|
MPOE-PR (OP)
|
 |
June 27, 2013, 02:08:15 AM |
|
This is actually the important point. There still exists a contingent of people "investing" who'd be best served by taking their BTC capital whatever it is, depositing with just-dice (which is provably fair!), fixing their desired rate of return to whatever they consider reasonable and pushing the button.
Yes they will eventually lose the capital. That is EXACTLY what will happen on all the various PMBs, "crowdfinance", "assets", "securities" and assorted scams out there that they patronise. The only notable difference is that just-dice takes 1% on the long term, whereas the troop of scammers take whatever they can get, probably about 30% or so net average overall.
Rather than trying to "invest" with some dead in the water t-shirt manufacturer or zero-hash waste heat producer or mentally-ill owned and operated Bitcoin merchant or "lend" with BitJam or "trade" with Bitfinex or what have you, the forum muppetry would obtain much better results simply rolling for it.
The only criteria they use are the rate of return, the only thing that interests them is for the intervals to be as short as possible (what monthly reports, weekly is too long for these people, they literally have the unchecked insanity to propose someone calculate the books daily and post their "winnings"). That's pretty much the extent of this magical "research" they do, that's their 'due dilligence". Why bother then with an ad hoc, informally-specified, bug-ridden, slow implementation of half of a dice site ? Why feed the scammers ? Just roll for it! Want 5% "interest" ? Want 3.5% "dividends" ? Load a Bitcoin or whatever you're "investing" into the dice site and roll for it. Your capital will on average survive for longer this way than your "invested" "portofolio" that you're "managing" would have. And you don't even have to wait, you can click the button for a new "dividend" period as soon as you're ready to see the results.
Source. Discuss. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"Your bitcoin is secured in a way that is physically impossible for others to access, no matter for what reason, no matter how good the excuse, no matter a majority of miners, no matter what." -- Greg Maxwell
|
|
|
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
|
Eric Muyser
Full Member
 Offline
Activity: 224
Merit: 100
You can't kill math.
|
|
June 27, 2013, 02:10:38 AM |
|
Esteemed leader  |
@EricMuyser | EricMuyser.com | OTC - "Defeat is a state of mind; no one is ever defeated until defeat has been accepted as a reality" - Bruce Lee
|
|
|
|
Rival
|
|
June 27, 2013, 02:17:49 AM |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
radiumsoup
|
|
June 27, 2013, 02:25:13 AM |
|
Esteemed leader Did I miss a vote somewhere? |
PGP fingerprint: 0x85beeabd110803b93d408b502d39b8875b282f86
|
|
|
|
MPOE-PR (OP)
|
|
June 27, 2013, 02:27:06 AM |
|
For the record, that thing reads like it was written by some SEO expert in Lahore, as part of a "one million articles this year" drive. I've seen better stuff in blog spam. |
|
|
|
Eric Muyser
Full Member
Offline
Activity: 224
Merit: 100
You can't kill math.
|
|
June 27, 2013, 02:33:55 AM |
|
For the record, that thing reads like it was written by some SEO expert in Lahore, as part of a "one million articles this year" drive. I've seen better stuff in blog spam. Or email spam. Your leader would know a thing or two about that. |
@EricMuyser | EricMuyser.com | OTC - "Defeat is a state of mind; no one is ever defeated until defeat has been accepted as a reality" - Bruce Lee
|
|
|
twentyseventy
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1386
Merit: 1000
|
|
June 27, 2013, 02:34:23 AM |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deprived
|
|
June 27, 2013, 02:38:13 AM |
|
This is actually the important point. There still exists a contingent of people "investing" who'd be best served by taking their BTC capital whatever it is, depositing with just-dice (which is provably fair!), fixing their desired rate of return to whatever they consider reasonable and pushing the button.
Yes they will eventually lose the capital. That is EXACTLY what will happen on all the various PMBs, "crowdfinance", "assets", "securities" and assorted scams out there that they patronise. The only notable difference is that just-dice takes 1% on the long term, whereas the troop of scammers take whatever they can get, probably about 30% or so net average overall.
Rather than trying to "invest" with some dead in the water t-shirt manufacturer or zero-hash waste heat producer or mentally-ill owned and operated Bitcoin merchant or "lend" with BitJam or "trade" with Bitfinex or what have you, the forum muppetry would obtain much better results simply rolling for it.
