baloo_kiev
|
|
September 19, 2013, 04:11:04 PM |
|
What happened to PURHASE offer? Can see no Ask orders at the selling price.
Offer is always taken down each day at around the time of dividends/report. Once I've checked the accounting and that the new price is correct a new bid gos up. Oh, sure! I forgot to look at the clock before posting))
|
|
|
|
Deprived (OP)
|
|
September 20, 2013, 04:03:49 PM |
|
J-D took some pretty heavy losses today.
Sold 5781 Swapped 0 Total 5781 Price 0.009291 Total 53.711271 Less Fee 53.60384846 Man Fee 1.608115454
BTC Balance (BTC-TC) 1133.781499 9071 LTC-ATF.B1 90.71000000 CIPHERMINE Bonds 379.86000000 Coinlenders CD 27/9 202.8462525 Coinlenders Cash 0 Just-Dice Balance 181.18000000 TOTAL ASSETS 1,988.37775163 Outstanding MINING 210972 Outstanding SELLING 210972 Outstanding PURCHASE 14135 Effective Units 225107 Block reward 25 Difficulty 112,628,549 Hashes per MINING 5000000 Daily Dividend 0.00002233 50 days (Min Liquid) 0.00111629 100 days (Forced Close) 0.00223259 365 days (Buyback) 0.00814895 405 days (IPO) 0.00904199 400 days (Post SELLING div) 0.00893036 410 days (Pre SELLING div) 0.00915361 NAV Post MINING Div 1,983.35203752 NAV/U Post MINING Div 0.00881071 Days Dividend Post Div 394.64 SELLING Dividend - NAV Post SELLING Div 1,983.35203752 NAV/U Post Selling Div 0.00881071 PURCHASE selling price 0.009251 PURCHASE buy-back price 0.008634 J-D House profit at report 4675
|
|
|
|
Deprived (OP)
|
|
September 21, 2013, 04:05:22 PM |
|
Big kicking for J-D today. It's a competitor betting big and (so far) winning on it. We're still well up on J-D investment overall - but this clearly shows why I wasn't willing to increase investment there above 10%.
Sold 182 Swapped 0 Total 182 Price 0.009251 Total 1.683682 Less Fee 1.680314636 Man Fee 0.050409439
BTC Balance (BTC-TC) 1135.022031 9071 LTC-ATF.B1 90.71000000 CIPHERMINE Bonds 375.45000000 Coinlenders CD 27/9 202.9673038 Coinlenders Cash 0 Just-Dice Balance 170.17200000 TOTAL ASSETS 1,974.32133521 Outstanding MINING 210972 Outstanding SELLING 210972 Outstanding PURCHASE 14317 Effective Units 225289 Block reward 25 Difficulty 112,628,549 Hashes per MINING 5000000 Daily Dividend 0.00002233 50 days (Min Liquid) 0.00111629 100 days (Forced Close) 0.00223259 365 days (Buyback) 0.00814895 405 days (IPO) 0.00904199 400 days (Post SELLING div) 0.00893036 410 days (Pre SELLING div) 0.00915361 NAV Post MINING Div 1,969.29155779 NAV/U Post MINING Div 0.00874118 Days Dividend Post Div 391.53 SELLING Dividend - NAV Post SELLING Div 1,969.29155779 NAV/U Post Selling Div 0.00874118 PURCHASE selling price 0.009178 PURCHASE buy-back price 0.008566 J-D House profit at report 2220
|
|
|
|
Lytse
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 56
Merit: 0
|
|
September 21, 2013, 06:09:57 PM |
|
Can someone explain why the JD losses affect the DMS.mining value instead of DMS.selling? (Or is there another reason for the DMS.mining drop that I am missing?)
|
|
|
|
Rannasha
|
|
September 21, 2013, 06:13:54 PM |
|
Can someone explain why the JD losses affect the DMS.mining value instead of DMS.selling? (Or is there another reason for the DMS.mining drop that I am missing?)
Value != price. The price of DMS.MINING has dropped considerably the last 2 days. Yesterday started with quite a bit of SELLING buys, which pushed up the SELLING price and consequently MINING price was pushed down by arbitrage-action. Afterwards, there were pretty big dumps of MINING both yesterday and today. The JD losses on their own will not affect MINING at all, as long as difficulty keeps rising. Since JD only makes up 10% of the NAV, it can only drop it the NAV by 10% (if the entire investment goes to zero) and that only becomes noticable for MINING if difficulty stops growing. As it stands right now, any investment gains and losses only affect the value of SELLING.
|
|
|
|
Progressive
|
|
September 21, 2013, 06:27:53 PM |
|
Can someone explain why the JD losses affect the DMS.mining value instead of DMS.selling? (Or is there another reason for the DMS.mining drop that I am missing?)
