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

[dhenson]

first they need to achieve 1%, which is still a stretch.  If they get that done by Mid Oct, THEY MIGHT be able to pull off 50 TH/s by Nov 1.

So, until Nov 1, they really aren't worth .002 btc, by your calculations. 

And I agree, the risk is very high, they are unlikely to be able to achieve 1% by Nov 1.

The market apparently disagrees with you.

[1714161154]

1714161154

[1714161154]

1714161154

[1714161154]

1714161154

[1714161154]

1714161154

[velacreations]

The market apparently disagrees with you.

we'll see

[Ytterbium]

That is incorrect as lately friedcat has been withholding the money from the hardware sales and dividends only included proceeds from the mining.

That's interesting.  Presumably to invest more in hardware?

One problem with these bitcoin mining stocks is that as competition heats up the mining companies may need to poor all their revenue into new hardware, and ultimately the fabs end up with all the money.

[velacreations]

That is incorrect as lately friedcat has been withholding the money from the hardware sales and dividends only included proceeds from the mining.

That's interesting.  Presumably to invest more in hardware?

One problem with these bitcoin mining stocks is that as competition heats up the mining companies may need to poor all their revenue into new hardware, and ultimately the fabs end up with all the money.

he's been holding back a portion of the dividend to fund Gen2.  Estimates are that he's got at least 11K btc saved.

[Ytterbium]

If labcoin can stabilize their hardware issues they should definitely consider selling hardware.  People will likely still pay a pretty big premium for hardware that ships same day.

Plus, if you ship it out "for hackers" at a low price some of the talented hackers out there might be able to fix the stability issues (as we saw with Avalons running over 350Mhz)

[BitThink]

there's one kind of business man, who always show investors bright future even themselves don't believe. For example, a small startup founder will promise 100 million revenue in 2 years just to attract investors. Lying becomes these guys' habit, so they keep lying even when it is completely harmful and unnecessary.

I guess that's the reason we've seen another promise, 20TH in 2 weeks. This is announced even before they have fixed the longlasting problem forbidding them from bring up 2TH. Moreover, why '2 weeks' becomes so popular now? After delaying again and again due to the endless tweaking, why they never learn to be smart and be conservative in promising?

[velacreations]

I guess that's the reason we've seen another promise, 20TH in 2 weeks. This is announced even before they have fixed the longlasting problem forbidding them from bring up 2TH.

in 2 weeks, they brought .75 TH/s online (but promised at least 4 TH/s by now), so they are currently under performing. In 2 weeks, they'll be lucky to top 10 TH/s.

[Bitcycle]

Lot of bid pressure building.  Looks like there's more people wanting to get in than out at the moment.

If your bids aren't getting filled, maybe you should bid higher.

[Ytterbium]

I don't know that "the market" actually expects them to hit 20Th/s. They've been underperforming, and they're about a week behind schedule. But they do have a hashrate, and that hashrate has been going up.  A little consistency and a steady increase should help get the share price back up a little bit, and hopefully indicate they are ironing out kinks and getting things fixed and ready.

[velacreations]

They've been underperforming, and they're about a week behind schedule. 

how do you figure that?  They promised 2 TH/s 2 weeks ago, and even that was lower than they predicted (4-6TH/s).

I'd say they are at least 2 weeks behind schedule, as they haven't even met the hash rate they promised 2 weeks ago.

The point of the math is even if they do hit 20 TH/s in 2 weeks (highly unlikely), their fair value is lower than the current price.  The best case scenario at this point puts them worth less than .002 in 2 weeks.

[Bitcycle]

They've been underperforming, and they're about a week behind schedule. 

how do you figure that?  They promised 2 TH/s 2 weeks ago, and even that was lower than they predicted (4-6TH/s).

I'd say they are at least 2 weeks behind schedule, as they haven't even met the hash rate they promised 2 weeks ago.

The point of the math is even if they do hit 20 TH/s in 2 weeks (highly unlikely), their fair value is lower than the current price.  The best case scenario at this point puts them worth less than .002 in 2 weeks.

Keep repeating it, maybe your bid will get hit.   

[BitCsByBit]

If labcoin can stabilize their hardware issues they should definitely consider selling hardware.  People will likely still pay a pretty big premium for hardware that ships same day.

Plus, if you ship it out "for hackers" at a low price some of the talented hackers out there might be able to fix the stability issues (as we saw with Avalons running over 350Mhz)

Good point.

Avalon chips were pushed to stable 450MH/s from the standard 282MH/s.
Bitfury chips are pushed to 4GH/s from the standard of around 2GH/s.

There are some talented developers out there.

[velacreations]

Keep repeating it, maybe your bid will get hit.  

sorry, I won't be paying above fair value for something this risky.

EDIT: interesting that you don't try to counter my point.

[dhenson]

They've been underperforming, and they're about a week behind schedule. 

how do you figure that?  They promised 2 TH/s 2 weeks ago, and even that was lower than they predicted (4-6TH/s).

I'd say they are at least 2 weeks behind schedule, as they haven't even met the hash rate they promised 2 weeks ago.

The point of the math is even if they do hit 20 TH/s in 2 weeks (highly unlikely), their fair value is lower than the current price.  The best case scenario at this point puts them worth less than .002 in 2 weeks.

You are deliberately excluding potential profits.  Though I admit standard logic doesn't really seem to apply as there isn't a whole lot of risk in getting left behind with this stock.  If past performance is any indication, the price can and will turn around on a dime.

If we applied your logic to your beloved AM, their share price would be worth .33 btc/share @ 50% valuation. (at 50TH/1100TH network with 4000 coins a day, 400,000 shares).  Obviously their risk is much lower and the potential profits are baked in.

Please don't insult us by pretending you don't understand that you can't just value an asset on it's CURRENT hash rate.

[velacreations]

Please don't insult us by pretending you don't understand that you can't just value an asset on it's CURRENT hash rate.

of course not, I'm valuing this on THEIR FUTURE hash rate.  Actually, it's based on their "promised" hash rate, which we know is greatly exaggerated.  At their current hash rate, well, let's just say .002 is optomistic.

What other revenue are you expecting before Nov?  Will Labcoin be selling Gen 1 hardware as everyone else is releasing Gen2?  We can't rely on things they COULD do, we have to rely on what they are actually doing or likely to do.

AM has a current value not just due to their risk and potential profit, but also because THEY ARE ACTUALLY DELIVERING DIVIDENDS at those levels.  AM is CURRENTLY selling hardware.  Is Labcoin?   When Labcon has the track record of AM, they might warrant an APR less than 50%.  

I have yet to see you guys show any realistic scenario where they exceed my calculations. 

Like I said, IF they can get 1% of the network, they'll be worth .002.  They have a long way to achieve even that.

[Bitcycle]

Please don't insult us by pretending you don't understand that you can't just value an asset on it's CURRENT hash rate.

of course not, I'm valuing this on THEIR FUTURE hash rate.  Actually, it's based on their "promised" hash rate, which we know is greatly exaggerated.  At their current hash rate, well, let's just say .002 is optomistic.

What other revenue are you expecting before Nov?  Will Labcoin be selling Gen 1 hardware as everyone else is releasing Gen2?  We can't rely on things they COULD do, we have to rely on what they are actually doing or likely to do.

AM has a current value not just due to their risk and potential profit, but also because THEY ARE ACTUALLY DELIVERING DIVIDENDS at those levels.   When Labcon has the track record of AM, they might warrant an APR less than 50%.  

I have yet to see you guys show any realistic scenario where they exceed my calculations.

Like I said, IF they can get 1% of the network, they'll be worth .002.  They have a long way to achieve even that.

I see you do plan to keep repeating the same thing.

Just move your bid up, dude.

[velacreations]

Just move your bid up, dude.

I know you can't sell at current levels, but you should.  
When more people see/do the math, they'll come the same conclusion.

I see you do plan to keep repeating the same thing.

and I see you can't provide a valid counter point...

[BitCsByBit]

Just move your bid up, dude.

I know you can't sell at current levels, but you should.  
When more people see/do the math, they'll come the same conclusion.

I see you do plan to keep repeating the same thing.

and I see you can't provide a valid counter point...

At least it is refreshing to see that you have moved on from screaming "it's a scam", but there is really no point in repeating yourself.
State your point and move on,  otherwise I'll suspect that you have alternative motives!

[dhenson]

Like I said, IF they can get 1% of the network, they'll be worth .002.  They have a long way to achieve even that.

I'm late for dinner so this is the last I'll post on the issue (I'm sure others are tired of this by now anyway).  edit...For this example I've pegged the network hash rate at 1300 TH.  I realize this is low, but changing it wouldn't effect the outcome ratio.



As you can see, I've granted Labcoin 20TH on Nov. 1 (low) and Asicminer 100TH on Nov. 1 (high).  Based on a 50% valuation, labcoin is undervalued by half at current price whereas Asicminer is overvalued by 2.86 x.

Obviously both assets should have risk and potential factored in.  What this should show is that Labcoin is undervalued due to risk, and Asicminer is overvalued due to potential.

It is up to each investor to determine at what price point to invest, however, I believe that once burnside and Labcoin work their shit out and get the warning removed we will see less risk therefore a higher price point.

edit... I would further speculate that it is much easier for a company to remove risk than to provide greater potential.  Locking shares, pictures of hashing rigs and steady hashing rate increases would remove much of the currently baked in risk of labcoin.

[velacreations]

So you are only comparing one part of the AM revenue with the entire (hopeful) revenue of Labcoin?

Why not compare the actual dividends paid last week?  Oh right, LC doesn't have any...

It's crazy that you just make up numbers to try and show LC has more value than it actually does.  AM has 70% of the hash rate in your example right now earning coins. LC has less than 4%.  Nice try.

Now, go back when AM was getting going and they had only paid a handful of dividends.  The API rates were 70%!  You're gonna try to say that LC has more potential now than AM did in it's first month of dividends? And less risk?  Ha!

You said it yourself: 1% of the network = .002 value