smickles
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
August 30, 2012, 04:28:56 AM |
|
Nothing from the third tranche will sell, even if it is "released" until all of the second tranche sells and nobody who bought already is selling below .0037 BTC. If you think SDICE will sell out, there's a great arbitrage opportunity for an early buyer to resell at .0036 when evoorhees starts selling the third tranche. I don't think this IPO will sell out so I'm not making that bet, but you could make 975 BTC if you did that now.
EDIT: Minus the ridiculous 20 BTC fee for getting an MPEX account.
There are ways to do that and not a pay 20 BTC fee. You would have to rely on a pass-through, which adds a lot of risk and complicating factors. I'd rather pay the 20 BTC fee and do it myself. Actually, I would suggest to use a broker. edit: a broker would give you fewer risks (compared to satoshidice/evoorhees, mpex, glbse, passthru operator, it would be just satoshidice/evoorhees, mpex, broker), and likely less fee than the passthru 5% cut of the dividend.
|
|
|
|
Bitcoin Oz
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
August 30, 2012, 04:53:54 AM |
|
Nothing from the third tranche will sell, even if it is "released" until all of the second tranche sells and nobody who bought already is selling below .0037 BTC. If you think SDICE will sell out, there's a great arbitrage opportunity for an early buyer to resell at .0036 when evoorhees starts selling the third tranche. I don't think this IPO will sell out so I'm not making that bet, but you could make 975 BTC if you did that now.
EDIT: Minus the ridiculous 20 BTC fee for getting an MPEX account.
There are ways to do that and not a pay 20 BTC fee. You would have to rely on a pass-through, which adds a lot of risk and complicating factors. I'd rather pay the 20 BTC fee and do it myself. Actually, I would suggest to use a broker. edit: a broker would give you fewer risks (compared to satoshidice/evoorhees, mpex, glbse, passthru operator, it would be just satoshidice/evoorhees, mpex, broker), and likely less fee than the passthru 5% cut of the dividend. Is there a list of brokers posted anywhere ?
|
|
|
|
EskimoBob
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 910
Merit: 1000
Quality Printing Services by Federal Reserve Bank
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
August 30, 2012, 06:46:39 AM |
|
I also don't think it's right to call this an IPO when only 10% of the company is up for sale. If evoorhees made >50% equity available for purchase by the public, I'd change my opinion. If you don't want to call it an IPO, then what is it? Seems like IPO is the commonly accepted term that comes closest to describing what this is? Admittedly, normal terminologies aren't perfectly applicable in Bitcoin world. Hopefully the contract adequately informed people what was being offered, what the obligations are, etc. If there's some new term that should be used for such a thing, I'm all ears ![Smiley](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/smiley.gif) Revolutionary technologies have a tendency of disrupting traditional nomenclature. The issuer probably shoot himself in the foot by allowing trading while "IPO" is still going. What is really strange, this same mistake gets repeated over and over in every issue on GLBSE and probably will be repeated in new exchanges like https://cryptostocks.com, https://www.litecoinglobal.com, etc. What is also missing, is the fixed deadline and what happens, when all shares are not sold by this particular date.
|
While reading what I wrote, use the most friendliest and relaxing voice in your head. BTW, Things in BTC bubble universes are getting ugly....
|
|
|
FreeMoney
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1246
Merit: 1016
Strength in numbers
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
August 30, 2012, 07:03:35 AM |
|
I also don't think it's right to call this an IPO when only 10% of the company is up for sale. If evoorhees made >50% equity available for purchase by the public, I'd change my opinion. If you don't want to call it an IPO, then what is it? Seems like IPO is the commonly accepted term that comes closest to describing what this is? Admittedly, normal terminologies aren't perfectly applicable in Bitcoin world. Hopefully the contract adequately informed people what was being offered, what the obligations are, etc. If there's some new term that should be used for such a thing, I'm all ears ![Smiley](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/smiley.gif) Revolutionary technologies have a tendency of disrupting traditional nomenclature. The issuer probably shoot himself in the foot by allowing trading while "IPO" is still going. What is really strange, this same mistake gets repeated over and over in every issue on GLBSE and probably will be repeated in new exchanges like https://cryptostocks.com, https://www.litecoinglobal.com, etc. What is also missing, is the fixed deadline and what happens, when all shares are not sold by this particular date. So evoo just pays himself for the shares who the hell cares? It's the same to cancel/end the offering and to buy them from yourself.
