[AMC]-The Official Active Mining Cooperative Discussion

[kslaughter]

Help me out here.  You've sold 2M shares at 0.0005 for a total of 1000 BTC.  You bought over 1000 BTC worth of avalon chips.

How much other capital do you have?

Because I don't see how you have funds to build boards for the avalon chips, let alone pay for masks on your own device. 

Just sit back, the plan will be revealed soon and you will see the light.

[stoasis]

Dear fellow bitcoiners,


Please, don`t be blinded by ASICminer greed and think for yourself before investing in any bitcoin company. Would AMC deliver it's promises then this could be a potential good investment but the current state of affaire makes AMC succes dependable on to many outside factors. So be wary.

What has been bothering the most is Mr. Slaughter. Mr. Slaughter is being to mystical for my taste. Every announcement he has made has been either to vague or to general to double check (" major semiconductor company", "ISP company", ...). I also don’t believe he’s street smart enough, seeing how he has handled the IPO and the way he has been fending people who are questioning him.

AMC is a mining corporation, buying mining hardware to hash. We don’t know how many money the founders have invested but we do know that they are holding more than 60% of the shares. For all i know the shareholders could be the one providing all the funds, making it a risk free investment for the the founders. I wouldn’t like to see another Ian Bakewell debacle happening here.


Please Mr. Slaughter don't take this personally this is just my impression based on the forum posts.
A coupe of Questions to Kslaughter:

*What's being invested by the founders and private shareholders? How do you justify owning more than 60% percent of the shares?

*What would happen if the price would rally ? Would you stop selling shares ?

*Are there any intentions of making shareholders boardmembers? This could potentially increase the trust in the company.


Stoasis

edit: layout

[kslaughter]

Dear fellow bitcoiners,


Please, don`t be blinded by ASICminer greed and think for yourself before investing in any bitcoin company. Would AMC deliver it's promises then this could be a potential good investment but the current state of affaire makes AMC succes dependable on to many outside factors. So be wary.

What has been bothering the most is Mr. Slaughter. Mr. Slaughter is being to mystical for my taste. Every announcement he has made has been either to vague or to general to double check (" major semiconductor company", "ISP company", ...). I also don’t believe he’s street smart enough, seeing how he has handled the IPO and the way he has been fending people who are questioning him.

AMC is a mining corporation, buying mining hardware to hash. We don’t know how many money the founders have invested but we do know that they are holding more than 60% of the share. For all i know the shareholders could be the one providing all the funds, making it a risk free investment for the the founders. I wouldn’t like to see another Ian Bakewell debacle happening here.


Please Mr. Slaughter don't take this personally this is just my impression based on the forum posts.
A coupe of Questions to Kslaughter:

*What's being invested by the founders and private shareholders? How do you justify owning more than 60% percent of the shares?

*What would happen if the price would rally ? Would you stop selling shares ?

*Are there any intentions of making shareholders boardmembers? This could potentially increase the trust in the company.


Stoasis

edit: layout

I don't own 60% of the shares, you need to read the description a little closer.  We want the stock to rally, we want investors to have a good "Long Term Investment".
Selling shares depends on our capital needs to buy more equipment, R & D, and other expenses related to mining.  When the Avalon's get here they will start generating capital,
so I see the need for selling shares decreasing in the future.  Board seats are sure possible in the future.

[stoasis]

AMC Offering:

AMC's offering is comprised of 100,000,000 shares in total.

1 share of AMC on BitFunder represents 1/100,000,000th of 100% of the monthly profits after all expenses.

AMC shares offer no voting rights. Shares of AMC on BitFunder do not represent real world shares of the
company.  The shares are solely a distribution mechanism for rights to profits.

20,000,000 shares will be retained by AMC to maintain a growth and expansion fund.

As of the time of this writing, up to 40,000,000 will be released over time to the public on a varying
time scale as capital is required to complete the project.  Any remaining shares not included in the
IPO are owned/maintained/controlled by AMC. These shares will be used at the issuers discretion
for any uses deemed fit. These uses are not limited to, but may include employment.

Shares not issued are owned by AMC which is indirectly implying that the founders are owning more than 60% of the shares. I'm also wondering what you mean by R&D. Aren't the miners developed by VMC which, as you have stated before, is a different company.

[luke.watson]

AMC Offering:

AMC's offering is comprised of 100,000,000 shares in total.

1 share of AMC on BitFunder represents 1/100,000,000th of 100% of the monthly profits after all expenses.

