Hi N_S. The answer is a definite...sort of. I have a fellow crypto currency nerd long time friend who is also among bASIC-Mining's top shareholders that I've called upon to give the gear a swift kick as needed when I was travelling. He has keys to my office and enough knowledge to restart the gear, but I wouldn't describe him as tech savvy exactly, at least not in a hands on sense. He could take over and keep things running fairly seamlessly in an emergency situation as far as the accounting and payouts go, but he doesn't have much interest in keeping abreast of the technological landscape.

Cheers.

Hi AngelSky. I host them myself in MI as opposed to a contracted colo. This is much cheaper and I can therefore keep purchased gear online longer. Plus I'm a tinkerer by nature.

Cheers.

Hi guitarplinker. I pay a staggered rate for power ranging from $.08/Kwh and $.11/Kwh depending on usage. I believe the rate was lower in the fall/winter last season, but I'd have to check on that.

Welcome aboard btw.

When I speak of efficiency, I'm referring to power consumption. BFL's 65nm based products are somewhere between 50-60% more efficient than ASICMiner's current 130nm offerings. While this hasn't mattered much in the past as operating costs are currently negligible, this will change as operating margins for miners continues to contract. Eventually all but the most efficient ASIC gear will be forced offline as they'll cost more in electricity than they're generating in revenue. Bitfury's 55nm gear shipping is significant in that it's the first gear to take the efficiency lead away from BFL.

As you said, the auction that you linked is for Oct/Nov delivery. Dave at bitfury has suggested that bitfury chip orders would ship early in October and finished products would likely ship toward the end of October. This is one more link in the chain we'd have to rely on and the potential savings we'd get by going with Barntech's auction over a direct pre-order purchase at megabigpower would seem to offer  a poor risk/reward profile. 

Cheers.

I've had no issues with bfgminer v3.1.1 on bitminter, slush, or btcguild using BFL gear. I've had some issues with 50BTC, polmine.pl, and btcoxygen when mining them with BFL gear.

Cheers.

Hi thehun. Perhaps I wasn't clear in my wording. It's not necessarily that I want to wait and purchase a mess of new bitfury/knc products to add hashes, but I do want to see what effect bitfury's August shipments and their rapid deployment to their self mining pool (ghash.io) will have on the secondary market. If it further erodes the resale price of used Avalon or BFL gear then that may make more sense. Avalons overclock better and have similar efficiency and while BFL gear doesn't overclock well it's more efficient than any of the currently available options for immediate delivery.

Cheers.

I'm calling HAxXOR(z)!

Recommend BTCGuild PPLNS if you're having trouble with bitminter. BFL gear is very happy mining there and @ bitminter which it sounds like you've tried.

Cheers.

lol

That chop job is gold!

I like the move by AM to lower the price of blades, but I think we can find better opportunities to purchase HW. We should see some results from Bitfury shipping products for August delivery very soon and knc shortly after. I'd like to see how it plays out.

Hi JimiQ84 guitarplinker. That's correct, there hasn't been much to vote on. Our last pre-order was for an Avalon B3 and we've been tacking on Avalon & BFL gear from the secondary market since which was approved by shareholder vote.

Cheers.

Edit: addressed the wrong person.

Thank you for your frank appraisal. I agree your revised outlook is likely more accurate, but makes the OP seem rather dated. If you anticipate continued network expansion at a rate near 100%/month and re-targets below 12days, then you should really update the OP to reflect this rather than the 2.5%/day and 12day re-targets.

Cheers.

Not sure I follow your reasoning here. They provided a number(6Th/s) and then appeared to lower that number to 3-4Th/s. Someone suggested they've said previously that they were selling some amount of hardware that might account for this estimate change, but I haven't yet seen anything to back that up. Since there are no real specifics from the company we're left to speculate on the cause of this apparent reduction. Some amount of dysfunctional or reduced functionality could account for this and some indication can be gleaned from test equipment without production boards to populate. Obviously if the chips aren't as capable as management thought then their timetable will be in jeopardy.

Thanks. Who's "he" in this case? The official release says only:

Wasn't it supposed to be 6Th worth of chips? Do we know what happened to the rest of the chips? I wonder if there's a serious yield problem. 130nm is so mature at this point that yields should be very predictably high.

Yep. TheSeven being on the team is one of the principle reasons I purchased IPO shares as it's instant street cred.

I have never purchased a single share of ActM or AMC.

Very well, since you're more focused on discussing my actions than LC's in the LC thread, let's review.

The sequence of events goes like this:

1) LC says they'll announce results early this week.
2) CreativeX buys a small stake in LC for his company in anticipation of this news.
3) LC fails to announce results early in the week and instead their PR guy posts a herp derp "I got nothin' and I can't phone home."
4) CreativeX expresses his displeasure on a public forum, but does not change his position because he's not the type to freak out easily.

I apologize if you find my comments offensive in some way, but I'm not a cheerleader. There are plenty of those around anyway. I'm an investor commenting in the appropriate location. If you do not like my comments then click ignore.

China I assume.

Why wouldn't you buy AM at a roughly 50% discount to it's all time high? FC is obviously capable of delivering results.

LC does seem promising, but let's not kid ourselves. AM is the 500lbs gorilla in the room and has already faced and overcome many of the problems with large scale deployment that LC management hasn't even had to deal with yet and they're late to the party with a soon to be obsolete process node. I think they did it right developing 130nm chips first, but they'll need to transition away from those chips very quickly.

ASICMiner is also over one year ahead of LC. They'll be rolling out G2 while LC is struggling to grab and hold a small share of the global network with a process node AM is phasing out and at a time when 28 - 55nm will be taking the lead. LC has to move very quickly and cannot afford to make any major mistakes. They'll need their 65nm chips pronto.

So no comment then? Can I assume then that you do feel this company has been well managed?

I chose to invest in this IPO with my own funds and sold those for a profit quite some while ago, mostly due to the company's lack of transparency and inability to follow through on it's plans(founder shares still not locked). I like their business model, I do not like their execution.

I manage a company that holds shares in this company and I have every right to comment here. If you don't like it simply click the ignore button on the left there.

Mad? Why do you say that? What's unprofessional about making a comment? A comment shared by many I might add. Do you think the company has been well managed? If so why/how?