Why is the BitFunder SDice pass through trading so cheaply?

[MPOE-PR]

lol, agreed on all of the above.
apparently its becoming quite common for asset issuers to use varying methods to pump their share prices far far beyond reasonable earnings. its all fine for now. until the day that something clicks somewhere, and the price drops like a rock leaving a lot of people with near worthless crap. well.. except the issuers hehe they make out like a bandit in the meantime. but thats okay, everyone accepts it, and just hopes they are not the ones left holding the bag at the end.

No, actually, it used to be the case that asset issuers pumped their bullshit far beyond what was reasonable, back when all you muppets had GLBSE to dick around on, and Nefario was "someone with his level of trust in the community".

Since we've (MPEx, that is) killed off that stupid bullshit prices are actually being more or less reasonably set by the market, whatever that means in BTC. Huge effort is being put specifically into removing market inefficiencies and making prices reflective of underlying economic reality, the recent S.BBET IPO being an excellent case study for this.

Obviously you don't think so, but the reason you don't think so is that you are excluded from price formation. The reason you are excluded from price formation isn't something external to you however. It is purely internal, to wit, the fact that you are worthless as a human being, have no point in this world and your opinions do not matter. I hope you've enjoyed the 15 minutes while it lasted, because they ain't never coming back.

Now let me hear the whine chorus. Reality is so very very mean and unfair. When you're done with that take a week to stfu and read this daily.

[1714106449]

1714106449

[1714106449]

1714106449

[1714106449]

1714106449

[1714106449]

1714106449

[btcbids]

lol, agreed on all of the above.
apparently its becoming quite common for asset issuers to use varying methods to pump their share prices far far beyond reasonable earnings. its all fine for now. until the day that something clicks somewhere, and the price drops like a rock leaving a lot of people with near worthless crap. well.. except the issuers hehe they make out like a bandit in the meantime. but thats okay, everyone accepts it, and just hopes they are not the ones left holding the bag at the end.

No, actually, it used to be the case that asset issuers pumped their bullshit far beyond what was reasonable, back when all you muppets had GLBSE to dick around on, and Nefario was "someone with his level of trust in the community".

Since we've (MPEx, that is) killed off that stupid bullshit prices are actually being more or less reasonably set by the market, whatever that means in BTC. Huge effort is being put specifically into removing market inefficiencies and making prices reflective of underlying economic reality, the recent S.BBET IPO being an excellent case study for this.

Obviously you don't think so, but the reason you don't think so is that you are excluded from price formation. The reason you are excluded from price formation isn't something external to you however. It is purely internal, to wit, the fact that you are worthless as a human being, have no point in this world and your opinions do not matter. I hope you've enjoyed the 15 minutes while it lasted, because they ain't never coming back.

Now let me hear the whine chorus. Reality is so very very mean and unfair. When you're done with that take a week to stfu and read this daily.

you are correct. I simply failed at expressing sarcasm. mebbe should have wrote 'i guess its okay *eyeroll*' also if you are being defensive of mpex and teeth at throat thinking i ment mpex assets, i was not referencing any mpex stocks. do you consider them pumped and fitting that description or just too used to defending them from other people? i imagine its prolly the latter.

offtopic - i am curious though how mpex has killed off the stupid bullshit prices of mining 'stocks' 'bonds' whatever you wanna callem when mpex primarily has its own asset, two gambling assets, and hosting company, and no miners? again, nothing aginst the type/quality/number of assets on mpex, just comparing types..  are you meaning overall btc price adjustments? i think the impressive pricing for stocks issued on mpex have done some pretty neat things esp. for each other, just not sure how it effects other types of 'assets' on other markets.  not trying to be rude, just want your thoughts on it in a conversely manner.

[🏰 TradeFortress 🏰]

Too cheap? What if it's absurdly overpriced?
1) Can it be overpriced because this guy in a funny hat and a mask can close it down with a flip of switch when he gets his first phone call from a 3 letter agency and is asked to close down his illegal gambling site?
2) Can it be overpriced because it trades at 7+ PE? (over 7 times the annual earnings per share) and has no valuable assets (actually I have not seen the balance sheet. Have you?)
3) has no unique business model, that can not be copied with few programmers and mediocre web designer? (Why have I not copied this low-life business and launched my own gambling site? I consider gambling as a really disgusting business and I honestly do not give a flying fuck if you disagree.
4) or is it because sdice can spin coin from IPO on sdice to make it look way better than it actually is? (This is a small price to pay if it helps to sell out it's final 6+ mil shares but becomes unnecessary when the IPO is sold out) <- pure speculation, do not get hysterical!
5) ...


PS! btcbids, your phobia of capital letters and "enter" key in not as cute as you think. Maybe you can skip the spacing between the words too, thiswillmakeyourpostsevenmore"fun"toread. LOL

Regarding #3. There are multiple clones to satoshiDICE, and none of them comes close to an order of magnitude. #1 is a good point through.

[Bugpowder]

i am curious though how mpex has killed off the stupid bullshit prices of mining 'stocks' 'bonds' whatever you wanna callem

It has to do with the direction of the exponential.  In the real world, when people buy stocks, they try to buy ones where the exponent is positive r = A*exp(x/t), like the red line.  But mining is intrinsically a negative exponent process r = A*exp((1-x)/t), like the blue line. So MPEX is winning because they carry red line companies, not blue line companies.

Also, no ponzi.

[btcbids]

i am curious though how mpex has killed off the stupid bullshit prices of mining 'stocks' 'bonds' whatever you wanna callem

It has to do with the direction of the exponential.  In the real world, when people buy stocks, they try to buy ones where the exponent is positive r = A*exp(x/t), like the red line.  But mining is intrinsically a negative exponent process r = A*exp((1-x)/t), like the blue line. So MPEX is winning because they carry red line companies, not blue line companies.

Also, no ponzi.

http://brainwindows.files.wordpress.com/2013/01/mpexschematic.jpg

definitely.

Since we've (MPEx, that is) killed off that stupid bullshit prices are actually being more or less reasonably set by the market, whatever that means in BTC.

just curious how their red line effects the mining stocks being more or less reasonably set by the market and how they prevent/expose/cull ponzi's, etc. on other markets.

[Bugpowder]

just curious how their red line effects the mining stocks being more or less reasonably set by the market and how they prevent/expose/cull ponzi's, etc. on other markets.

Well that is an interesting question.  I don't think most MPEX account holders would be investing substantially in GLBSE trash. 

Let me ask a related question though, is the limited number of quality red line companies coupled with increasing buyer demand causing excessive valuations in existing MPEX securities?  OR are they actually undervalued, as the demand curve appears to also be following the red line?

[btcbids]

just curious how their red line effects the mining stocks being more or less reasonably set by the market and how they prevent/expose/cull ponzi's, etc. on other markets.

Well that is an interesting question.  I don't think most MPEX account holders would be investing substantially in GLBSE trash. 

Let me ask a related question though, is the limited number of quality red line companies coupled with increasing buyer demand causing excessive valuations in existing MPEX securities?  OR are they actually undervalued, as the demand curve appears to also be following the red line?

we should prolly move this to a side thread. i diverged way off topic with this. sorry.

[Factory]

i am curious though how mpex has killed off the stupid bullshit prices of mining 'stocks' 'bonds' whatever you wanna callem

It has to do with the direction of the exponential.  In the real world, when people buy stocks, they try to buy ones where the exponent is positive r = A*exp(x/t), like the red line.  But mining is intrinsically a negative exponent process r = A*exp((1-x)/t), like the blue line. So MPEX is winning because they carry red line companies, not blue line companies.

Also, no ponzi.

For the sake of accuracy, I would argue that individuals should place more importance on solid EPS growth over revenue growth. There are many factors that can cause a company to have increased revenue while also having a negative effect on the company's bottom line. It may be better to change the chart to reflect that.

Of course, EPS growth is only one of a long list of factors that are important to consider when evaluating securities (if approaching from a fundamental perspective.) Unfortunately, with btc-based assets we don't have the luxury of complete detailed and accurate financial data.

[MPOE-PR]

do you consider them pumped and fitting that description or just too used to defending them from other people? i imagine its prolly the latter.

The latter indeed.

just curious how their red line effects the mining stocks being more or less reasonably set by the market and how they prevent/expose/cull ponzi's, etc. on other markets.

It's a simple point of competition for finite resources. This is not quite as visible in fiat, because in fiat bs gov'ts can create and do create fake money to prop up wasteful/pointless paraeconomic ventures run by the "right people", which is just another way of saying "popular" (which is, of course, the wrong game to play if you aim for prosperity).

In BTC however, where resources are absolutely finite, there will only be so much BTC available for investment at any given time. This BTC will be allocated to the available investments somehow. Part of it will be allocated by idiots, on paraeconomic criteria like "we don't like MPEx". Part of it will be allocated economically. As time goes on the share available to the idiots to allocate as they see fit dwindles, and the share available to the rational players increases. Since human behavior is reinforced by success and (usually, except in the case of a really limited pile of hardcore idiots) discouraged by failure, the flow is even faster as individual people realize they are being part of the idiot group and jump ship.

Soon enough the situation reaches equilibrium, which is pretty much where we're at. In short, the beauty of economy is that it works.

None of this is to mean MPEx is perfect, by any means. That's not the point at all. It just means MPEx is the standard, and because stock exchanges are fundamentally a convergent, naturally standardizing market it also means the accretion trend will continue, exactly in the same way and fundamentally for the same reasons Bitcoin grows against fiat currencies.

It's by now impractical for any serious company contemplating being listed in BTC to forego the significant capital available on MPEx in order to favor a different venue (in fact, the cost of doing so can be calculated on the basis of the volume difference, and is in any case significant) for a variety of reasons, and certainly such an attempt would imply the modification of said company to include "being an exchange", which requires rare and valuable skills (programming notably NOT being one of them) and other human capital. Such an effort necessarily spells a movement away from said corp's core mission, whatever it may be (*).

A willingness to move away from the core mission, a cavalier attitude towards incurring costs and foregoing benefits all work together to paint a very unflattering picture in the eye of the discerning investor (If these people have any confidence in their business, why are they working on moving away from it to do something else? If they have the capital to pursue reinventing the wheel, why do they need my investment? If they're not interested in cashing in now why should I expect they ever will get my shares dividends?) and rapidly the convergence effects become very strong indeed.

* To quote Buffet,

Concluding this little dissertation on acquisitions, I can't resist repeating a tale told me last year by a corporate executive. The business he grew up in was a fine one, with a long-time record of leadership in its industry. Its main product, however, was distressingly glamorless. So several decades ago, the company hired a management consultant who  -naturally - advised diversification, the then-current fad. ("Focus" was not yet in style.) Before long, the company acquired a number of businesses, each after the consulting firm had gone through a long - and expensive - acquisition study. And the outcome? Said the executive sadly, "When we started, we were getting 100% of our earnings from the original business. After ten years, we were getting 150%."

PS. For a doodle, Bugpowder's graph is remarkably accurate. The period is indeed ~5 months, for instance.

[burnside]

It's by now impractical for any serious company contemplating being listed in BTC to forego the significant capital available on MPEx in order to favor a different venue (in fact, the cost of doing so can be calculated on the basis of the volume difference, and is in any case significant) for a variety of reasons, and certainly such an attempt would imply the modification of said company to include "being an exchange", which requires rare and valuable skills (programming notably NOT being one of them) and other human capital. Such an effort necessarily spells a movement away from said corp's core mission, whatever it may be (*).

So what you're saying is that no one should list on the NYSE because the NASQAQ has more volume?  I call BS.

Different exchanges have different benefits, trade methods, tools for the issuers, end user accessibility, security features, and other pros and cons.  Which exchange is best is a matter of best fit, not a matter of volume.  Otherwise there would only ever be one exchange in any given currency.

[Factory]

It's by now impractical for any serious company contemplating being listed in BTC to forego the significant capital available on MPEx in order to favor a different venue (in fact, the cost of doing so can be calculated on the basis of the volume difference, and is in any case significant) for a variety of reasons, and certainly such an attempt would imply the modification of said company to include "being an exchange", which requires rare and valuable skills (programming notably NOT being one of them) and other human capital. Such an effort necessarily spells a movement away from said corp's core mission, whatever it may be (*).

So what you're saying is that no one should list on the NYSE because the NASQAQ has more volume?  I call BS.

Different exchanges have different benefits, trade methods, tools for the issuers, end user accessibility, security features, and other pros and cons.  Which exchange is best is a matter of best fit, not a matter of volume.  Otherwise there would only ever be one exchange in any given currency.

Different exchanges have different requirements- they also operate in different fashions. It is not always which one is a matter of best fit, but rather which one a stock can list to. Stocks also switch exchanges based on a variety of reasons- such as market cap and the extent of their filings.

Exchanges exist to help provide liquidity. Saying that it is not a matter of volume is rubbish.

[molecular]

Why is the Satoshi Dice asset on Bitfunder.com trading at a significantly lower rate than the SDice shares on Mpex, or similar pass throughs?

The fact that you have to go through making accounts for 2 sites in order to buy might have something to do with it.

