It will be interesting to see what effect the newly-launched DMS.MINING asset has on the price of TAT.VIRTUALMINE, and vice-versa, as they are similar (not identical!) assets and both offered in the BTCT.co ecosystem.
TAT.VIRTUALMINE is the equivalent of 1 MH/s
DMS.MINING is the equivalent of 5 MH/s
with TAT at .0075, DMS.MINING should be at 5*(.0075) = .0375.
So either Mining is undervalued or TAT is overvalued if one were to take a simplistic view at the situation.
the thing is, you can't convert either to the other in the equivalent hashrate since they're both virtual assets... (you can't take 5 of TAT.VIRTUALMINE and convert to hashrate, then sell that hashrate for 1 DMS.MINING. You have to do it in BTC, which is not tied to the hashrate at all.) At least, not like how you could take a BFL device and trade it for an equivalent hashrate in Avalon chips, anyway. They're both really nothing more than 2nd-tier bonds* backed by the issuers' reputations and promises to repay. So value against each other can't be made against hashrate, it has to be compared using dividends.
I know, I know, it's splitting hairs since the dividends for both are exactly 5:1 to each other, identical to the hashrate ratio between them. But a better comparison would be "TAT.VIRTUALMINE pays x dividends per day, and DMS.MINING pays 5x dividends per day (ignoring the DMS.SELLING dividend for the sake of simplicity here, since the conversation is focusing on the mining divs anyway.)" Then you're left with rate of return on the original purchase price, along with a confidence multiplier based on the reputation and promise to repay of the issuer in regards to the actual dividends. When you boil it down, THAT'S the real comparison between the two issues - ability to repay and track record of repayment. (This appears to me to be flat between the two, by the way.) The wrench in the clockworks is the way the purchase price is worked out with DMS, since you can buy more at the lower static value the issuer sets if the market price of the derivatives start to approach TAT's value per hash. DMS.MINING is effectively building in a permanent undervalue situation compared to TAT's free market rate, effectively capping the rate of return for DMS "buy and hold" investors (
UNLESS the "SELLING" derivative works a different way than I understand, but I'm pretty sure I understand it.) Kinda weird way to do it if you ask me, but it's an extremely interesting experiment at the very least.
*I don't mean "2nd-tier" as a slight by ANY means - I mean they are both backed by other company's assets, and not on their own assets. I own a very little of both primarily for the educational value.