Factory, we have a very easy to delineate problem here. You say
I am not 'strong-arming' anyone. I don't expect anything I say to change what the issuer will price this IPO at. I, however, enjoy discussing all theory and practice of investing and finance. I always attempt to do my due dilligence, and am meerly sharing my findings, thoughts, and opinions with others.
This is great. Then you follow by saying
The section I quoted of your last post exemplifies your bias and your unwillingness to accept uncertainty.
To tell anyone for certain that you know the future is dishonest. I find that to be terribly unprofessional, and I am somewhat shocked to see a statement such as that come from a "PR" account.
And here it starts. Nothing I have said actually translates to a denial of future uncertainty. If you want to go into dissecting semantics and pretend you don't understand what "the story is" means or such that's fine, but it will not make you look respectable, as you imagine. It will make you look [more] like a man on a mission. Which, I suppose, is fine by me if it's fine by you. It does however contradict the pretense you set forth above, and that's what'd be dishonest in this entire discussion.
It is dishonest to claim that 10 times 10 is a thousand. It is dishonest to claim somebody is "unprofessional" because they're either not working for whoever's shilling you out or else you just don't like them. It is dishonest to deny the facts of the matter, such as they are.
That MPEx is held to standards nobody else is held to is perfectly fine. That people ask "Hey, what happens in case your domain gets seized" is great, because it gives us the opportunity to answer. I can understand why we're the only exchange asked these things: nobody cares about the others. Asking questions is not the problem. Pretending questions were not answered just because the answer doesn't come out to be what you wanted or expected it to be, that's dishonest. Getting a good answer and pretending it's a bad answer, that's dishonest. Claiming to be insulted by "LOL" and using "fuck" as a form of address, that's dishonest.
So, as far as "professional" goes, let me tell you a little about things you have no way of knowing, given that I work for the - so far only - people who professionally handle BTC securities. There are exactly two bitcoin companies listed in the bitcoin world so far. One is MPOE/MPEX. The other is SatoshiDICE! The reason
both these exist as available investments for people in BTC is not the intrinsic strength or value of the investor market in BTC. Either owner could have had much better deals going to the established marketplaces.
The reason both of these exist is that it just so happens that their owners simultaneously a. don't really need the money and b. would like to see BTC flourish and develop. That's it. No amount of ranting and raving about how 10% dividends a year is too close to real world's 2.5 dollars / 650 dollar share and not close enough to imaginary 7% a week returns is going to matter in that discussion, because it can't make the respective owners either poorer or less desirous to see BTC flourish.
S.MPOE makes about half what S.DICE does, and is currently trading at a slight premium over what S.DICE is asking for. Thus the P/E multiplier of S.MPOE is closer to about 20x. That is what investors (the real variety, not the forum dweller variety) value it at. It is true that the owner there retained about 98% so far, and so that might have an impact, or else the growth potential is valued differently, or what have you. Either way that falls, based on actual experience as opposed to imaginary experience, S.DICE is a good buy.
We have talked to numerous companies that have valid business models in order to offer their shares to the interested public. There are exactly two answers that we hear with inordinate frequency. One is that the owner doesn't need the money, so a listing doesn't make sense. The other - heard in general as a reply to the observation that BTC will go to shit in a bucket if serious businesses don't start offering real investor debuchees and actual financial instruments - is that the owner does not want or need the hassle of a bunch of drama from two penny investors.
That is what you are doing, with your unwelcome and unwarranted delusions of self importance. You are, with every dishonest remark, with every goblet of bile, with every hateful and rude comment on this forum, you are making it more difficult for the actual professionals to close actual deals, and you are making it less likely for actual businesses to go BTC rather than traditional, and in short you are sticking nails in BTC's coffin. It's that simple: as long as BTC is perceived as "that currency in which they do Ponzis" we are, collectively and generally, going nowhere. We have a limited window of time to make BTC work, financially. If in 2020 all that's happening are still "investments" of the ilk we've seen offered all over this forum, the very notion of cryptocurrency might be too discredited to ever take off. If this insanity going on the lines of "bitcoin is for raising money to buy a toaster" is allowed to continue it might become our ceiling. As it is it will come to haunt us.
I haven't seen you explaining why ZIP is such a bad thing, back then. Why not? How's the honesty/dishonesty going there? I don't recall seeing you explaining why LIB.x were bad things, back in the day. Were you even around, in those times? Pirate uninsured bonds are trading in distress, 30-40 cents to the dollar. I was there saying it's dishonest, back then. Were you? Where were you? Were you being honest?
So, please, take a step away from your computer, and take a step away from yourself. And think. Am I being intelligent, and am I contributing something useful? It's perfectly fine to not have the money to go in, it's perfectly fine to have the money and not want to go in. It's perfectly fine to not go in. It is perfectly unfine to be carrying on in this manner.
. We are all here to make him rich. We just want to switch the handlers. 
