Review of S.DICE

[adamstgBit]

I'm thinking of buying some S.DICE shares,and so I'm trying to get an estimate of the bonds annual yield

100 shares = 0.001% of all shares
assuming dividend pay out of 1,000BTC / month to share holders = 0.01BTC dividend pay out / month for 100 shares
100 shares cost ~0.4, so an investment of 0.4BTC will yield 0.12BTC a year ~30% annual yield

not bad, eh?

should i hit the buy button?  

[1714880944]

1714880944

[1714880944]

1714880944

[1714880944]

1714880944

[1714880944]

1714880944

[1714880944]

1714880944

[zoinky]

You won't.

[DPony13]

You can buy shares of Satoshi Dice?

Wow, you'd earn a lot if that's true.

[adamstgBit]

You can buy shares of Satoshi Dice?

Wow, you'd earn a lot if that's true.

yes you can buy them, 10,000,000Shares have been issued, 100% of Satoshi Dice's profits are distributed to share holders.

and now they are trading on MPEX, I'm dealing with a pass through... havelockinvestments.com

[Bugpowder]

Your growth model is fairly conservative....

If you can pick up passthru shares for under .005, I'd do it.  Shares just hit 0.0048 on MPEX now that the IPO sold out.

[Chalkbot]

adam,

Do you know anything about havelockinvestments? I like the site, but never heard of it and don't know who is running it. Must be relatively new, since only 3 funds currently, unless I'm missing something.

[adamstgBit]

adam,

Do you know anything about havelockinvestments? I like the site, but never heard of it and don't know who is running it. Must be relatively new, since only 3 funds currently, unless I'm missing something.

It is run by the people behind cavirtex I believe. It has been around for a few months so far.

I think they are 2 separate Canadian companies that work closely thorougher.

they started off with only 1 fund, their own mining fund. My guess is they try very hard not to offer ponzi scheme investments so are very picky about what funds are traded on their platform.

and yes they are relatively new...  Aug 2012

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nnmbKPh6qqs

[Chalkbot]

Thanks for the info guys.

I might just test it out a little and see how it goes.

[adamstgBit]

Havelock Investments is pleased to announce it is now accepting applications for funds to list on our exchange. We strive to achieve a very high level of both transparency and confidence, and will be thorougly vetting any applications. We will only accept the highest quality funds into our exchange. If you would like to apply, simply Contact Us via email and describe your company/fund, its dividend/growth strategy and provide complete contact information, so we can contact you to move forward.

[adamstgBit]

the  S.DICE IPO on havelock sold out 

[sunnankar]

and so I'm trying to get an estimate of the bonds annual yield

First, Satoshi Dice is an equity play; not a bond. So you should be doing the appropriate financial analysis.

All original shares from the IPO have now been sold.

Now that you are quite a bit richer (or rather, your assets are more liquid now) what sort of stuff are you going to do with all those bitcoins (if you would like to share)?

A nice 8% jump in price has been nice for those of us holding shares. Where are all those people saying this was a horrible stock to hold? Cause it would take "like 10 years to make any money!"?

Well, actually its trading at around 0.0047 now so that is more like a 40% gain.

While not being a fan of the vices, this does present a fairly finance textbook example of a melt-up due to good news. Let me run through the analysis for the fun of it.

Although December had unusually high earnings of 3.2% (17,206.44888669 /537,375.97) the intriguing part is the strengthening of the SD balance sheet to the tune of about 28,000 BTC retained earnings.

To be conservative we will assume the public float dividend were doubled and paid out to the anonymous investor holding the other 90%. After all, the anonymous investor owns 9x more than the public float and would not want to jeopardize SD's solvency potentially having to shutter it due to bad luck and has probably not taken any dividends since they probably have plenty of cash from the IPO and could probably fly private wherever they want with this type of monthly cash-flow.

This leaves about 25,000 BTC of retained earnings which to exhaust would require about -4.795% negative luck on 550,000 BTC of bets compared to the Dec beginning retained earnings of -2.22%. Assuming the anonymous investor has taken no dividends then the luck probabilities change to -5.11% and -2.29%.

In other words, if you do the probability (some other math whiz can solve this if they feel particularly magnanimous) that SD will exhaust its RE's due to bad luck in the dice game and cease being a going concern then it reveals that solvency risk just plummeted massively causing an increase in the expected discounted future cash flows.





Everything else being equal, this additional 15,500 BTC of retained earnings, makes SD much safer of an investment with a much higher NPV which is already corrected for BTC exchange rate risk.

Consequently, a melt-up in the price is to be expected. What is fairly exceptional is that the issuer did not cancel the IPO's at .0037 or at least move the bid up; or maybe the anonymous investor bought them using some dividends. But that is neither here nor there, using a similar risk premium before Dec's earnings would put a price around at least .0075. So it will be interesting to see how long it takes to get there; assuming an average Jan luck.

[adamstgBit]

Yup, i feel good about my investment 

[adamstgBit]

am i reading this chart right, 5 days ago 4milloin shares were sold? that almost half of all the shares, anonymous investor sold some of his 90%?

[adamstgBit]

I'm thinking of buying some S.DICE shares,and so I'm trying to get an estimate of the bonds annual yield

100 shares = 0.001% of all shares
assuming dividend pay out of 1,000BTC / month to share holders = 0.01BTC dividend pay out / month for 100 shares
100 shares cost ~0.4, so an investment of 0.4BTC will yield 0.12BTC a year ~30% annual yield

not bad, eh?

should i hit the buy button?  

my calculation are dead wrong.
their are actually 100,000,000 shares, 90% of which is held by the owner, 10% of which was sold as IPO

Based on current profits, 1000 shares will earn .0299 BTC monthly (0.3588 BTC yearly) which is roughly a 8.79% annual dividend yield at IPO prices.

not as HOT as i thought but still, a good place to park some coins 

[Korbman]

Do you know anything about havelockinvestments? I like the site, but never heard of it and don't know who is running it. Must be relatively new, since only 3 funds currently, unless I'm missing something.

Havelock has been around for a bit, but they've only started opening up their doors to hosting new funds in October 2012 or so. I was their first fund besides their own to be featured (and it's not easy to get hosted..you have to prove you're a good investment first).

You can probably message Lightbox here on the forums, he's the owner of Havelock and runs the exchange.

the  S.DICE IPO on havelock sold out  

For now. We helped run up the price after switching the passthru to a public offering instead of private

[adamstgBit]

my calculation are dead wrong.
their are actually 100,000,000 shares, 90% of which is held by the owner, 10% of which was sold as IPO

Based on current profits, 1000 shares will earn .0299 BTC monthly (0.3588 BTC yearly) which is roughly a 8.79% annual dividend yield at IPO prices.

not as HOT as i thought but still, a good place to park some coins  

If its only about dividends/passive income, then you're getting a much better deal parking your coins in RCKE:BFRF ( https://www.therocktrading.com/en/offers/BFRF ) ±12% per annum paid monthly and they guarantee buyback at 0.97 (you risk ±3% to gain ±12% / year).

https://www.therocktrading.com/en/funds/listdividends?id=RETF

they haven't paid out a dividend since like 14-Jul-2011! lol wtf...

[Grant]

https://www.therocktrading.com/en/funds/listdividends?id=RETF

they haven't paid out a dividend since like 14-Jul-2011! lol wtf...

That's RETF, which is a "marketmaker fund" that rarely flips a profit.

The one i mentioned is BFRF, not RETF. Has paid one each month since its IPO started (the total amounts are smaller in the beginning because less bonds were outstanding, but per bond amounts are always 0.01): https://www.therocktrading.com/en/funds/listdividends?id=BFRF

[adamstgBit]

https://www.therocktrading.com/en/funds/listdividends?id=RETF

they haven't paid out a dividend since like 14-Jul-2011! lol wtf...

That's RETF, which is a "marketmaker fund" that rarely flips a profit.

The one i mentioned is BFRF, not RETF. Has paid one each month since its IPO started (the total amounts are smaller in the beginning because less bonds were outstanding, but per bond amounts are always 0.01): https://www.therocktrading.com/en/funds/listdividends?id=BFRF

Company Prospectus
The Rock is pleased to introduce Bitcoin Fixed Return Bond.
You may buy on our exchange our bond at a nominal price of 1 bitcoin per unit.

We will pay a fixed monthly dividend of 1%

Total Issue: 1000 units (1000 Bitcoins)
Guarantee buy back at 0.97 Bitcoin cents

PONZI! and not just any Ponzi, a low yield Ponzi...

its not bad returns... but like wtf do they do?

[Bugpowder]

I'm thinking of buying some S.DICE shares,and so I'm trying to get an estimate of the bonds annual yield

100 shares = 0.001% of all shares
assuming dividend pay out of 1,000BTC / month to share holders = 0.01BTC dividend pay out / month for 100 shares
100 shares cost ~0.4, so an investment of 0.4BTC will yield 0.12BTC a year ~30% annual yield

not bad, eh?

should i hit the buy button?  

my calculation are dead wrong.
their are actually 100,000,000 shares, 90% of which is held by the owner, 10% of which was sold as IPO

Based on current profits, 1000 shares will earn .0299 BTC monthly (0.3588 BTC yearly) which is roughly a 8.79% annual dividend yield at IPO prices.

not as HOT as i thought but still, a good place to park some coins  

Your math is still wrong.  Earnings are ~10,000/month on 530,000 betting volume.  Only 1,000/mo currently gets paid out to MPEX shareholders, since the float is 10% of total stock.

30% return a year, assuming you don't reinvest and no growth (BTW, 150,000 coins bet in the first 3 days of this month vs. 530,000 all of last month).

Also, you can't ignore the stock valuation growth.  In the last month the stock value has gone from 0.0034 to a peak of 0.0048 (41% gain).  Currently trading below .0048 for the moment, but that won't last long.

-Bug

[sunnankar]

30% return a year, assuming you don't reinvest and no growth (BTW, 150,000 coins bet in the first 3 days of this month vs. 530,000 all of last month).

Despite the threadjack, let's get back on topic to the hugely undervalued SD.

150k in 3 days compared to 530k last month which was relative to 180k in Nov.

Dec was up 190% over Nov. And Jan is 10% over and already 28% up on Dec's volume so it is on track to be up another 180%+ month over month.

Imagine if its another 3.2% luck month like Dec. That would be earnings of 48k and a dividend of 4,800BTC or 180% higher than Dec's.

Then, it could be a -% luck month!

Either way, it should be interesting.

[adamstgBit]

Theirs more S.DICE Shares to be bought on havelockinvestments.com

but they are kinda over priced.... 0.48BTC for 1 unit (which represents 95 S.DICE shares)

... damn do i hit the buy button  

[sunnankar]

on havelockinvestments.com

Why not just use MPEx?

[adamstgBit]

on havelockinvestments.com

Why not just use MPEx?

i think it costs 30BTC just to open an account? and I don't know how to use their PGP thing...

[adamstgBit]

not sure why mpex.co makes it so god damn hard to trade...
and basically encourage passthru's

and I hope the market naturally moves to a "smooth platform" like havelock

[repentance]

i think it costs 30BTC just to open an account? and I don't know how to use their PGP thing...

It's worth pointing out that MPEx openly admit they use this strategy as a means of selecting their customer-base.  It's actually not unusual in the world of conventional financial services to target certain customers and exclude others from dealing with you directly by imposing minimum investment requirements, offering your product only to sophisticated investors, etc.

[adamstgBit]

Sending an order works like this : you clearsign your order (gpg --clearsign), then you encrypt the result with the exchange's public key (gpg --encrypt --armor -r F1B69921). If you don't have that key try gpg --search-keys 'F1B69921'. The exchange answers with a signed message encrypted with your own public key, which you can decrypt at will. You don't have to use the web interface at all, you can POST directly to the script (via for instance curl).

If that didn't make any sense to you :


    Open up a terminal. On Ubuntu you press Ctrl+Alt+T. On Os/X (Macs) you navigate to /Applications/Utilities and double-click on Terminal. In Windows you click Start > Run > cmd.exe.

    Type gpg --clearsign, hit Enter. If it complains that it can't find gpg, you have to navigate to the directory where you have it installed. If you have ever identified with gribble you certainly have it installed. If you never did, aren't part of the WOT etc you should go get it right now. Trying to be part of a cryptocurrency without knowing how to use gpg is like trying to be part of the 60s without knowing how to use a bong. If you're on Windows this is a good place to start. Also make sure you read the documentation, for instance here.

    Type your passphrases if prompted for it, hit Enter. Don't panic if nothing seems to happen and you just get a blinky cursor, this is RMS-style user interface.

    Type your command for MPEx, such as STAT, then hit Ctrl-d and Ctrl-d again. (On some systems such as Windows this might be Ctrl-z instead. Whatever EOF is on your system, that's what you need.)

    Type gpg --encrypt --armor -r F1B69921, hit Enter.

    If prompted for confirmation on whether to trust the key press y, hit Enter. This means you haven't signed the key, please do so (type gpg --sign-key F1B69921 hit Enter then gpg --send-key F1B69921 hit Enter.).

    Paste the clearsigned message from before. Get the whole thing, don't just copy the signature block. It starts with "-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----". Hit Ctrl-d and Ctrl-d again.

    Paste the gnarly result into the MPEx box, "Output as html" checked (it's checked by default).

    Copy the resulting message.

    Go back to terminal, type gpg, hit Enter.

    Paste message, Ctrl-d and Ctrl-d again.

    If prompted for passphrase type it in, hit Enter. It'll pop up your sig info, hit Ctrl-d.

    At this point you are looking at the exchange's response. If it complains that you pasted mangled output you probably didn't correctly copy/paste things. If it doesn't complain then congratulations! You've made it.

omg this is crazy....

[notme]

Sending an order works like this : you clearsign your order (gpg --clearsign), then you encrypt the result with the exchange's public key (gpg --encrypt --armor -r F1B69921). If you don't have that key try gpg --search-keys 'F1B69921'. The exchange answers with a signed message encrypted with your own public key, which you can decrypt at will. You don't have to use the web interface at all, you can POST directly to the script (via for instance curl).

If that didn't make any sense to you :


    Open up a terminal. On Ubuntu you press Ctrl+Alt+T. On Os/X (Macs) you navigate to /Applications/Utilities and double-click on Terminal. In Windows you click Start > Run > cmd.exe.

    Type gpg --clearsign, hit Enter. If it complains that it can't find gpg, you have to navigate to the directory where you have it installed. If you have ever identified with gribble you certainly have it installed. If you never did, aren't part of the WOT etc you should go get it right now. Trying to be part of a cryptocurrency without knowing how to use gpg is like trying to be part of the 60s without knowing how to use a bong. If you're on Windows this is a good place to start. Also make sure you read the documentation, for instance here.

    Type your passphrases if prompted for it, hit Enter. Don't panic if nothing seems to happen and you just get a blinky cursor, this is RMS-style user interface.

    Type your command for MPEx, such as STAT, then hit Ctrl-d and Ctrl-d again. (On some systems such as Windows this might be Ctrl-z instead. Whatever EOF is on your system, that's what you need.)

    Type gpg --encrypt --armor -r F1B69921, hit Enter.

    If prompted for confirmation on whether to trust the key press y, hit Enter. This means you haven't signed the key, please do so (type gpg --sign-key F1B69921 hit Enter then gpg --send-key F1B69921 hit Enter.).

    Paste the clearsigned message from before. Get the whole thing, don't just copy the signature block. It starts with "-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----". Hit Ctrl-d and Ctrl-d again.

    Paste the gnarly result into the MPEx box, "Output as html" checked (it's checked by default).

    Copy the resulting message.

    Go back to terminal, type gpg, hit Enter.

    Paste message, Ctrl-d and Ctrl-d again.

    If prompted for passphrase type it in, hit Enter. It'll pop up your sig info, hit Ctrl-d.

    At this point you are looking at the exchange's response. If it complains that you pasted mangled output you probably didn't correctly copy/paste things. If it doesn't complain then congratulations! You've made it.

omg this is crazy....

PGP is really not as complicated as it sounds and well worth the effort to learn.

[Grant]

PONZI! and not just any Ponzi, a low yield Ponzi...

its not bad returns... but like wtf do they do?

For being a ponzi they're pretty damn sustainable one (several of their funds returned beyond 100% on initial investment), they been running since 2007.

As for what BFRF does, you can find it here (scroll down): https://www.therocktrading.com/en/topics/127

It basically forwards 1%/mo of Pyramining returns (while keeping anything beyond 1% for themselves).

[eliale]

PONZI! and not just any Ponzi, a low yield Ponzi...

its not bad returns... but like wtf do they do?

For being a ponzi they're pretty damn sustainable one (several of their funds returned beyond 100% on initial investment), they been running since 2007.

As for what BFRF does, you can find it here (scroll down): https://www.therocktrading.com/en/topics/127

It basically forwards 1% of Pyramining returns (while keeping anything beyond 1% for themselves).

Thank you Grant for the important explanation about us!

The Rock, as mentioned, has been in  the virtual business since year 2007.  We started in Second Life and we are now gradually moving into the Bitcoin world.

Among various activities we do have a Currency Exchange:

 https://www.therocktrading.com/en/exchange/currency

As far as BFRF, it is a bond issued in BTC for a total of 1000 units.  It pays 1% fixed monthly return and it is tradable at our Stock Exchange at:

https://www.therocktrading.com/en/offers/BFRF

All 1000 btc are invested into Pyramining project:

http://www.pyramining.com/

from which we receive investment payments, we do provide insurance coverage for investors utilizing our referrals (https://www.therocktrading.com/en/pages/pyramining)  and buyback opportunity for those interested in getting out of the project.

Please note that we do reserve the right to call back the Bonds at 1 BTC per unit

For any further information, please do not hesitate to contact us at:  info@therocktrading.com

Thank you!

[Korbman]

Theirs more S.DICE Shares to be bought on havelockinvestments.com

but they are kinda over priced.... 0.48BTC for 1 unit (which represents 95 S.DICE shares)

... damn do i hit the buy button  

Not quite overpriced. 0.0048 is the largest wall on MPEx with 335k shares being sold...anything under that is sub 5,000 shares. At 0.48BTC a share, we're purchasing essentially everything under the .0048 mark and some of the .0048 (which is why the offering price is now .48 BTC per 100 shares).

[adamstgBit]

Theirs more S.DICE Shares to be bought on havelockinvestments.com

but they are kinda over priced.... 0.48BTC for 1 unit (which represents 95 S.DICE shares)

... damn do i hit the buy button  

Not quite overpriced. 0.0048 is the largest wall on MPEx with 335k shares being sold...anything under that is sub 5,000 shares. At 0.48BTC a share, we're purchasing essentially everything under the .0048 mark and some of the .0048 (which is why the offering price is now .48 BTC per 100 shares).

well 1 unit = 100 shares that pay 95% of wtv MPEx pays the fund...
and the lil bit about this 95% being reviewed ever 3 months is kinda scary
I would like them to removed that and agree to give us at least 95% or 90% forever?

they make ~5% profit on the sell of the shares because they are at a slightly higher rate and they make 5% off ever dividend

that's fine, that's the cost of the pass through... but can't they agree to have that 95% fixed in stone?

[lightbox]

Theirs more S.DICE Shares to be bought on havelockinvestments.com

but they are kinda over priced.... 0.48BTC for 1 unit (which represents 95 S.DICE shares)

... damn do i hit the buy button  

Not quite overpriced. 0.0048 is the largest wall on MPEx with 335k shares being sold...anything under that is sub 5,000 shares. At 0.48BTC a share, we're purchasing essentially everything under the .0048 mark and some of the .0048 (which is why the offering price is now .48 BTC per 100 shares).

well 1 unit = 100 shares that pay 95% of wtv MPEx pays the fund...
and the lil bit about this 95% being reviewed ever 3 months is kinda scary
I would like them to removed that and agree to give us at least 95% or 90% forever?

they make ~5% profit on the sell of the shares because they are at a slightly higher rate and they make 5% off ever dividend

that's fine, that's the cost of the pass through... but can't they agree to have that 95% fixed in stone?

Hi, thanks for the feedback! The intent of the 95% being revisited every three months was to allow it to possibly be increased in favour of investors, not decreased. I should have been more clear on that. Ill update the description on the site shortly!

I've also got another update to post regarding the fund.. It'll go up shortly!

Cheers,
 James

[wachtwoord]

Hi, thanks for the feedback! The intent of the 95% being revisited every three months was to allow it to possibly be increased in favour of investors, not decreased. I should have been more clear on that. Ill update the description on the site shortly!

I've also got another update to post regarding the fund.. It'll go up shortly!

Cheers,
 James

While you are on it please make the units (100 shares) convertible to actual shares. Then customers have the option to switch to that if MPEX ever switches to a pricing structure the customer can agree with (my opinion: MPEX is retarded, PGP is not a show stopper for me paying 30 BTC for an account is) or S.DICE sells shares on another exchange as well (May be a ADR on NASDAQ in a couple of years ).

[adamstgBit]

Hi, thanks for the feedback! The intent of the 95% being revisited every three months was to allow it to possibly be increased in favour of investors, not decreased. I should have been more clear on that. Ill update the description on the site shortly!

I've also got another update to post regarding the fund.. It'll go up shortly!

Cheers,
 James

While you are on it please make the units (100 shares) convertible to actual shares. Then customers have the option to switch to that if MPEX ever switches to a pricing structure the customer can agree with (my opinion: MPEX is retarded, PGP is not a show stopper for me paying 30 BTC for an account is) or S.DICE sells shares on another exchange as well (May be a ADR on NASDAQ in a couple of years ).

I don't think MPEX  allows the transfer of shares privately from one user to the other.

anyway its not important to me, the independent S.DICE market on havelock is sufficient.

[Peter Lambert]

not sure why mpex.co makes it so god damn hard to trade...
and basically encourage passthru's

and I hope the market naturally moves to a "smooth platform" like havelock

Obviously, they don't mind it being difficult because it is simpler for them, makes the coding simpler and therefore easier to keep secure. The added bonus is that with pass-through brokers popping up, there is much less customer service for them to do, since only the people who actually know what they are doing use MPEx, the dabblers and tech un-savy send all the inane questions to the brokers.

[lightbox]

Hi, thanks for the feedback! The intent of the 95% being revisited every three months was to allow it to possibly be increased in favour of investors, not decreased. I should have been more clear on that. Ill update the description on the site shortly!

I've also got another update to post regarding the fund.. It'll go up shortly!

Cheers,
 James

While you are on it please make the units (100 shares) convertible to actual shares. Then customers have the option to switch to that if MPEX ever switches to a pricing structure the customer can agree with (my opinion: MPEX is retarded, PGP is not a show stopper for me paying 30 BTC for an account is) or S.DICE sells shares on another exchange as well (May be a ADR on NASDAQ in a couple of years ).

Interesting idea! Ill take a look into that and work out some numbers. Doing a conversion like that (if even possible with mpex) would be a manual process so there'd likely have to be a fee associated with it.

[DannyM]

I don't think MPEX  allows the transfer of shares privately from one user to the other.

Of course it does, read the FAQ, its the PUSH command.

[MPOE-PR]

i think it costs 30BTC just to open an account? and I don't know how to use their PGP thing...

It's worth pointing out that MPEx openly admit they use this strategy as a means of selecting their customer-base.  It's actually not unusual in the world of conventional financial services to target certain customers and exclude others from dealing with you directly by imposing minimum investment requirements, offering your product only to sophisticated investors, etc.

Not only is it commonplace, it's actually legally required in most jurisdictions.

While you are on it please make the units (100 shares) convertible to actual shares.

IIRC this is how DeadTerra's passthrough works.

I don't think MPEX  allows the transfer of shares privately from one user to the other.

Insistently and persistently read the FAQ.

Other than that, the market already naturally moved. Fortunately for BTC and I guess unfortunately for you, the move was away from "smooth" markets, whatever the heck that means.

[DannyM]

Other than that, the market already naturally moved. Fortunately for BTC and I guess unfortunately for you, the move was away from "smooth" markets, whatever the heck that means.

[lightbox]

I don't think MPEX  allows the transfer of shares privately from one user to the other.

Of course it does, read the FAQ, its the PUSH command.

Excellent! I thought I saw it there somewhere!

[molecular]

havelockinvestment.com SDICE IPO sold out again. You can now use the well-done market there to buy from other havelock users or go to MPEX, of course, if you want satoshi dice shares.

[adamstgBit]

havelockinvestment.com SDICE IPO sold out again. You can now use the well-done market there to buy from other havelock users or go to MPEX, of course, if you want satoshi dice shares.

havelock will issue another IPO in about 30mins!

i kinda wish they would let the price rise on their market b4 issuing another "IPO"
I want to trade S.DICE on the market!

[lightbox]

havelockinvestment.com SDICE IPO sold out again. You can now use the well-done market there to buy from other havelock users or go to MPEX, of course, if you want satoshi dice shares.

havelock will issue another IPO in about 30mins!

i kinda wish they would let the price rise on their market b4 issuing another "IPO"
I want to trade S.DICE on the market!

Theoretically the price will never rise outside of a certain range from MPEX... If there's the demand we'll keep building the size of our passthru which will ultimately make trading SDICE on havelock more liquid.

Maybe after this round we'll hold off a few days to let things settle a bit.

Cheers,
 James

[adamstgBit]

havelockinvestment.com SDICE IPO sold out again. You can now use the well-done market there to buy from other havelock users or go to MPEX, of course, if you want satoshi dice shares.

havelock will issue another IPO in about 30mins!

i kinda wish they would let the price rise on their market b4 issuing another "IPO"
I want to trade S.DICE on the market!

Theoretically the price will never rise outside of a certain range from MPEX... If there's the demand we'll keep building the size of our passthru which will ultimately make trading SDICE on havelock more liquid.

Maybe after this round we'll hold off a few days to let things settle a bit.

Cheers,
 James

well price did get bumped to 0.64 in-between 2 of the IPO's,  (this was ~ 40% above MPEX   )
your marketplace allows everyone to get in on the action, this means price will FOR SURE be above MPEX.
MPEX is like the supplier of shares, that you and a hand full of others re-sale, so the market price will have a premium for sure.

[molecular]

well price did get bumped to 0.64 in-between 2 of the IPO's,  (this was ~ 40% above MPEX   )
your marketplace allows everyone to get in on the action, this means price will FOR SURE be above MPEX.
MPEX is like the supplier of shares, that you and a hand full of others re-sale, so the market price will have a premium for sure.

I like to play this game, too: it can be extremely lucrative. But it wont work well in this case for the above-stated reasons... not before MPEX runs out of initial shares.

Of course havelock could exploit this situation for themselves and play a nice little game... but I doubt he/they will.

[MPOE-PR]

havelockinvestment.com SDICE IPO sold out again. You can now use the well-done market there to buy from other havelock users or go to MPEX, of course, if you want satoshi dice shares.

havelock will issue another IPO in about 30mins!

i kinda wish they would let the price rise on their market b4 issuing another "IPO"
I want to trade S.DICE on the market!

Theoretically the price will never rise outside of a certain range from MPEX... If there's the demand we'll keep building the size of our passthru which will ultimately make trading SDICE on havelock more liquid.

Maybe after this round we'll hold off a few days to let things settle a bit.

Cheers,
 James

well price did get bumped to 0.64 in-between 2 of the IPO's,  (this was ~ 40% above MPEX   )
your marketplace allows everyone to get in on the action, this means price will FOR SURE be above MPEX.
MPEX is like the supplier of shares, that you and a hand full of others re-sale, so the market price will have a premium for sure.

Dood, you literally have no idea what you're talking about. S.DICE monthly volume is in the 40-50k BTC range. Math, srsly.

[adamstgBit]

havelockinvestment.com SDICE IPO sold out again. You can now use the well-done market there to buy from other havelock users or go to MPEX, of course, if you want satoshi dice shares.

havelock will issue another IPO in about 30mins!

i kinda wish they would let the price rise on their market b4 issuing another "IPO"
I want to trade S.DICE on the market!

Theoretically the price will never rise outside of a certain range from MPEX... If there's the demand we'll keep building the size of our passthru which will ultimately make trading SDICE on havelock more liquid.

Maybe after this round we'll hold off a few days to let things settle a bit.

Cheers,
 James

well price did get bumped to 0.64 in-between 2 of the IPO's,  (this was ~ 40% above MPEX   )
your marketplace allows everyone to get in on the action, this means price will FOR SURE be above MPEX.
MPEX is like the supplier of shares, that you and a hand full of others re-sale, so the market price will have a premium for sure.

