[LABCOIN] IPO [BTCT.CO] - Details/FAQ and Discussion (ASIC dev/sales/mining) - page 708.

physalis

sr. member

Activity: 392

Merit: 250

Quote from: stereotype on August 28, 2013, 08:35:46 AM

Quote from: BlockChains on August 28, 2013, 08:12:01 AM

Also by comparison AsicMiner is approx 60,000,000mhs/400,000 = 150mhs /share

150mhs/.4mhs = 375x valuation

2.8btc/375 = .0074 price per share of labcoin

If LC is to be compared to AM, then im finding it hard to accept that LC only has to double in price from here (0.0035), to be as valuable as a company that has dictated and led this market (yes, thats changing), and with a demonstrable track record. Doesnt add up to me, until hardware is evident and put to work, which AM has been doing before LC was a twinkle in someones eye.

His calculations were based on the the 4 TH we have in comparison to the 60 TH that AM has.
If LC was as big as AM, the valuation is more like 0.1 btc/LCshare.

Vigil

sr. member

Activity: 378

Merit: 250

This is complete ridiculousness.

Mabsark

legendary

Activity: 826

Merit: 1004

For crying out loud, this is basic maths!

AM has 400,000 shares
Labcoin has 10,000,000 shares

10,000,000 / 400,000 = 25

By multiplying the number of AM shares by 25, we get 10,000,000. Accordingly, we must also divide the share price by 25 as well to keep the value of AM the same. So, 400,000 AM shares at 2.5 BTC/share is equivalent to 10,000,000 AM shares at 0.1.

So, if Labcoin is as successful as AM and AM is worth 2.5 BTC per share, then Labcoin is worth 0.1 BTC per share.

drawingthesun

legendary

Activity: 1176

Merit: 1015

Quote from: San1ty on August 28, 2013, 08:52:29 AM

Looks like the news didn't really sustain a big rally.

Once they admit that the first chips are hashing away there will be a rally. Until no hashing the shares can't really go anywhere, its all pure speculation. Up or down.

Mutated btc

member

Activity: 84

Merit: 10

Quote from: Mutated btc on August 28, 2013, 08:43:13 AM

Quote from: BlockChains on August 28, 2013, 08:12:01 AM

Also by comparison AsicMiner is approx 60,000,000mhs/400,000 = 150mhs /share

150mhs/.4mhs = 375x valuation

2.8btc/375 = .0074 price per share of labcoin

hmm, maybe your calculation is incorrect

say LC share is now 0.003 per share and its 0.4Mh/s

AM say its 3 btc per share, you say its 150Mh/s ok

therefore multiply 1000 to 0.003 to bring it to 3btc, therefore its Mh/s will also be 1000 x .4 = 400Mh/s per share at 3 btc for LC thats if you have 1000 share of 0.003.

so LC wins, correct me if wrong

oh im going dizzy been awake too long, didnt see the 0.0074 per share LC, nice share, i believe it should go high soon

San1ty

sr. member

Activity: 462

Merit: 250

Looks like the news didn't really sustain a big rally.

creativex

sr. member

Activity: 434

Merit: 250

Quote from: richard_dein on August 28, 2013, 08:39:05 AM

Quote from: creativex on August 28, 2013, 08:31:22 AM

LC does seem promising, but let's not kid ourselves. AM is the 500lbs gorilla in the room and has already faced and overcome many of the problems with large scale deployment that LC management hasn't even had to deal with yet and they're late to the party with a soon to be obsolete process node. I think they did it right developing 130nm chips first, but they'll need to transition away from those chips very quickly.

According to the (purported) IRC conversation (http://bcoinnews.com/theseven-confirms-working-with-labcoin/) with TheSeven they have indeed been working on 65nm chips. Nobody outside Labcoin can be sure, but I'm sure they know they need to be quick. The current price can be justified by holding merely 1% of network, so I won't worry about this prospect just yet.

On the other hand, ActiveMining has around 4x the valuation despite even less release of information...

Yep. TheSeven being on the team is one of the principle reasons I purchased IPO shares as it's instant street cred.

I have never purchased a single share of ActM or AMC.

BlockChains

member

Activity: 110

Merit: 10

I was ball parking with the .0074 and just opening up discussion. Obviously AM has a huge track record and LC has yet to have a hash hashing. Other factors are that LC also intends to sell hardware and intends to have ~10 times the 4 THs online within a month after bringing the initial 4 online.

Though we don't have much evidence, I found the screen shot of the pestering of the I-Tec Pro employee pretty solid confirmation as it seemed like a legit reply from an employee of a company being bothered by random strangers who start Instant Messaging out of a forum. Also the poster who posted the screenshot has had consistent "nuanced" English and I doubt he could fabricate that easily.