AMC shares offer no voting rights. Shares of AMC on BitFunder do not represent real world shares of the
company.  The shares are solely a distribution mechanism for rights to profits.

20,000,000 shares will be retained by AMC to maintain a growth and expansion fund.

As of the time of this writing, up to 40,000,000 will be released over time to the public on a varying
time scale as capital is required to complete the project.  Any remaining shares not included in the
IPO are owned/maintained/controlled by AMC. These shares will be used at the issuers discretion
for any uses deemed fit. These uses are not limited to, but may include employment.

Shares not issued are owned by AMC which is indirectly implying that the founders are owning more than 60% of the shares. I'm also wondering what you mean by R&D. Aren't the miners developed by VMC which, as you have stated before, is a different company.

I think that the shares will be used to fund the company so in theory it will work out better for the shareholders if the company reinvests the money from the unsold shares

[Deprived]

AMC Offering:

AMC's offering is comprised of 100,000,000 shares in total.

1 share of AMC on BitFunder represents 1/100,000,000th of 100% of the monthly profits after all expenses.

AMC shares offer no voting rights. Shares of AMC on BitFunder do not represent real world shares of the
company.  The shares are solely a distribution mechanism for rights to profits.

20,000,000 shares will be retained by AMC to maintain a growth and expansion fund.

As of the time of this writing, up to 40,000,000 will be released over time to the public on a varying
time scale as capital is required to complete the project.  Any remaining shares not included in the
IPO are owned/maintained/controlled by AMC. These shares will be used at the issuers discretion
for any uses deemed fit. These uses are not limited to, but may include employment.

Shares not issued are owned by AMC which is indirectly implying that the founders are owning more than 60% of the shares. I'm also wondering what you mean by R&D. Aren't the miners developed by VMC which, as you have stated before, is a different company.

Of the 100% of shares.

20% are held by AMC for growth/reinvestment (a horrible way to do things but sadly common - shares should represent ownership not be a crude way to determine the percentage of profits dividended),
40% are potentially for sale to the public - with unsold ones the same as the first 20%
The other 40% would be the founder's own shares.

There's thus three ways to look at it:

If you look at divdends then the founder receives 40% of all dividends regardless of how many shares are sold.
If you look at distributed profits (i.e. the dividends that end up NOT going back to AMC) then before any shares were sold he received 100% (obviously) and when all 40% public ones are sold he receives 50%.
If you look at actual ownership then he owns 100% initially falling to 60% if all public shares are sold.

Right now if any profits were made he'd be entitled to the vast majority of that portion of them that was destined to end anywhere other than in AMC itself - as his personal 40% outweigh the portion actually sold.

How well the shares do depend mainly on how profits are calculated - which is where you have to hope he's generous as that largely depends on how VMC decides to define its cost price that it charges to AMC.  And of course VMC isn't responsible to investors so doesn't have to make any disclosure in respect of that.

Bottomline is that he DOES own more than 60% - dropping to exactly 60% if/when all 40% of public shares are sold.  Reason for that is the ownership the shares owned by AMC.  Those are owned by whoever owns AMC.  Shareholders do NOT own AMC (that's explicit in the contract) so do not any part of those shares.  In practical terms, assuming good faith, the actual effective owned percentage of profits is 50% if all public shares are sold.

[ChronoX5]

Shares not issued are owned by AMC which is indirectly implying that the founders are owning more than 60% of the shares. I'm also wondering what you mean by R&D. Aren't the miners developed by VMC which, as you have stated before, is a different company.

Of the 100% of shares.

20% are held by AMC for growth/reinvestment (a horrible way to do things but sadly common - shares should represent ownership not be a crude way to determine the percentage of profits dividended),
40% are potentially for sale to the public - with unsold ones the same as the first 20%
The other 40% would be the founder's own shares.

There's thus three ways to look at it:

If you look at divdends then the founder receives 40% of all dividends regardless of how many shares are sold.
If you look at distributed profits (i.e. the dividends that end up NOT going back to AMC) then before any shares were sold he received 100% (obviously) and when all 40% public ones are sold he receives 50%.
If you look at actual ownership then he owns 100% initially falling to 60% if all public shares are sold.

Right now if any profits were made he'd be entitled to the vast majority of that portion of them that was destined to end anywhere other than in AMC itself - as his personal 40% outweigh the portion actually sold.

How well the shares do depend mainly on how profits are calculated - which is where you have to hope he's generous as that largely depends on how VMC decides to define its cost price that it charges to AMC.  And of course VMC isn't responsible to investors so doesn't have to make any disclosure in respect of that.

Bottomline is that he DOES own more than 60% - dropping to exactly 60% if/when all 40% of public shares are sold.  Reason for that is the ownership the shares owned by AMC.  Those are owned by whoever owns AMC.  Shareholders do NOT own AMC (that's explicit in the contract) so do not any part of those shares.  In practical terms, assuming good faith, the actual effective owned percentage of profits is 50% if all public shares are sold.

There's this sentence in the IPO:

Only the first 40,000,000 issued shares will receive 100% of the monthly profits after all expenses until the total dividends paid is equal to .0005 BTC per share.

So after all shares are sold there is a time frame where 100% of the profits are paid out to the shareholders and the growth and expansion fund. I agree with the rest of your analysis.

Something completely unrelated: Who is the guy buying batches of 50,000 shares at 0.000799999? I appreciate that someone is supporting the current price level but what's in it for him/her?

[Vbs]

(...)
Bottomline is that he DOES own more than 60% - dropping to exactly 60% if/when all 40% of public shares are sold.  Reason for that is the ownership the shares owned by AMC.  Those are owned by whoever owns AMC.  Shareholders do NOT own AMC (that's explicit in the contract) so do not any part of those shares.  In practical terms, assuming good faith, the actual effective owned percentage of profits is 50% if all public shares are sold.

Thanks for the analysis Deprived.

As a comparison, ASICMINER has a roughly 41/59% profits split (favoring Bitfountain). I didn't find an explicit reference to the "ownership" of ASICMINER.

Introduction
ASICMINER is a virtual identity totally held by investors of the Bitfountain company. The Bitfountain company's business includes mining with self-built ASIC devices, as well as the sales of them. Currently ASICMINER shareholders holds 163,962 shares, while Bitfountain shareholders holds 236,038 shares. ASICMINER shares have the privilege of getting all net profits till 0.1BTC/share from the day when dividends began to be paid. They also have the exemption of dilution, which means that each ASICMINER share always equals to 1/400,000 of the total profits and voting power of the summed value from both ASICMINER and Bitfountain.
(...)

[stoasis]

(...)
Bottomline is that he DOES own more than 60% - dropping to exactly 60% if/when all 40% of public shares are sold.  Reason for that is the ownership the shares owned by AMC.  Those are owned by whoever owns AMC.  Shareholders do NOT own AMC (that's explicit in the contract) so do not any part of those shares.  In practical terms, assuming good faith, the actual effective owned percentage of profits is 50% if all public shares are sold.

Thanks for the analysis Deprived.

As a comparison, ASICMINER has a roughly 41/59% profits split (favoring Bitfountain). I didn't find an explicit reference to the "ownership" of ASICMINER.

Introduction
ASICMINER is a virtual identity totally held by investors of the Bitfountain company. The Bitfountain company's business includes mining with self-built ASIC devices, as well as the sales of them. Currently ASICMINER shareholders holds 163,962 shares, while Bitfountain shareholders holds 236,038 shares. ASICMINER shares have the privilege of getting all net profits till 0.1BTC/share from the day when dividends began to be paid. They also have the exemption of dilution, which means that each ASICMINER share always equals to 1/400,000 of the total profits and voting power of the summed value from both ASICMINER and Bitfountain.
(...)

It has to do with the voting power. 1 ASICminer is entitled to 1/400 000 of the voting power while 1 AMC share isn't entitled to anything except profit.

The number of shares owned by AMC isn't the issue. Investors should be wary about the lack of  transparency. If the investors are providing 100 % funding, which seems likely seeing that the amount of hardware bought is proportional to the number of shares sold, in no way should they be entitled to only 1/40 000 000 of the profit per share in the first year or 1/100 000 000 of the profit afterwards. In no way are the founders providing any benefit to AMC.

This is in no way the same as ASICsminer:

How much has Bitfountain already invested, to give it right to 50% of shares?

Thanks for your question. Bitfountain has already invested 10k$ for the labor cost and EDA tools fee of physical design.
We ourselves made the logic-level design, tuning, and optimization so this part is almost free. We also keep another 15k$ or
so as a reserve for unexpected scenarios, but un-spent yet.

Of course the amount invested buy ourselves is much smaller compared to what we want to raise. Therefore it
resembles to the model that we become the 50% shareholder by contribution of mostly actual execution and technology factor.

