Quote from: mchwierutSC on December 12, 2016, 11:08:40 PM

Quote from: SpacemanOne on December 12, 2016, 09:03:04 PM

Quote from: sanchicharro on December 12, 2016, 03:04:27 PM

Article in smithandcrown.com about if you should (or not) invest in Chronobank:

https://www.smithandcrown.com/participate-chronobank-crowdsale/

What do you think about their guesstimates?

Best,

My second impression: Price/Earning Ratios are almost impossible to estimate for Chronobank. We can't predict the TIME token price after the ICO so we are not able to estimate the Chronobank capitalization even one month after the ICO. We can try to estimate the total funds raised in ICO but it won't actually be the Chronobank capitalization. It will depend on the TIME token market price.

Good comments SpacemanOne.

We ended up using a PE Ratio for a couple reasons. First, so we (and readers) could get access to benchmarks and comparisons in the broader market. Second, just modeling the stream of potential payments didn't seem sufficient, because it seemed to imply that it was only worth it if the stream of payments summed up to the initial investment. We had a similar approach with ICONOMI that was helpful as a framework. CoinFund had an excellent analysis of REP tokens that valued them as an annuity, but the majority of feedback was that they should have used P/E ratios.

You're right that we can't predict the TIME trade value at a future point in time. Since we can't predict the future price and since ChronoBank isn't giving out earnings now, we decided to use the price at the crowdsale and the potential earnings to capture a similar idea: how much am I willing to pay for the opportunity to get a payment in the future. The two values aren't exactly the same, and thanks to your comment, we added some language to that effect. If there's anything you'd suggest adding to further clarify, let me know. (also, you're right that the value shouldn't have been $8.25 - we lowered it to $6.82 under the assumption that the average bonus for crowdsale participants would be 10%)

You made a good point earlier about whether correlating the amount raised and the amount of LHT issued was necessary. It also seemed like raising more funds would make the project more likely to succeed in securing users and issuing more LHT. We definitely discussed having 9 scenarios but that seemed like overkill. If you want to take on the task though, we could include your work.

Your opinion is valuable for me, thanks. PE Ratio may be convenient for comparison, in the end it's a matter of taste.
However it should be also mentioned the TIME tokens price can be higher in future that can increase the investors gain in a certain sense. An investor can sell some of his TIME tokens (for a price of lowering his further yearly income in %) and receive a significant sum immediately (something like receiving future profits right now). This effect is not lost in PE ratio but it's like hidden and not so evident.
I also have a comment on the Low scenario. I had a conversation with Chronobank team and asked a question about the expected LHT market cap in the first year. Their lower estimation is AUD 40 mln and the top is AUD 120 mln. The lower estimation is based on their current agreements. I've included the above numbers in my recent post about Chronobank, the link is in my signature (the lower one).
Maybe it's worth taking into account these numbers in your work. Your estimations are based on Chronobank's data too, I don't think the research will become less objective.