Pages:
Author

Topic: [CRYPTOSTOCKS] Labcoin Official Thread - Self-Moderated - page 40. (Read 96918 times)

member
Activity: 98
Merit: 10
Based on Sam's performance before, the possibility that labcoin will success goes lower and lower (1% -> 0.1%).
More and more competent competitors show up with large enough hash power and advanced technology.
Until now, we only have lagged <10TH. I don't know why people are so happy with this short time dividend. 
newbie
Activity: 56
Merit: 0
Sam, obviously you don't know what you're doing.
Just stop wasting our money. Just transfer it back to your creditors and be
done with it.
legendary
Activity: 882
Merit: 1000
With 200 satoshi daily dividends, if they can mantain this proportion ( by adding some hashpower as the difficulty raises) it adds up to 0,007 btc of dividend per share per year.

meaning that at 0.007 is roi 100% in 365 days



I think you've made a mathematical error 0.000002 (assuming that's 200 satoshi) x 365 = 0.00073 (or 0.0007). This would mean with the current prices of the stocks, you can atleast expect to get 100% return + assuming that they do increase their hash to their promised TH - taking difficulty into the equation, however with this stated - most investors who bought in at IPO and higher won't be seeing a decent return anytime soon. (maybe?)

Yes sorry, I mean 0,0007.

Just saying that the things are better than what they look. So if they can deploy/Buy hasrate up to 50ish TH that will mean  roughly dividends untill february.

So 0.0005- 0.0006 could be the right price
According to the current difficulty increase rate, to keep the same proportion (or dividend), it's not just adding 'some' hash rate. The hash rate has to be increase more than 30% every 10 days, and more than doubled per month. No company on earth can achieve this objective for one year. So 0.0005 - 0.0006 is definitely not the right price, unless you believe the network hashing rate will stop increasing exponentially in a couple of months.
sr. member
Activity: 420
Merit: 250

The problem is that Sam has given no indication of a roadmap for future hashing growth.

Investors have no idea what to expect when, so it's impossible to judge what the shares should be valued at.

Combined with the fact that there needs to be some sort of exciting news to get people to put money on cryptoshares in the first place, there's not much hope of the share price increasing any time soon.

If Sam delivered on his promise to have 20 TH of hashing by the end of October, perhaps, but it's looking like he'll fail to deliver yet again.
full member
Activity: 163
Merit: 100
With 200 satoshi daily dividends, if they can mantain this proportion ( by adding some hashpower as the difficulty raises) it adds up to 0,007 btc of dividend per share per year.

meaning that at 0.007 is roi 100% in 365 days



I think you've made a mathematical error 0.000002 (assuming that's 200 satoshi) x 365 = 0.00073 (or 0.0007). This would mean with the current prices of the stocks, you can atleast expect to get 100% return + assuming that they do increase their hash to their promised TH - taking difficulty into the equation, however with this stated - most investors who bought in at IPO and higher won't be seeing a decent return anytime soon. (maybe?)

Yes sorry, I mean 0,0007.

Just saying that the things are better than what they look. So if they can deploy/Buy hasrate up to 50ish TH that will mean  roughly dividends untill february.

So 0.0005- 0.0006 could be the right price
member
Activity: 66
Merit: 10
With 200 satoshi daily dividends, if they can mantain this proportion ( by adding some hashpower as the difficulty raises) it adds up to 0,007 btc of dividend per share per year.

meaning that at 0.007 is roi 100% in 365 days



I think you've made a mathematical error 0.000002 (assuming that's 200 satoshi) x 365 = 0.00073 (or 0.0007). This would mean with the current prices of the stocks, you can atleast expect to get 100% return + assuming that they do increase their hash to their promised TH - taking difficulty into the equation, however with this stated - most investors who bought in at IPO and higher won't be seeing a decent return anytime soon. (maybe?)
full member
Activity: 163
Merit: 100
With 200 satoshi daily dividends, if they can mantain this proportion ( by adding some hashpower as the difficulty raises) it adds up to 0,007 btc of dividend per share per year.

meaning that at 0.007 is roi 100% in 365 days

member
Activity: 67
Merit: 10
Sam,what's the next target of the hashrate?
Second batch,2nd gen chips development,financial report,open-space visit(time?),etc..
Please give us a full update.
thx.

+1
sr. member
Activity: 448
Merit: 250
Sam,what's the next target of the hashrate?
Second batch,2nd gen chips development,financial report,open-space visit(time?),etc..
Please give us a full update.
thx.
sr. member
Activity: 420
Merit: 250
We've finally deployed about 10 TH/s of stable hashing output.

Here is the guest account for http://ghash.io, username : labcoin2 password : 12345





What's the schedule for increasing the rate?
legendary
Activity: 1442
Merit: 1001
The volume at cryptostocks is a joke.  We really need to move to havelock.

There not on havelock because they didn't and wouldn't provide any proof, this is also why they are not on Bitfunder.

Cryptostocks added them for the fees,

It would have been simple to list on Bitfunder if they managed to provide any proof, but they didn't. And it looks like they won't.


I personally wouldn't be offering up any details with all the pitch forks that have been flying around here. Would you?


