Bitcoin Forum
December 14, 2017, 01:25:14 AM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.15.1  [Torrent].
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  

Warning: Moderators do not remove likely scams. You must use your own brain: caveat emptor. Watch out for Ponzi schemes. Do not invest more than you can afford to lose.

Pages: « 1 ... 700 701 702 703 704 705 706 707 708 709 710 711 712 713 714 715 716 717 718 719 720 721 722 723 724 725 726 727 728 729 730 731 732 733 734 735 736 737 738 739 740 741 742 743 744 745 746 747 748 749 [750] 751 752 753 754 755 756 757 758 759 760 761 762 763 764 765 766 767 768 769 770 771 772 773 774 775 776 777 778 779 780 781 782 783 784 785 786 787 788 789 790 791 792 793 794 795 796 797 798 799 800 ... 914 »
  Print  
Author Topic: [LABCOIN] IPO [BTCT.CO] - Details/FAQ and Discussion (ASIC dev/sales/mining)  (Read 1058520 times)
abuelau
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 686


www.coinschedule.com


View Profile
September 27, 2013, 08:23:46 AM
 #14981

Yes, what you said make sense. However, one thing is that this IPO has a company and a CEO, with his name listed.

And has anyone been in contact with him? I could make an IPO and list Bill Gates as chairman.

As for the current share price, I have to say, if anything its still rather high. Am I wrong saying it IPO'd at 0.001 and its now still about half of that?

If even labcoin is legit, its clear they will be unable to meet the expectations set forth at ipo. But the current price only makes sense to me if people still believe their chip not only exists, but will start hashing fairly soon with a relatively small risk  this is going absolutely nowhere. IOW, Im amazed its holding up so well and equally amazed how most of you seem to think this price is low. Facebook value dropped about as much after the IPO, no one thought FB was a scam.
At the time of IPO, we were even further from the chips. If not the btct closing, I don't see anything worse now than the time of IPO except their poor PR communication.

If don't see anything worse now than at the time of the IPO you should probably try looking.  The company has failed to deliver on any of its claims.  Currently, there are two likely possibilities: 1) LC did actually receive their first batch of chips, their performance is about 10% of the rate LC advertised, and there are additional technical issues with the chips that prevent them from hashing steadily.  

2) LC is a total scam, rather than just a completely incompetent company.  

Yes, their first batch of chips did not work well. According to the irc chat of theSeven, however, the first batch was actually build by sneaking to the small university fab. It is possible the problem was caused by the poor product quality there. They are waiting for their second batch, and I guess they are still on the way.

So why don't they come here and say that? Why do they make us find TheSeven in an IRC chat?

Know what's happening in cryptoworld: www.coinschedule.com
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1513214714
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1513214714

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1513214714
Reply with quote  #2

1513214714
Report to moderator
BitThink
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 882



View Profile
September 27, 2013, 08:23:54 AM
 #14982

One thing is that they keep saying the 20TH will be online in the early October. I don't think lying about this does any good to them. Most likely they just have some problem in assembling and deploying.
BitCsByBit
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 252


View Profile
September 27, 2013, 08:24:49 AM
 #14983

3) LC is completely incompetent scam

They raised 10K BTC didnt they? And we dont have a frigging idea who is really behind it. That would qualify as a successful scam to me.

They raised 7K BTC, but that was for their 65nm chip.

They funded the 130nm chip.

Tipsy jar: 1HgfLMXiJQj9KZ7abLRh9rWuR7dgeSyub4
drawingthesun
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1078


View Profile
September 27, 2013, 08:25:21 AM
 #14984

3) LC is completely incompetent scam

They raised 10K BTC didnt they? And we dont have a frigging idea who is really behind it. That would qualify as a successful scam to me.

Raised 7,000 bitcoin, they kept 3,000 bitcoin worth of shares for themselves.

They have made over 30,000 bitcoin by trading on their own news. One of the most successful scams in recent bitcoin history. Well played Labcoin, well played.
Duffer1
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 227



View Profile
September 27, 2013, 08:27:04 AM
 #14985

According to the irc chat of theSeven, however, the first batch was actually build by sneaking to the small university fab. It is possible the problem was caused by the poor product quality there.

TheSeven's response: TheSeven   Duffer1: lol, people are misquoting me all the time
BitCsByBit
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 252


View Profile
September 27, 2013, 08:28:34 AM
 #14986

3) LC is completely incompetent scam

They raised 10K BTC didnt they? And we dont have a frigging idea who is really behind it. That would qualify as a successful scam to me.

