elective-stereophonic
elective-stereophonic
[ANN] Jinn singapore
Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

Latest Nxt Client: Nxt 1.11.15

Pages: 1 ... 14 15 [16] 17 18 ... 80

Author Topic: [ANN] Jinn  (Read 309864 times)

Arpeggio

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Karma: +5/-0
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 31
    • View Profile
Re: [ANN] Jinn
« Reply #300 on: September 26, 2014, 03:25:55 am »

Not that this will change anything but now we know the execution price of the dutch auction is not under 60 nxts. If it were something like 30-40 nxt then it would be okay imo. But considering the huge risk and likelihood of failure 10% was really stingy to offer.

If you project this much funding is needed for Jinn then may I suggest raising the shares to 150,000 at the very least and lower your target price. Offering 10% at these prices with the target price not even reached yet is too greedy no offense.

You clearly need a lot of money to make this a success. Nobody disagrees with that. Raising the number of initial tokens and lowering the price will get you more funds.
Logged

buybitcoinscanada

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Karma: +33/-4
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 203
  • Banned!
    • View Profile
Re: [ANN] Jinn
« Reply #301 on: September 26, 2014, 03:47:21 am »

A
« Last Edit: October 15, 2014, 11:05:10 pm by buybitcoinscanada »
Logged

Triangle

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Karma: +67/-34
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 226
    • View Profile
Re: [ANN] Jinn
« Reply #302 on: September 26, 2014, 04:04:49 am »

Not that this will change anything but now we know the execution price of the dutch auction is not under 60 nxts. If it were something like 30-40 nxt then it would be okay imo. But considering the huge risk and likelihood of failure 10% was really stingy to offer.

If you project this much funding is needed for Jinn then may I suggest raising the shares to 150,000 at the very least and lower your target price. Offering 10% at these prices with the target price not even reached yet is too greedy no offense.

You clearly need a lot of money to make this a success. Nobody disagrees with that. Raising the number of initial tokens and lowering the price will get you more funds.

Seconded. From what they have explained as being the first checkpoint, I'm trying to figure out why they feel they need more than $150,000 at this point. If they really do, add more tokens to the offering. Consider on top of that, the likelihood of Nxt becoming less valuable than it is now, thus the project becoming underfunded is quite low and the probability of upside on Nxt while this project is being developed is looking pretty good.


While we do understand that it may look like that to some, to us it is the exact other way around. We cannot afford to gamble that NXT will go up in price, regardless of what we think as individuals, a professional startup has to take into account the risks. Currently one of the biggest risks is that NXT falls in value, so we have to be absolutely certain that the price we accept can withstand some volatility.

Also I realize that a lot of people feel that 10% sounds like very little, but 10% is above what most seeding rounds give out. Usually it's between 5-8% and often way higher sums raised than what is currently on the table, and that is in dollars, not extremely volatile crypto-currency funding.

Our primary concern is to get Jinn to market, which we are confident that we can and will do, but this costs dollar money, not just crypto money. On top of this we are not going to crash NXTs price, so it's not like we can cash out ASAP to secure the funding in dollar (which would be way less volatile), so all of these things factor into our decision. Because at the end of the day, what matters is that Jinn is launched which will benefit all asset holders tremendously.
Logged

Arpeggio

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Karma: +5/-0
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 31
    • View Profile
Re: [ANN] Jinn
« Reply #303 on: September 26, 2014, 04:24:43 am »

Not that this will change anything but now we know the execution price of the dutch auction is not under 60 nxts. If it were something like 30-40 nxt then it would be okay imo. But considering the huge risk and likelihood of failure 10% was really stingy to offer.

If you project this much funding is needed for Jinn then may I suggest raising the shares to 150,000 at the very least and lower your target price. Offering 10% at these prices with the target price not even reached yet is too greedy no offense.

You clearly need a lot of money to make this a success. Nobody disagrees with that. Raising the number of initial tokens and lowering the price will get you more funds.

Seconded. From what they have explained as being the first checkpoint, I'm trying to figure out why they feel they need more than $150,000 at this point. If they really do, add more tokens to the offering. Consider on top of that, the likelihood of Nxt becoming less valuable than it is now, thus the project becoming underfunded is quite low and the probability of upside on Nxt while this project is being developed is looking pretty good.


While we do understand that it may look like that to some, to us it is the exact other way around. We cannot afford to gamble that NXT will go up in price, regardless of what we think as individuals, a professional startup has to take into account the risks. Currently one of the biggest risks is that NXT falls in value, so we have to be absolutely certain that the price we accept can withstand some volatility.

Also I realize that a lot of people feel that 10% sounds like very little, but 10% is above what most seeding rounds give out. Usually it's between 5-8% and often way higher sums raised than what is currently on the table, and that is in dollars, not extremely volatile crypto-currency funding.

