Ken very rarely gives figures and information so i don't take the below quote lightly... Maybe you are reading into his wording too much Entropy Update on trading and wafers:
It is going to be a few more days before, I can get the verifying program uploaded to the server.
I have been busy getting on the February UMC production run for our 55nm chip.
We are going to get 6 Wafer in the middle of April with about 1 week to package the chips. Based on our estimated yield of 6,800 chips per wafer this give us 40,800 chips for a total hash rate of 77.52 TH/s. Next we are going to receive 19 wafers by the end of April for a total of 245.48 TH/s, giving us 323 TH/s. In May we will be able to get all of the wafers we want to run.
That's interesting. If true, he is starting a full wafer lot and then holding 19 wafers before first metal. This is a common strategy to validate your design with the first few wafers so if there are problems you can go to mask edit and only scrap the 6 wafers. My editorial comment would be that his estimate of hash per wafer seems about 30-40% high for 55 nm, and UMC has a reputation for horrible yields. On top of that expecting packaged and tested chips in 1 week is very optimistic. Most teams have been running more like 60 days to get from finished silicon to tested boards. |
|
|
|
Wow now cointerra has a security breach not really surprised, through all the 'head architect of Samsung'/'cryptography teacher' fluff theyre just a bunch of amateurs, i can't believe i was duped into purchasing one of these machines from them. Im sure theyre loving it though anything to buy them more time.
If you were 'duped', why are you offering your units for sale? And at double the price you paid? It seems awfully unethical to be trying to pass the buck with a huge markup if you truly feel cheated. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=433851.msg4852270#msg4852270 |
|
|
|
Jun-14 Cumulative Return = 959.00 May-14 Cumulative Return = 119.00 Difference = 840 BTC mined in 1 monthTotal BTC mined in 1 month (3600 BTC x 30 days) = 108,000 BTC 840 BTC / 108,000 BTC = 0.007777 = 0.77 % of hashrate from May to June LOL! Ken updated VBS's spreadsheet. I really missed that thing. Funny stuff. |
|
|
|
|
Who wouldn't want to pay a premium to do business with the oh so honorable ngzhang and Yifu?
Go fuck yourselves guys. I hope the chinese government raids your mine that you stole from batch 2 buyers and destroys every private key you hold.
|
|
|
|
There's a huge red flag here in Ken's latest posting for anyone who actually thinks he is serious about delivering 1-2 Ph/s in Q2 of this year. He says " getting us on the February run at UMC". In a fab wafer starts happen every day. A fully operational fab runs ~20000 or more wafers per month in lots of 25 wafers. For a normal start there is no particular 'run' to catch, and certainly no monthly run. There is one type of operation that does happen on a monthly basis; shuttle runs. A shuttle a wafer build with shared mask space. Your design is put on the masks along with many other people's in order to reduce costs and risk when testing if your design works. It's a way of test driving your design without the huge risk of paying for a full mask set. But, in exchange you only get a few hundred test chips for evaluation. So, if that is what Ken is doing, he would get a couple hundred chips at the end of April and be able to use them to validate his design. If they worked, it would take another 60-90 days before a full mask set could be built a wafers could be completed to produce anything more than a couple Th/s of devices. ... After the program verifies your shares, we will send a list of verified shareholders to CT, where they will create the account if not already created and add the verified number of shares to the account.
So you haven't even started the process yet? Yes, I have been working on it for awhile; however, the trip to the west coast to get the 55nm chip, working with eASIC to change to a custom 28nm chip, getting us on the February run at UMC so that we could have chips in mid april has been my priority this month. |
|
|
|
|
Every bitcoin article on bloomberg/businessweek should be read with "We hate bitcoin and," added to the beginning.
