All you idiots that "invested" in PMBs: - page 2.

Peter Lambert

hero member

Activity: 756

Merit: 500

It's all fun and games until somebody loses an eye

Quote from: Entropy-uc on June 23, 2013, 11:20:08 PM

Quote from: Peter Lambert on June 23, 2013, 11:11:49 PM

Quote from: Entropy-uc on June 23, 2013, 10:58:58 PM

Fascinating. I wonder what percentage of mining security issuers have taken a runner? There's amazingrando, Ian Bakewell, SIN,... Who else completely defaulted on these securities?

This is part of the fundamental reason I don't think it's possible to have a fairly priced mining bond. By the time you discount the security for the risk of default, the price would be under the intrinsic value of the mining hardware.

No, the price should be LOWER for the security risk, not higher.

That is what discount means. A lower price to account for the default risk.

Net, I don't think you can come up with a pricing model that justifies fair value of a mining bond greater than the cost of hashing hardware available at present. And since it wouldn't be rational to sell a bond at that price, it isn't possible to offer mining bonds at fair value.

Sorry, misread what you were saying, I edited my previous post.

Entropy-uc

hero member

Activity: 756

Merit: 501

Quote from: Peter Lambert on June 23, 2013, 11:11:49 PM

Quote from: Entropy-uc on June 23, 2013, 10:58:58 PM

Fascinating. I wonder what percentage of mining security issuers have taken a runner? There's amazingrando, Ian Bakewell, SIN,... Who else completely defaulted on these securities?

This is part of the fundamental reason I don't think it's possible to have a fairly priced mining bond. By the time you discount the security for the risk of default, the price would be under the intrinsic value of the mining hardware.

No, the price should be LOWER for the security risk, not higher.

Take a look back through the securities section of the forum and you will find plenty of other examples. It was not just mining bonds either. Remember UBX raised something like 1250 btc. And bitcointorrents was paying regular monthly dividends but I think they disappeared when the GLBSE went down. And then there is FZB, I am not sure whether to call that a scam?

That is what discount means. A lower price to account for the default risk.

Net, I don't think you can come up with a pricing model that justifies fair value of a mining bond greater than the cost of hashing hardware available at present. And since it wouldn't be rational to sell a bond at that price, it isn't possible to offer mining bonds at fair value.

Deprived

hero member

Activity: 532

Merit: 500

Quote from: Peter Lambert on June 23, 2013, 11:11:49 PM

Quote from: Entropy-uc on June 23, 2013, 10:58:58 PM

Fascinating. I wonder what percentage of mining security issuers have taken a runner? There's amazingrando, Ian Bakewell, SIN,... Who else completely defaulted on these securities?

This is part of the fundamental reason I don't think it's possible to have a fairly priced mining bond. By the time you discount the security for the risk of default, the price would be under the intrinsic value of the mining hardware.

No, the price should be LOWER for the security risk, not higher.

Take a look back through the securities section of the forum and you will find plenty of other examples. It was not just mining bonds either. Remember UBX raised something like 1250 btc. And bitcointorrents was paying regular monthly dividends but I think they disappeared when the GLBSE went down. And then there is FZB, I am not sure whether to call that a scam?

Heh, don't forget your own ones when you're discussing securities that vanished without giving back funds or producing accounts.

Peter Lambert

hero member

Activity: 756

Merit: 500

It's all fun and games until somebody loses an eye

Quote from: Entropy-uc on June 23, 2013, 10:58:58 PM

Fascinating. I wonder what percentage of mining security issuers have taken a runner? There's amazingrando, Ian Bakewell, SIN,... Who else completely defaulted on these securities?

This is part of the fundamental reason I don't think it's possible to have a fairly priced mining bond. By the time you discount the security for the risk of default, the price would be under the intrinsic value of the mining hardware.

~~No, the price should be LOWER for the security risk, not higher.~~ EDIT: Wait, the first time I read it I thought you were saying that the risk of default makes the high price OK. Nevermind.

