Topic: The coming flash crash in AMC - page 8. (Read 29407 times)

Price bubbles aren't the only thing turning people against bitcoin.  Getting ripped off while using bitcoin tends to make people blame bitcoin, not the con artist who cheated them.

I would have to dispute one of your claims.  Buying AMC shares at 0.0008 will not be profitable in the long run.  One tenth of that price might be a good buy, if you can trust Ken with money.

Two points:

1)  In no way does bitcoin security performance effect bitcoin overall.  Unfortunately, the only thing holding bitcoin back at the moment is public acceptance.  The problem is, every time the public gets involved, the price bubbles, pops and scares the public off.  We need to diversify the exchanges enough so that arbitrage can calm the market to a minimum level of stability.

2) All fun aside, Ken really thinks AMC is a real company and a solid investment.  Will it be Asicminer 2.0? No, most definitely not.  Is it profitable @ .0008 / share? Yes.  Is it a scam? No.  Might the U.S. Gov. crack down on AMC/VMC for the multiple questionable business practices? Yes.

I'm no longer an AMC share holder.  I will admit that I made quite a bit of BTC off of this roller coaster ride.  However, in my heart, I believe Ken is being truthful and has only the best intentions in mind.  His business plan however admittedly is faulty.

I will say however that I have a sneaking suspicion that VBS and Lewiki are both part of AMC and not 'normal' share holders.

Also.. Please stop holding burnside in some way responsible.  That's just stupid.  He leaves it up to the shareholders to approve new securities.  AMC was already trading on bitfunder, there was at the time no compelling reason to deny the listing.

Most sites just charge a fee and you are listed.  Your contract could say that you will use the money to 'Kill Whitey' and you could still be trading.

I had thought BTCT.co would be different as they do have a review process, but they failed miserably in this instance.  It looks like buyers there lost 750 BTC in the last 2 days so maybe changes will be made.

More likely not though.

AMC isn't even a company, it is only a unit under VMC. How could it be approved for public trading?

Paying dividends to 'unsold' shares in this manner is actually illegal... it can be classed as money laundering, the  corporate profit is being pumped out of the company via a back door into a privately controlled external entity.
This would get you 10-15 in Hong Kong....

Normally the exchange should sanction the directors, but again they have no actual 'legal power' other than say 'don't do it again'.
A possible option would be to prevent further listings by the people involved, but to do that the exchange would need the status of  be something that people WANT to be listed on, unfortunately allowing such behavior is just undermining the whole system.

Bitcoin is not going to get anywhere fast as regards adoption, if it is considered a haven for drug dealers, money launders and dodgy business practices.

There wasn't much flash to it, but it sure as hell crashed.

It's nice to know folks read my posts.  

I'm going to go out on a limb here and make another prediction:

Within 2 weeks AMC will break below the 0.0005 early investor price if Ken doesn't restructure the company.

Assets only support a price of 1/10 of that level, and that is before we consider the self dealing to VMC that bleeds value out of AMC.  Even the newbs are reading the fine print and realizing what a ripoff the stock is at this point.  It's no longer just Minor Miner, Deprived and myself beating the drum.

Probably a family member.

What is that?

Lol, Ken and his accomplice are trying really hard to work the price up again, but smart investors have learnt the lesson and not fall to his trap again, no one is buying his shit anymore.

The AMC thread has become such a train wreck I am going to preserve this here.  It's informative to see how much value Ken is skimming before you even consider the gift of IP rights to himself.

Essentially shareholders provide all the capital, take all the risk, get no IP rights, and 8% of the profits from AMC.

Of course it could.  But you would have to ask why he would do so.  He's already grabbed $500 000 for himself.  Why would he change direction now.

Based on his actions, I would examine any 'gifts' from Ken carefully.  They are likely to be more trojan horse than attempts to make things fair for his investors.

What if Ken re-wrote the contract to give him less power in AMC in regards to controlling the share prices and issuing shares. Do you guys think that would help AMC and it's investors?

Ken is free under his contract to crash it to 0.0005 whenever he chooses.

Based on the assets of the company it is worth about 0.00006  (that is 60 millionths of a BTC).  But the self dealing terms make it worth zero in my eyes.

Another imminent crash coming, if the support at 0.0008 does not hold, it would be a freefall back to IPO price!

Very true. Having a poorly run investment exchange is just welcoming government problems. Look at what happened to mtgox. Obviously that is a different scenario, but it shows that you have to run a tight ship. Having a bitcoin securities exchange that is irresponsible as far as assets it allows is asking for problems. The concept of wild west investing when using bitcoin should be abandoned when it is obvious that the asset is a delusion investment.

Bitfunder/BTCTC/others: please be responsible in what you allow to be listed. Fancy spreadsheets, "estimates" and big promises should be considered worthless. At least have a warning on specific assets that (a) do not have hardware in hand (b) are heavily based on research/development before profit occurs (c) cashflow will not occur for over 3 months.

I keep seeing these assets being listed that are basically "Ordered asic chips from xyc. They are expected to be here in 3-6 months. Pay off my initial cost, believe my estimates and share in the mined bitcoin". Its awful.

I think AMC would struggle with 10TH at that time.

Eh, because the highest risk anyone is willing to take on is actually buying AMC at the IPO price. From Wikipedia:

"A naked call occurs when a speculator writes (sells) a call option on a security without ownership of that security. It is one of the riskiest options strategies because it carries unlimited risk as opposed to a naked put where the maximum loss occurs if the stock falls to zero."

For bearish call option sellers, the same is true when the price rises. No one should be writing naked call options - that makes investing in BTC securities look conservative.

Oh, according to Asicminer's estimate, network hashrate will reach 0.8-1P by the end of 2013.

Wiser than me! Fortunately AMC's shares are so "cheap" I bought a few thousand and thought "that's enough" for now. When I realized how dodgy an investment it was, I sold them at a loss and put them in ASICIMINER, who incidentally have just announced they will be releasing "800-1000T hashing power this year". And what they announce historically normally happens.

I wish people who are really good in those analytics like Deprived would be included in the valuation of new securities, it really hurts btct.co's and Bitcoins reputation when you include crappy moneygrabs in there.

I was also tempted to put money in this as I saw it got zero "no"-votes and people buying lots of this. (But then I saw this big wall and thought, well better wait a while and take your time to read what this is about)