This time around it really seems that Bitmine is very close to start shipping I can give you some definitive ones from the SW side: - CoinCraft Desk
- done: the driver got integrated in upstream cgminer just today (check git repository)
- done: all remaining FW parts (UI, sensors, actors) passed long term testing over night
- done: with that, FW is ready for deployment
- CoinCraft Rig
- done: IAP bootloader to reflash STM32 over SPI in the field
- done: initial hashing proxy tunneling SPI comms between host and 2 chip chains
- done: Initial cgminer driver
- WIP: sensor and actors (temperature, voltage regulator, etc.)
- WIP: self-optimization, long-term stability
Essentially, the FW for the Desk was done before time (devices are assembled / tested while I type), while the SW for the Rig will be ready just in time. This would be really good news - Bitmine represents more than 80% of pre-ordered hardware. |
|
|
|
One more try on possible future valuation. I will use different approach - comparison with peers. At the beginning I want to say that I had some trouble to find really comparable and publicly listed operations. For example there are several mining operations listed on Havelock - COG, HMF, KCIM - but each of them seems to be different in a meaningful way from Peta. HMF and KCIM are much, much smaller (by a factor of 20-40). In the case of COG it seems that the person who runs it does a lot of things that lead to a loss of credibility - which I hope won't be the case of Peta. There are, of course, operations of 'hosting' and 'mining contract' type - but these having completely different model does not fix our purpose. To chose peers I started with the following assumption: Peta has a good chance to be perceived by the market as a high profile operation. So I searched for listed operations with very good opinion. I also searched for ventures with reinvestment strategy - this eliminates for example Picostocs' 500TH. Stellar reputation and reinvestment requirements left me with: GMP (Cryptostocks), HMF (Havelock) and KCIM (Havelock). All of them much smaller but having good reputation and similar model. To quantify this comparison I will use the price of Ghs we pay when buying shares. All ventures wait for new 28nm equipment and expect jump in hash power by March 2014. Why all three could give a hint of FUTURE valuation of PETA? - 1) all three didn't sell their equipment in November 2013 so they have been paying dividends all the time. Which puts them well into the frame of running operation with reinvestment 2) their reputation is already very well established and the market sees practically no operational risk. Comparison: GMP - 0,09btc/Ghs KCIM - 0,065btc/Ghs HMF - 0,085btc/Ghs PETA just after deployment: 240 -340Th, 80675 shares, 2,88-3,45 Ghs/share which leads to a price in the range of 0,185-0,32. These results don't diverge much from (partial quote): If we use that yield to be 33% of the share price, that gives 0.27 btc/share
25% -- 0.36 btc/share
And are more optimistic than those (partial quote): If they base dividends on the 80674 outstanding shares, then the EPS becomes 0.02809btc
Further into the future? 1) Market valuation per Ghs will most probably decline in time (consequence of rising difficulty) 2) Smartness of reinvestment enters in full importance - CryptX's simulations show that Ghs/share could be well above 10 at the end of the year. Please, don't treat this estimation too seriously. It's just a shot. And there are a lot of IF's  very nice valuation but in your calculation you forgot about bdd (B.MINE) on havelock which is a 5gh/s mining bond, priced at 0.067 per unit, way below ipo price B.MINE is a derivative, not an asset Yes, it shouldn't be taken into consideration. B.MINE price reflects expected dividend from 5Ghs but only during very limited time frame. What's more there are certain rules that may provoke it's early expiration in case of stagnating or falling difficulty - exactly when you would expect rising dividend. Additionally the time frame of its dividend is impacted by payouts to B.SELL. Anyone considering purchase of B.MINE should read very carefully its documentation. |
|
|
|
One more try on possible future valuation. I will use different approach - comparison with peers. At the beginning I want to say that I had some trouble to find really comparable and publicly listed operations. For example there are several mining operations listed on Havelock - COG, HMF, KCIM - but each of them seems to be different in a meaningful way from Peta. HMF and KCIM are much, much smaller (by a factor of 20-40). In the case of COG it seems that the person who runs it does a lot of things that lead to a loss of credibility - which I hope won't be the case of Peta. There are, of course, operations of 'hosting' and 'mining contract' type - but these having completely different model do not fix our purpose. To chose peers I started with the following assumption: Peta has a good chance to be perceived by the market as a high profile operation. So I searched for listed operations with very good opinion. I also searched for ventures with reinvestment strategy - this eliminates for example Picostocs' 500TH. Stellar reputation and reinvestment requirements left me with: GMP (Cryptostocks), HMF (Havelock) and KCIM (Havelock). All of them much smaller but having good reputation and similar model. To quantify this comparison I will use the price of Ghs we pay when buying shares. All ventures wait for new 28nm equipment and expect jump in hash power by March 2014. Why all three could give a hint of FUTURE valuation of PETA? - 1) all three didn't sell their equipment in November 2013 so they have been paying dividends all the time. Which puts them well into the frame of running operation with reinvestment 2) their reputation is already very well established and the market sees practically no operational risk. Comparison: GMP - 0,09btc/Ghs KCIM - 0,065btc/Ghs HMF - 0,085btc/Ghs PETA just after deployment: 240 -340Th, 80675 shares, 2,88-3,45 Ghs/share which leads to a price in the range of 0,185-0,32. These results don't diverge much from (partial quote): If we use that yield to be 33% of the share price, that gives 0.27 btc/share
25% -- 0.36 btc/share
And are more optimistic than those (partial quote): If they base dividends on the 80674 outstanding shares, then the EPS becomes 0.02809btc
Further into the future? 1) Market valuation per Ghs will most probably decline in time (consequence of rising difficulty) 2) Smartness of reinvestment enters in full importance - CryptX's simulations show that Ghs/share could be well above 10 at the end of the year. Please, don't treat this estimation too seriously. It's just a shot. And there are a lot of IF's |
|
|
|
It seems we have more new machines  |
|
|
|
Unfortunate to hear about minershare...  Glad I chose PBMining instead!  Me too |
|
|
|
that been said, I was thinking the last few days about the behavior of other people, this IPO have a voting share right, I see that I don't agree with most of you, and I also see that Cryptx will have a tough time operating this operation when some bitch about every small detail (get rich right tonight with these scam coins), therefor I was selling my shares slowly (yes I was the one bringing the price down to 0.055).
