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

[kingcrimson]

I think them wiping out the order book made people mistakenly believe everyone panic sold down to sub-IPO. Definitely cheap at this point (as long as the hashing is legit)

[1714095028]

1714095028

[1714095028]

1714095028

[1714095028]

1714095028

[1714095028]

1714095028

[NineLives]

Hi guys,

Please can someone give me an update.  I'm a bit lost to whats going on?

BTCT.co is closing so what happens to our shares?
I doubt I goto sell off before it closes so what do I need to do?

Can someone advise pls..

Ta..

Try reading the thread?

Dude, I've sat quiet a few times with your remarks and sarcasm on this forum and quite frankly, its annoying and childish..  Most of your sarcasm comes from assuming people are stupid.  Well, your making your self sound like a tit.  If you have nothing grownup to say then please don't say anything.  Everyone has the right to ask questions even if its a noobie one!!!

[velacreations]

I think them wiping out the order book made people mistakenly believe everyone panic sold down to sub-IPO. Definitely cheap at this point (as long as the hashing is legit)

but the hashing hasn't improved, and they are still severely behind schedule.    Read some of the discussion yesterday about what their share price would actually be worth IF they are able to achieve even 1% of the network (hint: .002 per share).  Currently, they have .06% of the network.


EDIT:  looking at the last few payments, it's clear that the hash rate did not improve, as Ytterbium had suggested.  The reality of the situation is that the hash rate on the BTCGuild page is likely Labcoin's current hash rate.

[Bitcycle]

I think them wiping out the order book made people mistakenly believe everyone panic sold down to sub-IPO. Definitely cheap at this point (as long as the hashing is legit)

but the hashing hasn't improved, and they are still severely behind schedule.    Read some of the discussion yesterday about what their share price would actually be worth IF they are able to achieve even 1% of the network (hint: .002 per share).  Currently, they have .06% of the network.

YAAAAAAAAAAAAAAWWWWWWWWWWWNNNNNNNNNN

Seriously, dude.

[AtlasONo]

Does all this talk about tweaking miners really make sense? I mean they have a group working fine, they have a hidden group working. Why not just hammer out the rest of them & tweak the firmware later on a small subset.

I'd like more technical insight.

[velacreations]

Seriously, dude.

still not able to dispute the math, huh?

[AngelSky]

Still tweaking.

Btw, Moderator Score is now -1.

[Bitcycle]

Seriously, dude.

still not able to dispute the math, huh?

You've been trounced math-wise.  If you haven't seen that, it doesn't speak well of your analytical skills.  

[tucenaber]

Seriously, dude.

still not able to dispute the math, huh?

You've been trounced math-wise.  If you haven't seen that, it doesn't speak well of your analytical skills.  

Sigh. You know math isn't a spectator sport Either you verify it yourself or it doesn't count.

If you download the figures from blockchain.info you get the last 50 transactions. Excluding the tiny ones gives 44. There are two bumps with a low period in between. The low period has an implied hashrate of 538 GH/s. The average over the last 44 transactions gives you an implied hashrate of about 716 GH/s.

Note that both of these numbers are below the team number. Please explain.

[Duffer1]

Sigh. You know math isn't a spectator sport Either you verify it yourself or it doesn't count.

If you download the figures from blockchain.info you get the last 50 transactions. Excluding the tiny ones gives 44. There are two bumps with a low period in between. The low period has an implied hashrate of 538 GH/s. The average over the last 44 transactions gives you an implied hashrate of about 716 GH/s.

Note that both of these numbers are below the team number. Please explain.

Have you factored in 3% pool fee?

[tucenaber]

No. Feel free to multiply appropriately.

[BitCsByBit]

Seriously, dude.

still not able to dispute the math, huh?

You've been trounced math-wise.  If you haven't seen that, it doesn't speak well of your analytical skills.  

Sigh. You know math isn't a spectator sport Either you verify it yourself or it doesn't count.

If you download the figures from blockchain.info you get the last 50 transactions. Excluding the tiny ones gives 44. There are two bumps with a low period in between. The low period has an implied hashrate of 538 GH/s. The average over the last 44 transactions gives you an implied hashrate of about 716 GH/s.

Note that both of these numbers are below the team number. Please explain.

You're right regarding the average over the last 44 transactions, but you have to agree that the last 10 transactions are consistently higher than the previous transactions by about 50%.

Their previous payments were consistent at 0.1 every hour, and the payments in the last 8 hours are consistent at 0.15 every hour.

When I put that together with their last statement, I get an impression that they already have around 50% more hashing power not yet merged with the Labcoin team, due to the known stability issues, and we all know how people here react to the unstable hashrate figures!

Time will tell.

For what concerns the hashrate, as soon as we reach stability with another batch, we will merge it on btcguild, be patient.

[Bitcycle]

 Advantages of founders who want to be able to sell shares-

1) They care about the share price.

2) They want to be able to actually sell shares.

That gets them pretty motivated to get the exchange thing sorted out quickly.

[moneymanagment]

Do we know what the time frame is for btct getting shut down

[yuansuyi]

Do we know what the time frame is for btct getting shut down

here: https://btct.co/  in the front page.

[tucenaber]

...

Thanks for answering with actual arguments. I don't know who's right and that wasn't even the point. I just wanted to give Bitcycle a chance to trounce me

[KSGuy]

oh man what a mess

so it looks like we're either going to
https://bitfunder.com/
or
https://www.havelockinvestments.com
?

How do we move our labcoin shares over, what's going to happen now?

[Fordee]

Well... I guess Burnside 'locking' Labcoin's shares is kinda a moot point now eh guys?

[pedrog]

oh man what a mess

so it looks like we're either going to
https://bitfunder.com/
or
https://www.havelockinvestments.com
?

How do we move our labcoin shares over, what's going to happen now?

Here:

All btct shares will be converted to direct shares as soon as we receive official communication from Ethan Burnside before 31 October.
Dividends will be paid regularly until the btct platform is available.
For what concerns the hashrate, as soon as we reach stability with another batch, we will merge it on btcguild, be patient.
We will also evaluate listing again on another exchange.

UPDATE:

I just woke up to the information that BTCT.CO is "winding down" (Shutting down, I haven't even had time to read the full release or catch up on the information thread).

Burnside has previously informed the team (at listing) that complete ownership registry is kept up-to-date (as per previous discussions reg. direct shares), and while this obviously is something no one was expecting I expect all shares to be accounted for.

As to alternate listing, direct share conversion and other alternatives for share holders i currently have not had time to consider this yet but of course we will start working ASAP on a solution.

[dopamine]

LABCOIN switch to 796 exchange please