Looks like I have to be the guy to stand up for cryptx. Oh the irony.
- The explanation for the 21BTC transaction makes complete sense, and I see no reason to doubt it.
- That the move to P2P didnt happen should be considered a god sent. Yes, unit holders voted for it, but anyone who was still holding units at that point was per definition mathematically challenged or an idiot, so be glad Cryptx didnt listen. It would have been nice had cryptx spread his hashrate to several smaller pools (including p2p) to take power from ghash.io while not creating unacceptable variability, but moving everything to P2P would be madness.

Cryptx, if you are reading, consider moving part to bitminter, part to eligius, part to P2P etc. Each of them is small and has high variability, but using all of them reduces that problem while fighting centralization.

Anyway, that was the good news. Now the bad one. Looks like today might the be first day you get no dividends:
https://blockchain.info/address/1PETAmNrgdzx3FwzJPNuhx18JVKdGtwWt6
10.5 BTC isnt enough to pay the fees.

Probably cryptx will do another loan to pay his fees and some theoretical div, but think about that for a second.
And get used to it.

You dont have to guess variables like electricity cost, we have a pretty good idea what it costs. Many of the other variables also to a large extend, cancel each other out for AM if you do the math. Eg, lower hardware costs would result in higher overall network speed on my curves, but decrease the TAM per TH. THe BTC value isnt impacted much at all within the range of reasonable estimates. 

Of course what you end up with is an estimate of the TAM, but its not going to be off by a factor 10x (like most other predictions were last year. I dare say I pretty much nailed it so far).  If you prefer valuing this share by gut feeling instead, be my guest. Happy buying at 1BTC.

The above logic lets you actually calculate the network speed, and therefore TAM for asicminer if you make assumptions for things like electricity cost and BTC exchange rate. I did this a year ago, and with the current exchange rate,  it seems we should be heading towards a 5-600PH network at $700/TH. So the TAM is on the order of 300PH which would be worth ~$200M. Or ~400K BTC. Or ballpark of ~1 BTC per AM share. Thats the total available market, how much AM will grab of that, and how much profit margin they will achieve, who knows, but I doubt its gonna be 100% of the market at 100% profit.

I posted the answer to that a year ago:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=295270.0

Those large scale mining operations  pay on the order of 5 cents per kwh.
Note that we are around $700/TH retail for the hardware already, and that will keep dropping.
No one took those estimates seriously when I posted them. The network was below 1PH back then.

AT least those gambling sites have a clearly profitable, credible business model, they have a publicly verifiable cold storage and offer mathematically verifiable odds. In the long run they earn a lot more by staying honest than by a one time money grab. None of this is true for this ponzi.

Dont know, but some weird transactions going on on peta's adress:

https://blockchain.info/address/1PETAmNrgdzx3FwzJPNuhx18JVKdGtwWt6

At 2014-09-02 12:35:57 you see the 2 outgoing transactions for fees and (paltry) divs. Nothing weird there, but a few hours later, there is a sizable (21.25 BTC) incoming transaction from ghash.io. Most of which is spirited away to that 14cG address. Id keep an eye on that.

So I can believe you? Lol, no, its the only way anyone  with a brain could ever believe you are not constantly bumping this thread with the sole purpose of making money off the referral in your signature.

Of course, you dont care about that, because those with a brain are not likely gullible enough to fall for this ponzi in the first place.

If you want anyone to believe you "just use them", and  are not promoting them and recruiting victims for this ponzi, then remove the referral from your sig.

No, but PETA dividends are; fees are fixed in dollar, and they represent over 50% of the mining revenue.  If BTC exchange rate where to fall by 50%, dividends would hit zero.

If you really dont know how that is possible, should you be invested in a mining asset?
Hint: its variability, and even at 1040 satosh's it was still a hair below where it should have been on average with the previous difficulty. It been (well) below expected average for a long time.

With todays difficulty, expected average divs are
0.00001834 -  0.15 / $475 / 30= 0,00001053= 781 satoshi's.

And by the end of next week at currently estimated difficulty (and assuming constant BTC rate), it will be

0.00001590 --  0.15 / $475 / 30= 0,00001053= 537 satoshi's.

Can you see a trend?

