Quote from: Lab_Rat on March 11, 2014, 05:21:25 PM

Quote from: ksenter on March 11, 2014, 04:46:54 PM

Quote from: grnbrg on March 11, 2014, 03:30:27 PM

Quote from: ksenter on March 11, 2014, 12:19:15 PM

No he didn't. He said he'd attempt to find a way to benefit us. Maybe he'll offer us a 25% discount on future bond purchases. That would also qualify as an attempt to benefit us. As of right now he has not once said he would honor the original agreement of our shares growing proportionally with the company's hashrate.

He also indicated he is having a detailed report on the issue produced and that "I'm doing what's necessary and I believe that the end result will be something everyone can live with."

While it might be nice to have all the information on everything related to LRM the instant it is available, that's just not how business works. I expect we'll have something concrete within a week or two.

grnbrg.

I don't need, or even strongly desire, a concrete answer right now. I, and I think most people here, would be perfectly satisfied if he simply committed to continuing the original intent of the "bonds". All he needs to do is reassure us that we are not stuck with 300 mh permanently, but rather our hash rate value will continue to grow with the company's.

I don't understand why he would suddenly say your bonds are now a fixed hashrate, and then not clarify any of the details, if he intended for us to benefit from the future hashrate growth. Why say anything at all, he clearly had no problem being silent before now.

I hope he does come back with something better in a couple of weeks. That would be terrific. I just don't have my hopes up very high.

I can't provide reassurance without giving information that I can't give until things are in place. All I can say is that I'm working on the permanent solution and believe I have found a reasonable and legal way to provide over 300MH.

301MH fixed? Tongue

Ok, just kidding, don't get any ideas.

By the way, here's a solution to some of the tension. A problem that has been a problem since the beginning. Your fee structure should not be built into the 25%. It causes concern as there is no transparency. And one of your stated goals/intentions in the was to be transparent.

Instead! A fine solution if I must say so myself.

You should eliminate any Labrat fee terminology... and in place of it create 5000 new bonds for yourself, and call the dividends from that as your fee for management.
That way 100% of the 25% goes to electricity and new hardware, and less speculation on what is going on behind the curtain. Your pay would be very fair and dependent upon performance of LRM - along with everyone else. You claimed you wanted to operate more openly/transparent. This is a very fine opportunity to do that and win support in the midst of any legal wrangling. You'd receive about 8% of all dividends - isn't that plenty fair if not very generous? I'm willing to bet this idea receives a lot of welcome b/c it shouldn't affect your pay and it peels back the curtain a bit.

By the way, the video above of Dave's PH farm was scary. LR, are you ready to handle that kind of facility?