[TheBeardedMann]

I have a question. Say the "Antminer S7.25A7!" comes out and it's the bees knees of miners. Since we are all share holders, could we get a request for the cost of replacing the S5s with the S7.25A7! and put that change to a vote?

[Daffy]

At that point GHX owners may also redeem GHX in exchange for S5's as outlined in the asset definition.

And what if we don't want to redeem them what is the alternative?

[cyberdexter]

You keep your GHX, nothing else. You don't have to redeem.

However, if hardware is being replaced GH will destroy GHX to match the hashrate and re-issue GHX as required. This topic should have it's own discussion.

[ThePeddler]

Will owners be encouraged somehow to send back in GHX to be destroyed when liquidating equipment or will it be a system driven process?

[nemesio]

Any idea how GH is going to handle replacing obsolete equipment?

Yes, we'll decommission (sell) and replace hardware before it goes obsolete. The first S5's will be most likely replaced at the end of the batch 1 hosting agreement. At that point GHX owners may also redeem GHX in exchange for S5's as outlined in the asset definition.

I have a question. Say the "Antminer S7.25A7!" comes out and it's the bees knees of miners. Since we are all share holders, could we get a request for the cost of replacing the S5s with the S7.25A7! and put that change to a vote?

Once the S7 is ready for order we'll of course work with Bitmain in replacing hardware as well. However, most likely we'll liquidate existing units (as explained above) and purchase new hardware.

There we go.

[cyberdexter]

Will owners be encouraged somehow to send back in GHX to be destroyed when liquidating equipment or will it be a system driven process?

The way GHX is laid out is that there can't be more GHX in circulation than backed by physical hardware. This means if hardware is taken offline to be either shipped for relocation, sold or send to a member who has redeemed GHX for the hardware, then the amount of shares matching that hashpower must be destroyed and new shares will be issued with fresh hashpower coming online.

The idea is to start a rotation of hardware by replacing hardware which has been either sold or redeemed while bringing in new batches of new hardware. However during the process of swapping hardware any excess GHX need to be destroyed.

For redeemed hardware it's not a problem since the owners will send their GHX when requesting the hardware. Soon as those redeemed units would go offline the GHX will be un-coloured so that the remaining GHX owners continue to receive their dividends according to the actual power hashing and their percentage of shares owned in the farm.

For units that are taken offline to get either re-located or sold GetHashing will have to acquire an equal amount of GHX and un-colour those shares while re-locating or liquidating those units, cycle the funds and then re-issue new shares with the next batch of new hardware coming online.

Some units might be mined until they go obsolete though since we can't guarantee selling hundreds of used miners within a short period of time nor have we done such a sale / hardware replacement yet and we're still a good two months away from cycling through batch 1. We (all of us) will have to asses their profitability and sustainability in approx 4-5 weeks from now to decide what we as GHX owners want to do with the batch 1 hardware.

Edit:

Relocating a "portion" of the units has been discussed with a number of members and there is some interesting hosting solutions out there that need to be looked into a little more.

[ThePeddler]

Too bad the wife smushed my data center idea........ Then again electric rates in Pittsburgh likely couldn't compete with hosting in say Iceland

[Dave_Wills]

I wonder if a person would decide to hash until it was 100% obsolete if Bitmain could move them to our Hashnest account and just hash them to the end of profitability?.

[nemesio]

Hashnest account and just hash them to the end of profitability

@cyberdexter this is a great question, if for whatever reason Get Hashing hits a problem

[paulc010]

That would be a great option for those of us that also have hashnest investments.

[cyberdexter]

@cyberdexter this is a great question, if for whatever reason Get Hashing hits a problem

I shall ask. @Dave_Wills thanks for the suggestion.

[ThePeddler]

The idea is to start a rotation of hardware by replacing hardware which has been either sold or redeemed while bringing in new batches of new hardware. However during the process of swapping hardware any excess GHX need to be destroyed.

.....

For units that are taken offline to get either re-located or sold GetHashing will have to acquire an equal amount of GHX and un-colour those shares while re-locating or liquidating those units, cycle the funds and then re-issue new shares with the next batch of new hardware coming online.

That is the point of my question.
It's still not clear how exactly that process will work?
Will that acquisition happen via a buyback program, relying on folks to hand back in a certain percentage of their GHX, or by some systematic process in the background?

Trading in for hardware is straight forward, but removal of GHX from the system for hardware taken off-line isn't so clear

[cyberdexter]

Trading in for hardware is straight forward, but removal of GHX from the system for hardware taken off-line isn't so clear

I didn't want to use the word buy-back for obvious reasons but yes, that's basically how it works. GH needs to acquire the amount of GHX matching the hashing power of the hardware being taken offline or move or whatever and destroy those shares.

[ATCkit]

GHX don't expire neither is there a contract limit. You now officially own a share of the GHfarm. The only term that applies for GHX is the policy against operator failure This means that in case GH should ever cease operating the hardware would be liquidated at which point GHX owners may request to have units shipped to them in exchange for their GHX.

I have only 27.2 GHX. This definitely won't cover an S5 to have it shipped to me when batch 1 becomes unprofitable...nor do i have room for another S5 in my little farm.

So what becomes of my 27.2 GHX if GHX don't expire? Do they simply get transferred to a future batch of the GHFarm?

[cyberdexter]

Your GHX would just keep hashing as they do now or GH would offer to buy-back if we would have to destroy some shares or another member might chose to buy them from you.

[ATCkit]

How do they keep hashing if batch 1 is obsolete? That's what I'm trying to get my head around.
ya i'm debating selling them or holding onto them for the long run. So this discussion is quite important to me.

[Redacted]

Because there is (or will be) a batch 2 doesn't mean that batch one is obsolete. Batch 1 will be obsolete when they no longer cover the maintenance fees - which isn't threatening to happen in the short term.

Even on hashnest - S5s are the newest thing, but S4, S3 are still available and hashing.

[Onalim]

But will there be a separation between batch 1, batch 2, etc.? I was under the impression that GHX is GHX, regardless of the batch it is from.

[astro]

Currently all coins are backed by hashing power, but technically speaking that hashing power could be obsolete and just sucking profits from the hashing power that isn't (think 200TH running profitably, but 300TH worth of shares splitting the profits because 100 TH is S3s or something ridiculous).

However, that would be terrible management. Everything I have heard indicates that GH would be buying back shares, shipping out earlier batches, or replacing equipment long before that happened.

This is the real long-term management of a mining farm. There's different ways to handle it, but basically you have to be swapping out your miners at some point. How GHX will do this remains to be seen, but buy-backs or allowing people to redeem miners would be a few options.

[Redacted]

I thought that batch 2 would be a different asset ? It almost has to be.