Pricing of investment in venture business is always hard. Some would say 50% is unfair to the investors, because they
take almost all the risk. While others would say 50% is too high, since many angels provide all money for a startup to
bootstrapping out of it's infancy while only take 10-20%. But the greatest thing about market is that people vote with
their own stake, therefore the market cap of ASICMINER will tell us whether it's under- or over-priced in the next months
to come.

I'm still baffled at the reason for splitting VMC and AMC into two separated entities other than maximizing the profit for the founders while maximizing the risk for early investors.

Stoasis


Edit: added text about ASICminer
 

[lewicki]

I believe the 6 Avalons were purchased before money was raised for them.

[lewicki]

Something completely unrelated: Who is the guy buying batches of 50,000 shares at 0.000799999? I appreciate that someone is supporting the current price level but what's in it for him/her?

Whatever he is doing, I think that it says a lot that no one has been selling into it.

[kendog77]

kslaughter,

Did you follow all the rules that a company must follow before going public? Have your books been audited by independent accountants? You are running a US based company, so I suspect this entire venture must follow SEC guidelines.

http://www.xconomy.com/boston/2010/02/11/ready-set-go-public-the-10-things-you-need-to-do-now/

I'm amazed that a company can value itself at a couple million dollars, and raise a couple hundred thousand dollars without independent auditors being involved to ensure that investors are not getting ripped off.

I'm just trying to imagine what would happen if you went on Shark Tank and said your company was valued at couple million dollars when it hasn't brought in any revenue. I think you would be laughed out of the room...

Why do I get the feeling that there will be an episode of "American Greed" on this entire venture in the near future?

[abuelau]

Oh come on, stop with this nonsense. If you don't like it don't buy it!

I agree with making things more transparent, I want to see Ken's full name, address, etc but this is the Bitcoin world, things are risky and he is doing nothing different from what Asicminer did.

And I have a feeling you want to see the bond price go down so you can buy some at .0005.

[kendog77]

Oh come on, stop with this nonsense. If you don't like it don't buy it!

I agree with making things more transparent, I want to see Ken's full name, address, etc but this is the Bitcoin world, things are risky and he is doing nothing different from what Asicminer did.

And I have a feeling you want to see the bond price go down so you can buy some at .0005.

I believe ASICMiner is based out of China, is it not? I still believe that US based companies that go public need to follow SEC guidelines.

In order for BitCoin to go mainstream, it needs to have more professionalism and less fly-by-night operations.

The Feds have been cracking down on Bitcoin exchanges, so I believe you're taking a big risk by investing in a public, US based mining company if they aren't following the rules.

[Minor Miner]

Something completely unrelated: Who is the guy buying batches of 50,000 shares at 0.000799999? I appreciate that someone is supporting the current price level but what's in it for him/her?

I do not know who this person is.   I do know that in a typical pump and dump you make the market this way:
Buy up a lot of shares at almost nothing (or just issue them if you create new company).
Start hyping with vague promises of huge finds (this is why mining/oil/diamonds are great for these people).
Find greedy people that will ignore warnings because they want to get rich easy.
Push the market higher on a THINLY traded stock by making it appear heavily traded.....

How do you do that?   Well, you have tons of shares to sell right?   And, you have plenty of money from the first suckers that came in right?
So, how much does it cost you to buy shares at 0.00079999 and then also buy them back at 0.0008?
1 satoshi.   How many times can you do this per each sucker that bought ONE share?  10,000 shares per share purchased and more if any fools actually step in and start buying (and help you with the PUMP).

An NDA does NOT prevent revealing who you are talking to.  It prevents both parties from giving away secrets that they may learn during the quoting process.

Just a couple things to think about.

[abuelau]

I believe ASICMiner is based out of China, is it not? I still believe that US based companies that go public need to follow SEC guidelines.

In order for BitCoin to go mainstream, it needs to have more professionalism and less fly-by-night operations.

The Feds have been cracking down on Bitcoin exchanges, so I believe you're taking a big risk by investing in a public, US based mining company if they aren't following the rules.

The IPO makes it very clear that people don't own the company. No one bought shares of AMC, this is simply a way to track dividend payments. So it's not a real-life IPO with real-life stocks and therefore he didn't "go public".

[kslaughter]

Oh come on, stop with this nonsense. If you don't like it don't buy it!

I agree with making things more transparent, I want to see Ken's full name, address, etc but this is the Bitcoin world, things are risky and he is doing nothing different from what Asicminer did.

And I have a feeling you want to see the bond price go down so you can buy some at .0005.

I believe ASICMiner is based out of China, is it not? I still believe that US based companies that go public need to follow SEC guidelines.

