So, as far as I know, AM shares were 0.1 btc at IPO and recently hit over 5.0 btc which represents a 50 fold increase in value.
ActM shares were 0.0005 btc at IPO and would be valued at 0.025 btc if they also increased by a factor of 50.
What happened with AM that allowed for such a massive increase in value?
Is it fair to expect the same, or similar, price increase with ActM, assuming they fullfill their promises?
By the time ActM equal AM in terms of network hashrate, and assuming other competitors at this point have also played their hand, would this mean that the giddy heights of a 50 fold increase from IPO price are resigned to the history books?
And finally, why hasn't anyone photoshopped 'Ken For President'?
ActM shares were 0.0005 btc at IPO and would be valued at 0.025 btc if they also increased by a factor of 50.
What happened with AM that allowed for such a massive increase in value?
Is it fair to expect the same, or similar, price increase with ActM, assuming they fullfill their promises?
By the time ActM equal AM in terms of network hashrate, and assuming other competitors at this point have also played their hand, would this mean that the giddy heights of a 50 fold increase from IPO price are resigned to the history books?
And finally, why hasn't anyone photoshopped 'Ken For President'?
A factor of 50 (0.025BTC/share) would equate to weekly dividends of 0.000125BTC modeled at 0.5%(26%APR). During 25BTC block reward period, this would require only 12.4% mining share with VMC breaking dead even on hardware sales/purchases (NOTE: VMC actually stands to make a sizable profit on sales). This is actually less of a mining share than ASICMINER currently boasts. In other words, ActM doesn't even have to reach their mining share dominance to reap a similar return on investment.