ASICMINER Speculation Thread

[notme]

You are welcome to disagree or use your own valuation models, but the fact that you choose to do so, does not make your method absolutely better, or more accurate.

+1

I've explained my method and the reasons why it works for me.  I'm not trying to claim everyone should value things in the same way, and if you are a short term trader than the other methods presented have some merit.

[1714701806]

1714701806

[1714701806]

1714701806

[1714701806]

1714701806

[velacreations]

People have a limited supply of btc, and they want to invest the whole amount of BTC, not just whole shares.

This is the strongest point I've seen so far, but IMO is balanced by convertibility of whole shares.

not in the eyes of smaller shareholders. why would anyone want to wait a week for FC to approve of a share transfer when you can just sell them on an exchange?

I'll give you a real life example.  I bought some shares on an auction when AM-PT was trading around 5.1.  I bought the shares for 4.7.  Meanwhile, the price crashed, and by the time the share transfer had gone through, the price had dropped to 3.6, back to 4.7, back down to 3.9, back up to 4.5, then to 4, then back and worth between 4 and 4.5.

Had I had those shares, I could have bought and sold them a number of times during that volatility period and increased my holdings and overall value considerably.

Now, I knew what I was getting into, so no big deal, but for a small holder, than has 5 btc to invest and is not looking at a several month investment, converting to direct shares is a liability, not a benefit.

The point here is that these valuations depend a lot on the investor's goals.  Short term, long term?  different valuation. under 10 btc, over 100btc?  different valuations.  day trading or hands off?  different valuations.

I can see several cases where TAT.AM is a smarter investment for a small holder than full AM-PT or direct shares.

[notme]

People have a limited supply of btc, and they want to invest the whole amount of BTC, not just whole shares.

This is the strongest point I've seen so far, but IMO is balanced by convertibility of whole shares.

not in the eyes of smaller shareholders. why would anyone want to wait a week for FC to approve of a share transfer when you can just sell them on an exchange?

I'll give you a real life example.  I bought some shares on an auction when AM-PT was trading around 5.1.  I bought the shares for 4.7.  Meanwhile, the price crashed, and by the time the share transfer had gone through, the price had dropped to 3.6, back to 4.7, back down to 3.9, back up to 4.5, then to 4, then back and worth between 4 and 4.5.

Had I had those shares, I could have bought and sold them a number of times during that volatility period and increased my holdings and overall value considerably.

Now, I knew what I was getting into, so no big deal, but for a small holder, than has 5 btc to invest and is not looking at a several month investment, converting to direct shares is a liability, not a benefit.

The point here is that these valuations depend a lot on the investor's goals.  Short term, long term?  different valuation. under 10 btc, over 100btc?  different valuations.  day trading or hands off?  different valuations.

I can see several cases where TAT.AM is a smarter investment for a small holder than full AM-PT or direct shares.

I'm not reading your example.  I understand your point from your sentence.  As I've said repeatedly, I'm looking at this from a long term investor perspective, not a trader perspective.  The balance of market participants in each camp is impossible to know, but the correct valuation is somewhere between the two camps.

[velacreations]

I'm not reading your example.  I understand your point from your sentence.  As I've said repeatedly, I'm looking at this from a long term investor perspective, not a trader perspective.  The balance of market participants in each camp is impossible to know, but the correct valuation is somewhere between the two camps.

I hear ya, I'm just saying I think there are more small holders with less than 5 btc that investors like you.  And, I think that's why the price gap is historically a lot closer than the 4% we were seeing.

[notme]

I'm not reading your example.  I understand your point from your sentence.  As I've said repeatedly, I'm looking at this from a long term investor perspective, not a trader perspective.  The balance of market participants in each camp is impossible to know, but the correct valuation is somewhere between the two camps.

I hear ya, I'm just saying I think there are more small holders with less than 5 btc that investors like you.  And, I think that's why the price gap is historically a lot closer than the 4% we were seeing.

Sure, there are probably more.  But the large holders (obviously) have more weight each.

[freedomno1]

Why are you guys measuring per year values when you can just trade between the two
http://www.investopedia.com/terms/d/ddm.asp


Prove your point with math  
MATH BATTLE !
Never get to say that  

Because your math requires numbers we don't have access to.

Just make some rough estimate till we get financials with AM monthly or weekly scales are where it's at as bitcoin itself fluctuates and as investors we need to calculate currency risk as well into all our valuations as it impacts the stock price

That's a good way to calculate nonsense.

Not necessarily but it would be pretty rough

[Pierre]

Your explanation shows a disregard in accepted logic in order to leap to your conclusion.

Please explain?

It also implies that TAT.AM can be worth less than zero, which is obviously impossible.

No it does not! My model simply calculates TAT.AM as being worth exactly 95% of the full AM shares if you buy and hold forever. There's no way it can be worth less than zero with my model.

