Just a brief update.
As you may have noticed LTC has risen significantly vs BTC. That means two things:
1. The rise reduces growth (expressed in LTC). Recent weeks have seen growth boosted by LTC falling - looks like this week will be the opposite. At present despite having made over 2.5% trading this week we're only up 0.14%.
2. This rise greatly diminishes the likelihood of needing to issue more units. At present the bonds:NAV ratio is at around 93% which is pretty much exactly where I like it to be (75%-100% range is my target).
For those new to the fund let me explain about our currency exposure. We raise most of our BTC-denominated capital from bonds - which generate liabilities cancelling out our BTC-exposure on that capital. But we can't raise ALL our BTC-denominated capital from bonds as that would potentially leave bond-holders exposed in the event of a fast depreciation in the LTC/BTC exchange-rate coupled with even a modest trading loss in BTC-denominated investments. So we always maintain around a 15% exposure to BTC - with orders set on BTC-E to keep us at that level of exposure if the exchange-rate moves significantly.
Because we do have some exposure to BTC any rise in LTC vs BTC decreases our NAV/U (our BTC-denominated investments become worth less LTC) and any fall in LTC vs BTC increases our NAV/U. For small movements this has negligible impact but for larger moves in the exchange-rate it does produce a noticable effect.
Long-term the trading performance of the fund has had far more impact than the exchange-rate : we've delivered over 800% profit DESPITE LTC massively rising vs BTC over the life-time of the fund (that rise means the profit delivered measured in LTC has been REDUCED from what it would otherwise have been).
Personally I prefer weeks like this one so far (no real change in NAV/U with decent trading profits being cancelled by a rise in LTC) to ones like last week (higher growth - but largely due to LTC falling vs BTC).
Topic: [LTC-GLOBAL] LTC-ATF - page 2. (Read 25457 times)
WEEKLY REPORT
Growth in NAV/U (pre-management fee) was 3.9% with an estimate that ~1.75% was trading profits and the rest resulting from the continued decline of LTC vs BTC. With BTC rising steadily vs USD it would be expected that LTC will continue to fall vs BTC due to arbitrage unless/until something happens to cause a rise in LTC's value.
If this continues much longer it does pose a potential (minor) problem to LTC-ATF. Under the terms of the contracts for our bonds we are committed to ensuring that the value of our issued bonds does not exceed 150% of LTC-ATF's own NAV (Assets we manage less the value of our liabilities). As LTC falls vs BTC that ratio increases - and currently stands at 108.68%. That's not a problem at present - being barely above the 75-100% range that I consider to be the sweet-spot. But if LTC declines much further then we'll get near the 150% point.
If that point is reached (and it would be reached if LTC fell to around .013 vs BTC - lower than that if we make more profit in the meantime) then the fund has to do one of two things:
1. Recall bonds.
2. Issue more LTC-ATF units.
As there's no way to selectively recall part of an issue and, in any event, we can use all the capital we have I would go with option 2 - and sell more units into existing bids.
Hopefully it won't come to that and if it does happen then it isn't as bad as it may seem. Whilst it would dilute existing investment that is balanced by two factors:
1. The new units would be selling at above NAV/U and so generate an increase in NAV/U.
2. When LTC falls vs BTC profits tend to rise (expressed in LTC). That's because most of our trading is done in BTC - and with a lower exchange-rate each 1 BTC of profit translates into more LTC profit and hence a larger percentage increase in NAV/U. The massive rise in LTC vs BTC is what caused us to be unable to generate the 5-10% profits we were making earlier on - if LTC does fall right back vs BTC then such profits would become possible again.
Notwithstanding the above I'd still prefer not to need to issue more units - and will only do so if it becomes essential to do so and then would only do so to the extent that I had to. The commitment to maintain that ratio is a key one from the perspective of bondholders (it's what ensures they can't end up with LTC-ATF defaulting on them if some trades go wrong) and is not one that can be avoided. It's also a sensible one from the perpective of LTC-ATF investors - as it avoids the potential of massive percentage loss of NAV/U from a few bad trades.
Given that I'm having to consider this possibility does this mean I was wrong to pay a dividend in July? I don't think so. When the last dividend was paid the exchange-rate was at .0032 and appeared to have stablised in that area. I don't think I could reasonably be expected to predict a fall in the rate to .0013 within 2 months (which is what would need to happen for more units to be issued). Whilst it was always a possibility (everything's always a possibility) retaining unused capital solely to protect against a drop of that magnitude would, I believe, have been unreasonably cautious.
Let's hope LTC doesn't fall faster than we make profits - but if it does then hopefully it's at least clear what will happen (and why). I would NOT be able to give advance warning of such sales if the ratio was actually over 150% (I would have to immediately fix it). if the ratio was near 150% but below it then I'd try to give some advance notice to maximise the price new units sold at. Note that I have the right to personally purchase 25% of newly issed units at NAV/U - I would not exercise that right for small batches sold in a rush (nor would I place bids to buy them ahead of others - unless there were insufficent bids over NAV/U otherwise). I WOULD exercise that right if a larger batch were sold with advance notice - to maintain my own equity in LTC-ATF.
Management fee of 111 units will be transferred after this is posted.
Fund's own bid is at : .657
Back to testing the new transfer bot.
Growth in NAV/U (pre-management fee) was 3.9% with an estimate that ~1.75% was trading profits and the rest resulting from the continued decline of LTC vs BTC. With BTC rising steadily vs USD it would be expected that LTC will continue to fall vs BTC due to arbitrage unless/until something happens to cause a rise in LTC's value.
If this continues much longer it does pose a potential (minor) problem to LTC-ATF. Under the terms of the contracts for our bonds we are committed to ensuring that the value of our issued bonds does not exceed 150% of LTC-ATF's own NAV (Assets we manage less the value of our liabilities). As LTC falls vs BTC that ratio increases - and currently stands at 108.68%. That's not a problem at present - being barely above the 75-100% range that I consider to be the sweet-spot. But if LTC declines much further then we'll get near the 150% point.
If that point is reached (and it would be reached if LTC fell to around .013 vs BTC - lower than that if we make more profit in the meantime) then the fund has to do one of two things:
1. Recall bonds.
2. Issue more LTC-ATF units.
As there's no way to selectively recall part of an issue and, in any event, we can use all the capital we have I would go with option 2 - and sell more units into existing bids.
Hopefully it won't come to that and if it does happen then it isn't as bad as it may seem. Whilst it would dilute existing investment that is balanced by two factors:
1. The new units would be selling at above NAV/U and so generate an increase in NAV/U.
2. When LTC falls vs BTC profits tend to rise (expressed in LTC). That's because most of our trading is done in BTC - and with a lower exchange-rate each 1 BTC of profit translates into more LTC profit and hence a larger percentage increase in NAV/U. The massive rise in LTC vs BTC is what caused us to be unable to generate the 5-10% profits we were making earlier on - if LTC does fall right back vs BTC then such profits would become possible again.
Notwithstanding the above I'd still prefer not to need to issue more units - and will only do so if it becomes essential to do so and then would only do so to the extent that I had to. The commitment to maintain that ratio is a key one from the perspective of bondholders (it's what ensures they can't end up with LTC-ATF defaulting on them if some trades go wrong) and is not one that can be avoided. It's also a sensible one from the perpective of LTC-ATF investors - as it avoids the potential of massive percentage loss of NAV/U from a few bad trades.
Given that I'm having to consider this possibility does this mean I was wrong to pay a dividend in July? I don't think so. When the last dividend was paid the exchange-rate was at .0032 and appeared to have stablised in that area. I don't think I could reasonably be expected to predict a fall in the rate to .0013 within 2 months (which is what would need to happen for more units to be issued). Whilst it was always a possibility (everything's always a possibility) retaining unused capital solely to protect against a drop of that magnitude would, I believe, have been unreasonably cautious.
Let's hope LTC doesn't fall faster than we make profits - but if it does then hopefully it's at least clear what will happen (and why). I would NOT be able to give advance warning of such sales if the ratio was actually over 150% (I would have to immediately fix it). if the ratio was near 150% but below it then I'd try to give some advance notice to maximise the price new units sold at. Note that I have the right to personally purchase 25% of newly issed units at NAV/U - I would not exercise that right for small batches sold in a rush (nor would I place bids to buy them ahead of others - unless there were insufficent bids over NAV/U otherwise). I WOULD exercise that right if a larger batch were sold with advance notice - to maintain my own equity in LTC-ATF.
Management fee of 111 units will be transferred after this is posted.
Fund's own bid is at : .657
Back to testing the new transfer bot.
Notification of Testing
Over the coming weekend (31st August and 1st September) I will be testing a modified transfer bot that can automatically handle trades between BTC-TC and LTC-Global. Testing may extend past that if necessary.
This testing will occur on the LTC-ATF.B1 and LTC-ATF.B2 securities. Various accounts controlled by myself will be transferring these securities around - and extra of each security will be temporarily issued for the purpose of testing.
This testing will have no lasting impact (all extra sharcs issued will be returned prior to dividend payments) but will mean that at times the shares outstanding on LTC-ATF.B1 and LTC-ATF.B2 may significantly vary (testing isn't only of 1:1 exchanging but also of X:1 exchanging with fee deduction and return of shares not amounting to sufficient for a full trade to occur).
As well as shares outstanding varying in the securities themselves there will on occasions also be changes in shares held by the DMS accounts on both BTC-TC and LTC-Global.
All testing will be on accounts controlled by myself and manual transfers will be used to return all share counts to their correct values at the conclusion of testing (and before any dividend payments).
Over the coming weekend (31st August and 1st September) I will be testing a modified transfer bot that can automatically handle trades between BTC-TC and LTC-Global. Testing may extend past that if necessary.
