Topic: [PicoStocks] 100TH/s bitcoin mine [100th] - page 70. (Read 470140 times)

Saying the market is "fucked" is still your personal opinion. You are entitled to it ofc, but not everyone must agree to it.

I also think there are pretty good and valid reasons for several of the regulations to prevent this and other kind of events. But they must be explicit and not implicit.

Why don't you make an article about the "basic" explicit regulations that bitcoin exchanges/asset issuers should comply? That would certainly be a good starting point for further debate on this whole issue (that is not limited to 100TH only).

@furuknap: alright, i don't know you and shouldn't make assumptions about your personal motives. sorry about that.

it's just that IMO the 100TH shares are in danger of heading towards unsustainable levels because of too many people doing too little research. unsustainable because other options offer the same potential value for the same risk (other than there being other intermediaries) for a fraction of the price. it's like offering TAT.ASICMINER for half the price of a full Asicminer share because your buyer doesn't know the market.

now i don't want a market that gets controlled by major forces either. i just don't think the whole buy low sell sky high attitude that we see much too often is going to do us any good.


disclosure: i own a few shares, but not many. i bought in mainly for the mining opportunity as a hedge against other mining projects and not for the resale of shares. my stakes are set, i don't care for the price to go either way, i just hope for the project to succeed in time.

So fucking up the market is OK as long as one person thought it was a good idea? Great.

Everyone, buy my lottery tickets! Oh, and I'll donate a part to charity, because if my intentions are good, everything is OK.

.b

EDIT: BTW, most of the civilized world has strict regulations to prevent this kind of event. I know, I know, we're crypto anarchists and all that cool shit, but did anyone stop for a moment and think that there may be a good idea behind those regulations too and not the the man sticking it to us all?

There isn't any clear cut, one-sided, point of view to this. Everyone that bought 100TH PMB's knew they weren't buying them in a regulated exchange.

If anyone wins at poker in an underground casino they also know there is a chance to be ripped clean on the way out by the bouncer.

The only guiding principle that remains is to assess if the issuer was doing what he did with a good intent or a bad intent.

My personal answer is that he did it with good intent. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion and should proceed accordingly. There is no "one truth".

Are you incapable of reading or is it just that you project your own motivations on everyone else and refuse to comprehend that there may be motivations that conflict with your desires?

.b

tytus' 0.2 wall in may was too sudden, too soon, i give you that. share prices where going up to about 0.26 and all of a sudden tytus' cut the market off. that was a wrong thing to do, he apologized, said he would give a heads up in the future and we moved on.

tytus' 0.4 wall was announced and came up with prices at what, 0.36? that's what, 11% assuming you bought in at the highest price back then? not bad for a single day of speculating.

either way, comparing AM to 100TH is comparing apples to oranges. AM is still growing and selling hardware, while a 100TH will always just stay a 200MH mining bond that hopefully comes to fruition.

i think you were just trying to pull the market up up up and are pissed that someone with a greater stake in the shares intervened.

So you are talking about market manipulation.


Sorry to say, but you are not. If you think that's what you're buying, you may be in for a surprise.

You are buying a chance for a share of hosted mining. That chance carries risk of not getting anything, just like my proposal.

This isn't unique for this PMB; it is common to all PMBs and assets. Even US Treasuries carries a slim chance of default. There's always risk with assets; the people that bought into this at 0.04 did not buy shares of hosted mining, they bought a chance that they might get a share of hosted mining, but with huge risks.

If fact, here's the flip side of the challenge; would you sell me your shares at 0.04 again? Because if you think you're only buying shares of mining and do not want any upside in terms of price increase, then that must be a fair price, right?


It was. It is what he did today and it was what he did in May. Sure, he did so right after good news, which is essentially the same as saying "I forbid you to feel too optimistic about this news. I decide how optimistic you should be"

Did he put up a buy wall when the chips were delayed? Or when Bitfury failed in his bet yesterday? Those were negative news and he did not attempt to control people's emotions then. Why are you OK when he does so and only he is benefiting from the action?


There might be a speck of relevance to your argument if I even had any shares. However, I sold before yesterday so the cap wouldn't have affected me in any case. In fact, if he put up a sell wall at 0.1, I would benefit.

So, I'll advance your next question; what possible motivation could I have, seeing that I don't get an ounce of benefit from the wall going away but would in fact get a benefit if it was there? How could I possibly be arguing for the thing that would not give me benefit but would argue against that which would bring me benefits?

