Author Topic: [LTC-GLOBAL] CIPHERMINE Industrial Cryptocoin Mining & High Perf. Computing  (Read 334345 times)

Offline WoodTech

  • VIP Donator
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 278
  • Kate Craig-Wood
    • Wood Technology LLP
Re: [LTC-GLOBAL] CIPHERMINE - New cryptocoin mining company
« Reply #15 on: June 24, 2013, 09:53:45 AM »
Plus this: A motion shall be considered approved on a majority of more than 50% of the shares (50,000 shares).
Meaning that only your voice (how your 100k shares are distributed, with you getting 65%) counts. Isnt it a bit harsh? meaning that motions in here basicly are a joke and just your public stunt?

Apologies, I missed this post. I don't think this is unreasonable, no. Again, taking my own business Memset Ltd, which are are considering floating on NASDAQ or AIM in a few years time my and my brother's intention is to keep hold of 75% of the shares. This gives us absolute control (for real companies a 25% shareholder can veto motions), but NASDAQ, for instance, is quite happy for you to only offer 10% of the share capital on the exchange.

However, if we were then to take actions which harmed our shareholders, or if we were to exclude them from the decision-making process entirely, this would reduce the value of our shares. So it is here; I am highly-motivated to increase CipherMine's share price and in order to do that I must keep the market happy. If I start ignoring shareholders or doing things in pure self-interest then the shares will drop in value.

Further, as articulated in the business plan, a big threat for a virtual company is the founders selling a big chunk of their shares to make a fast buck then dumping the company. Since I have only 65% and the majority is 50%+ this means I am unlikely to want to sell very many.

By comparison, if we look at Ethan Burnside's BTC-TC and LTC-GLOBAL shares, he owns >90% but these securities command incredibly market capitalisations. I am putting a much larger proportion of CipherMine on the market, and there are four founding shareholders too.

I hope that addresses your concerns?

Kate.

Offline WoodTech

  • VIP Donator
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 278
  • Kate Craig-Wood
    • Wood Technology LLP
Re: [LTC-GLOBAL] CIPHERMINE - New cryptocoin mining company
« Reply #16 on: June 24, 2013, 10:15:26 AM »
So with your prediction of current 19 mill difficulty reaching 60 mill difficulty you calculated those profits from the things you ordered? I get it you ordered the chips and fpga's. Sorry, with the hashing power you ordered on that difficulty (which is as you say predicted) you wont be getting anything (with your model of "fixed price prediciton"). So either there is a flaw somewhere in there, or you are not saying something.

My model predicts profitability as the productivity per hash (the direct inverse of difficulty) less the fixed costs per hash. If we take a specific example, one of our 10 x Ztex FPGA board stacks. They produces ~2,250 MH/sec, which at present generates roughly 0.057 BTC/day, or EUR €5.13/day (using our fixed price of 90 EUR/BTC). The stack itself (~€105/board) and an allowance for the management server (~€100 - we can run many stacks of one machine) costs ~€1,150, or €1.05/day in hardware amortisation. They don't use much power either, but let's round it up to 100W. At €0.12/kWh that's €0.29/day. We're tidily in profit at current difficulty (19m); €3.96/day.

If we increase difficulty to 60m we must reduce the productivity per hashrate proportionally: ( 19m / 60m ) x €5.13 = €1.62/day revenue. Less our €1.34/day costs and our profit is only €0.28/day/stack. Once difficulty reaches 73m those FPGAs will no longer be profitable if we include the depreciation. At that point we will either sell them, re-use them for another project, or we may "sweat the asset" and keep them running until they are generating less than they power cost. In reality the hardware cost is already sunk, so the cashflow cost is only €0.29/day and revenue will not drop to that until a difficulty of 336m.

However, the plan only allows for buying SHA256 FPGAs in the first few months, and even then only spending 30% of our hardware reinvestment fund on them. After September we intend to be spending the 30% FPGA allowance on scrypt FPGAs instead which should be much more profitable. We may also be able to re-purpose the SHA256 FPGAs as scrypt ones (I need to check with Giles on that, since I think he said we could not, so don't count on that assumption). The core 65% of the hardware fund will be going towards ASICs which cost only about €100 to produce the same hashrate as one of those 10 FPGA stacks and use similar or most likely less power.

SHA256 FPGAs are good purchases still though since, unlike ASICs, they are re-purposeable. As the subtitle on the business plan implies, it is our intention to diversify into high-performance computing and FPGAs are an important part of that.