Dood, you literally have no idea what you're talking about. S.DICE monthly volume is in the 40-50k BTC range. Math, srsly.

lol dude. you obliviously have more experience in this trading game...

But 30BTC for MPEX is a show stopper for many small investors.
are you saying havelock's new SDICE IPOs will have 0 efect to the exchange rate of MPEX SDICE.... lol
you wana bet havelock market will always be at least slightly higher then MPEX?  i do

SDICE is a super good investment opportunity.

[MPOE-PR]

It will likely be off due to liquidity difference, but that works in either direction.

[repentance]

But 30BTC for MPEX is a show stopper for many small investors.

It's meant to be a show-stopper - they don't want to deal with small investors directly.  In fact, if you read Mircea Popescu's blog you'll know that the fee is going to increase over time.  Small investors are not their target market.  Deal with it.

[MPOE-PR]

But 30BTC for MPEX is a show stopper for many small investors.

It's meant to be a show-stopper - they don't want to deal with small investors directly.  In fact, if you read Mircea Popescu's blog you'll know that the fee is going to increase over time.  Small investors are not their target market.  Deal with it.

Actually, small investors should probably stick with school.

[wachtwoord]

Conduct your business any way you choose, but please don't state such utter nonsense as facts.

[Korbman]

But 30BTC for MPEX is a show stopper for many small investors.

It's meant to be a show-stopper - they don't want to deal with small investors directly.  In fact, if you read Mircea Popescu's blog you'll know that the fee is going to increase over time.  Small investors are not their target market.  Deal with it.

Actually, small investors should probably stick with school.

Definitely...better to throw around 1,000 Bitcoins at a time when investing than testing the waters little by little with puny 5 Bitcoin investments 

[/sarcasm]

[molecular]

But 30BTC for MPEX is a show stopper for many small investors.

It's meant to be a show-stopper - they don't want to deal with small investors directly.  In fact, if you read Mircea Popescu's blog you'll know that the fee is going to increase over time.  Small investors are not their target market.  Deal with it.

Actually, small investors should probably stick with school.

Some big investors should be sent back to school.

[adamstgBit]

But 30BTC for MPEX is a show stopper for many small investors.

It's meant to be a show-stopper - they don't want to deal with small investors directly.  In fact, if you read Mircea Popescu's blog you'll know that the fee is going to increase over time.  Small investors are not their target market.  Deal with it.

I know.

thats cool....

I don't plan on putting more then 20BTC in S.DICE... all thanks to https://www.havelockinvestments.com/  

[molecular]

If all I wanted to buy was S.DICE how much would I need to buy in order to make the mpex fee worth it vs using a pass through like on BitFunder or Havelock I wonder?

Doesn't make much difference currently. Seems on MPEX the price got pushed up, too. Assuming you had asked this a week ago: about 30 / (0.48-0.30) = 16700 shares. Today about: 30 / (0.478-0.46) = 1,500,000

[DannyM]

If all I wanted to buy was S.DICE how much would I need to buy in order to make the mpex fee worth it vs using a pass through like on BitFunder or Havelock I wonder?

You lose 5% with both of those "pass throughs". Also check coinbr.com

[adamstgBit]

Theirs more S.DICE Shares to be bought on havelockinvestments.com

but they are kinda over priced.... 0.48BTC for 1 unit (which represents 95 S.DICE shares)

... damn do i hit the buy button  

Not quite overpriced. 0.0048 is the largest wall on MPEx with 335k shares being sold...anything under that is sub 5,000 shares. At 0.48BTC a share, we're purchasing essentially everything under the .0048 mark and some of the .0048 (which is why the offering price is now .48 BTC per 100 shares).

well 1 unit = 100 shares that pay 95% of wtv MPEx pays the fund...
and the lil bit about this 95% being reviewed ever 3 months is kinda scary
I would like them to removed that and agree to give us at least 95% or 90% forever?

they make ~5% profit on the sell of the shares because they are at a slightly higher rate and they make 5% off ever dividend

that's fine, that's the cost of the pass through... but can't they agree to have that 95% fixed in stone?

 

[MPOE-PR]

Definitely...better to throw around 1,000 Bitcoins at a time when investing than testing the waters little by little with puny 5 Bitcoin investments 

[/sarcasm]

There's a difference between small investors and small investments. Sarcasm works best when it doesn't backfire miserably.

Conduct your business any way you choose, but please don't state such utter nonsense as facts.

Context is your friend. What are you on about?

If all I wanted to buy was S.DICE how much would I need to buy in order to make the mpex fee worth it vs using a pass through like on BitFunder or Havelock I wonder?

Fee is 30 BTC (25 if you use a referral).

If you trade 2-3k BTCs' worth in your entire account history, you've paid for it. If you're charged more than 1% to trade, it's going to take even less but in general as simple rule of thumb, if your total turnover is in the thousands range you should get an account. If not, no.

Doesn't make much difference currently. Seems on MPEX the price got pushed up, too. Assuming you had asked this a week ago: about 30 / (0.48-0.30) = 16700 shares. Today about: 30 / (0.478-0.46) = 1,500,000

That made zero sense. The difference between using MPEx and using a PT is the trade fee. MPEx charges 0.2% sell side only.

If you're trying to account for slippage that's going to be really very difficult to do, but if we go with the observed record (S.DICE pt on GLBSE was off by as much as 100% at times) anything over 100 BTC justifies an account on the liquid venue.

[wachtwoord]

Conduct your business any way you choose, but please don't state such utter nonsense as facts.

Context is your friend. What are you on about?

Erm the statement right above my post? It's not rocket science. But let me spell it out.

Actually, small investors should probably stick with school.

Conduct your business any way you choose, but please don't state such utter nonsense as facts.

Charging such a high one-time fee as the only way to conduct business (as opposed to a cheaper option for large customers) as opposed to a way of charging that is proportional to the use (aka a percentage on each trade) is a rather shortsighted way of conducting business but as I stated that is your right. Please, however, if you say silly things such as: "small investors should probably stick with school" because if no-one speaks against it it looks like we are agreeing with you and this might discourage people out of making investment proportional to their wealth.

Because of automation we no longer need much fixed costs (if any) for services such as these. You are making unnecessary artificial thresholds and creating inefficiencies in the market. Because of this I was rather disappointed with Eric Voorhees (who I hold in high regard) choosing MPEX for Satoshi Dice.

[MPOE-PR]

Conduct your business any way you choose, but please don't state such utter nonsense as facts.

Context is your friend. What are you on about?

Erm the statement right above my post? It's not rocket science. But let me spell it out.

Actually, small investors should probably stick with school.

Conduct your business any way you choose, but please don't state such utter nonsense as facts.

Charging such a high one-time fee as the only way to conduct business (as opposed to a cheaper option for large customers) as opposed to a way of charging that is proportional to the use (aka a percentage on each trade) is a rather shortsighted way of conducting business but as I stated that is your right. Please, however, if you say silly things such as: "small investors should probably stick with school" because if no-one speaks against it it looks like we are agreeing with you and this might discourage people out of making investment proportional to their wealth.

Because of automation we no longer need much fixed costs (if any) for services such as these. You are making unnecessary artificial thresholds and creating inefficiencies in the market. Because of this I was rather disappointed with Eric Voorhees (who I hold in high regard) choosing MPEX for Satoshi Dice.

Well the problems we encounter are many and varied. For one, a "should" could never be "a statement of fact". This distinction is about as old as bacon. For the other, you seem to have missed polysemy in my statement, and along with it a world of humor. Would you say "small child" denotes a short child or a young child?

All this proven incompetence in decoding messages aside, I very much doubt your discussion of "business" has any basis in fact whatsoever. Since I'm not terribly inclined to discuss business with Kramerica Industries scions, I guess we can leave this as it is.

[arepo]

i dont mean to stumble blindly into this thread, but on the topic of satoshi dice, i don't really understand where all the money comes from. who would play this without some kind of martingale strategy? are there people using this site just as stupid as people who buy scratchoff lottos everyday?

[molecular]

i dont mean to stumble blindly into this thread, but on the topic of satoshi dice, i don't really understand where all the money comes from. who would play this without some kind of martingale strategy? are there people using this site just as stupid as people who buy scratchoff lottos everyday?

gambling is addictive and satoshi dice is one of the most competitive games in terms of the share it takes from the players.

and yes: people use martingale with s.dice (even using bots)

Are they stupid? I'd say no. Some win, some lose.

[Chalkbot]

Since Satoshi Dice has incorporated a "maximum bet" feature for any given line, it eliminates the possibility of someone with a huge bankroll whittling away their funds using a Martingale strategy. I've only spot checked the math on their odds and payouts (not even considering the transaction fees) but I didn't find anywhere that it might be feasible to do so.

As a share holder, I encourage anyone to go prove me wrong.

Also yes, I'm sure the majority of their business comes from the type that would buy scratch off tickets every day. Like they always say, lottery should not be played for investment purposes... unless you are investing in the lottery itself.

[Grant]

who would play this without some kind of martingale strategy?

Marting Gale is just a "gamblers fallacy", but i believe a lot of "believers" run bots with it. Unless satoshi dice isn't random, no system will be any better than placing completely random bets at random times.

http://wizardofodds.com/ask-the-wizard/betting-systems/martingale/
http://wizardofodds.com/gambling/betting-systems/

[Chalkbot]

Just a heads up; Havelock has put up an additional 100 shares of S.DICE for 0.48.

It's incredibly easy to get set up and buy/sell shares on the website.

[arepo]

who would play this without some kind of martingale strategy?

Marting Gale is just a "gamblers fallacy", but i believe a lot of "believers" run bots with it. Unless satoshi dice isn't random, no system will be any better than placing completely random bets at random times.

http://wizardofodds.com/ask-the-wizard/betting-systems/martingale/
http://wizardofodds.com/gambling/betting-systems/

you're right. except some particularly non-risk-averse strategies can inflate both expected value and risk. the martingales are a perfect example of this. but your critique gets to the bottom of this-- these games are all negative ev games and im surprised it gets as much traffic as it does.

i don't see people hanging out in garages betting on cointosses, so what's the difference?

[thoughtfan]

For now SatoshiDICE has got fantastic free publicity:

• The proportion of transactions v. all non-SatoshiDICE transactions showing on Blockchain.info et al;
  
• the debate surrounding its affect on the blockchain;
  
• that it's one of a few 'big' successful ventures in the whole Bitcoin marketplace let alone in the gambling Bitcoin marketplace;
  
• the controversy regarding its legality or the legality of its use in various jurisdictions and the philosophical debate surrounding that;
  
• S.DICE shares being traded, discussion of that, of counter-party risks and the topics that are being discussed in this thread;
  
• All the above also keep discussion of some sort about SatoshiDICE almost perpetually in the limelight at bitcointalk and everywhere else Bitcoin is discussed.
  

All of the above means it currently has a tremendous advantage over any copycat newcomer coming into the field.

However, as a potential investor, I'd like some idea as to whether there are plans to invest in protecting this immense market lead.  There are some gambling outfits out there valued at magnitudes of order larger than SatoshiDICE who could potentially overnight launch a competing service with a slick marketing campaign and loss-leading incentives.  The tiny costs SatoshiDICE manages for such a huge turnover is fantastic but existing companies who are potential competitiors have customer service, PR and marketing departments and budgets.

Do we know whether the 90% holder is happy to leave SatoshiDICE as it is, prepared to accept a substantial loss of market share and a potential decimation of turnover should/when this happens in order keep costs and risks minimal or is he/she up for the challenge of preempting one of the 'big boys' coming in to try and crush it?  I'm also intrigued if this challenge were taken up at which point would it be profitable to take marketing into the non-Bitcoin world resulting in SatoshiDICE bringing newbies into Bitcoin?

[evoorhees]

Since Satoshi Dice has incorporated a "maximum bet" feature for any given line, it eliminates the possibility of someone with a huge bankroll whittling away their funds using a Martingale strategy. I've only spot checked the math on their odds and payouts (not even considering the transaction fees) but I didn't find anywhere that it might be feasible to do so.

As a share holder, I encourage anyone to go prove me wrong.

Also yes, I'm sure the majority of their business comes from the type that would buy scratch off tickets every day. Like they always say, lottery should not be played for investment purposes... unless you are investing in the lottery itself.

Yes and this is very important. I've worked with some of the brilliant statisticians from within this very community to understand these risks of the "player with a huge bankroll" and taken steps to mitigate that risk.

Suffice to say that the numbers in SatoshiDICE are not arbitrary - the max bets, the formulas for determining them, the way transactions are processed, how the coins are stored, etc... lots of work has gone into making the system sustainable and reducing vulnerabilities.

[evoorhees]

However, as a potential investor, I'd like some idea as to whether there are plans to invest in protecting this immense market lead.  There are some gambling outfits out there valued at magnitudes of order larger than SatoshiDICE who could potentially overnight launch a competing service with a slick marketing campaign and loss-leading incentives.  The tiny costs SatoshiDICE manages for such a huge turnover is fantastic but existing companies who are potential competitiors have customer service, PR and marketing departments and budgets.

This is a good point, but it is not specific to SatoshiDICE. Every Bitcoin company faces the looming possibility of more professional outfits recognizing the huge potential of this system, dropping a million or two to build a superior competitor, and winning the business.

While this is a challenge Bitcoin companies all face, it is immeasurably good for Bitcoin itself.

Key here, however, is that because of the technical nature of Bitcoin systems, it will often make sense for these outsiders to buy out the current leaders because they have the technical expertise for these systems. Bitcoin is dangerous to use if you don't know how to use it properly... and a naive company that drops big money into this may fall victim to any number of problems because they weren't experts in Bitcoin itself.

I will simply state here that if a sale of SD happens to some outside party, the current MPEx shareholders will receive buyout funds proportionately to their shares. In other words, if an outsider moves into this industry, there is a good chance SD would be bought out, and then S.DICE holders still end up winning (perhaps winning big).

[tvbcof]

...
I will simply state here that if a sale of SD happens to some outside party, the current MPEx shareholders will receive buyout funds proportionately to their shares. In other words, if an outsider moves into this industry, there is a good chance SD would be bought out, and then S.DICE holders still end up winning (perhaps winning big).

Some of the Bitcoin dev team have mentioned the strain SD puts on the nascent Bitcoin solution, and it is blamed for a fair part of the blockchain bloat.  Even so, it does not seem to be enough to have induced a workable merkle pruning scheme yet.  I do hope that such a thing is even practical.  It seems a shame to me that so much effort was put into the GUI client a year and a half ago vs. some of the more foundational aspect of the Bitcoin solution since the end result seems to be that the QT-client (and P2P nature of Bitcoin itself) is increasingly unpopular due to bloat.

One of the earliest concerns of mine regarding Bitcoin is that it did not seem to have enough protection against 'denial of service' attacks, though I still have not studied the issue in great detail.

I would be leery of investing in SD in case the evolution of the Bitcoin solution injects measures which impact the practicality of SD working as it does (however that is.)  Maybe SD could adapt.  I wouldn't know.

[molecular]

...
I will simply state here that if a sale of SD happens to some outside party, the current MPEx shareholders will receive buyout funds proportionately to their shares. In other words, if an outsider moves into this industry, there is a good chance SD would be bought out, and then S.DICE holders still end up winning (perhaps winning big).

Some of the Bitcoin dev team have mentioned the strain SD puts on the nascent Bitcoin solution, and it is blamed for a fair part of the blockchain bloat.  Even so, it does not seem to be enough to have induced a workable merkle pruning scheme yet.  I do hope that such a thing is even practical.  It seems a shame to me that so much effort was put into the GUI client a year and a half ago vs. some of the more foundational aspect of the Bitcoin solution since the end result seems to be that the QT-client (and P2P nature of Bitcoin itself) is increasingly unpopular due to bloat.

One of the earliest concerns of mine regarding Bitcoin is that it did not seem to have enough protection against 'denial of service' attacks, though I still have not studied the issue in great detail.

I would be leery of investing in SD in case the evolution of the Bitcoin solution injects measures which impact the practicality of SD working as it does (however that is.)  Maybe SD could adapt.  I wouldn't know.

Blockchain bloat will have to be dealt with at some point anyway. SDICE is just accellerating this a bit. It was clear a long time ago that the "p2p nature" (as in: every customer runs a node) of Bitcoin was going to be "reduced".

[tvbcof]

Blockchain bloat will have to be dealt with at some point anyway. SDICE is just accellerating this a bit. It was clear a long time ago that the "p2p nature" (as in: every customer runs a node) of Bitcoin was going to be "reduced".

[/quote]

Ya, this has significantly shifted my interest in the Bitcoin implementation of 'crypto-accounting systems'.  My interest is still high of course, but it is weighted more toward seeking personal profits than it was, and analyzing the system as a general study for future independent efforts vs. hoping that evolutionary developments of Bitcoin proper hold much hope as leverage toward balancing the imbalances in our mainstream monetary solutions.  So it goes.

[molecular]

Blockchain bloat will have to be dealt with at some point anyway. SDICE is just accellerating this a bit. It was clear a long time ago that the "p2p nature" (as in: every customer runs a node) of Bitcoin was going to be "reduced".

Ya, this has significantly shifted my interest in the Bitcoin implementation of 'crypto-accounting systems'.  My interest is still high of course, but it is weighted more toward seeking personal profits than it was, and analyzing the system as a general study for future independent efforts vs. hoping that evolutionary developments of Bitcoin proper hold much hope as leverage toward balancing the imbalances in our mainstream monetary solutions.  So it goes.
[/quote]

If I parsed this correctly you said something like: "Due to this I don't think bitcoin can save the world any more but still make me rich"?

[thoughtfan]

However, as a potential investor, I'd like some idea as to whether there are plans to invest in protecting this immense market lead.  There are some gambling outfits out there valued at magnitudes of order larger than SatoshiDICE who could potentially overnight launch a competing service with a slick marketing campaign and loss-leading incentives.  The tiny costs SatoshiDICE manages for such a huge turnover is fantastic but existing companies who are potential competitiors have customer service, PR and marketing departments and budgets.

This is a good point, but it is not specific to SatoshiDICE. Every Bitcoin company faces the looming possibility of more professional outfits recognizing the huge potential of this system, dropping a million or two to build a superior competitor, and winning the business.

While this is a challenge Bitcoin companies all face, it is immeasurably good for Bitcoin itself.

Key here, however, is that because of the technical nature of Bitcoin systems, it will often make sense for these outsiders to buy out the current leaders because they have the technical expertise for these systems. Bitcoin is dangerous to use if you don't know how to use it properly... and a naive company that drops big money into this may fall victim to any number of problems because they weren't experts in Bitcoin itself.

I will simply state here that if a sale of SD happens to some outside party, the current MPEx shareholders will receive buyout funds proportionately to their shares. In other words, if an outsider moves into this industry, there is a good chance SD would be bought out, and then S.DICE holders still end up winning (perhaps winning big).

Thank you for this.  Appreciated, especially given that I was so critical of a blog of yours the other day!  I'm a bit slow picking up on who is who round here but I've just twigged SD was your baby so congratulations on that

The potential buyout aspect wasn't something I'd given much thought to.  Talking in terms of general Bitcoin companies I can see that as well as being a good thing for Bitcoin, as you suggest,  if those owning/running these businesses now are doing so with this in mind it could also lead to their not thinking as long-term as if they planned to run the business themselvesi ndefinitely.  Just as the odds of hitting 5 consecutive heads of a coin is a lot smaller if you're only planning on tossing 50 times rather than 5,000 times the same applies for instance to the odds of being hacked.  This may not be that relevant for SD but for other businesses if one is only planning to stay in the game and hold out until a takeover the attitude to security might not be the same as a business planning to stay for the long haul where the risks of being hit are much higher.

I'm assuming you know the mystery SD 90% holder so I wonder if there are plans to issue any information for shareholders other than financial info - such as plans as I discussed or intention to sell?  If you and others involved in the project are busy with other projects, given the business is growing without any active promotion it might be useful to know whether there is an intention to develop it so that if and when such an offer comes along it is more worth the potential competitor/buyer's while buying in rather than competing against.

BTW I notice the SD entry on the Bitcoin wiki is still pretty negative starting with the statement '...  is generally considered to be DDoS attack against the Bitcoin network'.  There are plenty who do see SD as spamming the blockchain but as molecular pointed out here, and others have elsewhere, it can also be looked at as providing a service as a catylist to the devs finding a solution they'd have needed to deal with sometime anyway.  I'm finding there is no consensus such as is implied on the wiki and maybe someone could amend it accordingly.

[wachtwoord]

I'm assuming you know the mystery SD 90% holder

Erik owns at least some of that 90%, and I'd wager he owns a substantial amount. Which is good, entrepreneurs should be rewarded when they succeed

[thoughtfan]

I'm assuming you know the mystery SD 90% holder

Erik owns at least some of that 90%, and I'd wager he owns a substantial amount. Which is good, entrepreneurs should be rewarded when they succeed

I agree that it is good that he is rewarded and am also pleased to hear it likely to be the case.  I had just wanted to keep my stated assumption as broad as possible which was why I didn't go there specifically.

But seeing as you brought it up I've got a few ifs lined up (none of which am I assuming to be true):  If Erik owns a substantial amount, let's say he is the majority stakeholder and everyone else is coming along for the ride, if he is is also SD's main 'technical staff' whilst largely occupied with let's say BitInstant projects, is it possible that the SD project, which is doing just fine with minimal intervention, thank you very much, would not get the same attention to take advantage of its position today as it might were it the passion of someone who wanted it to bring him fame and fortune (or to sell out for maximum return)?

I am no VC and I am not claiming rights to know everything about the business, nor even am I saying Erik is obliged to answer at all, but the principle of investing in the person as well as the business counts for me and even if nothing is forthcoming I don't think it is unreasonable to make a request forsome kind of broad statement of what is planned for SD.

[tvbcof]

Blockchain bloat will have to be dealt with at some point anyway. SDICE is just accellerating this a bit. It was clear a long time ago that the "p2p nature" (as in: every customer runs a node) of Bitcoin was going to be "reduced".

Ya, this has significantly shifted my interest in the Bitcoin implementation of 'crypto-accounting systems'.  My interest is still high of course, but it is weighted more toward seeking personal profits than it was, and analyzing the system as a general study for future independent efforts vs. hoping that evolutionary developments of Bitcoin proper hold much hope as leverage toward balancing the imbalances in our mainstream monetary solutions.  So it goes.

If I parsed this correctly you said something like: "Due to this I don't think bitcoin can save the world any more but still make me rich"?

In a nutshell, that's about the size of it.

It's a bit more complex than that of course.  Bitcoin can still contribute much more than the enormous contribution it already has in an effort towards proving the viability of alternatives to modern fiat currencies.  But on it's current trajectory Bitcoin is more-or-less destined for the same fate as the USD, and in my opinion, headed that way even faster than the USD when Brenton Woods is taken as a starting point.

To clarify, the 'fate' I mentioned is monopolization by parties who don't have the interests of the public at large as a primary goal.  Not that this was ever fully the case with the USD, but it has served surprisingly well over a fair period of time as a vehicle upon which the bulk of the population realized significant benefit by it's use and/because had some pretty decent management over much of it's lifespan.

[molecular]

Blockchain bloat will have to be dealt with at some point anyway. SDICE is just accellerating this a bit. It was clear a long time ago that the "p2p nature" (as in: every customer runs a node) of Bitcoin was going to be "reduced".

Ya, this has significantly shifted my interest in the Bitcoin implementation of 'crypto-accounting systems'.  My interest is still high of course, but it is weighted more toward seeking personal profits than it was, and analyzing the system as a general study for future independent efforts vs. hoping that evolutionary developments of Bitcoin proper hold much hope as leverage toward balancing the imbalances in our mainstream monetary solutions.  So it goes.

If I parsed this correctly you said something like: "Due to this I don't think bitcoin can save the world any more but still make me rich"?

In a nutshell, that's about the size of it.

It's a bit more complex than that of course.  Bitcoin can still contribute much more than the enormous contribution it already has in an effort towards proving the viability of alternatives to modern fiat currencies.  But on it's current trajectory Bitcoin is more-or-less destined for the same fate as the USD, and in my opinion, headed that way even faster than the USD when Brenton Woods is taken as a starting point.

To clarify, the 'fate' I mentioned is monopolization by parties who don't have the interests of the public at large as a primary goal.  Not that this was ever fully the case with the USD, but it has served surprisingly well over a fair period of time as a vehicle upon which the bulk of the population realized significant benefit by it's use and/because had some pretty decent management over much of it's lifespan.

There are huge difference between USD and BTC and also between the Banking Cartel that runs the Dollar and a potentially small Bitcoin network. The Bitcoin network will always be open for anyone who has the resources to join. The fate of the USD is loss of trust and hence evaporation. I don't quite see how Bitcoin would follow here. Care to elaborate or point me to a post/thread where you or someone else has done this?

[tvbcof]

In a nutshell, that's about the size of it.

It's a bit more complex than that of course.  Bitcoin can still contribute much more than the enormous contribution it already has in an effort towards proving the viability of alternatives to modern fiat currencies.  But on it's current trajectory Bitcoin is more-or-less destined for the same fate as the USD, and in my opinion, headed that way even faster than the USD when Brenton Woods is taken as a starting point.

To clarify, the 'fate' I mentioned is monopolization by parties who don't have the interests of the public at large as a primary goal.  Not that this was ever fully the case with the USD, but it has served surprisingly well over a fair period of time as a vehicle upon which the bulk of the population realized significant benefit by it's use and/because had some pretty decent management over much of it's lifespan.

There are huge difference between USD and BTC and also between the Banking Cartel that runs the Dollar and a potentially small Bitcoin network. The Bitcoin network will always be open for anyone who has the resources to join. The fate of the USD is loss of trust and hence evaporation. I don't quite see how Bitcoin would follow here. Care to elaborate or point me to a post/thread where you or someone else has done this?

Some other time on a more appropriate thead and board.  And after I've brushed up on some tech and spent more effort understanding more precisely the current state of things.  Current magnitude of some of the numbers, and studied some recent growth charts some more.  Thx for your patience.

[Monster Tent]

I'm assuming you know the mystery SD 90% holder

Erik owns at least some of that 90%, and I'd wager he owns a substantial amount. Which is good, entrepreneurs should be rewarded when they succeed

I agree that it is good that he is rewarded and am also pleased to hear it likely to be the case.  I had just wanted to keep my stated assumption as broad as possible which was why I didn't go there specifically.

But seeing as you brought it up I've got a few ifs lined up (none of which am I assuming to be true):  If Erik owns a substantial amount, let's say he is the majority stakeholder and everyone else is coming along for the ride, if he is is also SD's main 'technical staff' whilst largely occupied with let's say BitInstant projects, is it possible that the SD project, which is doing just fine with minimal intervention, thank you very much, would not get the same attention to take advantage of its position today as it might were it the passion of someone who wanted it to bring him fame and fortune (or to sell out for maximum return)?

I am no VC and I am not claiming rights to know everything about the business, nor even am I saying Erik is obliged to answer at all, but the principle of investing in the person as well as the business counts for me and even if nothing is forthcoming I don't think it is unreasonable to make a request forsome kind of broad statement of what is planned for SD.

For a preview of this look at http://feedzebirds.com which is one of the major reasons not to invest in  sdice.
 

[molecular]

In a nutshell, that's about the size of it.

It's a bit more complex than that of course.  Bitcoin can still contribute much more than the enormous contribution it already has in an effort towards proving the viability of alternatives to modern fiat currencies.  But on it's current trajectory Bitcoin is more-or-less destined for the same fate as the USD, and in my opinion, headed that way even faster than the USD when Brenton Woods is taken as a starting point.

To clarify, the 'fate' I mentioned is monopolization by parties who don't have the interests of the public at large as a primary goal.  Not that this was ever fully the case with the USD, but it has served surprisingly well over a fair period of time as a vehicle upon which the bulk of the population realized significant benefit by it's use and/because had some pretty decent management over much of it's lifespan.

There are huge difference between USD and BTC and also between the Banking Cartel that runs the Dollar and a potentially small Bitcoin network. The Bitcoin network will always be open for anyone who has the resources to join. The fate of the USD is loss of trust and hence evaporation. I don't quite see how Bitcoin would follow here. Care to elaborate or point me to a post/thread where you or someone else has done this?

Some other time on a more appropriate thead and board.  And after I've brushed up on some tech and spent more effort understanding more precisely the current state of things.  Current magnitude of some of the numbers, and studied some recent growth charts some more.  Thx for your patience.

of course... looking forward to it.

[molecular]

Looks like it broke past 48 last night over on mpex

yep. lowest ask: 0.00484562

I wonder how much havelock has "stored" for future IPOs on havelock.