You can put any numbers you want into my model, you'll never get a negative valuation for TAT.AM

[freedomno1]

On a sidenote Evoorhees sold Sdice

[Pierre]

On a sidenote Evoorhees sold Sdice

Wait what

[freedomno1]

On a sidenote Evoorhees sold Sdice

Wait what

You heard me
Anyways it is the end of an era and mpex's jewel is gone
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=101902.msg2751536#msg2751536

[TsuyokuNaritai]

On a sidenote Evoorhees sold Sdice

Wait what

You heard me
Anyways it is the end of an era and mpex's jewel is gone
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=101902.msg2751536#msg2751536

So... boost in AM price as ex-S.DICE shareholders with spare BTC suddenly burning a hole in their wallets look for another security with similar dividend returns?

[freedomno1]

On a sidenote Evoorhees sold Sdice

Wait what

You heard me
Anyways it is the end of an era and mpex's jewel is gone
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=101902.msg2751536#msg2751536

So... boost in AM price as ex-S.DICE shareholders with spare BTC suddenly burning a hole in their wallets look for another security with similar dividend returns?

Sure lets run with that more investors into AM incoming  
(Sidenote well I guess that helps my random prediction to come true haha a shot out of left field)

[vlaoou321]

asicminer so cool

[Lohoris]

Only the last sentence is correct.

5% price difference is what you should expect on a 5% dividend fee.

Every time you get paid, you get 5% less.

Velacreations has the right idea, and is even trying to teach you, forgoing his own advantage.

The 5% mgmt fee on dividends does not directly devalue the share by 5%. The math is not as simple as that.

Believe what you want, but those who can do better math, and those who are better at trading will just benefit more.

Share price and yield from dividend are not proportionally correlated. For example, it was not long ago that AM shares were half the price of today, and paying the same divs. Divs did not double, yet the price did.

WAT

Of course they are: if you pay 5% less, the share is *exactly* worth 5% less.

The dividend is the only thing that matters in the end:
if you are an investor you don't care about share price once you have bought it,
if you are a speculator you do care, but since for investors the price is 5% lower, it will as a consequence be lower for speculators too.

The only value in this asset is the dividend, since it bears no voting powers or whatever, anything else are just ghosts.

[chriswilmer]

Only the last sentence is correct.

5% price difference is what you should expect on a 5% dividend fee.

Every time you get paid, you get 5% less.

Velacreations has the right idea, and is even trying to teach you, forgoing his own advantage.

The 5% mgmt fee on dividends does not directly devalue the share by 5%. The math is not as simple as that.

Believe what you want, but those who can do better math, and those who are better at trading will just benefit more.

Share price and yield from dividend are not proportionally correlated. For example, it was not long ago that AM shares were half the price of today, and paying the same divs. Divs did not double, yet the price did.

WAT

Of course they are: if you pay 5% less, the share is *exactly* worth 5% less.

The dividend is the only thing that matters in the end:
if you are an investor you don't care about share price once you have bought it,
if you are a speculator you do care, but since for investors the price is 5% lower, it will as a consequence be lower for speculators too.

The only value in this asset is the dividend, since it bears no voting powers or whatever, anything else are just ghosts.

If you get 5000 shares you can become a board member. I assume they vote on stuff, so that would imply that the shares do have value in that sense. Also, I think most investors do care about the share price going up...

[Rival]

Two points:

One, now we know who was pouring literally millions into btc pushing the price up to $100. They bought Satoshidice.

Second, all of those shareholders who got bought out are now looking for a place to invest... and there really is nowhere else to go but ASICminer. Look for the big spike.

[Taxidermista]

One, now we know who was pouring literally millions into btc pushing the price up to $100. They bought Satoshidice.

And do you think today's 12% drop is related too?

[Rival]

One, now we know who was pouring literally millions into btc pushing the price up to $100. They bought Satoshidice.

And do you think today's 12% drop is related too?

It follows as day follows night.

[Lohoris]

If you get 5000 shares you can become a board member

Not with TAT.AM shares, since they can't be redeemed for direct shares.
So they are actually worth even less than 95% of AM-PT.
However this is counterbalanced by the lower denomination, which allows you to buy some with spare change.
But that's what they are worth: spare change.
Anyone holding more than 99 fractional shares is just a fool IMAO.

Even the third-party risk is lower with AM-PT, since you already have to trust burnside anyway, being the owner of the trading platform.

(nothing personal against TaT, of course)

[empoweoqwj]

One, now we know who was pouring literally millions into btc pushing the price up to $100. They bought Satoshidice.

And do you think today's 12% drop is related too?

Where has it dropped 12% - AM1 @ havelock has barely moved .... always expect a slight move down after d-day