Help me out here. You've sold 2M shares at 0.0005 for a total of 1000 BTC. You bought over 1000 BTC worth of avalon chips.
How much other capital do you have?
Because I don't see how you have funds to build boards for the avalon chips, let alone pay for masks on your own device.
The avalon chips costed ฿782.10, you can see the screenshot in https://bitfunder.com/asset/AMC > Profile > Images. Don't know how much the boards will cost.  |
|
|
|
Thanks lewicki for your opinion. This is a high risk investment which offers a very high return if we can pull off being the next ASICminer. I am going to do my best to make sure this does not go down in flames. One thing you can count on is I have the ability to turn a business around when things are not going in the right direction. I was able to turn around my ISP business when the Free internet services started taking a lot of my business. I was able to adapt to the current climate, then as the Free services dried up, I was able to have the ISP business grow for another 6 years until dial up internet dried up. This business is a little different, I don't expect those kind of problems, but there could be others. I will be ready for them if and when they come.
Succinctly, mining is mostly a silicon time race, king of the hill style! The biggest issues to solve are (1) hardware quantity/quality/price equilibrium and (2) time for deployment. ASICminer went the quantity+time route, delivering in bulk before mostly anyone else (mining+selling), and are now reaping the benefits. I would say we have a pretty good starting point, but I would be much more relaxed if we had ( today) 50k chips incoming instead of 10k.  |
|
|
|
TradeFortress, Have you thought about doing a weekly report/dividend payout? Keep up the great work! |
|
|
|
New image of Avalon's shopping cart with the 6 Avalon's and the chip order. Also, image of the 10,000 chip order. https://bitfunder.com/asset/AMC profile->images Thanks! Waiting eagerly to see another 10k chip order in there! |
|
|
|
So from the 40 million shares only 2 million have been sold?
If that's the case, I hope they don't sell the next batches at .0005 again?
I would not count on .0005 again, I don't see that happening unless there is a crazy demand for capital. I can't rule that out, but I don't see it happening. When the Avalon's get here and start mining there is going to be an inflow of capital to AMC from the 20 Million growth and expansion fund shares. Thanks for the clarification! In any case, the 0.0006/share is selling fast! |
|
|
|
So from the 40 million shares only 2 million have been sold?
If that's the case, I hope they don't sell the next batches at .0005 again?
Don't fret so much about the price. It's all a matter of volume. E.g., it's better to sell more at 0.0005 than less at 0.0006, if that means getting more batches of chips sooner than later. Time is really of the essence here. |
|
|
|
Are there any shares left at .0005?
Not guaranteedly, only if Ken/AMC decides to sell them at that price to cover for additional hardware/expenses. The only guaranteed prices are the ones in the ask wall. Take your chances! |
|
|
|
SPRINGFIELD, MO, – May 28, 2013 – VMC a manufacturer of the Fast-Hash Bitcoin Mining Machines is announcing today that they have ordered (Order: #10409) a full batch (10,000) of Avalon chips to build ~29 Fast-Hash-80's for AMC should AMC provide the capital in the next few weeks, this would bring AMC machine total to 39 units. The 39 machines will bring the cooperatives hash power to 3,504,000 MH/s, 3,504 GH/s, or 3.504 TH/s. At the current Difficulty of 12,153,411.71 this will bring the estimated total revenue as of this writing to a total of $19,280.28 per day and a yearly amount of $5,398,450.75. AMC is a hybrid mining and development cooperative and a business unit of VMC.
Very nice! Now, lets round up the funds for yet another 10k chips! |
|
|
|
I still expect the issuer to sell more at 0.0005 if that means getting more hardware sooner than later. Mining is a time race.
> AMC may issue up to 20,000,000 "Early-Adopters" shares which may be posted for no less than 0.0005 BTC each and will also issue 20,000,000 growth and expansion fund shares to AMC. > AMC will only issue 40,000,000 shares (20,000,00 "Early-Adopter and 20,000,000 AMC growth and expansion fund shares) > Additional shares may be sold at no less than .001 BTC each. Vbs, I could be missing something, but since 40M shares have been issued at .0005, can AMC really sell additional shares at a lower price than .001 ? 40M were issued (created), but not sold. |
|
|
|
I still expect the issuer to sell more at 0.0005 if that means getting more hardware sooner than later. Mining is a time race. But why does he need to sell at 0.0005 though? Why not let the market decide how much they are willing to pay per share and sell at that price or perhaps just slightly lower? It really only depends on the rate at which the funds are needed. For example, imagine he needs more coins for hardware now and starts selling at 0.0006; after awhile realizes he isn't selling anything because there are a lot of flippers dumping shares between 0.0005 and 0.0006. No income would mean less assets/missed chances for the cooperative, which is a much higher toll than selling more at 0.0005. |
|
|
|
|
I still expect the issuer to sell more at 0.0005 if that means getting more hardware sooner than later. Mining is a time race.
|
|
|
|
Short update: Nothing to update yet.. Still waiting for response from BitFunder. I have stated that I would be happy if I was issued more shares to bring down my average share price to .0005.
The price has been stable at .0005 since the IPO issue was brought up on this thread, so maybe calling the IPO misleading wasn't too far-fetched after all?
Pointless actually, since anyone that had bids at 0.0005 got those filled. Instead of waiting, you chose to buy immediately at the ask price. Your choice. Moral of the story: Next time, don't buy without seeing if the same thing is being offered at a better price. |
|
|
|
Understand.
Company: established 2 months ago, assets amounting to one non-delivered order of 6 avalon machines (and some plans about future growth). Market value: USD 2.6 million.
Correct?
You can't assume market value solely on price, without taking into account volume. Your estimation assumes all shares are sold (volume). Market capitalization is equal to the share price x shares outstanding. Shares outstanding are all the shares of a corporation or financial asset that have been authorized, issued and purchased by investors and are held by them. |
|
|
|
Nowhere I did see the statement that shares would be all selled using solely an "ask wall" method. It was stated that the price could rise due to demand.
Sure, neither does it state that they are sold on Pay-what-you-bid basis. Exactly. The correct quote on the contract is "If demand is strong enough then share prices may increase throughout the IPO", so we agree that a fixed 0.0005 at all times was never promised? The assumption you make about the demand is false. It took two months for the volume to decrease from 5 to 4.6mil. He created an illusion of demand by removing the stock of the market. That's the problem.
The stock was issued, you can't "take it back". If you check the Profile>Details tab on Bitfunder, there is 40,000,000 issued. What you mean is that an illusion of scarcity was created when the ask wall at 0.0005 was removed. In the end, that is a benefit for AMC, since it allows to see the real market value of shares, instead of keeping a fixed minimum price. All shareholders benefit from a higher sell value, as it increases the holdings of the company their shares belong to. Overvalued stock? So, they would be happy to pay higher for their stock, just not to the issuer? They would be really happy now, knowing they had bought from a flipper and not helping AMC a bit. Nice logic there.
Sorry, this make no sense. Of course, they would pay the flipper. Just in case you did not think that far that's what happens with stocks when IPO is bought out. Currently when people buy most stock on BitFunder they are buying it from someone who is flipping. Thats the big problem with BitFunder and IPOs. It's not designed to handle them well. Only the issuer should be allowed to sell shares during an IPO period. |
|
|
|
That's a bullshit argument. The contract reads like shares would be issued in batches or starting with a placement of 5 mil which would not come and go willy-nilly. Evidence? At least two people above thought IPO closed out and bought overvalued stock.
Nowhere I did see the statement that shares would be all selled using solely an "ask wall" method. It was stated that the price could rise due to demand. Overvalued stock? So, they would be happy to pay higher for their stock, just not to the issuer? They would be really happy now, knowing they had bought from a flipper and not helping AMC a bit. Nice logic there. |
|
|
|
Your point being? I'm not in this to flip anything.
I'm really starting to think you're in this to make sure AMC is only offered at a minimum price, like that would be really beneficial for the cooperative and its shareholders in the long run. Also, you have clearly no idea of the various price strategies that shares can be sold in an IPO. Pay-what-you-bid was used in the IPO of Japan Telecom, for example. Thinking that IPO shares can only be sold all at the same price reveals quite the lack of market knowledge. EDIT: It is also pretty straightforward to see that if you bought shares at price X, everytime the issuer sells shares at a price: - Lower than X: your shares lost value - Same as X: your shares kept value - Higher than X: your shares increased in value It is of the best interest of anyone that bought shares at prices higher than 0.0005 that the issuer stops selling everything at 0.0005 now. |
|
|
|
It is sad to see history so quickly forgotten. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Initial_public_offering#Pricing_of_IPOHistorically, some IPOs both globally and in the United States have been underpriced. The effect of "initial underpricing" an IPO is to generate additional interest in the stock when it first becomes publicly traded. Flipping, or quickly selling shares for a profit, can lead to significant gains for investors who have been allocated shares of the IPO at the offering price. However, underpricing an IPO results in lost potential capital for the issuer. One extreme example is theglobe.com IPO which helped fuel the IPO "mania" of the late 90's internet era. Underwritten by Bear Stearns on November 13, 1998, the IPO was priced at $9 per share. The share price quickly increased 1000% after the opening of trading, to a high of $97. Selling pressure from institutional flipping eventually drove the stock back down, and it closed the day at $63. Although the company did raise about $30 million from the offering it is estimated that with the level of demand for the offering and the volume of trading that took place the company might have left upwards of $200 million on the table. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