[k]

Looks like it broke past 48 last night over on mpex

yep. lowest ask: 0.00484562

I wonder how much havelock has "stored" for future IPOs on havelock.

Still at a discount on bitfunder. lowest ask there is 0.0044440 currently

https://bitfunder.com/asset/G.SDICE

[Deprived]

In other words, if you do the probability (some other math whiz can solve this if they feel particularly magnanimous) that SD will exhaust its RE's due to bad luck in the dice game and cease being a going concern then it reveals that solvency risk just plummeted massively causing an increase in the expected discounted future cash flows.

Think that's largely irrelevant anyway - as if they have some bad luck then the max size of bets would just get decreased.  So the real Risk of Ruin is (and always has) been very near zero.

Larger cash reserves DOEs, however, allow increasing max bets OR maintaining current limits through a longer run of bad luck (both of which tend to increase cash-flow and hence profit) - but that has nothing like the impact it would have had if the max bets had been fixed in stone and there were a real risk of ruin.

[kjj]

Still at a discount on bitfunder. lowest ask there is 0.0044440 currently

https://bitfunder.com/asset/G.SDICE

Need someone to decide that playing market maker would be fun.
Between BitFunder btct.co and MPEX I am sure one could find some good arbitrage opportunities.

One point I forget to mention : I do trades free of charge. You can trade your S.DICE for GSDPT or your GSDPT for S.DICE 1:1. I also offer to liquidate the bond on MPex for a 1:1 trade between the amount liquidated by selling the bond and the amount you will receive.

I've been kicking the idea around.  DeaDTerra seems pretty busy.  I doubt that he'd like to be the conduit for such a thing.

What really makes me pause is that trades on MPEX are absolute and final.  I don't trust any other exchange enough to be willing to tie up much capital or effort in an arbitrage bot, because I have a feeling that I'd get hung out to dry in a rollback sooner or later.  That said, if some exchange is willing to start GPG-signing account listings or trade notifications, and they demonstrate a lasting commitment to them, I'll do it.

[evoorhees]

I'm assuming you know the mystery SD 90% holder

Erik owns at least some of that 90%, and I'd wager he owns a substantial amount. Which is good, entrepreneurs should be rewarded when they succeed

I agree that it is good that he is rewarded and am also pleased to hear it likely to be the case.  I had just wanted to keep my stated assumption as broad as possible which was why I didn't go there specifically.

But seeing as you brought it up I've got a few ifs lined up (none of which am I assuming to be true):  If Erik owns a substantial amount, let's say he is the majority stakeholder and everyone else is coming along for the ride, if he is is also SD's main 'technical staff' whilst largely occupied with let's say BitInstant projects, is it possible that the SD project, which is doing just fine with minimal intervention, thank you very much, would not get the same attention to take advantage of its position today as it might were it the passion of someone who wanted it to bring him fame and fortune (or to sell out for maximum return)?

I am no VC and I am not claiming rights to know everything about the business, nor even am I saying Erik is obliged to answer at all, but the principle of investing in the person as well as the business counts for me and even if nothing is forthcoming I don't think it is unreasonable to make a request forsome kind of broad statement of what is planned for SD.

You have great points, thoughtfan.

Is it possible that another person could run the site better than me, and make it even more successful? Absolutely. If that person reads this, please contact me, because it'll likely be a win for you, a win for me, and a win for the shareholders. But, I think I've done reasonably well turning this site into the most popular bitcoin game in the universe, no?

Promoting/managing it doesn't take a huge amount of time, but yes I'm spread across a number of Bitcoin projects (and what better way to spend my time... this stuff is so damn cool)

The plans for SD are fairly simple and straightforward.
1) Continue promoting Bitcoin around the world and working to bring about the global monetary revolution. SD is obviously a huge benefactor of base level Bitcoin adoption, and my passion and loyalty will always be first and foremost with promoting the Bitcoin system itself.
2) Maintain the site securely, actively monitor potential exploits, review findings with people smarter than me, etc. This is always top priority and we've done a damn good job so far I think.
3) Continue to promote through the channels I've used. I won't go into details here.
4) Continue developing and polishing the desktop and Android apps
5) Find excellent partnerships (the blockchain.info integration is a prime example)
6) Watch for and seek out those who could take the site to the next level (this gets back to your prime point, thoughtfan)

Thanks for the good question!


 

[evoorhees]

For a preview of this look at http://feedzebirds.com which is one of the major reasons not to invest in  sdice.
 

There are some exciting plans for FZB as well, though indeed it has suffered from some neglect over the past few months.  The FZB IPO was for 30% equity and only cost about $12k. S.DICE was for 10% and cost FAR more. I think the cost-to-potential return on both are very good, but then again I know the inside information on both.

Expect a renaissance of FZB within 2-3 months.

[Spaceman_Spiff]

Care to elaborate or point me to a post/thread where you or someone else has done this?

Some other time on a more appropriate thead and board.  And after I've brushed up on some tech and spent more effort understanding more precisely the current state of things.  Current magnitude of some of the numbers, and studied some recent growth charts some more.  Thx for your patience.

I would be interested in reading this when you get to it.  A pm with link to thread at that point in time would be great.

[tvbcof]

Care to elaborate or point me to a post/thread where you or someone else has done this?

Some other time on a more appropriate thead and board.  And after I've brushed up on some tech and spent more effort understanding more precisely the current state of things.  Current magnitude of some of the numbers, and studied some recent growth charts some more.  Thx for your patience.

I would be interested in reading this when you get to it.  A pm with link to thread at that point in time would be great.

Doh!  I'm really on the hook now   I'm tied up with non-computer projects this week and need to do a week of real work the week following.  I planned to take some time and put some real study into things once the ASIC fiasco had calmed and produced some more clarity...partially to decide if I wish to own one.  As a side effect of that, I hoped to be able to elaborate on my conjectures about the possible futures of Bitcoin.  I don't think I have any extra-ordinary insights into Bitcoin and my grasp of the technical aspects is exceeded by many in the community, but I'll try to remember to PM you (or ping at least ping this thread) if/when I produce anything I feel may be vaguely worth reading.  Or if I see someone else capturing what I feel to be particularly comprehensive and well written concepts which mirror my own thoughts.

[adamstgBit]

I'm shorting S.DICE 

[thoughtfan]

I'm shorting S.DICE 

You sure about that with the favourable Matonis write-up in Forbes?

I was just thinking I'd bought just in time.  Thanks for your timely nicely timed response Erik, btw to my questions

[adamstgBit]

I'm shorting S.DICE 

its not crashing 

[k]

I'm shorting S.DICE 

How are you shorting it?

[adamstgBit]

I'm shorting S.DICE 

How are you shorting it?

by selling it

[Chalkbot]

I'm shorting S.DICE 

its not crashing 

What was your logic behind an S.DICE crash?

[molecular]

I'm shorting S.DICE 

How are you shorting it?

by selling it

Doesn't shorting mean selling borrowed stuff (implying the obligation to give it back at some point).

The meaning of the term "shorting" including simple selling (of stuff you own) doesn't make sense to me. You can just use "selling" in that case.

Similarly, "being short bitcoin" in my mind implies you will have to give someone bitcoin at some point.

Otherwise I could truthfully say stuff like "I'm short spaceships".

[wachtwoord]

Well I am short some spaceships. Do you happen to be selling any?

[adamstgBit]

the difference between shorting and selling!

shorting: selling only to buy back lower (covering)
selling:    selling with no intention to buy back ever. (getting the fuck out)


leveraged trading is playing with borrowed money.

[adamstgBit]

I'm shorting S.DICE  

its not crashing  

What was your logic behind an S.DICE crash?

hype, and its over valued because it seen as the only worthwhile bitcoin investment, i think soon many new IPOs will come out, and people will sell their over bought S.DICE to diversify into these new opportunists.

also at anytime 10million more S.DICE units can be injected into the market

and think about it... S.DICE gets really unlucky one month, that means some big players got lucky, these big players quit while they are ahead, and S.DICE goes under.

its not a sure bet that's for sure...

[Peter Lambert]

I'm shorting S.DICE  

its not crashing  

What was your logic behind an S.DICE crash?

hype, and its over valued because it seen as the only worthwhile bitcoin investment, i think soon many new IPOs will come out, and people will sell their over bought S.DICE to diversify into these new opportunists.

also at anytime 10million more S.DICE units can be injected into the market

and think about it... S.DICE gets really unlucky one month, that means some big players got lucky, these big players quit while they are ahead, and S.DICE goes under.

its not a sure bet that's for sure...

Why do you think another 10 million shares injected would crash the price? If it is a good investment at the current price for the 1st 10% of the company, why wouldn't it be a good investment for the second 10% of the company?

[molecular]

the difference between shorting and selling!

shorting: selling only to buy back lower
selling:    selling with no intention to buy back ever.

definitely a valid way to look at it. Will consider changing my mind.

[CurbsideProphet]

I'm shorting S.DICE  

its not crashing  

What was your logic behind an S.DICE crash?

hype, and its over valued because it seen as the only worthwhile bitcoin investment, i think soon many new IPOs will come out, and people will sell their over bought S.DICE to diversify into these new opportunists.

also at anytime 10million more S.DICE units can be injected into the market

and think about it... S.DICE gets really unlucky one month, that means some big players got lucky, these big players quit while they are ahead, and S.DICE goes under.

its not a sure bet that's for sure...

Why do you think another 10 million shares injected would crash the price? If it is a good investment at the current price for the 1st 10% of the company, why wouldn't it be a good investment for the second 10% of the company?

Because it's supply and demand.  If you double the supply without increasing the demand, the price will go down. 

[Peter Lambert]

I'm shorting S.DICE  

its not crashing  

What was your logic behind an S.DICE crash?

hype, and its over valued because it seen as the only worthwhile bitcoin investment, i think soon many new IPOs will come out, and people will sell their over bought S.DICE to diversify into these new opportunists.

also at anytime 10million more S.DICE units can be injected into the market

and think about it... S.DICE gets really unlucky one month, that means some big players got lucky, these big players quit while they are ahead, and S.DICE goes under.

its not a sure bet that's for sure...

Why do you think another 10 million shares injected would crash the price? If it is a good investment at the current price for the 1st 10% of the company, why wouldn't it be a good investment for the second 10% of the company?

Because it's supply and demand.  If you double the supply without increasing the demand, the price will go down. 

I think there should be a "at a certain price" somewhere in there. If evoorhees puts up a sell order of 10 million shares at the current price,  that would not affect the amount of dividends I get from my shares next month.

[molecular]

I'm shorting S.DICE  

its not crashing  

What was your logic behind an S.DICE crash?

hype, and its over valued because it seen as the only worthwhile bitcoin investment, i think soon many new IPOs will come out, and people will sell their over bought S.DICE to diversify into these new opportunists.

also at anytime 10million more S.DICE units can be injected into the market

and think about it... S.DICE gets really unlucky one month, that means some big players got lucky, these big players quit while they are ahead, and S.DICE goes under.

its not a sure bet that's for sure...

Why do you think another 10 million shares injected would crash the price? If it is a good investment at the current price for the 1st 10% of the company, why wouldn't it be a good investment for the second 10% of the company?

Because it's supply and demand.  If you double the supply without increasing the demand, the price will go down. 

I think there should be a "at a certain price" somewhere in there. If evoorhees puts up a sell order of 10 million shares at the current price,  that would not affect the amount of dividends I get from my shares next month.

It doesn't affect the amount of dividens in any case because the dividends are payed to all 100 million shares. If erik put up another 10 million on mpex that wouldn't change, because they would come from that already being-payed-to pool of shares.

[MPOE-PR]

It's a bit more complex than that of course.  Bitcoin can still contribute much more than the enormous contribution it already has in an effort towards proving the viability of alternatives to modern fiat currencies.  But on it's current trajectory Bitcoin is more-or-less destined for the same fate as the USD, and in my opinion, headed that way even faster than the USD when Brenton Woods is taken as a starting point.

To clarify, the 'fate' I mentioned is monopolization by parties who don't have the interests of the public at large as a primary goal.  Not that this was ever fully the case with the USD, but it has served surprisingly well over a fair period of time as a vehicle upon which the bulk of the population realized significant benefit by it's use and/because had some pretty decent management over much of it's lifespan.

Get something straight: your socialist notions are the problem, not bitcoin. Any functional (even marginally functional) economic system, any significant subsystem thereof (such as the currency) and any way to organize society whereby people are free is squarely at odds with your ideology. This is because your ideology is irretrievably broken.

It will never be the case that a world which includes everyone is worth living in. Ever.

[evoorhees]

the difference between shorting and selling!

shorting: selling only to buy back lower (covering)
selling:    selling with no intention to buy back ever. (getting the fuck out)


leveraged trading is playing with borrowed money.

"Shorting" specifically refers to selling shares you don't own (typically by borrowing them from a broker or someone else). You then -must- buy them back to cover that debt. Your bet is that the price will be lower, so you buy them back for less than you sold them for, and profit!

If you just have an asset and sell some of it, for whatever reason, that's not shorting, it's just called selling

[CurbsideProphet]

I'm shorting S.DICE  

its not crashing  

What was your logic behind an S.DICE crash?

hype, and its over valued because it seen as the only worthwhile bitcoin investment, i think soon many new IPOs will come out, and people will sell their over bought S.DICE to diversify into these new opportunists.

also at anytime 10million more S.DICE units can be injected into the market

and think about it... S.DICE gets really unlucky one month, that means some big players got lucky, these big players quit while they are ahead, and S.DICE goes under.

its not a sure bet that's for sure...

Why do you think another 10 million shares injected would crash the price? If it is a good investment at the current price for the 1st 10% of the company, why wouldn't it be a good investment for the second 10% of the company?

Because it's supply and demand.  If you double the supply without increasing the demand, the price will go down. 

I think there should be a "at a certain price" somewhere in there. If evoorhees puts up a sell order of 10 million shares at the current price,  that would not affect the amount of dividends I get from my shares next month.

I don't need to qualify anything.  He's talking about share price, not dividends.  They are two entirely different things.

[Peter Lambert]

I'm shorting S.DICE  

its not crashing  

What was your logic behind an S.DICE crash?

hype, and its over valued because it seen as the only worthwhile bitcoin investment, i think soon many new IPOs will come out, and people will sell their over bought S.DICE to diversify into these new opportunists.

also at anytime 10million more S.DICE units can be injected into the market

and think about it... S.DICE gets really unlucky one month, that means some big players got lucky, these big players quit while they are ahead, and S.DICE goes under.

its not a sure bet that's for sure...