|
Play Bitcoin Poker at sealswithclubs.eu. We're active and open to everyone.
|
|
|
EskimoBob
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 910
Merit: 1000
Quality Printing Services by Federal Reserve Bank
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
August 30, 2012, 08:33:28 AM |
|
I also don't think it's right to call this an IPO when only 10% of the company is up for sale. If evoorhees made >50% equity available for purchase by the public, I'd change my opinion. If you don't want to call it an IPO, then what is it? Seems like IPO is the commonly accepted term that comes closest to describing what this is? Admittedly, normal terminologies aren't perfectly applicable in Bitcoin world. Hopefully the contract adequately informed people what was being offered, what the obligations are, etc. If there's some new term that should be used for such a thing, I'm all ears ![Smiley](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/smiley.gif) Revolutionary technologies have a tendency of disrupting traditional nomenclature. The issuer probably shoot himself in the foot by allowing trading while "IPO" is still going. What is really strange, this same mistake gets repeated over and over in every issue on GLBSE and probably will be repeated in new exchanges like https://cryptostocks.com, https://www.litecoinglobal.com, etc. What is also missing, is the fixed deadline and what happens, when all shares are not sold by this particular date. So evoo just pays himself for the shares who the hell cares? It's the same to cancel/end the offering and to buy them from yourself. I guess you have no idea what the idea behind a "IPO" is.
|
While reading what I wrote, use the most friendliest and relaxing voice in your head. BTW, Things in BTC bubble universes are getting ugly....
|
|
|
FreeMoney
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1246
Merit: 1016
Strength in numbers
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
August 30, 2012, 09:22:54 AM |
|
I also don't think it's right to call this an IPO when only 10% of the company is up for sale. If evoorhees made >50% equity available for purchase by the public, I'd change my opinion. If you don't want to call it an IPO, then what is it? Seems like IPO is the commonly accepted term that comes closest to describing what this is? Admittedly, normal terminologies aren't perfectly applicable in Bitcoin world. Hopefully the contract adequately informed people what was being offered, what the obligations are, etc. If there's some new term that should be used for such a thing, I'm all ears ![Smiley](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/smiley.gif) Revolutionary technologies have a tendency of disrupting traditional nomenclature. The issuer probably shoot himself in the foot by allowing trading while "IPO" is still going. What is really strange, this same mistake gets repeated over and over in every issue on GLBSE and probably will be repeated in new exchanges like https://cryptostocks.com, https://www.litecoinglobal.com, etc. What is also missing, is the fixed deadline and what happens, when all shares are not sold by this particular date. So evoo just pays himself for the shares who the hell cares? It's the same to cancel/end the offering and to buy them from yourself. I guess you have no idea what the idea behind a "IPO" is. Maybe you have some idea about IPOs elsewhere. But this one (and all I've seen here) are a simple way to offer some shares to the public. It doesn't matter if evoorhees, evoorheez, or a swamp monster buys the shares or doesn't. One share is a set fraction and you don't need to worry yourself with others.
|
Play Bitcoin Poker at sealswithclubs.eu. We're active and open to everyone.
|
|
|
dree12
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1246
Merit: 1077
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
August 30, 2012, 01:08:14 PM |
|
I also don't think it's right to call this an IPO when only 10% of the company is up for sale. If evoorhees made >50% equity available for purchase by the public, I'd change my opinion. If you don't want to call it an IPO, then what is it? Seems like IPO is the commonly accepted term that comes closest to describing what this is? Admittedly, normal terminologies aren't perfectly applicable in Bitcoin world. Hopefully the contract adequately informed people what was being offered, what the obligations are, etc. If there's some new term that should be used for such a thing, I'm all ears ![Smiley](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/smiley.gif) Revolutionary technologies have a tendency of disrupting traditional nomenclature. The issuer probably shoot himself in the foot by allowing trading while "IPO" is still going. What is really strange, this same mistake gets repeated over and over in every issue on GLBSE and probably will be repeated in new exchanges like https://cryptostocks.com, https://www.litecoinglobal.com, etc. What is also missing, is the fixed deadline and what happens, when all shares are not sold by this particular date. So evoo just pays himself for the shares who the hell cares? It's the same to cancel/end the offering and to buy them from yourself. I guess you have no idea what the idea behind a "IPO" is. Maybe you have some idea about IPOs elsewhere. But this one (and all I've seen here) are a simple way to offer some shares to the public. It doesn't matter if evoorhees, evoorheez, or a swamp monster buys the shares or doesn't. One share is a set fraction and you don't need to worry yourself with others. Yeah, the terminology was confusing, but the type works fine. The difference between this IPO (which was technically still a "initial public offering", though different) and regular IPOs was how the shares are a) not issued by a company, but sold by an individual and b) do not raise money for the company.
