Topic: P/B ratio, or how to not get raped in the Bitcoin securities markets - page 2. (Read 6397 times)
June 25, 2013, 09:50:55 PM
u crazy man if a message board is what you are relying for your research~back up this claim with real data...thanks
June 25, 2013, 09:46:53 PM
I obviously have more shame than friedcat who now proposes to sell hardware with a 3300% markup, when he's selling USB miners he bought for ~$3 for ~$100.
ok please prove this ...a link please would be awesome..thanks
ok please prove this ...a link please would be awesome..thanks
Sure, here you go:
2. The final margin cost for 1TH/s is less than 10k$, the actual number depends on the volatile price of PCB components. Installing and power bill are currently low. We will be self-funded.
1TH=1000GHs=1000000mhs/300mhs per unit =3333 units.
$10000/3333 ~= $3/unit
As for price, here you go:
Minimum Order Volume of 50 USB sticks. Price of 0.99 each. 2% sent as redundancy (not in warranty). Shipping is free.
BTC0.99*$103 per BTC = ~$100/unit.
.b
June 25, 2013, 09:41:03 PM
I obviously have more shame than friedcat who now proposes to sell hardware with a 3300% markup, when he's selling USB miners he bought for ~$3 for ~$100.
that's wild!..please prove this ...a link to back this claim up would be awesome..thanks
that's wild!..please prove this ...a link to back this claim up would be awesome..thanks
June 25, 2013, 09:23:06 PM
Okay. So your price to book is 18. Good to know.
And ASICMiner price to book using the same rules is roughly 240. Also good to know, I guess.
.b
I'm not here to debate ASICMINER with you.
ASICMINER's IPO sold at a price to book of 2. That is because all the investor funds went into the company, and the principals held 50% of the stock as sweat equity. Today, I estimate the price to book of ASICMINER to be less than 3. That is based upon valuing existing hash rate at 3 BTC / GH/s, and future hash rate at 0.2 BTC.
At almost 10x ASICMIMER's price to book, and 20x the cost of ASICs delivered in the time frame yours will arrive, it's obvious the security you are proposing is a bad deal.
There is no question that P/B isn't an absolute. As I pointed out at the start, very low P/B value can be a bad deal. And a company like facebook can be a great investment with a high P/B.
For mining investments it is a very good indicator. ASICMINER is proof of that.
For mining investments it is a very good indicator. ASICMINER is proof of that.
The entire history of bitcoin securities is a story of lost capital on investors part, with the sole exception of ASICMINER. This will have to change if bitcoin is going to prosper. Burnside and Uyko would do well to ban new issues of mining turds.
And the price to book for AMC is still 35. Well over 10 times ASICMINER right now.
Hardly the 2 that ASICMINER sold at when they were raising funds, and certainly in no way comparable to the ~3 they are valued at today. I wonder why you keep comparing yourself to Friedcat?
On valuation of AM and P/B:
62 TH/s at 3 B / GH/s, plus the 200 TH/s of hardware on the way, plus inventory of USB miners for sale, plus the business value of the sales of hardware. P/B of 3 is probably low because I have know idea of the value of the capital equipment they have in terms of power supplies and cooling etc for the data centers.
I find P/B to be quite useful. It told me that your hero Kslaughter is selling his penny stock scam at 20x the valuation that ASICMINER came to market at, and at least 10x their current valuation.
I was astonished when Erik claimed the 6100 BTC betting pool as his asset rather than SDICE's. SDICE should have been the second big winner investment beside ASICMINER. Instead it has become Erik's personal ATM.
ASICMINER has a price to book of ~3. There is plenty of uncertainty about that number because there isn't a solid balance sheet to evaluate all the assets with. That number is based upon 1) Valuation of the existing hashrate at 3 BTC / GH/s 2) The reported future hardware on order by ASICMINER at 0.2 BTC / GH/s, 3) an estimate of the inventory of USB miners and 4) a gross valuation of the value of the hardware sales business.
ASICMINER was selling hardware at ~3.9 BTC / GH/s until they ran out of blades. Is that a good price? I don't know. It's certainly better than paying you 4 BTC / GH/s for a promise of hash power 3 months from now.
