This is a mining growth organization designed to aggressively increase shareholder value and help secure the Bitcoin network through consistent reinvestment of profits.
Be careful with this. Strictly speaking, if you never payout dividends and never liquidate the hardware, investors receive only on-paper benefits.
They should be able to cash out their profits through share sales if they wish. Should we run up against any issues with continued growth, such as maxing out electrical capacity at a site and having to wait for new lines to be put in, or preparing a new site for installation, and we end up in a position of not being able to invest in new mining equipment, I will initiate a motion for dividend payments to commence until such time we are able to continue reinvestment.
In theory, yes, but that requires a fairly stable share price and good liquidity in order to be appealing, both of which tend to be in short supply unless you're planning on providing them.
With that model, investors take two major risks: (1) that you actually own the hardware and (2) that you will make enough Bitcoins mining for reinvestment to actually increase the value of the stake in hardware owned by a share. (1) is a serious concern with no identity verification, but I know I've harped on this already. (2) is an important issues as well. Regardless of any particular companies and how much you trust them, I think most of us can agree that significant increases in MH/BTC are coming soon. Hardware purchased now may actually depreciate in value faster than it mines coins.
I understand the concerns with identity verification involved in an IPO such as this, where shareholders have a stake in the hardware involved. I will likely verify in a few different ways on GLBSE, but I am not sure if I will ever be comfortable with a scan of my ID sitting in someone else's database online.
I can't predict the future. ASICs may hit the network in weeks or months, bitcoin devs could decide to change the hashing algo, causing a massive asset devaluation if we're moved over to ASICs, transaction fees may not be enough to cover profitability in the long term... there are a lot of variables to consider. What I can do is offer my word that I will do what I believe is in the best interest of my shareholders, and I will gladly listen to their opinions of the best path forward.
The good thing about the position I'm currently in, is I have hardware on hand to begin mining immediately for OBSI.ABMO, and I have further hardware on order which I may be willing to sell into the operation once it arrives. Butterfly Labs has stated that they will take dollar-for-dollar trade ins on this hardware when they release ASICs, and it will be up to shareholders to vote on the motions as to when or if we trade in.
You can verify with GLBSE through a mutually trusted middleman, if that's less unappealing. (Or at least, it's been done before)
If you could predict the future, you'd have much more profitable ways than this to earn money. I'm not suggesting you can, I'm just playing devil's advocate and hoping it will at least help anticipate possible problems.
Share release is as follows:
1 Million Shares @ 0.1 BTC
1 Million Shares @ 0.2 BTC
1 Million Shares @ 0.3 BTC
1 Million Shares @ 0.4 BTC
1 Million Shares @ 0.5 BTC
1 Million Shares @ 0.6 BTC
1 Million Shares @ 0.7 BTC
1 Million Shares @ 0.8 BTC
1 Million Shares @ 0.9 BTC
1 Million Shares @ 1.0 BTC
What what what? Assuming you expect hardware value per share to increase (the whole business model), shouldn't new shares be priced according to hardware value, not arbitrary numbers? What's the incentive for me to buy a share now instead of in a month for the same price and more value?
Am I missing something here?
The incentive is to make sure you get in while the share price is still low, you can wait it out and hope there are still shares available at that price later, but you're playing a game of chicken with other investors who may not care to wait. Each tier of shares represents a milestone in our growth, and it should result in a vibrant secondary market and opportunity for early investors to cash out at a profit if they wish to do so.
As shares are purchased they will quickly be invested in further mining hardware & supporting necessities. The share value should maintain a fairly steady growth as a tier of shares is sold, then grow quickly once a tier is sold out and profits are continually reinvested.
The concept is fine, it's the execution I'm concerned about. Requiring the sale of 100,000 BTC of shares before moving on to the next tier will realistically mean a few years at a very optimistic minimum. To be honest, I doubt you'll ever raise that much - that's about half a percent of all the Bitcoins which will ever be in existence.
Issuer reserves the right to cease operations and liquidate assets without motion.
If you want to do this, I think you'll need to elaborate on the procedure. How would assets be liquidated? For what reason(s) would you cease operations?
This is mostly a catch-all in cases of death or disease where I or my heirs may simply be unable to continue operations. Liquidation speed would depend on the circumstances of course, as I could not control the situation after my demise. I have no plans to cease operations at any point, and once we become a large enough operation to have multiple employees, I will enter a motion to have this part of the contract updated to reflect our position as an entity that can continue on for the foreseeable future.
I would of course abide by a passing motion to cease operations, but I sure wouldn't like it
I'm just suggesting you implement at least a framework procedure, e.g. name an executor and the like, or state that the majority shareholder would manage it, or something similar. Again, as investors are investing in physical hardware, this is an important point.
I know I'm negative; don't take it too harshly. Best of luck in any case.