Break-even is about 0.000046 if you take into account BTC's depreciation since IPO 

So staggered. That will give first mover advantage on the market to whoever gets them first. Bit of a lottery

Yep, my bad. I guess I presumed if the market was live from launch there would be coins to sell, but it'll be empty for a few hours. Is the distribution simultaneous or staggered?

Sorry if this has already been answered, but -

If IPO is up until 1hr before launch, and the pre-mine is split between investors, how can you give the coins out 2-10 hrs before launch?

Or have I missed something?

I've withdrawn other non-BTC currencies successfully

Sounds like someone wants people to panic dump on his low buy walls 

Last week it went to 0.00145 before game had even started, it is still cheap now

I may as well throw this in the mix, I'm waiting on a total of 1.49604851 in withdrawals. Username same as here.

I'm waiting on 1.5 BTC too, the site owners are doing what they can. These are teething problems for a site with great future potential

So I presume all the coins are given out when the BTC is received, not held over like the pot?


I never expect it to be easy, I just expected there to be more of a game, more action. It is called Insanitycoin after all. This week it was Wetpaperbagcoin, the market got a little fluid and the bottom fell out pretty quickly. I'm picking up my groceries off the floor

This experiment depends on two things,

1) Faith in the dev (both personal trust and future development of the coin)
2) The ability to make money from it

I would imagine most of the coin buying currently is because of 2). People are selling below 0.001 not just for liquidity reasons, it's because if the current trend continues, short term returns will decrease even further as bagholders from week 1 & week 2 compete with sellers from week 3 for the dev buyback, suggesting we won't see the price much over 0.00115 next week, and by week 5 or 6 the dev may struggle to convince people to invest at all.

Although I still have a little faith in this, this week's rule changes, the dev's protestations of 'why are people setting their sells so low?' without any plan to raise the price much, the 'accidental' early start, have all made this experiment look more like a sucker trap

The development of the project needs to accelerate as quickly as the injection of money, to increase demand. Otherwise any long term price projection based purely on supply, along with the coin itself, will fail.

It looks like a fun idea, but I can't see it working.

The only ones that stand a chance of being placed are those that invest the max allowed (5BTC). That means only 5 places (+1 random) payout an amount higher than their investment. If it was all 5BTC players, there would be 40 players, yet only 6 will be guaranteed a profit, meaning 85% of the players would lose, and most would lose a lot.

This may appeal to gamblers, but considering most dice games payout over 99% of the pot, and this only pays out 86%, it doesn't look like a good deal.

At least hand it over to someone who wants to take it further!

Yes, it's here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=447657.msg4988833#msg4988833
It is a comparison to show the differences from a few pages back on this thread.

Now will everyone please stop banging on about Coingen. I don't care whether the code is from Coingen or Toys 'R' Us.
The market is full of coins that are clones of other coins, code borrowed and tweaked. What makes a difference is having an active dev that makes the coin unique.

Karma has an active dev who knows what he's doing. The coin is unique, and has new features coming.