Promised future technology mines exactly at zero hashrate now.  |
|
|
|
Blue dots incoming!  7/28 dots = 25%  |
|
|
|
Do investors have to opt in, or is it automatic, when will this program be implemented, is this being done by bitfunder or AMC?
Kslaughter, can you answer the questions which were asked a few posts earlier, or at least provide a link to where we can find the information? This is being done by AMC, for our Investors. No action on the part of our Investors is required at this time. It has been nearly two weeks and I have yet to see or hear anything about the shares issue being resolved. Do you at least have a approximation for when this will occur? (tomorrow, next few days, next week, next month, next year?) Bolded relevant bits. Now that our First Batch of Early Adopter shares has sold out we are waiting for the Avalon machines to come in and start producing revenue. We will then start paying dividends to our Investors after the first week of mining with the Avalon's. Due to the fact that shares were selling with good demand at the .0008 price level, before Ukto of Bitfunder.Com forced us to reduce the price to a bargain level, we will only be releasing shares in batch 2 at no less than .0008 BTC.
Also, we are implementing our Investors Protection Program (IPP) for those Investors who purchased shares higher than .0005 after May 28, 2013 04:59 CDT and on or before May 31, 2013 14:59 CDT. IPP will reimburse our Long Term Investors the difference between the price they purchased their shares at, and the price of our shares on August 31, 2013 at 00:01 CDT or .0005 whichever is higher, only if the share price is below .0008 BTC on August 31, 2013 at 00:01 CDT. The Investor must still own the shares to be reimbursed. This program is being implemented due to Bitfunder.Com forcing us to price our shares at .0005, without due cause. Of course we will strive in the coming months to raise the share price and add shareholder value to the shares our Investors hold.
Update:
The group after May 28, 2013 04:59 CDT and before May 31, 15:59 CDT are add to the above group.
|
|
|
|
|
From the current prices on BFL chip coupons ($1 to $2 per chip), I would suggest trading those for something between ($1/100/0.0008 =) 12 to ($2/100/0.0008 =) 25 AMC shares per chip? Thoughts?
|
|
|
|
Thanks. Also, since 2.8TH = 10k Avalon chips or ~732 BFL chips, the board manufacturing cost is bound to be cheaper on BFL (lesser boards needed). |
|
|
|
I've been doing the math on BFL vs Avalon, and the conclusion I'm always arriving to is that buying from BFL is the better choice right now, as: - we get ~2.15x the amount of hashrate (@$50/100 chips) for the equivalent Avalon price;
- the chance for the network difficulty to double (~2.15x) within the extra month of waiting from delivery is very slim;
- we only need to pay 50% upfront, so we can do a much larger order and get the remaining 50% funds from our hardware that goes online until that time.
|
|
|
|
Yes, that is exactly what I was thinking, so I have changed it back to 1 BTC. Also, what is nice is the amount in the bitcoin address will always be within ~1 BTC of the total for the week, giving investor a transparent look into how much we are mining.
 |
|
|
|
Doesn't look like any fees are being charged to us. However, I did change it to 5 BTC to cut down on the number of transactactions.
You know, since there are no tx fees to be paid by us, your initial threshold of BTC1 is a good choice, as that means less BTC "at risk" in the btcguild account in case of hacks/ddos/downtime/etc. |
|
|
|
Doesn't look like any fees are being charged to us. However, I did change it to 5 BTC to cut down on the
number of transactactions.
Yes, you are correct. There are BTC0.0015 fees in those transactions but they seem to be paid by BTCGuild. They also group as many tx as they can to minimize fees.  |
|
|
|
I won't be posting the png anymore as they take up a lot of space in the thread. Here is the address that AMC uses to withdraw its mining revenue to. Use this address to see how much BTC we have mined. We withdraw from BTCGuild if we get over 1 BTC in the account. http://blockchain.info/address/1DJpsvnM7xTnQbWEhLYyCyfxQyxwupEzCaYou should increase the limit, as each of those transactions will incur the 0.0005 network tx fee penalty.  Maybe make it ~1 tx/day? At the moment that's a ~BTC6 threshold. Edit: Fees are paid by btcguild, it seems. |
|
|
|
BFL chips have a delivery of around 14.3 weeks after order. Each batch of 100 chips will have an average speed of 382.5GH/s (due to binning). Since an Avalon 10k batch is ~2.8TH/s, for comparison, that's 7.32 BFL batches (732 chips). Using the current $100.94/ BTC, the cost is BTC544 (@$75/100 chips) or BTC362.6 (@$50/100 chips), with 50% to be paid now and 50% on delivery. The proposition seems interesting, especially since only 50% needs to be paid upfront. The only drawback is really the 14.3 wks delivery time, which is a HUGE ONE. One month of mining @2.8TH/s with 10k Avalons that arrived one month before (9-10wks delivery), even at 60M difficulty (est sep-oct) is around BTC670/month, which effectively makes a 10k order of BTC782 in fact cost only BTC112, just because it arrived one month earlier. |
|
|
|
(Updated above post with FPGA mini-rig values) (...)