ASICMINER was selling hardware at ~3.9 BTC / GH/s until they ran out of blades. Is that a good price? I don't know. It's certainly better than paying you 4 BTC / GH/s for a promise of hash power 3 months from now.
ASICMINER is far better than any comparable issue though. They actually provide regular communications, pay like clockwork, and have a shareholder board. Should they improve? Absolutely yes.
Well, you could have fooled me...
You are trying to sell a contract for hardware you bought at an 1800% markup.
Have you no shame?
Have you no shame?
Obviously I have more shame than friedcat who sells hardware he bought at a 5000% markup (thats 5 thousand percent, or 50 times what he paid) when he sold AM Blades at 50BTC that he bough for around 1BTC each, for 10GHs. I obviously have more shame than friedcat who now proposes to sell hardware with a 3300% markup, when he's selling USB miners he bought for ~$3 for ~$100.
Look, we can do this dance all night, but no matter which rules you apply, my asset is priced far below AM in P/B. I've said it before, it is a moot point because my contracts isn't a company, but you can't really win this comparison.
.b
June 25, 2013, 08:56:54 PM
Okay. So your price to book is 18. Good to know.
And ASICMiner price to book using the same rules is roughly 240. Also good to know, I guess.
.b
June 25, 2013, 08:27:45 PM
It is the value of the hardware. Since you do not have that hardware in hand, it is the future value of hardware. KNC has established that value at $20 / GH/s.
So now it's the value of the hardware, not what you paid. Can you ever make up your mind?
Now, if you can point to recent sales of future hardware orders significantly above that valuation we might have something worthwhile to discuss.
Yes, I can point to AM sales. What did they charge? $300/GHs?
Oh, but you're right! They're charging 30x what they paid _now_ so that's not ripping people off, but when I charge people 18x what I paid, it's ripping people off.
And again: How much did you pay for your hardware?
I believe you have pointed links to the prices before, but the hardware price is $2160. Thus my sales price vs purchase price is around 18x, or around 60% of the markup your favorite stock company charges, and even that is after they dropped prices by 50%. Until a week ago, my price had 1/5 of the markup AM adds.
But that's OK because you get a cut, right?
.b
June 25, 2013, 08:18:17 PM
Hmm, there is what they paid for it, and then there is what they could sell it for now. Those are not always the same thing.
I tried using that approach too, but then it became about what you paid for it. When I tried using what I paid for it, it became a matter of the value of hashing power (completely independent of both what was paid and for what it could sell). Regardless, my asset has a much better P/B than AM.
Of course, this entire point is moot because my asset isn't a company, it is a contract, so a measure of P/B is about as useful as a comparison of gasoline prices to cab fare.
.b
Again you fail to understand.
It is the value of the hardware. Since you do not have that hardware in hand, it is the future value of hardware. KNC has established that value at $20 / GH/s.
Now, if you can point to recent sales of future hardware orders significantly above that valuation we might have something worthwhile to discuss.
And again: How much did you pay for your hardware?
June 25, 2013, 04:36:05 PM
Hmm, there is what they paid for it, and then there is what they could sell it for now. Those are not always the same thing.
I tried using that approach too, but then it became about what you paid for it. When I tried using what I paid for it, it became a matter of the value of hashing power (completely independent of both what was paid and for what it could sell). Regardless, my asset has a much better P/B than AM.
Of course, this entire point is moot because my asset isn't a company, it is a contract, so a measure of P/B is about as useful as a comparison of gasoline prices to cab fare.
.b
hero member
Activity: 756
Merit: 500
It's all fun and games until somebody loses an eye
June 25, 2013, 04:29:13 PM
Your hashpower is coming in 3 months. Future hashrate is not worth as much as hashing today.
So when my hashpower comes, my P/B will be 1.1, right? That would make AMs P/B using the same formula be around 8.
Once again: How much did you pay for your 120 GH/s ? That is your book value. If you massively overpaid for it, we can have a different discussion.
So because AM pays $10000/Ths, their book value is $620000. Trading at $150M means their P/B is around 240.
.b
Hmm, there is what they paid for it, and then there is what they could sell it for now. Those are not always the same thing.
June 25, 2013, 04:27:14 PM
Your hashpower is coming in 3 months. Future hashrate is not worth as much as hashing today.