Take a look back through the securities section of the forum and you will find plenty of other examples. It was not just mining bonds either. Remember UBX raised something like 1250 btc. And bitcointorrents was paying regular monthly dividends but I think they disappeared when the GLBSE went down. And then there is FZB, I am not sure whether to call that a scam?

Entropy-uc

hero member

Activity: 756

Merit: 501

Quote from: Peter Lambert on June 23, 2013, 10:40:26 PM

Quote from: ?? on ??

Quote from: Peter Lambert on June 23, 2013, 09:43:46 PM

Quote from: EskimoBob on June 23, 2013, 03:44:34 AM

...Who ever invented those nasty perpetual mining turds, was either a clueless fuck, who did not understand how bad it is for the investors or, he knew exactly! what it is and abused the nonexisting investing experience of BTC enthusiasts.

I think that honor would go to CentiMine, of the CentiMine400 stock on the GLBSE.

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/centimine-anonymous-mini-mining-contracts-on-glbse-cm400-final-payout-8642

From the second post there, it appears there were others ahead of him with the ~~scam~~ concept.

Quote from: CentiMine on May 17, 2011, 09:36:24 AM

Ok, it seems this thread got moved from "Marketplace" here. Sorry to have caused any confusion or trouble.

The original reasoning to put it there was that dishwara + SIN also have their threads regarding their mining contract sales in that other area.

Yeah, I had forgotten exactly who was doing what. Dishwara was more of a mining company, I think, SIN was a "perpetual" mining bond, and CM400 was a mining bond with a limited lifetime. CM400 payed much less back than was originally invested. SIN the operator took off with everybodies money, Dishwara ran into trouble of some sort with the mining, but he bought back the outstanding shares eventually.

Fascinating. I wonder what percentage of mining security issuers have taken a runner? There's amazingrando, Ian Bakewell, SIN,... Who else completely defaulted on these securities?

This is part of the fundamental reason I don't think it's possible to have a fairly priced mining bond. By the time you discount the security for the risk of default, the price would be under the intrinsic value of the mining hardware.

Peter Lambert

hero member

Activity: 756

Merit: 500

It's all fun and games until somebody loses an eye

Quote from: ?? on ??

Quote from: Peter Lambert on June 23, 2013, 09:43:46 PM

Quote from: EskimoBob on June 23, 2013, 03:44:34 AM

...Who ever invented those nasty perpetual mining turds, was either a clueless fuck, who did not understand how bad it is for the investors or, he knew exactly! what it is and abused the nonexisting investing experience of BTC enthusiasts.

I think that honor would go to CentiMine, of the CentiMine400 stock on the GLBSE.

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/centimine-anonymous-mini-mining-contracts-on-glbse-cm400-final-payout-8642

From the second post there, it appears there were others ahead of him with the ~~scam~~ concept.

Quote from: CentiMine on May 17, 2011, 09:36:24 AM

Ok, it seems this thread got moved from "Marketplace" here. Sorry to have caused any confusion or trouble.

The original reasoning to put it there was that dishwara + SIN also have their threads regarding their mining contract sales in that other area.

Yeah, I had forgotten exactly who was doing what. Dishwara was more of a mining company, I think, SIN was a "perpetual" mining bond, and CM400 was a mining bond with a limited lifetime. CM400 payed much less back than was originally invested. SIN the operator took off with everybodies money, Dishwara ran into trouble of some sort with the mining, but he bought back the outstanding shares eventually.

SOSLOVE868

sr. member

Activity: 378

Merit: 250

Quote from: ?? on ??

Quote from: Peter Lambert on June 23, 2013, 09:43:46 PM

Quote from: EskimoBob on June 23, 2013, 03:44:34 AM

...Who ever invented those nasty perpetual mining turds, was either a clueless fuck, who did not understand how bad it is for the investors or, he knew exactly! what it is and abused the nonexisting investing experience of BTC enthusiasts.

I think that honor would go to CentiMine, of the CentiMine400 stock on the GLBSE.