|
|
|
|
EskimoBob
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 910
Merit: 1000
Quality Printing Services by Federal Reserve Bank
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
August 30, 2012, 01:46:36 PM |
|
this is getting a bit off topic but the point I wast trying to make is this: If you structure your " IPO" like this: 1) 2 million shares @ 0.0032 btc (Aug 24, Midnight GMT) 2) 5 million shares @ 0.0034 btc (Aug 25, Midnight GMT) 3) 3 million shares @ 0.0037 btc (Aug 26, Midnight GMT) and allow trading between those dates for investors (GLBSE or what ever other exchange) you shoot yourself in the foot because you start competing with those who bought your shares in stage 1 and or 2 because some of them go for a short term profit and exit. Do you understand, why this is actually bad for the issuer and for the whole "IPO"? To be brutally honest, structuring the deal like this was structured is just plain old stupid. This is NOT helping the issuer at all. There is nothing bad about giving discount, but discount is usually given for (very) large blocks of stock or bonds. Sure, there are lots of IPO's where stock is placed in multiple steps (dates) but there is another reason for this: 1) 2 million shares @ 0.0032 btc (Aug 24, Midnight GMT) - block trades above X shares 2) 5 million shares @ 0.0034 btc (Aug 25, Midnight GMT) - block trades above Y shares 3) 3 million shares @ 0.0037 btc (Aug 26, Midnight GMT) - what ever is left from previous sales. Do you see the difference and understand, why it's done like that? BTW, the "small guy" is not actually getting fucked.
|
While reading what I wrote, use the most friendliest and relaxing voice in your head. BTW, Things in BTC bubble universes are getting ugly....
|
|
|
FreeMoney
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1246
Merit: 1016
Strength in numbers
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
August 30, 2012, 07:41:18 PM |
|
this is getting a bit off topic but the point I wast trying to make is this: If you structure your " IPO" like this: 1) 2 million shares @ 0.0032 btc (Aug 24, Midnight GMT) 2) 5 million shares @ 0.0034 btc (Aug 25, Midnight GMT) 3) 3 million shares @ 0.0037 btc (Aug 26, Midnight GMT) and allow trading between those dates for investors (GLBSE or what ever other exchange) you shoot yourself in the foot because you start competing with those who bought your shares in stage 1 and or 2 because some of them go for a short term profit and exit. Do you understand, why this is actually bad for the issuer and for the whole "IPO"? To be brutally honest, structuring the deal like this was structured is just plain old stupid. This is NOT helping the issuer at all. There is nothing bad about giving discount, but discount is usually given for (very) large blocks of stock or bonds. Sure, there are lots of IPO's where stock is placed in multiple steps (dates) but there is another reason for this: 1) 2 million shares @ 0.0032 btc (Aug 24, Midnight GMT) - block trades above X shares 2) 5 million shares @ 0.0034 btc (Aug 25, Midnight GMT) - block trades above Y shares 3) 3 million shares @ 0.0037 btc (Aug 26, Midnight GMT) - what ever is left from previous sales. Do you see the difference and understand, why it's done like that? BTW, the "small guy" is not actually getting fucked. Shares you can trade immediately are worth more than shares you have to wait to trade. I wouldn't buy in a system like you describe because I would know that the operator expects the price to drop and that's why they forbid letting a market price to emerge asap.
|
Play Bitcoin Poker at sealswithclubs.eu. We're active and open to everyone.
