Topic: Lab Rat Data Processing, LLC (LabRatMining) Official Announcement - page 240. (Read 452224 times)

BTW, what do you mean you'll not "crap up this thread"?!  

Again, many thanks for the comprehensive review! I had missed that their dividends are daily, that does indeed account for pretty much the whole discrepancy (and the fact that I somehow got their shareprice wrong by a factor of around 2!)

As you say, the difference in owning the hardware is pretty much moot as it dwindles to nothing, plus, although bond holders don't "own" the hardware in LRM, the company is obliged to keep mining with it on behalf of investors pretty much indefinitely, so it's virtually the same.

Looks like the valuations are pretty similar as it stands then, which is good as it shows some consistency in the market. This should mean though, that unless BASIC have a whole load of hardware on order and paid for then it's hard to imagine LRM's valuation increasing a lot when the big delivery of hardware comes in. What I mean by this is that because BASIC is a long standing proposition, and thus has had plenty of time to find an equilibrium/"true valuation", and given that LRM is performing similarly and is valued similarly, this shows that its valuation is approximately based on current performance (i.e. hashrate) and not on forecasted performance, and so once it's shown that LRM is achieving what is promised then the value should move to reflect that.

And yes, I had noticed that the transparency of BASIC is exemplary. I think we can expect more of that once the BitFury hardware is delivered.

I should be so eloquent, thank you maqifrnswa. The history of PMBs is well known.

I'll not crap up this thread out of respect to Lab_Rat.

Cheers.

BASIC: Managed group buy (like LRM/Nasty) 0% management fee, 25% fee taken out at time of IPO used to pay for management shares in hardware. 30% of net proceeds are retained earnings for reinvestment in hardware (OgNasty does 25%, labrat does 25% minus management fee).

A fundamental difference between BASIC and LRM is that you actually own the hardware in BASIC, while LRM owns the hardware for LRM. Since hardware essentially depreciates to 0 in two years, it's not too much of a difference. It's hard to compare future deals since we don't know what's on order or who will actually deliver (on time), but the market seems to show equal confidence in both securities to secure hashrate.

basic has extremely transparent accounting of expenses and hardware, balance sheets and income statements are readily available.

Dividends are paid daily, so they are about the same as labrat's (basic: ~0.0007/week, LRM: ~.0011), and the shares cost about the same as labrats (basic: ~0.12, LRM: ~0.17). I think the yield of the two is pretty similar and PE is pretty similar (basic: 0.58%/week, LRM: 0.64%/week)
https://btct.co/security/BASIC-MINING

The remainder will change over time as difficulty and hardware quantity increases.  We haven't seen the bulk of hardware yet so re-investment isn't really an issue.  Once the bulk of BF gear is in, I will be announcing how much has been reinvested.

Hey BigAsic,

It goes like this

25% gets taken out to pay for Expenses.

So 25% - Expenses = Remainder

Whatever is in the Remainder goes towards Reinvestment and Management Fees.

We do not know what percentage of the remainder goes towards either of those.

While I don't believe we have a right to see a "Balance Sheet", I think it would promote honesty and good will towards shareholders if LabRat made a Weekly, Bi-Weekly, or Monthly Balance sheet to show what expenses were paid, what management fees were paid, and what reinvestments have collect.

Transparency is the key to maintaining shareholder confidence and I believe Lab is off to a good start so far.

That is an extremely useful comparison/run-down maqifrnswa, thank you! How does Basic-Mining BTC-TC compare with all of those by the way?

(https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/btt-130982)

It seems interesting to me as it appears to be run by a well known member of the community, be hashing at ~1.4TH/s, paying about 1/10th of LRM dividends at the moment, and trading with a share price ~50% higher... Are they expecting a huge influx of hardware that they've already paid for? And by huge it would have to be proportionately bigger than the hardware LRM is expecting to explain the enormous difference in both PE ratio and actual shareprice...

Lab, you say 25 is operation expenses and the remainder of that 25 percent goes towards reinvestment and fees. so, does that mean 50 percent is taken out 25 for fees and 25 for reinvestment?

Im a tad slow this morning, lol

From what I get from what your saying, you take 25 percent to pay for expenses, then the remainder of that 25 percent you take 25 percent of that for expansion.  Could you give us a breakdown if that is the case?

shares of a group buy, listed on bifunder. I and II refer to the first day and later orders of KNC miners.

Fixed hashrate per share (determined by however much KNC delivers). 2% management fees, all dividends minus rent/electricity/etc. paid out to shareholders. organized by "soniq"

LabRat (LRM, less <25% management fee, also some amount of original cost per share went to management fees, <20%) and OgNasty (Nastyfans, 0% management fee) essentially run managed group buys with mandatory reinvestment; Addition (run by tyrion, 0% management fee but a known quantity of shares are held by organizers paid for by investors at purchase) and Soniqcoin (SNQI/SNQII, run by soniq, 2% management fee and a known quantity of shares held by organizers paid for by investors at purchase) are exchange-tradable group buys; ASICMINER and Activemining are shares in companies that mine with their own hardware (management pays themselves as seen on balance sheets/income statements, management owns significant shares in company).

All three types of securities have benefits/drawbacks, I think it's important for people to understand them since bitcoin is a self-regulated system -- simply chasing the highest profits may cause a bubble if investors don't spend the right time evaluating the fundamentals of competing offerings.

To anyone who noticed the dip in hashrate this morning, there was a failover of 500-600GH to EMC... Unsure why, but they're back on the pool they should be.  Didn't lose out on any coins though.  I think were almost to 70BTC to be paid out already this week.

25% is operational expenses and the remainder of that 25% goes towards reinvestment and management fees.

Im a tad confused. I know that we are getting 75 percent of the coins. i was under the impression that the 25 percent went to operational expenses. I keep hearing that 25 percent is reinvested. so, could someone explain how it actually works? I just need some clarification....

We have taken different routes for the same end. Im not familiar with your expression, so lets see.  

Your question about income comfortability is probably subjective, with wide bands of acceptable risk and expectation. I think the fundies will be happy 0.5% per week, while the casual players happy with 2% per week, while short time traders would be hoping that they can exploit opportunities above that. But as you say, sustainability would need to exist (for the first two examples, anyway).
 
Trouble is, as we have just found out, its not easy when there's not a concise enough consensus of what value/price is, or perceived to be, while its a constantly moving market place.....as LR is going to demonstrate, i hope.    

In case it's of interest, there are now exactly 50,000 bonds in existence, of which all but 318 are dividend paying, i.e. only 318 bonds of the IPO remain unsold.

Check the math on that. I still come out with about BTC0.0018

Early delivered, top-of-the-line hardware will easily exceed 7% weekly; people who had early Avalon's got >>7% daily. The key is in it being sustainable though.

By the way, what are SNQI and SNQII? (Sorry if I'm being slow, and I did google first...)

Im assuming 50,000 shares are currently issued (if its not higher, then hardly anyone went for the OTC share sales).
Calculated using known daily income of 1TH = 4.46btc per day.

So, 3.75 (average LR hashing rate) * 4.46 * 7 = 117.07btc per week.
So, 117.07 x .75 (reinvestment fund) / 50000 = 0.0023 div per share
Therefore, if bought @
   
0.15 = 1.53% weekly return
0.16 = 1.43% weekly return
0.17 = 1.35% weekly return
0.18 = 1.27% weekly return

All depends on what kind of interest you have, in how you relate and react to those figures (fund managers will like, short term investors will not like).
mmmerlin was making a point about seemingly unobtainable ROI's of 7% last week. If you believe KNC will deliver within ~10 days as intimated by KNC yesterday, i trust people have researched the current price/ROI of SNQI + SNQII ?? 

Looks like LRM is on track for ~BTC0.00179977 per bond this weekend.  Call it BTC.0018
Speculative Bond price with Price:Dividend (P/D) of x120 => ~BTC0.216 bond price; x190 => ~BTC0.342
Using current P/D = 0.17/0.00116401 = x146 => ~BTC0.2628

Let's see how the prices/dividend ratio helps or not in speculating price this weekend. I'm not confident, but the outcome will be interesting.
The ratio could go still go down since it's already x146...maybe some kind of equilibrium will bring it closer to x120 or x100... or lower?

Any thoughts on what people think a weekly or annual return would attract the average person to hold or buy?

x100 =   1.00% per week =   52% annual (if sustained)
x120 = ~0.83% per week = ~43% annual       ""
x146 = ~0.68% per week = ~36% annual       ""
x190 = ~0.53% per week = ~27% annual       ""

Most shares were bought at maybe 0.17 or 0.18 on average. So, those may want to hold onto bonds more tightly than those that bought at 0.20.

lol.. You're right, but I think he meant the opposite... or perhaps it was a freudian slip. j/k

Actually he says "it's better to over-promise under-deliver correct?", which is the opposite.