. Also understanding the intricacies of how these hardware projects are operating helps. Especially around time to get more wafers produced, assembly, burn in, etc.

I will not be posting any numbers because others should be doing their own due diligence like BurtW has been doing.

^^^
Giving shareholders the exact numbers would screw your opperation because NO ONE would buy any shares that will NOT, and I repeat NOT be profitable!
The only one who will profit is gigavps.
Mark my words!

[deeplink]

I will not be posting any numbers because others should be doing their own due diligence like BurtW has been doing.

Giving shareholders the exact numbers would screw your opperation because NO ONE would buy any shares that will NOT, and I repeat NOT be profitable!

I agree that this is the most likely reason you won't see any numbers from gigavps.

On the other hand, what use are numbers? Making some calculations is no rocket science, but any numbers that anyone including gigavps can pull out of his ** are only guestimates. There are too many unknown variables for which you have to make an assumption. Changing any of those assumptions will completely skew the outcome. It will be possible to calculate any outcome between highly profitable and catastrophic loss at this moment.

It's just a bet. A very bad bet, but still a bet.

[jamesg]

I will not be posting any numbers because others should be doing their own due diligence like BurtW has been doing.

Giving shareholders the exact numbers would screw your opperation because NO ONE would buy any shares that will NOT, and I repeat NOT be profitable!

I agree that this is the most likely reason you won't see any numbers from gigavps.

On the other hand, what use are numbers? Making some calculations is no rocket science, but any numbers that anyone including gigavps can pull out of his ** are only guestimates. There are too many unknown variables for which you have to make an assumption. Changing any of those assumptions will completely skew the outcome. It will be possible to calculate any outcome between highly profitable and catastrophic loss at this moment.

It's just a bet. A very bad bet, but still a bet.

So take the free upgrade.

I'm not putting a gun to anyone's head. 

If I didn't offer the upgrade, you would be complaining that I'm not keeping my word. I try to make an offering that I think works, you complain because I'm might make money or the offer isn't right.

I would rather read ideas about how to make the offer better than to read how you feel I'm doing something wrong.

The latter gets us nowhere.

I've done everything in my power to make sure Teramining will be a huge success. It is of course dependent on BFL making a somewhat timely delivery. That said, I am behind BFL 100% and believe that they are the best manufacturer of mining products. As we have seen with bASIC, not all ASIC manufacturers are created equal.

[Deprived]

I will not be posting any numbers because others should be doing their own due diligence like BurtW has been doing.

Giving shareholders the exact numbers would screw your opperation because NO ONE would buy any shares that will NOT, and I repeat NOT be profitable!

I agree that this is the most likely reason you won't see any numbers from gigavps.

On the other hand, what use are numbers? Making some calculations is no rocket science, but any numbers that anyone including gigavps can pull out of his ** are only guestimates. There are too many unknown variables for which you have to make an assumption. Changing any of those assumptions will completely skew the outcome. It will be possible to calculate any outcome between highly profitable and catastrophic loss at this moment.

It's just a bet. A very bad bet, but still a bet.

So take the free upgrade.

I'm not putting a gun to anyone's head. 

If I didn't offer the upgrade, you would be complaining that I'm not keeping my word. I try to make an offering that I think works, you complain because I'm might make money or the offer isn't right.

I would rather read ideas about how to make the offer better than to read how you feel I'm doing something wrong.

The latter gets us nowhere.

I've done everything in my power to make sure Teramining will be a huge success. It is of course dependent on BFL making a somewhat timely delivery. That said, I am behind BFL 100% and believe that they are the best manufacturer of mining products. As we have seen with bASIC, not all ASIC manufacturers are created equal.

Well you could make a pretty simple change to ensure noone actually makes loss.

Make the duration of it the LONGER of X months (currently 6) and the time taken for investors to receive back their initial investment in dividends.

So if it gos well and they make a profit eearly then contracts end after X months.  If it doesn't go well you keep paying dividends until they've received back their initial investment. 

There's then the issue of calculating what initial investment is.  That's not too hard - just means valuing gigamining shares with a residual value of their IPO cost less dividends paid to date.

Obviously you can only go this sort of route if you genuinely believe investors are likely to make a profit in 6 months and VERY likely to make a profit in a year or so (beyond that there'd be no significant returns anyway).  But that's what you believe, right?

[jamesg]

But that's what you believe, right?

Fine. Let's do some maffs.

In my WORST CASE SCENARIO, where both asicMINER and Avalon deliver 100% of what they have announce, I show a return of .0323 BTC per each 600k contracts available.

