Quote from: arousedrhino on June 22, 2014, 05:35:24 AM

Quote from: xhomerx10 on June 22, 2014, 03:50:22 AM

Quote from: arousedrhino on June 22, 2014, 12:35:05 AM

Quote from: xhomerx10 on June 21, 2014, 05:17:24 AM

Quote from: explorer on June 21, 2014, 02:22:15 AM

Quote from: xhomerx10 on June 21, 2014, 12:54:43 AM

Quote from: arousedrhino on June 20, 2014, 11:20:18 PM

Quote from: AcoinL.L.C on June 20, 2014, 08:19:06 PM

Quote from: jjdub7 on June 20, 2014, 07:05:09 PM

Quote from: spartan82 on June 19, 2014, 02:40:18 PM

Why not just keep pumping the money back into the company and receive yearly dividends every Christmas? I'm all for it

keep the funds FC, make it a fatter payout at the end of the year for us lol

I actually wouldn't mind this either. I'd like to see FC diversify a bit and start a holdings unit as a second line of business just to give us some wiggle room and stabilize prices. What's your take on that Friedcat Buffett?

They need better customer service. Transfer of shares took 9 days last time, now transferring to havelock, which will take who knows how long. This is why they need the shares to be on havelock or counterparty, or figure out a way to make it easier for investors to trade holdings.

And dividends are a must, this is a crypto stock, very high risk. If they can't pay a decent dividend, the price should be much lower than it is even now.

A week and a half is not long at all for transferring shares.

Stocks are leading indicators not lagging.

Stock market returns are leading indicators. Thankfully, they are not always accurate. Let's hope they are not accurate in the case of Asicminer shares.

I don't know about that. AM has returned multiple times the IPO price per share in the first year. That seems a pretty good indication. On what scale do you find that to be a bad indication?

On a scale of 4 to 0.2 I'd have to say...

The return of multiple IPO price was a long time ago and was fuelled by speculation. Sure we got some dividends but we don't mine anymore. Now we rely on outside expertise to make our chips into something useable. Yeah all I can see are bulls and roses.

When we talk about return of IPO price we are talking about the dividends paid out to shareholders over the lifetime of the company which has been more than the .1 BTC IPO Price. Were Not talking about the speculation ramp up that occurred last summer. If you sold your shares right now they would return 2 times the IPO price by your logic.

That's not my logic. I'm not sure how you get that from what I wrote.
I don't believe we can have a logical discussion about return on a share of AM without consideration for the share value except at IPO.
You're telling me that we did well at the beginning so that's a good indication for the future when the company has made some serious changes in direction. We aren't building miners anymore - the big money is in manufacturing and selling miners and mining the Bitcoins. Having strayed so far from the formula that made the initial returns I can't see getting my investment back even if I buy in now to lower my average buy price. I believe it would be throwing good money after bad at this point. That's part logic and part emotion.

In your post you stated:

Quote from: xhomerx10 on June 21, 2014, 05:17:24 AM

......

The return of multiple IPO price was a long time ago and was fuelled by speculation. Sure we got some dividends but we don't mine anymore. Now we rely on outside expertise to make our chips into something useable. Yeah all I can see are bulls and roses.

That statement is not true is all I am pointing out. The return of the IPO price had nothing to do with speculation, it was returned via dividend payments. The stock could have traded at .1 BTC and the IPO price would have been returned via dividend payments.

The high stock price was driven by speculation but that had no effect on the dividends which were paid out that returned the original IPO price and more.

Go discuss the share value all you want, just don't try to imply that a high share price is what paid back the original IPO price, that came from dividends.

I'm sure others are not interested in our inability to understand one another's arguments.