Lol?
Of course he has -and always had- an interest in minimizing the actual running costs, which one can only guess. But the difference between that, and the $0.15/GH "hosting fee" is what butters his sandwich. And yes, within a month or two, he will drop those fees; otherwise dividends would end up being negative, prompting a sale of his farm and ending his hosting fee revenue. So most likely you will see him come up with some excuse as to why he can suddenly reduce the fees and keep paying a few dozen satoshi's in divs until there is barely any resale value in the hardware. So after losing their shirt, pants and socks,  'unit' holders lose their underwear too.

Still looking good though. Annual Yield 584.66%. What a bargain

They may not let you compound individually,  so the ponzi doesnt collapse as fast, but that doesnt change the fact they pay out ~1% per day. If that actually corresponded to their profits, they would make >3000% per year on their own capital.

Just as important question: why do they need ever more money, spend a lot on advertising, referral programs etc ? If they really could achieve >3000% YoY, you'd expect their own capital to grow at an insane rate, and therefore they would need less external capital over time, not more.

He just gave a press conference:

One cant prove a negative, so I cant prove there is no business model behind this ponzi, but the burden of proof does not lie with me, as I am not soliciting funds or making promises of future profits. The burden of proof lies with whoever is soliciting your money. Its up to them to prove they are a legitimate business. They provide none whatsoever. No names, no address, no contact info on the website. No credible business plan. No explanation why they pay insane interest rates for loans any bank or VC would give them at a fraction of the cost.  No reason given why they seem to have unlimited appetite for ever more money, whether its BTC, dollar, or anything else.

This is a classical ponzi and a glaringly obvious one. Either you see it and you are a fraud. Or you dont, and you're an idiot.

Let me ask you, did you invest in MM(M(-2011)) ?
 

BT offers its investment to US citizens, and is therefore in violation of US security laws (as is anyone providing material assistance). And EU laws. And Japanse. And Australian. Id be very surprised if they werent even violating Russian laws, but I wont pretend Ive looked in to relevant Russian laws concerning unregistered securities. I do know the guy behind MM landed in jail, so I guess at least ponzi's arent allowed there either.


You're most welcome.

Not to everyone, only to people ripping off others. Are you the kind of person who wishes Mark Karpeles or Trendon Shavers can retire rich?

You see, either you truly believe BT is legit, and you would be crazy not to reinvest your profits. And for that matter, just about anything you can afford to lose.
The fact that you dont seem to do this, suggests you know this is a ponzi, but you will promote it anyway to lure in new investors either for your referral reward, or to make sure it only collapses after you got out. That makes you just as much a scammer as the people behind this. And therefore, I certainly do wish ill on your financial well being. People like you are the cancer of the bitcoin economy.

If his non stop promotion of this ponzi is considered substantial assistance, he would be as liable as the perpetrators of this scam:

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/15/77o

(note that it doesnt even have to be a ponzi. This is a ponzi, but its also an unregistered security, and therefore without a doubt in violation if the linked articles)


If by "bitcoin investors" you mean people who waste their precious bitcoins on scams and  mathematically certain loss generating "investments", then all evidence suggests they are indeed unbelievably gullible.

Yawn, been hearing that "argument" ever since I got involved in to bitcoin. Countless people posted their pirate profits as if that somehow disproved it was an obvious ponzi.  Ive seen many dozens of them, and all these HYIP always turned out the same way, no exceptions. This one wont either. Its just a matter of when.

I honestly hope you reinvest all your "profit", all your money and take out a loan at the bank on top of it. You will deserve whats coming for promoting an obvious ponzi (which BTW, theoretically makes you liable).

Sure, something is up at ghash. Good thing cryptx didnt listen to its shareholders and moved away from it.
That said, its not like they were supposed to be very high.
1GH = 0.00002109 BTC / day
Fee = 0.15 / $500 / 30 day/month= 0.00001
Expected dividend is therefore 0.00001109

From next week on, an important milestone will be achieved: fees will be higher than dividends and things will collapse real fast. it looks like ~850 satoshi's in 3 days, and a 20% increase after that will push it to ~450 satoshi's. At 365PH, with current BTC rate,  its all over, and if the current network growth continues, that means in less than 2 months.



FWIW, my initial simulations showed it would happen by the end of the year, but I didnt foresee the BTC price drop.