Why do you think another 10 million shares injected would crash the price? If it is a good investment at the current price for the 1st 10% of the company, why wouldn't it be a good investment for the second 10% of the company?

Because it's supply and demand.  If you double the supply without increasing the demand, the price will go down. 

I think there should be a "at a certain price" somewhere in there. If evoorhees puts up a sell order of 10 million shares at the current price,  that would not affect the amount of dividends I get from my shares next month.

I don't need to qualify anything.  He's talking about share price, not dividends.  They are two entirely different things.

Right, share price. If evoorhees puts up a sell order for a million shares, that would not necessarily drop the price of the stock. If it is worth buying, then if more share go up for sale there will just be more people buying shares.

[CurbsideProphet]

I'm shorting S.DICE  

its not crashing  

What was your logic behind an S.DICE crash?

hype, and its over valued because it seen as the only worthwhile bitcoin investment, i think soon many new IPOs will come out, and people will sell their over bought S.DICE to diversify into these new opportunists.

also at anytime 10million more S.DICE units can be injected into the market

and think about it... S.DICE gets really unlucky one month, that means some big players got lucky, these big players quit while they are ahead, and S.DICE goes under.

its not a sure bet that's for sure...

Why do you think another 10 million shares injected would crash the price? If it is a good investment at the current price for the 1st 10% of the company, why wouldn't it be a good investment for the second 10% of the company?

Because it's supply and demand.  If you double the supply without increasing the demand, the price will go down. 

I think there should be a "at a certain price" somewhere in there. If evoorhees puts up a sell order of 10 million shares at the current price,  that would not affect the amount of dividends I get from my shares next month.

I don't need to qualify anything.  He's talking about share price, not dividends.  They are two entirely different things.

Right, share price. If evoorhees puts up a sell order for a million shares, that would not necessarily drop the price of the stock. If it is worth buying, then if more share go up for sale there will just be more people buying shares.

If nothing fundamentally changes other than an influx of new stock, the share price will decline.  If it's worth buying then buyers would already be bidding up the current price.  The current share price is the meeting of the CURRENT supply and demand.  If you increase the supply side, the price will go down without additional demand.  Current demand is already priced into the share price so like I said, unless there is a fundamental change to drive demand, increased supply will result in a lower share price.

[Peter Lambert]

hype, and its over valued because it seen as the only worthwhile bitcoin investment, i think soon many new IPOs will come out, and people will sell their over bought S.DICE to diversify into these new opportunists.

also at anytime 10million more S.DICE units can be injected into the market

and think about it... S.DICE gets really unlucky one month, that means some big players got lucky, these big players quit while they are ahead, and S.DICE goes under.

its not a sure bet that's for sure...

Why do you think another 10 million shares injected would crash the price? If it is a good investment at the current price for the 1st 10% of the company, why wouldn't it be a good investment for the second 10% of the company?

Because it's supply and demand.  If you double the supply without increasing the demand, the price will go down. 

I think there should be a "at a certain price" somewhere in there. If evoorhees puts up a sell order of 10 million shares at the current price,  that would not affect the amount of dividends I get from my shares next month.

I don't need to qualify anything.  He's talking about share price, not dividends.  They are two entirely different things.

Right, share price. If evoorhees puts up a sell order for a million shares, that would not necessarily drop the price of the stock. If it is worth buying, then if more share go up for sale there will just be more people buying shares.

If nothing fundamentally changes other than an influx of new stock, the share price will decline.  If it's worth buying then buyers would already be bidding up the current price.  The current share price is the meeting of the CURRENT supply and demand.  If you increase the supply side, the price will go down without additional demand.  Current demand is already priced into the share price so like I said, unless there is a fundamental change to drive demand, increased supply will result in a lower share price.

Ah, but that is where the supply and demand "at a certain price" comes in. It may be worth buying at 0.005 btc/share, but not as good a deal at 0.0055 btc/share, so people do not bid up the price. But if somebody comes along ad sells more shares, that does not change the calculation of whether it is worth buying at 0.005 so people will continue buying the shares. 

[adamstgBit]

hype, and its over valued because it seen as the only worthwhile bitcoin investment, i think soon many new IPOs will come out, and people will sell their over bought S.DICE to diversify into these new opportunists.

also at anytime 10million more S.DICE units can be injected into the market

and think about it... S.DICE gets really unlucky one month, that means some big players got lucky, these big players quit while they are ahead, and S.DICE goes under.

its not a sure bet that's for sure...

Why do you think another 10 million shares injected would crash the price? If it is a good investment at the current price for the 1st 10% of the company, why wouldn't it be a good investment for the second 10% of the company?

Because it's supply and demand.  If you double the supply without increasing the demand, the price will go down. 

I think there should be a "at a certain price" somewhere in there. If evoorhees puts up a sell order of 10 million shares at the current price,  that would not affect the amount of dividends I get from my shares next month.

I don't need to qualify anything.  He's talking about share price, not dividends.  They are two entirely different things.

Right, share price. If evoorhees puts up a sell order for a million shares, that would not necessarily drop the price of the stock. If it is worth buying, then if more share go up for sale there will just be more people buying shares.

If nothing fundamentally changes other than an influx of new stock, the share price will decline.  If it's worth buying then buyers would already be bidding up the current price.  The current share price is the meeting of the CURRENT supply and demand.  If you increase the supply side, the price will go down without additional demand.  Current demand is already priced into the share price so like I said, unless there is a fundamental change to drive demand, increased supply will result in a lower share price.

Ah, but that is where the supply and demand "at a certain price" comes in. It may be worth buying at 0.005 btc/share, but not as good a deal at 0.0055 btc/share, so people do not bid up the price. But if somebody comes along ad sells more shares, that does not change the calculation of whether it is worth buying at 0.005 so people will continue buying the shares. 

its not "worth buying" at these prices.
the IPO was kinda over priced too.
as bitcoin bubbles up, it will be less and less worth it.

[Peter Lambert]

If nothing fundamentally changes other than an influx of new stock, the share price will decline.  If it's worth buying then buyers would already be bidding up the current price.  The current share price is the meeting of the CURRENT supply and demand.  If you increase the supply side, the price will go down without additional demand.  Current demand is already priced into the share price so like I said, unless there is a fundamental change to drive demand, increased supply will result in a lower share price.

Ah, but that is where the supply and demand "at a certain price" comes in. It may be worth buying at 0.005 btc/share, but not as good a deal at 0.0055 btc/share, so people do not bid up the price. But if somebody comes along ad sells more shares, that does not change the calculation of whether it is worth buying at 0.005 so people will continue buying the shares. 

its not "worth buying" at these prices.
the IPO was kinda over priced too.
as bitcoin bubbles up, it will be less and less worth it.

SatoshiDice does business in bitcoins, so having the exchange rate go up is actually good for this stock.
Obviously a large number of people did not think the IPO was overpriced, since they bought up the shares.

SatoshiDice is doing much better than my 401k, I wish there was an easy way to move some of the money over without having to pay lots of money in withdrawal fees and taxes.

[adamstgBit]

If nothing fundamentally changes other than an influx of new stock, the share price will decline.  If it's worth buying then buyers would already be bidding up the current price.  The current share price is the meeting of the CURRENT supply and demand.  If you increase the supply side, the price will go down without additional demand.  Current demand is already priced into the share price so like I said, unless there is a fundamental change to drive demand, increased supply will result in a lower share price.

Ah, but that is where the supply and demand "at a certain price" comes in. It may be worth buying at 0.005 btc/share, but not as good a deal at 0.0055 btc/share, so people do not bid up the price. But if somebody comes along ad sells more shares, that does not change the calculation of whether it is worth buying at 0.005 so people will continue buying the shares. 

its not "worth buying" at these prices.
the IPO was kinda over priced too.
as bitcoin bubbles up, it will be less and less worth it.

SatoshiDice does business in bitcoins, so having the exchange rate go up is actually good for this stock.
Obviously a large number of people did not think the IPO was overpriced, since they bought up the shares.

SatoshiDice is doing much better than my 401k, I wish there was an easy way to move some of the money over without having to pay lots of money in withdrawal fees and taxes.

I'm not saying S.DICE is toxic, its good shit! and because of this its in a little bit of a bubble ATM,  price should fall to more reasonable levels soon enough.

I hope!

in any case I'm not going to cover my S.DICE short at a loss, i might do that for bitcoin but that's different

[adamstgBit]

its not "worth buying" at these prices.
the IPO was kinda over priced too.
as bitcoin bubbles up, it will be less and less worth it.

sunnankar made the argument in the beginning of this thread that shares are worth .0075

Now a few days are left in the month still for the whales to win it back... but it looks like satoshiDICE is going to have another great month.

Even with the BTC price rally (now reversing) how low does the share price need to get for it to be "worth buying" to you?

5BTC / 1000

holy shit S.DICE droped to 0.8BTC / 1000 a few hours ago

ok i'll buy at 2BTC / 1000

[Chalkbot]

Even with the BTC price rally (now reversing) how low does the share price need to get for it to be "worth buying" to you?

5BTC / 1000

holy shit S.DICE droped to 0.8BTC / 1000 a few hours ago

ok i'll buy at 2BTC / 1000

Adam, the 0.8 selloff was almost certainly due to a typo. That guy lost a lot of BTC selling way below the market price at the time.

The selloff and the hypothesis to how the mistake was made are documented in this chat log:
http://polimedia.us/trilema/2013/marketplace-excitement-with-expert-commentary-for-your-vicarious-trading-pleasure/

[adamstgBit]

Even with the BTC price rally (now reversing) how low does the share price need to get for it to be "worth buying" to you?

5BTC / 1000

holy shit S.DICE droped to 0.8BTC / 1000 a few hours ago

ok i'll buy at 2BTC / 1000

Adam, the 0.8 selloff was almost certainly due to a typo. That guy lost a lot of BTC selling way below the market price at the time.

The selloff and the hypothesis to how the mistake was made are documented in this chat log:
http://polimedia.us/trilema/2013/marketplace-excitement-with-expert-commentary-for-your-vicarious-trading-pleasure/

if somone made a typo once.... he can do it again!

short all the bitcoins s.dice!

[Bowjob]

Oh god.. someone lost a lot of BTC.. He was off by a factor of 10! I wonder if they guy harmed himself or something.

[Peter Lambert]

if somone made a typo once.... he can do it again!

short all the bitcoins s.dice!

But he lost all his money on that typo, so he can't make the same mistake again.

Money will flow from the stupid/weak/careless to the smart/strong/careful.

[Bowjob]

So.. I'm sure that guy who just lost 70 grand trading S.Dice at such a cheap price is here somewhere. If you are are reading this, care to share your story?

[Bowjob]

and so I'm trying to get an estimate of the bonds annual yield

First, Satoshi Dice is an equity play; not a bond. So you should be doing the appropriate financial analysis.

All original shares from the IPO have now been sold.

Now that you are quite a bit richer (or rather, your assets are more liquid now) what sort of stuff are you going to do with all those bitcoins (if you would like to share)?

A nice 8% jump in price has been nice for those of us holding shares. Where are all those people saying this was a horrible stock to hold? Cause it would take "like 10 years to make any money!"?

Well, actually its trading at around 0.0047 now so that is more like a 40% gain.

While not being a fan of the vices, this does present a fairly finance textbook example of a melt-up due to good news. Let me run through the analysis for the fun of it.

Although December had unusually high earnings of 3.2% (17,206.44888669 /537,375.97) the intriguing part is the strengthening of the SD balance sheet to the tune of about 28,000 BTC retained earnings.

To be conservative we will assume the public float dividend were doubled and paid out to the anonymous investor holding the other 90%. After all, the anonymous investor owns 9x more than the public float and would not want to jeopardize SD's solvency potentially having to shutter it due to bad luck and has probably not taken any dividends since they probably have plenty of cash from the IPO and could probably fly private wherever they want with this type of monthly cash-flow.

This leaves about 25,000 BTC of retained earnings which to exhaust would require about -4.795% negative luck on 550,000 BTC of bets compared to the Dec beginning retained earnings of -2.22%. Assuming the anonymous investor has taken no dividends then the luck probabilities change to -5.11% and -2.29%.

In other words, if you do the probability (some other math whiz can solve this if they feel particularly magnanimous) that SD will exhaust its RE's due to bad luck in the dice game and cease being a going concern then it reveals that solvency risk just plummeted massively causing an increase in the expected discounted future cash flows.





Everything else being equal, this additional 15,500 BTC of retained earnings, makes SD much safer of an investment with a much higher NPV which is already corrected for BTC exchange rate risk.

Consequently, a melt-up in the price is to be expected. What is fairly exceptional is that the issuer did not cancel the IPO's at .0037 or at least move the bid up; or maybe the anonymous investor bought them using some dividends. But that is neither here nor there, using a similar risk premium before Dec's earnings would put a price around at least .0075. So it will be interesting to see how long it takes to get there; assuming an average Jan luck.

S.Dice shares have reached 0.0075 in MPEX. Well done

[Bowjob]

Everyone should make fun of me now that I sold almost half of my holdings 12,500 shares. I'm glad I hedged a bit though.

[sunnankar]

S.Dice shares have reached 0.0075 in MPEX. Well done

Yes, once again I was right.

Should be worth slightly less than double that if you take this months earnings into consideration

Well, I am not sure if double is the right amount but S.Dice is certainly worth more than .0075. Jan earnings so far are about 17k BTC on 680k. So, after dividend this should leave approximately 45k of retained earnings making it an extremely safe investment all things considered. My Wallet just passed 100k users.

Also, since the initial .0037 IPO sold out earlier in the month the European gaming magazine advertising campaign, according to the prospectus, should be getting rolled out soon. That should help quite a bit with publicity, brand recognition, earnings and share price.

So, I would not be surprised if those 4m shares at .01 start getting nibbled into pretty soon. 40k BTC is a lot of savings ($800k) so it would be surprising if the capital pools are that deep. But MPEx did add 49 new accounts in Jan. That wall at .0075 should get taken out pretty quickly since they are undervalued.

Despite not being a fan of the vices, I am actually kind of interested in this little experiment. I wonder if some casino is going to acquire SD for $100-200m in 12-18 months.