Could it be, I don't know, that there is no personal motivation behind my attacks on this behavior and that this is genuinely an attack on the action for no other reason than that this is really, really, really, really, really bad for investors and thus bad for 100TH, thus bad for a good idea (picostocks), and thus bad for Bitcoin? Could it be that, unlike what you seem to think, there are people in the world that looks beyond immediate financial rewards and, oh god no, would actually like to see the whole community grow, even when it goes against their immediate personal benefit?

Nah, that would mean I was right all along, and that would also mean you're arguments are based on a false assumption, and we can't have that, can we?


You have no idea what I used to calculate anything for my investments.

.b

100TH IS GONNA SKYROCKET LOLOLOL

FTFY

Not talking about today's wall. I was talking about the ~0.2 walls that were bought up quite quickly. Yes, he did stop after people on the forum complained.


The primary reward is the dividend. I'm buying a share of hosted mining. NOT speculation that the value of my shares will go up.



That is not what tytus did, right? In fact, he posted some positive news (in his mind). What would be the market's reaction if friedcat announced he was going to sell any shares? Regardless of his motivations. If friedcat said he wanted to cash out some shares for liquidity but the company was still sound, would you take him at his word or would you speculate that the company is going down? Some people would take him at his word, some would panic. I'm not saying it'd be an easy decision to pick a side in that case, but putting on a tin-foil hat will either prove foolish or genius...most people don't have a crystal ball.

So tytus put 5000 shares for sale at 0.4 (a bit above the lowest ask -- above the all time high). If you think shares are worth more than 0.4 then he did you a favor because now you can buy more. If they are worth less than 0.4 shares...well first people need to buy through the lower asks then start buying into his wall. As you said the wall could be an indication that tytus feels this is a ceiling, so buyers should be wary...anyone that buys at these levels should be acutely aware of the risk they are taking (because of the wall).

I believe you're most dismayed at the fact that tytus put a potential cap on share price and he is limiting your upside in terms of share price. Let me ask you this. What are you buying in this security? From the business plan, it was clear to me that I was buying hashing power. This is as if I was buying hosted Avalons or BFL machines. The primary reason for buying shares is to earn income from the hashing power. A secondary side-effect of listing shares on an exchange is that others would be able to bid on my purchased hashing power. I understand that when you bought into this security, one of your primary variables was share price and that is a valid variable to include. However, the primary variable should have been mining income.

If you read "Simplified Exit" part of the business plan, it states that Picostocks makes it easier for people to disinvest from mining technology. The section also states that shares prices will "likely" increase around the time of deployment, but I interpret the document as meaning...prices of your shares might or might not increase. The document also states that value of the shares will quickly diminish over time. Again, this information indicates to me that the primary value of the shares should be the dividends rather than banking on an increase in share price.

I understand you're not pleased with a (perceived) cap on share price, but IMO you were using the wrong variable to calculate returns.

If you're talking about today's event, he pulled the wall before it was hit. If you're talking about the walls in May, he only stopped adding more once I (and others) yelled at him for it, which prompted the promise of 'never again!' that was broken today.


Exactly. The market did not at the time want to assume the risk for such a price, so they didn't. This is a healthy market in action.


Sure, and people know that there's no point in buying anything above that price because tytus may just as well throw more bonds on the market at that price.

However, if tutys the day after told you that 'Sorry, we couldn't get the chips to work, your bonds are now worthless' would you be equally elated? When that is a real risk that you are assuming, you want some kind of reward if that risk turns out to work in your favor.

Again, look at my proposal. you can buy a bond/ticket from me for 3BTC. It may turn into 3.1 or even 3.5 if the cows don't come home at all, but it may also turn into zero. How many do you want?

I'm guessing your lack of "Wow, give me 100!" is less due to your lack of funds and more because you realize that assuming the risk of losing everything is not worth the potential upside of just 0.1 or 0.5.

Now, why would you be OK with this scenario if the numbers were slightly different, say 0.30 and 0.31 and 0.35 instead? Because that's exactly what you're saying; you assume all the risk for minute potential reward but only because in the case of 100TH we're talking about slightly different numbers. The upside has been capped today by tytus.



I'm not sure tutys should be entitled to sell at all, but that's up to the market to decide after he has made a proper announcement. The market will either say "wow, he's stupid and doesn't know half the things I do" or they will say "wow, if he's bailing, knowing what he does, then maybe this isn't such a good idea after all" or anything in between.

