Bitcoin Forum
December 12, 2017, 06:21:33 PM *
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 ... 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 [132] 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 ... 914 »
  Print  
Author Topic: [LABCOIN] IPO [BTCT.CO] - Details/FAQ and Discussion (ASIC dev/sales/mining)  (Read 1058195 times)
VolanicEruptor
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 392



View Profile
August 21, 2013, 12:41:58 AM
 #2621

Nice publicity.  Keep it comin'

1513102893
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1513102893

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1513102893
Reply with quote  #2

1513102893
Report to moderator
Creating a Bitcoin client that fully implements the network protocol is extremely difficult. Bitcoin-Qt is the only known safe implementation of a full node. Some other projects attempt to compete, but it is not recommended to use such software for anything serious. (Lightweight clients like Electrum and MultiBit are OK.)
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1513102893
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1513102893

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1513102893
Reply with quote  #2

1513102893
Report to moderator
1513102893
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1513102893

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1513102893
Reply with quote  #2

1513102893
Report to moderator
JohnyBigs
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 364


View Profile
August 21, 2013, 12:48:58 AM
 #2622

TheSwede,

Will you guys also offer the mining hardware at almost cost for shareholders? Just wondering about this, it would be nice if shareholders can purchase mining hardware at cost for themselves also.

Thanks
TheSwede75
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 224



View Profile
August 21, 2013, 12:52:16 AM
 #2623

TheSwede,

Will you guys also offer the mining hardware at almost cost for shareholders? Just wondering about this, it would be nice if shareholders can purchase mining hardware at cost for themselves also.

Thanks

As far as I know Labcoin has not gotten this far into the discussion on possible miner sales. Priority stays with Chip-sales and Mining operation for the near future.
Luckybit
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 714



View Profile
August 21, 2013, 12:54:31 AM
 #2624


Using 30% of initial income to accelerate sale, development, production and mining capability is a growth strategy and what sets Labcoin apart from a set-hash rate mining bond. If you want to make a comparison you can compare the business model of asicminer and a set-hash rate bond without reinvestment strategy.

The long term plan and intention is to use the reinvestment fund to over time increase dividend payments (profits) to surpass what shareholders would earn if 100% dividends would be paid out from day-1 as the team of course believes that Labcoin can invest at far greater profit in development, production, sales and mining power then individual investors.

Why only 30%?  I'm sure that people would be worried if you didn't pay out anything, they'd think it might be a big scam or something - but you can also prove your hashrate.

What I'd like to see is is the opportunity for people to have their dividends reinvested directly into the company if they want: Dividends payed in new stock rather then BTC.

That way, you'd be able to have more money to spend on growth, and more quickly increase your hashrate and thus the profits.

It would have to be in the form of a loan. The people who do this should get something back.

The bond idea is being floated by Ciphermine. Kate from Ciphermine is talking about offering a growth bond. Nothing would stop Labcoin from offering a similar growth/reinvestment bond and it's not such a bad idea to offer it once the share price is high enough that the bond makes sense.

The bond price would have to be a flat price, relatively cheap and guaranteed to be paid back, and then many people would invest at least something into it. New investors who miss out on the Labcoin IPO prices could buy the bond instead and it would have lower risk.

yuansuyi
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 112



View Profile
August 21, 2013, 12:54:59 AM
 #2625

If there is any stock on BTCT right now that you should hold long-term, it's this one.I would even be hesitant to throw my money into asicminer right now. Labcoin just makes sense.  Labcoin is the only one who takes the win for earliest deployment date, most aggressive development and carries the most potential to increase in value from a start-up.
A company like ASICMINER is striving to maintain value, Activemining is great but is still going to take awhile with its 28nm development, and icedrill has an ask wall that's bigger than China's (good luck making any short/medium term gains on that one).  

If anyone has shares in ASICMINER,  I would selling them off. Labcoin is the baby, perfectly positioned to grow into a solid competitor of AM.  Don't invest in the old senile dinosaur struggling to keep its own mass ... invest in the start-up with 100x growth potential.  

I absolutely agree. I believe LC is still way undervalued, even in its still unproven state.