So when my hashpower comes, my P/B will be 1.1, right? That would make AMs P/B using the same formula be around 8.
Once again: How much did you pay for your 120 GH/s ? That is your book value. If you massively overpaid for it, we can have a different discussion.
So because AM pays $10000/Ths, their book value is $620000. Trading at $150M means their P/B is around 240.
.b
June 25, 2013, 03:55:13 PM
While the details may be a little off, the concept itself is useful in many places.
On the other hand you've missed out perhaps your best example possible: S.MPOE book 0, mkt cap ~780,000 BTC.
Another important and quite Bitcoin-specific point is the Cost of Book. Ie, a company with 10k BTC worth of gear (call it SkepsiDyne in loving memory of the Global Scam Exchange) is actually to be discounted with the CP risk of the op, because the higher the book gets, the more heavily it weighs on the operator. Even small operations (take Usagi's now famous few-hundred BTC lolsecurities, or EskimoBob's Art pseudoasset) suffer from the same problem (as obviously you can find consciences for sale at any price).
On the other hand you've missed out perhaps your best example possible: S.MPOE book 0, mkt cap ~780,000 BTC.
Another important and quite Bitcoin-specific point is the Cost of Book. Ie, a company with 10k BTC worth of gear (call it SkepsiDyne in loving memory of the Global Scam Exchange) is actually to be discounted with the CP risk of the op, because the higher the book gets, the more heavily it weighs on the operator. Even small operations (take Usagi's now famous few-hundred BTC lolsecurities, or EskimoBob's Art pseudoasset) suffer from the same problem (as obviously you can find consciences for sale at any price).
MPOE-PR, can you please amuse forum readers with another number - S.MPOE shareholder's equity in BTC.
June 25, 2013, 03:12:46 PM
While the details may be a little off, the concept itself is useful in many places.
On the other hand you've missed out perhaps your best example possible: S.MPOE book 0, mkt cap ~780,000 BTC.
Another important and quite Bitcoin-specific point is the Cost of Book. Ie, a company with 10k BTC worth of gear (call it SkepsiDyne in loving memory of the Global Scam Exchange) is actually to be discounted with the CP risk of the op, because the higher the book gets, the more heavily it weighs on the operator. Even small operations (take Usagi's now famous few-hundred BTC lolsecurities, or EskimoBob's Art pseudoasset) suffer from the same problem (as obviously you can find consciences for sale at any price).
On the other hand you've missed out perhaps your best example possible: S.MPOE book 0, mkt cap ~780,000 BTC.
Another important and quite Bitcoin-specific point is the Cost of Book. Ie, a company with 10k BTC worth of gear (call it SkepsiDyne in loving memory of the Global Scam Exchange) is actually to be discounted with the CP risk of the op, because the higher the book gets, the more heavily it weighs on the operator. Even small operations (take Usagi's now famous few-hundred BTC lolsecurities, or EskimoBob's Art pseudoasset) suffer from the same problem (as obviously you can find consciences for sale at any price).
LOL! Popcorn time. This comedy is getting funnier.
Right, pop some popcorn. EskimoBob, she is insulting you, are you just going to take that?
No, Peter. As you can see, Mr Dipshit (or his sockmuppet aka PR scank) is making a complete fool out of him/her self. Let her write more BS and brag about his/her delusions. You are welcome to join them, btw. I bet you are good at it.
hero member
Activity: 756
Merit: 500
It's all fun and games until somebody loses an eye
June 25, 2013, 02:30:55 PM
While the details may be a little off, the concept itself is useful in many places.
On the other hand you've missed out perhaps your best example possible: S.MPOE book 0, mkt cap ~780,000 BTC.
Another important and quite Bitcoin-specific point is the Cost of Book. Ie, a company with 10k BTC worth of gear (call it SkepsiDyne in loving memory of the Global Scam Exchange) is actually to be discounted with the CP risk of the op, because the higher the book gets, the more heavily it weighs on the operator. Even small operations (take Usagi's now famous few-hundred BTC lolsecurities, or EskimoBob's Art pseudoasset) suffer from the same problem (as obviously you can find consciences for sale at any price).
On the other hand you've missed out perhaps your best example possible: S.MPOE book 0, mkt cap ~780,000 BTC.