just cashed the last shares after reading comments over here, 20% profit is acceptable for me, and good luck everyone with the merged mining and all other matters.
I hope you will come back. Normally, variety of points of view helps to make good decisions. By the way, voting power depends on the number of shares you own so don't give up too early |
|
|
|
I fail to see how "hiring a PR person" will fix anything since all the information is known by Gar255 and him only.
It just doesn't make sense...
+1 +2 |
|
|
|
1. I agree that merged mining is a nice idea. But surely it is NOT priority. Priority is to build efficient farm and then to reinvest in cost effective and fast way. When and only when this is done and works in a way that allows for some spare time (for CryptX that is) they could turn to merged mining or other interesting ideas. 2. There are some interesting posts by Zefir on official Bitmine forum https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=291141.1440 regarding what's going on at Bitmine and with development of alternative PCBs |
|
|
|
|
Up to now I always thought about 'deployment' as reaching full hash power per share at the target deployment date - 2.44Ghs before 15 January, 2.88 before 15 February, ...
Unfortunately, today, I found that the exact wording in PETAPROSPECTUSV2.0.pdf is ambiguous.
It talks about deployment (which clearly suggests requirement of reaching 2.44Ghs/share ) in case of mid-January threshold but talks only about 'starting deployment' when giving example of mid-February deadline - really strange.
I start seeing this as some kind of litmus paper how CryptX is going to treat shareholders.
Really curious if tomorrow we get a statement similar to that from 15 January.
|
|
|
|
Website spoil, cannot login  Me too. When trying: session_start() [function.session-start]: Cannot send session cache limiter - ... |
|
|
|
|
Asked them about ID and KnC contracts proofs around 4 days ago. No reply.
|
|
|
|
|
CryptX's expertise to manage the farm and ability to strike good deals for new hardware are essential.
Next several months should show how we really stand.
By the way I think an update could arrive around February 15.
|
|
|
|
I've been with him all day, sleeping in the same room as him tonight in Dallas, picking up our Cointerra hardware in person tomorrow!
Cheers,
Garrett
Perhaps it could be the right time to send e-mail to Havelock about COG.F and COG.F2? |
|
|
|
The gentleman who bought 500Gh/s was able to verify his purchase and address on the phone. So in other words: sorry guys, still sold out. When I hit 'Buy A Contract' I see a page with: 'Blockchain is not responding. We are unable to get a price. Please try back in a little while.' is this the way to say 'SOLD OUT' or something else is wrong? |
|
|
|
|
Let's speculate a bit about future network share of Peta-Mine.
Given current statements by both Bitmine and Cointerra full deployment before mid-March seems realistic. This would mean 3.45Ghs per share.
Total number of shares could reach the ceiling of 100 000 especially if the deployment is achieved before end of February. So we get to around 345Th.
Current total network hash rate is roughly 22Ph. This gives Peta ~1,55% at the deployment - or a bit less if network grows between now and deployment time.
No one knows the future but it seems, barring any kind of ELA type event for bitcoin community, that total network power will rise substantially in 2014.
Frankly, I will be very, very glad if Peta's reinvestment strategy allows it to preserve its network share (1-2%).
CryptX's own estimations show that Peta's share could actually fall slightly in time.
Time will tell.
|
|
|
|
|
Not sure what do you mean by: 'their goal of being 35% of the network'.
Peta's strategy is to reinvest 35% of its net income and according to Cryptx's forecasts (a bit dated) Peta hash rate should represent around 1-2% of total hash power.
|
|
|
|
Posts are trickling in the cointerra thread that people are receiving their miners. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=269093.1800Not sure what the shipment time is between texas and where ever petamines datacenter is for 30+ units, but it shouldn't be too long now. CryptX is located in Belgium as, most probably, the datacenter for all equipment so the customs may cause some delay (Cointerra case). |
|
|
|
OK. After half a year of waiting, and more than a month overdue now, we all want to see some progress.
CryptX could communicate more often, but I can understand that all details of his deals maybe can not be disclosed.
Glad to see they are focusing on developing and producing own mining boards for chips. I think this can greatly help when reinvesting.
That's the point. We have several years of mining ahead of us. Probably, it's going to be very competitive business and the ability to implement reinvestment strategy (35% of net income in Peta case) on time is going to be crucial for long term success. Personally, I hope CryptX will be able to fulfill IPO contract because in this case Peta Mine should be very profitable for all of us. Fulfill the contract means both to increase hash power by 20% for each month of delay and to implement reinvestment strategy ASAP after deployment. One can really not exaggerate on importance of second condition - reinvestment must be FAST. Of course I hope they manage to negotiate to receive as much hardware as possible because of delays. But if they use it for 'deployment' or 'reinvestment' purposes? According to the contract they are free to use it for both. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