Our primary concern is to get Jinn to market, which we are confident that we can and will do, but this costs dollar money, not just crypto money. On top of this we are not going to crash NXTs price, so it's not like we can cash out ASAP to secure the funding in dollar (which would be way less volatile), so all of these things factor into our decision. Because at the end of the day, what matters is that Jinn is launched which will benefit all asset holders tremendously.

I agree with everything you said. Except that Jinn as an investment is way riskier than just about anything I can think of to invest in. Given that, 10% is very expensive for investors. I as an investor want Jinn to succeed and therefore want Jinn to raise all the money it needs and then some. So in order to do that is it really unreasonable for you guys to take 5% less than initially planned?
Logged

spaw

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Karma: +14/-1
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 150
    • View Profile
Re: [ANN] Jinn
« Reply #304 on: September 26, 2014, 04:41:22 am »

Not that this will change anything but now we know the execution price of the dutch auction is not under 60 nxts. If it were something like 30-40 nxt then it would be okay imo. But considering the huge risk and likelihood of failure 10% was really stingy to offer.

If you project this much funding is needed for Jinn then may I suggest raising the shares to 150,000 at the very least and lower your target price. Offering 10% at these prices with the target price not even reached yet is too greedy no offense.

You clearly need a lot of money to make this a success. Nobody disagrees with that. Raising the number of initial tokens and lowering the price will get you more funds.

Seconded. From what they have explained as being the first checkpoint, I'm trying to figure out why they feel they need more than $150,000 at this point. If they really do, add more tokens to the offering. Consider on top of that, the likelihood of Nxt becoming less valuable than it is now, thus the project becoming underfunded is quite low and the probability of upside on Nxt while this project is being developed is looking pretty good.


While we do understand that it may look like that to some, to us it is the exact other way around. We cannot afford to gamble that NXT will go up in price, regardless of what we think as individuals, a professional startup has to take into account the risks. Currently one of the biggest risks is that NXT falls in value, so we have to be absolutely certain that the price we accept can withstand some volatility.

Also I realize that a lot of people feel that 10% sounds like very little, but 10% is above what most seeding rounds give out. Usually it's between 5-8% and often way higher sums raised than what is currently on the table, and that is in dollars, not extremely volatile crypto-currency funding.

Our primary concern is to get Jinn to market, which we are confident that we can and will do, but this costs dollar money, not just crypto money. On top of this we are not going to crash NXTs price, so it's not like we can cash out ASAP to secure the funding in dollar (which would be way less volatile), so all of these things factor into our decision. Because at the end of the day, what matters is that Jinn is launched which will benefit all asset holders tremendously.

I agree with everything you said. Except that Jinn as an investment is way riskier than just about anything I can think of to invest in. Given that, 10% is very expensive for investors. I as an investor want Jinn to succeed and therefore want Jinn to raise all the money it needs and then some. So in order to do that is it really unreasonable for you guys to take 5% less than initially planned?
Is this really the riskiest? There is money to be made with just the software developments if I've been reading this right, but there's a good chance I'm not
Logged
I manage BOOST: A small NXT venture capital fund and NXTVenture company. getBOOSTed!

Triangle

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Karma: +67/-34
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 226
    • View Profile
Re: [ANN] Jinn
« Reply #305 on: September 26, 2014, 04:51:55 am »


I agree with everything you said. Except that Jinn as an investment is way riskier than just about anything I can think of to invest in. Given that, 10% is very expensive for investors. I as an investor want Jinn to succeed and therefore want Jinn to raise all the money it needs and then some. So in order to do that is it really unreasonable for you guys to take 5% less than initially planned?

While there is no doubt there is risk involved and I have no idea what you have considered investing in, I do think you overestimate the risk of this project failing completely without starting to generate income.
This project will be monetized from software development and emulator way before Jinn the processor reaches market.
If we decided to take 5% less (assets), we would just sell for less instead.

Is this really the riskiest? There is money to be made with just the software developments if I've been reading this right, but there's a good chance I'm not


You are correct, software development and emulator will generate profits way before Jinn.
Logged

neofelis

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Karma: +73/-12
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 564
    • View Profile
Re: [ANN] Jinn
« Reply #306 on: September 26, 2014, 05:05:28 am »

What do you mean "not equity shares"?  This 10% is not ownership in the company? You want our money and will give part of the profits to the investors but no say in how the company will be run? 10% is not enough of ownership to control a company but if the company really becomes worth something the investors still only get profits but no capital appreciation.

