Topic: SCAM IPO [Bakewell] - Finally, a 'transparent' investment that will 'grow'! - page 15. (Read 47857 times)

Yeah - it may seem counterintuitive, but having an ask-wall up all the time will sell less shares than only having it up occasionally.  I believe there's a few reasons for this:

1.  The huge wall looks insurmountable - it gives the impression that the company has run into a brick-wall.  If the potential invstor hasn't read the whole thread (and most don't - as evidenced by the total junk people invest in) then they may get the impression nothing will happen until all have sold.
2.  There's no urgency for potential investors to but with a huge wall - they know it'll still be there tomorrow/next week.
3.  The wall totally prevents investment for short-term speculation, immediately ruling out an entire class of investors.

I think limiting the amount of shares is a great idea.  There are several mining operations that have left a huge ask-wall up, and prices have only dropped.  The operations which have had a more controlled release of shares have seemed to at least maintain prices.

You asked for any suggestions I had - so here gos.

First off, just resetting the price (as you propose) would have exactly the wrong result.  The price CAN'T go over 0.15 because of the ceiling - so what your proposal does is guarantee that the price of shares wll progressively fall.  That's not something your investors are going to like too much  - remember that a lowered price per share for further issues has a double-whammy effect on existing investors:

1.  It locks them into a loss on their share value.,
2.  For each new piece of equipment you buy more shares have to be sold (as the price/share is lower) - meaning their portion of dividends gets diluted more than hashing power increases.

What you need to do is give prices a chance to rise - and the key to that is patience.  So here's my suggestion (only a quick sketch of it - as it's 4.00am and I need to head to bed shortly):

Remove further new shares from the market other than sufficient to buy your next rig.  Once those have sold, no new ones will be made available immediately.

Let the price adjust itself.  If/when that price settles above 0.15 for some significant amount of time then announce that the next block of shares will be made available in a week (or whatever time-scale).  That block should be sufficient to buy your next rig (i.e. the cost of it less any portion of mining income reserved for expansion).  At the predefined time/date you sell that block into the market at 0.15.  Any pre-orders above .15 would of course get filled first.  That surplus above 0.15 could be put towards expansion or dividended out to all share-holders post-sale.

How does this help?

1.  The price can rise above 0.15.  That removes one of the current problems - tha tanyone buying shares KNOWS WITH CERTAINTY that if they ever need to liquidate (in the foreseeable future) they're guaranteed to take a loss doing it (not strictly true for those who bulk-purchased).
2.  A lot of investors like the possibility of buying shares in an IPO then selling them afterwards for a profit.  At present that's impossible.  This gives a window in which profts can be taken.
3.  If even a single share sells on issue at above 0.15 then existing investors have gained from it.  Rewarding your early investors is always a good idea.

In essence you need to reduce/regulate supply so the market can set a price.  If that price happens to be below 0.15 then the simple truth is that you wouldn't have sold much more even if you'd left the Ask-wall up.  Already I see some slightly lower asks going up - and that is BOUND to continue if things don't change: as there's nowhere someone who wants to sell can price an ask except below 0.15.  What about new investors who would have bought shares if you left the wall up?  They'd be buying off current investors at below 0.15 right now - with the wall gone (albeit temproarily) there's at least a cahnce those trades will occur above 0.15.  WHich doesn't directly help you sell MORE shares - but at a minimum is more encouraging for current investors.

Let the market show you whether/when there's demand for more shares at 0.15 (or above) - if you see the demand there then fill it.  If there's not the demand then the Ask-wall does nothing anyway.

If I had a gear to put in I would be mining for myself. The whole point of Bakewell is to pool resources and start a mining operation, with reasonable transparency and a clear plan regarding the transition to ASICs.

Oh, okay. Nevermind.

Ian knows why that statement is there, in the future please don't come to my companies thread and talk trash or I'll be here to talk trash in yours.

 

So have you bought any gear yet?  Paid any dividends?

What are you planning on buying a couple boxes with 2 7970s in them?

Puts you at ~2.6Ghash?

Thats about  6 BTC a week, half paid as a dividend to shareholders.  3 BTC spread over 5000 shares @ .125 each 625 BTC, thats about 0.5% per week.  With no ASIC gear on order.

Wow, I didn't realize how light the payout is when the operater doesn't put any gear in to start the company.

This has got to be one of the fun parts of managing a mining asset... getting to spend thousands on equipment.
Have fun, and make us proud.
Don't forget to wheel and deal a little. Ask the manager for discounts if you spend more than X thousand. The worst that can happen is that they say "no."

Yeah what you're describing sounds good, it is more just my curiosity, not that I don't trust Ian.

Sure, a spreadsheet would be nice. I'd be happy with a general biweekly report stating income from btc mined and sales of equipment, and payouts and various expenses. No need for details. In case you are concerned whether we are getting good deals, get in touch with Ian with questions and suggestions.

I see we're now at 5006 in the wild!

When do we expect to have our first rig up and running?

Also, does anyone else think it may be a good idea to have a spreadsheet documenting where money is spent and recieved from?

Yes. I can vouch that Gigabyte cards are covered under 3-year manufacturer's warranty, based on serial number. Reselling is not a problem.

My only fear is: the person who purchases the rig expects any kind of warranty. If no warranty is given, then resell price could be hurt.

Nice I think the high resale value of GPUs is a really important factor right now.

hi Ian bakewell

Do you have any clues about how much Mh/s will be generated per share?

I say (as a shareholder) that BAKEWELL should avoid BFL. Have any opinions on https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=110090.0?

Glad to see we are making progress, and looking forward to first dividends!

Woot!


Please put these numbers and hardware inventory in a public spreadsheet.


Awesome.

This is why we (the investors) pay the operators of mining companies (like Ian) a fee or a percentage.
It's Ian's job to look out for all of our best interests in BAKEWELL.

Keep us updated just like you have on everything else. There are other ASIC companies out there.

Woo!  Getting close to our first rig!