So.... below is an example with a gigaminer owning 504 contracts.

Code:

              Gigamining Contract Teramining Contract Expected 6mo Output Payment to Upgrade Profit in 6mo
Free Upgrade                  504                2016             65.1168             0.0000       65.1168
Paid Upgrade                  504                7560            244.1880           146.1600       98.0280

So, as we can all see now, Teramining, according to my worst case estimates has the potential to take in 11.6k BTC and pay out 19.38k BTC.

That is a net loss of a 7.78k BTC and could be much higher if network conditions are better than my worst case estimates. But of course, not everyone will take the paid upgrade.

So then you might ask, "why the hell are you even doing this?". Because I said I would.

Now, on to guaranteeing things.... since you have said you are a lawyer in the UK, would you advice your client to guarantee anything with a contract such as this? If you are any type of good lawyer, I'm sure you would say no.

My plans include all Gigaminers and I am offering a free upgrade for those who don't want to pay.

[Deprived]

Now, on to guaranteeing things.... since you have said you are a lawyer in the UK, would you advice your client to guarantee anything with a contract such as this? If you are any type of good lawyer, I'm sure you would say no.

My plans include all Gigaminers and I am offering a free upgrade for those who don't want to pay.

I'm not a lawyer - nor have I ever claimed to be one.

I wouldn't suggest guaranteeing anything - and didn't do so.  Though I can see how you got that impression.  What I'd suggested was that the contract end after 6 months if total dividends exceeded initial investment - but continued if they hadn't.  At that stage they would continue until either initial investment was repaid OR there was no longer any production (which would happen eventually anyway - as your new contract doesn't guarantee fixed payments).

Obviously you could add some other clause - such as being able to liquidate the hardware if mining became unprofitable and making a final payment.

The key really is whether your goal is either:

a) To guarantee significant profit for yourself,
b) To try to ensure minimal chance of loss for investors and no loss for yourself.

Obviously those two sets of objectives aren't compatible in some scenarios (e.g. where the first wave of deep price-cuts on ASICs occur early leading to heavy new influx of ASICs with smaller capital costs to recoup, driving difficulty up and profitability down).  I'd argue your current contract is very heavily weighted in favour of a) - making sure you get to keep the hardware after a period of time irrespective of how well/badly investors have done.  You CAN reduce risk to investors without exposing yourself to risk of loss - but at the risk of significantly lower profit for yourself if things go badly.

As for "My plans include all Gigaminers" - whether that's true or not depends on what you consider to be Gigaminers.  Nothing in your plans so far includes those who bought a few contracts on GLBSE where the value of those contracts is less than the cost to them of obtaining Apostille.  Are those people Gigaminers? 

[jamesg]

As for "My plans include all Gigaminers" - whether that's true or not depends on what you consider to be Gigaminers.  Nothing in your plans so far includes those who bought a few contracts on GLBSE where the value of those contracts is less than the cost to them of obtaining Apostille.  Are those people Gigaminers? 

I'm guessing you've come up with some magical way to create legally binding documents in all countries for free?

I am treating everyone equally which is the only proper way to handle where we are at. There are no beneficial assignees on the Gigamining contract that was hosted on GLBSE.

I have also proven my willingness to continue with those who see what I am trying to do and agree with it. It does no one any good if VPS gone like GLBSE now is.

[nebulus]

Can you gives us a definition of a "Gigaminer"? From your posts, it seems like you are not sure what to do with those who have not submitted their info. Maybe, you have not really thought about it yet but for heaven's sake just say so.

Going forward, I do not plan to submit any documents to claim what I had invested.
However, I am interested to know what is going to become of my shares/dividends.

Thanks!

[jamesg]

Can you gives us a definition of a "Gigaminer"? From your posts, it seems like you are not sure what to do with those who have not submitted their info. Maybe, you have not really thought about it yet but for heaven's sake just say so.

Going forward, I do not plan to submit any documents to claim what I had invested.
However, I am interested to know what is going to become of my shares.

Thanks!

Hi nebulus,

At this time, there is no cut off date for claims. All accumulated BTC will be held in cold storage. Since the Gigamining contract is perpetual, coins will keep accumulating in the cold storage wallets until they are claimed.

This is the only way to insure that I will be able to cover the liability at any point in the future.

Best,
James

[nebulus]

All right, maybe I'll come up with something before I am too old to mess with this. Thanks for the answer.

[MrTeal]

Can you gives us a definition of a "Gigaminer"? From your posts, it seems like you are not sure what to do with those who have not submitted their info. Maybe, you have not really thought about it yet but for heaven's sake just say so.

