ASICMINER: Entering the Future of ASIC Mining by Inventing It

[Franktank]

I'm well aware of transaction fees; their potential simply does not justify ASICMiner's P/E of 100, especially as their first mover advantage is about to come under fire. The magnitude of the hype around this company is unreal.

How do you come up with a P/E of 100?

P/E = (share price)/(earnings of last 6 months*) = 4 BTC/0.5 BTC -> P/E of 8

*should be "earnings of last 12 months" but AM's only been mining for 6 mos.  

Correct or no?

[1715029114]

1715029114

[DeathAndTaxes]

I'm well aware of transaction fees; their potential simply does not justify ASICMiner's P/E of 100, especially as their first mover advantage is about to come under fire. The magnitude of the hype around this company is unreal.

How do you come up with a P/E of 100?

P/E = (share price)/(earnings of last 6 months*) = 4 BTC/0.5 BTC -> P/E of 8

*should be "earnings of last 12 months but AM's only been mining for 6 mos.

Correct or no?

P/E is annualized so you should convert the earnings of the past x months to 12 months before computing the P/E.
Still I wanted to see how the person I was responding to computed a P/E of 100.  I have a feeling it will be "fun".

[Franktank]

I'm well aware of transaction fees; their potential simply does not justify ASICMiner's P/E of 100, especially as their first mover advantage is about to come under fire. The magnitude of the hype around this company is unreal.

How do you come up with a P/E of 100?

P/E = (share price)/(earnings of last 6 months*) = 4 BTC/0.5 BTC -> P/E of 8

*should be "earnings of last 12 months but AM's only been mining for 6 mos.

Correct or no?

P/E is annualized so you should convert the earnings of the past x months to 12 months before computing the P/E.
Still I wanted to see how the person I was responding to computed a P/E of 100.  I have a feeling it will be "fun".

In order for AM to have a P/E of 100, share prices would have to be 50 BTC/share. I'm bullish on AM but I don't see that as a possibility (at least in the near term).

EDIT: I can confirm that they've paid 0.50 BTC/share, I've kept record of every single dividend payout since Feb 28 (first payout).

[VolanicEruptor]

I'm well aware of transaction fees; their potential simply does not justify ASICMiner's P/E of 100, especially as their first mover advantage is about to come under fire. The magnitude of the hype around this company is unreal.

How do you come up with a P/E of 100?

P/E = (share price)/(earnings of last 6 months*) = 4 BTC/0.5 BTC -> P/E of 8

*should be "earnings of last 12 months but AM's only been mining for 6 mos.

Correct or no?

P/E is annualized so you should convert the earnings of the past x months to 12 months before computing the P/E.
Still I wanted to see how the person I was responding to computed a P/E of 100.  I have a feeling it will be "fun".

In order for AM to have a P/E of 100, share prices would have to be 50 BTC/share. I'm bullish on AM but I don't see that as a possibility (at least in the near term).
EDIT: I can confirm that they've paid 0.50 BTC/share, I've kept record of every single dividend payout since Feb 28.

That would mean a market cap of 50 billion dollars.  That doesn't even make sense.. ever..

[freedomno1]

I'm well aware of transaction fees; their potential simply does not justify ASICMiner's P/E of 100, especially as their first mover advantage is about to come under fire. The magnitude of the hype around this company is unreal.

Lets just call it the arse equation

(Well unless the price of bitcoin really collapsed then we have other things to worry about)
(Inverse is proportional to an exchange conversation due to limitations in the bitcoin total only so many bitcoins existing means valuations can increase but in BTC per unit lowers at large enough scales)

[VolanicEruptor]

Oops I didn't take into account that BTC could drop to $1, in which case 50BTC/share could be possible, assuming am gets into non-bitcoin related ventures.  

[chriswilmer]

I'm well aware of transaction fees; their potential simply does not justify ASICMiner's P/E of 100, especially as their first mover advantage is about to come under fire. The magnitude of the hype around this company is unreal.

How do you come up with a P/E of 100?