The only criteria they use are the rate of return, the only thing that interests them is for the intervals to be as short as possible (what monthly reports, weekly is too long for these people, they literally have the unchecked insanity to propose someone calculate the books daily and post their "winnings"). That's pretty much the extent of this magical "research" they do, that's their 'due dilligence". Why bother then with an ad hoc, informally-specified, bug-ridden, slow implementation of half of a dice site ? Why feed the scammers ? Just roll for it! Want 5% "interest" ? Want 3.5% "dividends" ? Load a Bitcoin or whatever you're "investing" into the dice site and roll for it. Your capital will on average survive for longer this way than your "invested" "portofolio" that you're "managing" would have. And you don't even have to wait, you can click the button for a new "dividend" period as soon as you're ready to see the results.
Source. Discuss. Can't disagree with the general theme - that the vast majority of "investments" are total crap that will almost certainly lose money. For those who can't identify the few decent investments (i.e. the vast majority or people) then the best strategy would be: 1. Invest your money with Just-Dice. 2. When you get some profit from the investment gamble the winnings on a high-odds gamble - only do this as a single bet occasionally (not with dust as soon as you receive it). Unless dooglus scams your capital is pretty safe (the BR management is sufficiently cautious that long-term losses on the investment side are unlikely unless there's very strange betting patterns) - which means it's already beating the overwhelming majority of BTC investments. If you win the long-shot gamble then you end up ahead of the decent investments as well. Main problem with Just-Dice is likely to be that investment outweighs gambling - driving investment return right down. But even if it only returns your principal it's way ahead of what most people are currently achieving. |
|
|
|
|
TECHICENINE
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 28
Merit: 0
|
|
June 27, 2013, 02:46:47 AM |
|
This is actually the important point. There still exists a contingent of people "investing" who'd be best served by taking their BTC capital whatever it is, depositing with just-dice (which is provably fair!), fixing their desired rate of return to whatever they consider reasonable and pushing the button.
Yes they will eventually lose the capital. That is EXACTLY what will happen on all the various PMBs, "crowdfinance", "assets", "securities" and assorted scams out there that they patronise. The only notable difference is that just-dice takes 1% on the long term, whereas the troop of scammers take whatever they can get, probably about 30% or so net average overall.
Rather than trying to "invest" with some dead in the water t-shirt manufacturer or zero-hash waste heat producer or mentally-ill owned and operated Bitcoin merchant or "lend" with BitJam or "trade" with Bitfinex or what have you, the forum muppetry would obtain much better results simply rolling for it.
The only criteria they use are the rate of return, the only thing that interests them is for the intervals to be as short as possible (what monthly reports, weekly is too long for these people, they literally have the unchecked insanity to propose someone calculate the books daily and post their "winnings"). That's pretty much the extent of this magical "research" they do, that's their 'due dilligence". Why bother then with an ad hoc, informally-specified, bug-ridden, slow implementation of half of a dice site ? Why feed the scammers ? Just roll for it! Want 5% "interest" ? Want 3.5% "dividends" ? Load a Bitcoin or whatever you're "investing" into the dice site and roll for it. Your capital will on average survive for longer this way than your "invested" "portofolio" that you're "managing" would have. And you don't even have to wait, you can click the button for a new "dividend" period as soon as you're ready to see the results.
Source. Discuss. wait i'm coding some[___]COIN bond faucets will be back online soon+bytecoin BTE byte bit whatever..LOL |
|
|
|
|
usagi
VIP
Hero Member
Offline
Activity: 812
Merit: 1000
13
|
|
June 27, 2013, 03:07:07 AM |
|
Discuss.
bets: 135 wins: 78 losses: 57 luck: 116.72% wagered: 3.96140014 profit: 1.79540000 i'm up 45%. works for me in fact I think I'm going to go invest all of BMF's money in dooglus's site right now! *(please tell me I don't need to put a smiley at the end of the above sentence...) |
|
|
|
|
|
xaviarlol
|
|
June 27, 2013, 10:31:49 AM |
|
This is actually the important point. There still exists a contingent of people "investing" who'd be best served by taking their BTC capital whatever it is, depositing with just-dice (which is provably fair!), fixing their desired rate of return to whatever they consider reasonable and pushing the button.
Yes they will eventually lose the capital. That is EXACTLY what will happen on all the various PMBs, "crowdfinance", "assets", "securities" and assorted scams out there that they patronise. The only notable difference is that just-dice takes 1% on the long term, whereas the troop of scammers take whatever they can get, probably about 30% or so net average overall.
Rather than trying to "invest" with some dead in the water t-shirt manufacturer or zero-hash waste heat producer or mentally-ill owned and operated Bitcoin merchant or "lend" with BitJam or "trade" with Bitfinex or what have you, the forum muppetry would obtain much better results simply rolling for it.