The only reason for me to be afraid to invest here would be if there was the possibility that they are complete liars, and the whole project nothing but a scam.
But if you followed the IPO, you know that they deliberately turned down holding it auction-style, which would have given them probably at least double the IPO money. That is pretty much the most anti-scam move they could have made, and gives me about 99.9% certainty that it's not a scam. If they are a scam, that would have been the most irrational and deceiving step I'd have ever seen in a scam.

And to see why they are undervalued, consider this:
Why for example is ActM valued at ~0.005 now, with 25 million shares, and LC at ~0.0025 with only 10 million shares? It's absolutely beyond me.
If you see them at the same level of uncertainty right now, LC should be at least at 0.01 already (since they have 2.5x less shares).
ActM has nothing in reach, the Avalon Clones are delayed and will very likely never see ROI. Buying them already was a bad investment by ActM.
The 28nm development... has it even started? If I understand correctly, they only have a not-even-official partnership with eASIC to start development on them. It will take a long time before anything comes of it.
LC on the other hand had their chips taped out before they even started the IPO. They have been developing since last year.
And now with Swede confirming that the chips will come and get hashing within the next few weeks, it really makes no sense to me that somehow, LC is still valued less than ActM by the market.
Can anyone help me understand what's the reason for this? Because I just don't see it.

I'm not saying all this to push the price or anything, just stating my completely honest opinion. I have no interest in a short-term push of the price, because I'm certain LC's success will do that on its own soon enough.
I'm balls deep invested in LC and I believe it might turn out to be the best investment I have made in my entire life, right next to getting invested in bitcoin in the first place.

Vbs(the ACTM's PR guy) will tell you that 130nm is old dust, and 28nm is super super super. Ken can't say anything about the deal between eASIC because the NDA, what's a funny excuse.
JohnyBigs
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 364


View Profile
August 21, 2013, 12:55:50 AM
 #2626

If there is any stock on BTCT right now that you should hold long-term, it's this one.I would even be hesitant to throw my money into asicminer right now. Labcoin just makes sense.  Labcoin is the only one who takes the win for earliest deployment date, most aggressive development and carries the most potential to increase in value from a start-up.
A company like ASICMINER is striving to maintain value, Activemining is great but is still going to take awhile with its 28nm development, and icedrill has an ask wall that's bigger than China's (good luck making any short/medium term gains on that one).  

If anyone has shares in ASICMINER,  I would selling them off. Labcoin is the baby, perfectly positioned to grow into a solid competitor of AM.  Don't invest in the old senile dinosaur struggling to keep its own mass ... invest in the start-up with 100x growth potential.  

I absolutely agree. I believe LC is still way undervalued, even in its still unproven state.

The only reason for me to be afraid to invest here would be if there was the possibility that they are complete liars, and the whole project nothing but a scam.
But if you followed the IPO, you know that they deliberately turned down holding it auction-style, which would have given them probably at least double the IPO money. That is pretty much the most anti-scam move they could have made, and gives me about 99.9% certainty that it's not a scam. If they are a scam, that would have been the most irrational and deceiving step I'd have ever seen in a scam.

And to see why they are undervalued, consider this:
Why for example is ActM valued at ~0.005 now, with 25 million shares, and LC at ~0.0025 with only 10 million shares? It's absolutely beyond me.
If you see them at the same level of uncertainty right now, LC should be at least at 0.01 already (since they have 2.5x less shares).
ActM has nothing in reach, the Avalon Clones are delayed and will very likely never see ROI. Buying them already was a bad investment by ActM.
The 28nm development... has it even started? If I understand correctly, they only have a not-even-official partnership with eASIC to start development on them. It will take a long time before anything comes of it.
LC on the other hand had their chips taped out before they even started the IPO. They have been developing since last year.
And now with Swede confirming that the chips will come and get hashing within the next few weeks, it really makes no sense to me that somehow, LC is still valued less than ActM by the market.
Can anyone help me understand what's the reason for this? Because I just don't see it.

I'm not saying all this to push the price or anything, just stating my completely honest opinion. I have no interest in a short-term push of the price, because I'm certain LC's success will do that on its own soon enough.
I'm balls deep invested in LC and I believe it might turn out to be the best investment I have made in my entire life, right next to getting invested in bitcoin in the first place.

The problem is it's unproven, there is no such thing as undervalued in an unproven state. When you are in the unproven state you are worth $0 dollars, so in reality the company is over-valued, because they have a valuation for x amount of dollars, and zero revenues.

It's one thing to actually be producing, selling, and mining, and another thing just talking about it. LabCoin may very well do all the things it has set out to do, but until then it's just another vaporware company. When they have a real tangible business then and only than can you say it's undervalued.

Until than it's all speculation, speculating that they will deliver and meet the expectations that they have set.
physalis
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 392



View Profile
August 21, 2013, 12:58:18 AM
 #2627

Will you guys also offer the mining hardware at almost cost for shareholders? Just wondering about this, it would be nice if shareholders can purchase mining hardware at cost for themselves also.
That is a terrible idea and (I hope) they won't do something like that.
I hope that when the time comes, they will offer their miners at competetive prices that also make sense to customers (contrary to what AM is doing so far).
But not cheaper for shareholders, that's just silly.
JohnyBigs
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 364


View Profile
August 21, 2013, 12:58:42 AM
 #2628

TheSwede,

Will you guys also offer the mining hardware at almost cost for shareholders? Just wondering about this, it would be nice if shareholders can purchase mining hardware at cost for themselves also.

Thanks

As far as I know Labcoin has not gotten this far into the discussion on possible miner sales. Priority stays with Chip-sales and Mining operation for the near future.

I understand I'm just saying in the future if you guys decide to start selling actual hardware, would the shareholders get a discounted price on the units?

Also, I was under the impression that you guys will engage in hardware miner sales, or just chips? It would make sense as hardware miners will have a higher margin than selling bulk chip orders.
JohnyBigs
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 364


View Profile
August 21, 2013, 01:02:10 AM
 #2629

Will you guys also offer the mining hardware at almost cost for shareholders? Just wondering about this, it would be nice if shareholders can purchase mining hardware at cost for themselves also.
That is a terrible idea and (I hope) they won't do something like that.
I hope that when the time comes, they will offer their miners at competetive prices that also make sense to customers (contrary to what AM is doing so far).
But not cheaper for shareholders, that's just silly.

why is that silly? We own 70% of the company why shouldn't it be cheaper for us. If you owned a business and wanted to be your merchandise would you pay full price for it? or cost? What's silly is paying full price for something you produce yourself lol.
cw92
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 66


View Profile
August 21, 2013, 01:05:05 AM
 #2630

Because you're subsidizing the competition.
szmarco
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 574



View Profile
August 21, 2013, 01:05:23 AM
 #2631

Will you guys also offer the mining hardware at almost cost for shareholders? Just wondering about this, it would be nice if shareholders can purchase mining hardware at cost for themselves also.
That is a terrible idea and (I hope) they won't do something like that.
I hope that when the time comes, they will offer their miners at competetive prices that also make sense to customers (contrary to what AM is doing so far).
But not cheaper for shareholders, that's just silly.

why is that silly? We own 70% of the company why shouldn't it be cheaper for us. If you owned a business and wanted to be your merchandise would you pay full price for it? or cost? What's silly is paying full price for something you produce yourself lol.

If you want a discount,Lock your shares first to confirm that your are a shareholder? how difficult to handle it like this.
VolanicEruptor
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 392



View Profile
August 21, 2013, 01:06:18 AM
 #2632

Will you guys also offer the mining hardware at almost cost for shareholders? Just wondering about this, it would be nice if shareholders can purchase mining hardware at cost for themselves also.
That is a terrible idea and (I hope) they won't do something like that.
I hope that when the time comes, they will offer their miners at competetive prices that also make sense to customers (contrary to what AM is doing so far).
But not cheaper for shareholders, that's just silly.

why is that silly? We own 70% of the company why shouldn't it be cheaper for us. If you owned a business and wanted to be your merchandise would you pay full price for it? or cost? What's silly is paying full price for something you produce yourself lol.

We don't own 70% of the company.
This isn't Wall Street.

physalis
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 392



View Profile
August 21, 2013, 01:07:27 AM
 #2633

why is that silly? We own 70% of the company why shouldn't it be cheaper for us. If you owned a business and wanted to be your merchandise would you pay full price for it? or cost? What's silly is paying full price for something you produce yourself lol.

So if you hold a share of Apple stock, do you get the new iPad cheaper?
yuansuyi
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 112



View Profile
August 21, 2013, 01:09:37 AM
 #2634

why is that silly? We own 70% of the company why shouldn't it be cheaper for us. If you owned a business and wanted to be your merchandise would you pay full price for it? or cost? What's silly is paying full price for something you produce yourself lol.

So if you hold a share of Apple stock, do you get the new iPad cheaper?
Ignore this kid. I think he just want to increase his post count.
JohnyBigs
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 364


View Profile
August 21, 2013, 01:09:50 AM
 #2635

Will you guys also offer the mining hardware at almost cost for shareholders? Just wondering about this, it would be nice if shareholders can purchase mining hardware at cost for themselves also.
That is a terrible idea and (I hope) they won't do something like that.
I hope that when the time comes, they will offer their miners at competetive prices that also make sense to customers (contrary to what AM is doing so far).
But not cheaper for shareholders, that's just silly.

why is that silly? We own 70% of the company why shouldn't it be cheaper for us. If you owned a business and wanted to be your merchandise would you pay full price for it? or cost? What's silly is paying full price for something you produce yourself lol.

We don't own 70% of the company.
This isn't Wall Street.

You clearly don't know how shares work do you?
VolanicEruptor
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 392



View Profile
August 21, 2013, 01:11:32 AM
 #2636

Will you guys also offer the mining hardware at almost cost for shareholders? Just wondering about this, it would be nice if shareholders can purchase mining hardware at cost for themselves also.
That is a terrible idea and (I hope) they won't do something like that.
I hope that when the time comes, they will offer their miners at competetive prices that also make sense to customers (contrary to what AM is doing so far).
But not cheaper for shareholders, that's just silly.

why is that silly? We own 70% of the company why shouldn't it be cheaper for us. If you owned a business and wanted to be your merchandise would you pay full price for it? or cost? What's silly is paying full price for something you produce yourself lol.

We don't own 70% of the company.
This isn't Wall Street.

You clearly don't know how shares work do you?

These aren't the same kind of "shares" you deal with on a real stock exchange.  This is a virtual bitcoin security exchange. You have no ownership of the company and you have no voting rights, unless they are given to you as part of the agreement.  Trust me, this has been discussed many times before.  

Luckybit
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 714



View Profile
August 21, 2013, 01:11:54 AM
 #2637


Using 30% of initial income to accelerate sale, development, production and mining capability is a growth strategy and what sets Labcoin apart from a set-hash rate mining bond. If you want to make a comparison you can compare the business model of asicminer and a set-hash rate bond without reinvestment strategy.

The long term plan and intention is to use the reinvestment fund to over time increase dividend payments (profits) to surpass what shareholders would earn if 100% dividends would be paid out from day-1 as the team of course believes that Labcoin can invest at far greater profit in development, production, sales and mining power then individual investors.

Why only 30%?  I'm sure that people would be worried if you didn't pay out anything, they'd think it might be a big scam or something - but you can also prove your hashrate.

What I'd like to see is is the opportunity for people to have their dividends reinvested directly into the company if they want: Dividends payed in new stock rather then BTC.

That way, you'd be able to have more money to spend on growth, and more quickly increase your hashrate and thus the profits.

The 30% achieves the same thing as reinvesting dividends. The people who usually reinvest dividends are companies that pay a very small portion not 70% that's just crazy lol. You can't also get paid in new stock that would dilute shareholders.

Secondly, there's not enough shares and volume to allow everyone to reinvest safely as prices will go up from all the buys, and as mentioned before the company can't make new shares as it will dilute ownership.

Imagine you own stock in a company that has $1000 and does nothing with it.  There are 1,000 shares and they are each worth $1.  Then, the company issues 500 new shares and charges one dollar a share. They do nothing with the money.

Now the company is worth $1500, there are 1500 shares, and each share is now still worth $1.

If the company gave shareholders the option of taking dividends in new stock, the value of the stock wouldn't change - the company would increase by however much they didn't pay out in dividends.

However, if that money was re-invested in more hashpower the value of the company would increase at a faster rate, and the % of the company owned by the shareholder would increase as well.