DMS.MINING was way overvalued, that's the reason for the drop.
|
|
|
|
Lytse
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 56
Merit: 0
|
|
September 21, 2013, 06:31:08 PM |
|
Value != price.
Oops The price of DMS.MINING has dropped considerably the last 2 days. Yesterday started with quite a bit of SELLING buys, which pushed up the SELLING price and consequently MINING price was pushed down by arbitrage-action. Afterwards, there were pretty big dumps of MINING both yesterday and today.
Do you think those are panic sells? The JD losses on their own will not affect MINING at all, as long as difficulty keeps rising. Since JD only makes up 10% of the NAV, it can only drop it the NAV by 10% (if the entire investment goes to zero) and that only becomes noticable for MINING if difficulty stops growing. As it stands right now, any investment gains and losses only affect the value of SELLING.
Thanks, this is what I thought. I was expecting a price drop in DMS.selling
|
|
|
|
Lytse
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 56
Merit: 0
|
|
September 21, 2013, 06:42:38 PM |
|
Can someone explain why the JD losses affect the DMS.mining value instead of DMS.selling? (Or is there another reason for the DMS.mining drop that I am missing?)
DMS.MINING was way overvalued, that's the reason for the drop. I don't know the right value price for DMS.mining. A right value price could be 0.002 BTC per share based on the block eruptor blade pricing at BTC guild. (not available for international shipment)
|
|
|
|
Progressive
|
|
September 21, 2013, 06:50:56 PM |
|
My estimation is based on my guess of the future difficulty growth, not on the price of an overpriced hardware. I guess even 0.0017 is overpriced.
|
|
|
|
Rannasha
|
|
September 21, 2013, 07:28:05 PM |
|
Can someone explain why the JD losses affect the DMS.mining value instead of DMS.selling? (Or is there another reason for the DMS.mining drop that I am missing?)
DMS.MINING was way overvalued, that's the reason for the drop. I don't know the right value price for DMS.mining. A right value price could be 0.002 BTC per share based on the block eruptor blade pricing at BTC guild. (not available for international shipment) The right price of MINING does not depend on what the competing hashing-related stuff is doing. The only thing that should influence pricing for DMS.MINING is the expected dividend-payments (and the speed with which they come). And this in turn depends on the difficulty evolution. Simple mathematics tells us that if the difficulty increases by the same relative amount every time, the total amount of dividend paid out by MINING over its entire lifetime is: 14 * X / D where X is the daily dividends right now and D the fractional difficulty increase per adjustment (so 0.2 for 20%). To get the correct result, this should be computed at the start of a difficulty cycle (or deduct the amount of dividends paid since the last adjustment from the computed result). Additionally, the block-reward halving is not included in the computation, but this is far enough away that dividends have become negligible by then (unless difficulty stops growing soon). As an example, if you expect a 25% increase per adjustment, MINING will pay a total of 1.25 mBTC, counted from the start of the current cycle, so 6 days ago. Deducting the dividend paid over those days, you get 1.12 mBTC left. So if you assume that the difficulty goes up by 25% per adjustment, you should not pay more than 1.12 mBTC for MINING right now. Of course, you'll want to pay less than that, because investing to break even after an infintely long series is not a good investment at all.
|
|
|
|
tucenaber
|
|
September 21, 2013, 08:19:13 PM |
|
Simple mathematics tells us that if the difficulty increases by the same relative amount every time, the total amount of dividend paid out by MINING over its entire lifetime is: 14 * X / D
You are using 14 days here for the length of the difficulty period, and that is not correct when difficulty is increasing. Therefore your formula will overestimate the value of MINING.
|
|
|
|
Rannasha
|
|
September 21, 2013, 08:23:07 PM |
|
Simple mathematics tells us that if the difficulty increases by the same relative amount every time, the total amount of dividend paid out by MINING over its entire lifetime is: 14 * X / D
You are using 14 days here for the length of the difficulty period, and that is not correct when difficulty is increasing. Therefore your formula will overestimate the value of MINING. While it may appear like that, do the math, sum up the geometric series, taking into account that each cycle only lasts for 14 / (1 + D) days and you'll see the simple expression that I mentioned previously emerge. edit: If you want to deprive yourself of the fun of deriving it yourself, you can check https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=228327.msg2493461#msg2493461
|
|
|
|
odolvlobo
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 4494
Merit: 3401
|
|
September 21, 2013, 08:29:58 PM Last edit: September 21, 2013, 08:44:38 PM by odolvlobo |
|
Rannasha, I agree with most of what you wrote, but I disagree with these: Value != price.
