Well, bitfury does have great chips, it seems. And they seem to know how to run a decent operation. But this is in no ways impeding AM from grabbing their own share of the pie. I'm still very confident the final BE300 chip will do just fine!
From the information we have available, it would suggest AM will be first out with products based on the next gen ASICs. With bitcoin price picking up again, AM stand a very good chance of selling a lot of hashing power before the competition's ASICs are even available. |
|
|
|
Looks like both u & Puppet have the bad habit of getting things straight after lot of conversation. Should I assume that this is because the same person is typing both ?
That would be a pretty silly assumption considering Puppet advocates buying and holding BTC whereas I advocate buying AMHash. Anyways, my stand is straight as it was from my very first post. None of these cloud mining services, from Cex.io to CMW to AsicMiner does full disclosure of everything that a transparent company can do. As Gavin properly predicted all of them are doing fractional reserve mining. But, I dont see anything wrong in that, as long as they dont show any intention to run away with customers money. In case of CMW, they did not lie about anything from the beginning. They clearly stated what they will not disclose. I am OK with that, so I'm with them. The funny thing is that, AM Hash/AsicMiner people are feeling insecure and coming back to this thread again and again. Puppet might take this opportunity to jump in for a bet about how long this service will survive. I wont take it as it is about a future event and hence a gambling. The interesting fact is that, initially Puppet or some of his friend predicted that service will run away within 2-3 months. Now they are predicting 6 months... Let us see.  Of course the scammer doesn't show any intention of running away with the money, why on earth would they? Do you think the scammer is just going to announce their intention to steal everyone's money? No, they just steal the money and either come up with an excuse or disappear. ASICMiner isn't a cloud mining service, it's the oldest bitcoin ASIC and miner manufacturer and is set to release new, more efficient miners next month. If CMW actually had any miners, they would come from a manufacturer such as ASICMiner. ASICMiner have proven their trustworthiness on many occasions. There would have been no need for AMHash to provide proof of legitimacy (beyond FriedCat's word) yet they did. Cloud Mining Website refuses to provide any evidence of legitimacy whatsoever and has earned no such trust from the community. Yep, clearly the same!  |
|
|
|
Yah... returned 200 BTC in a day to gain trust and raised 800 BTC+ in a week by using that trust. Seems legit. Typical Chinese communist type. Help someone at his bad day and make him a communist slave for rest of his life. So, let me get this straight. The oldest bitcoin ASIC manufacturer isn't legit but the cloud mining scam that refuses to provide any evidence of legitimacy is perfectly legitimate. |
|
|
|
Funnily enough, I was just looking into another "cloud mining service" called "cloumin.in". It seems to have the exact same transaction structure as CMW. From their "Proof of payments" you can see that the last output from the latest payment was: 1AZ8aWkapStU6UUf3bGgEho6Rrvx1huuvR - (Unspent) 0.000065 BTC From the cloudmin.in website you can see that's the payout for 10 Gh/s which costs 0.008 BTC. By looking at that address, you can see that it paid for those 10 Gh/s in this transaction, sending 0.008BTC to 1GNoohohBjDNBeRfQeJ1c43LLMiXYxq6Zd, which is a customer pay-in address from cloudmin.in. From 1GNoohohBjDNBeRfQeJ1c43LLMiXYxq6Zd, the money is transferred to 1J53FDjBPYj7qYaWT8fY26nPY6CLknTaVc which by looking at that address, you can see that it receives payments of multiples of 0.008 BTC. It is quite obviously a pay-in collection address, in the same way that 1LfpedDQLqqEmSDZ9B7v2sPzz5NeeDhXec is for CMW. If you click the addresses below that collection address, you'll find that they lead to Eobot too, just like CMW. What are the odds of 2 separate businesses having such an identical transaction structure involved in funnelling money to Eobot? What's even funnier is that that website was PM'd to me by a victim of MineThatCloud which already has a connection to CMW (by redirecting their website to CMW). My investigation into cloudmin.in was looking for a connection to MineThatCloud, yet I found that it's transaction structure is identical to CMW's. Just another coincidence though, eh? |
|
|
|
Picture of a bunch of Chinese does not prove anything. People need to know how FriedCat looks like and what is his business address, because he is raising millions from market. Involved in scams like GLBSE, Hashie and upcoming HaveLock. If you can accept his anonymity and portray him as legit in your thread, then lose the right to ask about anyone else.
