@GgGgGg - Sorry for my delayed reply. I don't know how many miners Canoe(China) has or had, or what percentage of those they plan to bring to the Canoe USA operation. (in light of escalating hostility to crypto from China's government, it seems more and more likely that Canoe USA might get all of them - but that's just speculation). I've read MGTI pr stating a goal ("forward looking statement" there..) of up to 5,000 mining rigs. And they only have 48 million OS. The most I've seen in any SANP/Canoe or is a goal of 2,000 owned mining rigs - but since Canoe is / will be a pool, they'll get a percentage from every additional rig that signs in and works in the pool. No telling how many that will be, but I've seen Slushpool claim to have 50,000 logged-in miners.
One issue is SANP's OS count at 7.35 billion shares. If all else between MGTI & SANP were equal (and it isn't), the different share counts would mean that SANP shares would be 1/150th the pps of MGTI shares. (but nothing at all is "equal" between the two, so 1/150 is NOT a valid basis to price either vs the other...).
"Would a share buyback make sense?" I don't know... To me, yeah.. I like to see a company buy back it's shares, it strengthens the position of every remaining share. A buyback from mining proceeds would be a good way to distribute mining revenues without the hassle of sending out dividend checks. We would see a steady, measured decline in OS count, without the negative impact of a RS. So market cap should continue to grow in step with mining revenues, and share price should rise as book value per share rises from the falling OS count in the denominator of BV/S. Essentially, when a shareholder wanted his share of mining revenues, the remaining shareholders (thru the company) would "buy him out", buying back his shares for mining revenue cash. The longer a shareholder stays in, the larger his share of mining revenues should be, and his buyout price should be higher because of it. I like it, hope it happens this way.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
