[LABCOIN] IPO [BTCT.CO] - Details/FAQ and Discussion (ASIC dev/sales/mining)

[TheSwede75]

And if shareholders do have some sort of vote, 4m shares = successful IPO but you can then issue up to 6m more shares without shareholder input?

Sorry if there is any confusion. What this means is that if the IPO seeks AT LEAST 4 million shares within 30-days we will consider it a success (as this will cover the basic needs for generation 1 miners/chip production etc.)

The total amount of shares will Always be 10 million, no more or less.

3 million shares are owned by management, founders etc.

A total of 7 million are offered in the IPO and will be sold at 0.001 per share.

The only reason for the 4 million share "success" clause is that if we do not raise at least 4k BTC we will cancel the IPO and return the funds.

Does this make sense?

We will also NOT undersell the IPO price. Meaning that we will never place shares on the market under 0.001. We will also make sure to place the entire 7 million shares as one block in the IPO, and avoid the possibility of a portion selling out, price going up and us dropping the "market price" by floating more shares.

[zy02264]

Just went through a few lines of your stockholder agreement on BTCT.

"The majority of the IPO funds will go towards development, NRE and prodction of the 65 nm chips as this is a more expensive start-up process then 130 nm."

"Keep open bookkeping available to users showing what funds are being invested in projects and how the company intends to spend IPO funds in the coming weeks and months."

Seriously??? Can't you at least find someone to do proof reading before you announce such a huge plan??

[TheSwede75]

Question:
1. So how much percentage of profits is LabCoin planning to pay as a dividend?

"All shares are entitled to an equal percentage of dividends"
"Pay regular dividends amounting to a percentual share of ownership in the company on a bi-weekly basis."

There is no mention of the percentage of profits but only dividends.

2. To clarify, the shareholders have the ownership of LabCoin without voting right. Is that correct?

Thanks!

1. This will be clarified shortly but what we are working with is between 30-40% reinvestment fund at least in the short term and 60-70% directly towards dividend paid by-weekly or weekly.

2. We are defining this as well as we speak. We have gotten some requests for the possibility of selling "board seats" (ASICMINER style) where x amount of shares owned by a single share holder would equal a % of voting rights. It is a little complicated since we do not want to make decision making a long and complicated process, while still ensuring that share holders feel secure that we are developing in a direction that the majority is comfortable with.

[TheSwede75]

Just went through a few lines of your stockholder agreement on BTCT.

"The majority of the IPO funds will go towards development, NRE and prodction of the 65 nm chips as this is a more expensive start-up process then 130 nm."

"Keep open bookkeping available to users showing what funds are being invested in projects and how the company intends to spend IPO funds in the coming weeks and months."

Seriously??? Can't you at least find someone to do proof reading before you announce such a huge plan??

This is the very reason we have this thread open and are not rushing the IPO. What changes would you suggest to clarify the description above (except for grammatical mistakes etc.)

What the above is meant to communicate is that we are planning on being transparent with our share holders in what the funds raised are used for.

I would also like to clarify that the IPO details posted so far is NOT final version and we still have details to add, text changes to be made etc. the final version will be online today and open for voting shortly.

[zy02264]

Thank you for clarifying. Those typos made me to doubt if you are really serious about your project. You don't have typos in your resume, do you? So I suggest you to correct them ASAP. Keep good working!

[TheSwede75]

Information under 'details' on BTCT.CO (locked security 'LABCOIN') updated. Questions and comments welcome.

I also have a few questions for the forum:

Q: What would you rather see? 7 million shares @ 0.001 OR 700.000 shares @ 0.01 ?
Q: Is there interest in "Board seat" style offering where for example 250.000 shares would give the owner the right to join 'virtual board meetings' and represent share holders in project management and decision making etc?
Q: We are considering asking Burnside for the option of "direct shares" that could be 'removed' from BTCT.CO and traded outside of the exchange. Is there interest for a independent owner registry of 'Labcoin 100' shares (1 Labcoin 100 share would be equal to 100 Labcoin shares as listed on BTCT.CO) for easier off-exchange trading of larger blocks of shares for larger share holders?

Remember, these are just questions based on suggestions from forum members.

[twentyseventy]

I'd personally rather see 7M shares as opposed to 700K, in the name of liquidity.

[Franktank]

Information under 'details' on BTCT.CO (locked security 'LABCOIN') updated. Questions and comments welcome.

I also have a few questions for the forum:

Q: What would you rather see? 7 million shares @ 0.001 OR 700.000 shares @ 0.01 ?
A: I suggest 700.000 shares (1 million overall); if further dilution is required, share splitting would be an option

Q: Is there interest in "Board seat" style offering where for example 250.000 shares would give the owner the right to join 'virtual board meetings' and represent share holders in project management and decision making etc?
A: I vote this; however we need the definitive number for "board seats"

Q: We are considering asking Burnside for the option of "direct shares" that could be 'removed' from BTCT.CO and traded outside of the exchange. Is there interest for a independent owner registry of 'Labcoin 100' shares (1 Labcoin 100 share would be equal to 100 Labcoin shares as listed on BTCT.CO) for easier off-exchange trading of larger blocks of shares for larger share holders?
A: I second this. While burnside has yet to prove otherwise, there are some that would like that option of "direct shares" to remove any possibility of "3rd party intervention."

Remember, these are just questions based on suggestions from forum members.

Replies above in red.

[auto2nr1]

I'd personally rather see 7M shares as opposed to 700K, in the name of liquidity.

+1

[AM4Bitcoin]

1) 700.000
2) Yes , definitely
3) For the people that want this, why not. But since you get updated shareholder lists from btct everyday i dont think that a shutdown or something else would hurt to much.

[nycgoat]

7m as opposed to 700k is great for liquidity, but not if they are going to keep track of "direct" shares.  Maybe 7m could be released, but they would have to be turned to "direct" shares in blocks of 100?? 1,000??

Board seats would be excellent.

Direct shares should be a definite addition. This would remove a lot of CP risk.  

[TheSwede75]

For now, I think the plan is to:

1. Keep the IPO at 7 million for liquidity.
2. Consider the concept of board seats. We are weighting the options as we speak.
3. Allow for (when this can be arranged with Burnside) direct shares referred to as 'LABCOON100' for trading outside of stock exchanges. We will look into how to facilitate the creation of 'LABCOIN100' from larger blocks of shares that then will be de-registered from trading on BTCT.CO and handled through private cold bookkeeping.

Update coming soon. We are also ready to reveal estimated market pricing for our 130nm chips (Mass production cost) and I can reveal that we will be setting a completely new "low" for pricing of USD/GH with these chips once first-run is done and we go into full production.

[blackswan]

I'm looking forward to the development of this asset.  Typically, how long is the approval process for an IPO on BTCT.CO?

[servicelabs]

Watching too.

[piecinitup]

Missed a couple good IPOs so I'm excited to watch this one. 

[TheSwede75]

I'm looking forward to the development of this asset.  Typically, how long is the approval process for an IPO on BTCT.CO?

From what I know it can be anything between a few hours to several days. We are aiming to get approved early this week. As soon as approval is given we will set a time for release of the entire IPO batch of BTC7.000 (7.000.000 shares @ 0.001 BTC each)

[burnside]

Q: We are considering asking Burnside for the option of "direct shares" that could be 'removed' from BTCT.CO and traded outside of the exchange. Is there interest for a independent owner registry of 'Labcoin 100' shares (1 Labcoin 100 share would be equal to 100 Labcoin shares as listed on BTCT.CO) for easier off-exchange trading of larger blocks of shares for larger share holders?

I don't have a problem with it but I do have a few points that may help in making the decision:

1) Internal transfers on BTCT.co (user to user) are free.  (so if you want to privately transfer a large chunk, no problem...)
2) As someone pointed out, asset lists are available at any time via API and are mailed out a couple times a day, so losing track in an exchange failure is not likely.
3) Keeping track internally has not been fun for Friedcat/ASICMINER.  In fact, it's been a bit of a nightmare for him trying to track all the direct shares.  (primarily because direct share transfers are a PITA.)

Cheers.

[FloatesMcgoates]

Can you elaborate on why you are going with the 65nm process?

With ActiveMining proceeding with a 28nm process, how do you plan to compete?

[lophie]

So when exactly ill the IPO be unlocked? I have a couple of spare coins around here 

[TheSwede75]

Can you elaborate on why you are going with the 65nm process?

With ActiveMining proceeding with a 28nm process, how do you plan to compete?

The short answer here is that we simply do not believe that investing heavily in the absolute "bleeding edge" of technology is wise or necessary to achieve competitive results or profitability.

Labcoin is not a project that is primarily focused on developing the absolutely most "high tech" ASIC possible, but rather to reach the market quickly with the best hash rate per invested dollar.

If you had to choose between ordering a high density mining chip from butterfly labs or a well designed multicore chip based on a technically older design with lower density from Bitfury, what would you choose right now? (Not to mention a year ago, when Butterfly Labs started their process).

With parallel development teams and established contacts with foundries and manufacturing plants in China, we simply see more profitability in developing and producing chips and mining equipment based on tried and available technologies, then risking investor funds and delays in targeting next generation tech.

I hope this at least somewhat answers your question.