Quote from: xhomerx10 on October 28, 2014, 04:14:44 PM

Quote from: cs54 on October 28, 2014, 04:02:25 PM

Quote from: xhomerx10 on October 27, 2014, 08:56:46 PM

Quote from: cs54 on October 27, 2014, 08:27:31 PM

Quote from: glendall on October 27, 2014, 07:35:14 PM

I think it would been a far more successful IPO launch to offer a tremoundous price per hash for the IPO, which would then attract investors and stimulate the buying and selling on havelock after the IPO. The way it is priced now, although a decent and fair price, you can only really imagine the price going down and that's even if the IPO gets filled at all.

So, a loss leader? I would worry about expectation-setting for AMHash2, if that contract will be structured like AMHash1.

Really this is like a gift from AM Wink

So...a loss leader

It doesn't follow as they have no other product to offer.
AM needs to unload the chips before the end of their useful life. Chip sales aren't working - I believe this us more of a "plan D". Loss leader simply doesn't fit in this context but I may be missing something.

Well, there's AMHash2 thru AMHash 5, offered at a potentially higher initial price.

There's also simply the movement of overstock to reduce inventory and stimulate cash flow. Which in turn funds the development and sale of Gen 4.

I agree though, that this is semantics, and a bit of a Plan D. I still think that an AM special dividend would work wonders in stimulating demand for AMHash 1.