Topic: [LABCOIN] IPO [BTCT.CO] - Details/FAQ and Discussion (ASIC dev/sales/mining) - page 433. (Read 1079974 times)

They are just doing everything so wrong.

Suspect and at the same time completely pointless. Probably even contra productive. Ask Barbra Streisand.

"This photo has been removed" ?

What is the motivation for removing a photo? I'm not a typical paranoia, but this is pretty suspect.

Hmm so we made the first wafer batch didn't launch a test first to save time and produced 100,000 non functional chips so we can't refund the money
That would be grim indeed

The silence over the past few hours suggests that the ActM cheer-leading squad has taken a break from Labcoin, probably due to the fact that they have issues with their own share price - currently down to the IPO level on BTCT.

In the last 90 pages, 90% of the posts were posted by the heavily invested ActM FUDsters.

To be honest, I expected some teething issues and I'm not surprised, given that they did not test the PCB's before ordering them:


These types of issues occur and I'm confident that they will be ironed out shortly.

At the end of the day, for every share that was sold there was a buyer.   

Edit: Typo

The problem, of course is that even if they do fix their problems, it's not going to fix their share prices because people no longer trust them.

Instead of saying "We are hashing at 2Th/s" they could have said "We got one of our chips to hash on a custom testing board - we're waiting for or mass produced boards to actually start, we should be at 2TH/s once we get them in a couple days" the reaction wouldn't have been that they were a scam and not hashing at all.

So, while maybe they're having some issues getting everything up and running, they've burned through their credibility and won't be able to get back to the prices that they were at before until they have a solid track record of dividends.

Well, you said yourself - you don't think it's a scam, you just think they're having problems, and may be incompetent.  If that's the case, there's still a possibility they might fix whatever problems they're having, and might not be soo incompetent that they can't get it right. Maybe they just need to wait for new PCBs or something.

I mean, if someone gave you 50/50 odds that they'll fix they're problems you probably wouldn't take the bet.  But, if someone were to offer you a 10:1 bet, or a 100:1 bet, you might be tempted to put a small amount of money on it, right?

Presumably people aren't investing everything they've got on this, they're likely placing small bets on the possibility they might fix their issues.

That's a plausible explanation.   I always said I thought the PCBs looked really weird, and certainly using microvias for all the pads would certainly be a strange choice, no doubt.

I almost wonder if the boards are actually upside down , and the visible traces are just for grounding the chips - which would mean 1 via underneath the solder pad, and the lines that look like pads for the chips are actually just silkscreened markings to show where the're supposed to go. They look like they're the same color as the other white markings, as far as I can tell - it's pretty hard to see.

But anyway the whole "the boards are bad that proves they're scammers!!" thing makes zero sense. Why would scammers create boards with no traces when they have $700k in IPO money to spend.  You can get a PCB created in 24 hours, with any design you want, including full netlist testing to make sure all the connections on every board work fine.  It would be expensive, but it's certainly something that could be done.

Some people have been theorizing that they're deliberately crashing the price in order to buy up more cheap shares to increase their stakes.

Whatever is going on they are behaving in a really unprofessional way, IMO.


If the visible pads for the devices are for the decoupling capacitor, then they're only about 3-5mm away from the chips, which are only 10mm in width in total. I'm assuming that's what those pads are for, and the visible traces are for either the input or output power.


No, they actually went pretty slowly.  They ordered a test run of about 2k chips, but were going to wait until they actually got those chips and got them working before they ordered a second run.

Compared to 24 hours ago, the silence over the last hours suggests that our beloved bears are done.

By the way, I'm paying a bounty of .5 Bitcoin, if anyone can provide a consistent and gap-less log of all orderbook changes from over the last 48 hours or to be more precise at least starting at 2013-09-13 12:00 UTC. I don't care about the data format as long as it's parsable in any way. Offers via PM with a sample please.

500 pages is not far away, keep up the good work guys!

I missed this in all the excitement-  a straight up claim that they are actually mining, on some level anyway.

No proof, of course. 

Of course I realise that. That's why I keep pointing out that such claims are idiotic and people claiming to have such evidence are clearly liars and simply spreading FUD.

More photos would definitely help, if they're the right photos.

Post a lab pic.

Post a pic of an assembled board (big help)

Post a pic of a board hooked up to mining software (HUGE help)

Post the lab shots LC and stop these damn glam photos. I know he said no more photos but that is just ridiculous.

it's no matter with the price if there is a scam, no matter what close it is to the IPO price, it will drop down down down...

"All I'm saying is that not providing proof of mining is not the same as proving that Labcoin are not mining."

Three "not's" to get to the end of that sentence? Really? Are you serious?

You must realize it's literally impossible to prove they are not doing something?
On the other hand it is very very easy for them to prove that they are mining....one mining address, or a single picture can make this all go away.

 

I'm not claiming otherwise about the burden of proof. All I'm saying is that not providing proof of mining is not the same as proving that Labcoin are not mining.

As for people losing money, that's there own fault for making poor decisions based on FUD. If they wasn't comfortable with the risks inherent with Labcoin from the very beginning, they shouldn't have invested. Labcoin is no less riskier now than it was at IPO. In fact, it's considerably less riskier in my opinion.

I'm actually not convinced by the comments regarding the PCB design.  Everyone likes to be an expert on the internet, but I'm not sure how much someone can tell by the photos we have. More than once I've encountered experts giving opinions on scanty evidence and they turned out to be wrong.

Not completely discounting those opinions, but certainly not taking them as gospel.

I'm currently of the mind that the chips themselves do work, but their board design does not allow for stable operation.

I'm just guessing, though, like everyone else.  Since Labcoin isn't being forthcoming about their situation, that's all we can do.

crash and burn...lol

Maybe they ordered all the chips without testing them first. I recall reading that they were choosing not to do this to save time. Also, how would they know if they don't have a single functional mining board? The ones pictured obviously don't work as everyone experienced with PCB design has pointed out.