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/centimine-anonymous-mini-mining-contracts-on-glbse-cm400-final-payout-8642

From the second post there, it appears there were others ahead of him with the ~~scam~~ concept.

Quote from: CentiMine on May 17, 2011, 09:36:24 AM

Ok, it seems this thread got moved from "Marketplace" here. Sorry to have caused any confusion or trouble.

The original reasoning to put it there was that dishwara + SIN also have their threads regarding their mining contract sales in that other area.

What happening by that time ? ? I read over the thread ,but still can not understand what the story about it.

Peter Lambert

hero member

Activity: 756

Merit: 500

It's all fun and games until somebody loses an eye

Quote from: EskimoBob on June 23, 2013, 03:44:34 AM

...Who ever invented those nasty perpetual mining turds, was either a clueless fuck, who did not understand how bad it is for the investors or, he knew exactly! what it is and abused the nonexisting investing experience of BTC enthusiasts.

I think that honor would go to CentiMine, of the CentiMine400 stock on the GLBSE.

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/centimine-anonymous-mini-mining-contracts-on-glbse-cm400-final-payout-8642

SOSLOVE868

sr. member

Activity: 378

Merit: 250

Quote from: joele on June 23, 2013, 12:56:49 AM

You can check the mining profit per difficulty adjustment here

http://btc.re/?t=miningcalc

I like what you put ,end the world or never....

This perfectly describing to the some PMBs in the market...

crumbs

full member

Activity: 210

Merit: 100

If i could get my hands on the unicorn blood that makes PMBs sell, i'd be soooo happy.

canuck

member

Activity: 116

Merit: 10

Quote from: EskimoBob on June 23, 2013, 04:03:36 AM

Quote from: ryan1894 on June 23, 2013, 03:48:22 AM

Quote from: EskimoBob on June 23, 2013, 03:44:34 AM

from: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.2555766

...Who ever invented those nasty perpetual mining turds, was either a clueless fuck, who did not understand how bad it is for the investors or, he knew exactly! what it is and abused the nonexisting investing experience of BTC enthusiasts. PMB are dressed up nice indeed. Wink

Let me break it down for ya'll so you can understand wtf you get yourself into.

Lets say we have 2 guys. A and B. A wants to buy a bike so he can deliver newspapers. He ask you (B) for a loan. Once more, bond is a loan and principal investment must be returned.

He tells you:
1) Give me a loan but I have no obligation to pay you back what you gave me or in other words - I will stretch this loan out forever and will not guarantee you get back you money. I'll try to do my best so it won't happen.

2) I will make weekly (or what ever) payments but those payments are not fixed and can float up or down, depending how many papers I managed to deliver riding this bike. Bike I bought with your money. BTW. if I say home and sleep, you get nothing.

3) The road is one way and endless. It's mostly up the hill pedaling. Higher I get, slower I move and less papers deliver. BTW, there will be fewer and fewer houses too. One more thing... I'll deduct the cost of sandwiches and water from the earnings and keep some of the earned coin for my self.

Now, do you lend me the money to buy that bike?

PS! There will be other bikes on that road. Some have motors and "paper cannons".

I think most people understand what they're getting into - it's just that BTCT's dividend yield estimates are misleading because they're basing the yields on current prices - not at IPO.

Taking into account the falling price, I think most PMB's probably have a yield of 30-40% max in contrast to securities such as B.YABMC where BTCT estimates 172% yield, based on current prices

I actually thought DMS.MINING would return at least 100%, and I think that most people think that PMBs would return at least 100%.

OK, I guess my example was still too complicated to comprehend.

* you lucky man. You have 1 share of "A"
* "A" pay you money. Good money! 10 money every Saturday! You so happy!
* "A" price drop 12 money every Saturday too. You sad! Got 10 but lost 12.
* You still happy!? You stupid!

Or do we need to use crayons and paint you a fkn picture?

If you can buy a PMBT at deep discount so your next predicted "div payments - loss form price drop" gives you a positive number, go for it.

