POLL: Would you keep mining at a loss?

[SgtSpike]

Say that the value of bitcoins dropped so drastically that it was suddenly costing you more in electricity to continue mining, compared to the value of the bitcoins you were generating.  Say this drop happened last night, and it is the next morning when you realize this.  Also assume that the drop resulted in you generating only 75% of the value in bitcoins as what you are paying for electricity to mine.  You have no idea whether the market would bounce back, or whether it was a permanent drop to this new valuation.

Would you continue mining?

[Jaime Frontero]

yes.  for awhile, anyway.

reasons 4 & 5 combined.

i'd probably cut back to my best miner - to support the network.  it just isn't that much money /month not to protect my investment, at least for a few months.

[SgtSpike]

Personally, I kind of think that we'd see a drastic bounce-back of the market to compensate for such a drop.  I haven't run the numbers recently, but I'd estimate that anywhere above $1.25/btc, I would remain profitable mining.  I can't imagine it dropping to $1.25 and not bouncing back.  There's too much support here.  Too many people who believe in the idea for it to have a complete spiral to the bottom, at least when looking at it from the perspective of a panic-sell situation.

I know I'd probably be lining up to buy bitcoins if they were only $1 each again. 

[grue]

no. if i was losing money, i would stop my miners, and buy bitcoins normally.

[cloud9]

Sitting with the capital investment anyway - with running electricity costs only a small fraction of the total hardware costs - I would say that it would be best to stay mining with an outlook of a better future price.  And also buying at the lower cost with easier profits due to probable lower difficulty and lower network hash due to other miners dropping out, but not letting the capital go idle.

[fpgaminer]

Yes, because my miners are hooked up to a stationary bicycle with a generator attached. Free electricity! 

[xenon481]

No, because it is stupid to pay $1.00USD in electricity costs to generate $0.75USD worth of BTC when I could instead spend $1.00USD to purchase $1.00USD worth of BTC.

[SlaveInDebt]

I would continue because I support BTC as a currency. Did lots of distributed computing before this for no monetary gain and I feel just as strongly about BTC and what it can do for man kind as I do about disease research and other projects.

[SgtSpike]

No, because it is stupid to pay $1.00USD in electricity costs to generate $0.75USD worth of BTC when I could instead spend $1.00USD to purchase $1.00USD worth of BTC.

Good point - I should have had that as a poll option.

[rezin777]

I've always mined at a loss (in relation to other currencies).

So, I have a hard time with this poll.

[airdata]

if it drops to 1.50, hit me up via pm and I'll buy 1000btc off of you.

I just got started and really want to give it a full month to guage costs / gains.  I probably will never stop being jealous of all of the people lucky enough to get in early.

[da2ce7]

You would stop mining only if you directed the leftover funds directly into bitcoin thorough an exchange.  There are some interesting economic dynamics:

Electricity bills are not instantaneous, but on credit.  So all the miners are really taking out bitcoin futures that the price isn't going to be worth less when paying the electricity bill.
Miners also need to take into account the cost of buying the coins 'now' v.s. mining the coins  on credit.

A rational miner would work out what had a better return:  Buying coins now from an exchange v.s. mining now and paying for the coins later in your electricity bill.