Once you read it that way they all start to make sense.
|
|
|
|
Cross posting this in case Ken deletes it from the other thread: Hi Ken,
I would appreciate it if you could address these questions in your next update. Thanks
1) What is the estimated $ per GH costs for the full deployment of the 55nm chips. This includes (but not limited to) chip cost, board cost, controller cost, set up costs, coding costs, rent, power, staffing, security etc.
2) What were the fixed costs for the 55nm chip. This includes (but not limited to) IP costs from the two new engineers (monetary or otherwise), NRE costs for the tapeout, fixed design costs for boards (if not amortised into the per unit deployment cost in Q1).
3) What are the limits (if any) to the space/power available in our chosen data centre.
Regards,
wasubii
These questions if answered would help the competition, don't you think? Hi Ken, I am afraid i have to respectfully disagree. What could the competition do given that information? The fact is, that everyone who is mining is doing everything they can to get as much hash online as possible - information from us as to what we are doing will not help or hinder them in that respect. Or perhaps i am missing something? How do you think they could use that information for their benefit or our detriment? Regards, wasubii I think any information about what are cost are would not be good to release. I don't know how they would use the information; however, if they don't have it, then I don't have to worry about how they would use it. Hi Ken, Thanks for your reply I would argue that the answers to those questions above should be known to shareholders, both current and future. The future performance of the company hinges on this information and it doesn't fall under any type of NDA as far as i can tell. If a competitor was thinking about copying what we were doing they could easy go out and get quotations for a 55nm mask, controller boards, mounting costs, hosting costs etc. I don't see how revealing these figures could possibly damage ActM, but conversely, i believe that releasing them would improve perceived transparency (something you are not known for) and boost investor confidence. You have already given the W per GH/s figures for the 55nm chips, you have also hinted at the level of our electricity costs (although as per usual you worded it very freely - much like your 'we have shipped products'). Why not release the rest of the information? Your argument above is a weak one - this is a publicly traded company and shareholders expect to be given key information - i believe the answers to the questions above fall within the realm of information that should be released to the shareholders. I for one am doubting that the 55nm chips are going to ROI after you take into account the IP costs, mask set and crucially, the deployment costs. However, if the 55nm IP from the two new engineers is also the basis for the new fully custom 28nm chips, then the IP costs would figure into the ROI calculation for the 28nm chips as well - which gives a much better picture for the 55nm chips because the costs are spread out over both types of chips. I understand that you prefer to not release any information at all - to date you have been incredibly secretive and in my opinion, that has damaged both your personal reputation and that of the company. In this new field of unlicensed, unregulated BTC securities there seems to be little shareholders can do to hold you to account - hence the endless jumping up and down and shouting on the thread. I beg you to reconsider your stance on answering the above three questions - i really think it is in everyone best interests for you to be more open with us shareholders. Regards wasubii Expect a good update tomorrow. He is never going to answer because the truth is that it will cost more per Gh/s to manufacture 55 nm that you could buy 28 nm hardware from the existing suppliers. Whatever was paid for the 55 nm design and taping out out was literally the equivalent of piling the money up and burning it. |
|
|
|
 Ken mentioned additional hashrate came online in November, what machines were those? CEX.IO Yet another way to mislead shareholders. That wasn't even the worst of the BS in this weeks hand waving. But it was among the funniest. CEO of super low cost mining hardware outfit goes out and buys the most expensive hash rate possible. That would only make sense if you knew you were never getting your own hardware, or you wanted to deceive people. I'm bored with this soap opera again. Watching sock puppets talk to each other all day has limited value. |
|
|
|
I only wish the reduced rate had come with better than anticipated power usage instead of the reverse.
If wishes were horses... Unfortunately the power consumption and performance are coupled together. Cointerra targeted a very high clock rate, and designing boards for that is not easy. I expect they will be able to improve on the board design and capture both their original target performance and substantially improve upon the power consumption. But that is going to take time, and it makes no sense to hold off on shipping a functional design to gain 20% when difficulty goes up by that much every 10 days. I still see them as the most professional organization in the market today. Organizations are tested when things don't go to plan. What Cointerra does in the next few weeks will define their reputation forever. Andy Grove saved Intel's reputation by making the tough decision and recalling the CPUs with FDIV defects. Ravi is going to have to make a similar decision here. ... Way too many words to repeat what I said in a single sentence.