The only criteria they use are the rate of return, the only thing that interests them is for the intervals to be as short as possible (what monthly reports, weekly is too long for these people, they literally have the unchecked insanity to propose someone calculate the books daily and post their "winnings"). That's pretty much the extent of this magical "research" they do, that's their 'due dilligence". Why bother then with an ad hoc, informally-specified, bug-ridden, slow implementation of half of a dice site ? Why feed the scammers ? Just roll for it! Want 5% "interest" ? Want 3.5% "dividends" ? Load a Bitcoin or whatever you're "investing" into the dice site and roll for it. Your capital will on average survive for longer this way than your "invested" "portofolio" that you're "managing" would have. And you don't even have to wait, you can click the button for a new "dividend" period as soon as you're ready to see the results.
Source. Discuss. Aren't you the one who said ASICMiner was terrible, a scam and everyone who invests in it are retarded when it first began? BTC3.45 later... |
|
|
|
|
|
Rival
|
|
June 27, 2013, 11:56:05 AM |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Atruk
|
|
June 27, 2013, 12:36:28 PM |
|
This is actually the important point. There still exists a contingent of people "investing" who'd be best served by taking their BTC capital whatever it is, depositing with just-dice (which is provably fair!), fixing their desired rate of return to whatever they consider reasonable and pushing the button.
Yes they will eventually lose the capital. That is EXACTLY what will happen on all the various PMBs, "crowdfinance", "assets", "securities" and assorted scams out there that they patronise. The only notable difference is that just-dice takes 1% on the long term, whereas the troop of scammers take whatever they can get, probably about 30% or so net average overall.
Rather than trying to "invest" with some dead in the water t-shirt manufacturer or zero-hash waste heat producer or mentally-ill owned and operated Bitcoin merchant or "lend" with BitJam or "trade" with Bitfinex or what have you, the forum muppetry would obtain much better results simply rolling for it.
The only criteria they use are the rate of return, the only thing that interests them is for the intervals to be as short as possible (what monthly reports, weekly is too long for these people, they literally have the unchecked insanity to propose someone calculate the books daily and post their "winnings"). That's pretty much the extent of this magical "research" they do, that's their 'due dilligence". Why bother then with an ad hoc, informally-specified, bug-ridden, slow implementation of half of a dice site ? Why feed the scammers ? Just roll for it! Want 5% "interest" ? Want 3.5% "dividends" ? Load a Bitcoin or whatever you're "investing" into the dice site and roll for it. Your capital will on average survive for longer this way than your "invested" "portofolio" that you're "managing" would have. And you don't even have to wait, you can click the button for a new "dividend" period as soon as you're ready to see the results.
Source. Discuss. Aren't you the one who said ASICMiner was terrible, a scam and everyone who invests in it are retarded when it first began? BTC3.45 later... That doesn't mean it isn't overpriced. Much as S.Dice found itself overpriced earlier this year (and is probably overpriced again now). |
|
|
|
|
MPOE-PR (OP)
|
|
June 27, 2013, 12:43:58 PM |
|
Main problem with Just-Dice is likely to be that investment outweighs gambling - driving investment return right down. But even if it only returns your principal it's way ahead of what most people are currently achieving.
Actually the proposition was not to invest it there, but to gamble it there. As you well point out investment takes too long and is too small to please the crowd I'm addressing, as it will never turn half a McChickenBox into "Oprah Rich". Yes, people have been rewriting/repackaging MP's stuff for quite some time. It's how they learn, and for that matter it's why he writes. |
|
|
|
|
Deprived
|
|
June 27, 2013, 12:52:36 PM |
|
This is actually the important point. There still exists a contingent of people "investing" who'd be best served by taking their BTC capital whatever it is, depositing with just-dice (which is provably fair!), fixing their desired rate of return to whatever they consider reasonable and pushing the button.
Yes they will eventually lose the capital. That is EXACTLY what will happen on all the various PMBs, "crowdfinance", "assets", "securities" and assorted scams out there that they patronise. The only notable difference is that just-dice takes 1% on the long term, whereas the troop of scammers take whatever they can get, probably about 30% or so net average overall.
Rather than trying to "invest" with some dead in the water t-shirt manufacturer or zero-hash waste heat producer or mentally-ill owned and operated Bitcoin merchant or "lend" with BitJam or "trade" with Bitfinex or what have you, the forum muppetry would obtain much better results simply rolling for it.