Explain why this is a good idea.
Logged

buybitcoinscanada

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Karma: +33/-4
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 203
  • Banned!
    • View Profile
Re: [ANN] Jinn
« Reply #307 on: September 26, 2014, 05:40:59 am »

A
« Last Edit: October 15, 2014, 11:05:00 pm by buybitcoinscanada »
Logged

Arpeggio

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Karma: +5/-0
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 31
    • View Profile
Re: [ANN] Jinn
« Reply #308 on: September 26, 2014, 05:42:41 am »

    While there is no doubt there is risk involved and I have no idea what you have considered investing in, I do think you overestimate the risk of this project failing completely without starting to generate income.
    This project will be monetized from software development and emulator way before Jinn the processor reaches market.

    Of course from your perspective its easy to see how likely success will be and how soon it will start. I understand for this to fail miserably is not that high of a chance. But I am also factoring:
    • the future of Nxt as a currency
    • the relative anonymity of your team
    • the unregulated aspects of investing through Nxt

    If we decided to take 5% less (assets), we would just sell for less instead.
    If you sell for less you will raise less money. If you offer 5% more, you get less assets but more funds to bring Jinn to fruition. Unless I am misunderstanding the statement.

    Anyway, I am all for this project. Making Jinn happen is what matters most.
    Logged

    devphp

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Karma: +87/-14
    • Offline Offline
    • Posts: 1229
      • View Profile
    Re: [ANN] Jinn
    « Reply #309 on: September 26, 2014, 06:25:27 am »

    Those who say that Jinn is way overpriced now and the most risky asset, I don't agree. Look at what SuperNET did as far as funding goes. It's no less riskier than Jinn. Either both of them are risky and overpriced, or neither of them are. I guess we have to wait for a few months to find out.
    Logged

    Sebastien256

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Karma: +169/-24
    • Offline Offline
    • Posts: 2823
    • ^LOOK UP^ = Nxt community!
      • View Profile
    Re: [ANN] Jinn
    « Reply #310 on: September 26, 2014, 07:11:52 am »

    What do you mean "not equity shares"?  This 10% is not ownership in the company? You want our money and will give part of the profits to the investors but no say in how the company will be run? 10% is not enough of ownership to control a company but if the company really becomes worth something the investors still only get profits but no capital appreciation.

    Explain why this is a good idea.

    Good point. Looking for an answer to this.
    Logged
    Please drop your ideas concerning Nxt and/or NRS in this topic -> List of feature request for Nxt and/or NRS (with the full list in OP).

    Berry

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Karma: +12/-26
    • Offline Offline
    • Posts: 88
      • View Profile
    Re: [ANN] Jinn
    « Reply #311 on: September 26, 2014, 08:07:33 am »

    Those who say that Jinn is way overpriced now and the most risky asset, I don't agree. Look at what SuperNET did as far as funding goes. It's no less riskier than Jinn. Either both of them are risky and overpriced, or neither of them are. I guess we have to wait for a few months to find out.

    Really?
    Supernet is backed by assets.
    Jinn is not.
    You can´t compare them.

    To value this project at 2,5mio$ is insane. I know they need funding. They really do, but 60 NXT per share is insane.
    « Last Edit: September 26, 2014, 08:13:34 am by Berry »
    Logged

    lucky88888

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Karma: +42/-14
    • Offline Offline
    • Posts: 694
    • NXT-E328-UJDF-KTGH-9C6YQ
      • View Profile
    Re: [ANN] Jinn
    « Reply #312 on: September 26, 2014, 08:32:35 am »

    yub 60nxt per share.. great project and fantastic programmer but im out way too over priced.
    will reinvest in after price goes down or progress is shown.

    at this rate it will sold at 100nxt per share.
    Logged
    NXT-E328-UJDF-KTGH-9C6YQ
    8897013707391239174

    kodtycoon

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Karma: +43/-18
    • Offline Offline
    • Posts: 916
      • View Profile
    Re: [ANN] Jinn
    « Reply #313 on: September 26, 2014, 08:56:29 am »

    This is possibly a quote I will regret, but at this stage I think this is way over priced.  This is due to the significant risk of this project being successful.  This is a near-impossible project but it is one that if it succeeds then owning just few shares today could be like hitting the lottery in 20 years.

    Smart money tells me that a lot of hyped up buyers are filling the order book who will start to dump below the final ipo price in 2-3 months, unless revenue starts pouring in before then.

    Ergo, I'm in but I'm waiting until after the IPO.  I will revisit this frequently and take my chances on the likelyhood that there will be a selloff.  If there isn't, I'll just buy at a higher price when I'm confident in the business model from the results that I see.  Yes, this means that I could potentially make more if I'd invest now, but his is a huge risk and I'm rather high-risk averse.

