|
$0.8/GH for SP10 quality, in hand equipment won't bring out the punters. Demand is high and only a relatively small quantity of units exist.
|
|
|
|
Dogie, how can you possible give AMT a 10/10 for delivered miners? They delivered broken half ass boxes to some people. Most seem to have received nothing. They swear at their customers, and delete most posts. That should be a 1/10 for communications and ethics. Come on, where is the justification.
Because the criteria is simply have they delivered miners, the answer is yes. Its not how good are they, how reliable are they - each criteria is independent. AMT currently has the lowest score of any company which isnt VMC (which has failed) and BFL, which is BFL. |
|
|
|
|
Getting OT now. ASICminer is huge.
|
|
|
|
Your 'inside information' is either wrong or old.
can you produce or link to any data that shows the relative size of asicminer? what about just looking at list of mining pools (blockchain.info or organ of corti). we can see where kncminer is.. we can even see where bitfury might be. perhaps we can see some of the others. we also know what bitmain says they are. if we add up the network percentages that bitfury (40%), bitmain (20%), kncminer (10%?) and a few others (15%?) say they are (and hopefully can prove it someday)... then there's not a lot of unknowns left. asicminer is a public company. did they disclose just how big they are? Let me invite you to do some basic estimation of AM's worth. Total dividends distributed so far are 0.5911 BTC per share. Bitfountain, AM parent company, own 236,038 shares. You do the math. i dont see how total dividends in any way equates to the company's size. dividends go to the shareholders ! the total dividend doesnt equate to its revenue, nor its hashpower on the mining network. so what that last year they made 100,000+ bitcoins in dividends. thats awesome.. but that was last year. When they were a major part of the bitcoin mining network. They were HUGE HUGE HUGE last year. we all know that. What about this year? What about next year!? they dont appear to be HUGE any longer. Im doing the math. BitFountain 'made' 0.5911 * 236,038 bitcoins in total dividends, ever. Thats 139,522 bitcoins theyve made in profit into BitFountain. Thats not AsicMiner, thats BitFountain. And theyve done really really well last year. AsicMiner no longer has those bitcoins, theyve been dividend'd out to BF. This year, according to Havelock, the yield (dividend ratio compared to stock price) is 2%... so this year, isnt as good a year as last year (thats an understatement) You just linked us to information suggesting they just spent several million on chip orders.... |
|
|
|
bitfury - mostly makes chips, not systems. Yes, they make systems for their own private mine but they have hardly sold any of those to the public. probably 90%+ of the systems that have been 'sold' containing bitfury chips were made by unconnected third parties utilising bitfury's chips. yet you have them classified as a manufacturer of systems and have given them the benefit of not pre-selling, whereas the third parties who make the systems using bitfury chips, often do pre-orders right up until the chips arrive in stock. i myself bought bitburner boards from cryptx via pre-order., months in advance of their delivery. Most people bought bitfury boards from someone else and not direct from bitfury. now, of course, these companies are selling from stock because they've got plenty of chips, but in advance of the chips arriving in volume they were taking pre-orders. And what about your ethics score? You've got BitFury marked as an 'F' for a private mine, yet you've got KnCMiner scored as Ethics FF, which means 'HUGE private Mine' . Thats a purely emotional response, and isn't borne by the facts. Do you really think KnCMiner's private mine is bigger than BitFury's private mine?
I've not classified them as anything other than a company who makes chips - which is a huge positive. It means they've raised significant capital and have invested significant money in getting it right. They're much less likely to disappear overnight then someone who has just bought a small number of chips and integrated them. Bitfury's mine is not directly competing with their customers because they're two separate things entirely - they raised $10M for a farm. They don't have preorders waiting. KNC on the otherhand do, they raised preorder funds several times from the community, promised not to compete against their customers, then used all that cash (once orders went) to fund a super mine. After that they stopped caring about the average consumer because they no longer had to. That has been evidenced by the recent failed Neptune launch and now the even more preorders being offered. That's why their mine punishes them (a whole extra 2 points may I add...) I'm not sure what you mean by an emotional response, I've not had dealing or orders with either company, I have no financial investment or incentive either way. I couldn't really care less what they do. cointerra - doesn't seem well classified according to your rating methodologies. for instance, you scored them 1/10 for 'uses pre-orders' whereas they've been selling from stock ever since their systems arrived (months ago). you can buy one from stock today, or any time in the last few months. yet again, thats an emotional bias and isn't factual. they did do pre-orders (like most companies out there) before their stock arrived. You also rated them 1/10 for 'on time'. Why, if you're scoring out of 10, do you only have 3 options, Yes, No and Mixed. Why not have a linear (or log) score out of 10 for how 'on time' each company is? This particular company delivered their systems in batches according to month and the customers orders were delivered in that specific month. They shipped thousands of systems, and the vast majority were delivered in the month they were due (or a week or two late) the earlier batches were a few weeks late but not 'months late'. apart from the 1st batch (december), which was delayed a whole month and the customers who bought that batch were given compensation in the form of double the number systems. there's no way this company could be judged 1/10 for 'on time' if you're trying to compare relative timeliness to the others. Many of the asic companies on your list are ones that have never shipped (hashfast, blackarrow, bfl, vmc etc ) are are those infinitely late. Your ratings are scored out of 10, so you could easily differentiate those that shipped a little late versus those that shipped very very very late (or, Never) using the entire scoring range.
"they did do pre-orders (like most companies out there) before their stock arrived". You answered it yourself. Again I have no investment or incentive in any of this, so its not really fair for you to call it an emotion reponse because you don't agree with my opinion. You can see how much people (like you) are arguing about 1 and 2 points all over. To have 10 different scaling numbers within 10 categories for each company is insane and unusable. I'm not sure if you've worked with this style of rating system before, but the aim is to have as few categories as you can get away with. The more categories, the less useful and useful a rating system is. I think cointerra was significantly later than 'a few weeks', you can link me to something if you want. Size of companies. how do you rate that? it seems like pure fiction. You have AsicMiner, BitMain and BitFury rated as 'Huge' (i agree with the latter two but i think asicminer is probably not so huge any longer). You have Spondoolies and RockMiner as 'Large', but how do you even classify those? RockMiner as small and i think even Spondoolies would admit they're not 'large'. How are you going to measure it? Is this just pure guesswork? Why not based it on a measurable or determinable statistic like Revenue, or Petahashes shipped?
Asicminer is huge, huge huge huge. Every unit a multitude of companies sells has 100s of their chips in, its an astronomical scale. You're not in Asia where most of their business gets done but they are crazy. Bitmine - You have them rated as Large... How was that measured? you ALSO have them listed as having made their own chip. Did they really make their own chip or do they just buy it from innosilicon like so many chinese companies? Innosilicon says they made the chip and that bitmine is 'a reseller', like everyone else.
They're large because of their chips, and while I dispute they're 'just a reseller', it still wouldnt matter. They're the ones with the partnership and they're the ones powering a significant portion of consumer devices on the market today. In order of size of company, i suspect a more realistic list would be: BitFury is 1st, KnCMiner 2nd, Bitmain 3rd, Cointerra 4th, etc.. this size rating probably works regardless of whether you measure by petahash or revenue. I doubt asicminer is even relevant at this time. They're no longer Huge. They were HUGE when the network was less than 1 Petahash - now they're a minnow - and got left behind when the others designed better chips.
Your 'inside information' is either wrong or old. |
|
|
|
AMT ethics? 5/10 ... utterly ridiculous... should be 0/10.
They have no proof that they delivered a working model to anyone.
They sent a bounced check to their original manufacturer.
They shipped broken equipment to their users.
They never accepted RMA from anyone.
They don't even have a legit office!
As with the post a few up, I can't punish them for an ethics infraction which doesn't exist yet in the guide, and we don't actually have proof for. In the future they may be hurt with the addition of a 'legal action' infraction. They have/did have working models, I've seen them. |
|
|
|
HashFast should have gone with ranking to 0 because they have failed to deliver 95% of equipment and what they delivered was with 6 months delay. Also they are crrently going through bankruptcy court hearings so they literally ceased to exist.
Black Arrow communication ranking shoudl go to zero. They have completely stopped any customer service 2 months ago. They have never answered any phone calls and they have been ignoring any customer's e-mails for last 2 months. They also, every day, on their forum thread they keep cenosring-removing any posts related to seeking any legal action against them.