The only criteria they use are the rate of return, the only thing that interests them is for the intervals to be as short as possible (what monthly reports, weekly is too long for these people, they literally have the unchecked insanity to propose someone calculate the books daily and post their "winnings"). That's pretty much the extent of this magical "research" they do, that's their 'due dilligence". Why bother then with an ad hoc, informally-specified, bug-ridden, slow implementation of half of a dice site ? Why feed the scammers ? Just roll for it! Want 5% "interest" ? Want 3.5% "dividends" ? Load a Bitcoin or whatever you're "investing" into the dice site and roll for it. Your capital will on average survive for longer this way than your "invested" "portofolio" that you're "managing" would have. And you don't even have to wait, you can click the button for a new "dividend" period as soon as you're ready to see the results.
Source. Discuss. Aren't you the one who said ASICMiner was terrible, a scam and everyone who invests in it are retarded when it first began? BTC3.45 later... That doesn't mean it isn't overpriced. Much as S.Dice found itself overpriced earlier this year (and is probably overpriced again now). You need to read the comments made in context to see just how off the mark MPOE-PR was. Specifically it's already paid out more in dividends in the last 3 months than she claimed the shares were worth at most. I agree with MPOE-PR on a lot of things - on that issue she was utterly wrong. I also undervalued ASICMINER (I sold at about 0.75 BTC - clearly an error with hindsight). What I got wrong was the extent to which BFL and AVALON would totally screw up and leave ASICMINER able to help themselves both to Mining and to sales - and, perhaps most importantly of all, to credibility. What MPOE-PR got wrong was the assumption that EVERYTHING not on MPEx is crap and will fail. Being listed on MPEx is neither a pre-requisite for success (see ASICMINER) or a guarantee of success (see BitVPS, S.BBET so far and the Giga pass-through). FWIW I personally consider a security to be a definite success when (and only when) investors have received back at least the average IPO cost in dividends/final payment. Until then it can only be a likely success that could still end up a failure if the operator ran with the cash - as recovery of funds in scammed/dead BTC securities is pretty much nonexistent. |
|
|
|
|
usagi
VIP
Hero Member
Offline
Activity: 812
Merit: 1000
13
|
|
June 27, 2013, 01:57:24 PM |
|
FWIW I personally consider a security to be a definite success when (and only when) investors have received back at least the average IPO cost in dividends/final payment. Until then it can only be a likely success that could still end up a failure if the operator ran with the cash - as recovery of funds in scammed/dead BTC securities is pretty much nonexistent.
I actually agree with you but I find it comical how quickly you flip-flop in your definitions and positions in a discussion. For example, given your above definition, Tu.SILVER is a success: 2013-06-27 08:50:02 DIVIDEND PAYMENT: (TU.SILVER) 1832 0.00003000 ฿0.05496000
2013-06-26 02:41:04 DIVIDEND PAYMENT: (TU.SILVER) 1832 0.00003000 ฿0.05496000
2013-06-25 05:22:12 DIVIDEND PAYMENT: (TU.SILVER) 1832 0.00003000 ฿0.05496000
2013-06-24 19:03:41 DIVIDEND PAYMENT: (TU.SILVER) 1832 0.00003000 ฿0.05496000
2013-06-23 22:09:30 DIVIDEND PAYMENT: (TU.SILVER) 1832 0.00003000 ฿0.05496000
2013-06-22 07:31:30 DIVIDEND PAYMENT: (TU.SILVER) 1832 0.00003000 ฿0.05496000
2013-06-21 11:34:13 DIVIDEND PAYMENT: (TU.SILVER) 1832 0.00003000 ฿0.05496000
2013-06-20 05:16:10 DIVIDEND PAYMENT: (TU.SILVER) 1832 0.00003000 ฿0.05496000
2013-06-19 08:26:15 DIVIDEND PAYMENT: (TU.SILVER) 1832 0.00003000 ฿0.05496000
2013-06-18 08:24:04 DIVIDEND PAYMENT: (TU.SILVER) 1832 0.00003000 ฿0.05496000
2013-06-17 07:55:37 DIVIDEND PAYMENT: (TU.SILVER) 1832 0.00003000 ฿0.05496000
2013-06-16 06:12:50 DIVIDEND PAYMENT: (TU.SILVER) 1832 0.00003000 ฿0.05496000
2013-06-15 04:00:41 DIVIDEND PAYMENT: (TU.SILVER) 1832 0.00002900 ฿0.05312800
2013-06-14 08:28:24 DIVIDEND PAYMENT: (TU.SILVER) 1832 0.00002800 ฿0.05129600
2013-06-13 00:55:30 DIVIDEND PAYMENT: (TU.SILVER) 1832 0.00002700 ฿0.04946400
2013-06-12 05:48:09 DIVIDEND PAYMENT: (TU.SILVER) 1832 0.00002600 ฿0.04763200
2013-06-11 08:07:28 DIVIDEND PAYMENT: (TU.SILVER) 1832 0.00002500 ฿0.04580000
2013-06-10 14:43:20 DIVIDEND PAYMENT: (TU.SILVER) 1832 0.00002400 ฿0.04396800
2013-06-09 12:40:53 DIVIDEND PAYMENT: (TU.SILVER) 1832 0.00002300 ฿0.04213600
2013-06-08 07:30:38 DIVIDEND PAYMENT: (TU.SILVER) 1832 0.00002200 ฿0.04030400
2013-06-07 01:07:06 DIVIDEND PAYMENT: (TU.SILVER) 1832 0.00002100 ฿0.03847200
2013-06-06 05:38:07 DIVIDEND PAYMENT: (TU.SILVER) 1832 0.00002000 ฿0.03664000
2013-06-05 00:30:18 DIVIDEND PAYMENT: (TU.SILVER) 1832 0.00001900 ฿0.03480800
2013-06-04 13:09:31 DIVIDEND PAYMENT: (TU.SILVER) 1832 0.00001800 ฿0.03297600
2013-06-03 02:31:56 DIVIDEND PAYMENT: (TU.SILVER) 1832 0.00001700 ฿0.03114400
2013-06-02 07:04:52 DIVIDEND PAYMENT: (TU.SILVER) 1832 0.00001600 ฿0.02931200
2013-06-01 02:35:42 DIVIDEND PAYMENT: (TU.SILVER) 1832 0.00001500 ฿0.02748000
2013-05-30 21:41:07 DIVIDEND PAYMENT: (TU.SILVER) 1832 0.00001400 ฿0.02564800
2013-05-30 00:44:43 DIVIDEND PAYMENT: (TU.SILVER) 1832 0.00001300 ฿0.02381600
2013-05-29 00:31:48 DIVIDEND PAYMENT: (TU.SILVER) 1832 0.00001200 ฿0.02198400
2013-05-27 23:49:36 DIVIDEND PAYMENT: (TU.SILVER) 1832 0.00001100 ฿0.02015200
2013-05-27 01:27:03 DIVIDEND PAYMENT: (TU.SILVER) 1832 0.00001000 ฿0.01832000
2013-05-26 12:08:04 DIVIDEND PAYMENT: (TU.SILVER) 1832 0.00001100 ฿0.02015200
2013-05-25 08:21:03 DIVIDEND PAYMENT: (TU.SILVER) 1832 0.00001000 ฿0.01832000
2013-05-24 12:35:37 DIVIDEND PAYMENT: (TU.SILVER) 1832 0.00001000 ฿0.01832000
2013-05-03 10:39:06 DIVIDEND PAYMENT: (TU.SILVER) 1232 0.00500000 ฿6.16000000
2013-05-01 13:09:53 DIVIDEND PAYMENT: (TU.SILVER) 1232 0.01000000 ฿12.32000000
2013-04-29 11:26:44 DIVIDEND PAYMENT: (TU.SILVER) 1232 0.00300000 ฿3.69600000
2013-04-29 11:26:13 DIVIDEND PAYMENT: (TU.SILVER) 1232 0.00154880 ฿1.90812160
2013-04-24 10:02:24 DIVIDEND PAYMENT: (TU.SILVER) 1222 0.00800000 ฿9.77600000
013-04-18 12:09:22 DIVIDEND PAYMENT: (TU.SILVER) 1222 0.00710000 ฿8.67620000
2013-04-11 11:32:50 DIVIDEND PAYMENT: (TU.SILVER) 1222 0.01700000 ฿20.77400000
2013-03-26 15:39:29 DIVIDEND PAYMENT: (TU.SILVER) 790 0.00140800 ฿1.11232000
2013-02-23 08:28:28 DIVIDEND PAYMENT: (TU.SILVER) 800 0.00128000 ฿1.02400000
(Total per-share returned to investors: 0.0551178, internal BV calc: 0.0472) Now, if you can't admit that TU.SILVER is a success, can we trust anything else you say? |
|
|
|
|
|
Deprived
|
|
June 27, 2013, 02:13:20 PM |
|
FWIW I personally consider a security to be a definite success when (and only when) investors have received back at least the average IPO cost in dividends/final payment. Until then it can only be a likely success that could still end up a failure if the operator ran with the cash - as recovery of funds in scammed/dead BTC securities is pretty much nonexistent.