In fact, tutys has given power of decision over to the market, but now he's effectively killed that market with his actions by saying '"children, please, you can't play with the toys I gave you after all"


If you don't see the difference between a PT operator selling off the assets of a completely different fund and this then you have now idea what you're talking about.

Let me ask you this; what would you say if friedcat came out tomorrow and said "Sorry, we really don't have confidence that AM will ever make much more than 1BTC so here are 10,000 shares at 1BTC put on the market". How do you think investors now buying at 3BTC would think? Would that be a reasonable and defendable action because, you know, it's his shares and stuff?

.b

If you noticed...his wall was eaten up. As you said...let the market dictate. If the market thinks .4 is worth it then they will buy. Are you trading based on voodoo technical analysis and "signs" or fundamentals. If not on fundamentals then you're gambling. Live with the gamble.


The IPO is exactly where Tytus (attempted) to sell his risk...but if you noticed, a very small percentage of total shares went to the community at large. People simply didn't trust it. He tried to sell at 0.04 and few people bought.

Serious question...if tytus put a block of 10000 shares are at the IPO price on the market today, would you be happy or sad? My answer is...I would be ELATED and I've bought a lot of shares above the IPO price.

Another question: when do you think tytus is entitled to sell? how much would you allow him to sell? I don't know the exact numbers, but it seems like there is less than 10% of total shares in the hands of non-insiders. If you seriously believed this security was worth over 0.4, you should have absolutely NO problem with him dropping a wall at 0.4 because the market would see value in purchasing at 0.4. Perhaps you were counting on the low liquidity to make a profit during "panic buying"...again that is a gamble you took. IMO, if you truly believe the security has value over 0.4 then tytus is doing you a favor by increasing liquidity.


Like you said...this is a BOND. The original purpose of this security was to allow people to purchase hashing power. In your analysis, you stated this would not be like AM because fundamentally they are two different types of securities. Logically there should be a cap on the price of this. If the market thinks it's higher than 0.4 that wall would have disappeared with time.

FYI, a very similar thing happened with the ASICMINER-PT. The person who runs the PT put up a wall @ 2.1/2.4 https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/selling-gasicminer-pt-210933 ...much lower than the market price at the time.The market ATE  IT UP because they saw value.

+1 internet point for furuknap.

I'll be blunt. At this point, I see now way for an extremely long time to rebuild the confidence of investors. If 100TH is still to be a viable asset, several things must happen.

1) 100TH is delisted from pico.
2) 100TH is listed on another exchange where tutys has no controlling interest
3) The shares controlled by tytus are put in escrow, only to be put on market after the escrow has ensured the rules set forward by tytus (and possibly the exchange) has been followed (for example 48 hour notice, declaration of price in advance, any exchange-specific regulations if any, etc)

Whether pico surives is actually not very relevant to 100TH, but I can't see an exchange operated by tytus being possible in the foresesable future.

I'll post an article in the coming days explaining my thoughts on this event and what happened in May. Tytus, I encourage you do contact me (DM) if you want to voice your side of it as part of that article. I will publish anything relevant and give you an early review of the content.

.b

Ok. Anyway, thanks for explaining your reasoning.

That must be his or her choice, provided they are not insiders and does not break any rules. The latter is more of a joke at this point.
.b

What if the guy that holds 200,000 decides that he wants to sell at 0.1?

Whether the sale is anonymous or not is just a matter of hiding the fact and doesn't make the act any less horrible. The news is still that tytus feels that 0.4 is the absolute maximum value anyone should pay. As someone who knows more about this operation than anyone, those are heavy words.

The fact that he currently holds so many shares that he can control the price only makes his ability to enforce his opinions on everyone else apparent.

What if he decides that nobody from here on is allowed to sell for more than 0.1? He can certainly enforce that, just like he enforced 0.21 and 0.23 a few weeks ago when investors were willing to pay 0.35 and maybe more. In other words, anyone buying this share can only sell at a price that tytus agrees to. If he decides you should have paid a lower price, well, you've lost, just like those that lost in May.

.b

Would you have been ok, or "more ok", then, with Tytus listing shares for sale had he done so anonymously, since it would not send the same insider signal, rather than announcing it so publicly and using a trading platform (picostocks) that appears to allow us all to track which specific accounts are trading the shares?  This is one of the interesting differences between picostocks and some of the other exchanges; other exchanges (e.g. btct.co, Bitfunder) would seem to make it easier for large shareholders and insiders to dump shares anonymously without tipping off the market that they are doing so, unless I am unaware of information leakage on those platforms.