    My 2 cents.

    im with you on that actually.. pulled out last night. its getting over valued at this stage.. this will only compound the risk on the very early adopters. if jinn is to be the next intel then buying shares 2 months - 3 months down the line will still be like buying apple stocks back before they got the first vc investment. the fact we even know about it at such an early stage means we have a long long time to buy in and still make huge profit. so ya the risk has gotten to much for me to invest at this stage. as the dragons say... "im out". lol (until a point in the future) ::)
    Logged

    devphp

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Karma: +87/-14
    • Offline Offline
    • Posts: 1229
      • View Profile
    Re: [ANN] Jinn
    « Reply #314 on: September 26, 2014, 08:57:40 am »

    Those who say that Jinn is way overpriced now and the most risky asset, I don't agree. Look at what SuperNET did as far as funding goes. It's no less riskier than Jinn. Either both of them are risky and overpriced, or neither of them are. I guess we have to wait for a few months to find out.

    Really?
    Supernet is backed by assets.
    Jinn is not.
    You can´t compare them.

    To value this project at 2,5mio$ is insane. I know they need funding. They really do, but 60 NXT per share is insane.

    I wouldn't really call those assets. To me both SuperNET and Jinn are about the same high risk, as both projects essentially rely on one person's vision (James for SuperNET, CfB for Jinn) with a lot of spots that investors don't comprehend, not to mention other risks. But you are free to have your own view on them. I'll shut up now or someone will say I am spreading FUD :)
    Logged

    jabo38

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Karma: +40/-38
    • Offline Offline
    • Posts: 381
      • View Profile
    Re: [ANN] Jinn
    « Reply #315 on: September 26, 2014, 09:20:57 am »

    I was hoping to get more shares.  But I got priced out of my big order.  Whales have deep pockets.  Me..... not at all. 

    Good luck with Jin!
    Logged
    Never Enough Money

    valarmg

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Karma: +178/-57
    • Offline Offline
    • Posts: 1766
      • View Profile
    Re: [ANN] Jinn
    « Reply #316 on: September 26, 2014, 09:25:48 am »


    I wouldn't really call those assets. To me both SuperNET and Jinn are about the same high risk, as both projects essentially rely on one person's vision (James for SuperNET, CfB for Jinn) with a lot of spots that investors don't comprehend, not to mention other risks. But you are free to have your own view on them. I'll shut up now or someone will say I am spreading FUD :)

    A huge percentage of SuperNET is backed up of Nxt+BTC that aren't going to be spent. Is that what you mean by risky assets?
    « Last Edit: September 26, 2014, 09:28:00 am by valarmg »
    Logged
    NXT-CSED-4PK5-AR4V-6UB5V

    profitofthegods

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Karma: +10/-0
    • Offline Offline
    • Posts: 69
      • View Profile
    Re: [ANN] Jinn
    « Reply #317 on: September 26, 2014, 09:27:10 am »

    What do you mean "not equity shares"?  This 10% is not ownership in the company? You want our money and will give part of the profits to the investors but no say in how the company will be run? 10% is not enough of ownership to control a company but if the company really becomes worth something the investors still only get profits but no capital appreciation.

    Explain why this is a good idea.

    More profits = more dividends = higher asset price. That's capital appreciation isn't it? Equity is legal ownership (This isn't a DAC so you can't have the tokens act as crypto-equity, which means the only kind of equity is government sanctioned equity), which with something like this comes with all sorts of legal complications which I don't want my NXT to have to pay for.

    Also on votes, I don't trust the average investor to have the first clue how to run something like this. I'm not saying we're all idiots, but I've seen where voting gets us in political elections...

    On a less positive note, I originally calculated 50 as a fair price so I do think this is getting overpriced and I hope it doesn't go up too much further.
    Logged

    devphp

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Karma: +87/-14
    • Offline Offline
    • Posts: 1229
      • View Profile
    Re: [ANN] Jinn
    « Reply #318 on: September 26, 2014, 09:31:22 am »

    A huge percentage of it is backed up of Nxt+BTC that aren't going to be spent. Is that what you mean by risky assets?

    Yes, those are risky. I would prefer to see software products or even hardware as assets, but neither projects have those yet, hence they both are on the same level for me. Both projects are at this stage all about trust and faith in one person backing the project. Correct me if I am wrong, but the software part of Jinn doesn't require much more spending of collected funds than SuperNET, although that's one of the spots that are not clear yet with both projects.
    Logged

    Come-from-Beyond

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Karma: +794/-671
    • Offline Offline
    • Posts: 4013
      • View Profile
    Re: [ANN] Jinn
    « Reply #319 on: September 26, 2014, 10:16:50 am »

    On a less positive note, I originally calculated 50 as a fair price so I do think this is getting overpriced and I hope it doesn't go up too much further.

    Could you tell how you ended with this number, please? I'd like to compare your numbers to mine.
    Logged
    Pages: 1 ... 14 15 [16] 17 18 ... 80
     

    elective-stereophonic
    elective-stereophonic
    assembly
    assembly