The problem is, if the hashpower of the company doesn't keep up with difficulty growth, then the value of the company actually goes down, because their revenues decrease.

Short answer as best as I can:

Allowing share-holders to reinvest 'as they see fit' by issuing bonds or more shares just seems like a more complicated way of achieving the same thing - continuous growth. Labcoin feels that 70% direct dividend is more than a fair share of earnings while allowing for long term development and a 'treasury' to enable the project to maximize earnings over time.

To be crass: If an investor feels like they could invest an extra 30% better themselves then Labcoin can being able to buy/develop/sell and mine at wholesale rates maybe investing in the project is not the right choice. To me at least, its not all about short term profit, but also about long term viability and trust. Something that I believe Labcoin will prove over time. I personally think this goes for any investment that is not simply an interest bearing bond or finite mining operation delivering a set hash rate.

Again, this is to a large part personal opinion and I do not mean to insult anyone or step on any toes.


Here is a long term problem though, at some point we will reach the physical limits of ASIC chip technology. When those limits are reached then the only way to maintain a 10% of the network hashrate and outpace the continuous difficulty increase will be to make massive amounts of chips. A company with a lot more money will be able to make a lot more chips, so that would mean Nvidia, AMD or Intel could come in at the last minute and start mining themselves and because they have billions to spend on chips they could easily do a 51% attack by having the money to spend on it.

Right now we assume Bitcoin wont be big enough for them to spend that kind of money and that is correct. If Labcoin is to exist beyond the race to 20nm (because eventually there will not be any more efficiency left in chip design), then how will Labcoin compete with the company who can spend a few hundred million on chips?

For this reason it is worth considering releasing a long term growth bond that people can buy into which gives Labcoin a loan for the long term future. This would guarantee that as long as there are enough people who support Labcoin within the community by buying the bond that Labcoin could maintain 10% of the network. It would remove the risks I outline above.

Ciphermine is considering this approach. I wouldn't be surprised if Asicminer eventually does something similar. I see it as one of the few ways to leverage the advantages of being first. I don't think Labcoin will be able to rely on chip efficiency increases for longer than a few years and then the race will be to see who can make the most chips the fastest and sell the most chips for the chapest (and mine). Labcoin will have stiff competition in making and selling chips and the profit margins could shrink.
JohnyBigs
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 364


View Profile
August 21, 2013, 01:16:08 AM
 #2638

Will you guys also offer the mining hardware at almost cost for shareholders? Just wondering about this, it would be nice if shareholders can purchase mining hardware at cost for themselves also.
That is a terrible idea and (I hope) they won't do something like that.
I hope that when the time comes, they will offer their miners at competetive prices that also make sense to customers (contrary to what AM is doing so far).
But not cheaper for shareholders, that's just silly.

why is that silly? We own 70% of the company why shouldn't it be cheaper for us. If you owned a business and wanted to be your merchandise would you pay full price for it? or cost? What's silly is paying full price for something you produce yourself lol.

We don't own 70% of the company.
This isn't Wall Street.

You clearly don't know how shares work do you?

These aren't the same kind of "shares" you deal with on a real stock exchange.  This is a virtual bitcoin exchange. You have no ownership of the company and you have no voting rights, unless they are given to you as part of the agreement.  Trust me, this has been discussed many times before. 

From what they mentioned in OP and the IPO there are 10M shares of which the owners own 3M, and the 7M are public.

Therefore the public owns 70% of the company, you don't need to have voting rights to be an owner. End of the day if the company gets liquidated the public has the rights to 70% of the assets. This of course is all based on a country that has laws and can enforce these things, such as the US for example.

In Hong Kong who knows, you might get told too bad lol.
JohnyBigs
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 364


View Profile
August 21, 2013, 01:17:53 AM
 #2639


Using 30% of initial income to accelerate sale, development, production and mining capability is a growth strategy and what sets Labcoin apart from a set-hash rate mining bond. If you want to make a comparison you can compare the business model of asicminer and a set-hash rate bond without reinvestment strategy.

The long term plan and intention is to use the reinvestment fund to over time increase dividend payments (profits) to surpass what shareholders would earn if 100% dividends would be paid out from day-1 as the team of course believes that Labcoin can invest at far greater profit in development, production, sales and mining power then individual investors.