Stop talking complete bollocks. FriedCat isn't raising any money from the market. ASICMiner got their funding years ago. That's why they've always been able to sell hardware from stock rather than needing to do pre-orders. Also, FriedCat is one of the most trustworthy names in bitcoin, from returning a massive transaction fee that they mined the block for to giving a full refund to anyone that bought a Prisma months after the sale of those Prismas. What has CMW done to earn peoples trust? Refuse to provide any evidence of legitimacy? Funnel funds to Eobot? Steal people DC pics? |
|
|
|
The odd is that u r an absolute idiot and after finding so many same pattern, u r still unable to discover the real reason.
What's even funnier is that that website was PM'd to me by a victim of MineThatCloud which already has a connection to CMW (by redirecting their website to CMW). My investigation into cloudmin.in was looking for a connection to MineThatCloud, yet I found that it's transaction structure is identical to CMW's. Just another coincidence though, eh? |
|
|
|
Funnily enough, I was just looking into another "cloud mining service" called "cloumin.in". It seems to have the exact same transaction structure as CMW. From their "Proof of payments" you can see that the last output from the latest payment was: 1AZ8aWkapStU6UUf3bGgEho6Rrvx1huuvR - (Unspent) 0.000065 BTC From the cloudmin.in website you can see that's the payout for 10 Gh/s which costs 0.008 BTC. By looking at that address, you can see that it paid for those 10 Gh/s in this transaction, sending 0.008BTC to 1GNoohohBjDNBeRfQeJ1c43LLMiXYxq6Zd, which is a customer pay-in address from cloudmin.in. From 1GNoohohBjDNBeRfQeJ1c43LLMiXYxq6Zd, the money is transferred to 1J53FDjBPYj7qYaWT8fY26nPY6CLknTaVc which by looking at that address, you can see that it receives payments of multiples of 0.008 BTC. It is quite obviously a pay-in collection address, in the same way that 1LfpedDQLqqEmSDZ9B7v2sPzz5NeeDhXec is for CMW. If you click the addresses below that collection address, you'll find that they lead to Eobot too, just like CMW. What are the odds of 2 separate businesses having such an identical transaction structure involved in funnelling money to Eobot? |
|
|
|
That's pretty silly as the maths will show that cloud mining is more profitable for most people.
I would like to see those maths. From what I have seen, the investor, for the most part, has had a choice of either unprofitable or ponzi scheme. I posted this the other day: If you can get legitimate cloud mining contracts for cheaper than the cost of a physical miner, then you'd also make a profit from cloud mining too.
You could currently buy 1700 Gh/s of AMHash off Havelock for less than 0.00097499 BTC/Gh, so less than 1.657483 BTC for 1700 Gh.
AMHash charges 0.001551 USD/Gh/day for maintenance. For 1700 Gh, that's 2.6367 USD.
An SP20 is currently selling for 479 USD. At 235 USD/BTC, that's 2.03829787 BTC. You also need to pay for shipping and a PSU.
The SP20 does 1700 Gh/s (customers say about 1500-1600) and consumes 1200 W.
That gives 0.00119900 BTC/Gh and 28.8 kWh used daily.
With an electricity cost of 0.1 USD/kWh, that gives a daily running cost of 2.88 USD.
The SP20 can also be underclocked to 1176 Gh/s using 639W.
That gives 0.00173325 BTC/Gh and 1.54 USD daily running cost or 0.001310 USD/Gh/day.
You are more likely to profit from legitimate cloud mining than you are from mining bitcoins at home or even if you get you miner hosted.
|
|
|
|
That is just one example. A PSU is just a capital expense and can be sold when you no longer need it for nearly the entire cost. You still must (indirectly) pay for shipping as the manufacturer still needs to ship the miners from where they produce them to wherever they will be hosted. Electric costs vary from place to place so your argument that you pay higher electric costs by running them at your home is invalid.
You can't count on reselling heavy used PSUs for almost full price at all. It's also far easier and cheaper to ship all the miners to one central location than to ship them to individual customers around the world. As for electricity costs, most people do not have electricity costs that are less than 0.1 USD/kWh. This topic is about cex therefore it should be assumed that he was talking about it. Even if he was not then the overall point of my post is still valid. Mining rewards (net of maintenance) will generally decrease over time as the difficulty increases (although this time around the difficulty will decrease, although not enough to counter the fact that the price of bitcoin has fallen so the net mining reward will still be lower)
It was quite obvious the poster was not talking about CEX but cloud mining in general. Also, that wasn't you point at all. Your point was that cloud mining is unprofitable compared to home mining. That's pretty silly as the maths will show that cloud mining is more profitable for most people. |
|
|
|
If the manufacturer is providing the hardware at cost then it would be contrary to your above point because they would not be making any money off of the sale.
The cloud mining contract is the sale, not the provision of miners. The third party would need to make it's profit from somewhere. There needs to be a difference between the amount that is sent to the manufacturers and the amount they receive from customers. There will also be additional costs like paying someone to monitor and adjust the miners, someone to handle customer service, someone to handle potential customer's questions, someone to handle payouts. Plus management to manage these people. The manufacturers are already self-mining. The only extra cost involved is from the website used to sell hashing power. Also, a cloud mining service needs far less customer support than shipping miners all around the world. |
|
|
|
If the manufacturer is providing the hardware at cost then it would be contrary to your above point because they would not be making any money off of the sale.
The cloud mining contract is the sale, not the provision of miners. |
|
|
|
|
Guy, just thought you should know that I wouldn't purchase from Genesis Mining simply because they don't make their maintenance fees and other neccessary contract information available unless you sign up first. There's bound to be other potential customers with the same mentality. If you can do anything to change that you should.
|
|
|
|
|
The price of Havelock just represents badly programmed bots outbidding all other bids which pretty much keeps the price at a minimum.
Look at it like this, does anyone actually think that AM1 is worth less than ALC?
|
|
|
|
one year.. its very long life for cloud mining.. congrulation honestly.. i hope you will continue more years..  I hope and wish, BCS will reach the end of 5-year-contracts. That would be a very good ROI/ROR while the BTC/USD will raise again!  Of course they won't last for 5 years, they won't last till the end of this year. If they even have any miners, then once they become unprofitable, your contracts become worthless. No miner currently available would last anywhere near 2 years, never mind 5 years. |
|
|
|
|
This garbage is not cloud mining service, it's a scam that refuses to provide any evidence of legitimacy.
|
|
|
|
CEX has broken own rules in FAQ: Guarantee compensation for loss. So I call them scammers with real company adress. I lost some profits because of CEX's outdated mining-hardware, but compensated it with daytrading. As long CEX has no plan and no willing to compensate mining and GHS loss, I will not invest there anymore.
That's not CEX breaking their contract, that's CEX following it. The fact you didn't make a profit from mining is irrelevant, that's your own problem for buying overpriced contracts based on obsolete hardware. If you was mining at home, and didn't make a profit would you call the company that sold the miner to you a scammer? No, the company is not the scammer, the fault lies with you. Good luck, Cloudminr - I'm with you till the end ...  You don't have a choice in the matter. |
|
|
|
Cloud mining is simply more profitable for both customer and manufacturer so it's inevitable really and ideally, you should be able to buy and sell your hashing power on the market, so people can get in and out whenever they want without any hassle.
I would dispute this. The manufacturer is going to have to partner with some third party that is not going to want to pay the "retail" price (eg want to get a discount) and the lower sales price is likely going to be less then the difference between the retail price and the cost of selling/shipping retail amounts of miners to retail customers. For the customer on the other hand, the cloud mining company is going to be able to command a higher price from customers because of less hassle of setting up and maintaining the mining equipment Check the numbers and you'll see that I'm right. For example, AM made more money from the sale of AMHash contacts than they did from the sale of Prismas while at the same time, customers saved money because they didn't have to pay for shipping or extras. Also, the manufacturer doesn't have to partner with anyone, but if they do, if would make sense to provide the hardware at cost. |
|
|
|
Do you ever think that cloud mining will become profitable again?
It still is, just over a longer period of time. This is not true. As it stands now it is not profitable having your GHs running at CEX. They will become even less profitable as time goes on as the difficulty tends to increase (although the adjustment in ~3 days will likely be an exception to this). You need to remember that when you are cloud mining verses "home" mining you are adding an additional layer of people who need to profit which will make it generally less profitable then if you purchased your hardware yourself He never said CEX.IO. He said cloud mining. All the manufacturers offer their their own services now so it means being able to mine without having to pay for shipping, PSUs and ridiculously expensive electricity. |
|
|
|
only one of them cex.io cex.io hasn't disappeared though, nor has it broken its contract. They have just "temporarily" stopped payouts. As specified in the contract. It's just like someone mining for profit at home turning their miner off because the electricity costs became greater than the mining reward. That's why claims of 5 year contracts are pure nonsense - miners don't remain profitable for anywhere near that amount of time. All legitimate services will have such termination clauses in their contract, scams don't need them though. |
|
|
|
only one of them cex.io cex.io hasn't disappeared though, nor has it broken its contract. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
