Topic: SANDSTORM: - A Collective Investment Vehicle for BTC. - - page 5. (Read 35774 times)

Do you have any changes that you would suggest to the way I manage Sandstorm?

Still horribly managed.

Weekly Report.

The virtual securities markets have shown a general decline over the past two weeks which has negatively impacted Sandstorms long positions. This shows a grim outlook when analysing Sandstorms week to week NAV. However, The way I operate Sandstorm somewhat mitigates the risk of a general decline. Small declines in the market do not affect Sandstorms ability to achieve profit.

For example Sandstorm could have realised the profits from the 2.5BTC ASICminer shares a long time ago. Holding onto these shares at this purchase point acts as a buffer. Keep in mind the long term strategies employed by Sandstorm that allow for dips in the market.

On a brighter side, Friedcat just announced news regarding hardware sales. I believe this may start a upward trend in ASICminer. Sandstorm purchased more shares based off this news.

I took part in some old style intra-weekly trading of activemining units which overall turned a small profit.

An email proposing changes to the Sandstorm prospectus was sent to a vote via email. The changes were to address some of Korbmans suggestions/concerns. All major shareholders that responded voted YES. This correlated with a agreeing vote of at least 72%. Therefore, the changes will be implemented.

Happy Trading!


Profits
.49 BTC selling Labcoin Shares
.445 BTCtrading Activeminer shares

.590 BTC ASICminer Dividends
.018 BTC Cognitive Dividends
.038 BTC bASIC Dividends
.017 BTC ActiveMining Dividends


Total =BTC 1.598(1.598BTC to dividends)

Dividends
1.598/100000 = .00001598 per share

Last weeks assets


Assets
10 ASICminer direct shares (2.5)
6 ASICminer-PT shares (2.48)
4 ASICminer-PT shares(4.19)
4 ASICminer-PT shares(3.85)
4 ASICminer-PT shares(3.81)

3000 Labcoin Shares(.001)
10 Cognitive Shares (.28)
100 RentalStarter shares (.0149)
15 bASIC shares (.27)
15 bASIC shares (.41)
3000 Active Miner shares (.0025)

6.31 BTC

@Smidge

my reasoning was in general, not meant especially you.
but.
after i wrote here i found one less polite post by josh at your fund's thread (not qouting it here)

so, no comments by me more, not yet. i'm just logged in and not read what's up in the world... ehm... forum

Hi felente,

I was pointing out that the funds NAV is down dramatically (and 23.36% is dramatic imho), with noone mentioning it. There is no point in having a fund manager collecting a management fee when there are no actions taken whatsoever. He even describes the fund as performing quite well. This has nothing to do with trolling, but with protecting shareholder value.

@Josh Btw, you still have an open order for 500 shares that we received no incoming coins for.

you should do think in the long term.
lost xx% THIS week? and gain next week - no?? what about next month? or year??
be more patient and give josh a try to do main job and not waste the time trolling here.

besides it seems to me that some subjects are interested for detailed "updates" everyday (no, best - hourly!) to peep on josh's strategies
this is his weapon, and he's not obligated to tell the world about each and every aspect of it.
nevertheless - please write right here YOUR detailed strategies FIRST, then ask from someone else the same.

guys, that's a trust.
there is no evidence for josh's bad intentions, obviously.
i bought small amount of shares and getting some dividends for that.
the overpricing of shares is another issue and not josh's merit. also not directly...
weekly reports are fine too - maybe this can be fine-tuned in the future, but this is not an excuse and reason to disallow him to use his own "capital" as needed.

be more polite.
we're all coming from nowhere once.
if that's the main reason - do not trust those people "from nowhere" (first) and do not yammer (then).
it's YOUR choice to risk, and risk is not the same as scam - look for difference.

What does the share price have anything to do with the net assets? Smidge asked if it is correct that you lost the fund some -24% of its assets in the last week. The answer to that appears to be "yes". The fact that you are selling BTC for fiat at the same time you launch an IPO certainly does bring up questions, particularly because you came out of nowhere. You haven't proved you are trustworthy yet, so don't get defensive.

I personally pointed out that I think the way you report the fund performance to shareholders is deceptive, and you do it that way to cover the fact that it has performed poorly.You should post its actual performance, not a bunch of other unimportant stats. The first thing you should show is the net asset growth of loss in that period.

Are both me and Smidges comments not correct or appropriate? If so, please explain where we are wrong.

Hey guys,

It's up to the free market to price the Sandstorm units. IMHO Sandstorm shares are still overpriced. I think the "value" of the shares are about 2 or 3 times the IPO price. Anyone who's done any research into Sandstorms assets would know this. Currently I'm really working on increasing this value without placing to much risk on Sandstorm.

I see Sandstorm as performing quite well. I know there is volatility in the market right now. This is why Sandstorm has long term positions which act as a buffer against the market falling. People look to much into the short term in the BTC world.

Of course i'm acting in the greater interest of shareholders. I put a lot of hours into operating this fund the best way I can. I think updates once a week is sufficient. If you want to know whats happening with sandstorm, why not ask? It just doesn't feel right spamming my own thread.

As to the accusations regarding my localbitcoin account. This is completely ridiculous. I've made a lot of BTC through trading long before I began Sandstorm. Don't I a have a right to turn some of my personal BTC into fiat? If i ran off with the IPO funds how did i pay for the assets in the public portfolio on btct.co? Why would I sell stolen BTC through a user account with my name on it? Do you guys really think that i'm that stupid?

For disclosure I've sold around 15 BTC through localbitcoin about a month ago out of my personal wallet and 5BTC about 2 months ago, also from my personal wallet. I've also bought BTC from localbitcoins.com. I think it's a great site.

These slanderous comments from other fund managers are tiring. I'm sorry about my negative tone in this message. It's just hard to see constant criticism against something i've put so much work into over the last 2 months. I suppose i should get used to it.

That is highly suspicious. Why would you be selling Bitcoins for fiat if you just opened a Bitcoin investment fund?? If you were scammed are a sandstorm shareholder, I'd suggest doing everything you can to get your money back ASAP.

I don't think josh really cares about sandstorm or its shareholders. One lil lousy update a week? If we're lucky. What myself and S.E.C and A.S.I.C (australian securities and investments comission) are investigating and interested in, is that the Fund manager Josh Mutch setup a localbitcoins account around the same time as doing the IPO https://localbitcoins.com/ad/19465/purchase-bitcoin-bank-transfer-australia-australia

Now the question becomes is he selling sandstorm IPO funds to buy things for himself in the real world or he just doesn't care anymore and is cashing out before it really does turn into a shitstorm?
 

Oh, the irony!

Haha. I wish someone would track all the fund performance and post it somewhere. I'd probably get more shareholders if someone did that. Although less shareholders means more profit for me!

On the next episode of TOP FUND MANAGER, Lord Sugar tells it like it is!

Anyone who bought shares in this deserved to lose their money. Though unfortunately I suspect most people who did were noobs at bitcoin and fell for the promises of "At least 1% per week". Instead they got -24% per week.

Also, I think it's quite sad that the fund manager decided to kind of mask the true performance of the fund in a way where ordinary people would not have known just how poorly it has performed. This is going to turn in to a shitstorm, perhaps shareholders should vote to change the name.

So, obviously I have a conflict of interest here, but the fund is down 23.36% in one week if I read this correctly.

And what you did as a fund manager to "prevent" it from tanking like the rest of the market was buying Labcoin and then selling some of them?

Any shareholders still reading this thread?

Weekly Report.

I see these two new IPO’s changing the dynamic of the BTC hardware manufacturing industry in the future. It is hard to see how this new competition will affect ASICminer and the economy down the track. All I know is that there is a lot of money getting thrown into these companies collectively right now.

Again it seemed necessary to buy into an IPO which had huge demand. Sandstorm managed to pick up 5119 units of Labcoin at IPO prices(.001). I was up all night due to the bad time-zone  getting updates on this launch. 1119 of these units were sold at .0028 in order to decrease the risk of the position.

Just like ActM, I’m not 100% convinced by these companies (btcgarden and labcoin). I’m aware of the possibility that one of them may turn out to to be a scam. Therefor Sandstorm will limit exposure, but still be involved in the potential for big rewards. This will be done by recovering a percentage of the initial investments.

The market vacuum created by the Labcoin IPO allowed for some cheap(ish) bASIC shares to be picked up. The reason for my continuing investment in basic is that I have a lot of confidence in the operator of the company.

It’s been a busy week, so I didn’t send the email out regarding changes to the prospectus. I will do this by the end of the weekend. Also, I think I’ve found an easy way to disclose Sandstorms trades in more detail. This may be included in next weeks report.

Due to being involve in these IPO’s, Sandstorms NPV has seen a healthy lift.

Happy Trading.

Profits
2.004BTC selling Labcoin Shares

.446 BTC ASICminer Dividends
.015 BTC Cognitive Dividends
.024 BTC bASIC Dividends

-.51 Havelock fee (mainly for listing fee and IPO. This is totaled monthly)

Total =BTC 2.114(2BTC to dividends+.114BTC to carryover fund)

Dividends
2/100000 = .00002 per share

Last weeks assets


Assets
10 ASICminer direct shares (2.5)
6 ASICminer-PT shares (2.48)
4 ASICminer-PT shares(4.19)

4000 Labcoin Shares(.001)
10 Cognitive Shares (.28)
100 RentalStarter shares (.0149)
15 bASIC shares (.27)
15 bASIC shares (.41)
3000 Active Miner shares (.0025)

35.87 BTC

any updates?

Awesome! Thanks for the reply. Let’s see if I can whittle this down a bit so we don’t have to keep staring at walls of text as the thread goes on.

EDIT: Nevermind, it’s still a big wall of text


As I’m sure you know, this begs the question of why? If the object is to garner trust in your trading ability, then why not show that you’ve had successful trading experiences in the past? Even if you didn’t start off successfully, showing a progression and adaptation to Bitcoin markets over time (prior to starting Sandstorm) would go quite far.


No you didn’t. How I can be so confident in my answer? Simple. I read through all available information on your asset and there is no indication of the performance you’ve quoted. The “words on paper” phrase was used figuratively, meaning we’re to trust you know what you’re doing simply based on what you write in this thread. There isn’t any evidence to back your claims, and you’ve made it clear you’re heavily resistant to releasing any data that may change that. That seems a bit...peculiar…


I’m not missing the point at all. I’m giving you a third party perspective to what I’m reading throughout this thread. My advice – work on the quality of the service you’re selling.


Yeah, no worries. Differentiating between the two is a pretty common mistake among fund developers.

EDIT: I’m actually being serious. I’ve seen this mix-up a number of times, especially back in the GLBSE days.


You’re saying that you’re not guaranteeing a minimum 1% dividend, yet as you market your fund you state it’s a minimum expectation?

I see what you mean, but Holy poorly-worded-prospectus Batman! Maybe it would be better with something along the lines of “Through active trading, the goal of Sandstorm is to achieve a weekly dividend of 1% based on capital raised, but by no means is this guaranteed”. This leaves it open as a clearly stated weekly goal, instead of an expectation, which gives you the flexibility to go lower without as much uproar.


It is quite challenging, I agree. Any way you look at it, starting with a fixed amount of shares and then increasing that amount will result in dilution. The puzzle comes from minimizing the effects of the action and making sure that all investors are aware of any changes made ahead of time.


Ah, got it, and I definitely understand your concerns with respect to lack of capital, difficulty, etc.

If Sandstorm grows and increases its capital, would you consider purchasing mining equipment? The equipment would be beneficial in two ways: 1) Adding an additional revenue stream so the burden of relying solely on trading for income is lessened, and 2) adding physical assets to Sandstorm’s balance sheet (whenever that gets created), increasing the value of the company.

Obviously there’s more than just the cost of the hardware that needs to be considered when making the final purchase decision. It can get complicated, sure, but since when is diversifying your revenue streams something to be avoided?


Your solution definitely works quite well, and stifles any unreasonable expectations Investors may have should the company run into trouble.


For an investor, a company’s financial statements are by far the most important resource the company can provide.
Investors shouldn’t need to guesstimate about how the company is doing, how the company is managed, or how the portfolio progresses from day to day (or week to week) based on bits of information posted here and there. It’s the company’s job to provide investors with enough information where they are able to make a fully informed decision prior to investing.
You may believe there is sufficient information available, but in actuality the details are quite lacking. It seems you understand this, which is a step in the right direction. I hope to see an update on this soon, and I guarantee others will appreciate it as well.

If you need help creating an income or balance sheet, just ask! There’s plenty of people around here that are more than willing to lend a hand or give advice.


Correct, but if you’re investing in funds known to be a bit sketchy, how do you think investors will view your decisions?


And should you invest in securities outside of BTCT, what happens then? Suddenly we’ll only be able to see 75% of your holdings? 50%?

I look forward to your accounting updates.


And a quick proverb for the day, “The road to hell is paved with good intentions”. Investors are paid based on your actions, not your intentions.

I’m glad we’ve been able to address a number of concerns with the fund, and I always think it’s a good thing. It seems there’s still much to be done, but if you can pull it off I don’t doubt you’ll be able to grow your fund without a problem.

Weekly Report.
As expected, the thunderous finish to ActM’s capital raising was followed on by a rise in the share price. There is currently a lot of interest in this company. As time goes on it seems to be gaining investor loyalty. I expect that some solid activity from this company could create a spike in the price of these shares in the coming months. However, I still see this investment carrying considerable risk.

Another relatively stable week from ASICminer compared to it’s recent history.

Due to the fallout from SEC news, there was a lot of uncertainty and volatility created yesterday. I believe a fair bit of this was unwarranted. Still, negative sentiment could cause a downward trend in particular securities. Of course the BTC world moves very fast and this sentiment could evaporate by the end of the weekend.

Sandstorms reaction to this was to reduce its holdings in bASIC.

 At one stage during the “mayhem” someone bought up a large amount of ASICminer PT shares. Sandstorm sold into the ripples of this move. I just happened to be lucky enough to be watching the markets at that time.

These moves put Sandstorm in a relatively liquid position during this time of some uncertainty. The behaviour of the markets will be watched and some re-buys may be done over the coming week.

During this week a motion will put forward via email to major shareholders (greater than 1%). This will propose to clean up parts of the Sandstorm prospective which have been highlighted in this thread.

Unless something drastic happens, I believe Sandstorm is still in a very positive position.

Happy Trading.

Profits
.8BTC selling 500 AMC(now Active Mining) shares
4.6 BTC selling 20 bASIC shares
2.32BTC selling 4 ASICminer-PT shares

.577 BTC ASICminer Dividends
.009 BTC Cognitive Dividends
.039 BTC bASIC Dividends
.016 BTC Active Mining Dividends


Total =8.361BTC (2.5BTC to dividends+5.861BTC to carryover fund)

Dividends
2.5/100000 = .000025 per share

Last weeks assets



Assets
10 ASICminer direct shares (2.5)
6 ASICminer-PT shares (2.48)
4 ASICminer-PT shares(4.19)

10 Cognitive Shares (.28)
100 RentalStarter shares (.0149)
15 bASIC shares (.27)
3000 (.0025)

46.2 BTC

Mission complete
BTCT was interesting today any comments or will I need to wait on that  
11 Pages and 11 Days adds an 11 Reference

Thanks for the reply