ASICminer did very well for all its shareholders
im kicking myself for not buying in with my friend when it ipo'ed Don't, at the time there was a grand chance they'd just run with the money and never do anything. Investors who took that risk got compensated. |
|
|
|
this is not tulip mania and you didn't answer my question. dig deeper, you'll figure it out. tldr; is it something about Swarm Intelligence? Keynesian Beauty Contest anybody? |
|
|
|
In one way I'm glad this thread exists, in another way sad that I am too exhausted from all the meddling to participate and disappointed that this kind of discussion is only possible here in very rare cases. Currently I just can throw around some terms, Bayesian non-linear regression & feed forward neural networks. Oh an visiting classes...  |
|
|
|
|
For the lulz I suggest doing this poll in regular intervals (every months or so)
And make a chart of the development.
|
|
|
|
|
Do you realize the runaway effect that happens when the money received is used to buy additional assets (Bitcoins), the amount available on the market, the increased proportion of the asset a share might represents vs the value of all shares? I know it's complicated and the use of technical terms hinders understanding, sorry.
I wish I did fully understand it myself.
|
|
|
|
|
What is there to explain about it? This is how financial derivatives work.
Then what could happen is that either:
-A share represents more than 1/5 Bitcoin
-The share represents still 1/5 BTC for which they might issue additional shares
-something in-between
-This is all Bullshit and they are just leave it at the 200.000 Bitcoins
* It's all in above link albeit it's very technical and I don't quite understand it myself but I do notice the potential similarity*
|
|
|
|
How are the winklevoss propping it up? they are just allowing a larger market to express their demand. Not propping anything up.
They aren't, right now. And they haven't said they will. This is strictly theoretical. They own 200K BTC for which they sell 1M shares, all right so good. However since they are paid in Dollars they could use these Dollars to re-invest them in BTC. Get it? What? They would sell their ETF BTC to buy real BTC? Something something ponzi. Either I don't get your sarcasm or you don't get that this is entirety ethical and rational, just dangerous. |
|
|
|
How are the winklevoss propping it up? they are just allowing a larger market to express their demand. Not propping anything up.
They aren't, right now. And they haven't said they will. This is strictly theoretical. They own 200K BTC for which they sell 1M shares, all right so good. However since they are paid in Dollars they could use these Dollars to re-invest them in BTC. Get it? And depending on how the value of the ETF is derived this can result in a liquidity crisis as explained above. |
|
|
|
What I like to mention here, like I already described before is the dangerous game the Vinklevoss are playing if they decide to "prop up". If they leave it at the 200K and be done with it it wouldn't have any dire consequences, maybe siphon a few buyers off mtgox but overall stabilize the price. However if they do prop up it will lead to a very chaotic market where due to insufficient liquidity prices rally up crazy and crash instantly after the liquidity returns. There is an interesting academic work on the subject which you can observe here: http://demonstrations.wolfram.com/TheHazardsOfProppingUpBubblesAndChaos/ |
|
|
|
|
Bulls are finding their feet now, this could be interesting.
|
|
|
|
Would anyone be surprised to learn that the Winklevoss twins were almost solely responsible for pumping Bitcoin from single to triple digits with bid-walls?
No more surprised than to hear that they now want to cash out and realise that they can't  Wouldn't it make more sense to take cash from the IPO to manipulate the price further before cashing out? They might have enough cash and coins to drive the price up and down at will. Yes, I already mentioned that, it's called propping up and it leads to insane volatility or more specifically flash crashes with crazy rallies in between. The IPO IS them cashing out. Yes they can use their own cash to manipulate the price prior to an IPO, but that would mean buying more coins, the very things they are trying to get rid of. A dangerous game, especially in what is looking more and more like a bear market. And very telling that they applied at time when the price was at the psychologically significant $100 mark. Smells of FEAR to me. Perhaps they are the reason for the gap between us and other exchanges right now as they try to prop up the price Yes it would lead to them buying more coins, but it doesn't require irrational acting (on their part and on their clients), you are right the outcome would be disastrous. It's a bitter-sweet paradise for daytraders... since it increases both chaos and potential gains. |
|
|
|
Would anyone be surprised to learn that the Winklevoss twins were almost solely responsible for pumping Bitcoin from single to triple digits with bid-walls?
No more surprised than to hear that they now want to cash out and realise that they can't Wouldn't it make more sense to take cash from the IPO to manipulate the price further before cashing out? They might have enough cash and coins to drive the price up and down at will. Yes, I already mentioned that, it's called propping up and it leads to insane volatility or more specifically flash crashes with crazy rallies in between. |
|
|
|
You realize that anybody who buys their security does this instead of buying Bitcoins on for example Gox? It could be the case the kind of people who are willing to buy the ETF would never have been willing to buy on Mt Gox at all. Nah, I don't think so. My rationale behind this: Whale sightings. |
|
|
|
Well, look on the bright side, at least they are not selling them now on the exchange !
You realize that anybody who buys their security does this instead of buying Bitcoins on for example Gox? Of course one might suggest they will be propping up, which should yield pretty lulzy results in regards to volatility. Golden times folks!  |
|
|
|
|
humanitee, you know what's irony?
The Winkledouches are actually faced with the dilemma of doing just that.
Also, where is Loaded?
|
|
|
|
Also watching this clusterfuck isn't nearly as much fun without the lag.  |
|
|
|
 GG, campBx now at $0.00 Someone dumped 2k coins there all the way to 0. Poor guy probably thought there was more depth. Auch ! Well, at least he made some other people very happy.... Not showing up at bitcoinity. |
|
|
|
|
BTC-e is already at 75 btw.
|
|
|
|
ASIC miners are losing money (putting more money into hardware and taking it out of the economy). Most of them just haven't realized how much they will lose yet at which point we'll have a real bear market.
Also - Google search trends have BTC valued around $25-$30 now (eg. search volume is twice as high as what is was in the beginning of 2013, and down a ton from the peak of the bubble).
Most of ASICs were paid with BTC by people who want to mine more BTC than they paid for hardware. Miners are not one who are or will bring the price down, it's ASIC manufacturers who are doing that. astute observation In a gold rush money is in the shovels - cash only. |
|
|
|
possible bottom is $44 (but in zero sum game it is not possible to sell @ $90 and buy back @ $45 for everyone) :-)
LOL somebody is showing colors. What a hypocrite!  Sharp downtrends consistently seem to bring out the worst in you. You're like an inverse rpietila. Sharp downtrends bring out the worst in all of us |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
