Bitcoin Forum
July 17, 2018, 04:47:43 AM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.16.1  [Torrent]. (New!)
 
   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 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 [24] 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 ... 914 »
  Print  
Author Topic: [LABCOIN] IPO [BTCT.CO] - Details/FAQ and Discussion (ASIC dev/sales/mining)  (Read 1058560 times)
yxxyun
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 100
Merit: 10



View Profile
July 31, 2013, 03:31:23 PM
 #461

we can start the labcoin and btcgarden at same time , so every one can buy shares at IPO price ...
1531802863
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1531802863

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1531802863
Reply with quote  #2

1531802863
Report to moderator
1531802863
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1531802863

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1531802863
Reply with quote  #2

1531802863
Report to moderator
MORE CRYPTO, LESS NOISE
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
TheSwede75
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 224
Merit: 100



View Profile
July 31, 2013, 03:31:58 PM
 #462

This IPO is a clusterfuck.

I totally understand your frustration. Unfortunately all we can do is try to handle the situation as well as possible. I think that this IPO may lead to BTCT.CO developing a new system for how IPO's are voted on and released in the future, so hopefully something good will come out of this situation.
Ytterbium
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 238
Merit: 100



View Profile WWW
July 31, 2013, 03:32:43 PM
 #463

I do not predict this being a problem. At least not on any 'scale' as creating a bunch of sock-puppet accounts 'just in case' seems like quite an undertaking when no solution has been posted yet. Then again, I also didn't predict the asset to be approved in 7 hours or with this interest so maybe I should just stop predicting things...  Sad

Here is what I'd do in your situation:

1) Reset all bids > 0.001 to 0.001
2) Set a cap on the number of shares each person can get
3) After the cap is in place, if it's still over 7mil then scale back orders based on % of orders placed.

Right now there are only about 11m orders placed > 0.001, which means if no new orders come in everyone gets 63% of what they asked for.  With a cap, it should be a pretty big portion of what everyone, except the huge orders, wanted.

vlaoou321
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 266
Merit: 250


View Profile
July 31, 2013, 03:33:17 PM
 #464

The best way, more than 0.001 will not be allowed to buy, according to the order has purchased IPO shares. Because just want to 0.001 price IPO. Otherwise the other way to sell IPO shares.

Reputation https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=198808.new#new
Tip: 1CtNCGTyhVkp6AzRwhTsqjkWgwCqk1vSjA
joele
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1018
Merit: 1000



View Profile
July 31, 2013, 03:34:17 PM
 #465

Just do the normal IPO, highest bids first.
Then the IPO fund will exceed to 7000 btc, return the extra as dividend.
foxykah
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 126
Merit: 100



View Profile
July 31, 2013, 03:34:30 PM
 #466

I do not predict this being a problem. At least not on any 'scale' as creating a bunch of sock-puppet accounts 'just in case' seems like quite an undertaking when no solution has been posted yet. Then again, I also didn't predict the asset to be approved in 7 hours or with this interest so maybe I should just stop predicting things...  Sad

Here is what I'd do in your situation:

1) Reset all bids > 0.001 to 0.001
2) Set a cap on the number of shares each person can get
3) After the cap is in place, if it's still over 7mil then scale back orders based on % of orders placed.

Right now there are only about 11m orders placed > 0.001, which means if no new orders come in everyone gets 63% of what they asked for.  With a cap, it should be a pretty big portion of what everyone, except the huge orders, wanted.

+1, I support.

Good things come to those who wait.
maxmint
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 700
Merit: 500



View Profile
July 31, 2013, 03:34:52 PM
 #467

The best way, more than 0.001 will not be allowed to buy, according to the order has purchased IPO shares. Because just want to 0.001 price IPO. Otherwise the other way to sell IPO shares.


vlaoou321: No offense, but you really should invest a little more time in making your posts understandable.

My PGP-Key: 462D02D8
Verify my messages using keybase: https://keybase.io/maxmint
TheSwede75
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 224
Merit: 100



View Profile
July 31, 2013, 03:34:52 PM
 #468

I do not predict this being a problem. At least not on any 'scale' as creating a bunch of sock-puppet accounts 'just in case' seems like quite an undertaking when no solution has been posted yet. Then again, I also didn't predict the asset to be approved in 7 hours or with this interest so maybe I should just stop predicting things...  Sad

Here is what I'd do in your situation:

1) Reset all bids > 0.001 to 0.001
2) Set a cap on the number of shares each person can get
3) After the cap is in place, if it's still over 7mil then scale back orders based on % of orders placed.

Right now there are only about 11m orders placed > 0.001, which means if no new orders come in everyone gets 63% of what they asked for.  With a cap, it should be a pretty big portion of what everyone, except the huge orders, wanted.

Personally I have to say that I quite like this solution. I will still wait until I can get guidance by Burnside before we make any decision. As previously stated, I just don't feel confident in taking any action by myself.
foxykah
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 126
Merit: 100



View Profile
July 31, 2013, 03:35:48 PM
 #469

I do not predict this being a problem. At least not on any 'scale' as creating a bunch of sock-puppet accounts 'just in case' seems like quite an undertaking when no solution has been posted yet. Then again, I also didn't predict the asset to be approved in 7 hours or with this interest so maybe I should just stop predicting things...  Sad

Here is what I'd do in your situation:

1) Reset all bids > 0.001 to 0.001
2) Set a cap on the number of shares each person can get
3) After the cap is in place, if it's still over 7mil then scale back orders based on % of orders placed.

Right now there are only about 11m orders placed > 0.001, which means if no new orders come in everyone gets 63% of what they asked for.  With a cap, it should be a pretty big portion of what everyone, except the huge orders, wanted.

+1, I support.

and this should be done with locking the asset before, then announcing this, and executing it. everybody gets their shares according to their bid volumes

Good things come to those who wait.
E.Sam
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 393
Merit: 250



View Profile WWW
July 31, 2013, 03:35:51 PM
 #470

The best way, more than 0.001 will not be allowed to buy, according to the order has purchased IPO shares. Because just want to 0.001 price IPO. Otherwise the other way to sell IPO shares.


vlaoou321: No offense, but you really should invest a little more time in making your posts understandable.

And here I am, thinking it was just me
limbaugh
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1316
Merit: 1000



View Profile
July 31, 2013, 03:37:06 PM
 #471



Here is what I'd do in your situation:

1) Reset all bids > 0.001 to 0.001
2) Set a cap on the number of shares each person can get
3) After the cap is in place, if it's still over 7mil then scale back orders based on % of orders placed.

Right now there are only about 11m orders placed > 0.001, which means if no new orders come in everyone gets 63% of what they asked for.  With a cap, it should be a pretty big portion of what everyone, except the huge orders, wanted.

Do it!
foxykah
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 126
Merit: 100



View Profile
July 31, 2013, 03:38:14 PM
 #472

I do not predict this being a problem. At least not on any 'scale' as creating a bunch of sock-puppet accounts 'just in case' seems like quite an undertaking when no solution has been posted yet. Then again, I also didn't predict the asset to be approved in 7 hours or with this interest so maybe I should just stop predicting things...  Sad

Here is what I'd do in your situation:

1) Reset all bids > 0.001 to 0.001
2) Set a cap on the number of shares each person can get
3) After the cap is in place, if it's still over 7mil then scale back orders based on % of orders placed.

Right now there are only about 11m orders placed > 0.001, which means if no new orders come in everyone gets 63% of what they asked for.  With a cap, it should be a pretty big portion of what everyone, except the huge orders, wanted.

Personally I have to say that I quite like this solution. I will still wait until I can get guidance by Burnside before we make any decision. As previously stated, I just don't feel confident in taking any action by myself.

but because of these kind of options, the asset should be locked ASAP to prevent future bids, as those would lower the % of shares each of the bidders will get

Good things come to those who wait.
VinceSamios
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 448
Merit: 250


View Profile WWW
July 31, 2013, 03:38:31 PM
 #473



Here is what I'd do in your situation:

1) Reset all bids > 0.001 to 0.001
2) Set a cap on the number of shares each person can get
3) After the cap is in place, if it's still over 7mil then scale back orders based on % of orders placed.

Right now there are only about 11m orders placed > 0.001, which means if no new orders come in everyone gets 63% of what they asked for.  With a cap, it should be a pretty big portion of what everyone, except the huge orders, wanted.

Do it!

Whats stopping people then asking for 200% the shares they actually wanted.... not a solution...

The Happy Clappy Bitcoin Chappy - http://twitter.com/vincesamios
foxykah
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 126
Merit: 100



View Profile
July 31, 2013, 03:40:21 PM
 #474



Here is what I'd do in your situation:

1) Reset all bids > 0.001 to 0.001
2) Set a cap on the number of shares each person can get
3) After the cap is in place, if it's still over 7mil then scale back orders based on % of orders placed.

Right now there are only about 11m orders placed > 0.001, which means if no new orders come in everyone gets 63% of what they asked for.  With a cap, it should be a pretty big portion of what everyone, except the huge orders, wanted.

Do it!

Whats stopping people then asking for 200% the shares they actually wanted.... not a solution...

it IS a solution IF it is executed WITHOUT ANY previous announcement, because that way nobody can multiply their bid volumes after the announcement.

Good things come to those who wait.
Bitcycle
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 420
Merit: 250


View Profile
July 31, 2013, 03:42:25 PM
 #475

Just do the normal IPO, highest bids first.
Then the IPO fund will exceed to 7000 btc, return the extra as dividend.
This.

To be honest, I'm a little concerned about a company that doesn't know what to do with extra money. Is there no place the extra funds could be put to work?
camu6
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 153
Merit: 100



View Profile
July 31, 2013, 03:42:36 PM
 #476



Here is what I'd do in your situation:

1) Reset all bids > 0.001 to 0.001
2) Set a cap on the number of shares each person can get
3) After the cap is in place, if it's still over 7mil then scale back orders based on % of orders placed.

Right now there are only about 11m orders placed > 0.001, which means if no new orders come in everyone gets 63% of what they asked for.  With a cap, it should be a pretty big portion of what everyone, except the huge orders, wanted.

Do it!

I like this solution too. IPO should stay at the planned IPO price, whatever the demand pre IPO is.
TheSwede75
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 224
Merit: 100



View Profile
July 31, 2013, 03:43:26 PM
 #477

I do not predict this being a problem. At least not on any 'scale' as creating a bunch of sock-puppet accounts 'just in case' seems like quite an undertaking when no solution has been posted yet. Then again, I also didn't predict the asset to be approved in 7 hours or with this interest so maybe I should just stop predicting things...  Sad

Here is what I'd do in your situation:

1) Reset all bids > 0.001 to 0.001
2) Set a cap on the number of shares each person can get
3) After the cap is in place, if it's still over 7mil then scale back orders based on % of orders placed.

Right now there are only about 11m orders placed > 0.001, which means if no new orders come in everyone gets 63% of what they asked for.  With a cap, it should be a pretty big portion of what everyone, except the huge orders, wanted.

Personally I have to say that I quite like this solution. I will still wait until I can get guidance by Burnside before we make any decision. As previously stated, I just don't feel confident in taking any action by myself.

but because of these kind of options, the asset should be locked ASAP to prevent future bids, as those would lower the % of shares each of the bidders will get

Unfortunately I cannot lock the asset as an issuer, since this automatically removes all bids. Waiting for Ethan Burnside's input.
foxykah
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 126
Merit: 100



View Profile
July 31, 2013, 03:43:32 PM
 #478



Here is what I'd do in your situation:

1) Reset all bids > 0.001 to 0.001
2) Set a cap on the number of shares each person can get
3) After the cap is in place, if it's still over 7mil then scale back orders based on % of orders placed.

Right now there are only about 11m orders placed > 0.001, which means if no new orders come in everyone gets 63% of what they asked for.  With a cap, it should be a pretty big portion of what everyone, except the huge orders, wanted.

Do it!

I like this solution too. IPO should stay at the planned IPO price, whatever the demand pre IPO is.

+1

Good things come to those who wait.
TheSwede75
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 224
Merit: 100



View Profile
July 31, 2013, 03:45:21 PM
 #479

Just do the normal IPO, highest bids first.
Then the IPO fund will exceed to 7000 btc, return the extra as dividend.
This.

To be honest, I'm a little concerned about a company that doesn't know what to do with extra money. Is there no place the extra funds could be put to work?

This is not our concern. The concern is 100% to ensure that the IPO is fair. Simply releasing the asset unannounced at this point could leave several investors feeling exceptionally mishandled paying far above IPO price for their shares. And even though I realize that it is 'market pricing' and no one is forcing anyone to bid over IPO price I am not willing to make this decision myself at this point.
foxykah
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 126
Merit: 100



View Profile
July 31, 2013, 03:45:44 PM
 #480

I do not predict this being a problem. At least not on any 'scale' as creating a bunch of sock-puppet accounts 'just in case' seems like quite an undertaking when no solution has been posted yet. Then again, I also didn't predict the asset to be approved in 7 hours or with this interest so maybe I should just stop predicting things...  Sad

Here is what I'd do in your situation:

1) Reset all bids > 0.001 to 0.001
2) Set a cap on the number of shares each person can get
3) After the cap is in place, if it's still over 7mil then scale back orders based on % of orders placed.

Right now there are only about 11m orders placed > 0.001, which means if no new orders come in everyone gets 63% of what they asked for.  With a cap, it should be a pretty big portion of what everyone, except the huge orders, wanted.

Personally I have to say that I quite like this solution. I will still wait until I can get guidance by Burnside before we make any decision. As previously stated, I just don't feel confident in taking any action by myself.

but because of these kind of options, the asset should be locked ASAP to prevent future bids, as those would lower the % of shares each of the bidders will get

Unfortunately I cannot lock the asset as an issuer, since this automatically removes all bids. Waiting for Ethan Burnside's input.

then maybe this should be done with also taking timestamps into consideration

Good things come to those who wait.
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 [24] 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 ... 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!