This testing will occur on the LTC-ATF.B1 and LTC-ATF.B2 securities. Various accounts controlled by myself will be transferring these securities around - and extra of each security will be temporarily issued for the purpose of testing.
This testing will have no lasting impact (all extra sharcs issued will be returned prior to dividend payments) but will mean that at times the shares outstanding on LTC-ATF.B1 and LTC-ATF.B2 may significantly vary (testing isn't only of 1:1 exchanging but also of X:1 exchanging with fee deduction and return of shares not amounting to sufficient for a full trade to occur).
As well as shares outstanding varying in the securities themselves there will on occasions also be changes in shares held by the DMS accounts on both BTC-TC and LTC-Global.
All testing will be on accounts controlled by myself and manual transfers will be used to return all share counts to their correct values at the conclusion of testing (and before any dividend payments).
Exchange-rate : .0208
Adjusted NAV/U : 0.6611
At present we're up ~2.2% on the week with an estimated 1.37% being from trading and the rest from LTC continuing to fall vs BTC.
Fund's own bid is at : .648
Trading has been a bit trickier than usual last few weeks to crashes in the prices of various securities (strangely, some of the worse ones managed not to fall). As we don't hold long-term investment positions much this sort of thing doesn't impact us to the extent it does actual 'investment funds' - unless, of course, we get caught holding securities when they crash. That wasn't the case here - although we DO have significant holdings for a change (and they've gone up since last report) they aren't in the ones that crashed (exception being ASICMINER where we did pick some up during the crash - and may not end up making much profit on them).
The crash itself is no surprise - it's largely grossly overvalued mining stuff losing value so as only to be hugely overvalued : the real crash hasn't happened yet (and likely won't for another month or two). I DON'T include ASICMINER in the 'grossly overvalued' category (it may well be overvalued but, if so, it isn't grossly so).
The new ASICMINER pass-through still isn't up for a few reasons:
1. I had significant RL work the last few weeks which wouldn't have let me commit to the significant time needed after it launches to process transfers in and maintain constant bid/ask walls - the crash in price exascerbated this as it meant far more attention would need to be spent.
2. Our new PT security is currentl glitched - I started updating it (did a few sections) but the actual contract can't be amended. Somehow it's gone into a status as though it had been trading - where contract is locked against changes. Will get burnside to fix this.
3. I've received updated software which will allow cross-platform automated share swapping - once tested this will make life much easier for me to run the pass-through and also simplify the contract and explanatory notes I need to provide to investors.
Some clarification on points 1 and 3. Initially (at least) the pass-through will be to shares of the pass-through on BTC-TC NOT to actual ASICMINER shares. This simplifies life for me in a few ways:
1. Transfers are much simpler.
2. Obtaining new backing shares is much easier.
Investors will be able to transfer shares in both directions between the BTC-TC ASICM pass-through and our one. I had been planning to do this manually initially - but now I have the updated software to test it makes sense to get that done first and start off with it already automated. That reduces work-load for me and also allows the fee per transfer to be a lot lower. Our pass-through will be a 100:1 split (each share in it representing 1/100th of a BTC-TC pass-through share). Transfers will have the minimum possible fee - of 1 of our shares per trade. That makes the maximum fee for a transfer 1%.
By doing this I largely sacrifice the ability to make profit for LTC-ATF by selling at a markup (we can safely assume the spread against BTC-TC will be arbitraged right down) - so our profit will come from the 3% fee on dividends. That offers much better value for investors - and should also offer much better liquidity (as anyone who wants to can arb against the spread on BTC-TC). In general when offering services such as pass-throughs I'd prefer to take a small percentage on a larger volume whilst offering good value than attempt to screw people by marking things up a lot.
Unfortuantely even with automated transfers there's still significant overhead for me - for each person who wants to do transfers I have to link their BTC-TC and LTC-Global accounts manually so the bot knows where to send to. And that means I have to deal with a PM from each user, verify it vs an actual transfer and update the database for the bot. Which is why the pass-through couldn't go live when I knew I wouldn't have much time - as I have to do one of linking accounts or manually maintaining bid/ask walls.
I still have some RL work to finish off today - then should be free until late next week (when I'll have some work to do again) so will try to get the modified bot tested over the weekend and the Security details updated.
Rough priority list for my work on securities (other than the usual daily trading etc which always occurs) is :
1. Test modified transfer bot.
2. Get ASICM pass-through finalised and up for approval.
3. Get other new set of securities done.
4. Get my website completed - It's frustrating that the website is mainly ready but needs to me to spend a few days working solidly on content before it can launch.
Adjusted NAV/U : 0.6611
At present we're up ~2.2% on the week with an estimated 1.37% being from trading and the rest from LTC continuing to fall vs BTC.