In order for BitCoin to go mainstream, it needs to have more professionalism and less fly-by-night operations.

The Feds have been cracking down on Bitcoin exchanges, so I believe you're taking a big risk by investing in a public, US based mining company if they aren't following the rules.

VMC is getting ready to spin off AMC as a foreign entity which will have a 9 member board of directors.

We just posted our "Private Placement Memorandum" on Bitfunder here are the links:

http://axs.net/AMC/PPM/PPM0001.jpg
http://axs.net/AMC/PPM/PPM0002.jpg
http://axs.net/AMC/PPM/PPM0003.jpg
http://axs.net/AMC/PPM/PPM0004.jpg
http://axs.net/AMC/PPM/PPM0005.jpg
http://axs.net/AMC/PPM/PPM0006.jpg
http://axs.net/AMC/PPM/PPM0007.jpg
http://axs.net/AMC/PPM/PPM0008.jpg

[dhenson]

So assuming AMC purchases all happen on schedule.  What total % of the 3660 daily coins should we be factoring into the per share dividend calculation?  I realize we can't know what the total hash rate of the network is.  But similarly to the Asicminer evaluations estimating 30% percent perpetually, what percent are we thinking AMC will hold?

Would it be crazy to assume 10%?  At 10%, that would be 133590 btc/year or .00333975 per share (only the first 40,000,000 receive dividends until .0005 is paid, I believe).  If you pattern the share valuation after Asicminer (where dividends are paying roughly 50% of the stock price annually) then @ 10%, AMC shares would be worth roughly .0066795 each.  (roughly 8 times more than there current price on BitFunder)

This is an honest question, not an attempt to pump the stock price.  I'm seriously considering a purchase and want to make sure I'm thinking clearly.

[kslaughter]

Something completely unrelated: Who is the guy buying batches of 50,000 shares at 0.000799999? I appreciate that someone is supporting the current price level but what's in it for him/her?

I do not know who this person is.   I do know that in a typical pump and dump you make the market this way:
Buy up a lot of shares at almost nothing (or just issue them if you create new company).
Start hyping with vague promises of huge finds (this is why mining/oil/diamonds are great for these people).
Find greedy people that will ignore warnings because they want to get rich easy.
Push the market higher on a THINLY traded stock by making it appear heavily traded.....

How do you do that?   Well, you have tons of shares to sell right?   And, you have plenty of money from the first suckers that came in right?
So, how much does it cost you to buy shares at 0.00079999 and then also buy them back at 0.0008?
1 satoshi.   How many times can you do this per each sucker that bought ONE share?  10,000 shares per share purchased and more if any fools actually step in and start buying (and help you with the PUMP).

An NDA does NOT prevent revealing who you are talking to.  It prevents both parties from giving away secrets that they may learn during the quoting process.

Just a couple things to think about.

Yes, a few things to think about. 

• I am happy to buy all the shares anyone wants to sell at .0007999 this keeps the speculators out of the market
• It is not the NDA but confidential information we don't want our competition to have.

[Minor Miner]

So assuming AMC purchases all happen on schedule.  What total % of the 3660 daily coins should we be factoring into the per share dividend calculation?  I realize we can't know what the total hash rate of the network is.  But similarly to the Asicminer evaluations estimating 30% percent perpetually, what percent are we thinking AMC will hold?

Would it be crazy to assume 10%?  At 10%, that would be 133590 btc/year or .00333975 per share (only the first 40,000,000 receive dividends until .0005 is paid, I believe).  If you pattern the share valuation after Asicminer (where dividends are paying roughly 50% of the stock price annually) then @ 10%, AMC shares would be worth roughly .0066795 each.  (roughly 8 times more than there current price on BitFunder)

This is an honest question, not an attempt to pump the stock price.  I'm seriously considering a purchase and want to make sure I'm thinking clearly.

To answer your question, yes, it would be crazy to assume someone with 6 avalons and a dream will capture 10% of the market of "free money".   Correction.   Someone that may receive 6 avalons in the future and right now has nothing.   You would need to assume that very few other people want this "free money".   
Basically, you would be assuming that markets are NOT efficient (in the long run).   The world is full of broke working stiffs that make this assumption.

If you believe in grossly inefficient markets then you should also believe that this stock will be grossly under valued when they actually have something (other than hype) to demonstrate to you.   Buy it then (like when they have 500 avalons hashing).   If OOC is accurate (and he has been for a long time), that is how many they are going to need by October to have 10% of the market.