[EskimoBob]

do you consider them pumped and fitting that description or just too used to defending them from other people? i imagine its prolly the latter.

The latter indeed.

just curious how their red line effects the mining stocks being more or less reasonably set by the market and how they prevent/expose/cull ponzi's, etc. on other markets.

It's a simple point of competition for finite resources. This is not quite as visible in fiat, because in fiat bs gov'ts can create and do create fake money to prop up wasteful/pointless paraeconomic ventures run by the "right people", which is just another way of saying "popular" (which is, of course, the wrong game to play if you aim for prosperity).

In BTC however, where resources are absolutely finite, there will only be so much BTC available for investment at any given time. This BTC will be allocated to the available investments somehow. Part of it will be allocated by idiots, on paraeconomic criteria like "we don't like MPEx". Part of it will be allocated economically. As time goes on the share available to the idiots to allocate as they see fit dwindles, and the share available to the rational players increases. Since human behavior is reinforced by success and (usually, except in the case of a really limited pile of hardcore idiots) discouraged by failure, the flow is even faster as individual people realize they are being part of the idiot group and jump ship.

Soon enough the situation reaches equilibrium, which is pretty much where we're at. In short, the beauty of economy is that it works.

None of this is to mean MPEx is perfect, by any means. That's not the point at all. It just means MPEx is the standard, and because stock exchanges are fundamentally a convergent, naturally standardizing market it also means the accretion trend will continue, exactly in the same way and fundamentally for the same reasons Bitcoin grows against fiat currencies.

It's by now impractical for any serious company contemplating being listed in BTC to forego the significant capital available on MPEx in order to favor a different venue (in fact, the cost of doing so can be calculated on the basis of the volume difference, and is in any case significant) for a variety of reasons, and certainly such an attempt would imply the modification of said company to include "being an exchange", which requires rare and valuable skills (programming notably NOT being one of them) and other human capital. Such an effort necessarily spells a movement away from said corp's core mission, whatever it may be (*).

A willingness to move away from the core mission, a cavalier attitude towards incurring costs and foregoing benefits all work together to paint a very unflattering picture in the eye of the discerning investor (If these people have any confidence in their business, why are they working on moving away from it to do something else? If they have the capital to pursue reinventing the wheel, why do they need my investment? If they're not interested in cashing in now why should I expect they ever will get my shares dividends?) and rapidly the convergence effects become very strong indeed.

* To quote Buffet,

Concluding this little dissertation on acquisitions, I can't resist repeating a tale told me last year by a corporate executive. The business he grew up in was a fine one, with a long-time record of leadership in its industry. Its main product, however, was distressingly glamorless. So several decades ago, the company hired a management consultant who  -naturally - advised diversification, the then-current fad. ("Focus" was not yet in style.) Before long, the company acquired a number of businesses, each after the consulting firm had gone through a long - and expensive - acquisition study. And the outcome? Said the executive sadly, "When we started, we were getting 100% of our earnings from the original business. After ten years, we were getting 150%."

PS. For a doodle, Bugpowder's graph is remarkably accurate. The period is indeed ~5 months, for instance.

This fkn gypsy joker and his sock puppet are gone completely bonkers...

I started to laugh so hard at  "MPEx is the standard" that I had a tear in me eyes. For fuck sake, mircea popescu, you are seriously delusional and this raving sock puppet of your is obviously beyond repair. I can see why some people actually buy your bull shit - they have <0 experience from the real world and you can confuse them easily. This only shows what a scumbags you 2 really are.  

Reality is, your "one stock wonder bazaar" is no better than any other exchange LTC/BTC world has up an running and you 2 slimy shit birds like to take credit for something that you nor that sorry ass mpex of yours, had nothing to do with. Fkn sociopaths!
One more thing, don't forget to STFU now!
LOL

[MPOE-PR]

This fkn gypsy joker and his sock puppet are gone completely bonkers...

I started to laugh so hard at  "MPEx is the standard" that I had a tear in me eyes. For fuck sake, mircea popescu, you are seriously delusional and this raving sock puppet of your is obviously beyond repair. I can see why some people actually buy your bull shit - they have <0 experience from the real world and you can confuse them easily. This only shows what a scumbags you 2 really are.  

Reality is, your "one stock wonder bazaar" is no better than any other exchange LTC/BTC world has up an running and you 2 slimy shit birds like to take credit for something that you nor that sorry ass mpex of yours, had nothing to do with. Fkn sociopaths!
One more thing, don't forget to STFU now!
LOL

How's the missus?