Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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.

Non-Tech : Ashton Technology (ASTN) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Rob W who wrote (3623)	3/17/2001 6:32:59 AM
From: jackie	Respond to of 4443

I did catch the part of the web cast dealing with the eVWAP questions. Rather surprised to hear the questions I posed entertained first on the program. Fred does not ignore the shareholder, that is a fact. He addressed some of the questions, but left out the answer to the big one: what is holding things up. My impression was the system is up and running and we will reach critical mass when we reach it. Those are real revenue shares trading and real money is being paid for the services. Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't Fred mention back office problems with the BOTB? And did he not also mention the big list players have not really jumped in? I also was encouraged by his announcement that Ashton will post the eVWAP volume numbers on the company website when the revenue volumes average over a million per day. It would also appear the million per day meets Fred's working definition of critical mass. In a way, I think Fred wants to avoid stating the system is 'live' at some given point. If he were to do so, then everyone would have these expectations of a huge jump in volume. What would be the effect if there wasn't? On the other, if one simply lets the system grow at its own pace, at the pace set by the customers, then it just grows. We can just sit back and watch events unfold and people can decide for themselves when the system is 'live' or has 'ramped up' or whatever you want to call it. There are simply too many parameters or factors involved in the actual use of the system to accurately determine projected volumes, including some point where the system is self-sustaining or has achieved critical mass. It's interesting this term critical mass. Of course it is derived from the concept developed during the Manhattan Project. Just how much fissionable material was required to sustain a chain reaction fast enough to produce an atomic explosion? The answer depends a great deal on the specifics of the design. For example, will you use an internal source of neutrons, or will you count on a stray neutron coming into your newly increased mass of nuclear material to trigger the bomb? If the former, the critical mass is much smaller. In the first compression style nuclear device, polonium was used as the neutron source. The hazelnut-sized trigger produced around 90 million neutrons per second, or the 10 or so neutrons needed within the crucial microsecond when the core was at its highest density. Chances were good enough neutrons went through the bomb from natural background radiation, but one doesn't trust the reliability of a multi-billion dollar enterprise to nature. Nor could they wait for the production of more plutonium to insure natural neutrons would trigger the device. Another factor affecting critical mass is the tamper material surrounding the core. The tamper reflects neutrons leaving the nuclear core back into main mass of the bomb to contribute to the chain reaction. Without the tamper, more fissionable mass would be needed because there would be a net loss of available neutrons leaving the growing chain reaction. Other factors affecting the actual size of critical mass would be tamper material used, explosive used in compressing the bomb, configuration of the device, etc. As with the atomic bomb, the actual critical mass of users of the eVWAP is subject to many factors. Some of these factors can be managed, others are really dependent on a host of psychological and market dynamics not readily measured, let alone managed. Each uranium or plutonium atom making up an atomic device has certain measurable attributes, such as neutron capture cross-section, that do not change with time. The individual elements making up the eVWAP are people or collections of people (companies), all of which are notoriously unpredictable. What to do? Just keep adding people to the system, correcting problems as you find them, and let them start using the system. Some factors you can absolutely filter out. For example, the guarantee of anonymity. Without it, you'll never reach critical mass because the people using the system will hold back, fearing somehow, someone will know what they are doing. As you bring on people to eVWAP, you increase the odds of a match. Exactly parallel to the trend of adding mass to an atomic bomb, you are increasing the odds of neutron capture. At some point, it starts feeding on itself. But one thing you don't want to do is announce you are ramping up. That might affect the perceptions of the users in a way you simply cannot anticipate. It might even cause a negative feedback as the traders will sit back and see what everyone else will do. No, just had the tool to them. Tell them how to use it. Show them how much money they will save. Encourage them to start using it. I think that is exactly what Fred is doing right now. Some day, we will look back and say, "On this day, with market conditions prevailing at that moment, the critical mass to eVWAP was so and so." Just some thoughts. Regards, Jack