I expect they will be able to improve on the board design and capture both their original target performance and substantially improve upon the power consumption. |
|
|
|
If you're upset with your own investment decision, then welcome to the world of buying pre-orders for custom mining hardware. You have to be lucky or judge carefully to make a good call, if so many people weren't making quick decisions then there wouldn't be so much wailing and bawling in these threads. You can see the wailing and bawling for yourselves, why put yourself through that? The only choice you have is to accept any loss quickly with dignity, or drag it out for as long as possible with the accompanying misery and frustration.
Pre-orders leave the customer vulnerable to being cheated. That doesn't justify cheating the customer. Do you spend a lot of time talking to rape victims about what they were wearing when they were attacked? |
|
|
|
Unless you are paying for electricity consumption you are engaging in theft of services. Their terms of use clearly make it against policy to be mining.
Do you really want to be expelled from your college?
I pay for electricity. I am not mining for a profit but as a learning experience. I also do not think it is clear at all that they have a policy against mining as it says it no where in their policy anything specifically about mining. You said yourself that you cannot use network resources for commercial purposes. Mining is inherently commercial since you earn money from it. Paying for the electricity yourself makes the issue less serious but having been explicitly told not to mine, continuing this operation is asking for a visit to the disciplinary committee. Sell your gear or find an off campus location to operate it. |
|
|
|
I only wish the reduced rate had come with better than anticipated power usage instead of the reverse.
If wishes were horses... Unfortunately the power consumption and performance are coupled together. Cointerra targeted a very high clock rate, and designing boards for that is not easy. I expect they will be able to improve on the board design and capture both their original target performance and substantially improve upon the power consumption. But that is going to take time, and it makes no sense to hold off on shipping a functional design to gain 20% when difficulty goes up by that much every 10 days. I still see them as the most professional organization in the market today. Organizations are tested when things don't go to plan. What Cointerra does in the next few weeks will define their reputation forever. Andy Grove saved Intel's reputation by making the tough decision and recalling the CPUs with FDIV defects. Ravi is going to have to make a similar decision here. |
|
|
|
|
Unless you are paying for electricity consumption you are engaging in theft of services. Their terms of use clearly make it against policy to be mining.
Do you really want to be expelled from your college?
|
|
|
|
Sorry your car is missing 20% of its engine... we'll give you a discount on your next one!
And it's more Gas than advertised......  How late is the feb batch going to be?? OK.. please dont shoot me. im just playing devils advocate here.. and using your car analogy... to show you from cointerra's point of view. youve ordered a sports car that was advertised as going at 200 MPH and consume 20 MPG and youve paid them $6,000 up front for it. Now, theyve come back and told you that theyre sorry, that the car that they built will go 170 MPH, and consume 24 MPG and with further tweaks in the future it may go faster. Theyve told you you can have a choice... do you still want your sports car delivered even though it goes a little slower.. at 170 MPH and consumes 24 MPG? or would you prefer a refund? Do you think a car company would allow you to take your car... but because it doesnt go 200 MPH and only goes 170 MPH do you think they will offer you a 15% refund? (i dont think so). theyre offering you your only two choices... 1. take it as is and hope they continue to tweak it... or 2. have a refund. The cost of building the car was the same so its not like they can afford to refund you anything. if you choose to take a refund they will sell the car to someone else. dont shoot me.. im just explaining it in the way that theyre seeing it.. and using your car analogy works well. Your car analogy breaks down because losing top speed doesn't affect the utility of the vehicle in any practical way. It would be more relevant to say you bought a truck to haul gravel 2 tons at a time to a site 500 miles away on one tank of gas. Now they tell you that the truck can only haul 1.6 tons of gravel 350 miles. Your needs haven't changed so you have to figure out a way to get 150 miles of extra gas into the truck, and buy more trucks to meet your contract. There is definitely some amount of risk sharing by customers in this case that is reasonable. But a tiny discount on future hardware doesn't really seem to be compensation. I'm hoping to see much better communication from Cointerra this week. Timing is still the most important factor, and a recovery there for January and February orders would improve my views greatly. |
|
|
|
Entropy we know* that the price on Crypto-Trade is unreal. Like an actually unreal price point that we won't be seeing anytime soon, if at all. Trying to convince the main people who try to pump the price isn't really a good use of time or effort.