Another important and quite Bitcoin-specific point is the Cost of Book. Ie, a company with 10k BTC worth of gear (call it SkepsiDyne in loving memory of the Global Scam Exchange) is actually to be discounted with the CP risk of the op, because the higher the book gets, the more heavily it weighs on the operator. Even small operations (take Usagi's now famous few-hundred BTC lolsecurities, or EskimoBob's Art pseudoasset) suffer from the same problem (as obviously you can find consciences for sale at any price).
LOL! Popcorn time. This comedy is getting funnier.
Right, pop some popcorn. EskimoBob, she is insulting you, are you just going to take that?
June 25, 2013, 01:51:38 PM
While the details may be a little off, the concept itself is useful in many places.
On the other hand you've missed out perhaps your best example possible: S.MPOE book 0, mkt cap ~780,000 BTC.
Another important and quite Bitcoin-specific point is the Cost of Book. Ie, a company with 10k BTC worth of gear (call it SkepsiDyne in loving memory of the Global Scam Exchange) is actually to be discounted with the CP risk of the op, because the higher the book gets, the more heavily it weighs on the operator. Even small operations (take Usagi's now famous few-hundred BTC lolsecurities, or EskimoBob's Art pseudoasset) suffer from the same problem (as obviously you can find consciences for sale at any price).
On the other hand you've missed out perhaps your best example possible: S.MPOE book 0, mkt cap ~780,000 BTC.
Another important and quite Bitcoin-specific point is the Cost of Book. Ie, a company with 10k BTC worth of gear (call it SkepsiDyne in loving memory of the Global Scam Exchange) is actually to be discounted with the CP risk of the op, because the higher the book gets, the more heavily it weighs on the operator. Even small operations (take Usagi's now famous few-hundred BTC lolsecurities, or EskimoBob's Art pseudoasset) suffer from the same problem (as obviously you can find consciences for sale at any price).
LOL! Popcorn time. This comedy is getting funnier.
June 25, 2013, 11:51:01 AM
While the details may be a little off, the concept itself is useful in many places.
On the other hand you've missed out perhaps your best example possible: S.MPOE book 0, mkt cap ~780,000 BTC.
Another important and quite Bitcoin-specific point is the Cost of Book. Ie, a company with 10k BTC worth of gear (call it SkepsiDyne in loving memory of the Global Scam Exchange) is actually to be discounted with the CP risk of the op, because the higher the book gets, the more heavily it weighs on the operator. Even small operations (take Usagi's now famous few-hundred BTC lolsecurities, or EskimoBob's Art pseudoasset) suffer from the same problem (as obviously you can find consciences for sale at any price).
On the other hand you've missed out perhaps your best example possible: S.MPOE book 0, mkt cap ~780,000 BTC.
Another important and quite Bitcoin-specific point is the Cost of Book. Ie, a company with 10k BTC worth of gear (call it SkepsiDyne in loving memory of the Global Scam Exchange) is actually to be discounted with the CP risk of the op, because the higher the book gets, the more heavily it weighs on the operator. Even small operations (take Usagi's now famous few-hundred BTC lolsecurities, or EskimoBob's Art pseudoasset) suffer from the same problem (as obviously you can find consciences for sale at any price).
June 25, 2013, 02:36:46 AM
How do you calculate the book value for a Co if you have never seen their "books"? Or to be more precise, if you have never seen reports like P/L, C/F, and the the balance sheet for the last N months.
They "probably sold X units" and "had a IPO for N but..." are not numbers you can use to calculate the P/B because you do not know what the "B" is.
It truly amazes me that Co's lie ASICMINER or SDICE, who roll around in thousands of BTC (hundreds of thousands of EUR) can not find a bookkeeper, who is capable compiling a proper P/L, C/F and the the balance sheet. All I can say is: "WTF!"
For f*** sake people, AM guys managed to design and manufacture the first ASIC chip and distribute it all around the world but can not find a little chink lady to do the numbers for them? Seriously?
Same applies to Evorhees and SDICE. Co that has managed to generate over 70K profit in BTC, is incapable of standard bookkeeping and can not even produce reports so investors can evaluate the Co? WTF!
Same "WTF!?" applies to all the listed Co's in all the exchanges. If you can not put together proper reports, find someone who can.