Raised 7,000 bitcoin, they kept 3,000 bitcoin worth of shares for themselves.

They have made over 30,000 bitcoin by trading on their own news. One of the most successful scams in recent bitcoin history. Well played Labcoin, well played.

Proof?

Tipsy jar: 1HgfLMXiJQj9KZ7abLRh9rWuR7dgeSyub4
BitThink
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 882



View Profile
September 27, 2013, 08:29:05 AM
 #14987

Yes, what you said make sense. However, one thing is that this IPO has a company and a CEO, with his name listed.

And has anyone been in contact with him? I could make an IPO and list Bill Gates as chairman.

As for the current share price, I have to say, if anything its still rather high. Am I wrong saying it IPO'd at 0.001 and its now still about half of that?

If even labcoin is legit, its clear they will be unable to meet the expectations set forth at ipo. But the current price only makes sense to me if people still believe their chip not only exists, but will start hashing fairly soon with a relatively small risk  this is going absolutely nowhere. IOW, Im amazed its holding up so well and equally amazed how most of you seem to think this price is low. Facebook value dropped about as much after the IPO, no one thought FB was a scam.
At the time of IPO, we were even further from the chips. If not the btct closing, I don't see anything worse now than the time of IPO except their poor PR communication.

If don't see anything worse now than at the time of the IPO you should probably try looking.  The company has failed to deliver on any of its claims.  Currently, there are two likely possibilities: 1) LC did actually receive their first batch of chips, their performance is about 10% of the rate LC advertised, and there are additional technical issues with the chips that prevent them from hashing steadily.  

2) LC is a total scam, rather than just a completely incompetent company.  

Yes, their first batch of chips did not work well. According to the irc chat of theSeven, however, the first batch was actually build by sneaking to the small university fab. It is possible the problem was caused by the poor product quality there. They are waiting for their second batch, and I guess they are still on the way.

So why don't they come here and say that? Why do they make us find TheSeven in an IRC chat?

Just remember making up all these things do not benefit them at all.
Currently, I think the share price and the emotion of the shareholders are the least important things for them to care about. Most likely, 1) they are busy in preparing the deploying the second batch. 2) they are still negotiating with Ukyo about the re-listing. Even 2) is not so important in current stage.

They only care about the hashing, since that's the only one brings them cash. However, it seems they can do nothing to improve their first-batch chips. All their hopes are now on the second batch.
Puppet
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 966


View Profile
September 27, 2013, 08:29:29 AM
 #14988

They raised 7K BTC, but that was for their 65nm chip.

They funded the 130nm chip.

FYI, 7K BTC most likely isnt enough to develop a 65nm chip and deploy miners based on it en masse. The mask sets alone might be on that order of magnitude.
Small wonder they have nothing to show for, other than theseven doing some contract work in the margin, probably just to keep up appearances.
BitCsByBit
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 252


View Profile
September 27, 2013, 08:33:34 AM
 #14989

They raised 7K BTC, but that was for their 65nm chip.

They funded the 130nm chip.

FYI, 7K BTC most likely isnt enough to develop a 65nm chip and deploy miners based on it en masse. The mask sets alone might be on that order of magnitude.
Small wonder they have nothing to show for, other than theseven doing some contract work in the margin, probably just to keep up appearances.


It's a 65nm chip, not 28nm. The price difference between the two is pretty significant.

Tipsy jar: 1HgfLMXiJQj9KZ7abLRh9rWuR7dgeSyub4
cw92
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 66


View Profile
September 27, 2013, 08:33:44 AM
 #14990

One thing is that they keep saying the 20TH will be online in the early October. I don't think lying about this does any good to them. Most likely they just have some problem in assembling and deploying.

You and the other few people still somehow hyping up LC continue to quote their claims.  What makes this promise any different from the countless others (all of which have been broken).  If they couldn't come anywhere near the few TH claim for the first batch, why are they any more likely to be on track for 20TH from the next batch?  Also, LC stated that they ordered the next batch weeks ago.  It's clear from their inconsistent hashrate that they have not yet figured out the issues with the first batch.  Please explain to me how they could have ordered a significantly better performing batch of chips before figuring out everything they botched for the first one.  
drawingthesun
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1078


View Profile
September 27, 2013, 08:33:58 AM
 #14991

Proof?

I hope I am wrong, but the timing of share drops to good news always seemed suspicious to me. Of course never attribute to malice what can be explained by stupidity, but I have a nagging feeling I am right.
abuelau
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 686


www.coinschedule.com


View Profile
September 27, 2013, 08:36:00 AM
 #14992

One thing is that they keep saying the 20TH will be online in the early October. I don't think lying about this does any good to them. Most likely they just have some problem in assembling and deploying.