So I believe labcoin is on track and if so should see a price around .0075 at least by mid September.

hasher87

hero member

Activity: 686

Merit: 500

anddddd the ship is going down

yuansuyi

member

Activity: 210

Merit: 10

Quote from: richard_dein on August 28, 2013, 08:32:20 AM

Quote from: BlockChains on August 28, 2013, 08:12:01 AM

Also by comparison AsicMiner is approx 60,000,000mhs/400,000 = 150mhs /share

150mhs/.4mhs = 375x valuation

2.8btc/375 = .0074 price per share of labcoin

Wrong calculation.

Labcoin has 10 million shares. AM just has 400,000. Network hashrate of ASICMiner has been around 40TH/s, although including miner sales they seem to consistently deliver dividends more than 20% of network on average, which is around 110TH/s. By doing this calculation like this you are effectively undervaluing Labcoin by 25x. You also undervalued AM by about a half, so effectively you underestimated Labcoin by a magnitude, if Labcoin were ever to be as big as AM.

The correct number based on your rationale should be around 0.1/share.

you are wrong.

Mutated btc

member

Activity: 84

Merit: 10

Quote from: BlockChains on August 28, 2013, 08:12:01 AM

Also by comparison AsicMiner is approx 60,000,000mhs/400,000 = 150mhs /share

150mhs/.4mhs = 375x valuation

2.8btc/375 = .0074 price per share of labcoin

hmm, maybe your calculation is incorrect

say LC share is now 0.003 per share and its 0.4Mh/s

AM say its 3 btc per share, you say its 150Mh/s ok

therefore multiply 1000 to 0.003 to bring it to 3btc, therefore its Mh/s will also be 1000 x .4 = 400Mh/s per share at 3 btc for LC thats if you have 1000 share of 0.003.

so LC wins, correct me if wrong

Bitcycle

sr. member

Activity: 420

Merit: 250

I'm just LOL'ing at this point.

Sure, you little financial geniuses, sure the price is going to be lower after they get chips in hand.

Of course. Keep betting that way. What could go wrong?

creativex

sr. member

Activity: 434

Merit: 250

Quote from: JWU90 on August 28, 2013, 08:24:50 AM

I do not need to comment, I never mentioned anything about management. It was about your professionalism. If it is "easily among the worst managed companies ever," and "unprofessional doesn't even begin to describe." Why the hell do you have your company funds in it? Huh

Very well, since you're more focused on discussing my actions than LC's in the LC thread, let's review.

The sequence of events goes like this:

1) LC says they'll announce results early this week.
2) CreativeX buys a small stake in LC for his company in anticipation of this news.
3) LC fails to announce results early in the week and instead their PR guy posts a herp derp "I got nothin' and I can't phone home."
4) CreativeX expresses his displeasure on a public forum, but does not change his position because he's not the type to freak out easily.

I apologize if you find my comments offensive in some way, but I'm not a cheerleader. There are plenty of those around anyway. I'm an investor commenting in the appropriate location. If you do not like my comments then click ignore.

richard_dein

member

Activity: 63

Merit: 10

Quote from: creativex on August 28, 2013, 08:31:22 AM

LC does seem promising, but let's not kid ourselves. AM is the 500lbs gorilla in the room and has already faced and overcome many of the problems with large scale deployment that LC management hasn't even had to deal with yet and they're late to the party with a soon to be obsolete process node. I think they did it right developing 130nm chips first, but they'll need to transition away from those chips very quickly.

According to the (purported) IRC conversation (http://bcoinnews.com/theseven-confirms-working-with-labcoin/) with TheSeven they have indeed been working on 65nm chips. Nobody outside Labcoin can be sure, but I'm sure they know they need to be quick. The current price can be justified by holding merely 1% of network, so I won't worry about this prospect just yet.

On the other hand, ActiveMining has around 4x the valuation despite even less release of information...

AngelSky

hero member

Activity: 1008

Merit: 537

Quote from: creativex on August 28, 2013, 08:31:22 AM

Quote from: AngelSky on August 28, 2013, 08:23:18 AM

Quote from: creativex on August 28, 2013, 08:17:20 AM

Quote from: BlockChains on August 28, 2013, 08:12:01 AM

Also by comparison AsicMiner is approx 60,000,000mhs/400,000 = 150mhs /share

150mhs/.4mhs = 375x valuation

2.8btc/375 = .0074 price per share of labcoin

ASICMiner is also over one year ahead of LC. They'll be rolling out G2 while LC is struggling to grab and hold a small share of the global network with a process node AM is phasing out and at a time when 28 - 55nm will be taking the lead. LC has to move very quickly and cannot afford to make any major mistakes. They'll need their 65nm chips pronto.

G2? Where? BTW, would you buy AM shares atm ? Because I wouldn't. On the other hand, LC seems promising.

China I assume.

Why wouldn't you buy AM at a roughly 50% discount to it's all time high? FC is obviously capable of delivering results.

LC does seem promising, but let's not kid ourselves. AM is the 500lbs gorilla in the room and has already faced and overcome many of the problems with large scale deployment that LC management hasn't even had to deal with yet and they're late to the party with a soon to be obsolete process node. I think they did it right developing 130nm chips first, but they'll need to transition away from those chips very quickly.

I would not buy AM because every 2 days I see big dumps making the price lower and lower and all I can see is some new USB miner with new colors. No hope to have GEN2 for some time from now. I don't bet on the biggest one because he's the biggest (that's why I use Bitstamp instead of Gox now). Let's give a chance to LC to make things happen fast.

stereotype

legendary

Activity: 1554

Merit: 1000

Quote from: BlockChains on August 28, 2013, 08:12:01 AM

Also by comparison AsicMiner is approx 60,000,000mhs/400,000 = 150mhs /share

150mhs/.4mhs = 375x valuation

2.8btc/375 = .0074 price per share of labcoin

If LC is to be compared to AM, then im finding it hard to accept that LC only has to double in price from here (0.0035), to be as valuable as a company that has dictated and led this market (yes, thats changing), and with a demonstrable track record. Doesnt add up to me, until hardware is evident and put to work, which AM has been doing before LC was a twinkle in someones eye.

Vigil

sr. member

Activity: 378

Merit: 250

Quote from: richard_dein on August 28, 2013, 08:32:20 AM

Quote from: BlockChains on August 28, 2013, 08:12:01 AM

Also by comparison AsicMiner is approx 60,000,000mhs/400,000 = 150mhs /share

150mhs/.4mhs = 375x valuation

2.8btc/375 = .0074 price per share of labcoin

Wrong calculation.

Labcoin has 10 million shares. AM just has 400,000. Network hashrate of ASICMiner has been around 40TH/s, although including miner sales they seem to consistently deliver dividends more than 20% of network on average, which is around 110TH/s. By doing this calculation like this you are effectively undervaluing Labcoin by 25x. You also undervalued AM by about a half, so effectively you underestimated Labcoin by a magnitude, if Labcoin were ever to be as big as AM.

The correct number based on your rationale should be around 0.1/share.

If Labcoin has many more shares then each share should be less than AM's shares at the same valuation.

alchimista

full member

Activity: 154

Merit: 100

ars longa, vita brevis

joele

legendary

Activity: 1022

Merit: 1000

Quote from: physalis on August 28, 2013, 08:08:12 AM

Quote from: eastpk on August 28, 2013, 08:04:17 AM

Quote from: physalis on August 28, 2013, 08:03:36 AM

Quote from: eastpk on August 28, 2013, 08:01:07 AM

I'm not sure if this would be right, but there is 10mil shares, and 4TH is about 40,000MH - which is about 250MH per share? Someone please correct me if I'm wrong.

I don't even know where to start correcting.

hahah sorry! I know my math was horrible on this, literally just thought of it in my head

4 TH = 4000000 MH
4000000 MH / 10 mil shares = .4 MH/share

That's not much, but the shares are also really cheap, and this is not a mining bond.
The most important part is that Labcoin plans to deploy ~50 TH within the coming 2 months

and at second week of Sept with 111 Million difficulty, mining for 4TeraH per day is 18 btc

edit: based on 30% increase diff

richard_dein

member

Activity: 63

Merit: 10

Quote from: BlockChains on August 28, 2013, 08:12:01 AM

Also by comparison AsicMiner is approx 60,000,000mhs/400,000 = 150mhs /share

150mhs/.4mhs = 375x valuation

2.8btc/375 = .0074 price per share of labcoin

Wrong calculation.

Labcoin has 10 million shares. AM just has 400,000. Network hashrate of ASICMiner has been around 40TH/s, although including miner sales they seem to consistently deliver dividends more than 20% of network on average, which is around 110TH/s. By doing this calculation like this you are effectively undervaluing Labcoin by 25x. You also undervalued AM by about a half, so effectively you underestimated Labcoin by a magnitude, if Labcoin were ever to be as big as AM.

The correct number based on your rationale should be around 0.1/share.

Topic: [LABCOIN] IPO [BTCT.CO] - Details/FAQ and Discussion (ASIC dev/sales/mining) - page 708. (Read 1079974 times)