Going forward, I do not plan to submit any documents to claim what I had invested.
However, I am interested to know what is going to become of my shares.

Thanks!

Hi nebulus,

At this time, there is no cut off date for claims. All accumulated BTC will be held in cold storage. Since the Gigamining contract is perpetual, coins will keep accumulating in the cold storage wallets until they are claimed.

This is the only way to insure that I will be able to cover the liability at any point in the future.

Best,
James

Just a clarification, how do you now plan to handle the perpetuity of Gigamining without the buyback feature? Should a Gigamining bondholder choose to continue their 5MH/s bond in perpetuity rather than upgrading to Teramining, how will you handle the closure of the company should you want to fold VPS in 20 years?

[boonies4u]

My plans include all Gigaminers and I am offering a free upgrade for those who don't want to pay.

I don't think free is the right word. I think at-no-charge is what you're looking for. There's only 3 options for Gigaminers... Don't claim shares through Quentin, claim shares and don't take paid option, or claim shares and take paid option. The Gigaminers who claim will become Teraminers no matter what.

I just don't like the wording, is all...
_

"Hey guys, Teramining is coming out! You can pay me money for more shares or pay nothing for a 1:1 trade! If you don't like it you can always not claim your Gigamining shares. It's not like i'm MAKING you pay me."
_

Teramining is certainly BETTER than nothing.  But that doesn't mean you won't get flak for what it IS.

Like Deprived said, you'll be acting...

a) To guarantee significant profit for yourself,
b) To try to ensure minimal chance of loss (or maximum chance of bonds being paid for in dividends) for investors and no loss for yourself.

What Teramining becomes and how you operate it will determine how the community and Gigaminers see you regarding the transition into and eventual ending of Teramining.

You already know all this though, I just felt like saying it outloud.

*

Just a clarification, how do you now plan to handle the perpetuity of Gigamining without the buyback feature? Should a Gigamining bondholder choose to continue their 5MH/s bond in perpetuity rather than upgrading to Teramining, how will you handle the closure of the company should you want to fold VPS in 20 years?

*

Given what I typed above, I would also like a clarification.

[Deprived]

Can you gives us a definition of a "Gigaminer"? From your posts, it seems like you are not sure what to do with those who have not submitted their info. Maybe, you have not really thought about it yet but for heaven's sake just say so.

Going forward, I do not plan to submit any documents to claim what I had invested.
However, I am interested to know what is going to become of my shares.

Thanks!

Hi nebulus,

At this time, there is no cut off date for claims. All accumulated BTC will be held in cold storage. Since the Gigamining contract is perpetual, coins will keep accumulating in the cold storage wallets until they are claimed.

This is the only way to insure that I will be able to cover the liability at any point in the future.

Best,
James

Just a clarification, how do you now plan to handle the perpetuity of Gigamining without the buyback feature? Should a Gigamining bondholder choose to continue their 5MH/s bond in perpetuity rather than upgrading to Teramining, how will you handle the closure of the company should you want to fold VPS in 20 years?

It's not actually a theoretical question.

Anyone who doesn't claim their shares yet would still be accruing dividends under the old policy.  Whilst, at present, there's no economically viable option for someone with only a few old shares that COULD change in the future.  e.g. in a few years time if BTC are worth $100 each then suddenly it could be worth paying the apostille cost to claim your few bonds.

I'd assume they'd just be getting their promised MH/s PPS output added to their accumulated value forever (with GIga keeping them in BTC so he doesn't face exposure to currency risk if they're claimed at a later date).

[BitcoinMint.US]

Fine. Let's do some maffs.

Code:

              Gigamining Contract Teramining Contract Expected 6mo Output Payment to Upgrade Profit in 6mo
Free Upgrade                  504                2016             65.1168             0.0000       65.1168
Paid Upgrade                  504                7560            244.1880           146.1600       98.0280

Using your "maffs" and doing some research of my other (more well managed and actively trading) holdings for comparison. I arrived at a valuation of BTC0.11 per bond for a 6 month contract, just in case anyone is wondering what this offering would be trading at in today's market.

[Epoch]

Code:

                GIGAMINING   TERAMINING
Total Gh/s      200Gh        5,400Gh
Mh/s per bond   5Mh/s        9Mh/s
Total bonds     40,000       600,000

Free Upgrade Path
I will offer a 1:4 exchange of Gigamining for Teramining that costs nothing to upgrade. An example would be if you have 400 Gigamining and don’t want to pay to upgrade, you can swap them 1:4 for Teramining. This would represent a 7.2x increase in the bonds hashing power at no additional cost. So in this case, the 400 Gigamining bonds (2Gh) would be upgraded to 1,600 Teramining bonds (14.4Gh).

Paid Upgrade Path
I will also offer a 1:15 exchange of Gigamining bonds for Teramining bonds. So, if you have 400 Gigamining bonds (2Gh) and pay the upgrade fee, you will receive 6,000 Teramining bonds (54Gh) in return. The fee to upgrade will be .29 BTC per Gigamining bond. So, the upgrade fee on 400 Gigamining bonds would be 116 BTC.

Contract Outline

• New contract is 9Mh/s.
• There is no representation made for the expected output of the contract. So if the hashing power makes more than 100%, you get more than 100%. That said, VPS has systems in place to make sure of 99% up-time including our own, fully redundant pool infrastructure.
• Contract lasts for 6 moths from the start date for each individual.
• Contract will start within one week of the equipment arriving and being setup.
• Any upgrade returns all rights of current Gigamining contract including payments
• Paid upgrades must be paid in full before the contract can begin.
• Purchase is non-refundable.
• Contract also includes an NDA so Teraminers can be free to ask questions and get answers.

You can view the entire contract here -> https://docs.google.com/document/d/15g0mjR1VQMr2866CDYI97nyyWA_UJZpX0uP8vrsDBzI/edit

Best,
James

Regarding the paid upgrade option, my interpretation of the above is that 0.29 BTC ($4.13 at today's exchange of $14.25/BTC) gets a Gigamining holder an additional 11 Teramining contracts over the 4 offered by the free path. 11 contracts at 9Mhps apiece is 99Mhps.

Consider a BFL Little Single SC. It hashes at 30,000Mhps and sells for $650. 99Mhps is 0.0033 the hashrate of the SC. 0.0033 of $650 is $2.15. But the paid Teramining upgrade is $4.13... a premium of 92% over the actual hardware cost (essentially double). And the contract ends after just 6 months. Of course some premium is to be expected (hosting facility, utilities, insurance, time, risk) but I find it difficult to justify a 92% markup... even more difficult knowing my purchased hashrate expires after 6 months.

So 3 options for Gigaminers to consider are (a) do nothing and accept the 1:4 free upgrade; (b) pay 0.29 BTC/share for the 1:15 upgrade; or (c) put their 0.29 BTC/share towards the purchase of an actual Single (which can likely be re-sold for its full purchase price after 6 months, given BFL's track record of a full-value trade-in program).

I do understand that some people are willing to pay a high premium for not having to worry about the effort of maintaining a physical miner, but I think it is worthwhile to go through the exercise.

Giga, for transparency, would you be willing to provide an itemized list of your (anticipated and/or estimated) operating costs, non-recurring costs, and operating income during the 6-month Teramining period? It would help Gigaminers better judge the value of both the free and paid upgrade paths on offer and help with their decision. My feeling is that a 0.20 BTC/share upgrade (33% markup) may be more reasonable than the 0.29 BTC (92% markup) proposed ... but without actual numbers to back either one of these, there is nothing to say that one is more reasonable than the other.

Also, for those who no longer wish to continue with Gigamining or Teramining, what options are available to sell their shares? Would you consider a buy-back of some of these yourself and, if so, for what price?

[BurtW]

Here is my understanding of how the upgrade works:

Each of your current Gigamining contracts is for the theoretical (calculated) Bitcoin output of five million hashes/second of mining power (5 MH/s)

Each of the new Teramining contracts will be for the actual Bitcoin output of nine million hashes/second of mining power (9 MH/s)

On the free upgrade path (no additional cost to you) you get four Teramining contracts for each Gigamining contract you turn in, so in terms of hashes you will get

4 x 9 = 36 MH/s for each 5 MH/s turned in for an overall upgrade ratio of 7.2 times the hashing power per contract

On the paid upgrade path (0.29 BTC per contract turned in) you get 15 Teramining contracts for each Gigamining contract you turn in, so in terms of hashes you will get

15 x 9 =  135 MH/s for each 5 MH/s turned in for an overall upgrade ratio of 27  times the hashing power per contract

The paid upgrade path will cost 0.29 BTC per contract or the equivalent in USD (about $3.90 per contract).

So, for example, if you have 1000 Gigamining contracts the paid upgrade path would cost 1000 x 0.29 = 290 BTC or about $3,900

Personally, I plan to spring for the paid upgrade path as I believe it will most likely be very profitable.

EDIT:  I copy pasted this from a time when BTC were at a lower price...