Topic: [CLOSED] S.DICE - SatoshiDICE 100% Dividend-Paying Asset on MPEx - page 92. (Read 316363 times)

um, did you notice that the volume and demand on glbse was hundreds of thousands lower than on mpex?

PR my foot. A 3-year old toddler is more polite than you are. Ignored.

Mircea just forgot his meds again. Here are some facts:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/heres-where-i-spew-my-accusations-against-mpoe-all-are-welcome-102333

Yeah, I would say shill. Get lost.



On a personal note, I find the gall of the misguided claims on the exchanges subject appalling. I will not turn this into an attack of the other exchange, the guy in charge of it is at least working to consolidate his secondary position, and from what I hear hasn't slept in three days. But the pretense of the forum trolls has to stop. We all know who's the top dog here, pretending it ain't so makes you look ridiculous at most. In general, it just makes you look stupid.

He is just lying about the PR person. This is Mircea Popescu himself, and he is here to stay. He is known on the forums for his sock puppets and insulting anyone who doesn't agree with him.
It is just a matter of time until problems will arise and it won't be pretty.

It's well known that MPEX's PR is not the best. To gain respect as an exchange, they need to fire their current PR immediately and replace them with a new one.

And this is exactly why MPOx cannot be taken seriously:


Why on earth did S.DICE align itself with an operation that goes around calling forum members "idiots?"

You are either an idiot or a shill. Which of the two is it?

I give credit to Mr V. for being the first to come out with a semi-credible IPO (although the conditions surrounding its release are not quite savory).

If anything, this shows us where the kinks in the system lie. A shady exchange, the kludgy necessity of a "pass through" to get listed on a real exchange.

You bring up a great point. Unlike a government sanctioned securities exchange, there are no regulations here. The prospectus for S.DICE never promised full insider transparency. How many shares does the owner hold? Was MPOx given any compensation? What are the details of the business arrangement between SatoshiDICE and Blockchain?

How will anyone know if they are investing in a company in which there is a conflict of interest?

The poster's issue was apparently with MPEx.  Please don't insult the readers' intelligence and pretend in your response that the original issue was advocating the monopoly of a single exchange.

The distinction is obvious and you do yourself no favours avoiding the salient points in such ways.

It makes me wonder as to the actual nature of your agreement and how you might benefit from it.

Just like a horizontal line, if it remains horizontal with time, has more of a tendency to go up than down if you wait long enough?   

That is exactly correct, and it is both necessary and implicit in the notion of "free market". This is how banking worked, at the time that banking actually worked and it was being done by Lombards. This is how diamonds are still traded in Antwerp today, millions' worth of stones moving around on the mere personal cognizance and say-so of trusted members. This is what having a free market both requires and means.


This is a blessing in disguise. The more that is accumulated the more is at risk. Paying out to investors actually reduces risks, and is thus a good thing. What would you really prefer, situation A where 1k BTC accumulated over 100 intervals resulting in a 100k BTC pot somewhere, or situation B where 1k BTC were paid out over 100 intervals resulting in 100 payments of 1k to investors? Cause looking at past experience the only certain thing is that investors aren't getting 100k BTC from situation A.


This has got to be a joke of some kind. Gox deals in millions, Bitcoinica dealt in 10's of ks at its peak. MtGox got hacked, survived and apparently learned from those mistakes, Bitcoinica got hacked, failed to learn from mistakes, imploding. You're proposing a poodle took over the brontosaurus here.


This is not a plan. Looky here:


S.DICE is by a wide margin the most liquid of all BTC assets. Sure, if you're looking to get out 10k BTC it might take days. Days, not five years. Then again, if you're looking to sell 10k BTC it might take a little on MtGox too. Certainly a 100k hard sell is sending the market tumbling. But if you're looking to to cash out a couple hundred...none of these are real concerns.

In the end it all works similar to how fiat-based stocks work: if you go in for a few shares it's one thing. If you go buy whole percents of a stock, be it BP or GOOG you're not going to be able to divest in five minutes. It's the nature of things, everyone knows this, don't go institutional investor unless you want to be one as it were.


No one person owns the bitcoin infrastructure, and nobody cares what any one person does. If what they do is useful then fine, if not then it's irrelevant. This can't be stressed enough, and in a bundle as to the earlier point someone raised of "what if blocks become full": not only the bets minimums could be raised, but moreover a currency that can't process transactions is thus irrelevant. Either it fixes itself or we all move on at that point.


I'd say this is the sort of thing by which bitcoin stands to gain.

Thanks for taking the time to reply to all of them!  I've written some responses back but we could probably go back and forth eternally so don't feel the need to address every concern I have.  I'm not the guy you're after.


Sure, if I were in your position I'd do the same thing.  I would rather have a diverse portfolio than all my eggs in one basket.  Selling some of SatoshiDICE allows you to take some other risks elsewhere.  I just think it's important to emphasize to the investors that this money isn't all going toward efforts to increase the business' value.  Apart from the portion going toward the marketing, it's an independent shareholder selling his shares.  After this round, if the company ever wishes to sell shares again, it'll have to compete with existing shareholders.  It'll be interesting to see what happens to the price then.


wow!  Well, nobody can stop you from charging whatever you think the shares are worth.