I can't just mash a company's score to 0. They're listed as bankrupt and no one can even buy anything from them. They will slowly drop off into inactive (which currently isnt in this thread). They're currently joint 3rd last. Black arrow are around, see above post. I can't punish them for using the moderated forum functionality, there are plenty of non moderated blackarrow threads you can post details about, including their CEO's address. |
|
|
|
This new guide looks really good. I love the composite scores. that makes it really easy for people.
Black Arrow
Communication 4/10
Ethics 5/10
They are about though, even if through negative interactions they are interacting with the community. One of their management PMed me within a few hours debating one of the ratings. The ethics has to go into a specific category. There maybe more types of infractions added in the future, like live lawsuits but for now I can't put them down for any of them other than generic. |
|
|
|
In order of size of company, i suspect a more realistic list would be: BitFury is 1st, KnCMiner 2nd, Bitmain 3rd, Cointerra 4th, etc.. this size rating probably works regardless of whether you measure by petahash or revenue. I doubt asicminer is even relevant at this time. They're no longer Huge. They were HUGE when the network was less than 1 Petahash - now they're a minnow - and got left behind when the others designed better chips.
Are you forgetting that asicminer had 60PH worth of wafers to sell as of ~2 months ago? That's probably more than bitfury has ever produced. Anyways it's pointless to speculate because nobody knows the exact (or even approximate) size of every company. Maybe use age instead of size? Tried that, companies can sit semi dormant and build reputation for free, again circumventing the system. |
|
|
|
do you think there's customers out there buying $60m of bitcoin mining hardware, at today's bitcoin price?
Absolutely, yes, yes, yes. That's only 100,000 bitcoins. |
|
|
|
@dogie
Hi, I see what you mean now. See if this sort of thing would be easier to update. Instead of having separate tables for each company, it's just one long table, with the top row made up of spacer gifs, which you can adjust to whatever you want with the "width" tag.
May or may not be easier for you to update later.
Will delete this post as soon as you reply.
Yeah gifs are the alternative solution, although I've seen the image proxy sometimes bunk out when you try and put 100+ images in one post and then shit goes down. I've got your code saved thanks. I wired this thing up to an excel spreadsheet which generates me the code automatically, so its easy to update atm. |
|
|
|
Hi, i just meant replacing the _______________ (_ _ _ _ _) with
(quote message to see). Regarding company size, it's simply a suggestion on my part. If you feel size translates into trustworthiness, i have no evidence that it doesn't, but to me it seems to penalize small chip integrators. Again, I defer to your opinion, I'm really glad you're maintaining this thread. If I haven't thanked you before, thanks  The ___s are structural spacing, tables are spastic as hell on SMF without the formatting options enabled. The table tries to collapse in to minimise width at all times. Company y rocks up and says "look we have miners", sells 5 online. According to the rating system, they would achieve almost a perfect score. That doesn't make any sense, hence there needs to be a size metric. |
|
|
|
Hi dogie. Looks awesome! The only possible glitch i see is with how the variables are weighed. For instance, a company being small detracts as many points as a company not shipping miners. Oh, and the forum software grocks the...
...tags, if that's useful.
It has to be that way or a brand new company yet to make mistakes is rated higher than the huge companies - that doesn't make any sense. They could have put in virtually no money, get a really high trustworthiness rating and then use it to steal preorder money. There has to be a criteria that looks at size and newness. What do you mean with the hr tags? Looks fine to me. |
|
|
|
Relaunch is now live, see the OP.
Huge improvement. Although I would have to disagree that btcgarden has ethics or quality issues. I've heard very little complaints and communication has been top notch. Also I don't think bitmain should be 10/10 for ethics because they have their own megamine (same size as KNC) and some questionable ethics like selling heavily used hardware. It might be a good idea to have two separate ratings for ethics and superfarming because some might not see self mining as being unethical (as long as they use their own time and money as well as stay far below 51%) BTCGarden does have quality issues, but they also deny it (hence the unethical issues). In bitmain's case its excluded because its never, ever impacted the customer deliveries as they only sell in batches, and deliver within their specified dates. They've also never ever specified the hardware is new, its hardware with a warranty. They aren't doing anything wrong there. Its already separate, farm mining is highlighted with the legend. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
