Topic: [HAVELOCK] CasinoBitco.in (CBTC) IPO Official Thread - page 4. (Read 25056 times)

Your not taking into account the share price after a year, if you earned 5 BTC back (50% Return) you would be holding shares in a decent company whose share value will very likely bring back a profit over what you paid should you decide to sell. Say the company had no growth really but maintained their current valuation (which is unlikely) and their incoming BTC decreased proportionately to their value rise. Your shares may sell for less BTC but would probably be valued (in USD) around the same amount $1000 which $1000+$2500(5BTC earned)+The same profit you would have seen from holding the original 10BTC. But if the company has significant holdings in BTC (bankroll) they would see a value increase of the bankroll and a corresponding increase in company valuation depending on how much of the company's value is in the bankroll. So in my opinion, you would earn the dividends(in USD value related to profit) The share value increase (partly from BTC holdings value increase and partly from growth and partly because it returned 50% in dividends in a year lol) which would be greater obviously than the $4000 profit from holding 10BTC. If the value of the company was solely based on the bankroll holdings it would now be 5X more valuable earning you $5000 from selling shares and $2500 in dividends.

I already did, but below is the quote so you can read it again. The fact is that while the USD holdings *remain the same*, you could have earned MORE by buying straight BTC because your BTC holdings would be greater. It doesn't matter if you spent 10 BTC and earned 5 BTC back but the price increased by 10x. Sure, you made 5x your original amount, but had you bought straight BTC you would have made twice that (10x the original amount).

To be clear, this is a hypothetical event that the price of bitcoin doubles overnight and the company sells that day. In this case though I don't see why any profit gained by this scenario wouldn't be passed on to the shareholder as well as be reflected in the share price.

The more likely scenario of bitcoin USD value doubling over the course of a year say, would have more subtle effect I would guess. But I still think the opportunity for profits based on btc market value would happen, it all boils down to what the price does between the times the bitcoins are converted to fiat and then back to fiat. The way Im seeing it, there is risk/opportunity for the dividends receiver/shareholder to make a profit/loss between the time CBTC earns the profit, and divies to the shareholders. I imagine this would produce a similar if not slightly muted result as compared to the overnight BTC/USD double in value, only over an extended period of time.

There are a lot of possible scenarios and variable, but I'm just not buying the idea that a shareholder loses value overtime because BTC value increase overtime. Not in a BTC denominated company. That would mean that every BTC denominated company is expecting the market price (in fiat) of BTC to fall overtime for them to be profitable long-term. That's contrary to popular opinion. Shares are a stake in the company's profit/loss. Consider a mining company for example, there income is btc which is paid out to shareholders in dividends. Not in dollars. BTC value increase only increases the value (in dollars) of any btc held by shareholders or the mining company. In a mining company dividends dont decrease because of market value, because their income is btc. In the casino, dividends amount will decrease because of btc market value but not because profit was taken in USD, but because btc value effects how much of it someone will gamble in USD. That would mean your USD profit would not change, but your dividends amount would get smaller.

The only way I see I would be wrong is if CBTC converts BTC to USD to hold as assets, bankroll, or before paying dividends. Maybe they will clarify this.

I think a lot of people may miss the boat on some of these securities because they can't grasp  the economics of a BTC-denominated company. It's very hard to get people to see past USD. It is so ingrained in our heads it is hard to comprehend. Most people have no idea how fiat currencies work behind the scenes at all. They just know what $5 can buy and what $100 can buy and most know that overtime the price of things cost more $ and that's it. If you've ever tried to explain BTC to someone who's never heard of it you probably know what I mean.

I guess I shouldn't be complaining that just keeps the share prices lower for longer so I can accumulate more  


If I'm wrong, call me out and explain to me why.

Great conversation! Feel free to correct me here.

My sense is that typically, all assets would pass to a buyer in event of a sale.
So, in a sense, they would simply be included in the purchase price (increasing it, versus if they were handled separately), based on which all unit holders would be compensated.

Bankroll might not be included. I'm not sure of that.


Both buyback and selling clause have no mention of the bankroll.

Are you saying that if the company is holding 540BTC and the value doubles the other entity buying the company would ignore the value of the BTC bankroll and only consider what is was worth the day before? Or are you saying the bankroll would not be included in the sale?

A sale for USD I mean. Since we all seem to be stuck on that

All discussion aside, I am glad we can have intelligent conversation here, whether I'm right or wrong, I'm enjoying the discussion. So far most of the thread I have seen related to securities are too flooded with idiots to get a word in edge-wise lol

Not really, because you can't request to cash out those shares for a portion of the bankroll. Thus if profits are lower, no one might be willing to buy at full price.

When you buy a share, you buy rights to PROFITS. You also earn a proportional share of the sale value if the casino is sold. But there's nothing about owning the bankroll or being able to cash that out at any time.

*In my opinion I should have put

I said most

And I believe this because BTC is perfect for gambling, it's like the attributes were created for it. I believe is BTC will be widely used and gain mainstream adoption within 5-10 years. When that being the case I believe BTC will be the top choice for online gamblers (if not sooner than mainstream btc adoption) why would you use anything else if btc is easier to get, safer and more private to use, and no waiting for deposits, payouts, or withdrawals. Almost nill fees to move this money around as well.

Now we have a long way still to go with BTC as far as ease of use and availability but I believe it will come. I mean everyday I see ideas, projects, and progress moving toward this. So first you have to believe how big bitcoin will be, then decide given a level playing firld, which would users prefer? Thats my source of reasoning.

What's your source or reasoning for this assertion? From what I've read, major online casinos aren't seeing the demand for them to accept / switch to BTC.

The BTC gambling niche is certainly growing, but I'd be careful projecting that it will take over anywhere near "most" of online gaming anytime soon.

Exactly my point, assets of 540BTC will double in value. So even if its only 25 of the evaluation it still doubles the value (in USD) of the 540BTC

Now your talking about people gambling less because btc price is rising and I can see that.

But if a companies profits are btc and their bankroll is btc. The value doubles tomorrow (assuming this has no effect on people hoarding more btc)
Then the bankroll doubles in value overnight, the same amount of btc is there so your dividend doesn't change but it is now worth twice as much.
Now your share value will reflect the value of the company in terms of profit, holdings, (all btc denominated) and obviously investor sentiment but why would someone then only want to pay half the value (in btc only) for a share that reflects in a big part the value (in holdings and profit 100% BTC) of the company?Maybe I'm still off but I can't get my head around it any other way so far.

If you leave USD out of the picture completely why would anyone care unless they wanted to buy some USD.
Maybe I see things differently and this could be debatable I supposed so many factors and unknowns

Try thinking about it as if USD didnt exist, pretend USD is cupcakes. Now the price of the cupcake only matters if I'm hungry, maybe get some insight as to my thinking here.

Actually, EXACTLY like that. The shares value are based on the profits the company make. If BTC price doubles, odds are that people will gamble with less BTC and profits will lower, thus so will the value of shares.

I guess the question is then, is this companies holdings and profits staying in btc? If yes than their company value would increase with btc market increase. Your right though this is all so new that noone really knows how the economics will play out.

If the company is taking profits in btc and dividends paid in that same btc, and the companies holdings are btc, then the market price increasing also increases the companies holdings. In other words what Im saying is if btc value doubled overnight whatever holdings the company has doubles also. I havent seen any fluctuations in share price related to USD market of btc.

But the shares are denominated in btc, So regargless of USD value I invest 10 BTC in the company, earn 5 BTC back. Now if the value of BTC doubled tomorrow I still have 10 BTC worth of shares. Which is worth twice as much. AS well as any profits the company made in btc is now worth twice as much. Not like if the btc market price doubled tomorrow and then my shares were only worth 5 btc. Now if the company were converting btc profits to fiat I could see what your saying but as far as I see they are totally btc denominated meaning whether you have your btc in a wallet or in shares your not missing out on market price increases. Tell me if Im wrong because thats how I thought most btc securities were.

BTC is $100 each now. You invest $1000 into a company. That's 10 BTC.

Over a year, you earn back 5 BTC that are worth $500 each. So you have $2500 now ($1500 profit).

You could have put that same $1000 into the BTC and held it, where you'd now have $5000 ($4000 profit).

I get that part but why does that decrease profits? Ill recieve less btc for dividends, but my share value will increase and the value of my dividend should not change. Am I still missing the point?