I actually agree with you but I find it comical how quickly you flip-flop in your definitions and positions in a discussion. For example, given your above definition, Tu.SILVER is a success: 2013-06-27 08:50:02 DIVIDEND PAYMENT: (TU.SILVER) 1832 0.00003000 ฿0.05496000
2013-06-26 02:41:04 DIVIDEND PAYMENT: (TU.SILVER) 1832 0.00003000 ฿0.05496000
2013-06-25 05:22:12 DIVIDEND PAYMENT: (TU.SILVER) 1832 0.00003000 ฿0.05496000
2013-06-24 19:03:41 DIVIDEND PAYMENT: (TU.SILVER) 1832 0.00003000 ฿0.05496000
2013-06-23 22:09:30 DIVIDEND PAYMENT: (TU.SILVER) 1832 0.00003000 ฿0.05496000
2013-06-22 07:31:30 DIVIDEND PAYMENT: (TU.SILVER) 1832 0.00003000 ฿0.05496000
2013-06-21 11:34:13 DIVIDEND PAYMENT: (TU.SILVER) 1832 0.00003000 ฿0.05496000
2013-06-20 05:16:10 DIVIDEND PAYMENT: (TU.SILVER) 1832 0.00003000 ฿0.05496000
2013-06-19 08:26:15 DIVIDEND PAYMENT: (TU.SILVER) 1832 0.00003000 ฿0.05496000
2013-06-18 08:24:04 DIVIDEND PAYMENT: (TU.SILVER) 1832 0.00003000 ฿0.05496000
2013-06-17 07:55:37 DIVIDEND PAYMENT: (TU.SILVER) 1832 0.00003000 ฿0.05496000
2013-06-16 06:12:50 DIVIDEND PAYMENT: (TU.SILVER) 1832 0.00003000 ฿0.05496000
2013-06-15 04:00:41 DIVIDEND PAYMENT: (TU.SILVER) 1832 0.00002900 ฿0.05312800
2013-06-14 08:28:24 DIVIDEND PAYMENT: (TU.SILVER) 1832 0.00002800 ฿0.05129600
2013-06-13 00:55:30 DIVIDEND PAYMENT: (TU.SILVER) 1832 0.00002700 ฿0.04946400
2013-06-12 05:48:09 DIVIDEND PAYMENT: (TU.SILVER) 1832 0.00002600 ฿0.04763200
2013-06-11 08:07:28 DIVIDEND PAYMENT: (TU.SILVER) 1832 0.00002500 ฿0.04580000
2013-06-10 14:43:20 DIVIDEND PAYMENT: (TU.SILVER) 1832 0.00002400 ฿0.04396800
2013-06-09 12:40:53 DIVIDEND PAYMENT: (TU.SILVER) 1832 0.00002300 ฿0.04213600
2013-06-08 07:30:38 DIVIDEND PAYMENT: (TU.SILVER) 1832 0.00002200 ฿0.04030400
2013-06-07 01:07:06 DIVIDEND PAYMENT: (TU.SILVER) 1832 0.00002100 ฿0.03847200
2013-06-06 05:38:07 DIVIDEND PAYMENT: (TU.SILVER) 1832 0.00002000 ฿0.03664000
2013-06-05 00:30:18 DIVIDEND PAYMENT: (TU.SILVER) 1832 0.00001900 ฿0.03480800
2013-06-04 13:09:31 DIVIDEND PAYMENT: (TU.SILVER) 1832 0.00001800 ฿0.03297600
2013-06-03 02:31:56 DIVIDEND PAYMENT: (TU.SILVER) 1832 0.00001700 ฿0.03114400
2013-06-02 07:04:52 DIVIDEND PAYMENT: (TU.SILVER) 1832 0.00001600 ฿0.02931200
2013-06-01 02:35:42 DIVIDEND PAYMENT: (TU.SILVER) 1832 0.00001500 ฿0.02748000
2013-05-30 21:41:07 DIVIDEND PAYMENT: (TU.SILVER) 1832 0.00001400 ฿0.02564800
2013-05-30 00:44:43 DIVIDEND PAYMENT: (TU.SILVER) 1832 0.00001300 ฿0.02381600
2013-05-29 00:31:48 DIVIDEND PAYMENT: (TU.SILVER) 1832 0.00001200 ฿0.02198400
2013-05-27 23:49:36 DIVIDEND PAYMENT: (TU.SILVER) 1832 0.00001100 ฿0.02015200
2013-05-27 01:27:03 DIVIDEND PAYMENT: (TU.SILVER) 1832 0.00001000 ฿0.01832000
2013-05-26 12:08:04 DIVIDEND PAYMENT: (TU.SILVER) 1832 0.00001100 ฿0.02015200
2013-05-25 08:21:03 DIVIDEND PAYMENT: (TU.SILVER) 1832 0.00001000 ฿0.01832000
2013-05-24 12:35:37 DIVIDEND PAYMENT: (TU.SILVER) 1832 0.00001000 ฿0.01832000
2013-05-03 10:39:06 DIVIDEND PAYMENT: (TU.SILVER) 1232 0.00500000 ฿6.16000000
2013-05-01 13:09:53 DIVIDEND PAYMENT: (TU.SILVER) 1232 0.01000000 ฿12.32000000
2013-04-29 11:26:44 DIVIDEND PAYMENT: (TU.SILVER) 1232 0.00300000 ฿3.69600000
2013-04-29 11:26:13 DIVIDEND PAYMENT: (TU.SILVER) 1232 0.00154880 ฿1.90812160
2013-04-24 10:02:24 DIVIDEND PAYMENT: (TU.SILVER) 1222 0.00800000 ฿9.77600000
013-04-18 12:09:22 DIVIDEND PAYMENT: (TU.SILVER) 1222 0.00710000 ฿8.67620000
2013-04-11 11:32:50 DIVIDEND PAYMENT: (TU.SILVER) 1222 0.01700000 ฿20.77400000
