Topic: Investigation Complete of Instamines and Fastmines for almost every top alt coin - page 4. (Read 12024 times)

I see, in addition to ignoring my previous post, your main motivation for "dislliking" PoS coins is because you missed the boat on all of them? (Or perhaps invested in the wrong ones?)

Otherwise, I can't see why you're bringing up the % the initial investors made... In fact, it's irrelevant now (if not, tell me how it's relevant, I'm interested in hearing your excuse).

...i purposely didnt count from the peak.  Itgoes higher than 80 million market cap (or 8 cents per nxt). I believe it reached 100 mill.

And im not saying they sold it all. I highly doubt they could. Im saying that is the value. Do you disagree with the numbers?

quick peak was caused by Bter's manual deposits - people didn't deposit there Nxt coins fast because they were sleeping, while chinese guys wanted to buy all. If you wanted to sell 50m Nxt, you would get maybe 100k USD. Price would simply go down to 1 Satoshi. Those, who would have wanted to do this, could do this in past. They didn't or made it slowly = success.

But counting with peaking price with selling millions of Nxt? Really? This is the dumbest analysis I have ever seen on this forum

copied from NXT original thread...

Address; Hash; BTC; Multiplier; Weight; Nxt

1Aq5XrMf7SQsVA3RsByvZiRnARSCoaenj; 0810dc38a2e6e956918f2057f06f02846dfcfc6bf8860d976e08dec7e5cbfe8d; 1; 300; 300; 49875768
168udnkT3BMgFkzXwzLGnEymJpXxrgEhxt; 0dff9e047bde2f3de9551ea9439190f62080b443060fd76f66f3b87af38c0b8a; 0,0105; 300; 3,15; 523696
1EujnSavF7qVg5ngrKpTLbD52aCvoyTPh; 0e1446244ca325c2dd0cd6a8c6a5d56733bcce315a5536b750a408092d0b48b5; 0,11; 300; 33; 5486334
1AN8bAhXrdnqHU8USe3rNqdcneWacxQUZu; 17596f1491007e17fc4fee55fe6cf43b99a42384b5fcd80e5269816152918230; 1; 300; 300; 49875768

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=303898.540

someone got 49,875768 NXT...for sending 1 BTC.

at today's price thats a cool $1.5 million.

at NXT's really quick peak (.08 a coin and higher), that was worth well over $3 million dollars.

if you want to sell at 500,000, you can start at 0.08, but price will go down and actually you will be selling at 0.06

+ Nxt IPO was not an investment. Only suckers would count it like that. It should be max. 100 USD, but unexpectly price of the Btc was rocketing and imagine - how would it be fair if someone invested 100 USD in September and 2000 USD in December and got the same stake because Bitcoin was unstoppable

Daedulus, you haven't explained how how NXT analysis is incorrect other than to suggest I'm not considering more options.

I stated that .01 BTC bought ~500,000 NXT in the Octo-November investor prelaunch. I then stated that in mid December, the price of the coin reached .08 per NXT. .08 x 500,000 = $40,000.

.01 BTC between September to November varied from 100-1000 dollars, but most of that spike occured at the end of November.


At the low end (the early NXT investors) who sent .01 BTC and got 500,000 NXT...

if 1 BTC ~ $100, .01 BTC ~ $1, then this investor turned 1 dollar into 40,000 by December 26th. That a 40000x return on investment.

At the high end...investors who sent .01BTC and got 500,000 NXT

if 1 BTC ~$1000, then .01 BTC  ~$10, then this investor turned 10 dollars into 40,000 by December 26th. thats a 4000x return on investment.

I picked $7 dollars as the value of .01 BTC, actually giving the investors some benefit of the doubt.


What do you disagree with here?

Given the best possible scenario, someone's $10 investment earned them $40K in 1-3 months. Keep in mind...some people sent way more than .01 BTC. The person who sent $100 worth of Bitcoin earned $400,000 in NXT. That's unreal. Especially when you consider that NXT hadnt even done anything yet.

That is what i point out in the wiki. Talking about the utility of NXT as though it makes up for this gaff doesn't make sense to me.

 

Who said we were debating my methodology? You can take umbridge all you want with my approach. It's already been stated, this article is not meant to be all inclusive. I don't take into account inflation (although I try to monitor that), utility and others because I am not trying to write that kind of article.


No, I will not conclude that all PoS investments are bad and a waste of time. Peercoin couldve been top notch if they didn't have the accidental PoW instamine. I still see them as better than 98% of the other PoW/PoS coins. As I said before, 100% pure PoS coins have a tricky thing to pull off; how to distribute their coins.

The problem with your "analysis" is that it's inconsistent and superficial. Nor are you a recognised authority on the ethics of cryptocurrency launches, hence the criticism of your presenting it as a "Wiki" because it leads people to believe that you are. In fact you're a self appointed one.

The inconsistency arises from the comparisons made from one coin to another without placing these in the appropriate market context. The implicit scope of your 'market domain' is basically the current 'coin' community (bitcointalk readers) whereas all these assets would be more fairly compared against a common background of the global market at which they're targeted.

Take your criticisms about distribution for example. When one coin is compared with another then, yes there are measurable differences in the context of the current market. On the other hand if the scope of appraisal was a proper global market domain then these differences pale into insignificance. ALL initial stakeholders of ALL cryptocurrencies amount to less than 1 thousandth of 1 percent of potential market participants. The investors of any cryptocurrency that's successful in such a market stand to make many thousands of percent of a gain whether the primary stakeholders number in the 10's, 100's or 1000's.  So the comparison is one of degree, not of principle as your appraisal alludes. Nowhere in the report is this perspective considered or even acknowledged.