[k]

So, after dividend this should leave approximately 45k of retained earnings making it an extremely safe investment all things considered.

I've seen you talk about these retained earnings before. Is there something in the prospectus about this? My understanding is that the profits are shared out amount the 100 million shares. So 10% goes to owners of the shares on MPEX and the other 90% goes to the other shareholder(s) (Erik or whoever), so those Bitcoins are not owned by SatoshiDice so shouldn't be used in making a valuation of the shares.

[sunnankar]

So, after dividend this should leave approximately 45k of retained earnings making it an extremely safe investment all things considered.

I've seen you talk about these retained earnings before. Is there something in the prospectus about this? My understanding is that the profits are shared out amount the 100 million shares. So 10% goes to owners of the shares on MPEX and the other 90% goes to the other shareholder(s) (Erik or whoever), so those Bitcoins are not owned by SatoshiDice so shouldn't be used in making a valuation of the shares.

Well, I suppose it is implied from past behavior (Oct 2012) based on terms 2.2(f-h) of IPO Agreement #3. It also makes sense based on the business model. Based on blockchain analysis, it looks like the other 90% investors take at most dividends equal to the 10% publicly listed. After all, SD's bankroll is one of its competitive advantages so it makes sense to get a large bankroll.

A little more clarity from the issuer on this issue of retained earnings would probably be good but I completely understand an unwillingness to do so as any representation could implicitly limit future behavior. But then the 10% shareholders are freeriding? off the 90% shareholder(s) retained earnings.

Really, the financial statements just need to be cleaned up a little bit. The Google Doc is pretty amateur (typical of startup Bitcoinland). And with an $12.5m market capitalisation it might justify the expense. As a shareholder I would not be opposed to a $100-200/month fee for a CPA to create a nice and pretty Google Doc (plus, three years of professionally prepared financial statements might be helpful when it comes time to sell it). Plus, it would free up the time of whoever is currently creating the Google Doc.

[wachtwoord]

They cannot hire someone for fiat money because they have none. As far as I can tell their strategy in the battle concerning the legality of the enterprise is keeping everything (all expenses and income) in the company in Bitcoin. That's one of the reasons for the IPO as the previous owners of the IPO'ed shares are able to use the funds acquired from that sell outside the current Bitcoin economy.

[sunnankar]

As far as I can tell their strategy in the battle concerning the legality of the enterprise is keeping everything (all expenses and income) in the company in Bitcoin.

That is one defense. But there are even stronger legal defenses that can be employed. The blockchain is a remarkable tool for slicing through all types of issues like civil procedure and purposeful availment to start with.

I do not think there are any material legal risks associated with SD; not that I would recommend the concession of any facts regarding it. Additionally, I would change some of the wording on the site to clean up some loose ends.

[Korbman]

Anyhow, I am doing much better on the investment side than I was rolling the dice, how about you guys?

In at .0037 and still holding 

[ThickAsThieves]

Hopefully a big vegas player comes and buys s.dice

I'm not sure if that's the ideal situation though.

What could S.DICE realistically sell out for? And, at what price is it more prudent for a buyer to just start his own operation?

[byronbb]

It's about limits and payout %. That's how you improve the product. A 500max bet is pretty big but its small in the world of degen whales.

Here's someone droping 900k on Barcelona last year on Betfair.



And here are current superbowl odds at pinnacle with max bet at 140k with rebets allowed after line move.

[sunnankar]

What could S.DICE realistically sell out for?

I think $100-200m in the next 12-18 months is realistic.

[herzmeister]

What could S.DICE realistically sell out for?

I think $100-200m in the next 12-18 months is realistic.

S.DICE is *only* about the domain though. It has no precious user data like other sites do.

[Peter Lambert]

What could S.DICE realistically sell out for?

I think $100-200m in the next 12-18 months is realistic.

S.DICE is *only* about the domain though. It has no precious user data like other sites do.

It may not have user data, but it does have users. People would pay to not have to generate their own userbase.

[ThickAsThieves]

 It has no precious user data like other sites do.

The site could probably implement user wallets and accounts at satoshidice.com.

The site very well may be worth $100m+, but that's a lot of money to put toward doing it yourself and marketing the piss out of it.

[Peter Lambert]

 It has no precious user data like other sites do.

The site could probably implement user wallets and accounts at satoshidice.com.

The site very well may be worth $100m+, but that's a lot of money to put toward doing it yourself and marketing the piss out of it.

Why would they need to make their own wallet, when blockchain.info wallet already has a direct satoshidice feature?

[sunnankar]

What could S.DICE realistically sell out for?

I think $100-200m in the next 12-18 months is realistic.

S.DICE is *only* about the domain though.

Actually, it is about even less than just the domain name which makes it even more valuable because there is even less risk to its going concern status.

[ThickAsThieves]

 It has no precious user data like other sites do.

The site could probably implement user wallets and accounts at satoshidice.com.

The site very well may be worth $100m+, but that's a lot of money to put toward doing it yourself and marketing the piss out of it.

Why would they need to make their own wallet, when blockchain.info wallet already has a direct satoshidice feature?

In reference to collecting user data. If the site takes user registrations, and includes a wallet, users will be more likely to stay there.

For users that are more interested in gambling than in the bitcoin movement, they might enjoy having an account. This would enable things like animated bets and interactive aspects playing the game. It would also give a way to collect email addresses  to announce new features, games, or products.

The website could also have a simple guide to help users that are new to bitcoin get set up with a personal wallet , etc.

Just thinking out loud...

[nrd525]

S. Dice is grossly over-valued.  The cost of creating a competitor is very low.  They don't offer anything special that another competitor cannot easily replicate.    Someone could return 99.5% of bets and still make a killing.

I'd value the company at 1x-2x annual earnings and label it as very high risk.

[Korbman]

They don't offer anything special that another competitor cannot easily replicate.

You're thinking about coding and layout. What you're not thinking about is the value of a Brand, which is generally what drives the value of a company. One million people could create one million gambling sites, but there will always be the original "SatoshiDice".

[nrd525]

They've got a name brand and some built up trust.  But they don't offer a community, a building, a color, a taste, a smell, a unique product or anything that holds a strong attraction to most people.

Maybe gamblers feel a strong connection to a company that takes away their money?  If so, I'm not a gambler so I don't understand this appeal.

Friendster and Myspace had both a name brand and a massive community - and they were both destroyed.  Imagine how fast they would have died without their strong communities.

Unlike many real corporations that have valuable assets (often approaching their market value), when/if Satoshi Dice fades away or rapidly dies you'll get 0% back. 

[Peter Lambert]

They've got a name brand and some built up trust.  But they don't offer a community, a building, a color, a taste, a smell, a unique product or anything that holds a strong attraction to most people.

They have bitcointalk.org!

[kjj]

S. Dice is grossly over-valued.  The cost of creating a competitor is very low.  They don't offer anything special that another competitor cannot easily replicate.    Someone could return 99.5% of bets and still make a killing.

I'd value the company at 1x-2x annual earnings and label it as very high risk.

You know, probably a hundred different people have all said this on the forums since S.Dice opened.  Surely if one of you were right, this thread would have gone dormant long ago, crushed by the flood of S.Dice users rushing to the better site.  And yet, here we are, still talking about them, still no real competition in view.  Perhaps you are missing something in your analysis.  Or maybe a couple million dollars a year isn't enough motivation to replicate their simple site.

[nrd525]

These guys seem to be doing pretty well:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=120497.100

[fcmatt]

quite honestly i think sd's biggest problem is that it gets boring quick.
some have stated that sd's whale has already started trying other gambling games.
sd needs more games or players will goto something else that is entertaining.
sitting in front of a bitcoin client sending money to an address and either waiting
or refreshing sd's website got old for me after just a few bets to see what all the
fuss was about. i never went back. I think others will go down the same path.

[adamstgBit]

quite honestly i think sd's biggest problem is that it gets boring quick.
some have stated that sd's whale has already started trying other gambling games.
sd needs more games or players will goto something else that is entertaining.
sitting in front of a bitcoin client sending money to an address and either waiting
or refreshing sd's website got old for me after just a few bets to see what all the
fuss was about. i never went back. I think others will go down the same path.

maybe the evoorhees is seeing this excat trend and this is why hes dumping like a mad fool...

[bitcoinBull]

quite honestly i think sd's biggest problem is that it gets boring quick.
some have stated that sd's whale has already started trying other gambling games.
sd needs more games or players will goto something else that is entertaining.
sitting in front of a bitcoin client sending money to an address and either waiting
or refreshing sd's website got old for me after just a few bets to see what all the
fuss was about. i never went back. I think others will go down the same path.

maybe the evoorhees is seeing this excat trend and this is why hes dumping like a mad fool...

I don't trust their reported revenues. It would be too easy and very cheap to fake users with a bot playing the game (the only cost would be transaction fees, not proportional to bet sizes).

The fact that they're raising money with "stock issues" is another red flag. The whole thing doesn't smell quite right..

[kingcrimson]

How does btc price effect share value? Lets say coins double from $20 to $40..meaning shares go from .006 to .003, which retains its value but cuts your total bitcoin total in half. Well you would've been better off holding the coins, no? Isn't simple speculation better than investing right now?

[Bowjob]

How does btc price effect share value? Lets say coins double from $20 to $40..meaning shares go from .006 to .003, which retains its value but cuts your total bitcoin total in half. Well you would've been better off holding the coins, no? Isn't simple speculation better than investing right now?

Except betting volume has gone up, not the other way around.

[thoughtfan]

How does btc price effect share value? Lets say coins double from $20 to $40..meaning shares go from .006 to .003, which retains its value but cuts your total bitcoin total in half. Well you would've been better off holding the coins, no? Isn't simple speculation better than investing right now?

It is an interesting one to think about.  Elaborating on Bowjob's reply the shares are only likely over time to reduce in value in the event that projected earnings per share were expected to drop.  I guess if USD/BTC keeps rising and the money for gambling comes mainly from fiat (or for businesses where price/profit is liked to fiat rate) there comes a time when it is impossible for the vast majority to be playing with the same size stakes as before.  But the indications for now are that increasing numbers of people are playing and some are playing with what at today's exchange rates are huge amounts of money in fiat terms.  I also tend to think, because generally the money people put into Bitcoin is money they can afford to lose anyway and because it isn't USD people treat it more like play money than they might if they were thinking of it in terms of USD all the time.  Just some comments and guesses

[Bowjob]

How does btc price effect share value? Lets say coins double from $20 to $40..meaning shares go from .006 to .003, which retains its value but cuts your total bitcoin total in half. Well you would've been better off holding the coins, no? Isn't simple speculation better than investing right now?

It is an interesting one to think about.  Elaborating on Bowjob's reply the shares are only likely over time to reduce in value in the event that projected earnings per share were expected to drop.  I guess if USD/BTC keeps rising and the money for gambling comes mainly from fiat (or for businesses where price/profit is liked to fiat rate) there comes a time when it is impossible for the vast majority to be playing with the same size stakes as before.  But the indications for now are that increasing numbers of people are playing and some are playing with what at today's exchange rates are huge amounts of money in fiat terms.  I also tend to think, because generally the money people put into Bitcoin is money they can afford to lose anyway and because it isn't USD people treat it more like play money than they might if they were thinking of it in terms of USD all the time.  Just some comments and guesses

I've actually had this concern: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=135760.0

For now S.Dice looks like its still growing.

[Chalkbot]

Any word on whether additional shares will be sold tonight, and at what price?

[Chalkbot]

Thanks Ian.

Debating whether or not I'm interested in picking up anymore at that price...

[sunnankar]

Low valuation of $20mil usd still puts the stock at BTC.01 - I see S.DICE being worth that today.

Buyout of 100mil+ possible? - I would agree with sunnankar on that being a possibility in a year / 18months if Bitcoin keeps going the way it is.
S.DICE is so well branded, mentioned in nearly every article written about bitcoin
.... sure the USA might go at it for gambling, but then they legitimize bitcoin
- so I am willing to gamble a bit on that. Either S.DICE dies and the rest of my coin skyrockets as BTC is legitimized as a commodity/currency
- or S.DICE grows to be huge / holds its spots as one of bitcoinlands coca-cola's / is bought by a big macau casino

With Blockchain.info growing at about 1.5% per day? The rate of Bitcoin adoption is getting faster because of network effects. It is on an exponential adoption curve. Looks at Facebook, Evernote, Paypalor Dropbox usage for similarities. Imagine SD revenue with 3m Blockchain.info users which is realistic by slightly increasing current growth rates in 12-18 months.

Doubt US can go after it for gambling. If they do they will likely fail on constitutional grounds of void for vagueness and over breadth doctrines, assuming they can even drag anyone into court and not get booted out on summary judgment and gone after for the tort of abuse of legal process. This would be a great test case for some precedent though.

Game theory wise US should just ignore Bitcoin and try to regulate exchangers to insert their data gathering hooks.

All potentials are likely SD positive though.

[Transisto]

What could S.DICE realistically sell out for?

I think $100-200m in the next 12-18 months is realistic.

S.DICE is *only* about the domain though. It has no precious user data like other sites do.

I'm curious how much a similar domain would be valued at.

SatoshiBets.com  lol 10$ http://hostye.com/d/satoshibets.com/

[wtfvanity]

What could S.DICE realistically sell out for?

I think $100-200m in the next 12-18 months is realistic.

S.DICE is *only* about the domain though. It has no precious user data like other sites do.

I'm curious how much a similar domain would be valued at.

SatoshiBets.com  lol 10$ http://hostye.com/d/satoshibets.com/

I'm sure that's very accurate. Try it with SD itself, $2000 value.

http://hostye.com/d/satoshidice.com/

[Transisto]

S.DICE is *only* about the domain though. It has no precious user data like other sites do.

I'm curious how much a similar domain would be valued at.

SatoshiBets.com  lol 10$ http://hostye.com/d/satoshibets.com/

I'm sure that's very accurate. Try it with SD itself, $2000 value.

http://hostye.com/d/satoshidice.com/

In the long term I think the "dice" part in satoshidice will eventually limits what it could become by adding new games,
vs say more generic gambling name like :
http://satoshinn.com/ (actual casino (beta))
or satoshicasino.com

[k]

With Blockchain.info growing at about 1.5% per day? The rate of Bitcoin adoption is getting faster because of network effects. It is on an exponential adoption curve. Looks at Facebook, Evernote, Paypalor Dropbox usage for similarities. Imagine SD revenue with 3m Blockchain.info users which is realistic by slightly increasing current growth rates in 12-18 months.

