Quote:
Originally Posted by Bobo Fett
There's been a lot of talk of profit, so it didn't sound to me like makeup would have been an issue.
.
this happens with periodic cashouts, it's a complication in any staking agreement. Ideally, when you chop, the stake ends, but I wanted weekly cashouts of 50-100 per week where the stake wouldn't end, so it's in a sense a salary of sorts that gets added to makeup as the stake goes along
so yes she was in profit and yes I was still in makeup
this is per our agreement to start the stake, which we adjusted downward as the stake moved along. I started taking out less and less, but as per our agreement, I could have taken more but we altered the deal to make it better for both of us.
here is how the deal was structured:
open ended stake with weekly cashout of 50-100 depending on how well the stake goes
total of the stake is chopped when it's mutually agreed to end
no leaving in makeup
so say I win 200 one week. we chop 100 apiece. Then the next week I lose 400. No chop. Then the next week I win 300. In this case, there is still a chop for the 300 even though the total of the stake is still 100, we still chop 50 apiece (the low chop). This will eventually become makeup.
Does this make sense.
This is the way I structured the deal and she agreed to in the beginning. Over the course of the stake, I lowered the chop amount because the stake wasn't doing well.
So yes, she was in profit and I still had make up accrued. This is always a complication on period chops.
Basically the deal was this, I was to be allowed to take chops based on the expected value of the contract, and in return, I don't leave in MU. That's how I verbally structured it to her, and I thought it was mutually beneficial.
Got it?