|
Could you be more specific as to what cicumstances surrounded these 1% daily interest loans? The whole post seems rather cryptic and hard to understand without a bit more detail.
|
|
|
|
I've not yet voted. Is the monthly % ROI you are seeking input upon a cash flow basis, or with depreciation factored in?
I'm not really sure what your question is. The monthly ROI would be on whatever you originally put in. As cash flow came in via rentals or leasing, payouts would most likely start with the smaller accounts and move up to the larger ones. As each aircraft is paid off there would be another round of "lending" to acquire another one, in each case being secured by the aircraft. At the moment I have enough potential members who will fly where this could be paid off in .5-1.5 years. This would be a cooperative. Most action taken would be up to a vote. Quite simple really. You speak of a '% monthly return'. Depending on how you define 'return', it leads to two different answers. One way is via cashflow: All income - all tangible expenses = cashflow One way includes depreciation: all income - all tangible expenses - depreciation = profit In a capital-intensive business (which I would presume this to be), the cashflow and the profit would likely be wildly divergent figures. Speaking of depreciation, how long are these airplanes expected to laast? |
|
|
|
Serious question: What does a US politician do if their campaign receives cash in mail? They can't legally accept it (is it from a US citizen?). The same should apply to returning (or not) invalid btc donations.
I think the staffer who is opening the mail stuffs the bills in their pocket so the politician doesn't have to answer any question.  |
|
|
|
If I betray people now, then I get a reward now. If I do not betray people, I might get more reward for a long time.
Note that I stated " assuming the individual believes there will be no personal repercussions after a betrayal". The anonymity currently available allows people to make this assumption and base their decisions on this assumption. Therefore (assuming you hold this belief that there will be no personal repercussions after the betray), there is no reason to believe that you can't "get more reward for a long time", while also "getting a reward now". Betray people anonymously to get your reward now, meanwhile continue any other action that you believe will get you more reward for a long time. I was thinking more along the lines of a betrayal that would damage the system as a whole, whereas you could use the system for gain if you build it up instead. |
|
|
|
Today 1 bitcoin can be traded for a slip of paper that says $10 on it.
Hey look, the bitcoin and the green paper can trade freely again! |
|
|
|
I will tell you that when people are able to trust each other then conducting business is faster, cheaper and more profitable for all parties involved. The air of distrust that scammers cause result in an increase of cost and difficulty between honest people.
We all pay for it, but I don't think we will ever be rid of them.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prisoner%27s_dilemmaCooperation is beneficial to the group, but betrayal is beneficial to the individual. If operating purely rationally (assuming the individual believes there will be no personal repercussions after a betrayal), then objectively betrayal is always more beneficial than cooperation. It would seem that all objective rational individuals would seemingly betray the other. In reality humans apparently display a systematic bias towards cooperative behavior, much more so than predicted by a theory based only on rational self interested action. Even so, the betrayal motivation is there, and there is enough variety in the human species to ensure that given such motivation, there will probably always be a significant number of individuals that chose betrayal over cooperation. If I betray people now, then I get a reward now. If I do not betray people, I might get more reward for a long time. |
|
|
|
Dividends are always going to roughly be proportional to risk involved.
This is completely incorrect. Dividends are for the most part based on free cash flow. 'Price/Earnings ratio are nearly always going to be proportional to the risk involved' - that would be a much more accurate statement. We can observe this by looking at very similar companies (with similar risks) within a sector and see that many have similar P/E ratios. However, within that same sector, you will see a wide range of % earnings paid out as dividends. *Although REITS and other similar investment vehicles will not have a wide range of % earnings paid out as dividends, as law states they must past out 90% minimum. People need to stop focusing on dividend yield and focus more on earnings. Earnings are what truly matter. This obsession and focus on dividend yields is a common occurrence in both BTC markets and major markets, and it demonstrates a clear misunderstanding of business operations and financial analysis. If a company is paying out 100% earnings as dividends, then it can get confusing wether to say dividends or earnings. Your point is good, people around here tend to focus too much on the dividend and ignore the growth. Although, it is understandable that people want to have a high dividend, that way they know the company is not running off with the money. |
|
|
|
For comparison, the average P/E (price-to-earnings) ratio on the London FTSE-100 is just over 20 to 1, and the average P/E ratio on the Dow Jones Industrial Average is over 15 to 1.
If you think that Satoshi Dice will continue to earn at or above its current rate over the long term (a couple of decades, say), it would be a great investment at a P/E ratio of 10 to 1.
Aye, but there's the rub. A decade is a long time in the Bitcoin world, and many things could happen to Satoshi Dice during that time. For that level of risk, 10/1 was too high for me. I would have invested at 5/1 though.
So if SatoshiDice reports a 2x jump in earnings next month, then you will buy some shares? Just in case anybody is confused, the lower the P/E ratio the more you make on a given investment. |
|
|
|
|
I'll take one!
EDIT: PM sent.
|
|
|
|
I didn't really deposit anything, and I didn't think anyone else was sending anything. I thought everyone "got the joke." Now I feel bad.
You mean Honest Bob was lying? I am so confused now  |
|
|
|
that whole market confuses me....seems almost impossible to find enough usefull info on any stock... and every stock i look at seems to have pathetic dividends...who knows... maybe its just all over my head.
