P/B ratio, or how to not get raped in the Bitcoin securities markets

[furuknap]

sure for you to be in this game you have to bring facts and links not just go quoting aliases off some message board...thanks

I still don't understand your point. You do realize friedcat is the spokesperson for ASICMiner, right? Anything coming from him should be taken as coming from ASICMiner. When he says that he pays, via the calculation I provided, roughly $3 for the hashingpower in the USB miners, I have no reason to doubt it.

Or are you questioning whether friedcat is indeed a spokesperson for ASICMiner?

.b

[1714894512]

1714894512

[1714894512]

1714894512

[1714894512]

1714894512

[TECHICENINE]

sure for you to be in this game you have to bring facts and links not just go quoting aliases off some message board...thanks

I still don't understand your point. You do realize friedcat is the spokesperson for ASICMiner, right? Anything coming from him should be taken as coming from ASICMiner. When he says that he pays, via the calculation I provided, roughly $3 for the hashingpower in the USB miners, I have no reason to doubt it.

Or are you questioning whether friedcat is indeed a spokesperson for ASICMiner?

.b

for all anyone knows you and him are the same person...you have his e:mail...thanks

[furuknap]

sure for you to be in this game you have to bring facts and links not just go quoting aliases off some message board...thanks

I still don't understand your point. You do realize friedcat is the spokesperson for ASICMiner, right? Anything coming from him should be taken as coming from ASICMiner. When he says that he pays, via the calculation I provided, roughly $3 for the hashingpower in the USB miners, I have no reason to doubt it.

Or are you questioning whether friedcat is indeed a spokesperson for ASICMiner?

.b

for all anyone knows you and him are the same person...you have his e:mail...thanks

Ah. I see. I'll just leave this here.

.b

PS: friedcat's email is public knowledge.

[EskimoBob]

There is a "ASICMINER Speculation Thread" for pointless AM related spit balling. Can you please take it there?

Cheers

PS! MP sock puppet, I am still waiting for the number.

[Peter Lambert]

PS! MP sock puppet, I am still waiting for the number.

On the other hand you've missed out perhaps your best example possible: S.MPOE book 0, mkt cap ~780,000 BTC. 

Is that the number you are looking for?

I don't remember where she said it (and I don't feel like going through the work of searching), but in a reply to me in one of these threads she said S.MPOE does not include a balance sheet because the equity is 0, which I guess means that all the information you want should be in the profit/loss statement.

[TECHICENINE]

anyone tell me... if friedcat's email is public knowledge::: where is it..thanks

[runeks]

Here is my calculation of the Price To Book value of AMC

5.651 TH/s future hashing starting by August 31, 2013 at 40,000,000 Difficulty (Over 2X the current difficulty) by that time would generate $1,458,007.07 in eight months, the time left for the 40,000,000 Million shares to receive 100% of the dividends.

This is wrong. Unless the difficulty rises to 40M by August 31st and only rises 2% per difficulty adjustment from then on. I think we all knows this will not happen.

I think a fair figure would be a 10% increase in difficulty per adjustment, although I think it will be much more (the last two difficulty adjustments were +20% and +28% IIRC).

If we use the 10% figure per difficulty adjustment, mining with 5.651 TH/s in 8 months will net you 8776.84 BTC, or around $917,000 at the current exchange rate:

Code:

Reward for mining for 240 days at 5,651,000 MH/s, starting at
difficulty 40,000,000, with an initial daily profit of 71.05 BTC,
and an increase in difficulty of 10% per 14 days:
--------------------------------------------------
Total profit (day 1): 71.05 (profit per day: 71.05) (difficulty: 40,000,000)
Total profit (day 14): 994.69 (profit per day: 64.59) (difficulty: 44,000,000)
Total profit (day 28): 1898.95 (profit per day: 58.72) (difficulty: 48,400,000)
Total profit (day 42): 2721.01 (profit per day: 53.38) (difficulty: 53,240,000)
Total profit (day 56): 3468.33 (profit per day: 48.53) (difficulty: 58,564,000)
Total profit (day 70): 4147.72 (profit per day: 44.12) (difficulty: 64,420,400)
Total profit (day 84): 4765.34 (profit per day: 40.11) (difficulty: 70,862,440)
Total profit (day 98): 5326.82 (profit per day: 36.46) (difficulty: 77,948,684)
Total profit (day 112): 5837.25 (profit per day: 33.14) (difficulty: 85,743,552)
Total profit (day 126): 6301.28 (profit per day: 30.13) (difficulty: 94,317,907)
Total profit (day 140): 6723.13 (profit per day: 27.39) (difficulty: 103,749,698)
Total profit (day 154): 7106.62 (profit per day: 24.90) (difficulty: 114,124,668)
Total profit (day 168): 7455.25 (profit per day: 22.64) (difficulty: 125,537,135)
Total profit (day 182): 7772.19 (profit per day: 20.58) (difficulty: 138,090,848)
Total profit (day 196): 8060.32 (profit per day: 18.71) (difficulty: 151,899,933)
Total profit (day 210): 8322.25 (profit per day: 17.01) (difficulty: 167,089,926)
Total profit (day 224): 8560.37 (profit per day: 15.46) (difficulty: 183,798,919)
Total profit (day 238): 8776.84 (profit per day: 14.06) (difficulty: 202,178,811)
Total profit (day 240): 8804.96 (profit per day: 14.06) (difficulty: 202,178,811)

[EskimoBob]

PS! MP sock puppet, I am still waiting for the number.

On the other hand you've missed out perhaps your best example possible: S.MPOE book 0, mkt cap ~780,000 BTC. 

Is that the number you are looking for?

I don't remember where she said it (and I don't feel like going through the work of searching), but in a reply to me in one of these threads she said S.MPOE does not include a balance sheet because the equity is 0, which I guess means that all the information you want should be in the profit/loss statement.

Peter, Peter, Peter... I told you to join Mr DipShit and his sock-muppet MPOE-PRBS, so you too can make yourself sound like a fkn idiot. It was a joke and not a serious recommendation

[Peter Lambert]

PS! MP sock puppet, I am still waiting for the number.

On the other hand you've missed out perhaps your best example possible: S.MPOE book 0, mkt cap ~780,000 BTC. 

Is that the number you are looking for?

I don't remember where she said it (and I don't feel like going through the work of searching), but in a reply to me in one of these threads she said S.MPOE does not include a balance sheet because the equity is 0, which I guess means that all the information you want should be in the profit/loss statement.

Peter, Peter, Peter... I told you to join Mr DipShit and his sock-muppet MPOE-PRBS, so you too can make yourself sound like a fkn idiot. It was a joke and not a serious recommendation

I'm not trying to join them, I just though she had already answered the question you were asking?

[Entropy-uc]

Okay.  So your price to book is 18.  Good to know.

And ASICMiner price to book using the same rules is roughly 240. Also good to know, I guess.

You are trying to sell a contract for hardware you bought at an 1800% markup.

Have you no shame?

Obviously I have more shame than friedcat who sells hardware he bought at a 5000% markup (thats 5 thousand percent, or 50 times what he paid) when he sold AM Blades at 50BTC that he bough for around 1BTC each, for 10GHs. I obviously have more shame than friedcat who now proposes to sell hardware with a 3300% markup, when he's selling USB miners he bought for ~$3 for ~$100.

Look, we can do this dance all night, but no matter which rules you apply, my asset is priced far below AM in P/B. I've said it before, it is a moot point because my contracts isn't a company, but you can't really win this comparison.

.b

Nonsense.  AM IPO'd at a price to book of 2, and I have shown a clear analysis that suggests their current P/B is on the order of 3.

You really should take a tip from Kslaughter and TAT.  They have the sense to not even try to defend their ripoffs of the public.

Be like Ken, go make a press release promising another press release like a wise stock sham promoter.  Trying to defend your attempt to price your shares at an 1800% markup isn't doing you any good.

[furuknap]

Nonsense.  AM IPO'd at a price to book of 2, and I have shown a clear analysis that suggests their current P/B is on the order of 3.

Sorry, but your numbers simply don't add up, and if you apply the same numbers to my asset, you'll find that I have a lower P/B than AM in every case.

Of course, you seem to be OK applying different standards to different assets and then compare them, but such is easily refuted or countered so it doesn't hold a lot of merit.

Let's try with a simple table. For the sake of simplicity, I'm taking my own spare 20GHs out of the equation. Including it would work in my favor. I'm also using a BTC/USD price of $100.

	Factor	AM	BFM
1	Purchase Cost/GHs	$10	$22
2	Selling Price/GHs (Blades)	$500	$400
3	Proceed ratio (Blades)	50x	18.2x
4	Selling Price/GHs (USB)	$300	$400
5	Proceed ratio (USB)	30x	18.2x
6	Hashrate in GHs	62000	120
7	Value of Hashing ($300/GHs)	$18'600'000	$360'000
8	Shares	400000	100000
9	Share Price (today)	BTC3.4	BTC0.004
10	Hashrate per share in mhs	155	1
11	Market Cap	$136'000'000	$40'000
12	Total value based on HW cost	$620'000	$2'200
13	P/B based on HW cost (11/12)	219.35	18.18
14	Total value based on hash at $300/GHs	$18'600'000	$36'000
15	P/B based on hash value (11/14)	8.09	1.1
16	Price per mhs	BTC0.022	BTC0.004

I know AM hash power is growing, and mine isn't. However, the future hashpower from AM has not been paid for. The 200TH priced at the same rate their previous power was priced will cost investors $2 million, or BTC20'000. Assuming AM percentage of the network at around 15% (which would mean network is 400TH and AM is 62TH) that is roughly 6 weeks of dividends from mining.