BWAHAHAHAHA! Oh good christ! +100

CAN'T...STOP...LAUGHING!

eltopo

full member

Activity: 230

Merit: 100

DMS.SELLING price is attractive if you think that DMS.MINING price is too high.

Birdy

sr. member

Activity: 364

Merit: 250

Quote from: ryan1894 on June 23, 2013, 03:33:57 AM

Does this mean that DMS.SELLING is a very attractive security at the moment?

It was when it was at the same price as DMS.Mining, probabably even double the price.
But now the difficulty has to increase a lot to make it profitable, even though we know it will increase it's impossible to tell if it will be 10% or 25% on average.
It's gambling now.

dexX7

legendary

Activity: 1106

Merit: 1026

Quote from: 🏰 TradeFortress 🏰 on June 23, 2013, 12:51:57 AM

Every single PMB on the market > 0.0026 BTC / MH (as of posting) is overpriced. Kthnxbye.

I'd like to know, why you choose the 1 % return per day threshold.

ryan1894

newbie

Activity: 53

Merit: 0

Quote from: eltopo on June 23, 2013, 04:37:55 AM

Quote from: ryan1894 on June 23, 2013, 03:48:22 AM

I think most people understand what they're getting into - it's just that BTCT's dividend yield estimates are misleading because they're basing the yields on current prices - not at IPO.

Taking into account the falling price, I think most PMB's probably have a yield of 30-40% max in contrast to securities such as B.YABMC where BTCT estimates 172% yield, based on current prices

I actually thought DMS.MINING would return at least 100%, and I think that most people think that PMBs would return at least 100%.

At this moment DMS.MINING sells for 0.013417. If future average difficulty rise will be lower than 15%, DMS.MINING will return 100% or more. The lower the average difficulty rise will be, the earlier you'll be profitable. If average rise will be > 15%, you lose. (This is only an example for buying price 0.013417)

Yea I understand but it seems that nobody ever sees a return of more than 50% on PMBs unless the issuer happens to be very generous and increases hash rate (e.g. PAJKA.BOND) or a percentage of the dividends are reinvested into more hardware and the security holder sees returns on this as well (turns into more of a share or a fund than a "PMB")

jmutch

full member

Activity: 196

Merit: 100

Yeah i feel sorry for anyone that has any kind of faith in PMB's. But, i guess the warnings were there for would be investors.

In my opinion if you lost coins on them it's your own fault. If you made coins, then you bet the system good on you!

I think it's kind of strange designing something that is certain to fail. Anyway!

John818

newbie

Activity: 31

Merit: 0

I followed that link Eskimo Bob and am very surprised that you don't mind exposing your arrogant and offensive nature.

If I had posted such obscenities and arrogant scrawlings, I'd be ashamed and very unlikely to offer a link to said thread.

eltopo

full member

Activity: 230

Merit: 100

Quote from: ryan1894 on June 23, 2013, 03:48:22 AM

I think most people understand what they're getting into - it's just that BTCT's dividend yield estimates are misleading because they're basing the yields on current prices - not at IPO.

Taking into account the falling price, I think most PMB's probably have a yield of 30-40% max in contrast to securities such as B.YABMC where BTCT estimates 172% yield, based on current prices

I actually thought DMS.MINING would return at least 100%, and I think that most people think that PMBs would return at least 100%.

At this moment DMS.MINING sells for 0.013417. If future average difficulty rise will be lower than 15%, DMS.MINING will return 100% or more. The lower the average difficulty rise will be, the earlier you'll be profitable. If average rise will be > 15%, you lose. (This is only an example for buying price 0.013417)

EskimoBob

legendary

Activity: 910

Merit: 1000

Quality Printing Services by Federal Reserve Bank

Quote from: ryan1894 on June 23, 2013, 03:48:22 AM

Quote from: EskimoBob on June 23, 2013, 03:44:34 AM

from: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.2555766

...Who ever invented those nasty perpetual mining turds, was either a clueless fuck, who did not understand how bad it is for the investors or, he knew exactly! what it is and abused the nonexisting investing experience of BTC enthusiasts. PMB are dressed up nice indeed. Wink

Let me break it down for ya'll so you can understand wtf you get yourself into.