You and the other few people still somehow hyping up LC continue to quote their claims.  What makes this promise any different from the countless others (all of which have been broken).  If they couldn't come anywhere near the few TH claim for the first batch, why are they any more likely to be on track for 20TH from the next batch?  Also, LC stated that they ordered the next batch weeks ago.  It's clear from their inconsistent hashrate that they have not yet figured out the issues with the first batch.  Please explain to me how they could have ordered a significantly better performing batch of chips before figuring out everything they botched for the first one.  

This is why the need to cut the crap and explain clearly what EXACTLY is going on. It would stop all this guess work and fear that comes with it.

Know what's happening in cryptoworld: www.coinschedule.com
drawingthesun
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1078


View Profile
September 27, 2013, 08:37:12 AM
 #14993

This is why the need to cut the crap and explain clearly what EXACTLY is going on. It would stop all this guess work and fear that comes with it.

If they explain what is really going on 0.0005 will seem expensive.
Puppet
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 966


View Profile
September 27, 2013, 08:37:40 AM
 #14994

It's a 65nm chip, not 28nm. The price difference between the two is pretty significant.

Yeah a 28nm mask set would cost several million dollar.
Bitfountain is on record saying a 65nm maskset would cost $500K at a cheap fab in China. Assuming LC could obtain similar prices, that leaves them almost penny less for the chip development, packaging development, PCBs,  actual wafer runs. miner components, assembly etc.

That money was never intended to fund a 65nm chip or farm, they would have needed to raise more.
BitThink
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 882



View Profile
September 27, 2013, 08:38:20 AM
 #14995

The only real risk is that their gen1 chips are completely failure, so they cannot stably hash with their batch-2 either. Moreover, their design of gen2 (a complete different team, led by a lady according to theSeven) fails. Then at that time, they have to announce the end of this project, and refund all the unspent money to the investors.

Even all these happen, the refund could be like 0.0001 or 0.0002 per share. So what's the point to dump at current price before we are certain the project is dead?
matt4054
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1428


BitcoinQueue.com


View Profile WWW
September 27, 2013, 08:41:37 AM
 #14996

Okay, 0.00025 is a fair price, you can stop selling now.
BitThink
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 882



View Profile
September 27, 2013, 08:43:52 AM
 #14997

One thing is that they keep saying the 20TH will be online in the early October. I don't think lying about this does any good to them. Most likely they just have some problem in assembling and deploying.

You and the other few people still somehow hyping up LC continue to quote their claims.  What makes this promise any different from the countless others (all of which have been broken).  If they couldn't come anywhere near the few TH claim for the first batch, why are they any more likely to be on track for 20TH from the next batch?  Also, LC stated that they ordered the next batch weeks ago.  It's clear from their inconsistent hashrate that they have not yet figured out the issues with the first batch.  Please explain to me how they could have ordered a significantly better performing batch of chips before figuring out everything they botched for the first one.  

I'm not saying they have a very high chance in working with their second batch. Otherwise, I will buy all the shares below 0.002.

I'm just saying there's still hope, so no need to panic sell. Do your own homework and evaluate the risk and rewards. Never be affected by this thread and other guys' behavior.

For your first question, unless we can prove they have sold most of their shares, this cannot be a complete scam. It's at most a failed project managed by some very incompetent guys.
abuelau
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 686


www.coinschedule.com


View Profile
September 27, 2013, 08:44:46 AM
 #14998

Where's Labcoin? Where's TheSwede?!?

Know what's happening in cryptoworld: www.coinschedule.com
ltiv
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 66


View Profile
September 27, 2013, 08:49:39 AM
 #14999

Looking to liquidate at a good rate? https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=300663.0 Wink
BitThink
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 882



View Profile
September 27, 2013, 08:49:48 AM
 #15000

Where's Labcoin? Where's TheSwede?!?
If you think there's still chance, now it's the great chance to increase your shares.
Pages: « 1 ... 700 701 702 703 704 705 706 707 708 709 710 711 712 713 714 715 716 717 718 719 720 721 722 723 724 725 726 727 728 729 730 731 732 733 734 735 736 737 738 739 740 741 742 743 744 745 746 747 748 749 [750] 751 752 753 754 755 756 757 758 759 760 761 762 763 764 765 766 767 768 769 770 771 772 773 774 775 776 777 778 779 780 781 782 783 784 785 786 787 788 789 790 791 792 793 794 795 796 797 798 799 800 ... 914 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!