Quote from: Stinky_Pete on December 16, 2013, 01:15:41 PM

Quote from: anykeywhy on December 16, 2013, 10:51:33 AM

Quote from: rudyo on December 16, 2013, 10:39:01 AM

Quote from: rudyo on December 16, 2013, 06:07:02 AM

How many GH/s does each share get? It is not clear at all.

Are the GH/s per share the same in #1, #2, #3 and #4? The spreadsheet shows 390 shares in each one.

Wasn't it 10 GH/s per share? That would be 300 per Neptune.

Please confirm.

Could someone please answer this specific question?

1) How many GH/s does each share get?

2) Are the GH/s per share the same in #1, #2, #3 and #4? The spreadsheet shows 390 shares in each one.

I just want a simple answer.

1) 1/390 [ToTal-Neptune-HashPower]

2) 1 share #X = 1 share #Y = ... | each share = 1/1560 (atm, keep in mind PSUs and OP details) of ToTal HashPower, in other terms

3) We actually don't know Neptune's final release ToTal HashRate!

Thanks & Cheers!
-akw-

Hi, can you clarify this.

Originally there were 300 shares per machine. We don't know the final hash rate of the machines but KnC marketting says 3000 GH/s so 1 share should be roughly 10 GH/s. When the machine arrives we will find out what the real hash rate is.

Now you are saying that there are 390 shares per machine. This means the shares I paid for at 1/300 of a machine are worth less than that. I am not happy about this.

I've tried to understand the new announcement in the first post, but it isn't at all clear. Can you find someone whose english is better to explain. Or someone on this forum.

Thanks

EDITED

Let me try to clarify the logic.
My understanding is people who got in early should be rewarded with bonus shares.
People who got in early, the price of bitcoins was higher, say $1000 / BTC and the purchase of one Neptune was 16.5 BTC
People who get in later, the price of bitcoins was lower, say $900 / BTC and the purchase of one Neptune was 18.5 BTC

Because all 4 Neptunes should be arriving at the same time (time is money), it seems that with the bonus shares, the earlier folks who purchased shares should be rewarded with extra shares since they paid more when BTC was higher vs the later ones who joined for Neptune #3 and #4.

However it doesn't make sense that that promised share calculation of 1/300th of Neptune got diluted by the implementation of bonus shares.
I did join this group buy late, so I don't recall the 1/300th advertisement in the OP. All I saw was 0.05 BTC per 10 GH/s. Was this in the original post before?
So basically since it's split 390 per Neptune, we are now paying 0.05 BTC for 7.7 GH/s instead of 10 GH/s. Yes we know Neptune is advertised as 3 TH/s and we are *assuming* that it will be released with a much higher hashing rate but I don't think it's correct to sell it based on *assuming* that it will be 3.9 TH/s when no one else is using this type of practice.

Perhaps a better way to do this is to refund "early folks" some bitcoins to make it fair for everyone.

anykeywhy, is my understanding correct for the reason for "bonus shares"?
Sorry the OP explanation isn't that clear, can you consider rewording it? It doesn't explain
1) why bonus shares were given out (emitted)
2) what "quotas" mean in this example
3) why balancing is necessary

Quote

Bonus Shares:
A total of 90 (45+45) Bonus shares have been emitted (by an incremental proportion with shares bought) & credited to the share-holders of the #1 & #2 Neptune orders.
That's not "perfect" balancing was done in order to save quotas by balancing number of emitted shares per machine, in order to absorb the change rate spreads & to fix a stable "universal" and definitive value for all shares emitted (and for the few to be emitted). Another main reason, beyond others, will be better explained in the next paragraph... --Fix Share value = they are more trade-