P/E = (share price)/(earnings of last 6 months*) = 4 BTC/0.5 BTC -> P/E of 8

*should be "earnings of last 12 months but AM's only been mining for 6 mos.

Correct or no?

P/E is annualized so you should convert the earnings of the past x months to 12 months before computing the P/E.
Still I wanted to see how the person I was responding to computed a P/E of 100.  I have a feeling it will be "fun".

In order for AM to have a P/E of 100, share prices would have to be 50 BTC/share. I'm bullish on AM but I don't see that as a possibility (at least in the near term).
EDIT: I can confirm that they've paid 0.50 BTC/share, I've kept record of every single dividend payout since Feb 28.

That would mean a market cap of 50 billion dollars.  That doesn't even make sense.. ever..

Why? Facebook was valued at $100 billion using a P/E ratio of ~100 (I think that was part of the rationale anyway). If ASICMiner maintained clear leadership over the bitcoin mining space in the next 2-3 years I think a multi-billion dollar valuation would make a lot of sense. About a hundred years ago, many people didn't think that drilling for oil was very valuable... it's hard to see the Exxon's of tomorrow (Exxon market cap is ~$400 billion).

[VolanicEruptor]

Our society is addicted to oil -- it is the only thing keeping it alive.  We can't sustain an overpopulated world with solar and wind power.  Without oil our economies would crumble and we would living in the dark ages -- except imagine the dark ages with a million times more people.  
We can survive without bitcoin, no matter how popular it will become.     It's value will never be comparable to oil because it's not a necessary resource.

[Franktank]

Our society is addicted to oil -- it is the only thing keeping it alive.  We can't sustain an overpopulated world with solar and wind power.  Without oil our economies would crumble and we would living in the dark ages -- except imagine the dark ages with a million times more people.  
We can survive without bitcoin, no matter how popular it will become.     It's value will never be comparable to oil because it's not a necessary resource.

The last 20 years of R&D put into renewable energy resources and biofuels would like to disagree with you. We still use oil because we can. If push came to shove, the proper adjustments will be made and we could survive w/o oil. That's the thing about humanity, we don't change until it's too late. However this discussion is meant for other forums.

[chriswilmer]

Our society is addicted to oil -- it is the only thing keeping it alive.  We can't sustain an overpopulated world with solar and wind power.  Without oil our economies would crumble and we would living in the dark ages -- except imagine the dark ages with a million times more people.  
We can survive without bitcoin, no matter how popular it will become.     It's value will never be comparable to oil because it's not a necessary resource.

I couldn't disagree more with this statement. 100 years ago, oil was hardly used for anything (we mostly used coal, wood, or horses to power things). Back then, anybody would tell you that "we can survive without oil" and it was a completely true statement at the time. Later, the world became dependent on oil for everything because oil is a highly convenient fuel. I don't think it takes a lot of imagination to see that the world might become highly dependent on bitcoin in the future.

[tinus42]

Oops I didn't take into account that BTC could drop to $1, in which case 50BTC/share could be possible, assuming am gets into non-bitcoin related ventures.  

And the USD could of course become increasingly worthless thanks to QE. I have several 100 trillion Zimbabwe dollar notes, maybe we will see their US dollar equivalents in the future when 50 billion USD will be chump change. 

[tinus42]

Our society is addicted to oil -- it is the only thing keeping it alive.  We can't sustain an overpopulated world with solar and wind power.  Without oil our economies would crumble and we would living in the dark ages -- except imagine the dark ages with a million times more people.  
We can survive without bitcoin, no matter how popular it will become.    It's value will never be comparable to oil because it's not a necessary resource.

Even if we could replace oil with alternative fuels (which aren't as efficient as oil and have a low EROEI (Energy Returned IOn Energy Invested)) we'd still need oil to make fertilizers and pesticides without which modern agriculture would be impossible.

[FNG]

I'm well aware of transaction fees; their potential simply does not justify ASICMiner's P/E of 100, especially as their first mover advantage is about to come under fire. The magnitude of the hype around this company is unreal.

How do you come up with a P/E of 100?

P/E = (share price)/(earnings of last 6 months*) = 4 BTC/0.5 BTC -> P/E of 8

*should be "earnings of last 12 months but AM's only been mining for 6 mos.

Correct or no?

P/E is annualized so you should convert the earnings of the past x months to 12 months before computing the P/E.
Still I wanted to see how the person I was responding to computed a P/E of 100.  I have a feeling it will be "fun".

In order for AM to have a P/E of 100, share prices would have to be 50 BTC/share. I'm bullish on AM but I don't see that as a possibility (at least in the near term).
EDIT: I can confirm that they've paid 0.50 BTC/share, I've kept record of every single dividend payout since Feb 28.

That would mean a market cap of 50 billion dollars.  That doesn't even make sense.. ever..

Your math is off by a huge amount. I'm assuming you're using USD.

[Vycid]

I'm well aware of transaction fees; their potential simply does not justify ASICMiner's P/E of 100, especially as their first mover advantage is about to come under fire. The magnitude of the hype around this company is unreal.

How do you come up with a P/E of 100?

P/E = (share price)/(earnings of last 6 months*) = 4 BTC/0.5 BTC -> P/E of 8

*should be "earnings of last 12 months but AM's only been mining for 6 mos.

Correct or no?

P/E is annualized so you should convert the earnings of the past x months to 12 months before computing the P/E.
Still I wanted to see how the person I was responding to computed a P/E of 100.  I have a feeling it will be "fun".

In order for AM to have a P/E of 100, share prices would have to be 50 BTC/share. I'm bullish on AM but I don't see that as a possibility (at least in the near term).

EDIT: I can confirm that they've paid 0.50 BTC/share, I've kept record of every single dividend payout since Feb 28 (first payout).

Share prices of 50 BTC/share would be a market cap of 20 million BTC. Forget the near term - this will never happen, which should be immediately obvious given a long-term bitcoin money supply of 21 million.

[101111]

Share prices of 50 BTC/share would be a market cap of 20 million BTC. Forget the near term - this will never happen, which should be immediately obvious given a long-term bitcoin money supply of 21 million.

Vycid see replies to your previous post on p572

[sharky101]

Does anyone know what percentage of weekly profit is maintained for development?

[aahzmundus]

I do not believe it is a set percentage.  Usually friedcat just takes what he needs... in the past he told us he was holding back 2,000 btc for future development.

[tinus42]

I'm well aware of transaction fees; their potential simply does not justify ASICMiner's P/E of 100, especially as their first mover advantage is about to come under fire. The magnitude of the hype around this company is unreal.

How do you come up with a P/E of 100?

P/E = (share price)/(earnings of last 6 months*) = 4 BTC/0.5 BTC -> P/E of 8

*should be "earnings of last 12 months but AM's only been mining for 6 mos.

Correct or no?

P/E is annualized so you should convert the earnings of the past x months to 12 months before computing the P/E.
Still I wanted to see how the person I was responding to computed a P/E of 100.  I have a feeling it will be "fun".

In order for AM to have a P/E of 100, share prices would have to be 50 BTC/share. I'm bullish on AM but I don't see that as a possibility (at least in the near term).

EDIT: I can confirm that they've paid 0.50 BTC/share, I've kept record of every single dividend payout since Feb 28 (first payout).

Share prices of 50 BTC/share would be a market cap of 20 million BTC. Forget the near term - this will never happen, which should be immediately obvious given a long-term bitcoin money supply of 21 million.

Theoretically it's possible to have such a valuation. Because it will never happen that all shares will be dumped at once. If someone dumps a significant amount of them the share price will decrease.

[Lauda]

Does anyone know what percentage of weekly profit is maintained for development?

Not sure if this is set to an exact number.

[velacreations]

I'm well aware of transaction fees; their potential simply does not justify ASICMiner's P/E of 100, especially as their first mover advantage is about to come under fire. The magnitude of the hype around this company is unreal.

The amount of FUD in your posts is unreal...