Sure it's a website but a business is operating at that website.  In the United States (and elsewhere) there are laws about who you can accept investments from, and for investors to be protected, the company needs to have a certain structure, bylaws/operating agreement, etc.  I'm beginning to understand that this whole operation and stock sale are not intended to take in to consideration any body of law, and you all are comfortable with the risks involved with that.  It's basically a gentleman's agreement offered on a handshake.  I think you would be better protected legally if you did not make this offer in terms of shares/company ownership, and rather just allowed people to purchase a contract for a percentage of profits.  If a shareholder ever decides to sue you, it's going to be a mess.


Sure, you still have a lot of incentive to grow the business.  Any money from this round of funding that does not go in to the company's coffers will be money that has to be spent out of profits later.  I don't think I've ever seen a pitch to raise funds where that money wasn't going directly in to expanding the business, but again, I now realize that there is very little money actually being raised, and the majority of the sale is a private shareholder liquidating.


This brings up another possibility.  I'd much rather invest in Erik Voorhees, Inc. than SatoshiDICE.  Since you won't be devoted to SatoshiDICE full-time, why not consolidate your efforts under one umbrella and allow people to purchase a stake of everything you produce?  What if you come up with something else like SatoshiDICE but better and decide to devote your time to that since it both produces more profit, and you own a larger stake?  I suppose this is where you and your investors would find out how far a handshake goes in court.


I'm glad that you now recognize it as a business and not simply a website.  It's nice to think that the site will be doing well enough to cover legal fees should they arise, but often legal problems come up when you're running out of money--just ask Intersango  Anyway, 7k BTC sounds like reasonable reserves.  Investors potentially do create exposure for themselves beyond lost profits:  https://vcexperts.com/buzz_articles/1180


True.  Given the site's structure and relative simplicity, it's probably not going to be an expensive issue to deal with.  Unfortunately, this also means lower barrier to entry.


I'd most be worried about the countries that you live in, travel through and have servers in:  http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/uk-gambling-ceo-arrested-at-us-airport/


The difference with BTC is that they're much more liquid.  If I see the end coming, I can cash out.  It'd probably be a lot more difficult to ditch my SD shares.  What if that other crypto-currency has SD built in?  My main problem is that the company has no real assets and doesn't intend to accumulate any that might be of value to investors if the site shuts down.  The company doesn't plan to diversify (beyond possibly a similar crypto-currency).  For the same reasons you want to sell 10% of your shares, I'd like to see company diversify its offerings.


We might have said the same things about MySpace before Facebook came along, or Gox before Bitcoinica.  It's still very early days for Bitcoin (and SD) and there are still very few professional offerings to compete with but that will change.


Well, I'd say that using the funds raised to rocket SD far beyond the competition's reach would be great, but we're really talking about $30k going toward that, not $300k, right?


Everybody is going to have a different opportunity cost for the coins but that is what a 'good' return will be measured by.  I'm pissed that I didn't sell everything I own to buy Bitcoin when it hit $2.  Do investors think better offerings will come up that will make them wish they didn't have their money tied up in this 5-year break-even plan?  Things are happening, as Bruce Wagner likes to say, in 'Bitcoin time'.


So who does pay employees/contractors?  Are you not in some capacity an agent for the business?  Who does the company hold responsible if somebody screws up?  Is it all volunteer work with immunity then?  There is no set amount of hours that the shareholders can expect the company will employ someone to work on the business?  Is there a board of directors who instructs these volunteers?  Or, does Erik just pay the compensation out of pocket for work performed on the company's behalf?


By botched I mean illegal.  It would probably be too much of a problem for any organization concerned with legal compliance to purchase SD after a funding round like this.


I should have said Acts of Gavin  Is it likely that SD would be obsoleted/broken by changes to Bitcoin?


I wish I could own a piece but for my own opportunity cost, the price of the shares and the risks at hand, I'm going to pass.  I hope you'll still invite me to the party in Macau


Probably a wise choice to present an alternative investment opportunity before the idle coin is thrown away on the next ponzi.  Boring ol' verifiable and sustainable have not been popular so far, unfortunately.


I'll end by saying that just because I'm not investing, that doesn't mean the deal isn't a good opportunity for some people.  You'll have to assess the risks and opportunity cost for yourself.  There are definitely worse guys you could give your money to than Erik--he's trustworthy and he'll probably use it to continue doing great things for Bitcoin.  Good luck all around.

I am having some fuck ups that's screwing me over. Yesterday it was bugs on GLBSE today it was MPex that don't work for me (probably my fault), once I get this all going I will issue more shares.
Sorry for the delay.
//DeaDTerra

If he won't supply then they don't really have to compete on fees.

And yes I love the free market.

1. Buy shares on MPEX
2. Trade shares 1:1 with DeaDTerra for pass-through shares
3. Sell pass-through shares for more than you bought them for
4. Wash, rinse, repeat.

It will cost you the initial 20 BTC, though, so either keep arbing both ways at every opportunity, or use a broker, or find some other thing you want at MPEX to justify the cost.

DT just needs to release more GLBSE shares in the passthrough since clearly there is demand outstripping supply. If he wont meet the supply need then someone else will need to do a passthrough that competes with less fees etc. Dont you love the free market ?

How does one go about arbitraging this for profit? Besides creating a passthrough?

There's the 2 things I predicted:
- This is an arb opportunity
- Greater GLBSE volume --> greater demand --> higher price
 

Considering there are millions of shares available you would have to be nuts to buy at twice the IPO price. Inb4 facebook.