SDice revenue is not guaranteed to rise with more Bitcoin users. With 3m Blockchain.info users bitcoin price in USD would surely be higher but because of the fixed number of bitcoins  (I know total bitcoin supply still increasing but my general point still holds) then Bitcoin revenue might not increase.  revenue (ignoring the luck element) can only increase if the amount of bitcoins gambled on SDice increases. So there may be 30x the number of Bitcoin users but on average they'd have 30x less Bitcoins so the average gambled on SDice per player may also reduce by 30x. If Bitcoin revenue/profit doesn't  increase then the Bitcoin denominated share price should also not increase. Of course that share price will be worth a lot more in terms of USD.

Another thing to maybe think about is that part of SDice's popularity is the relative lack of alternatives for things to spend Bitcoins on. With a 3m userbase, Bitcoin will be far more attractive to other developers and entrepreneurs and I can imagine there will be many more alternative ways to spend your bitcoin thus more competition for SDice.

[adamstgBit]

is this the tranche for today?

No one touched it yet? cuz someone appears to be selling ahead of it?

[bitcoinBull]

Why does SatoshiDice need to raise capital? Are there any reports of players winning huge payouts that they aren't able to meet with current funds? If not, then there's no need for capital.

[thoughtfan]

Why does SatoshiDice need to raise capital? Are there any reports of players winning huge payouts that they aren't able to meet with current funds? If not, then there's no need for capital.

SD isn't raising capital.  It is not an issuance of new stock being sold by SD.  It is stock already existing that prior to this week was part of the 90% private holding now being been sold into the open market.  In other words it is the private holder of the shares being sold that is receiving the money raised, not the business.

[adamstgBit]

should i buy?

or should i play?

 

[thoughtfan]

should i buy?

I guess by the call you made prior to this current tranche you've got a pretty good feel for the market:

OH OH i feel S.DICE could go down because of this 50% supply increase, seems traders are buying it up only to dump it back slightly higher  

My prediction is unless someone comes in with big bucks and soaks up what's likely to be a lot more asks at around this price and at all increments on the way up than are currently showing we're going to have to wait for new money to come in to gradually push the price back up.  If there's no big demand right now the few current stockholders who would still consider increasing their S.DICE holding have some time to watch the market and buy when confident it's not getting lower.  If Erik's previously stated plan to release another 2,000,000 before the end of the week goes ahead we could be hovering around this mark for quite some time.

As far as I know there is no indication of a decline in play/profit/projected dividend and the value of total existing stock has not changed therefore it is still of the same underlying value as it was on Monday when it was trading .007x.  In that sense it's still a bargain but nobody knows what could happen to the business in the meantime and there is still a possibility this will have been an excuse for a total re-evaluation for many, such that the risks associated (e.g. risk of legal persecution) as re-assessed now forms a bigger part in determining value.  If that's the case the 'heady days' of .007x may never return

From a personal perspective with the bid side of the order book at Havelock looking as it is were I to sell my holding right now I'd be at a substantial loss*.  However I like that what happened last night was different again to what happened the previous two nights in terms of what can be gleaned and extrapolated (or guessed and unfoundedly speculated ) from it.

* Edit: A few minutes later and this is no longer the case with enough bids around the .62 mark that I am no longer in negative equity

[adamstgBit]

should i buy?

I guess by the call you made prior to this current tranche you've got a pretty good feel for the market:

OH OH i feel S.DICE could go down because of this 50% supply increase, seems traders are buying it up only to dump it back slightly higher  

My prediction is unless someone comes in with big bucks and soaks up what's likely to be a lot more asks at around this price and at all increments on the way up than are currently showing we're going to have to wait for new money to come in to gradually push the price back up.  If there's no big demand right now the few current stockholders who would still consider increasing their S.DICE holding have some time to watch the market and buy when confident it's not getting lower.  If Erik's previously stated plan to release another 2,000,000 before the end of the week goes ahead we could be hovering around this mark for quite some time.

As far as I know there is no indication of a decline in play/profit/projected dividend and the value of total existing stock has not changed therefore it is still of the same underlying value as it was on Monday when it was trading 7.x.  In that sense it's still a bargain but nobody knows what could happen to the business in the meantime and there is still a possibility this will have been an excuse for a total re-evaluation for many, such that the risks associated (e.g. risk of legal persecution) as re-assessed now forms a bigger part in determining value.  If that's the case the 'heady days' of 7.x may never return

From a personal perspective with the bid side of the order book at Havelock looking as it is were I to sell my holding right now I'd be at a substantial loss*.  However I like that what happened last night was different again to what happened the previous two nights in terms of what can be gleaned and extrapolated (or guessed and unfoundedly speculated ) from it.

* Edit: A few minutes later and this is no longer the case with enough bids around the 6.2 mark that I am no longer in negative equity

I think 0.006 is a reasonable price, but the risks are high, the market feels saturated and there's still 3 million shares to go.... Do i wait and hope for a better price, or lock in this reasonable price... hmmmm....
... i placed a bid, i will give it more thought tomorrow.

[bitcoinBull]

Why does SatoshiDice need to raise capital? Are there any reports of players winning huge payouts that they aren't able to meet with current funds? If not, then there's no need for capital.

SD isn't raising capital.  It is not an issuance of new stock being sold by SD.  It is stock already existing that prior to this week was part of the 90% private holding now being been sold into the open market.  In other words it is the private holder of the shares being sold that is receiving the money raised, not the business.

[tinfoil hat on] The "private holder" could simply Erik Voorhees or an associate, it makes no difference. The question is, why are they selling their shares? Whether the shares already existed or newly "created" is a meaningless technicality. Fact is they are now selling on the open market. AFAICT, this is indistinguishable from raising capital. The question is why?

The other red flag is that it would be so easy for Mr. Voorhees to play his own game thereby creating fraudulent revenues in the blockchain. He would simply lose/win against himself, there is no risk and the only cost would be the block transaction fees. I don't know if this has been suggested elsewhere, but its the very likely that this is happening. Its the rule of thumb that companies starting gaming services (or any social activities, eg dating sites) simulate activity, simulate users, so the service or site doesn't appear dead. Real users see supposed "people" playing satoshidice on blockchain.info, it makes them think about playing too. How much of that is just simulated play with the service's own funds, and how much is real people risking actual coin? I bet that most is just simulated.

[thoughtfan]

Why does SatoshiDice need to raise capital? Are there any reports of players winning huge payouts that they aren't able to meet with current funds? If not, then there's no need for capital.

SD isn't raising capital.  It is not an issuance of new stock being sold by SD.  It is stock already existing that prior to this week was part of the 90% private holding now being been sold into the open market.  In other words it is the private holder of the shares being sold that is receiving the money raised, not the business.

The "private holder" could simply Erik Voorhees or an associate, it makes no difference. The question is, why are they selling their shares? Whether the stock already existed or newly "created" is a meaningless technicality. Fact is they are now selling on the open market. AFAICT, this is indistinguishable from raising capital...

You're right in that it makes no difference who of the 'private holders' is selling but my understanding is that there's a world of difference between private holdings being sold (to another private investor or to the public) and the business raising money by issuing new stock.  The latter increases the business's capital by creating more stock.  If the new capital brings in enough new revenue then profit as a percentage of capital will remain the same therefore the dividend will remain unchanged.  

But for this to happen the new capital would need to be spent on marketing or something to increase turnover sufficiently to keep the dividend the same.  So 'just' issuing new stock and increasing capital with no action to utilise the additional capital would result in a reduced dividend per share and have a consequent on share value.  This is not by any stretch of the imagination the same as selling privately held stock.

As for why Erik or associate is selling why does anyone sell shares?  I don't care as long as it is not diluting existing stock - which it isn't - even though there is an impact on price for the time being.

[tinfoil hat on]
The other red flag is that it would be so easy for Mr. Voorhees to play his own game thereby creating fraudulent revenues in the blockchain. He would simply lose/win against himself, there is no risk and the only cost would be the block transaction fees. I don't know if this has been suggested elsewhere, but its the very likely that this is happening. Its the rule of thumb that companies starting gaming services (or any social activities, eg dating sites) simulate activity, simulate users, so the service or site doesn't appear dead. Real users see supposed "people" playing satoshidice on blockchain.info, it makes them think about playing too. How much of that is just simulated play with the service's own funds, and how much is real people risking actual coin? I bet that most is just simulated.

This is virtually identical to what EskimoBob wrote on another thread to which evoorhees responded:

EskimoBob - I kinda felt like you were just spreading FUD, but I actually think you are legitimately concerned/skeptical, and that is the correct position to take. Everyone in Bitcoinland should be highly skeptical, and very careful. I don't want to fault you for it. You don't know me, and so I could just as easily be a scammer on teh interwebz. Your points are fine.

I'm not sure how to address them, other than to just keep working and building so that's what I'll do.

If you think S.DICE shares are a good deal, buy some. If not, don't buy them. I would rather people stay skeptical and avoid BTC equity listings entirely than lose their money to overly-speculative ventures and scam operations. It is through this period of trial by fire that we'll find who the virtuous people are, and I'd have it no other way.

I will tell you straightforward, that bets on SD are never manipulated in any way to make things look rosy. I'm not sure how to prove that to you, other than to just show you over time that it's true.

I would ask, however, that you try to avoid unsubstantiated claims. If you have a concern, please talk to me about it. I'm very public with who I am and what I do, and am reachable most of the day on Skype (account: evoorhees).

We'll let markets work, and the rest will be shown in time.

[bitcoinBull]

This is virtually identical to what EskimoBob wrote on another thread to which evoorhees responded:

Ah, thanks. I knew I couldn't be the only skeptical one..

[adamstgBit]

Tranche announcement - I'm going to keep the 3rd tranche available for another 24 hrs (until 5pm EST Saturday). After that, I'll remove it and will not be adding any other shares to the market. I'll hold on to the 4th and 5th tranches as it seems the market is satiated with the current supply.

whats going to happen when this wall is removed?

i think price is going to go down and stay down, no matter what kind of returns are seen next month...

[adamstgBit]

where do you get this graph?

[byronbb]

where do you get this graph?

From the greatest thread ever.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=80312.0

[FTWbitcoinFTW]

Quote from: dooglus on February 08, 2013, 08:51:13 PM

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=80312.msg1512955#msg1512955

[Bitobsessed]

So with the BTC rallying up, S.DICE is valued at ... 1 000 000 000 * .0062 = BTC6200000 @ $30 | $18,6000,000
Is this high? low? about right?

Hmm...I dunno.  Just because BTC is at $30+ does not mean you can do calcs like that.  Is it extremely valuable, yes.  But to extrapolate like that, just does not make sense.  Think about it a minute.

[tvbcof]

From the block size discussions recently it looks like at least for a while we're going to be toying with the economics of transaction fees.

Also, as I suspected, a lot of people are getting good and sick of the SatoshiDice spamage and what it's doing to the system.  I now see (from blockchain.info) more than a little 'diceoncrack' spam as well.

I mentioned earlier on this thread that actual real-world actions might impact the function and/or viability of SatoshiDice.  Perhaps (and hopefully in my opinion) utilization of Bitcoin as a messaging system by player who leach off the ecosystem by passing the costs on to others are numbered.

[Korbman]

So with the BTC rallying up, S.DICE is valued at ... 1 000 000 000 * .0062 = BTC6200000 @ $30 | $18,6000,000
Is this high? low? about right?

Hmm...I dunno.  Just because BTC is at $30+ does not mean you can do calcs like that.  Is it extremely valuable, yes.  But to extrapolate like that, just does not make sense.  Think about it a minute.

I thought it was only 100 million shares total, not a billion?

Even so, how does valuing a company in USD (or any currency that a Bitcoin can be converted to) not make sense? Just because they operate in Bitcoins doesn't mean we can't do some quick math to figure out their "real world" worth...

[ThickAsThieves]

So with the BTC rallying up, S.DICE is valued at ... 1 000 000 000 * .0062 = BTC6200000 @ $30 | $18,6000,000
Is this high? low? about right?

Hmm...I dunno.  Just because BTC is at $30+ does not mean you can do calcs like that.  Is it extremely valuable, yes.  But to extrapolate like that, just does not make sense.  Think about it a minute.

I thought it was only 100 million shares total, not a billion?

Even so, how does valuing a company in USD (or any currency that a Bitcoin can be converted to) not make sense? Just because they operate in Bitcoins doesn't mean we can't do some quick math to figure out their "real world" worth...

It all depends on how you're looking at it. Some available assets can produce a mostly predictable % dividend each month (in BTC). If you start comparing those assets to assets that have a dwindling % due to USD influence, then the picture gets clearer.

On the flip side, there's nothing stopping SDICE dividends from skyrocketing if more whales decide to play, or, if an influx of normal players comes along. It's a gamble!

[Peter Lambert]

So with the BTC rallying up, S.DICE is valued at ... 1 000 000 000 * .0062 = BTC6200000 @ $30 | $18,6000,000
Is this high? low? about right?

Hmm...I dunno.  Just because BTC is at $30+ does not mean you can do calcs like that.  Is it extremely valuable, yes.  But to extrapolate like that, just does not make sense.  Think about it a minute.

I thought it was only 100 million shares total, not a billion?

Even so, how does valuing a company in USD (or any currency that a Bitcoin can be converted to) not make sense? Just because they operate in Bitcoins doesn't mean we can't do some quick math to figure out their "real world" worth...

Yes, the correct figure should be 100 million shares, which would put the company somewhere around 1.8 million USD.

Doing these calculations is absolutely OK. One can sell (or buy), right now, a share of satoshidice for 0.0062 bitcoins, and one can sell (or buy) a bitcoin right now for $30 (or $35 or whatever the current rate is), so by using the intermediate of bitcoins you can sell one share of satoshidice for 0.186 USD, that is where the market puts the price of shares of satoshidice in USD. You can make similar conversions to EUR, GBP, JPY, XAU, or whatever currency you want.

[davincisolari]

I just speculated on a few shares of S.Dice!  Bitcoins are awesome.  As a non voting share holder I do have one suggestion to S.Dice.  Expand your offerings.  You have an great product with a lot of traffic, why not try to capture more of the market?  Maybe you could sell 30% more of the company and hire developers to build a full service gambling website.  Your investors would love you for it.  Just my tow bits, thanks and keep up the good work!