Price certainly does equal value. Price expresses the value that the market participants give it. If it did not, then the participants would trade until it did. This assumes that the price also reflects transaction costs and liquidity. I don't know the right value price for DMS.mining. A right value price could be 0.002 BTC per share based on the block eruptor blade pricing at BTC guild. (not available for international shipment)
The right price of MINING does not depend on what the competing hashing-related stuff is doing. The only thing that should influence pricing for DMS.MINING is the expected dividend-payments (and the speed with which they come). And this in turn depends on the difficulty evolution. There is no "right" price. The value you are describing is the present value of all the anticipated dividend payments. That is an excellent way to assign a value, but it is not the only way. Please note that you are forgetting to specify a discount rate. Your discount rate is what might cause your valuation to be very different from other valuations. Now, this value is not the only thing that affects the price. Competing opportunities such as the price of a block eruptor blade certainly can have an effect on the price of DMS.MINING. If the alternative is cheaper, then people will switch, and then the demand for DMS.MINING will drop and so will the price.
|
Join an anti-signature campaign: Click ignore on the members of signature campaigns. PGP Fingerprint: 6B6BC26599EC24EF7E29A405EAF050539D0B2925 Signing address: 13GAVJo8YaAuenj6keiEykwxWUZ7jMoSLt
|
|
|
tucenaber
|
|
September 21, 2013, 08:45:44 PM |
|
Simple mathematics tells us that if the difficulty increases by the same relative amount every time, the total amount of dividend paid out by MINING over its entire lifetime is: 14 * X / D
You are using 14 days here for the length of the difficulty period, and that is not correct when difficulty is increasing. Therefore your formula will overestimate the value of MINING. While it may appear like that, do the math, sum up the geometric series, taking into account that each cycle only lasts for 14 / (1 + D) days and you'll see the simple expression that I mentioned previously emerge. Actually you are right. Not a bad rule of thumb.
|
|
|
|
Deprived (OP)
|
|
September 22, 2013, 04:08:36 PM |
|
Sold 57 Swapped 0 Total 57 Price 0.009178 Total 0.523146 Less Fee 0.522099708 Man Fee 0.015662991
BTC Balance (BTC-TC) 1137.316759 9071 LTC-ATF.B1 90.71000000 CIPHERMINE Bonds 369.51000000 Coinlenders CD 27/9 203.0881027 Coinlenders Cash 0 Just-Dice Balance 167.00000000 TOTAL ASSETS 1,967.62486189 Outstanding MINING 210972 Outstanding SELLING 210972 Outstanding PURCHASE 14374 Effective Units 225346 Block reward 25 Difficulty 112,628,549 Hashes per MINING 5000000 Daily Dividend 0.00002233 50 days (Min Liquid) 0.00111629 100 days (Forced Close) 0.00223259 365 days (Buyback) 0.00814895 405 days (IPO) 0.00904199 400 days (Post SELLING div) 0.00893036 410 days (Pre SELLING div) 0.00915361 NAV Post MINING Div 1,962.59381190 NAV/U Post MINING Div 0.00870925 Days Dividend Post Div 390.10 SELLING Dividend - NAV Post SELLING Div 1,962.59381190 NAV/U Post Selling Div 0.00870925 PURCHASE selling price 0.009145 PURCHASE buy-back price 0.008535 J-D House profit at report 1321
|
|
|
|
Progressive
|
|
September 23, 2013, 07:14:14 AM |
|
I guess there is no reason to worry about future of DMS, right? IMPORTANT NOTICE TO ALL BTC TRADING CORP WEBSITE PARTICIPANTS
As a result of recent changes in the virtual currency regulatory environment, the btct.co and litecoinglobal.com virtual stock market websites will be closing down. The following is our current schedule:
Approximately a week ago, both sites were closed to any new users and new asset creation was disabled. Effective immediately, in conjunction with this release, trading will be halted, all order books cleared, and trading re-enabled. October 7, 2013, all forms of secondary market trading will be halted on both sites. Approximately October 31, 2013, both sites will be taken offline. It is strongly suggested that participants take the following steps to protect all of their virtual assets: All participants should take steps to transfer all of your BTC and LTC (and any other data you wish to keep, such as CSV trade histories) held on the sites to your personal computer or another trusted site. All participants should make sure that their public BTC or LTC address is properly set in the Account page on the Settings tab whereby it can be shared with all issuers. All “issuers” should have the contact information concerning their “investors”, and we ask that all “issuers” communicate with their “investors” as soon as possible as to how they will ensure that all are treated appropriately.