|
|
|
freeAgent
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
August 30, 2012, 10:50:35 PM |
|
this is getting a bit off topic but the point I wast trying to make is this: If you structure your " IPO" like this: 1) 2 million shares @ 0.0032 btc (Aug 24, Midnight GMT) 2) 5 million shares @ 0.0034 btc (Aug 25, Midnight GMT) 3) 3 million shares @ 0.0037 btc (Aug 26, Midnight GMT) and allow trading between those dates for investors (GLBSE or what ever other exchange) you shoot yourself in the foot because you start competing with those who bought your shares in stage 1 and or 2 because some of them go for a short term profit and exit. Do you understand, why this is actually bad for the issuer and for the whole "IPO"? To be brutally honest, structuring the deal like this was structured is just plain old stupid. This is NOT helping the issuer at all. There is nothing bad about giving discount, but discount is usually given for (very) large blocks of stock or bonds. Sure, there are lots of IPO's where stock is placed in multiple steps (dates) but there is another reason for this: 1) 2 million shares @ 0.0032 btc (Aug 24, Midnight GMT) - block trades above X shares 2) 5 million shares @ 0.0034 btc (Aug 25, Midnight GMT) - block trades above Y shares 3) 3 million shares @ 0.0037 btc (Aug 26, Midnight GMT) - what ever is left from previous sales. Do you see the difference and understand, why it's done like that? BTW, the "small guy" is not actually getting fucked. Shares you can trade immediately are worth more than shares you have to wait to trade. I wouldn't buy in a system like you describe because I would know that the operator expects the price to drop and that's why they forbid letting a market price to emerge asap. When offering newly-minted shares over long periods of time, it's customary for companies to have lockup periods on those shares they sell. The problem with this IPO is that was, apparently, priced too high. The tierd prices on different tranches is also nonstandard and causes the problems mentioned previously.
|
|
|
|
Slushpuppy
Member
![*](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/star.gif)
Offline
Activity: 106
Merit: 10
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
August 31, 2012, 08:33:35 AM |
|
https://glbse.com/asset/view/GSDPTIs this what I need to buy to have a stake in satoshiDICE? Because it says the shares have no voting rights. Please excuse my ignorance of how GLBSE works but I am willing to learn.
|
|
|
|
DeaDTerra
Donator
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1064
Merit: 1000
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
August 31, 2012, 08:45:08 AM |
|
https://glbse.com/asset/view/GSDPTIs this what I need to buy to have a stake in satoshiDICE? Because it says the shares have no voting rights. Please excuse my ignorance of how GLBSE works but I am willing to learn. Should you want to invest in SD through the GLBSE, yes that is the link. In purchasing those shares however, you are not buying stock in SD, you are buying into an entity that holds SD stock and passes the dividends -5% to you. This is why those shares have no voting power. The actual SD shares (and right to vote with them) is held by the issuer of this pass through offering. If there's a motion then I will put up a motion for the bonds on how we vote, I do not intend to keep the power myself. But as the shares are only 10% of the actual company I doubt there will be any public motion. I think Evoorhees will keep the voting power and the controll over the company hence the voting power of the Pass through doesn't matter ![Smiley](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/smiley.gif) //DeaDTerra
|
|
|
|
Slushpuppy
Member
![*](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/star.gif)
Offline
Activity: 106
Merit: 10
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
August 31, 2012, 08:48:33 AM |
|
can any of you shed some light on the probability of SD getting shut down? could such a service run effectively on TOR?
|
|
|
|
flower1024
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1428
Merit: 1000
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
August 31, 2012, 08:52:32 AM |
|
can any of you shed some light on the probability of SD getting shut down? could such a service run effectively on TOR?
no need for tor he could just copy his html page in a forum post. all satoshidice need to function is a way to show you their bitcoin address.
|
|
|
|
Slushpuppy
Member
![*](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/star.gif)
Offline
Activity: 106
Merit: 10
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
August 31, 2012, 09:21:45 AM |
|
too right! ![Grin](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/grin.gif) guess ill pull the trigger and buy a few shares. Thanks everyone!
|
|
|
|
freeAgent
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
August 31, 2012, 12:34:50 PM |
|
None of the SDICE shares for sales have voting rights, no matter where you purchase them, so that's irrelevant.
|
|
|
|
evoorhees (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1008
Merit: 1023
Democracy is the original 51% attack
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
August 31, 2012, 04:27:36 PM |
|
can any of you shed some light on the probability of SD getting shut down? could such a service run effectively on TOR?