What would be non-pathetic dividends in your mind? Most GLBSE assets are paying somewhere between 1-7% dividends PER WEEK! You might find that amount of dividends on wall street PER YEAR. |
|
|
|
i really appreciate the info...and sorry i guess i should have checked to see if anyone else had satoshi questions. as being a newb i guess i saw a chance to own a piece and sit back and reap the rewards. with the profits satoshi brings in i ASSUMED the payouts would be much higher. im sure 5 years from now ill be kicking myself for backing out....but i cant see investing now.
thanks again
I wouldn't back out yet. The price could jump upward in a week when the dividend comes out and updated stats are published. |
|
|
|
i really have no clue about the stock market the real one or the bitcoin one. i was excited to buy satoshidice stocks so i scraped together my last 1.7btc and bought the stock. i figured a gambling website couldnt fail and that i would recieve a nice dividend every month. i realize 1.7btc is not a huge investment but when i read the fine print it said the estimated dividend payout would be .35btc per 1000 shares a year! really? is this a normal return for a stock? considering how much ive been winning playing poker i cant see staying invested in this stock.
so why do people buy? to hope the price of the share goes up so they can sell? or sit back and recieve dividends?
like i said i have no experience with trading so any input would be appreciated
Do we really need another sotoshidice thread? I think there are already at least 3! You forgot to mention how much a share costs, currently about .0034 btc. So that 1.7 btc should have gotten you about 500 shares. The estimated return was using the current income from satoshidice, which could go up or down. As it stands now the dividend estimate is somewhere around 10% a year so your 1.7 btc will earn about .17btc in dividends. From what evoorhees has said, the site has seen an increase in traffic since the IPO was announced, so the return could be higher than that. For a normal stock in a normal market, I would say a 10% yearly dividend is decent. Somehow, the bitcoin stocks seem a bit different, with 10% monthly being more standard, due to the high risks involved. But since SatoshiDice is already running and generating income for the owners, it is seen as much lower risk and so is not expected to have such a high yield. |
|
|
|
Everyone willingly gave this dude their money.. No way in hell is a forum post a legal binding contract.....
The internet is not some magical place outside of the law, of course an agreement on a forum is a legally binding contract. Any agreement is legally binding, from verbal to written on a napkin to signed in front of witnesses. Actually, a forum post might be better than just a verbal agreement, because you can go back and point to it rather than just relying on people's word as to what was said. |
|
|
|
It does not gurantee they will not lose or steal the money, but it does allow the investor to get money back if that does happen, so the risk is lower. Really, for somebody who is running a "bank", you should know more about stuff like that.
That is all I have to say, I am leaving this conversation now.
Wait a second, doesn't that mean you also have to trust the insurance company? Now two parties have the opportunity to fuck you over. Ok, one last comment. Go take a probability and statistics class. If the probability of A is x and the probability of B is y, and A and B are independent, then the probability of A AND B is x * y, which is smaller than x. So having a second party behind the first decreases the risk to the investor. Now I am done. |
|
|
|
 what if Ron Paul Gets voted into office!?  LOL what if he runs for 2016? Ron Paul is retiring. Rand Paul for President, 2016! And Justin Amash for VP! |
|
|
|
Yes, having insurance would lower the risk to investors. Why is that so hard for you to understand?
Since you have no honesty in evaluating the riskyness of your investment, calling yourself honest as a reason to invest in you is just plain wrong.
Give me an example of a type of insurance that guarantees the depositee won't be a scum bag scammer or default somehow. These are funds for my life, why would I be dishonest? I'm not going to go broke somehow, I'm not even near that position anymore. And why are you consistently attacking me with your fallacious presumption that I'm a scammer, with not a shred of evidence? I see you do not know how bank insurance works. Try looking up FDIC or NCUA depoite insurance on wikipedia. I am not attacking you or calling you a scammer, I am just saying it is dishonest to advertise your bank as "low risk" when it is not, in fact, low risk. Why don't you tell me how it works? How does it guarantee they won't steal it? It does not gurantee they will not lose or steal the money, but it does allow the investor to get money back if that does happen, so the risk is lower. Really, for somebody who is running a "bank", you should know more about stuff like that. That is all I have to say, I am leaving this conversation now. |
|
|
|
Today's daily coupon has been paid @ 1% of IPO price.
Thank you. Do you really have to bump the tread every day? I imagine the people who own these shares can go on GLBSE and see the dividend has been paid. Perhaps you only need to post something if the payment will be delayed, or if you have some more interesting news? Or maybe potential investors want to know how consistent he is and what dividends currently look like. They won't stay at the max 1% forever, and anyone who might want to try to do any due diligence at least needs to know the current situation (even if it is "paid 1% again today"). But the information is available (actually, more complete info) right on the GLBSE asset page, just click on the "Dividend payments" and it will show the entire dividend payment history. |
|
|
|
2 factor auth is not required simply because it requires an external device (smartphone) to be efficient and not everyone has a smartphone. I decided to get one specifically to protect my GLBSE assets.
This is false. JAuth and other OSS software are available for OSX, Win and Linux to use the Google 2FA framework. There is no device based excuse not to use 2FA. The problem here is that there is no notification about *how to use* 2FA, including any links to needed software, on GLBSE. This gives the wrong impression just like both you and I had about 2FA. I didn't turn on 2FA on GLBSE because I don't have a smart phone. Terms of Service doesn't mean someone isn't negligent. It's just that they might not be legally responsible for being negligent. Does anybody have a quick link to info on the 2FA? |
|
|
|
Yes, having insurance would lower the risk to investors. Why is that so hard for you to understand?
Since you have no honesty in evaluating the riskyness of your investment, calling yourself honest as a reason to invest in you is just plain wrong.
Give me an example of a type of insurance that guarantees the depositee won't be a scum bag scammer or default somehow. These are funds for my life, why would I be dishonest? I'm not going to go broke somehow, I'm not even near that position anymore. And why are you consistently attacking me with your fallacious presumption that I'm a scammer, with not a shred of evidence? I see you do not know how bank insurance works. Try looking up FDIC or NCUA depoite insurance on wikipedia. I am not attacking you or calling you a scammer, I am just saying it is dishonest to advertise your bank as "low risk" when it is not, in fact, low risk. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