I honestly help that Exchanges take a lead here and start demanding standard reporting. It's good foe everyone.
Cheers!
June 25, 2013, 01:29:41 AM
June 24, 2013, 08:00:17 PM
ASICMINER has a price to book of ~3.
So far, you have yet to prove that or come even close. Last I checked, you were hovering somewhere around the ~100 area of P/B or ~18 if you agree that the proceeds on my asset is half that of AM.
There is plenty of uncertainty about that number because there isn't a solid balance sheet to evaluate all the assets with. That number is based upon 1) Valuation of the existing hashrate at 3 BTC / GH/s
OK, great, in that case, with my asset having 120GH/s of hashrate, the valuation would be 360BTC, so the P/B would be in the area of 1.1.
.b
June 24, 2013, 07:54:25 PM
(...)
AMC - Price: 100 000 000 * 0.0008 = 80000 BTC. Book value (6 Avalons at 70 GH/s + 5 TH/s of future hashing) 2260 BTC. Price to book 35
It should be obvious why these securities are beneficial only to their issuers, and why listings for BFMINES and AMC on BTCT.co should be rejected.
AMC - Price: 100 000 000 * 0.0008 = 80000 BTC. Book value (6 Avalons at 70 GH/s + 5 TH/s of future hashing) 2260 BTC. Price to book 35
It should be obvious why these securities are beneficial only to their issuers, and why listings for BFMINES and AMC on BTCT.co should be rejected.
There is a difference between outstanding shares and authorized shares. I would suggest you looking into it before writing these shiny pearls of information...
You are nothing but a useful idiot for Ken. Ken has issued 100 Million shares. He controls 60 million of these shares. 20 million of those are a vehicle for retained earnings. They are still outstanding shares.
And the price to book for AMC is still 35. Well over 10 times ASICMINER right now.
There are only 40 Million Issued shares. See the proof below:
From your asset profile on Bitfunder:
Quote
1 share of AMC on BitFunder represents 1/100,000,000th of 100% of the monthly profits after all expenses.
AMC shares offer no voting rights. Shares of AMC on BitFunder do not represent real world shares of the
company. The shares are solely a distribution mechanism for rights to profits.
20,000,000 shares will be retained by AMC to maintain a growth and expansion fund.
As of the time of this writing, up to 40,000,000 will be released over time to the public on a varying
time scale as capital is required to complete the project. Any remaining shares not included in the
IPO are owned/maintained/controlled by AMC. These shares will be used at the issuers discretion
for any uses deemed fit. These uses are not limited to, but may include employment.
AMC shares offer no voting rights. Shares of AMC on BitFunder do not represent real world shares of the
company. The shares are solely a distribution mechanism for rights to profits.
20,000,000 shares will be retained by AMC to maintain a growth and expansion fund.
As of the time of this writing, up to 40,000,000 will be released over time to the public on a varying
time scale as capital is required to complete the project. Any remaining shares not included in the
IPO are owned/maintained/controlled by AMC. These shares will be used at the issuers discretion
for any uses deemed fit. These uses are not limited to, but may include employment.
1 share is one 100 millionth of AMC. And AMC's assets are worth less than 1/35th of the share price. Plus as you specifically state, "As long as AMC does not sell it's shares below 0.0005 then they may do as they please with their shares. It is their company, their ownership, and their shares." So you can fuck your shareholders any way you want, if you ever decide that a 3500% mark up wasn't enough.
SDICE shareholders are learning all about that experience right now.
It seems that Ken acknowledges that he lied about there only being 40M shares, and recognizes that the true value of one share of AMC is 1/100 Millionth of AMC, giving the company a price to book of 35. It must be great to be able to sell assets to suckers at a 3500% markup.
June 24, 2013, 01:27:34 AM
To the OP. Don't let the PMB operators get you down. I read this thread and you opened my eyes. Plenty of other's eyes as well I'm sure. Keep up the good work. The fewer newbies to bitcoin who buy these junk bonds, the better
Thanks. I do appreciate the positive feedback. But you shouldn't worry about me. These guys are pikers. You should have seen the abuse I was taking last year at the hands of PatrickHarnett, Inaba, and GigaVPS.
Of course that fact that all 3 of those twats are completely discredited in this community today helps to strengthen my resolve.
Jump to: