Ow my bad, I didn't read correctly. I had put in the NAV/U of today instead of the one at the end of the last period.

Thanks, downloaded the file and filled in the 'blanks'.

To all readers: with todays numbers we would need to see a 16.7% increase in diff to get a 'positive' reserve fund.

Cheers

Hi Twentyseventy,

I don't know how your excel sheet works but would it be much effort to post with every diff change how much next diff change should be in order to receive dividend.

Would help alot of ppl.

Cheers,
EnJoyThis

This comment was made as a personal hint to be taken in an ironic way. It could be taken out of context by some and given a more serious meaning. It is not a financial assessment in any way and should not be construed as such, it is a token of personal faith in SF1 since I have been deeply involved with SF1 for now more than a year as I started speaking with entrepreneurs back in Summer 2013. My remark, in case anyone missed this, is meant to draw the attention to the fact that I find IMO a hypocrite would have the audacity of blaming someone to see value where he/she did not only a few weeks ago. There is no 'value' for SF1 to be seen here other than the price of the last seller's price.

In response to your comment I do not agree with your remark about 'doing the unitholders a disservice'. In order to know if unit holders may or may be better off we would need to assess what would happen if no one bought back any units and let these sit at BTC 0.00015 with extremely low levels of trading. We now give the opportunity to unit holders to hold shares in these startups, that may be a better option in the long run for these unit holders. Granted we do not give this opportunity to all unit holders and that is unfortunate; however, unit holders with less than 2,000 units had units which represented at the time of the consultation poll effectively BTC 0.3 (maximum) in bitcoin value, for which they will now get BTC 0.9 (maximum - or 3 times the last selling price). For those holding much less, anywhere from 1 unit to 100 units of SF1 (worth BTC 0.00045 to 0.045 at buy back price) for example and this is a common case among SF1 unit holders the unavailability of the share conversion option may not seem to be a huge problem, as seen during the consultation poll conducted in October.

Could you offer some possibilities why the price dropped from the initial offer price of 0.001BTC to 0.00015BTC, a whopping -85%? As an investor, it really pained my heart to see the price of such a good security dropping so much.

Are the major shareholders in any way related to Seedcoin? Were all the securities sold to Havelock investors for all 4 blocks? Were there any securities unsold to Havelock investors and later taken up by Seedcoin or entities related to Seedcoin?

Not only 'should (SF1) be valued' BTC .001 - it should have been valued much more... I am glad you see it now, it is unfortunate you or other forward-looking, perspicacious investors or traders did not buy SF1 units during the months its price was sitting at BTC.00015 per unit or even lower. I am not sure I follow this argument 'however they haven't invested in many startups' when we have been clear we have invested in 6 startups and recent stories in the media have mentioned third party investments of Venture Capital firms of $15m or $20m in one bitcoin startup (for example).

Hey twentyseventy.  It seems some folks are looking for your friend ABitInterested, the one with the legit offline business.
Care to help them?
Or?

Sure thing. I'm actually traveling this weekend so updates will come today and Sunday or will do all catch up on Sunday night.

The replacement value of any period is about a 6.5% difficulty increase. Obviously the last few periods have been running a deficit; will run the numbers on Sunday or Monday to let you know exactly what kind of increase is needed this time around for a SELL div.