drawingthesun
Legendary
 Offline
Activity: 1176
Merit: 1015
|
 |
August 28, 2013, 12:54:25 PM |
|
Looks like the news didn't really sustain a big rally.
Once they admit that the first chips are hashing away there will be a rally. Until no hashing the shares can't really go anywhere, its all pure speculation. Up or down. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"You Asked For Change, We Gave You Coins" -- casascius
|
|
|
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
|
Mabsark
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 826
Merit: 1004
|
|
August 28, 2013, 12:56:11 PM |
|
For crying out loud, this is basic maths!
AM has 400,000 shares
Labcoin has 10,000,000 shares
10,000,000 / 400,000 = 25
By multiplying the number of AM shares by 25, we get 10,000,000. Accordingly, we must also divide the share price by 25 as well to keep the value of AM the same. So, 400,000 AM shares at 2.5 BTC/share is equivalent to 10,000,000 AM shares at 0.1.
So, if Labcoin is as successful as AM and AM is worth 2.5 BTC per share, then Labcoin is worth 0.1 BTC per share.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Vigil
|
|
August 28, 2013, 12:56:17 PM |
|
This is complete ridiculousness.
|
|
|
|
|
|
physalis
|
|
August 28, 2013, 12:56:36 PM |
|
Also by comparison AsicMiner is approx 60,000,000mhs/400,000 = 150mhs /share
150mhs/.4mhs = 375x valuation
2.8btc/375 = .0074 price per share of labcoin
If LC is to be compared to AM, then im finding it hard to accept that LC only has to double in price from here (0.0035), to be as valuable as a company that has dictated and led this market (yes, thats changing), and with a demonstrable track record. Doesnt add up to me, until hardware is evident and put to work, which AM has been doing before LC was a twinkle in someones eye. His calculations were based on the the 4 TH we have in comparison to the 60 TH that AM has. If LC was as big as AM, the valuation is more like 0.1 btc/LCshare. |
|
|
|
|
|
physalis
|
|
August 28, 2013, 12:57:44 PM |
|
For crying out loud, this is basic maths!
AM has 400,000 shares
Labcoin has 10,000,000 shares
10,000,000 / 400,000 = 25
By multiplying the number of AM shares by 25, we get 10,000,000. Accordingly, we must also divide the share price by 25 as well into to keep the value of AM the same. So, 400,000 AM shares at 2.5 BTC/share is equivalent to 10,000,000 AM shares at 0.1.
So, if Labcoin is as successful as AM and AM is worth 2.5 BTC per share, then Labcoin is worth 0.1 BTC per share.
Who said anything else? But we're not as big as AM, so that calculation doesn't make any sense now. |
|
|
|
|
Mutated btc
Member
Offline
Activity: 84
Merit: 10
|
|
August 28, 2013, 12:58:40 PM |
|
why people selling?
|
|
|
|
|
|
demzie
|
|
August 28, 2013, 12:58:43 PM |
|
Looks like the news didn't really sustain a big rally.
Atleast the level of comment has rise instead of those f* trols. |
|
|
|
|
|
demzie
|
|
August 28, 2013, 12:59:37 PM |
|
why people selling?
They want/think the same thing like this morning will happen, they want to be ready.. That was before news/dates came though. |
|
|
|
|
|
creativex
|
|
August 28, 2013, 01:00:10 PM |
|
Wasn't it supposed to be 6Th worth of chips? Do we know what happened to the rest of the chips? I wonder if there's a serious yield problem. 130nm is so mature at this point that yields should be very predictably high.
|
|
|
|
Mutated btc
Member
Offline
Activity: 84
Merit: 10
|
|
August 28, 2013, 01:02:26 PM |
|
Wasn't it supposed to be 6Th worth of chips? Do we know what happened to the rest of the chips? I wonder if there's a serious yield problem. 130nm is so mature at this point that yields should be very predictably high.
more will come online as soon hashing starts 10 sept, to full speed planned |
|
|
|
|
|
Vigil
|
|
August 28, 2013, 01:02:28 PM |
|
Wasn't it supposed to be 6Th worth of chips? Do we know what happened to the rest of the chips? I wonder if there's a serious yield problem. 130nm is so mature at this point that yields should be very predictably high.
They are starting it up at 4TH and then ramp it up to 6TH. He stated that. |
|
|
|
|
stereotype
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1554
Merit: 1000
|
|
August 28, 2013, 01:04:02 PM |
|
Wasn't it supposed to be 6Th worth of chips? Do we know what happened to the rest of the chips? I wonder if there's a serious yield problem. 130nm is so mature at this point that yields should be very predictably high.
No explanation. See how easy that was of LC, just brushing aside 30-50% of what was expected. Share price says confidence is waning. |
|
|
|
|
|
physalis
|
|
August 28, 2013, 01:04:16 PM |
|
why people selling?
Think it's people taking profit that bought on the cheap last night. But I personally don't think the news was that much of a "good news", just like Swede's news last night wasn't the "bad news" that should have resulted in such a crash... Both were just non-news. We knew the chips would be out of fab, so what? The news that WILL push the price up by 2-3x will be the news "yaay, the boards work, everything works, here are the photos". |
|
|
|
|
|
creativex
|
|
August 28, 2013, 01:05:24 PM |
|
Wasn't it supposed to be 6Th worth of chips? Do we know what happened to the rest of the chips? I wonder if there's a serious yield problem. 130nm is so mature at this point that yields should be very predictably high.
They are starting it up at 4TH and then ramp it up to 6TH. He stated that. Thanks. Who's "he" in this case? The official release says only: Status update
We have received the first chip batch and we're working full speed on finalizing the controller board design, mining will start no later than 10 September with about 3-4 TH, and to reach the full speed within October. Dividend payments will start on the same week.
We again remind everyone that the team shares won't be sold. We understand the investors concerns and we will be publishing pictures of the installment as soon as we are able to, before mining will start. |
|
|
|
|
physalis
|
|
August 28, 2013, 01:05:27 PM |
|
Wasn't it supposed to be 6Th worth of chips? Do we know what happened to the rest of the chips? I wonder if there's a serious yield problem. 130nm is so mature at this point that yields should be very predictably high.
No explanation. See how easy that was of LC, just brushing aside 30-50% of what was expected. Share price says confidence is waning. Blablablabla. They sold the rest, like it was planned and announced. |
|
|
|
|
Mabsark
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 826
Merit: 1004
|
|
August 28, 2013, 01:05:51 PM |
|
For crying out loud, this is basic maths!
AM has 400,000 shares
Labcoin has 10,000,000 shares
10,000,000 / 400,000 = 25
By multiplying the number of AM shares by 25, we get 10,000,000. Accordingly, we must also divide the share price by 25 as well into to keep the value of AM the same. So, 400,000 AM shares at 2.5 BTC/share is equivalent to 10,000,000 AM shares at 0.1.
So, if Labcoin is as successful as AM and AM is worth 2.5 BTC per share, then Labcoin is worth 0.1 BTC per share.
Who said anything else? But we're not as big as AM, so that calculation doesn't make any sense now. According to that logic, Laboin shares should have zero value. With equal success to AM, Labcoin would be 25x less than AM. If Labcoin was only 1/10th as successful as AM it would be worth 250x less than AM. Makes perfect sense to me. |
|
|
|
|
richard_dein
Member
Offline
Activity: 63
Merit: 10
|
|
August 28, 2013, 01:06:47 PM |
|
you are wrong.
Ok, I misinterpreted his rationale. In that way I would give a 4TH/s evaluation of even less than the current price, perhaps less than 0.003. On the other hand, Labcoin isn't about its September hashrate, but its potential to keep a network percentage and making profits; same with AM. The charts on page 1 are reasonable, and you can see the current prices can be justified by around effectively 1% network share. |
|
|
|
|
|
physalis
|
|
August 28, 2013, 01:07:49 PM |
|
6 TH is their complete first chip order.
They said they sold bulk order of chips (not going to wade through the thread now to find where), so everything we get hashing will of course be < 6 TH.
But we get the money from the chip sale in the dividends, so that's completely fine.
|
|
|
|
|
cw92
Member
Offline
Activity: 66
Merit: 10
|
|
August 28, 2013, 01:08:08 PM |
|
Wasn't it supposed to be 6Th worth of chips? Do we know what happened to the rest of the chips? I wonder if there's a serious yield problem. 130nm is so mature at this point that yields should be very predictably high.
No explanation. See how easy that was of LC, just brushing aside 30-50% of what was expected. Share price says confidence is waning. Blablablabla. They sold the rest, like it was planned and announced. When was that planned or announced? |
|
|
|
|
Mutated btc
Member
Offline
Activity: 84
Merit: 10
|
|
August 28, 2013, 01:08:22 PM |
|
Wasn't it supposed to be 6Th worth of chips? Do we know what happened to the rest of the chips? I wonder if there's a serious yield problem. 130nm is so mature at this point that yields should be very predictably high.
They are starting it up at 4TH and then ramp it up to 6TH. He stated that. Thanks. Who's "he" in this case? The official release says only: Status update
We have received the first chip batch and we're working full speed on finalizing the controller board design, mining will start no later than 10 September with about 3-4 TH, and to reach the full speed within October. Dividend payments will start on the same week.
We again remind everyone that the team shares won't be sold. We understand the investors concerns and we will be publishing pictures of the installment as soon as we are able to, before mining will start. not sure what you guys thinking, full speed within october = adding more miners the batch i believe can go 6TH as i see |
|
|
|
|
|