2013-03-26 15:39:29 DIVIDEND PAYMENT: (TU.SILVER) 790 0.00140800 ฿1.11232000
2013-02-23 08:28:28 DIVIDEND PAYMENT: (TU.SILVER) 800 0.00128000 ฿1.02400000
(Total per-share returned to investors: 0.0551178, internal BV calc: 0.0472) Now, if you can't admit that TU.SILVER is a success, can we trust anything else you say? Your stupidity never ceases to amaze me. This time you seem to not know the difference between IPO price and current NAV/U. Your initial sales were at ~0.2 BTC. Those people have received back .0551178 in dividends and have remaining value of .0472. i.e. they've LOST half what they invested. As it happens, on this occasion, that isn't your fault - as a lot of that loss is the drop in price of silver. But for it to be an automatic success in my terms they'd need to have received back (in dividends) more than the 0.2 they paid originally. which ASICMINER has done and LTC-ATF has done (original IPO was 10 LTC, the 2 dividends we've paid amount to 25 LTC per share). It doesn't become a success because you make enough loss to reduce current NAV/U below dividends you've paid to date. Were that the case (which wierdly you appear to believe) then any share could be a success by dividending out 1% then losing the remaining 99%. |
|
|
|
|
|
Atruk
|
|
June 27, 2013, 03:38:45 PM |
|
You need to read the comments made in context to see just how off the mark MPOE-PR was.
Specifically it's already paid out more in dividends in the last 3 months than she claimed the shares were worth at most.
I agree with MPOE-PR on a lot of things - on that issue she was utterly wrong. I also undervalued ASICMINER (I sold at about 0.75 BTC - clearly an error with hindsight). What I got wrong was the extent to which BFL and AVALON would totally screw up and leave ASICMINER able to help themselves both to Mining and to sales - and, perhaps most importantly of all, to credibility. What MPOE-PR got wrong was the assumption that EVERYTHING not on MPEx is crap and will fail. Being listed on MPEx is neither a pre-requisite for success (see ASICMINER) or a guarantee of success (see BitVPS, S.BBET so far and the Giga pass-through). FWIW I personally consider a security to be a definite success when (and only when) investors have received back at least the average IPO cost in dividends/final payment. Until then it can only be a likely success that could still end up a failure if the operator ran with the cash - as recovery of funds in scammed/dead BTC securities is pretty much nonexistent.
I tend to agree with you. Hindsight though is a horrible way to make decisions when you invest. I made a yes bet here as a gamble because it is a thrilling opportunity for disproportionately large returns. Given the information at the time it was bold and risky, and it is still a longshot bet (though not quite as long anymore). Even with ASICMiner's stellar actual performance there hasn't been a time where one the hype is filtered that it has seemed to me to be worth quite what its trading for. Even with their credibility and competitor's lack thereof. I am not an investment person. I am not a finance person. I am a gambling person, but without using hindsight I can't look back and with the information (or lack thereof) think there was a time when ASICMiner seemed like a good opportunity. |
|
|
|
|
Deprived
|
|
June 27, 2013, 03:58:24 PM |
|
You need to read the comments made in context to see just how off the mark MPOE-PR was.