Kate.

Offline evilscoop

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 170
Re: [LTC-GLOBAL] CIPHERMINE - New cryptocoin mining company - NOW IN IPO
« Reply #17 on: June 24, 2013, 10:31:56 AM »
Quote
We may also be able to re-purpose the SHA256 FPGAs as scrypt ones

You cannot..
There is work on the raspberry coins fpga to do this, but nothing set in stone yet, and these or block burner are most likely to get scrypt first atm (dismissing enterpoint working in secret for the moment)
The spartan 6's just dont have the memory etc to do scrypt

Offline Ethera

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 488
    • Litecoininvest - litecoin investment platform
Re: [LTC-GLOBAL] CIPHERMINE - New cryptocoin mining company
« Reply #18 on: June 24, 2013, 10:37:45 AM »
Plus this: A motion shall be considered approved on a majority of more than 50% of the shares (50,000 shares).
Meaning that only your voice (how your 100k shares are distributed, with you getting 65%) counts. Isnt it a bit harsh? meaning that motions in here basicly are a joke and just your public stunt?

Apologies, I missed this post. I don't think this is unreasonable, no. Again, taking my own business Memset Ltd, which are are considering floating on NASDAQ or AIM in a few years time my and my brother's intention is to keep hold of 75% of the shares. This gives us absolute control (for real companies a 25% shareholder can veto motions), but NASDAQ, for instance, is quite happy for you to only offer 10% of the share capital on the exchange.

However, if we were then to take actions which harmed our shareholders, or if we were to exclude them from the decision-making process entirely, this would reduce the value of our shares. So it is here; I am highly-motivated to increase CipherMine's share price and in order to do that I must keep the market happy. If I start ignoring shareholders or doing things in pure self-interest then the shares will drop in value.

Further, as articulated in the business plan, a big threat for a virtual company is the founders selling a big chunk of their shares to make a fast buck then dumping the company. Since I have only 65% and the majority is 50%+ this means I am unlikely to want to sell very many.

By comparison, if we look at Ethan Burnside's BTC-TC and LTC-GLOBAL shares, he owns >90% but these securities command incredibly market capitalisations. I am putting a much larger proportion of CipherMine on the market, and there are four founding shareholders too.

I hope that addresses your concerns?

Kate.

I am sorry its just hard to take you serious after your claims. Here is the copypaste, tell me how will you comply with the percentages you want:

Listing Requirements for All Companies
Each company must have a minimum of 1,250,000 publicly-traded shares upon listing, excluding those held by officers, directors or any beneficial owners of more then 10% of the company. In addition, the regular bid price at time of listing must be $4, and there must be at least three market makers for the stock. However, a company may qualify under a closing price alternative of $3 or $2 if the company meets varying requirements. Each listing firm is also required to follow Nasdaq corporate governance rules 4350, 4351 and 4360. Companies must also have at least 450 round lot (100 shares) shareholders, 2,200 total shareholders, or 550 total shareholders with 1.1 million average trading volume over the past 12 months.

Listing Standard No. 1
The company must have aggregate pre-tax earnings in the prior three years of at least $11 million, in the prior two years at least $2.2 million, and no one year in the prior three years can have a net loss.

etc. etc. etc.

Thats for your plans. So you just tell something that you wish, without looking up of it. Well, guess everyone does business their way.

But hey, I wish you all the best. As far as I am concerned, I wouldn't invest in you, as I dont see how 10% will get anything (even their value) back, but thats just me. People might actually consider trading your stocks and not waiting for dividents. Best of luck!

Offline WoodTech

  • VIP Donator
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 278
  • Kate Craig-Wood
    • Wood Technology LLP
Re: [LTC-GLOBAL] CIPHERMINE - New cryptocoin mining company
« Reply #19 on: June 24, 2013, 11:19:16 AM »
I am sorry its just hard to take you serious after your claims.

To which "claims" are you referring? I have always backed up any claims with evidence and / or quantitative assessment? If there is a claim that I have made which you feel to be bogus then please tell me. If you have a concern it is likely others do as well and I would wish to address it.

Quote
Here is the copypaste, tell me how will you comply with the percentages you want:

Listing Requirements for All Companies
Each company must have a minimum of 1,250,000 publicly-traded shares upon listing, excluding those held by officers, directors or any beneficial owners of more then 10% of the company.
...
So you just tell something that you wish, without looking up of it. Well, guess everyone does business their way.