Being that they only deal in bitcoins and do not touch any other currency, I would personally bet on them having a nice long life ![Smiley](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/smiley.gif) Good luck shutting down the payment processor, its not like a prosecutor can put the squeeze on Bitcoin like they do on visa, mc, or paypal... Correct, and there is no intention of ever accepting or paying normal fiat currency with SatoshiDICE or ever having a bank account. It's Bitcoin only.
|
|
|
|
misterbigg
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1064
Merit: 1001
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
August 31, 2012, 04:51:46 PM |
|
can any of you shed some light on the probability of SD getting shut down? could such a service run effectively on TOR?
Of course SatoshiDICE can have its domain seized by the U.S. government:![](https://ip.bitcointalk.org/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2F5xcLw.jpg&t=665&c=gBt4Pey1IzWCXg) For potential investors, I wish that Mr. V would release information about how much traffic comes through the http://satoshidice.com domain versus how many people place bets directly to the Bitcoin addresses. I raised this issue before but it was conveniently swept under the rug. It would be great to have some facts regarding the financial impact of a domain seizure on the monthly revenues. Also, what is the plan to process the dividends if Mr. V is incarcerated (put in jail) or incapacitated? If he gets sick and lands in the hospital who processes the dividends? What if the server goes down?
|
|
|
|
evoorhees (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1008
Merit: 1023
Democracy is the original 51% attack
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
August 31, 2012, 05:44:37 PM |
|
can any of you shed some light on the probability of SD getting shut down? could such a service run effectively on TOR?
Of course SatoshiDICE can have its domain seized by the U.S. government:![](https://ip.bitcointalk.org/?u=http%3A%2F%2F&t=665&c=X3R0-r72180rCA) For potential investors, I wish that Mr. V would release information about how much traffic comes through the http://satoshidice.com domain versus how many people place bets directly to the Bitcoin addresses. I raised this issue before but it was conveniently swept under the rug. It would be great to have some facts regarding the financial impact of a domain seizure on the monthly revenues. Also, what is the plan to process the dividends if Mr. V is incarcerated (put in jail) or incapacitated? If he gets sick and lands in the hospital who processes the dividends? What if the server goes down? Sorry, didn't mean to sweep this question under the rug. Roughly 500 visitors per day come to SatoshiDice.com. 2/3 are returning visitors, 1/3 are new. If the domain was seized, business would be disrupted of course. But a new domain would be used, and the bet addresses and info posted elsewhere. Advertisement links would be changed to the new location, and it would be announced/discussed on the forum. But really, players don't even need the website to play - you can just copy the bet addresses in a text file and play whenever you want. Domain seizure has no effect on the server nor on gambling. Ahhh the beauties of bitcoin. If I were prevented from handling the payouts/dividends for some reason, it'd be delegated to a trusted friend. No big challenge there.
|
|
|
|
misterbigg
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1064
Merit: 1001
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
August 31, 2012, 06:26:39 PM |
|
Sorry, didn't mean to sweep this question under the rug. Roughly 500 visitors per day come to SatoshiDice.com. 2/3 are returning visitors, 1/3 are new. players don't even need the website to play - you can just copy the bet addresses in a text file and play whenever you want. Sure, Bitcoin nerds like us will play this way. But people aren't buying S.DICE based on an expectation of growth from Bitcoin nerds. They are buying it on the hopes that SatoshiDICE will receive a large influx of average Joes (of which there are many more than Bitcoin nerds) who want to gamble. These noobs cannot be expected to copy and paste bet addresses, or even run their own Satoshi client node. In order to reach the desired parabolic growth, SatoshiDICE needs an easy to use web front end. The front end on Blockchain.info is an example of that. We still have no decent way to estimate the impact of a domain seizure. It is claimed that a domain seizure will have negligible effect but I believe otherwise.
|
|
|
|
|