SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Gold/Mining/Energy : T.ITE: iTech Capital (TSE)

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Crazy Canuck who wrote (3817)1/21/2000 12:59:00 AM
From: Keith Minler  Read Replies (1) of 5053
 
WARNING:WILD SPECULATIONS AHEAD... WILD SPECULATIONS AHEAD

Well Crazy I'll take a crack at crunching some numbers.

We know that Medsite raised about 69 million.

We know that JDX kicked in 1 million the first time.
It seems a reasonable guess to think that they had to ante up 2 million more to stay even.

So that means that they have put in 3 of 69 or 1/23 of capital. If the principles intend to retain say 75% of the company then Jdx would have 1/23 of 25% or 1.086 % of Medsite.

If medsite IPO's to a similar value as Healtheon, say 6 billion; then JDX would have 1.086% of 6,000,000,000. or $65,160,000.

If there are 35,000,000 shares outstanding in JDX, then the per share value of our holdings in Medsite would be $1.86.

Which confirms most of us in our belief that JDX is way undervalued.

Note:PURE SPECULATION...PURE SPECULATION...PURE SPECUALTION

Anyone else have alternate guesses or hypotheses?

Later

Keith

EDIT: Thinking about it, the above implies a return on investment for JDX of about 20 to 1, seems to me to be a tad high. Does anyone know what kind of return venture capital normally generates in these type situations?

EDIT2:These figures are in US dollars, would mean about $2.75 CDN, I think, shouldn't do this type of stuff this late.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext