The problem is HW sales aren't going to continue unless they come up with a 28nm chip or something.
They are planning a Gen 2 to be coming out within 2 months, so yes, it does make sense to sell all of Gen 1, instead of mining with it. 
Topic: [LABCOIN] IPO [BTCT.CO] - Details/FAQ and Discussion (ASIC dev/sales/mining) - page 240. (Read 1079974 times)
September 22, 2013, 04:47:36 PM
September 22, 2013, 04:47:03 PM
Yeah including hardware sales.
Without hardware sales, if we take Asic miner as an example.
5btc/share peak at 50th with 400,000k shares is a 2, 000, 000 BTC valuation.
5btc/25x less shares for labcoim is .2/btc share if they hit 500th its 2btc/share at current difficulty of course it will rise, but if it doesnt as much and labcoin starts hashing as planned .5-1btc/share is not unresonable.
Without hardware sales, if we take Asic miner as an example.
5btc/share peak at 50th with 400,000k shares is a 2, 000, 000 BTC valuation.
5btc/25x less shares for labcoim is .2/btc share if they hit 500th its 2btc/share at current difficulty of course it will rise, but if it doesnt as much and labcoin starts hashing as planned .5-1btc/share is not unresonable.
Johny, I love your enthusiasm, but your reasoning needs a little polish. It doesn't really make sense to compare Labcoin to AM. AM's 5btc/share valuation came at a time where their trust was at an all time high and they had no competition. They were able to sell hardware at an insane markup and they at times held 20+% of the global network hash rate.
Those days are over.
September 22, 2013, 04:45:43 PM
Yeah including hardware sales.
Without hardware sales, if we take Asic miner as an example.
5btc/share peak at 50th with 400,000k shares is a 2, 000, 000 BTC valuation.
5btc/25x less shares for labcoim is .2/btc share if they hit 500th its 2btc/share at current difficulty of course it will rise, but if it doesnt as much and labcoin starts hashing as planned .5-1btc/share is not unresonable.
Without hardware sales, if we take Asic miner as an example.
5btc/share peak at 50th with 400,000k shares is a 2, 000, 000 BTC valuation.
5btc/25x less shares for labcoim is .2/btc share if they hit 500th its 2btc/share at current difficulty of course it will rise, but if it doesnt as much and labcoin starts hashing as planned .5-1btc/share is not unresonable.
It's not the TH/s that's important, it's the % of the network. When AM had 50 TH/s and a 5btc share price, they often surpassed 25% of the network. Unless something changes significantly, Labcoin will never have that much of the network, even with double their promises.
September 22, 2013, 04:45:34 PM
The problem is HW sales aren't going to continue unless they come up with a 28nm chip or something.
I'd have to disagree there... If they could produce a 2GH USB miner at an appropriate price point they could make a lot off of hardware sales.
They just need to focus on the markets where the other guys can't play.
They wouldn't be able to power a 2Gh/s mining stick without some new chip, since their old ones would draw too much power, I believe.
September 22, 2013, 04:43:58 PM
The problem is HW sales aren't going to continue unless they come up with a 28nm chip or something.
I'd have to disagree there... If they could produce a 2GH USB miner at an appropriate price point they could make a lot off of hardware sales.
They just need to focus on the markets where the other guys can't play.
September 22, 2013, 04:42:45 PM
Well looks like the lab has turned it around, so let's say labcoin reaches their december goal of 500th/s. Has anyone used some math and took a guess as the share price and dividend yet? If they get anywhere close to 500th/s it could be epic, no?
This can anyone run some numbers? Im going to take a guess of 5BTC+/share without hardware sales profits.
5btc doesn't make sense. There are 10,000,000 shares so that would mean a market cap of 6 BILLION DOLLARS.
LOL. he made the same insane prediction a while ago. I thought about mentioning it in my post but figured most people wouldn't remember.
The truly crazy thing isn't $5 billion. The price of bitcoin could go up to $10k tomorrow or something, making every asic company worth billions.
The crazy thing is that a valuation of labcoin shares at 5BTC would make the company worth 50 million bitcoins. That is, of course, more then twice the number of bitcoins that will ever exist, and more then 4x the number of bitcoins that are left to be mined.
Yeah including hardware sales.
Without hardware sales, if we take Asic miner as an example.
5btc/share peak at 50th with 400,000k shares is a 2, 000, 000 BTC valuation.
5btc/25x less shares for labcoim is .2/btc share if they hit 500th its 2btc/share at current difficulty of course it will rise, but if it doesnt as much and labcoin starts hashing as planned .5-1btc/share is not unresonable.
September 22, 2013, 04:41:34 PM
If you want to ignore ASICMiner's hardware sales
you can't really ignore the hardware sales, as that makes up more than 1/2 of AM's weekly dividend. AM's share price has typically followed 25-30% APR compared to their last dividend. That relationship has held for months, now.
The problem is HW sales aren't going to continue unless they come up with a 28nm chip or something.
September 22, 2013, 04:39:30 PM
If you want to ignore ASICMiner's hardware sales
you can't really ignore the hardware sales, as that makes up more than 1/2 of AM's weekly dividend. AM's share price has typically followed 25-30% APR compared to their last dividend. That relationship has held for months, now.
EDIT: additionally, AM's hash rate has not increased, as they are obviously selling Gen1 hardware instead of mining with it, as it's more profitable.
September 22, 2013, 04:36:50 PM
Well looks like the lab has turned it around, so let's say labcoin reaches their december goal of 500th/s. Has anyone used some math and took a guess as the share price and dividend yet? If they get anywhere close to 500th/s it could be epic, no?
This can anyone run some numbers? Im going to take a guess of 5BTC+/share without hardware sales profits.
5btc doesn't make sense. There are 10,000,000 shares so that would mean a market cap of 6 BILLION DOLLARS.
LOL. he made the same insane prediction a while ago. I thought about mentioning it in my post but figured most people wouldn't remember.
The truly crazy thing isn't $5 billion. The price of bitcoin could go up to $10k tomorrow or something, making every asic company worth billions.
The crazy thing is that a valuation of labcoin shares at 5BTC would make the company worth 50 million bitcoins. That is, of course, more then twice the number of bitcoins that will ever exist, and more then 4x the number of bitcoins that are left to be mined.
September 22, 2013, 04:35:52 PM
Asic miner was at 450, 000, 000 vsluation at the peak of $5BTC, at 50th/sec.
no, BTC/USD was lower then, and at most, they hit $200M (2,000,000 BTC) value. Even so, they were consistently delivering 25%+ of the network hash rate and 30+% APR, even on the 5 btc/share.
September 22, 2013, 04:34:17 PM
This can anyone run some numbers? Im going to take a guess of 5BTC+/share without hardware sales profits.
5btc/share is a ridiculous estimate (sorry, but it is).
Assuming the global network hashrate is 6PH by Jan 1 and Labcoin is hashing @ 500TH/s, that is 8.33% of the global network.
A conservitive estimate of global bitcoins mined in a 2 week period is 56,000 (4,000 x 14).
8.33% of 56,000 is 4666.648 bitcoins divided by 10,000,000 shares is .0004666 / share.
~30% is removed for costs/reinvestment etc.
Final result: .0003266/share for the 2 week period. (roughly .0085 annually) for a share price of .0339 @ 25% annual return.
Of course this is entirely unrealistic as nobody would at this point trust labcoin enough to be happy with a 25% annual return.
We're not even at 1/10th that now. Which I guess makes sense given the trust level.
He is assuming they achieve their hash power first. We haven't cracked 1TH yet.
September 22, 2013, 04:33:27 PM
Well looks like the lab has turned it around, so let's say labcoin reaches their december goal of 500th/s. Has anyone used some math and took a guess as the share price and dividend yet? If they get anywhere close to 500th/s it could be epic, no?
Impossible to know since we can't know what the overall difficulty will be.
According to this there's 7PH/s of announced hashrate coming online by December 2013. It could be higher, of if we're lucky other projects may fail and it'll be lower.
