Thank you, I think.

On share dilution, a good start would be to guarantee of no dilution beyond the 10,000,000 being issued (of which the company is initially retaining 7,600,000).  Then at least people can see what they are getting into.

On the price, please do provide visibility of your operational startup costs, if you do this I am sure you would have no trouble achieving an IPO sale which more than covers them.  My point was primarily that you have valued your company based on assumed success and profitability, an outcome which is not guaranteed and for which for which you are asking shareholders to take on the overwhelming majority of the financial risk.

Also - with 76% of ongoing mining revenue, I would expect the company should be capable of funding further large scale expansion (again - I do not have your specific costs, but please do enlighten me).

Could you also confirm whether dividends will reflect 100% of mining revenue, or just mining profit (i.e. revenue - cost of operation).

Finally - it would be good to understand the tax obligations you anticipate needing to comply with, and for instance whether such costs will also be deducted before shareholder profit is confirmed.

Aiwill, you should think about the kind of relationship you would like to have with your shareholders.

One of the reasons people LOVE Asicminer shares is the fact that each share will always represent 1/400000 of the voting and dividend rights.  Asicminer (BitFountain) have retained a proportion of these shares (over 50%) to derive the funding for further investment and growth, and are demonstrating the viability of such a model without the need for further share dilution.

Secondly, the Asicminer IPO was priced very reasonably based primarily on the capital requirements of the group at startup, Friedcat knew he did not have the credentials to charge a premium for a company with no profit making history, and structured the deal accordingly.

The terms of your offer appear stacked in your favour, with very little chance of making shareholders rich, and a very high chance of making you rich.

Why not respond to the concerns being raised here by restructuring the terms of your IPO?

1. Promise zero share dilution.
2. Reprice the IPO (to say 10% or less of current valuation).  If you truly believe this is too far underpriced then add a clause to clawback a greater proportion of dividend payments for a period of time should the stock subsequently rise to a certain price (e.g. your original valuation).
3. Retain a proportion of the shares to fund future growth and to line your pockets in the event you make a success of the company.

I think your math is out by a factor of 10.

10,000 BTC / 10,000,000 shares = 1BTC for every 1000 shares, per month.

...or 0.001BTC per share, meaning 18.5 month ROI ignoring risk of share dilution, failure to maintain hashrate proportion etc.

Looking at the chart I see two volume spikes in consecutive 4 hr periods, one at 55k and one at 83k.  The info box displays open/high/low/close for these periods in USD so it is reasonable to assume volume is also usd.  Based on experience at ICBIT (and I may be wrong here), the volume may be double counted to account for both the buy and the sell for each trade.  If this is the case we are talking about trade vol worth 70k USD (or somewhere in the region of 750BTC).

Reading here https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=233941.0 I see the futures platform is leveraged 2:1 for buyers and 4:1 for sellers, meaning that if a single buyer and seller were responsible for all buy/sell action (which is equally likely to not be the case) the amount of BTC required to execute on a 70k position at 50% and 25% margin respectively would be 375 BTC and 187 BTC respectively.

If somebody wanted to take a big position and offered a good price, this does not seem like unreasonable volume to me, and there is every chance that some of the volume represents the initial buyer/seller unwinding some or all of a smaller initial position, meaning even lower capital involvement (not to mention the high probability that the volume reflects activity across multiple traders).

In fact, the only unreasonable thing here seems to be the way in which you are throwing unfounded accusations around and claiming to be "sure" of them without any evidence whatsoever.  Even if they are a bunch of crooks, this isn't how to go about exposing them.

Why should OP not be allowed to do this?  The blockchain is a fantastic tool for innovation far beyond currency transactions, but more fundamentally, this stuff is either allowed or it is not, and the judgement of what is allowed should not be open to interpretation, it should be the boundary of what is technically possible.

If there are reasons why this sort of thing should be prevented, then either the platform needs to be improved to better cope with the impact, or the activity needs to be systemically prohibited, the focus should be on platform evolution through innovation, not on telling off community members who are playing within the rules (albeit at the boundaries).

Just my 2c.

Sorry I will stop now - but come on man are you serious?

So... a stupid landing page... controlled by you... to fool dumb men...

That could work!  I'm sure you have plenty of ideas for site names but if not how about 'Bitglory'?

Oh wait.

whilst I am utterly convinced your business model is flawless, how about publishing the btc address from which you pay interest to victims investors, you know just so we can take a look at the enormous payouts you are so benevolently distributing?

sounds legit to me. ALL IN

originally posted this a while back, bumping as i am still puzzled as to whether this vulnerability really is as large as it seems...?

I guess you are referring to this:


FWIW - i think the 30mm suggestion is incorrect and have notified the poster (looks to me like they have mixed up the case recommendations for the half and full ounce coins.  Unless the dimensions listed on Casascius own site are wrong, the 1oz coins have a 39mm diameter.

Hi - I might have missed something but it looks like you have these the wrong way round (I would expect the 1oz coin to require the 39mm case and the half to require the 30mm).

Also - if anyone is interested in the alternative case style with the inner foam ring, i think the 1 oz coins should fit the X39 on this page: http://www.air-tites.com/Air-Tite_Ring_Type_Coin_Holders_1.htm#X6

Note - i have not yet verified that these fit, but will do once received.

Coin dimensions are listed in the pricing table on Casascius page here: https://www.casascius.com/

Mike - if you have used these it would be great if you could confirm...

I have to say, I don't think your views are particularly well thought out, or widely held.

I have used ICBIT for some time and whilst the platform has obvious problems (such as the ability to weald a disproportionate influence over the clearing range adjustment), I have not been scammed, and in general my profits/losses have correlated with the trend in underlying price movement.

I have read your accusation thread linked to above, and your assumptions about what the 'normal' futures premium for BTC should be are simply wrong.  Sure the contango/premium reached 150 USD in March when BTC appeared to be running away like an unstoppable train and all the dinner menus read bear soup, but Fireball has made no secret about the fact he was unhappy with that situation and the risk it posed to his platform due the way counterparty loss is managed (the validity of which was demonstrated during the ugly counterparty contract liquidations which occurred during the subsequent March crash).  It was also no secret that Fireball has been publically reaching out for market makers, citing the large arbitration opportunities available as an incentive.  Combined with the recent slide in BTC which has deterred many bulls from making further long investments it is not at all surprising that contango has significantly retracted and in some cases we have seen backwardation.

I also think it is reasonable that if you no longer meet the margin requirement for a position, then your position should be liquidated.  If that means listing your assets for sale at an attractive price then so be it, ICBIT do not close out your long position by buying your assets from you (right or wrong, this is their stated business model) they are listed for sale to other platform users, and If there are no corresponding bids/asks to cancel out against I would expect them to be priced to reflect the need for a quick sale in order to preserve the risk of loss to others.  As a trader exposed to the risk that your losses may affect my profit, I EXPECT this safeguard.

ICBIT is a small platform and certainly high volume traders can heavily influence the market prices, but this is life, you will find the same situation within any tradeable asset market.  The way you have simply jumped to the conclusion that losses = conspiracy = ICBIT are out to rob us all (and then started throwing public accusations around) is not cool.

I could be wrong and Fireball may have some scheme in action designed to relieve you of your assets, but I don't believe this is the case, he once described the ICBIT venture to me as a once in a lifetime opportunity, and I believe this is how he sees it, as something he cares about and wants to see succeed.

Anyone deciphered the binary on the new issues?

Nice touch - thanks.

Will tip on delivery.

Coin diameter info here: https://www.casascius.com/

39mm

Based on this, it looks like the X39 on this page is what we need: http://www.air-tites.com/Air-Tite_Ring_Type_Coin_Holders_1.htm#X6

Worth noting these are the cases with the inner foam ring (which I prefer).

They are under a dollar each, I would be happy to contribute to the cost of these if we can arrange prior to shipping.

Casascius - if you are about it would be great if you could confirm these capsules are the right ones.

As per PM I'm in for 5 and tx now confirmed - thanks

Physalis - i would be interested (EU/UK). Possibly 5 1BTC (1 Silver Oz) coins if i can resist buying direct

haha... and something about a grilled cat


Also - hopefully not too lazy to buy shares given they probably make up half the IPO market (for some unexplained reason).

Might have already been mentioned, but there is already a London meet up community with over 200 members.

I've not been but the next event is Jun 5 I believe.

Check it here: http://www.meetup.com/London-bitcoin-meetup/?oc=gvam

Cheers