Fund's own bid is at : .648
Trading has been a bit trickier than usual last few weeks to crashes in the prices of various securities (strangely, some of the worse ones managed not to fall). As we don't hold long-term investment positions much this sort of thing doesn't impact us to the extent it does actual 'investment funds' - unless, of course, we get caught holding securities when they crash. That wasn't the case here - although we DO have significant holdings for a change (and they've gone up since last report) they aren't in the ones that crashed (exception being ASICMINER where we did pick some up during the crash - and may not end up making much profit on them).
The crash itself is no surprise - it's largely grossly overvalued mining stuff losing value so as only to be hugely overvalued : the real crash hasn't happened yet (and likely won't for another month or two). I DON'T include ASICMINER in the 'grossly overvalued' category (it may well be overvalued but, if so, it isn't grossly so).
The new ASICMINER pass-through still isn't up for a few reasons:
1. I had significant RL work the last few weeks which wouldn't have let me commit to the significant time needed after it launches to process transfers in and maintain constant bid/ask walls - the crash in price exascerbated this as it meant far more attention would need to be spent.
2. Our new PT security is currentl glitched - I started updating it (did a few sections) but the actual contract can't be amended. Somehow it's gone into a status as though it had been trading - where contract is locked against changes. Will get burnside to fix this.
3. I've received updated software which will allow cross-platform automated share swapping - once tested this will make life much easier for me to run the pass-through and also simplify the contract and explanatory notes I need to provide to investors.
Some clarification on points 1 and 3. Initially (at least) the pass-through will be to shares of the pass-through on BTC-TC NOT to actual ASICMINER shares. This simplifies life for me in a few ways:
1. Transfers are much simpler.
2. Obtaining new backing shares is much easier.
Investors will be able to transfer shares in both directions between the BTC-TC ASICM pass-through and our one. I had been planning to do this manually initially - but now I have the updated software to test it makes sense to get that done first and start off with it already automated. That reduces work-load for me and also allows the fee per transfer to be a lot lower. Our pass-through will be a 100:1 split (each share in it representing 1/100th of a BTC-TC pass-through share). Transfers will have the minimum possible fee - of 1 of our shares per trade. That makes the maximum fee for a transfer 1%.
By doing this I largely sacrifice the ability to make profit for LTC-ATF by selling at a markup (we can safely assume the spread against BTC-TC will be arbitraged right down) - so our profit will come from the 3% fee on dividends. That offers much better value for investors - and should also offer much better liquidity (as anyone who wants to can arb against the spread on BTC-TC). In general when offering services such as pass-throughs I'd prefer to take a small percentage on a larger volume whilst offering good value than attempt to screw people by marking things up a lot.
Unfortuantely even with automated transfers there's still significant overhead for me - for each person who wants to do transfers I have to link their BTC-TC and LTC-Global accounts manually so the bot knows where to send to. And that means I have to deal with a PM from each user, verify it vs an actual transfer and update the database for the bot. Which is why the pass-through couldn't go live when I knew I wouldn't have much time - as I have to do one of linking accounts or manually maintaining bid/ask walls.
I still have some RL work to finish off today - then should be free until late next week (when I'll have some work to do again) so will try to get the modified bot tested over the weekend and the Security details updated.
Rough priority list for my work on securities (other than the usual daily trading etc which always occurs) is :
1. Test modified transfer bot.
2. Get ASICM pass-through finalised and up for approval.
3. Get other new set of securities done.
4. Get my website completed - It's frustrating that the website is mainly ready but needs to me to spend a few days working solidly on content before it can launch.
WEEKLY REPORT (W/E 25th August 2013)
2.3% growth this week - however only about 0.63% came from trading profits with the remainder due to LTC falling more significantly vs BTC. Do remember that when I say 0.63% from trading profits there was actually a bit more made from trading - that figure is after deduction of all dividend payments made on bonds.
Management fee of 66 units for this week IS being taken (you'll see HWM for start of this week was set to UNADJUSTED NAV/U from last week - making sure no management fee was taken on the gain in NAV/U from me not taking last week's fee).
Will update current spreadsheet to reflect the management fee and also some profitable trades that went through overnight then will make a third post - giving more report details and also current NAV/U, current bid etc.
2.3% growth this week - however only about 0.63% came from trading profits with the remainder due to LTC falling more significantly vs BTC. Do remember that when I say 0.63% from trading profits there was actually a bit more made from trading - that figure is after deduction of all dividend payments made on bonds.
Management fee of 66 units for this week IS being taken (you'll see HWM for start of this week was set to UNADJUSTED NAV/U from last week - making sure no management fee was taken on the gain in NAV/U from me not taking last week's fee).
Will update current spreadsheet to reflect the management fee and also some profitable trades that went through overnight then will make a third post - giving more report details and also current NAV/U, current bid etc.
WEEKLY REPORT (W/E 18th August 2013)
Apologies for reports being late - even when I don't publish a report I save a copy of the spreadsheet on the Sunday so it can be produced later.
Just over 2.5% growth this week - with ~2% from trading and the rest from the small fall in LTC vs BTC.
