Quote from: iCEBREAKER on October 17, 2014, 09:36:53 PM

Unless we've already sold the CT, the loss is only theoretical, not actualized. CT is still in the running to be the Intel of BTC, so there's a decent chance our stock will outperform just hloding the BTC.

Not even sure how to feel about that happening honestly, but I find it more likely that I go outside tomorrow to survive a lightning strike only to be killed by a micrometeoroid as I leave the hospital.

Outperforming holding btc; over what timescale? Any considerable appreciation of our assets in Cointerra are most likely to follow a relative price path with bitcoin. And even if didn't, Cointerra, while showing the effort to remain relevant, won't find the opportunity at obtaining an Intel-like status in as polarized of a market. The cost and complexity of designing for a mining purposed chip is nowhere near as inhibiting to engineers, allowing a markedly wider potential pool of qualified entrants/competitors ...on top of which you're dealing with a market whose quantified potential for profits and opportunities for competition to join the market are already heavily reliant upon bitcoin's price.

Our shares in CT also remain denominated in USD, so whatever theoretical profits can be taken from the sale of shares (assuming they're not paying dividends lol) at some arbitrary point in the future, will likely only be able to buy us back roughly the equivalent amount of bitcoin as it would get us today (best case scenario). In a sense, a USD valuation of our shares in a company like Cointerra and any appreciation thereof is practically irrelevant when the shareholder's ..err ID profit-unit-holders are to be paid in BTC.

Quote from: 29750f0e1c2fbb3bb on October 17, 2014, 05:45:30 PM

Note that Willem was drawing two salaries from the funds and that some billing items had to be covered. This likely resulted in a short term negative cash flow of maybe 100 BTC between the time of your post and now. On Oct 9, there were still some funds (~75 BTC) allocated for upcoming expenses (25), a reward reserve (25) and as a pool buffer (25).
The internal audit will shine light on this issues. The term "appropriately" simply means that the funds were not used on non-business related items - it doesn't necessarily imply "good use" of funds. Digimex and its officers are still liable for code of conduct.

So that would seem to account for the deficit between current balance and July, however, that doesn't take into consideration anything that would have been mined in that same time frame.

I'm not expecting further figures from you, 297. I realize our cry for answers has reached the 'beating a dead horse' phase, but that audit has certainly made it to the top of my 2015 must reads list. Thank you very much for the explanations you've provided.

My final questions; Can you provide us the mining addresses? And what is our cumulative hashrate now?