No one is going to buy a share for over .0005, and I will not be putting up bids (if any) till we go down to .00005 or .00007 as I think this is a reasonable place for me to get in more than I have. Now I know this is overvalued in your opinion but I am factoring in the chance that this company my succeed, and the spare BTC I have laying around due to the lack of other stuff to do with them.
Now I would just like to state a very important point. I am not calling you a troll, or a fudster or anything. You have admitted to being against the company, you have stated that you don't own any shares and that Ken is incompetent. I understand where you are coming from and I have taken what you said at face value.
There is one thing that people in this forum are very paranoid about; people with shares facading a very bullish appearance about the company to pump the price and people without shares facading a very bearish appearance about the company to crash the price. Now I am not stating that you are doing that, and I really don't care what the price is because I have little desire to sell and less desire to buy but, you are appearing as the later in the moderated thread and it is going to cause people to mistrust you.
No one really thinks the company is worth $250M or close to that.
* Shareholders
My posts were in response to someone who claims to be a shareholder who thinks the stock is worth that much. I really don't care what anyone here thinks of me. I come to keep up to date on bitcoin every few months, and sometimes I stick around for the entertainment. Mostly I think browsing the forums here is bad for my personal wealth because observing the blatant scams and the fools who fall for them makes me want to sell bitcoins, which has always turned out to be a bad idea. I hope your shares actually start trading soon and that you get out of this mess as best as you can. |
|
|
|
What a coincidence, JUST shy of 30 days late.  Just watch them do it again with the Jan batch. 30 days late for whom? all december orders were moved into january (with comps so they are now officially january orders)... and we're still in january, and the first customer has their box. since i have some first batch orders, I'm hoping mine will start to arrive next week ... so yes, they're definitely some amount of days late perhaps even a couple of weeks late but they're not even a month late (.. yet). In the grand scheme of things, cointerra's delivery plans are really not as bad as some others we're following closely (hashfast, bitmine, etc) Damn, your boss is going to give you a bonus for that one. Which one are you in that picture?  Having met Jez in Las Vegas, I can definitely state that he is not in that picture. I'm not quite as pleased as he is, however. There has been far too many cases of companies shipping 1 system and then taking many weeks to actually ship in volume to be celebrating quite yet. I still hope Cointerra will prove to be the first case of a bitcoin supplier that does what they say they will do but I will reserve judgement until the facts are established. An updated schedule for each batch would be a good start at this point. |
|
|
|
I tried to get a substantive discussion of the value of Activemining going on the moderated thread. I think the stock is a sell over 0.00001, and showed why. Sadly I couldn't get any logical responses from the bulls. But Ken stepped in to save the day with the delete button. Look for Ken to log out soon and Zum to start posting again. :-) A reply of yours, quoted below, was deleted by the starter of a self-moderated topic. There are no rules of self-moderation, so this deletion cannot be appealed. Do not continue posting in this topic if the topic-starter has requested that you leave. You can create a new topic if you are unsatisfied with this one. If the topic-starter is scamming, post about it in Scam Accusations. Actually there are 25M shares, 10M is just the public share number. A 0.01 share price would value it closer to a quarter billion USD.
If you are using Dividend Yield as the core valuer of recieving shares you can discount the 15Mill private shares as they are not recieving any dividend. And they will not recieve any dividend until 25-50Mill USD has been paid out to investors. The full 'market cap' figure is thus not reflective of investor value. Shareholders invest for capital gains and dividend payout so the 15Mill are irrelevant until the guaranteed 0.0025 BTC per public share is paid out. At that time there will be a revaluation by the market. 0.0025 x 10M x $1000 BTC is $2.5M US. So if you want to get to a valuation higher than that you do have to account for the full number of shares. Mr.Teal is correct. Ken is trying to sell shares at a $250M valuation for the company. You are a horrible pessimist and think that 6 Avalons, a few benches and empty promises from a failed, alcoholic salesman is worth $100M |
|
|
|
Could you share how you come up with a value TODAY of $40M? Claiming future sales, or mining revenue that don't exist now, and may never exist doesn't cut it. For today's valuation the only thing you could do is estimate the cost to replicate what Ken has that might turn into those sales or revenue. And my calculations put that well under $1M.
I'd love to see some real numbers that you use to rationalize your valuation. I understand that it is difficult because Ken has failed to produce any credible financial statements, but I am curious about the bull case.
You don't understand the concept of share issues if you think future earnings are not priced in to security value. Future earnings might not cut it for you but for Wall Street they do. Maybe Wall Street are wrong? Your calculation, apart from being based on a false premise, is a bit clear of the mark considering we have several million in liquid assests. I could quote you some real numbers that valued Sony at zero in 2012. It was making an annual loss for four years. Did share price reflect that loss of earnings - yes. Did share price drop to reflect a value of negative 457Billion Yen? errr no. Of course not. Sony had assets with real sale value in the market. That is called book value and it usually acts as a floor for stock prices. Shares do trade under 1.0x book value, especially in cases where a company has fallen behind their competition or management is not trusted. Since Ken has failed to produce any books it's very hard to estimate book value for this mess. But I took a reasonable stab at it, which gives you 0.00001 for your shares. You seem to think the stock should trade today as if it is next year and Ken has succeeded in every aspect of your fantasy. He has a working 28 nm miner which has no competition so it's selling like hotcakes. Bitcoin is still extremely valuable, and Ken has built a 10 MW mining factory that has more than 1% of the network. With all that, the stock might be worth 0.004. But where is the profit for the poor bastards that buy it today at your fantasy price? Where is their reward for taking the spectacular risk that any of those miraculous things don't occur and they lose money? I was hoping for a rational discussion, but I see that it is still beyond the capacity of posters here. |
|
|
|
5x fully functional HashFast batch 1 BabyJets available NOW. Worked for the past 5 days without problems, but offered without garantee. Starting bid is 15 BTC per unit, increment minimum is 0.1 BTC Hashing rate is 425 gh/s without overclocking Shipping costs are included up to 200$ per machine (buyer pays any extra). Will ship worldwide with tracking. Customs fees and import taxes if any are responsibility of the buyer. Buyer may use John K. for escrow at their own expense. Bids on multiple units allowed, top 5 bids get the machines Auction closes on Thursday Jan. 30th 2014, 11:59 PM, eastern time. Picture : http://imgur.com/dBVEzLL15 BTC for all 5 would be crazy. 15 for 1? Are you drunk? Blissfully unaware of the alternatives? Trolling? A victim of recent head trauma? |
|
|
|
Oh, how the mighty have fallen! How did we get here and will we ever see those glory days again?
I'm still holding AM, mainly because I am too lazy to sell. But if Gen 3 fails, I fear all is lost.
FC mentioned that he does not like to work for others, what is preventing him from neglecting AM and letting it die a slow death while rebooting privately? His identity is still unknown so he can do whatever he pleases. Keeping my shares on faith alone is tough.
A study of Discus Fish would lead most to think that your scenario is already underway. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