On top of that you go on to use highly emotive language in amongst the descriptive content without even stating that this is your opinion or presenting any balancing historical background as to the basis for the various coin policies which in many cases is absolutely viable.

You have implicitly maligned many hard working developers who act in good faith without even consulting them or presenting an alternative context to your own for their coin launch policies. The irony of this is that many of them have thought these issues through to a far greater extent than this analysis could even be bothered with.

Please take this piece of propaganda down. It's is a badly researched opinion piece disguised as a 'guide'. A disservice to investors and one that should be taken with a huge grain of salt by anyone having the misfortune to stumble upon this mis-labelled rant.

Of course I/we take issue with your "analysis" because we (mainly those involved with PoS projects) understand that not-instantmine/instantmine is too simplistic. I'm sure this works perfectly for copycat PoW coins, because all you can do on these coins is basically mine them, and that's it. What was the last "slow-mined" PoW coin that did something revolutionary Bitcoin has not done? Looking at the top 20 on CMK... that list is basically zero - maybe namecoin, but it's already outdated.

You're talking about "investments", which includes both minable and non-minable coins. If you're going to lump all PoS coins into the "instantmine" section (when in reality, there is no "mining" in PoS), you're doing everyone who follows your analysis a disservice. Understandably, this is what the topic is about, but IMO, it's flawed, and that will become apparent in the future. I would say that people are getting tired of buying coins whose only feature is that they can be slowly mined and do nothing else but generate profit for the miners. The market will be shifting to doing useful work (and already is, look at maidsafe) and more efficient work. Distribution is important, but it's no longer the sole determining factor in a coin's success.

Anyways, not hating on your analysis, but again, IMO it's too simplistic to take seriously.

Pandaisftw

Bump.

I am a Nxt investor. That is no defence in a logical debate about methodology. Why do you ignore me?

What is in common between all the people strongly against my wiki?

recent most vicious haters...

Microguy-100% goldcoin supporter. My article is not kind to gldcoin.

pandaisftw-past posts show...NXT investor from the beginning who has been giving away 100K NXT donations as people do good things for NXT. My article is not kind of NXT.

wallstreetcoiner-gold coin supporter. Recently said he/she projects the top four coins to be BTC, LTC, DOGE, and GLD (lol). My article is not kind to gldcoin.

toknormal-to quote from another thread... top 5 coins at the moment...


I put NXT, DRK, PPC, BC all in the extreme caution section. He admits being a holder of NXT. Also a massive supporter of Cinni, which my article is not kind to Cinni, either.


Of course all of these people are against my writing. It's worth it to them.

Its such a coincidence all the people who spout vitriol at this simple wiki are major supporters of coins with extremely suspect mining situations...

My analysis is simple and meant for the NON mining public. I urge them throughout the wiki to do more investigation than just my simple work. The amazing thing is that a number of regulars here (myself included) never really did a simple investigation into all of these coins. They came out so fast with so many "new" features... I bet a number of these in my wiki will surprise people.

The issue is that the OP's "good/bad investment" is based off of a single variable - initial distribution. Obviously, this assumes that the coin is only ever used for a store of value and/or to trade, and never for any other purpose (ie. colored coins). The OP assumes that these coins have pretty much zero intrinsic value - because if they had some intrinsic value then initial distribution cannot be the sole determining factor in whether it is a good investment or not.

This is not an "investigation", it's a giant rant.

Clueless at best and positively malignant at worst, not to mention lazy.

Whatever the merits of the various currencies concerned, non of them are as much of a scam as calling this an "investor's guide" and dressing it up as a wiki.

It belongs in the dungeons of bitcointalk squabbler threads.

You know the price of everything and the value of nothing. I asked about value and how you judge it. It seems you only use initial distribution and nothing else and speak as though your article carries academic rigour when it appears they are just assertions based on a narrow definition of what a good investment is.

How do you take account of inflation, utility and many other factors that influence value in your article?  

You dont need to take hes words seriously. Just look at the simple facts and do your own research. You will see that majority of hes statements are correct.

I have no idea why anyone would take this report seriously when it was written by an author with an extremely heavy bias and one that clearly did not have even the most basic understanding of his subject matter.

This guy basically took one narrow view (the book cover approach) and proceeded to write an entire book report without reading a single page beyond the cover.

Sad but true.

added a few more...

ECC
microcoin
Unobtanium
shibecoin
Potcoin
Noblecoin

This seems to be the problem with most legit coins. Those scheming to get rich in a week aren't interested because they can't manipulate the price as easily.

Are you hoping people don't actually click your link or something?

Here is what is presented in your link as "proof" Goldcoin was not instamined.



the following are timestamps from the gld coin blockchain...

block 1   05-15 00:48:56

block 2200 05-15 10:54:43

block 11250 05-16 00:43:30

200 x 10,000 = 2,000,000 coins created

2000 ( 2200-200) blocks x 1,000 = 2,000,000 coins created...

9050 (11250-2200) blocks x 500 = 4,525,000 coins created...

that equals 8,525,000 GLD coins created in 24 hours. Exactly what my analysis showed. 8.5 million of 31 million available? instamine. major instamine.

THANKS FOR THE SUPPORTING INFORMATION.