|
TsuyokuNaritai
|
 |
July 17, 2013, 04:19:28 PM |
|
and now, share price is cautiously rising...
Very cautiously. Maybe people are still waiting for confirmations? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
|
|
|
|
|
|
velacreations (OP)
|
|
July 17, 2013, 04:24:44 PM |
|
and now, share price is cautiously rising...
Very cautiously. Maybe people are still waiting for confirmations? yes, I expect so. People waiting for dividends to reinvest. |
|
|
|
|
velacreations (OP)
|
|
July 17, 2013, 04:27:09 PM |
|
The dividend is good but it is no surprise. I would not expect a huge rise.
I expect it to stay around 4.4 until the weekend, unless we have some news from FC before then. |
|
|
|
|
TsuyokuNaritai
|
|
July 17, 2013, 04:44:38 PM |
|
The dividend is good but it is no surprise. I would not expect a huge rise.
Some people were fearing worse, and in the hour or so before the hardware share hit the payment account there was a race-to-the-bottom on btct with lots of asks climbing over each-other and eventually eating of the bid wall, which it's only just recovered from in the last few minutes. Now we know this was not a bad dividend already, and the blades sales aren't even in play yet. |
|
|
|
|
keeron
|
|
July 17, 2013, 04:50:56 PM |
|
Nice dividend... Enjoy people! (and other people noobs, PANIC!!!)
|
|
|
|
|
|
velacreations (OP)
|
|
July 17, 2013, 06:48:02 PM |
|
I find the big spread between the TAT.AM and AM kinda strange.
TAT.AM is around .0427 (4.27)
AM is around 4.44
That's like a 4% spread.
Any idea why? I guess people haven't received their AM dividends yet, so no buy pressure on TAT.
|
|
|
|
|
gog1
|
|
July 17, 2013, 06:51:23 PM |
|
Kind of rational. You get a 5% discount in your dividend.
|
|
|
|
|
|
velacreations (OP)
|
|
July 17, 2013, 07:05:17 PM |
|
Kind of rational. You get a 5% discount in your dividend.
well, then the price should be 5% of .5% (.025%) less, cause that's the difference. 4% > .025% |
|
|
|
|
TsuyokuNaritai
|
|
July 17, 2013, 07:14:30 PM |
|
Kind of rational. You get a 5% discount in your dividend.
well, then the price should be 5% of .5% (.025%) less, cause that's the difference. 4% > .025% No, because the 5% reduction is to all dividends, not just that one! |
|
|
|
|
velacreations (OP)
|
|
July 17, 2013, 07:36:57 PM |
|
Kind of rational. You get a 5% discount in your dividend.
well, then the price should be 5% of .5% (.025%) less, cause that's the difference. 4% > .025% No, because the 5% reduction is to all dividends, not just that one! well, ok, so let's look at dividends for the year (4.3, 30% APR). 5% of that is .0645 btc. 4% price difference doesn't make sense when your fee is 5% of the dividend (usually less than 1%). |
|
|
|
notme
Legendary
 Offline
Activity: 1904
Merit: 1002
|
|
July 17, 2013, 07:45:23 PM |
|
Kind of rational. You get a 5% discount in your dividend.
well, then the price should be 5% of .5% (.025%) less, cause that's the difference. 4% > .025% No, because the 5% reduction is to all dividends, not just that one! well, ok, so let's look at dividends for the year (4.3, 30% APR). 5% of that is .0645 btc. 4% price difference doesn't make sense when your fee is 5% of the dividend (usually less than 1%). 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. |
|
|
|
|
SOSLOVE868
|
|
July 17, 2013, 07:59:45 PM |
|
Kind of rational. You get a 5% discount in your dividend.
well, then the price should be 5% of .5% (.025%) less, cause that's the difference. 4% > .025% No, because the 5% reduction is to all dividends, not just that one! well, ok, so let's look at dividends for the year (4.3, 30% APR). 5% of that is .0645 btc. 4% price difference doesn't make sense when your fee is 5% of the dividend (usually less than 1%). 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. Guys are ignored that not everyone willing or afford to pay for a full PT, thus demand of TAT.ASICMINER should offseting its difference in Dividend. |
|
|
|
|
|
ThickAsThieves
|
|
July 17, 2013, 08:05:12 PM |
|
Kind of rational. You get a 5% discount in your dividend.
well, then the price should be 5% of .5% (.025%) less, cause that's the difference. 4% > .025% No, because the 5% reduction is to all dividends, not just that one! well, ok, so let's look at dividends for the year (4.3, 30% APR). 5% of that is .0645 btc. 4% price difference doesn't make sense when your fee is 5% of the dividend (usually less than 1%). 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. |
|
|
|
|
notme
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1904
Merit: 1002
|
|
July 17, 2013, 08:27:23 PM |
|
Kind of rational. You get a 5% discount in your dividend.
well, then the price should be 5% of .5% (.025%) less, cause that's the difference. 4% > .025% No, because the 5% reduction is to all dividends, not just that one! well, ok, so let's look at dividends for the year (4.3, 30% APR). 5% of that is .0645 btc. 4% price difference doesn't make sense when your fee is 5% of the dividend (usually less than 1%). 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. A financial ratio that shows how much a company pays out in dividends each year relative to its share price.
 By definition annual dividend yield is inversely proportional to share price. Now if you want to claim that annual dividends is not proportional to share price, then sure. |
|
|
|
binaryFate
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1484
Merit: 1003
Still wild and free
|
|
July 17, 2013, 08:40:19 PM |
|
Kind of rational. You get a 5% discount in your dividend.
well, then the price should be 5% of .5% (.025%) less, cause that's the difference. 4% > .025% No, because the 5% reduction is to all dividends, not just that one! well, ok, so let's look at dividends for the year (4.3, 30% APR). 5% of that is .0645 btc. 4% price difference doesn't make sense when your fee is 5% of the dividend (usually less than 1%). 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. A financial ratio that shows how much a company pays out in dividends each year relative to its share price.
By definition annual dividend yield is inversely proportional to share price. Now if you want to claim that annual dividends is not proportional to share price, then sure. notme you speak of correlation between absolute values of prices and dividends. TAT you speak of correlation between the evolution of the values of prices and dividends. Hope that helps. |
Monero's privacy and therefore fungibility are MUCH stronger than Bitcoin's. This makes Monero a better candidate to deserve the term "digital cash".
|
|
|
|
velacreations (OP)
|
|
July 17, 2013, 08:40:55 PM |
|
the spread is not normally this large. During times of higher volume, TAT share value can actually be higher, because it is more liquid. So, I guess someone just hasn't closed the gap with arbitrage, yet.
|
|
|
|
elefter
Member
Offline
Activity: 67
Merit: 10
|
|
July 17, 2013, 08:49:11 PM |
|
By definition annual dividend yield is inversely proportional to share price. Now if you want to claim that annual dividends is not proportional to share price, then sure. There are big companies that dont pay dividents for years and their stock price isnt zero or close to it |
|
|
|
|
|
TsuyokuNaritai
|
|
July 17, 2013, 08:50:32 PM |
|
Velacreations has the right idea, and is even trying to teach you, forgoing his own advantage.
Believe what you want, but those who can do better math, and those who are better at trading will just benefit more.
You sound like MPOE-PR.  The 5% mgmt fee on dividends does not directly devalue the share by 5%. The math is not as simple as that.
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.
Yes, there more plenty more factors affecting the share price difference than just the dividend difference. But in the conversation you were responding to, the difference of opinion wasn't about other complexities, it was about what difference the 5% reduced dividend should make to the share price, and Velacreations was mistaken on that point. |
|
|
|
|
gog1
|
|
July 17, 2013, 08:58:57 PM |
|
the spread is not normally this large. During times of higher volume, TAT share value can actually be higher, because it is more liquid. So, I guess someone just hasn't closed the gap with arbitrage, yet.
You can't really arb it as they are not equivalent and you don't have 'capital mobility'. You can only convert from normal share to 100th share. However, one can argue it's wiser to buy the 100th shares if it's below 95% of the whole shares. |
|
|
|
|
|
ThickAsThieves
|
|
July 17, 2013, 09:09:46 PM |
|
Velacreations has the right idea, and is even trying to teach you, forgoing his own advantage.
Believe what you want, but those who can do better math, and those who are better at trading will just benefit more.
You sound like MPOE-PR. Despite her cold candor, default stubbornness, and abrasive approach, people could learn a lot from her. The 5% mgmt fee on dividends does not directly devalue the share by 5%. The math is not as simple as that.
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.
Yes, there more plenty more factors affecting the share price difference than just the dividend difference. But in the conversation you were responding to, the difference of opinion wasn't about other complexities, it was about what difference the 5% reduced dividend should make to the share price, and Velacreations was mistaken on that point. The point is that taking 5% off of the share price as a means of factoring the mgmt fee, is incorrect. |
|
|
|
|
|