Why only 30%?  I'm sure that people would be worried if you didn't pay out anything, they'd think it might be a big scam or something - but you can also prove your hashrate.

What I'd like to see is is the opportunity for people to have their dividends reinvested directly into the company if they want: Dividends payed in new stock rather then BTC.

That way, you'd be able to have more money to spend on growth, and more quickly increase your hashrate and thus the profits.

The 30% achieves the same thing as reinvesting dividends. The people who usually reinvest dividends are companies that pay a very small portion not 70% that's just crazy lol. You can't also get paid in new stock that would dilute shareholders.

Secondly, there's not enough shares and volume to allow everyone to reinvest safely as prices will go up from all the buys, and as mentioned before the company can't make new shares as it will dilute ownership.

Imagine you own stock in a company that has $1000 and does nothing with it.  There are 1,000 shares and they are each worth $1.  Then, the company issues 500 new shares and charges one dollar a share. They do nothing with the money.

Now the company is worth $1500, there are 1500 shares, and each share is now still worth $1.

If the company gave shareholders the option of taking dividends in new stock, the value of the stock wouldn't change - the company would increase by however much they didn't pay out in dividends.

However, if that money was re-invested in more hashpower the value of the company would increase at a faster rate, and the % of the company owned by the shareholder would increase as well.

The problem is, if the hashpower of the company doesn't keep up with difficulty growth, then the value of the company actually goes down, because their revenues decrease.

Short answer as best as I can:

Allowing share-holders to reinvest 'as they see fit' by issuing bonds or more shares just seems like a more complicated way of achieving the same thing - continuous growth. Labcoin feels that 70% direct dividend is more than a fair share of earnings while allowing for long term development and a 'treasury' to enable the project to maximize earnings over time.

To be crass: If an investor feels like they could invest an extra 30% better themselves then Labcoin can being able to buy/develop/sell and mine at wholesale rates maybe investing in the project is not the right choice. To me at least, its not all about short term profit, but also about long term viability and trust. Something that I believe Labcoin will prove over time. I personally think this goes for any investment that is not simply an interest bearing bond or finite mining operation delivering a set hash rate.

Again, this is to a large part personal opinion and I do not mean to insult anyone or step on any toes.


Here is a long term problem though, at some point we will reach the physical limits of ASIC chip technology. When those limits are reached then the only way to maintain a 10% of the network hashrate and outpace the continuous difficulty increase will be to make massive amounts of chips. A company with a lot more money will be able to make a lot more chips, so that would mean Nvidia, AMD or Intel could come in at the last minute and start mining themselves and because they have billions to spend on chips they could easily do a 51% attack by having the money to spend on it.

Right now we assume Bitcoin wont be big enough for them to spend that kind of money and that is correct. If Labcoin is to exist beyond the race to 20nm (because eventually there will not be any more efficiency left in chip design), then how will Labcoin compete with the company who can spend a few hundred million on chips?

For this reason it is worth considering releasing a long term growth bond that people can buy into which gives Labcoin a loan for the long term future. This would guarantee that as long as there are enough people who support Labcoin within the community by buying the bond that Labcoin could maintain 10% of the network. It would remove the risks I outline above.

Ciphermine is considering this approach. I wouldn't be surprised if Asicminer eventually does something similar. I see it as one of the few ways to leverage the advantages of being first. I don't think Labcoin will be able to rely on chip efficiency increases for longer than a few years and then the race will be to see who can make the most chips the fastest and sell the most chips for the chapest (and mine). Labcoin will have stiff competition in making and selling chips and the profit margins could shrink.

Again, this can be accomplished simply by voting on suspending dividends, or lowering them, to raise the needed capital to continue to maintain 10% hashrate.

Adding bonds, dividend reimbursement plans, or anything else just complicates the issue. 
VolanicEruptor
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 392



View Profile
August 21, 2013, 01:18:04 AM
 #2640

Okay, you keep thinking you hold ownership buddy.  If you keep fightin with everything that everybody says, you're never going to learn anything..
Look it up and read into it.  Listen more, talk less..

Pages: « 1 ... 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 [132] 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 ... 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!