We regret this development. However, we want to do everything we can to minimize problems arising from this transition. It is our goal to keep this shutdown orderly and calm.
Thank you for your participation, creativity, loyalty and sense of community over the past year. Additional communications will follow as we work out the details.
Ethan Burnside BTC Trading Corp.
|
|
|
|
baloo_kiev
|
|
September 23, 2013, 07:21:03 AM |
|
Shit( I think there IS reason to worry about the future of DMS as well as the future of BTC.
|
|
|
|
FloatesMcgoates
|
|
September 23, 2013, 08:03:22 AM |
|
Deprived how are you going to handle the issue of the site shutdown? Given your how you have demonstrated extreme competence in running this offering so far, and given how you have intelligently laid out your BTC investments in a way that can be easily recouped, would it be fair to assume that some form of buyback is in order as per either 1.) BUY-BACK TERMS
It is the intention of Manager that this fund should be a long-term prospect (the prices of all three securities will gradually fall) however an option must exist for a shut down. In the event of shutdown then DMS.MINING (and any outstanding units of DMS.PURCHASE) would first receive a dividend equal to the LOWER of :
a) All funds held by the securities,
b) 365 times the daily dividended due at current difficulty.
The scenarios in which closure under these terms could happen are:
a) Manager proposes a shut down and this is approved by a vote of DMS.SELLING units AND is voted in favour of by a majority of voting units not held by the Manager. It is envisaged that this scenario would happen if difficulty rose massively AND there was no further interest in purchase of more DMS.MINING bonds.
b) Capital falls such that it is too low to pay 100 days of DMS.MINING bonds for 2 successive difficulties (i.e. before AND after a difficulty change). In that scenario it is apparent that all of the capital will go to DMS.MINING holders (and DMS.SELLING holders got it totally wrong) so closure and payment of all funds to them immediately is the only fair course of action.
Following payment of the dividend to DMS.MINING, any remaining funds are divdended to DMS.SELLING (and to any outstanding units of DMS.PURCHASE).
Manager may, at his discretion, choose to make final payments by means of a forced purchase rather than through dividends (incurring trading fees but freeing the tickers up for reuse). or 2.) UNFORESEEN CIRCUMSTANCES
It is possible that cirumstances could arise where the Manager is unable or unwilling to continue operating the fund. Should this position arise then immediately the Manager must:
Cease making new investments, Liquidate investments where possible, Cease selling new DMS.PURCHASE Offer redemption at 100% (less any exchange fees) of NAV/U for DMS.PURCHASE and bundles of equal numbers of DMS.MINING and DMS.SELLING where it is possible to do so whilst retaining at least 50 days dividend cover in liquid BTC for the remaining DMS.MINING. Manager must further seek to either:
Find a replacement manager to be approved by a majority vote by both all outstanding DMS.MINING and all outstanding DMS.SELLING. Propose a split of funds between DMS.MINING and DMS.SELLING to be approved by a majority vote by both all outstanding DMS.MINING and all outstanding DMS.SELLING. In the event of a vote with a proposal to split funds being left up for 7 days and (in either vote) the total of (Yes votes + No votes) being less than 50% of all outstanding shares then the Manager will determine a fair (in his best judgement) split of funds and execute final payments in accordance with that decision. This clause is added specifically to address the scenario where most shares have been redeemed with a large part of those remaining outstanding being unable or unwilling to participate in reaching closure.
|
|
|
|
FloatesMcgoates
|
|
September 23, 2013, 08:17:25 AM |
|
In any case I would propose for a motion to begin on DMS.SELLING to liquidate assets and commence buyback
|
|
|
|
Rannasha
|
|
September 23, 2013, 08:18:26 AM |
|
I guess option 2 applies to this situation the most. Option 1 mostly covers a voluntary shutdown (which has to be approved by a vote).
There's also option 3, which I'd prefer: Move to another exchange and credit the shares there based on the BTCT records.
|
|
|
|
|