As this report was significantly late I'm foregoing the management fee of 72 units that was due (theoretically I'm taking it then giving it back - as the gain from it will show up in the next week's report. That saved me changing formulas for calculating adjusted NAV/U for end of this report and beginning of next).
Apologies for reports being late - even when I don't publish a report I save a copy of the spreadsheet on the Sunday so it can be produced later.
Just over 2.5% growth this week - with ~2% from trading and the rest from the small fall in LTC vs BTC.
As this report was significantly late I'm foregoing the management fee of 72 units that was due (theoretically I'm taking it then giving it back - as the gain from it will show up in the next week's report. That saved me changing formulas for calculating adjusted NAV/U for end of this report and beginning of next).
hey deprived, how we doing the last few weeks? Lot of change in LTC/BTC, lots of volatility in a whole bunch of securities recently
Will catch up today. The fall in LTC/BTC has grown NAV/U (expressed in LTC - value has fallen if measured in BTC). The collapse of many mining securities hasn't touched us - other than making trading profits very slim (not many opportunities to trade profitably in a falling market). The general volatility has been hard to benefit from when most of it has had no obvious reason.
hey deprived, how we doing the last few weeks? Lot of change in LTC/BTC, lots of volatility in a whole bunch of securities recently
Yea looks like reports is a bit delayed, 16 days since the last one now so the minimum of a report once every fortnight has not been held this time.... 
hey deprived, how we doing the last few weeks? Lot of change in LTC/BTC, lots of volatility in a whole bunch of securities recently
WEEKLY REPORT
Much weaker results this week : 2.45% growth but under 1% came from trading with the rest from LTC falling vs BTC. There's a specific reason for the poor performance. One of the things I do is trade the spread on a few securities that have a very wide spread. One of these for quite a while has been Bitpride on Bitfunder (a horrible investment that's a t-shirt seller that raised thousands of BTC at IPO but has had declining sales). We've done well on it - often flipping shares for 50%+ markups but the price of it finally collapsed after even worse results than usual.
When the price collapsed not only did our existing holdings lose value, but we got more shares dumped into a bid. I made the call to liquidate our position totally and got rid of the lot at a loss. We definitely made decent profits overall on it - but when tarding junk securities there's always going to be a risk of taking a hit when confidence in it finally collapses. That proved to be the case here - not the first time it's happened to us and it definitely won't be the last. It's a risk we take/price we pay for that particular strategy - which only works on shares which are pretty shit as they tend to be only ones with very wide spreads. I'm satisfied I made no errors on it - just this week happened to be the one where we gave back a bit of what we'd made on it to get out of it at the end of its useful (to us) life-span )it isn't impossible it'll be worth trading again later - but if so it won't be in the range we were previously trading it in.
We're back above the NAV/U at which I last issued a dividend, however one will NOT be made at present. Two reasons for this:
1. We have some new securities coming out that can use more capital.
2. LTC has fallen vs BTC increasing the percentage of NAV/U that bond-debt represents. It's in our comfortable zone at present but would rise above my desired target range if we paid a dividend right now.
So there won't be a dividend until we've made a fair bit more growth and/or LTC has risen back a bit vs BTC.
Unfortunately I failed to get our ASICMiner pass-through out to date - I got side-tracked on other things (some RL work then bot testing for DMS). That security and 4 more new ones (all run by LTC-ATF) will be my main focus in the next few days. The other 4 in particular are, in my view, likely to attract decent volume and potentially bring in significant new profit for LTC-ATF.
The transfer bot for DMS is now functional - automatically handling transfers of shares for DMS. It will be updated to also do some work for LTC-ATF - allowing trades of our ASICM passthrough shares for ones on BTC-TC and also, later, allowing trades on the other 4 new assets we'll be running. Unfortunately the developer won't be able to work on it next week so it'll be a few weeks before it'll do the work for LTC-ATF. All costs/payments to the developer for his work are being paid by me personally, no fee will be charged to LTC-ATF (or DMS for that matter).
Management fee for this week is a paltry 70 units
The fund's own bid is at .607
Much weaker results this week : 2.45% growth but under 1% came from trading with the rest from LTC falling vs BTC. There's a specific reason for the poor performance. One of the things I do is trade the spread on a few securities that have a very wide spread. One of these for quite a while has been Bitpride on Bitfunder (a horrible investment that's a t-shirt seller that raised thousands of BTC at IPO but has had declining sales). We've done well on it - often flipping shares for 50%+ markups but the price of it finally collapsed after even worse results than usual.
When the price collapsed not only did our existing holdings lose value, but we got more shares dumped into a bid. I made the call to liquidate our position totally and got rid of the lot at a loss. We definitely made decent profits overall on it - but when tarding junk securities there's always going to be a risk of taking a hit when confidence in it finally collapses. That proved to be the case here - not the first time it's happened to us and it definitely won't be the last. It's a risk we take/price we pay for that particular strategy - which only works on shares which are pretty shit as they tend to be only ones with very wide spreads. I'm satisfied I made no errors on it - just this week happened to be the one where we gave back a bit of what we'd made on it to get out of it at the end of its useful (to us) life-span )it isn't impossible it'll be worth trading again later - but if so it won't be in the range we were previously trading it in.