No, that has not happened yet, but it must for AM to get another 200TH of hashingpower. Even if they get their new chips for half the price of what friedcat has stated previously, we're looking at just under three weeks of no dividends at all to pay for it.

I know AM is selling hardware too, but since mining power is equal from one asset to another (assuming luck is equal) AM investors are paying 340% more for that future hardware sales than they are for mining.

In simpler terms, AM must sell hardware for 3,4 times more than they mine every month for their prices to be comparable to mine.

.b

EDIT: Corrected some decimal and thousand separator mistakes

[redmetal]

Unfortunately Furuknap you need to start comparing apples with apples.

BMF vs AM or AMC has zero revelance,

Compare BMF with other PMB's and you will show how much of a failed ripoff your investment is.

Take 100th currently not mining but a cost of ~0.4 for 200mhs so 0.002 per mhash(half price of yours and using the same company for the purchases)

or even TATvm currently floating around 0.0035 for 1mhs - this is currently earning dividends, so is a way better purchase than BMF

Or even Addiction currently 23mhs for 0.018 - using KNC's ASIC's

AMC and AM or BF mines and Nasty fans are not comparable as they will increasing hashing power over time, where as BMF will only ever stay the same.

The only way BMF will be profitable to anyone but yourself is if the difficulty drops, and continues to drop.

Use the math how ever you want, but start comparing "like" for "like"

[Entropy-uc]

I know AM hash power is growing, and mine isn't. However, the future hashpower from AM has not been paid for. The 200TH priced at the same rate their previous power was priced will cost investors $2 million, or BTC20'000. Assuming AM percentage of the network at around 15% (which would mean network is 400TH and AM is 62TH) that is roughly 6 weeks of dividends from mining.

No, that has not happened yet, but it must for AM to get another 200TH of hashingpower. Even if they get their new chips for half the price of what friedcat has stated previously, we're looking at just under three weeks of no dividends at all to pay for it.

I know AM is selling hardware too, but since mining power is equal from one asset to another (assuming luck is equal) AM investors are paying 340% more for that future hardware sales than they are for mining.

In simpler terms, AM must sell hardware for 3,4 times more than they mine every month for their prices to be comparable to mine.

.b

EDIT: Corrected some decimal and thousand separator mistakes

You seem to be completely oblivious to the economics of semiconductor manufacturing.  And you are mixing the pricing of goods sold by ASICMINER with their shareholder's costs.

Let's ignore today's price to book because as EskimoBob rightly points out, there is less data than there should be.

Let's just compare IPO prices.

ASICMINER:  2
BFMINES   :  18
AMC         :  35  (sounds like 70 for Ken's next cash grab)
TAT.V       :  infinite

In order for a buyer to profit, the asset has to grow into their valuation.  Anyone buying your asset is starting from an 1800% deficit.

As I have said before, you offer a better deal than Kslaughter's ripoff, but that in no way makes your offering anything but a cash grab for yourself.

[TECHICENINE]

I know AM hash power is growing, and mine isn't. However, the future hashpower from AM has not been paid for. The 200TH priced at the same rate their previous power was priced will cost investors $2 million, or BTC20'000. Assuming AM percentage of the network at around 15% (which would mean network is 400TH and AM is 62TH) that is roughly 6 weeks of dividends from mining.

No, that has not happened yet, but it must for AM to get another 200TH of hashingpower. Even if they get their new chips for half the price of what friedcat has stated previously, we're looking at just under three weeks of no dividends at all to pay for it.

I know AM is selling hardware too, but since mining power is equal from one asset to another (assuming luck is equal) AM investors are paying 340% more for that future hardware sales than they are for mining.

In simpler terms, AM must sell hardware for 3,4 times more than they mine every month for their prices to be comparable to mine.

.b

EDIT: Corrected some decimal and thousand separator mistakes

You seem to be completely oblivious to the economics of semiconductor manufacturing.  And you are mixing the pricing of goods sold by ASICMINER with their shareholder's costs.

Let's ignore today's price to book because as EskimoBob rightly points out, there is less data than there should be.

Let's just compare IPO prices.

ASICMINER:  2
BFMINES   :  18
AMC         :  35  (sounds like 70 for Ken's next cash grab)
TAT.V       :  infinite

In order for a buyer to profit, the asset has to grow into their valuation.  Anyone buying your asset is starting from an 1800% deficit.

As I have said before, you offer a better deal than Kslaughter's ripoff, but that in no way makes your offering anything but a cash grab for yourself.

imo this appears to be the start of wild west cyber virtual capitalism...lol