If it is 7Ph, and they have 0.5Ph that would be 7% of the network. Looking at ASCIMiner's 7 day average hashrate, they're at about, maybe 45TH/s?
Total network hashrate is 0.99PH/s, according to bitcoin watch, so ASICMiner has maybe 4.5% of the network.
If you want to ignore ASICMiner's hardware sales (which the market is probably doing given they don't have anything beyond their 130nm stuff to sell yet) then you just multiply ASICMiner's share price by 0.04 go compensate for the difference in the number of shares. (400,000/10,000,00)
You get a share price of 0.064 if they were at 4.5%, and 0.0096 if they were at 7% and valued the same as ASICMiner.
Of course, it's unlikely they would be, given AM's long track record and Labcoin's dubious one.
September 22, 2013, 04:32:38 PM
This can anyone run some numbers? Im going to take a guess of 5BTC+/share without hardware sales profits.
5btc/share is a ridiculous estimate (sorry, but it is).
Assuming the global network hashrate is 6PH by Jan 1 and Labcoin is hashing @ 500TH/s, that is 8.33% of the global network.
A conservitive estimate of global bitcoins mined in a 2 week period is 56,000 (4,000 x 14).
8.33% of 56,000 is 4666.648 bitcoins divided by 10,000,000 shares is .0004666 / share.
~30% is removed for costs/reinvestment etc.
Final result: .0003266/share for the 2 week period. (roughly .0085 annually) for a share price of .0339 @ 25% annual return.
Of course this is entirely unrealistic as nobody would at this point trust labcoin enough to be happy with a 25% annual return.
yup.. split that in half, so .01518 for a 50% return and that sounds about right
September 22, 2013, 04:32:10 PM
Well looks like the lab has turned it around, so let's say labcoin reaches their december goal of 500th/s. Has anyone used some math and took a guess as the share price and dividend yet? If they get anywhere close to 500th/s it could be epic, no?
This can anyone run some numbers? Im going to take a guess of 5BTC+/share without hardware sales profits.
5btc doesn't make sense. There are 10,000,000 shares so that would mean a market cap of 6 BILLION DOLLARS.
Asic miner was at 450, 000, 000 vsluation at the peak of $5BTC, at 50th/sec.
So if labcoin has about 10X less shares at 50th they would be .50BTC, now at 500th whicb is 10X more would put them back to 5btc.
Sorry 25X less shares so about 1.5-2BTC/share with 500TH depending on network difficulty. Thats without hardware sales.
September 22, 2013, 04:28:39 PM
This can anyone run some numbers? Im going to take a guess of 5BTC+/share without hardware sales profits.
5btc/share is a ridiculous estimate (sorry, but it is).
Assuming the global network hashrate is 6PH by Jan 1 and Labcoin is hashing @ 500TH/s, that is 8.33% of the global network.
A conservitive estimate of global bitcoins mined in a 2 week period is 56,000 (4,000 x 14).
8.33% of 56,000 is 4666.648 bitcoins divided by 10,000,000 shares is .0004666 / share.
~30% is removed for costs/reinvestment etc.
Final result: .0003266/share for the 2 week period. (roughly .0085 annually) for a share price of .0339 @ 25% annual return.
Of course this is entirely unrealistic as nobody would at this point trust labcoin enough to be happy with a 25% annual return.
We're not even at 1/10th that now. Which I guess makes sense given the trust level.
September 22, 2013, 04:28:05 PM
Well looks like the lab has turned it around, so let's say labcoin reaches their december goal of 500th/s. Has anyone used some math and took a guess as the share price and dividend yet? If they get anywhere close to 500th/s it could be epic, no?
This can anyone run some numbers? Im going to take a guess of 5BTC+/share without hardware sales profits.
5btc doesn't make sense. There are 10,000,000 shares so that would mean a market cap of 6 BILLION DOLLARS.
Asic miner was at 450, 000, 000 vsluation at the peak of $5BTC, at 50th/sec.
So if labcoin has about 10X less shares at 50th they would be .50BTC, now at 500th whicb is 10X more would put them back to 5btc.
September 22, 2013, 04:26:22 PM
This can anyone run some numbers? Im going to take a guess of 5BTC+/share without hardware sales profits.