Lets say we have 2 guys. A and B. A wants to buy a bike so he can deliver newspapers. He ask you (B) for a loan. Once more, bond is a loan and principal investment must be returned.

He tells you:
1) Give me a loan but I have no obligation to pay you back what you gave me or in other words - I will stretch this loan out forever and will not guarantee you get back you money. I'll try to do my best so it won't happen.

2) I will make weekly (or what ever) payments but those payments are not fixed and can float up or down, depending how many papers I managed to deliver riding this bike. Bike I bought with your money. BTW. if I say home and sleep, you get nothing.

3) The road is one way and endless. It's mostly up the hill pedaling. Higher I get, slower I move and less papers deliver. BTW, there will be fewer and fewer houses too. One more thing... I'll deduct the cost of sandwiches and water from the earnings and keep some of the earned coin for my self.

Now, do you lend me the money to buy that bike?

PS! There will be other bikes on that road. Some have motors and "paper cannons".

I think most people understand what they're getting into - it's just that BTCT's dividend yield estimates are misleading because they're basing the yields on current prices - not at IPO.

Taking into account the falling price, I think most PMB's probably have a yield of 30-40% max in contrast to securities such as B.YABMC where BTCT estimates 172% yield, based on current prices

I actually thought DMS.MINING would return at least 100%, and I think that most people think that PMBs would return at least 100%.

OK, I guess my example was still too complicated to comprehend.

* you lucky man. You have 1 share of "A"
* "A" pay you money. Good money! 10 money every Saturday! You so happy!
* "A" price drop 12 money every Saturday too. You sad! Got 10 but lost 12.
* You still happy!? You stupid!

Or do we need to use crayons and paint you a fkn picture?

If you can buy a PMBT at deep discount so your next predicted "div payments - loss form price drop" gives you a positive number, go for it.

ryan1894

newbie

Activity: 53

Merit: 0

Quote from: EskimoBob on June 23, 2013, 03:44:34 AM

from: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.2555766

...Who ever invented those nasty perpetual mining turds, was either a clueless fuck, who did not understand how bad it is for the investors or, he knew exactly! what it is and abused the nonexisting investing experience of BTC enthusiasts. PMB are dressed up nice indeed. Wink

Let me break it down for ya'll so you can understand wtf you get yourself into.

Lets say we have 2 guys. A and B. A wants to buy a bike so he can deliver newspapers. He ask you (B) for a loan. Once more, bond is a loan and principal investment must be returned.

He tells you:
1) Give me a loan but I have no obligation to pay you back what you gave me or in other words - I will stretch this loan out forever and will not guarantee you get back you money. I'll try to do my best so it won't happen.

2) I will make weekly (or what ever) payments but those payments are not fixed and can float up or down, depending how many papers I managed to deliver riding this bike. Bike I bought with your money. BTW. if I say home and sleep, you get nothing.

3) The road is one way and endless. It's mostly up the hill pedaling. Higher I get, slower I move and less papers deliver. BTW, there will be fewer and fewer houses too. One more thing... I'll deduct the cost of sandwiches and water from the earnings and keep some of the earned coin for my self.

Now, do you lend me the money to buy that bike?

PS! There will be other bikes on that road. Some have motors and "paper cannons".

I think most people understand what they're getting into - it's just that BTCT's dividend yield estimates are misleading because they're basing the yields on current prices - not at IPO.

Taking into account the falling price, I think most PMB's probably have a yield of 30-40% max in contrast to securities such as B.YABMC where BTCT estimates 172% yield, based on current prices

I actually thought DMS.MINING would return at least 100%, and I think that most people think that PMBs would return at least 100%.

Topic: All you idiots that "invested" in PMBs: - page 2. (Read 3530 times)