...so for Nasdaq Capital Market (to which that pertains) there must be at least 10% of the shares listed for public trading - exactly the amount I stated. We have 100,000 shares and I just listed 10,000, with another 10k in reserve to list (20k total, or 20% of CipherMine publicly traded). I am not understanding the problem you think is there?

If you're referring to the number of shares, that is arbitrary and depends on the scale of the exchange. I could have made 10,000,000 shares and offered 1,000,000 at 0.000667 LTC each but that seemed a bit silly given the likely volumes on LTC Global. What matters is the percentage being offered, and I'm going way beyond what most people would consider to be the minimum requirement, as demonstrated by your cut and paste!

The same applies to NASDAQ's minimum requirements for shareholders and valuations; they pertain to the scale of the exchange and are thus not appropriate here. Further, I only cited the 10% element, about which your question originally was.

Kate.

Offline Ethera

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 488
    • Litecoininvest - litecoin investment platform
Re: [LTC-GLOBAL] CIPHERMINE - New cryptocoin mining company - NOW IN IPO
« Reply #20 on: June 24, 2013, 11:27:46 AM »
.. I cannot even start taking down the math..

And I wont. Dont want to be looked at as a bastard. Just saying, people should count your predicted hashrates, count incoming diff levels, see how much per share they can get at the beginning and the end of the year and do their conclusion. I did mine.

Offline WoodTech

  • VIP Donator
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 278
  • Kate Craig-Wood
    • Wood Technology LLP
Re: [LTC-GLOBAL] CIPHERMINE - New cryptocoin mining company - NOW IN IPO
« Reply #21 on: June 24, 2013, 12:01:25 PM »
.. I cannot even start taking down the math..

And I wont. Dont want to be looked at as a bastard. Just saying, people should count your predicted hashrates, count incoming diff levels, see how much per share they can get at the beginning and the end of the year and do their conclusion. I did mine.

I went through the calculation in a transparent manner. Further, I have independently verified that my assumption that difficulty is directly inversely proportional to productivity (coins/hashrate) via this bounty. I have exposed and defended my calculations. It seems odd you being unwilling to do the same since you are being so vehement on the topic.

However, if you are basing your calculations on a share of the existing hardware then that's where you've gone wrong. We're not selling bonds / shares in hardware. We are selling shares in the entire company including its future. To look at it another way, if you have 1,000 share (1% of CipherMine) and over the next 3 months we purchase an additional €30k EUR of hardware, you now effectively own 1% of the new ~€50k total without making any additional cash investment. By the end of the first year, according to our forecast, we will own >€200k EUR of mining machinery, and again without putting any more money you effectively own 1% of that total. We are selling shares in a company, not shares in hardware.

Kate.

Offline Ethera

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 488
    • Litecoininvest - litecoin investment platform
Re: [LTC-GLOBAL] CIPHERMINE - New cryptocoin mining company - NOW IN IPO
« Reply #22 on: June 24, 2013, 12:17:53 PM »
.. I cannot even start taking down the math..

And I wont. Dont want to be looked at as a bastard. Just saying, people should count your predicted hashrates, count incoming diff levels, see how much per share they can get at the beginning and the end of the year and do their conclusion. I did mine.

I went through the calculation in a transparent manner. Further, I have independently verified that my assumption that difficulty is directly inversely proportional to productivity (coins/hashrate) via this bounty. I have exposed and defended my calculations. It seems odd you being unwilling to do the same since you are being so vehement on the topic.

However, if you are basing your calculations on a share of the existing hardware then that's where you've gone wrong. We're not selling bonds / shares in hardware. We are selling shares in the entire company including its future. To look at it another way, if you have 1,000 share (1% of CipherMine) and over the next 3 months we purchase an additional €30k EUR of hardware, you now effectively own 1% of the new ~€50k total without making any additional cash investment. By the end of the first year, according to our forecast, we will own >€200k EUR of mining machinery, and again without putting any more money you effectively own 1% of that total. We are selling shares in a company, not shares in hardware.

Kate.
Ok, lets start as you so say calculations.

First your topic that you were so kind to link, forgot to mention, that your calculations of difficulty increase over SEVERAL month from 6 to 12 millions was overpassed and will be still overpassed with difficulty increase of 12 to 19 mill within 2 weeks. Thats what asic's coming into play can do. With you ordering so much hashing power and seeing how much hashing power will be released in total, I say your calculations are off by MILES.

Second, you dont put shareholders in your company, you put them into new company cyphermine, which has value of approx 22k euros in hardware and promisses (btw, no proof of orders or anything, sounds credible). This meaning that with your raised funds you denominate shares of investors by 9:1, meaning that 1 ltc put in actualy goes as 0.1 ltc at the end count of whole company (still not counting man power costs).

And from that, you take 90% off after electricity and etc. Meaning that from 0.1 LTC value that the sharebuyer had, he will actualy be accounted only 0.01 of working funds towards his investition.
You might be world renowned enterpreteur, awesome girl with lots of bla bla, but you should highlight those important moments. So far there is no proof to anything you stated, besides that you work in some company. I get it, you want to get rich, we all do. But thats not the way to do it.

Tell me, if my math is wrong.

Offline Ethera

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 488
    • Litecoininvest - litecoin investment platform
Re: [LTC-GLOBAL] CIPHERMINE - New cryptocoin mining company - NOW IN IPO
« Reply #23 on: June 24, 2013, 12:37:41 PM »
.. I cannot even start taking down the math..

And I wont. Dont want to be looked at as a bastard. Just saying, people should count your predicted hashrates, count incoming diff levels, see how much per share they can get at the beginning and the end of the year and do their conclusion. I did mine.

I went through the calculation in a transparent manner. Further, I have independently verified that my assumption that difficulty is directly inversely proportional to productivity (coins/hashrate) via this bounty. I have exposed and defended my calculations. It seems odd you being unwilling to do the same since you are being so vehement on the topic.

However, if you are basing your calculations on a share of the existing hardware then that's where you've gone wrong. We're not selling bonds / shares in hardware. We are selling shares in the entire company including its future. To look at it another way, if you have 1,000 share (1% of CipherMine) and over the next 3 months we purchase an additional €30k EUR of hardware, you now effectively own 1% of the new ~€50k total without making any additional cash investment. By the end of the first year, according to our forecast, we will own >€200k EUR of mining machinery, and again without putting any more money you effectively own 1% of that total. We are selling shares in a company, not shares in hardware.

Kate.

besides (From topic you linked) the answer

 "That's only partially true, and it depends on how far into the future you're trying to look. I can give you a pretty good estimate of what my earnings for tomorrow are going to be. The same for the next week. I can take a prediction of the diff recalculate, and predict what I'll be making for the next 2 weeks after that. One month prolly isn't too far to predict about what you'll be making. 6 months? Now that's a lot harder to tell, as there are way more variables than just "assume 1% growth per day" or "extrapolate the next diff recalc"."

thats from the same person that earned him your bounty for answering. You forgot to put in how fast new asic's are introduced and how much there is of them. hell, you can order a 250 Ghash asic from russians with delivery in september for 2.5k dollars. And they are sold out for first 2 batches. Each batch containing 100 of those puppies. Tell me again, how did you calculate your 1% a day.

Offline Benny

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 667
    • www.buyahash.com
Re: [LTC-GLOBAL] CIPHERMINE - New cryptocoin mining company - NOW IN IPO
« Reply #24 on: June 24, 2013, 02:26:05 PM »
Ethera, shouldn't you be managing your own bond offering, rather than attacking others'?

Offline Ethera

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 488
    • Litecoininvest - litecoin investment platform
Re: [LTC-GLOBAL] CIPHERMINE - New cryptocoin mining company - NOW IN IPO
« Reply #25 on: June 24, 2013, 02:43:34 PM »
Benny I am not attacking. Thats for sure. And as cypher is listed already its not attack, its a valid questions that I am bringing (I have some litecoins to invest too you know). Seeming as this is just a defence without facts, I am just saying that I will stay out. As for my continues replies, just showing people that not all glimmer that shines.

And for my bond, well as burnside said, things can take long. I present everything (with screenshots and data) not the promisses like in here.. Hell I should do that "we got bazillion on order, you should pew pew invest to me". Really?

Dont mix mine and this, those are 2 separate questions, she is not even my rival, as it is totaly different (shares vs bond) market and different offering method. Was just trying to clear if I should invest, got some personal arrogance, then did the math, then called out, got those responses. Or you saying that if I have offering as well I should be silent and not care for mine as investor rights and rights of others?

Offline WoodTech

  • VIP Donator
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 278
  • Kate Craig-Wood
    • Wood Technology LLP
Re: [LTC-GLOBAL] CIPHERMINE - New cryptocoin mining company - NOW IN IPO
« Reply #26 on: June 24, 2013, 09:01:51 PM »
Ethera, shouldn't you be managing your own bond offering, rather than attacking others'?