5btc/share is a ridiculous estimate (sorry, but it is).
Assuming the global network hashrate is 6PH by Jan 1 and Labcoin is hashing @ 500TH/s, that is 8.33% of the global network.
A conservitive estimate of global bitcoins mined in a 2 week period is 56,000 (4,000 x 14).
8.33% of 56,000 is 4666.648 bitcoins divided by 10,000,000 shares is .0004666 / share.
~30% is removed for costs/reinvestment etc.
Final result: .0003266/share for the 2 week period. (roughly .0085 annually) for a share price of .0339 @ 25% annual return.
Of course this is entirely unrealistic as nobody would at this point trust labcoin enough to be happy with a 25% annual return.
September 22, 2013, 04:26:14 PM
Burnside gave them multiple opportunities to make good on their promise and they never did. What the hell else was he suppose to do? Keep begging them for weeks/months/years on end and never get a response. All they have to do is provide him with the proof and it's over. But they can't do that!
Again, where is the process for placing a warning documented?
Was Labcoin notified this would be the next step?
Why not post more of an explanation rather than something that makes it seem the stock could be frozen at any moment?
September 22, 2013, 04:26:04 PM
The more I think about it, the more that warning is a drastic overreaction to a minor issue.
The whole thing has been handled very poorly by Burnside. I've lost some faith in the exchange because of this whole incident. Making up rules as you go along is not the way to earn my trust.
The whole thing has been handled very poorly by Burnside. I've lost some faith in the exchange because of this whole incident. Making up rules as you go along is not the way to earn my trust.
You only say that because it effects your share price. Labcoin has been acting shady as hell. I say that as a shareholder being unbiased...this warning will make Labcoin re-think pulling the same crap in the future, and know there are consequences.
No, I say that because Burnside has handled it very poorly, acting essentially on whims.
Putting up a warning like that is VERY serious, as was evidenced by the reaction to it. What was the process for it?
Where is this process documented? Where was it discussed?
Labcoin should be responsive, sure. That in no way absolves Burnside of his far too casual handling of the whole matter.
Today it's Labcoin, but it could be any offering on the site. We don't know when Burnside is going to decide to interpret things however he wants and take essentially random actions.
Burnside gave them multiple opportunities to make good on their promise and they never did. What the hell else was he suppose to do? Keep begging them for weeks/months/years on end and never get a response. All they have to do is provide him with the proof and it's over. But they can't do that!
Burnside most probably sees a responsible for his users. Thats a good sign. And since its hurting him too i doubt he did this slightly. Its generally a very bad idea if things lay down unsolved. I guess im reacting allergic to such behaviour since yifu behaved the same way. I think its a good thing that burnside is behind such things.
Its a simple thing for security issuers. Solve the problem and done.
September 22, 2013, 04:24:03 PM
The more I think about it, the more that warning is a drastic overreaction to a minor issue.
The whole thing has been handled very poorly by Burnside. I've lost some faith in the exchange because of this whole incident. Making up rules as you go along is not the way to earn my trust.
The whole thing has been handled very poorly by Burnside. I've lost some faith in the exchange because of this whole incident. Making up rules as you go along is not the way to earn my trust.
You only say that because it effects your share price. Labcoin has been acting shady as hell. I say that as a shareholder being unbiased...this warning will make Labcoin re-think pulling the same crap in the future, and know there are consequences.
No, I say that because Burnside has handled it very poorly, acting essentially on whims.
Putting up a warning like that is VERY serious, as was evidenced by the reaction to it. What was the process for it?
Where is this process documented? Where was it discussed?
Labcoin should be responsive, sure. That in no way absolves Burnside of his far too casual handling of the whole matter.
Today it's Labcoin, but it could be any offering on the site. We don't know when Burnside is going to decide to interpret things however he wants and take essentially random actions.
1) Labcoin broke several rules of BTCT and should have been delisted if burnside had strictly followed the term of services. You should be happy he didn't.
2) Labcoin and Swede didn't answer for weeks about these issues.
What do you expect?
Jump to: