Based on the current decline in weekly dividend the loan will indeed be paid off. The network seems to be increasing at about 11% every week on average. This means that every week the dividend will be adjusted by a factor of 0.9 (1/1.11) and also the amount paid to the loan will by adjusted by a factor of 0.9. This gives the following table of projected total available for dividends or repayment each week:
Total
Weekly
Dividend
(50/50) Remaining Loan/Reinvestment Sum
June 27 110.729 * 0.9 = 99.65 (427.62)
July 4 99.65 * 0.9 = 89.6 (327.97)
July 11 89.6 * 0.9 = 80.7 (238.37)
July 18 80.7 * 0.9 = 72.6 (157.67)
July 25 72.6 * 0.9 = 65.3 (85.07)
Aug 1 65.3 * 0.9 = 58.8 (19.77)
Aug 8 58.9 * 0.9 = 53.0 33.23
Aug 15 47.6 80.83
Aug 22 42.8 123.63
Aug 29 38.6 162.23
Sept 5 34.7 196.93
Sept 12 31.2 228.13
Sept 19 28.1 256.23
Sept 26 25.3 281.53
Oct 3 22.7 304.23
Oct 10 20.5 324.73
Oct 17 18.4 343.13
Oct 24 16.6 359.73
Oct 31 14.9 374.63
Nov 7 13.4 388.03
Nov 14 12.1 400.13
Nov 21 10.9 411.03
Nov 28 9.8 420.83
Dec 5 8.8 429.63
Dec 12 7.9 437.53
Dec 19 7.1 444.63
Dec 26 6.4 451.03
Jan 2 2015 5.7 456.73
Based on the above I believe PETA could indeed be profitable if we simply adjusted the Dividend/Reinvestment ratio to 95/5. That is 95% reinvestment and 5% for dividends. The weekly per-share dividend would immediately drop to 1/10 what it is now, but that would be sustainable indefinitely once the loan is paid off (by July 18 in this new scenario). This basically will enable double the amount for re-investment to build up and we could indeed keep up with network difficultly.
DON'T BE GREEDY PETA SHAREHOLDERS. We need the funds to re-invest and the loan needs to be paid back ASAP.
Personally I own hundreds of shares and would like this project to succeed. If we did adopt a 95/5 strategy this means the weekly dividend should stabilize at around 0.000075 per share sometime near the end of August as we quickly build up re-investment funds. At a price per share of 0.035 this would provide around 10% annual dividends forever as PETA would indeed keep up with difficulty. With this 95/5 strategy, if we more than offset difficulty increases then the dividend would increase naturally in a sustainable manner through our excess capacity resulting in our % of network share increasing through time.
What do others think about this strategy?