Topic: [PicoStocks] 100TH/s bitcoin mine [100th] - page 77. (Read 470140 times)

If we start before 5 months we will easily return in 3-4 months @ 0,20. I think is still a reasonable price.
We just need to wait and hope tytus is working hard for us  

BTW I prefer if he doesn't advertise 100th, I will be able to buy more shares at lower price, so who cares. If we have less people speculating on the price I think it will be better in the long term, so I hope all stay quietly just like now.

I think I understand tytus position here. He wants to sell stocks but he feels liquidity is low, this is why he would like to see the price go down a bit, so that more people would buy.

My 2c: If liquidity is low is probably because:

a) picostocks sucks in terms of trying to pass a sense of credibility and professionalism (compare it to bitfunder or havelockinvestments)
b) You should advertise more, you have one of the best GH/s prices, there are lots of people buyng GH/s for more in the aforementioned sites.

Might I remind everyone that 100th also does not deliver at this point. Reaching milestones is good, but it's not delivery or revenue.


About the cheapness, this greatly depends on a number of factors and comparing it to other options may not make much sense because if 100th does not earn a sufficient profit at this level, it only means the others are less profitable. 100th must be profitable on its own merit, not compared to other companies.

Still, though, this is a decision for investors, not for 100th.

.b

Founders have shares and are free market participants. So they are allowed to sell their shares at any time en it is up to the other market participants to distill information out of these sales.

Luckily these markets in the bitcoin economy are not regulated by some dictating government by its collective stupidity. If one gets screwed, one trusted the wrong (pseudonymous) persons to earn money for himself. Overprotection screws people and economies up in the long run.

Tytus, really like your USD/Ghash comparison with BFL. Says something about aiming for transparency, which is not in your short-term interest with the rising share prices of 100th.

The problems with BFL are:
- they failed to deliver again and again
- there is a long queue of orders yet to be served. An order made today probably won't be served before the end of this year. Timeliness is critical in the field of mining as everyone of us knows competition and difficulty scale up with time. So, I won't buy a BFL even if they sell at one half of the price now. Why would people still buy the blades and usb from ASICMINER although they are nearly 10x the cost of BFL? Because they are paying extra for a quick delivery.

Let the market decide the true value of your shares, as an issuer the best you should do is to provide the most accurate information to the investors, they are taking the risks and profits on behalf of their own decisions. All you are doing now is unfair to those who bought at 0.3+ because of an anticipation of a sharp increase in price shortly. I really feel sorry for those guys because of your unjustified decision.

@tytus: I appreciate your transparency, but:

1) You are comparing your GH/s cost with the only company that is cheaper and by the way doesn't deliver. Not even the Jalapenos, much less the higher end machines.

2) My point on the price is that if you compare 100TH with other similar security options in Bitfunder, you are still cheap. The cheapest you can get in Bitfunder is about 200MH/BTC and here one can get 1GH/BTC.

Again, you cannot decide on behalf of investors why they want to invest or what their reasons are. The cost of a scalpel and a clean bed is minute, but you'd still want to hire a surgeon to operate on you rather than asking a friend over to do it or even worse, do it yourself.

The cost of chips is also lower than a BFL box, which following your logic would mean that buying a BFL miners would be a bad investment and BFL should tell their customers to buy chips instead or even sell their boxes for lower prices to control the disappointment that their customers will see when they realize that people buying chips would get much cheaper hashing power.

Leave the market to do what the market is designed to do. I, for one, would not buy a BFL miner for a quarter of its price, simply because of the overhead of maintenance, risk of failure, because I'm moving shortly, because my wife doesn't like the color, or a ton of other reasons.

That should be my choice, not yours.

.b

Thanks for the update, Tytus, I appreciate the information and projections.

The market must decide what the true price of a share is, which is the entire point of floating on an exchange. At that point, the founders are no longer 'allowed' to say what is a fair price, but should instead focus on providing the information that the market needs to evaluate the value.

Whether someone wants to pay more or less is not up to the founders; only the market and the investors on that market. That market may or may not have other information that makes them evaluate the risk and profitability differently than you.

However, you are sending a very wrong signal to the market when you 'dump' shares right before an important announcement, especially when you do so at below market bids. This causes uncertainty about whether you have more information than the market. In a regulated setting, this would be considered insider trading regardless of whether you have other information. The normal procedure is to announce such sales when they are done from key insiders.

From what I understand now, there is no new information that would change the previous evaluation that the market does. If anything, the update on the wafers is positive in terms of being in line with your previous projections. The market now needs to decide what to do with that information.

.b

100th mine:
shares   518271
price per share BTC   0.2
market cap BTC   103654.2
hashrate [GH/s]   100000
price/hash [BTC/GH/s]   1.036542
BTC price   127
USD/GH/s   131.640834
   
BFL bitcoin miner:
GH/s   50
USD   2499
USD/GH/s   49.98

The 100th mine shares are now more expensive than equipment so the only reason to buy them would be the expectation that 100th can mine faster then own equipment when purchased. => The mine has to return revenues before BFL (and other) equipment will be abundant.

Oops, I missed the discussion on the thread ...

We are getting requests asking why we are "dumping" prices by offering shares from "73i6" (1AQxJQZtTNzUhviMjB8jqxxqL3Kbnm73i6 / Pico).
The main reason is that we want to increase liquidity because at low liquidity the price is too volatile. We can of course offer shares at higher prices but there must be a rational explanation of the valuation.
I believe the mine will be very successful in the first months but after that the revenues will drop (very) rapidly. The same will happen to the stock valuation. So this investment is quite tricky. To estimate the market cap of the 100th mine we have to predict how many BTC will be mined. 100k BTC are mined per month in total. I doubt the mine will make 100 BTC in the first two months. Other competitors will also fight for the mining revenues (BFL, maybe 28nm chip from helveticoin, and new batches of our chips). Also the chips have not been tested yet, so the investment is still very speculative.
We will update our projections in 3-4 weeks when we (hopefully) have functional boards.

Well, one thing is for sure: the GH/s cost of this share is one the low-end right now compared to other investments.

So as others said, it boils down to when they start hashing.

Yep, as simple as that, no need to spill an acid...

This was actually more a response to the glory of AM than a praise of 100TH. The point was to show that AM isn't leading the race because of skill but because they are the only horse in the race.



I doubt Bitfury would post lengthy descriptions of his progress in the 100TH threads if he had no connections with them. Theoretically, he can scam 100TH and not deliver, but I doubt that is the case. There is an obvious connection between them, but that's not really important in terms of defining whether this is a profitable venture, only to determine risk, like you say.

I don't think that's a real risk so I hold some shares, if you think it is a real risk you're not willing to take, then you don't buy shares :-)

.b

All is in business plan. Also nice graphs of predicted income. But few things changed. At startup there will not be a 500TH hashing power, and BTC is no longer 17$... Everything is paid, so you may easy calculated how dividends will look like... With AM you don't know a shit... If friedcat says that he must buy components then he will take 2000BTC and says sorry I had too... And who knows how much that components was? If someone saw a table with incomes and outcomes of AM then please post a link....

The same applies for all mining hardware.
We are buying shares of a 100TH mining hardware here, we all know clearly we will get 200MH per share before buying, whose network share would decreases with time.
The strength of asicminer is their PROMISE to upgrade their mining hardware with time, whose cost would likely be reduced from your dividends.
I don't know exactly their policy of giving out dividends, but for a normal company, all operational, purchase or investment costs should be be deducted from the income and a percent of the revenue is given out as dividends to shareholders.
With that said, all shareholders are paying the cost of hardware upgrades indirectly in order to keep asicminer's hash rate up with competition.
In the case of 100TH, we don't need to pay for the upgrade cost but we won't get a progressive hash rate either, but with 100TH, it should be able to stay relevant and give out hefty dividends within a year of two.
The only question is whether they will deliver on time.

tytus, no prior history? You lived under a rock since the early days of Bitcoin mining?


It failed, it wasn't a scam. I can attest to it personally: I was a bASIC customer and was refunded to the last cent.


Why should magic been involved when bASIC did refund everyone? In fact if someone is still claiming otherwise now, you can suspect him/her to try to scam bASIC, given that hundreds of customers either reported being refunded or didn't even bothered posting about it.


Why shouldn't people invest this kind of money if they can and why should they justify its source? And my understanding is that the 100TH-mine was funded by its current shareholders, not one single guy.
The largest shareholder has a little less than 2/5 of the shares (200_000 purchased at 0.04BTC => 8000BTC at the beginning of the year) where's your million dollar again?


Yeah like Bitfury would let someone build a scammer company on his own reputation without reacting in any way. Makes sense  

MPOE-PR: stop being envious of other people actually building something and go back on your exchange nobody wants to use anymore. Attacking stocks that didn't select your exchange with so pathetic FUD only damages your own reputation (assuming it's still somehow recoverable).

I'm not sure which part of this you don't understand but growth isn't possible and scaling means reduced profit. They have nothing to sell in a month or two. Profit for AM won't stay constant, it will go down.

The only situation in which AM profits can remain is that if one or very few large actors control the majority of hashing so there is no need to invest in the arms race. I don't consider this to be a very likely scenario, which means that, like for 100TH, profitability will go down with time.


OK, so how many Pentium IIIs would you like to buy? Shipping is, of course, included, and I can ship right now!

.b

AM doesn't need to grow more, they just need to scale to keep their 40% of the hashing power constant, who cares if they are not able to make more profit from block rewards, as long as it stays constant it's a very very good profit. Also they don't need to divert money from their profits to pay for new hardware and R&D since they can sell blades to pay for those.

very good news

Exactly, the hash rate will obviously keep increasing at a very fast rate as more players join the game, a project that is not designed to scale will be an always shrinking venture, losing % of the total hashing power everyday.