Quote from: dutu on February 12, 2014, 01:55:49 PM

Hi agibby,

I have posted these findings on Feb 02.
Can you please verify these and provide feedback (as you have been working with soniq to clarify the books and findings)

You hove have an agreement with soniq that you should not provide further feedback or checks on the balance sheet and payments, please let us know. At leas we should know if we can expect or not feedback from you.

It is really disappointing that all went very silent again with no further feedback, payments or information being provided to share holders.

Quote from: dutu on February 02, 2014, 05:57:49 PM

Hi agibby,

I have reviewed Soniqs balance sheet and mining income.
I will finalize the review, but let me share preliminary findings.

Firstly let me note that this verification is on the transactions up to Jan 31.

Excel file with verification calculation and results: http://sdrv.ms/1bkoevq

I.   Verification of total income amount and expenses

The conclusion is that my verification shows exactly the same total income amount as published by Soniq in the balance sheet.
This is, total income 1332,89 BTC.

Also the total expenses calculated by me comes to the same amount as in Soniqs balance sheet.
This is total expenses -211,23 BTC.

Which gives total accumulated for dividend payout is 1121,66 BTC.

II.   Comparison of total income amount to expected mining income

I have also compared the mining income in the balance sheet with expected mining income".
I have considers the starting mining dates as declared by Soniq, i.e.
   Oct 11 when GB1 miners (15 miners) have reached advertised hashing rate
   Oct 15 when GB2 miners (11 miners) have reached advertised hashing rate
(Note: In fact some GB1 miners have started before Oct 11, but the income before Oct 11 can be considered minor)

Calculation of "expected mining income" has been done based on
* mining period (i.e from Oct 11 (GB1) and Oct 15 (GB2) until Jan 31)
* Jupiter hashing power
* bitcoin network difficulty and
* mining calculator for applicable bitcoin difficulty.

The conclusion is that the total mining income in Soniqs balance sheet is in line with calculated expected income.
I have considered Jupiter hashing power = 550GH/s and applied an efficiency factor of 97.5%.
Under this conditions, the total income in Soniqs balance sheet differs with less than 1% from the expected income

III.   Corrections needed

As shown in detailed mining breakdown on period intervals GB2 members have been paid for part of mining income attributed to GB1 miners.

As it can be seen on lines 24 and 25, mining income was not received in full to soniqs wallet from the mining pools (note the difference between received amount and expected amount).
Part of bitcoin mined under period Oct 11 Oct 15 was transferred to soniqs wallet after only Oct 16 (on line 26 note the positive difference between received vs expected).

As shown in the table, amount of coins mined by GB1 15 miners (before GB2 and GB3 11 miners arrived) was 85.48 coins.
Soniq has issued a payment of 50 BTC for GB1, when in fact it should have been 85.48 BTC.

Incorrect amount paid to GB2: (85.48-50)/78000*33000 = 15 BTC.
In conclusion a correction is required to be done at next dividend pay-out: deduct 15 BTC from dividends for GB2 users and pay this out to GB1 users

I would like to ask you to verify the information I have posted here and confirm.
Please doublecheck with Soniqs, and once confirmed please apply the required correction.

Please verify and provide your and Soniq's feedback on above calculation and verification asap, before the next payout so that required correction can be applied. Other GB members are welcome to comment and provide feedback.

I only focued time on trying to balance the books in terms of what has been paid out to individuals. I hadn't looked at anything having to do with how much GB1 owes GB2 or vice versa. I'm not sure why this would be the case though... I don't think you can make the assumptions about expected income vs actual and then make an adjustment based on that. That was not my goal.

I finally got a hold of soniq recently and he reported to me that he's had a family emergency which is why he's been silent.

He's also waiting to hear back from espen about how the share price adjustments were handled or any issues that might have occurred there which Ben raised.

For the record, I'm nowhere near or desire to be the spokesperson for this GB or for soniq. In fact, soniq has taken objection to some of the replies I have made in the past. Please do not take my prior or current replies as such.