We're back above the NAV/U at which I last issued a dividend, however one will NOT be made at present. Two reasons for this:
1. We have some new securities coming out that can use more capital.
2. LTC has fallen vs BTC increasing the percentage of NAV/U that bond-debt represents. It's in our comfortable zone at present but would rise above my desired target range if we paid a dividend right now.
So there won't be a dividend until we've made a fair bit more growth and/or LTC has risen back a bit vs BTC.
Unfortunately I failed to get our ASICMiner pass-through out to date - I got side-tracked on other things (some RL work then bot testing for DMS). That security and 4 more new ones (all run by LTC-ATF) will be my main focus in the next few days. The other 4 in particular are, in my view, likely to attract decent volume and potentially bring in significant new profit for LTC-ATF.
The transfer bot for DMS is now functional - automatically handling transfers of shares for DMS. It will be updated to also do some work for LTC-ATF - allowing trades of our ASICM passthrough shares for ones on BTC-TC and also, later, allowing trades on the other 4 new assets we'll be running. Unfortunately the developer won't be able to work on it next week so it'll be a few weeks before it'll do the work for LTC-ATF. All costs/payments to the developer for his work are being paid by me personally, no fee will be charged to LTC-ATF (or DMS for that matter).
Management fee for this week is a paltry 70 units
The fund's own bid is at .607
Just a note on a small error in the above spreadsheet (it has no impact on results) - the LTC value of Havelock holdings is calculated incorrectly (BTC one which is the one that matters was correct). The error was noticed and fixed but appears I used an old copy of the report. Difference is tiny and the value isn't used in any totals - so I'm not going to redo the reports just to correct it (it's fixed in the current week's report which is coming shortly - was just doing last minute double-checking that it was correct and noticed I'd used uncorrected version of last week's).
WEEKLY REPORT 4/8/13
This is the rather late report for the status of the fund as at last weekend. Will be posting this week's immediately afterwards. it may seem silly me posting two - especially as the contract allows me to post every other week anyway. However I'm trying to keep weekly snapshots on record for the purpose of tracking past performance.
Growth of 5.7% this week - most of which came from trading (4.88% estimated). The NAV was higher for part of the week but dropped slightly at the end when LTC recovered some of the ground it had lost vs BTC.
Management fee of 158 units will be transferred.
This is the rather late report for the status of the fund as at last weekend. Will be posting this week's immediately afterwards. it may seem silly me posting two - especially as the contract allows me to post every other week anyway. However I'm trying to keep weekly snapshots on record for the purpose of tracking past performance.
Growth of 5.7% this week - most of which came from trading (4.88% estimated). The NAV was higher for part of the week but dropped slightly at the end when LTC recovered some of the ground it had lost vs BTC.
Management fee of 158 units will be transferred.
So what do you guys think, will BTC Growth be a strong competitor to LTC-ATF? Since LTC-ATF is currently traded way above its NAV, is BTC Growth going to be a good alternative for new investors?
Oh ok your right i see that 2013-07-25 19:00 0,05 LTC per share, that explains it.
Assume that explains it - after I pay a divend the hwm is reduced by the amount of the dividend. If it's still unclear let me know. Can't give an accurate update as not at a computer (on mobile at the pub) but we're up 6 or 7 percent so far this week mainly from flipping the labcoin ipo.
Oh ok your right i see that 2013-07-25 19:00 0,05 LTC per share, that explains it.
Why is the old HVM value used in the 31 july repport 0,56322737 instead of 0,613322737(the adj NAV from previous week) and why is the weeks result shown as a profit of 2.34%(2,61% ?) instead of a loss of 7,01% like it would have been if you used the correct? adj NAV like it has been done in all previous repports ?
A 0.05 dividend was paid ...
WEEKLY REPORT
As usual figues represent the fund's status on Sunday.
Good news is I've finally got everything transferred over to the new computer - it's amazing how fast a new computer is when you've been using an old one for a while.
Growth this week was 2.61% - though 1% of that was due to LTC falling vs BTC. The bubble in many securities is likely to burst before too long, so I'm having to be a bit careful not to get caught holding in something that's overpriced by 500% when it collapses. There's no shortage of new IPOs as well - just have to be careful to pick the ones that will actually succeed (which for us means rise in price post-IPO - very few will succeed in the sense of making a profit in the long-term for investors).
I've sold another 8000 LTC-ATF.B2 (this was after Sunday so report doesn't reflect it) and moved most of the raised funds to Havelock where we will now have a presence trading as well. I may well sell more later in the week once our next security (an Asic-Miner pass-through on LTC-Global) is ready. I hope to have that ready for moderator approval by the weekend. As with all pass-throughs there's minimal risk for LTC-ATF in running it - just some extra capital needed to process dividends and handle sales.
