|
Thanks, I agree as far as mass adoption goes; hopefully bitcoin will benefit the masses there in the long run.
However I was referring more to current events in India and the possibility that bitcoin could soon become a viable option for the wealthier class to avoid some of the recent regulation such as capital controls, curbs on gold importation, etc.
|
|
|
|
|
I'm just speculating here, but the situation in India is becoming increasingly favourable to bitcoin adoption:
- rupee has fallen to record lows against the usd;
- new capital controls imposed (Aug 14th) to stop cash flowing out of the country and stem the decline of the rupee;
- gold buying manipulation;
- stock market plunging;
- bonds near 10%;
- India's economy seems to be on the brink of financial crisis.
|
|
|
|
|
Reality check: law of supply and demand - price will fall.
|
|
|
|
Cointerra is operating on $1.5M startup funding without preorders. Considering AM has a market cap of $160M or so right now, I'd say that qualifies as "extremely low". Show me a company in another industry with the credible potential to displace $160M of market cap in a year on $1.5M startup funding, and I'll retract that statement.
Business plans are cheap. Not at all. I said "detailed financial documents". I can see from the pricing of their hardware and their share of the hashrate what is happening to their margins. I just don't know how much they have shrunk.
That's right, you don't know. Would you mind constructing a counterargument besides "that's wrong"? The S&P is indeed shortable and I believe it is closer to fair value than AM is. And enormous divs and few alternatives creates artificial positive demand - surely you can agree with that.
I did, it's there, read again. I disagree that it's 'artificial'. Shareholders are not forced into reinvesting, they receive divs in btc and they have other options, including converting to fiat if they choose. |
|
|
|
Now, that could be a ponzi scheme. So could AM, theoretically.
Assuming you understand what ponzi means, there goes any last remaining trace of credibility you may have had. |
|
|
|
That's funny, because it seems to me that AM's current valuation is based primarily on red herrings, heavily biased opinion, and conjecture.
Very unoriginal. AM as a company is extremely high-risk.
This is partly why you are so tiresome, the relentless spamming of risk at every possible opportunity. We know AM is risky. We get it, ok? AM operates in a rapidly shifting competitive landscape; ok we get that, we know it's risky, as is any stock (the S&P 500 could easily plunge 50% from current levels); maybe risk is what we like, now move on. Its revenue stream is demonstrably unstable (whatever happened to the 20% FC was going to maintain?).
So what, it's stable enough. Instability is a given in many industries. AM is not even 1 yr old; it's an emergent industry. We get that, now move on. It is beset by competition with extremely low barriers to entry.
Disagree. Exremeley low barriers - rubbish. It is publicly traded but does not release detailed financial documents. Its profit margins are shrinking even as its revenue decreases. Management is competent but barely transparent.
Then surely you are contradicting yourself. How can you comment on the financial position with such limited financial docs transparency? Most importantly, the share price does not appear to appreciate the risk, and from a simple perspective:
1) There is no ability to short-sell the stock, enabling overvaluation
2) There are enormous dividends and few alternatives for diversification, resulting in a lot of dividend reinvestment and therefore overvaluation
As a reasonably successful value investor in the traditional exchanges, this is a textbook case of a company I'd continually buy put options on until adjustment.
Wrong on all points. Risk is an individual matter; I'm happy with the prevailing 30+%. Perhaps you feel more secure with 60%? Enabling overvaluation does not mean it is overvalued. The S&P is shortable but that doesn't mean it is not overvalued. Enormous divs and few alternatives does not in and of itself cause overvaluation. It is only in your opinion that AM is overvalued; I think it is undervalued. If detracting opinions are tiresome to you, that's unfortunate, but I think it's healthy to have someone around here to disrupt the group-think. I assure you I am open to ideas I have not yet considered and my investment thesis is based on math and logic (or at least my version of those). If you disagree with me, and you can articulate why, I am happy to have that discussion.
Critical thinking, for or against, is very much appreciated and more than welcome. I'd love to see some. |
|
|
|
FC has already said he would be distributing operations in order to minimise geopolitical and other risks. Franchising further reduces those risks. FC is two steps ahead. Vycid is two steps behind.
Friedcat is planning to restructure his business (always risky) in order to remain competitive with a business model that his competitors will ostensibly have right off the bat. Franchising is a good idea to go beyond 20% of the hashrate without appearing to threaten to the stability of the network. Since he's nowhere near 20% right now, it's just a good way to cut into profit margins. Being in this business is risky; AM is evolving to stay ahead. Ostensibly has no basis in fact. Franchising is an additional revenue stream. Hash rate fluctuates so 'right now' is irrelevant. If you can come up with something worthwhile that doesn't equally apply to any upcoming potential competition then great, but otherwise all the red herrings, heavily biased opinion, and conjecture but no substance is getting very tiresome. |
|
|
|
|
FC has already said he would be distributing operations in order to minimise geopolitical and other risks. Franchising further reduces those risks. FC is two steps ahead. Vycid is two steps behind.
|
|
|
|
Share prices of 50 BTC/share would be a market cap of 20 million BTC. Forget the near term - this will never happen, which should be immediately obvious given a long-term bitcoin money supply of 21 million.
Vycid see replies to your previous post on p572 |
|
|
|
I'm well aware of transaction fees; their potential simply does not justify ASICMiner's P/E of 100, especially as their first mover advantage is about to come under fire. The magnitude of the hype around this company is unreal.
How do you figure P/E of 100? |
|
|
|
Im actually quite happy to have bought AM shares back in the GLBSE days and i'm looking forward to buy more. I found this: https://www.havelockinvestments.com/fund.php?symbol=AM1 Is this a legitimate way to purchase AM shares? The text there sounds like AM is in contract with havenlock investments? Yes, legit. |
|
|
|
Basic math shows how overpriced the shares are: there are ~10million more bitcoins left to be mined over the next century or so. Even if ASICMiner were able to maintain 20% of the total network hashrate throughout that period (breathtakingly unlikely), they'd only mine 2million BTC. Split between the 400,000 shares that creates an upper limit of 5BTC/share.
and how much in tx fees over that time? |
|
|
|
Bitcoiners are a very idealistic and optimistic bunch, so naturally there's people waiting to buy AM shares at BTC3.8 on the belief that "it's just worth more". But equities markets are often savage in their adjustments, and this is a serious powder keg... I'm going to go on record as saying that AM will not yield 1.6 million bitcoins in profit in the next ten years (P/E ratio of 10). When people realize that, and try to cash in on their shares, there will be bagholders.
Fact: Over 30% APR. No idealism necessary. Fact: 10 year forecast is pure fantasy. |
|
|
|
Vycid it's good for us to hear opinions from all sides, but seriously: The reality is that most people that own AM shares are very optimistic about the company.
You don't know that. Maybe some are very optimistic. But most? You claim that is the reality. Most are probably cautiously optimistic, but then I'd be just guessing. But so what? It's probably true in as much as shareholders of any company are cautiously optimistic about that company. It's hardly a reason to sell out. It's certainly not proof that the share's are overpriced which is what you are implying, in the context of your post. So those huge dividends have, to a large degree, been rolled back into the company rather than being invested in other ventures. This artificially inflates share prices.
Generating 'huge' divs is a good thing and whether the share price fully reflects that or not only time will tell. That those divs aren't being reinvested in other ventures is not a bad thing in and of itself, that would depend on the particular venture. It's certainly a pretty long bow to draw to say that since FC hasn't made such investments the share price is artificially inflated, in fact you could easily come to the opposite conclusion. As the margins on hardware decrease and cause the dividends to shrink
It's not that simple. There's more to divs than hardware sales. There are other revenue streams. Also, you have to factor in volume of hardware sales not simply margin. (this will happen - in fact, it already has happened to some extent),
I don't know where you're seeing that or over what time frame, but I suspect you're cherry picking some data to validate your position. that upward pressure on the share price will dissipate, and there will be a price adjustment.
You hope. Hope based on logical analysis? Mmm, don't know if I see that. And that doesn't even consider any adjustment due to the fact that the company is less profitable in the first place.
Huh? Say what? Less profitable than what? No offense Vycid, but if you think you are starting to sound a little bit, erm, extreme, in defense of your short position. And a serious question, do you really think the APR should be back in the 40% to 50% range? |
|
|
|
when are the divs usually announced?
About 3hrs from now. |
|
|
|
Neither ASICMiner's share of the network hashrate, not its exorbitant markups on hardware sales, are sustainable in the face of pending competition. Share price will be lucky to be half today's value this time next year.
Have you heard about the coming 1000TH/s of gen1 chips and december prototype of gen2 chip? It looks like you haven't. Or franchising. |
|
|
|
BTC price up, AM down. Surprised no one else has been watching the correlations. They swing inversely pretty tightl.
I don't see it, can you post a pic of what you are looking at please? |
|
|
|
Becoming insulting. Thats all you got? LOL!
You started with the personal insults, so that's another idiotic statement. In terms of friedcat and ASICMINER we where talking about the corruption that usual businesses in china face EVERYDAY and the threats that is imposing to ASICMINER. Such corruption is simply not happening in the US. In china there is simply no jurisdiction that you can rely on. That means that a random functionary of the communist party can force you to pay him his new pool or tomorrow you wont be doing business anymore.
To complain and whine about evil wall street may or may not be justified, but in this context of ASICMINER and doing business in china it is simply annoying and missplaced.
My comment was 4 words spoken in jest you could have easily ignored; the complaining, whining, annoying, retarded missplaced goofy comments are all yours. Nice attempt to get back on topic though, let's keep it there. |
|
|
|
I don't know how anyone does business in china - so damn corrupt.
Yeah, not like Wall St  Wall Street = Exchhange China = State So if you wanna compare those then compare China to the US. And no, the US is not even close when it comes to corruption. Everyone who has lives in China for some time and did business will gurantee you that. I "gurantee" you are wrong: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wall_Street is the financial district of New York City,[2] named after and centered on the eight-block-long, 0.7 miles (1.1 km) long street running from Broadway to South Street on the East River in Lower Manhattan. Over time, the term has become a metonym for the financial markets of the United States as a whole, the American financial sector (even if financial firms are not physically located there), or signifying New York-based financial interests. Doesnt matter one bit. Compare Wall Street to the Chinese financial sector. OK. or Compare China to the US. OK. But dont do those goofy wannabe comparisons while whining about the so evil Wall Street. If you wanna compare then compare Wall Street with the Chinese financial sector. Of course it matters you fucking retard. |
|
|
|
I don't know how anyone does business in china - so damn corrupt.
Yeah, not like Wall St Wall Street = Exchhange China = State So if you wanna compare those then compare China to the US. And no, the US is not even close when it comes to corruption. Everyone who has lives in China for some time and did business will gurantee you that. I "gurantee" you are wrong: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wall_Street is the financial district of New York City,[2] named after and centered on the eight-block-long, 0.7 miles (1.1 km) long street running from Broadway to South Street on the East River in Lower Manhattan. Over time, the term has become a metonym for the financial markets of the United States as a whole, the American financial sector (even if financial firms are not physically located there), or signifying New York-based financial interests. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