Specifically it's already paid out more in dividends in the last 3 months than she claimed the shares were worth at most.
I agree with MPOE-PR on a lot of things - on that issue she was utterly wrong. I also undervalued ASICMINER (I sold at about 0.75 BTC - clearly an error with hindsight). What I got wrong was the extent to which BFL and AVALON would totally screw up and leave ASICMINER able to help themselves both to Mining and to sales - and, perhaps most importantly of all, to credibility. What MPOE-PR got wrong was the assumption that EVERYTHING not on MPEx is crap and will fail. Being listed on MPEx is neither a pre-requisite for success (see ASICMINER) or a guarantee of success (see BitVPS, S.BBET so far and the Giga pass-through). FWIW I personally consider a security to be a definite success when (and only when) investors have received back at least the average IPO cost in dividends/final payment. Until then it can only be a likely success that could still end up a failure if the operator ran with the cash - as recovery of funds in scammed/dead BTC securities is pretty much nonexistent.
I tend to agree with you. Hindsight though is a horrible way to make decisions when you invest. I made a yes bet here as a gamble because it is a thrilling opportunity for disproportionately large returns. Given the information at the time it was bold and risky, and it is still a longshot bet (though not quite as long anymore). Even with ASICMiner's stellar actual performance there hasn't been a time where one the hype is filtered that it has seemed to me to be worth quite what its trading for. Even with their credibility and competitor's lack thereof. I am not an investment person. I am not a finance person. I am a gambling person, but without using hindsight I can't look back and with the information (or lack thereof) think there was a time when ASICMiner seemed like a good opportunity. ASICMINER at IPO seemed a good opportunity to me. At the time my fund was tiny - and GLBSE happened to close when our holding of it were low. But it was the first (and only for about 6 months) share that I intentionally purchased as a long-term holding. That decision is documented in my thread back then. The 2nd such investment was DMC - a totally shite investment but it became worth holding due to its own holdings of ASICMINER after ASICMINER did well. We actually made more from DMC than from ASICMINER itself. On the bet you linked the Yes side is actually a great bet - not because there's any likelihood of BBET becoming massive this year but because there's a not insignificant chance of an S.DICE collapse. i.e. the bet can be won by S.DICE losing market cap to below BBET as well as by BBET gaining market cap to above S.DICE. I'd still favour the No side but for two factors: 1. With the current odds of about 1:3 I'd be taking on CP risk and the risk of losing the bet in return for tieing up capital for 6 months for a 30% profit. That's just totally unattractive. 2. If MPEx were ever to delist S.DICE they MIGHT declare a win for Yes - as immediately after delisting they could argue S.DICE had a market cap of 0 (not being present in any market it wouldn't have a market cap - even if that were only temorary pending relisting elsewhere). With MPEx/BBET run by same people there's conflicts of interest there I wouldn't want to go near (on the No side). S.DICE is almost certainly in breach of its contract - by charging operational expenses to investors (when the contract explicitly limits what can be charged to expenses for promotion and development) - so delisting is far from impossible. Whether ASICMINER's worth its current value or not is open for debate. My take on it is to look at what income you believe is sutainable for it then work out what share price would be warranted with a similar P/E ratio to S.DICE or S.MPOE. |
|
|
|
|
|
MPOE-PR (OP)
|
|
June 27, 2013, 04:07:35 PM |
|
Specifically it's already paid out more in dividends in the last 3 months than she claimed the shares were worth at most.
It paid out 1.5 BTC per share in the past three months?! This comes as news to me. Weren't they doing something to the tune of 0.000x per week? FWIW I personally consider a security to be a definite success when (and only when) investors have received back at least the average IPO cost in dividends/final payment. Until then it can only be a likely success that could still end up a failure if the operator ran with the cash - as recovery of funds in scammed/dead BTC securities is pretty much nonexistent.
This is a useless standard for now, because no honest company will return 100% of its capital to investors within the first few years of operation, and Bitcoin is a few years old. Once we do a few more block halvings this will become more and more of a valid way to select blue chips, perhaps. Even with their credibility and competitor's lack thereof.
I would guess deprived isn't immune to getting a little carried away by fashion now and again. |
|
|
|
|