Overall, I would say the average for a Minirig is closer to 23 - 23.5 GH/s not 25, on average. Some overperform, but most are underperforming on average due to cards going flakey.
For a Single SC (60GH/s@300W) to have a ~10% overhead in power costs, the difficulty has to be around 275 million ($32.87 power cost/month at $0.15/kWh vs. $329.03/month revenue @ $100.56/ BTC). Assuming $/ BTC goes up, the power costs in $ go down proportionately. |
|
|
|
My personal answer is that he did it with good intent. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion and should proceed accordingly. There is no "one truth".
So fucking up the market is OK as long as one person thought it was a good idea? Great. Everyone, buy my lottery tickets! Oh, and I'll donate a part to charity, because if my intentions are good, everything is OK. .b EDIT: BTW, most of the civilized world has strict regulations to prevent this kind of event. I know, I know, we're crypto anarchists and all that cool shit, but did anyone stop for a moment and think that there may be a good idea behind those regulations too and not the the man sticking it to us all? Saying the market is "fucked" is still your personal opinion. You are entitled to it ofc, but not everyone must agree to it. I also think there are pretty good and valid reasons for several of the regulations to prevent this and other kind of events. But they must be explicit and not implicit. Why don't you make an article about the "basic" explicit regulations that bitcoin exchanges/asset issuers should comply? That would certainly be a good starting point for further debate on this whole issue (that is not limited to 100TH only). |
|
|
|
|
There isn't any clear cut, one-sided, point of view to this. Everyone that bought 100TH PMB's knew they weren't buying them in a regulated exchange.
If anyone wins at poker in an underground casino they also know there is a chance to be ripped clean on the way out by the bouncer.
The only guiding principle that remains is to assess if the issuer was doing what he did with a good intent or a bad intent.
My personal answer is that he did it with good intent. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion and should proceed accordingly. There is no "one truth".
|
|
|
|
What if the guy that holds 200,000 decides that he wants to sell at 0.1?  That must be his or her choice, provided they are not insiders and does not break any rules. The latter is more of a joke at this point. .b Ok. Anyway, thanks for explaining your reasoning. |
|
|
|
What if the guy that holds 200,000 decides that he wants to sell at 0.1? |
|
|
|
Guys, I still think there's something we're missing? Aren't we seeing the problem in reverse? For example, an FPGA single has ~10.40 MH/s/W, FPGA Mini-Rig ~18.80MH/s/W while a Single SC has ~200.00 MH/s/W. I did the following estimates using current diff= 15,605,633, $/BTC= 100.56 and $/kWh= 0.15 and a monthly time frame.  The FPGA single has currently a ~10.9% power cost overhead, the FPGA mini-rig ~6% and the SC single will have a ~0.57% power cost overhead. |
|
|
|
hf, Don't worry, the fact Ken is "touchy" is one of the reasons why I also agree with your points. From what I've seen he's one to defend the AMC shirt with all his heart and work tirelessly for that. That counts a lot in my book. |
|
|
|
Lets clear some of the raised issues. First, comparing the number of shares between both or the value of each is misleading. Different assets, different propositions. Second, just because Asicminer started first doesn't mean it will be the only major player infinitely. History in contemporary society has proved this argument many times wrong. Third, asicminer sells hardware paid by their own mining, which is very different than the VMC model. Hardware sold by VMC is not bought using AMC profits. VMC buys their own hardware, using their own funds. Fourth, opinions are just that, opinions, like mine. That's why they are a dime a dozen! |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