Sorry Ethera but I agree with Benny. This has gone beyond a constructive argument into an attack. Ref. the difficulty in that old post, I amended my predictions some time ago, after that post but before finalising the model. It now assumes a difficulty of 74m in a year.

As I stated before, comparing valuations to hardware value is daft and represents a failure to understand company valuation mechanics. We are not selling bonds / hardware shares.

Finally, I am a multi-award winning entrepreneur and have been completely open in this process, including putting my name to CipherMine. Have you been as transparent with your own listings? Where is your track record of building a multi-million pound business (Memset Ltd) from scratch I wonder?

At the end of the day, the proof is in the market. Our IPO sold out in a matter of hours and our share price has already risen by 27%. The market has spoken, and you are wrong.

Kate.

Offline Benny

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 667
    • www.buyahash.com
Re: [LTC-GLOBAL] CIPHERMINE - New cryptocoin mining company - NOW IN IPO
« Reply #27 on: June 25, 2013, 01:29:52 AM »
Congrats on the successful IPO. Look forward to seeing how the competition of various stocks and bonds amongst miners goes.

Offline Deprived

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 503
Re: [LTC-GLOBAL] CIPHERMINE - New cryptocoin mining company - NOW IN IPO
« Reply #28 on: June 25, 2013, 08:12:54 AM »
Ethera - I think you're right on one thing (Kate's estimates of future difficulty are optimistic) but totally off the mark on others.

You keep talking about 10% - but the fact investors will only own 10% of the company isn't what actually matters.  If it were the case that all the company had was the funds raised by investors it would be a valid criticism - but that isn't the case.

The existing assets have a definite value.
Rent-free use of a proper data-centre has a significant value - the cost of electricity is actually fairly minor compared to the other costs of managing a data-centre.
Free labour and expertise (in that no salary is paid for it) to allow assembly of machines well below retail price has a very significant value.
Use of idle hardware from the existing business has a significant value.

I'd guess the reason this got approval before yours is that:

A.  It has a clear contract and detailed projections.  Those projections may be optimistic (in my view they are) but the data's all there for people to modify them and make their own assessment.  You have a pretty vague sort of plan which suggests you have little or no experience in managing a business.
B.  Kate has a proven track record of running a profitable business of a far larger scale.  You have claims of private investments by unidentified individuals where no public records or accounts are available.

B. is absolutely critical.  It very clearly indicates that whatever else is the case, Kate isn't trying to scam.  There's no such assurance about you - as you've provided no proof that you have anything to lose if you run off with the money.  Finding an investment that almost certainly is NOT a scam is a massive boost to the confidence of moderators and investors - wthout that confidence there's little point arguing in detail about projections as any small variance in those is outweighed by the chance of 100% loss if it's a scam.

I'm not a moderator (at present) - but if I were I'd give VERY heavy weight to proof (or lack of the same) of previous success in running a profitable business.  Kate's business has that - yours doesn't.  So she gets the benfit of doubt on other issues where you don't.

Offline Ethera

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 488
    • Litecoininvest - litecoin investment platform
Re: [LTC-GLOBAL] CIPHERMINE - New cryptocoin mining company - NOW IN IPO
« Reply #29 on: June 25, 2013, 08:38:54 AM »
Deprived, would you kindly address those in my topic? Dont want to steal this topic for that.

As I said, it wasnt the ad hominem attack or a rivalry, it was a valid point from me having where to throw ltc to invest, and I had some questions that I validly asked. Even thou it was met with instant retaliation without facts I accept it, as she is world renown leading awesome girl. I get it.

Quote
Free labour and expertise (in that no salary is paid for it) to allow assembly of machines well below retail price has a very significant value.

Actually this point is a bit wrong from my perspective. I understand that they get shares (value of x), and from those shares they get dividents too (value y). I dont see that as a free labour.

Quote
It has a clear contract and detailed projections.
There are some typos (like Ltc becoming popular like Ltc) and that is not the issue here. As you said yourself, predictions and realism about it, that what does matter a tidy bit, due to the nature of business.

As I said I wasnt attacking, or anything, its hard to see why you automaticaly assume it.

For the rest, as I said I dont want to steal topic, but when person fully identifies himself as well, with a full work credentials, passport copy, and confirmations, I hardly could say thats a "not providing a proof".