I also have some more new securities upcoming that will be run by LTC-ATF (initially two pairs - one set on LTC-Global and the other on BTC-TC). Those are a bit different and I hope/think they'll be fairly popular (think a mix between a pass-through and DMS - though with nothing to do with mining). Can't give more information until they're up - to avoid someone else beating me to it.
Website progress has been slow, but now the new computer's all set I'm working back on it again. Would expect this week's report to be on the forums then subsequent ones on the new website.
Management fee of 74 units will be transferred after this is posted.
Fund's own buyback bid at .57
As usual figues represent the fund's status on Sunday.
Good news is I've finally got everything transferred over to the new computer - it's amazing how fast a new computer is when you've been using an old one for a while.
Growth this week was 2.61% - though 1% of that was due to LTC falling vs BTC. The bubble in many securities is likely to burst before too long, so I'm having to be a bit careful not to get caught holding in something that's overpriced by 500% when it collapses. There's no shortage of new IPOs as well - just have to be careful to pick the ones that will actually succeed (which for us means rise in price post-IPO - very few will succeed in the sense of making a profit in the long-term for investors).
I've sold another 8000 LTC-ATF.B2 (this was after Sunday so report doesn't reflect it) and moved most of the raised funds to Havelock where we will now have a presence trading as well. I may well sell more later in the week once our next security (an Asic-Miner pass-through on LTC-Global) is ready. I hope to have that ready for moderator approval by the weekend. As with all pass-throughs there's minimal risk for LTC-ATF in running it - just some extra capital needed to process dividends and handle sales.
I also have some more new securities upcoming that will be run by LTC-ATF (initially two pairs - one set on LTC-Global and the other on BTC-TC). Those are a bit different and I hope/think they'll be fairly popular (think a mix between a pass-through and DMS - though with nothing to do with mining). Can't give more information until they're up - to avoid someone else beating me to it.
Website progress has been slow, but now the new computer's all set I'm working back on it again. Would expect this week's report to be on the forums then subsequent ones on the new website.
Management fee of 74 units will be transferred after this is posted.
Fund's own buyback bid at .57
Would you care to explain how the last weeks(31 july repport) result is a profit, as far as i can see it looks like the gross assets value have gone down on both BTC and LTC and that the NAV is down to, and for some reason you don't use the adjusted NAV from previous week as old HWM this week like you always have done in your repports before ?
The value(in LTC) of 823.5702 BTC might be greater this week than 893.7899 BTC was last week thou to pricechange BTC/LTC but that still don't explain why you dont use last weeks NAV in the calculations and that one's still down from last week...
Date Gross assets BTC LTC old HWM adj NAV Profit
2 july repport 731.8706 24 154.15 0.5148988513 0.5502003063 8,94%? 8,17%
8 July repport 854.9658 23 881.73 0,55020031 0,58127047 6,27%? 5,64%
15 july repport 854.4514 28 293.09 0,58127047 0,60599474 4,73%? 4,25%
25 july repport 893.7899 27 930.93 0,60599747 0,613322737 1,33%? 1,21%
31 july repport 823.5702 27 636.58 0,56322737 ?? 0,57644914
Why is the old HVM value used in the 31 july repport 0,56322737 instead of 0,613322737(the adj NAV from previous week) and why is the weeks result shown as a profit of 2.34%(2,61% ?) instead of a loss of 7,01% like it would have been if you used the correct? adj NAV like it has been done in all previous repports ?
WEEKLY REPORT
As usual figues represent the fund's status on Sunday.
Good news is I've finally got everything transferred over to the new computer - it's amazing how fast a new computer is when you've been using an old one for a while.
Growth this week was 2.61% - though 1% of that was due to LTC falling vs BTC. The bubble in many securities is likely to burst before too long, so I'm having to be a bit careful not to get caught holding in something that's overpriced by 500% when it collapses. There's no shortage of new IPOs as well - just have to be careful to pick the ones that will actually succeed (which for us means rise in price post-IPO - very few will succeed in the sense of making a profit in the long-term for investors).
I've sold another 8000 LTC-ATF.B2 (this was after Sunday so report doesn't reflect it) and moved most of the raised funds to Havelock where we will now have a presence trading as well. I may well sell more later in the week once our next security (an Asic-Miner pass-through on LTC-Global) is ready. I hope to have that ready for moderator approval by the weekend. As with all pass-throughs there's minimal risk for LTC-ATF in running it - just some extra capital needed to process dividends and handle sales.
I also have some more new securities upcoming that will be run by LTC-ATF (initially two pairs - one set on LTC-Global and the other on BTC-TC). Those are a bit different and I hope/think they'll be fairly popular (think a mix between a pass-through and DMS - though with nothing to do with mining). Can't give more information until they're up - to avoid someone else beating me to it.