If I had to verify my identity to a trusted 3rd party such as Ukyo to have the value of my stock be several times higher?

You bet your ass I'd do it.

Don't make excuses for him. His actions are taking money out of your pocket.

I could care less if the stock was listed on bitfunder - I'm in the US.

If you're looking for legitimacy, pictures of the miners/chips would be far more valuable than sam's identity, which as I've stated is more of a liability.
hero member
Activity: 770
Merit: 509
If I had to verify my identity to a trusted 3rd party such as Ukyo to have the value of my stock be several times higher?

You bet your ass I'd do it.

Ukyo, the guy who without explanation banned all US customers causing a massive price crash affecting nearly every stock on the site? I would much rather use something like colored coins or if you want some real legitimate stocks you can have SEC registered ones which you know wont be scams. But no current exchanges will register with SEC nor will the securities because it is expensive and takes time.
sr. member
Activity: 420
Merit: 250
The volume at cryptostocks is a joke.  We really need to move to havelock.

There not on havelock because they didn't and wouldn't provide any proof, this is also why they are not on Bitfunder.

Cryptostocks added them for the fees,

It would have been simple to list on Bitfunder if they managed to provide any proof, but they didn't. And it looks like they won't.


I personally wouldn't be offering up any details with all the pitch forks that have been flying around here. Would you?


If I had to verify my identity to a trusted 3rd party such as Ukyo to have the value of my stock be several times higher?

You bet your ass I'd do it.

Don't make excuses for him. His actions are taking money out of your pocket.
sr. member
Activity: 766
Merit: 250
Hmm.. Where's today's Divs?  And since we are now at 10 TH/s, I was expecting to see more than the normalish 12.? BTC in the mining address. That's what it's been the past few days - 12.7ish

https://blockchain.info/address/17psAW21J4twanAFWmbcd5WdX2pKeX3trm
Looks like Divs are coming.. 16.85~ BTC this time

Got 'em!
sr. member
Activity: 766
Merit: 250
Hmm.. Where's today's Divs?  And since we are now at 10 TH/s, I was expecting to see more than the normalish 12.? BTC in the mining address. That's what it's been the past few days - 12.7ish

https://blockchain.info/address/17psAW21J4twanAFWmbcd5WdX2pKeX3trm
Looks like Divs are coming.. 16.85~ BTC this time
legendary
Activity: 1442
Merit: 1001

Especially chips' security depends on that so no pictures of hashing gear either, just to protect their true identities.


No, I'll grant you that it's probably either (unfounded) paranoia or fraud. There's no good reason to not show pictures of the units hashing. That doesn't meant they don't exist though...
full member
Activity: 223
Merit: 100

I probably wouldn't offer up any details period if I wanted to issue/sell securities to the general public without local regulation compliance.

They didn't have to provide info to us, just to the Bitfunder or Havelock and there would be no reason for us to see this information.

If Labcoin was legit, then proof would be easy and no issue, even to a trusted third party who wouldn't divulge this information to anyone, unless it turns out to be a scam....

If the purpose is evading security regulations, then providing information to the trusted 3rd party wouldn't help as clearly they would divulge if they were forced to by local authorities. Of course, the same tactic could easily be used to support a fraudulent operation, but I'm just saying that there are reasons a security issuer would not want to disclose their identity.

Especially chips' security depends on that so no pictures of hashing gear either, just to protect their true identities.

legendary
Activity: 1442
Merit: 1001

I probably wouldn't offer up any details period if I wanted to issue/sell securities to the general public without local regulation compliance.

They didn't have to provide info to us, just to the Bitfunder or Havelock and there would be no reason for us to see this information.

If Labcoin was legit, then proof would be easy and no issue, even to a trusted third party who wouldn't divulge this information to anyone, unless it turns out to be a scam....

If the purpose is evading security regulations, then providing information to the trusted 3rd party wouldn't help as clearly they would divulge if they were forced to by local authorities. Of course, the same tactic could easily be used to support a fraudulent operation, but I'm just saying that there are reasons a security issuer would not want to disclose their identity.
full member
Activity: 160
Merit: 100
The volume at cryptostocks is a joke.  We really need to move to havelock.

There not on havelock because they didn't and wouldn't provide any proof, this is also why they are not on Bitfunder.

Cryptostocks added them for the fees,

It would have been simple to list on Bitfunder if they managed to provide any proof, but they didn't. And it looks like they won't.


I personally wouldn't be offering up any details with all the pitch forks that have been flying around here. Would you?

I probably wouldn't offer up any details period if I wanted to issue/sell securities to the general public without local regulation compliance.

They didn't have to provide info to us, just to the Bitfunder or Havelock and there would be no reason for us to see this information.

If Labcoin was legit, then proof would be easy and no issue, even to a trusted third party who wouldn't divulge this information to anyone, unless it turns out to be a scam....
sr. member
Activity: 766
Merit: 250
Hmm.. Where's today's Divs?  And since we are now at 10 TH/s, I was expecting to see more than the normalish 12.? BTC in the mining address. That's what it's been the past few days - 12.7ish

https://blockchain.info/address/17psAW21J4twanAFWmbcd5WdX2pKeX3trm
Pages:
Jump to: