Topic: ASICMINER: Entering the Future of ASIC Mining by Inventing It - page 812. (Read 3917468 times)

Part of the shares can be bought with coins and part with other thingies, like facebook shares for example.

There's usually a premium, but SDICE is bought out at that price just to shut investor's mouth.  Imagine if they were bought out for way less than IPO price. 

If there's a ASICMINER buyout by some new entrant (ie. entities new to bitcoin), it probably cannot be done with bitcoins as the order book on gox + bitstamp has only 110k coins combined right now.

in the "real" world, when company is sold, the share is normally brought back at 2-3x price, as what happened to SDICE.

My point was simply that when this sale question was brought up, some people said AM could sell at "7 day average share price", some thought they couldn't sell without the consent of the shareholders, and some just said it wasn't mentioned anywhere int the contract so .... who knows?

That's all I'm asking ... for some clarification. Just saying "friedcat will do right by us" isn't really sufficient.

But hey, if nobody else thinks this is a priority question, fine.

I am. I ordered in September 2012 and received my order already. Sold it on eBay promptly thereafter. But, that makes me confident that other people are indeed receiveing their products as well. The network is seeing  a HUGE increase in hashrate and difficulty, while at the same time out dividends are slipping. On July 2, when I received mine, the total hashrate of bitminter (the pool I used) was less than 5.5 TH, by the time i shipped mine to the buyer, it was over 9 TH, and today it's nearing 12 TH. Where else are those hashes come from? Even friday, they claimed to ship "a lot" of mini rigs. Considering other days where they've said they've shipped one two or three MR's, a lot sounds like it will be a much bigger number - and every two that are shipped equals an additional TH of hashing power hitting the network.

Lets not fall into the "it's a scam" outlook of angry buyers still waiting for their products. I can say at least that Jalapenos have shipped, first hand. The hashrate of the network is flying upwards, and the word that Avalon Batch 3 was shipped was shipped doesn't account for the rapid growth in the june to mid july time frame. It's clearly not a "scam" - real products are shipping. It took a lot longer than all of us buyers would have liked, and there was probably a LOT more interest in these products than anyone ever would have guessed. So unless someone has a better idea of where all of this is coming from, and why people who post that they're waiting for their product on Jody's log on one day suddenly disappear from that blog a few days after their stated order date has passed, the truth appears they're coming online.

If it's not BFL, then who is the dark horse that's added so much power to the network at our expense? However you want to look at it, something is in the offing, and we're not keeping up.

I'm not trying to come across as a BFL sock puppet, simply a concerned AM shareholder who doesn't want to play the roll of an ostridge with its head in the sand. There's a lot of power out there documented as being on order, and even more to come (if KNC delivers), so I have to wonder how much we can grow our operation with the chips we have on hand, since 2nd gen chips are a fews away from delivery. Friedcat has been incredibly transparent so far, I think, and it would be great to have greater transparency as to what his thoughts are in the short to medium term future.

TAT will pretty much always post important things that friedcat doesn't post himself.  He posts a lot more than friedcat though, so there is more to sort through.

Thanks and apologies for missing this the first time it was posted! Normally I click on friedcat's username and read his posts. Should I also be following posts of a specific board member? e.g. ThickAsThieves? Thanks again!

As a shareholder I would like to see a question about the network connectivity of the node. Specifically is there is a plan to address the number of stales and the low number of transactions in the blocks mined by AM. This would help increase shareholder value (more blocks, more transactions) and also address a concern that the community has about AM. It would also increase confirmation time and thus make the network better overall. Thanks!

Honestly, if this were a public company, as a shareholder you would not know about it until the deal was announced. The sale could be for more than the current share price, the same or less than the current share price. Any smart CEO isn't publicly selling the company right up until the point that it's sold - that's how they get the best price.

I cannot not find that link to the question election document. Or is TAT giving himselfs airs!?

I'm not trying to stop discussion.  I'm just trying to make sure people know that they have to actually submit the question.

I know patronising others is easy, but I don't see anything wrong with collaboratively discussing and refining potential questions here.  Particularly if the community can help answer quesions without the need to bother Friedcat.

Would it be too hard to simply trace this back from divi payments? Anyone tried?

I know reading is hard, but posting here is not the way to get your question considered:


Emphasis is TAT's

BFL aside, it's a good question. Given the recent IPO's and other announcements around new mining ventures  (Labrat,  BTC Garden Hashfast etc), it would be very useful to re-check FC's view on the likely total network hashrate at the end of the year, and what proportion of this the current business plan predict's AM will still control.

Also - is there a danger that hardware sales/franchises will be hit if the hashrate rises too steeply and hardware intended to be sold is instead required to maintain network percentage...

BFL is the least of anyone in the mining space's worries. (Well assuming you aren't actually waiting for a BFL hardware delivery.)

-helixone

You're worried about BFL shipments coming online??  LOL that's like saying you're worried about USB asicminers coming online..

I would ask, believing that I heard that AM was aiming to maintain a steady 30% of the network hashrate, if that number is still achievable. Put another way, with BFL shipments obviously coming online, and other far more efficient offerings to come in the future from others (KnCMiner being an obvious contender, assuming, as always that they follow through) does AM believe that 30% is still achievable? If not, what number should we hope that AM will strive for? The target percentage of network hashrate having a huge impact on BTC flow, and therefore BTC dividends, and therefore the perceived value of AM, as an enterprise and on a per-sharew basis.

Or is that question too long?

Personally I'd much rather see a question in there about whether a sale of AM to a larger company is possible, and if so, under what conditions, and what would shareholders get out of it. There has been quite a bit of discussion about this on the boards and no two people seem to have the same take on it. Love to hear what friedcat had to say.