Website progress has been slow, but now the new computer's all set I'm working back on it again. Would expect this week's report to be on the forums then subsequent ones on the new website.
Management fee of 74 units will be transferred after this is posted.
Fund's own buyback bid at .57
As usual figues represent the fund's status on Sunday.
Good news is I've finally got everything transferred over to the new computer - it's amazing how fast a new computer is when you've been using an old one for a while.
Growth this week was 2.61% - though 1% of that was due to LTC falling vs BTC. The bubble in many securities is likely to burst before too long, so I'm having to be a bit careful not to get caught holding in something that's overpriced by 500% when it collapses. There's no shortage of new IPOs as well - just have to be careful to pick the ones that will actually succeed (which for us means rise in price post-IPO - very few will succeed in the sense of making a profit in the long-term for investors).
I've sold another 8000 LTC-ATF.B2 (this was after Sunday so report doesn't reflect it) and moved most of the raised funds to Havelock where we will now have a presence trading as well. I may well sell more later in the week once our next security (an Asic-Miner pass-through on LTC-Global) is ready. I hope to have that ready for moderator approval by the weekend. As with all pass-throughs there's minimal risk for LTC-ATF in running it - just some extra capital needed to process dividends and handle sales.
I also have some more new securities upcoming that will be run by LTC-ATF (initially two pairs - one set on LTC-Global and the other on BTC-TC). Those are a bit different and I hope/think they'll be fairly popular (think a mix between a pass-through and DMS - though with nothing to do with mining). Can't give more information until they're up - to avoid someone else beating me to it.
Website progress has been slow, but now the new computer's all set I'm working back on it again. Would expect this week's report to be on the forums then subsequent ones on the new website.
Management fee of 74 units will be transferred after this is posted.
Fund's own buyback bid at .57
Not sure why, but none of the embedded images in my posts are showing up on here - though they show fine in the LTC-ATF thread on the LTC forums. Guess it's to do with the stupid anonymising that they add onto links here.
EDIT: If anyone wants to see the reports they show up fine in the LTC forum thread : https://forum.litecoin.net/index.php/topic,657.210.html
Expect the problem will fix itself fairly quickly - it was working fine half an hour ago.
EDIT: If anyone wants to see the reports they show up fine in the LTC forum thread : https://forum.litecoin.net/index.php/topic,657.210.html
Expect the problem will fix itself fairly quickly - it was working fine half an hour ago.
WEEKLY REPORT
Sorry that this report is delayed. I've had problems with my laptop overheating and slowing right down to a crawl. I've bought a new one and got nearly everything transferred over to it - only problem has been with moving my copy of Office over to use the Excel spreadsheet. Think I may have to bite the bullet and just buy a new license - as the existing one has already been used on two computers so won't validate on a third.
Only news of any significance last week was the closure of S.DICE - and hence our pass-through to it. We made a small profit on the shares we held ourselves, but closure of our pass-through was done without fee (per the contract) so we made (and will make) no profit on the shares held by all our investors.
Profits were slim for the week : 1.33%. We made a bit more (2.22%) in trading profit but that was cut back by LTC rising vs BTC.
With LTC continuing to stay strong vs BTC and with the closure of S.DICE meaning we have less need of funds to manage our pass-throughs I've decided to pay a dividend of 0.05 LTC per share. That will be paid out shortly. NAV/U will still be slightly above what it was after we conducted the share split - and we're still good for supporting the extra bonds I expect to want to sell in the near future.
Management fee of 38 units will be transferred after I post this (and before the dividend is paid).
Bid will be at .555 (reflecting -.05 for the dividend and +.005 for the ~1% we're up so far this week).
Sorry that this report is delayed. I've had problems with my laptop overheating and slowing right down to a crawl. I've bought a new one and got nearly everything transferred over to it - only problem has been with moving my copy of Office over to use the Excel spreadsheet. Think I may have to bite the bullet and just buy a new license - as the existing one has already been used on two computers so won't validate on a third.
Only news of any significance last week was the closure of S.DICE - and hence our pass-through to it. We made a small profit on the shares we held ourselves, but closure of our pass-through was done without fee (per the contract) so we made (and will make) no profit on the shares held by all our investors.
Profits were slim for the week : 1.33%. We made a bit more (2.22%) in trading profit but that was cut back by LTC rising vs BTC.
With LTC continuing to stay strong vs BTC and with the closure of S.DICE meaning we have less need of funds to manage our pass-throughs I've decided to pay a dividend of 0.05 LTC per share. That will be paid out shortly. NAV/U will still be slightly above what it was after we conducted the share split - and we're still good for supporting the extra bonds I expect to want to sell in the near future.
Management fee of 38 units will be transferred after I post this (and before the dividend is paid).
Bid will be at .555 (reflecting -.05 for the dividend and +.005 for the ~1% we're up so far this week).
Jump to: