btt

[matt4054]

With this new addition bASIC-MINING has increased it's hashing power to approximately 465,000 Mh/s or 9.3Mh/s per share.

Wow, 9.3Mh/s per share... for 0.78 BTC...

Or, say, a BlockErupter at 330Mh/s... for 1.2 BTC...

I don't know guys, which one should I buy? I'm so conflicted... ... NOT.

Could you perform the very same analysis with AM shares vs their BE USB please?

Unlike PMBs or plain mining hardware, there is a strategy of reinvestment here, and the idea is more or less to increase or at least preserve the % of hashrate of the network as the difficulty grows. And over the last few months, things have been going very well for BM, thanks to the good management of creativex: acquiring the right hardware, at the right time and for a sensible price, basically.

[1715700706]

1715700706

[1715700706]

1715700706

[1715700706]

1715700706

[1715700706]

1715700706

[1715700706]

1715700706

[killerstorm]

Unlike PMBs or plain mining hardware, there is a strategy of reinvestment here, and the idea is more or less to increase or at least preserve the % of hashrate of the network as the difficulty grows.

This is bullshit. You can as well invest into mining hardware and reinvest some part of proceedings into more hardware. Sure, it requires some work, but really not that much, I guess.

ASICMINER is very different because it produces hardware itself at relatively low cost, also it sells hardware to increase capital.

ASICMINER might be able to keep up with growing hashrate (but it's not guaranteed, it all depends on what others will invest and what others will deliver), but let's just say it's much less likely for BASIC-MINING.

And over the last few months, things have been going very well for BM, thanks to the good management of creativex: acquiring the right hardware, at the right time and for a sensible price, basically.

He's buying for a market price. It is sensible, indeed, but anybody can buy devices that way (with some degree of luck).

[killerstorm]

With this new addition bASIC-MINING has increased it's hashing power to approximately 465,000 Mh/s or 9.3Mh/s per share.

Wow, 9.3Mh/s per share... for 0.78 BTC...

Or, say, a BlockErupter at 330Mh/s... for 1.2 BTC...

I don't know guys, which one should I buy? I'm so conflicted... ... NOT.

It's possible to buy virtual PMB at 0.003 BTC per Mh/s.

So 330 Mh/s is 1 BTC.

[Trillian]

Well right now, at a weekly AM dividend of 0.02BTC/share, we have an equivalent hashing power of roughly 150MH/s, for 4.2BTC.

To compare AM value against BM value, based purely on hashing power:

BM: 0.084 BTC per MH/s  (9.3MH/s for 0.78BTC)
AM: 0.028 BTC per MH/s  (150MH/s for 4.2BTC)

Thus BM is 3x more expensive than AM, and AM has so much more to it than just hashing power.

BM is all about hashing power, yet with 12% dividends per annum, which may be maintained with luck, and a 3x higher than "market rate" value, I don't see how I would ever be comfortable with such a small profit/risk ratio.

And I don't see how I would ever be comfortable buying BM at 0.8 BTC per share, geez Louise...

But in all this I keep being the fool, by my own estimates, because this headstrong ego keeps wanting to be right instead of wanting to make money...

[matt4054]

Unlike PMBs or plain mining hardware, there is a strategy of reinvestment here, and the idea is more or less to increase or at least preserve the % of hashrate of the network as the difficulty grows.

This is bullshit. You can as well invest into mining hardware and reinvest some part of proceedings into more hardware. Sure, it requires some work, but really not that much, I guess.

(1) Unlike PMBs or plain mining hardware, there is a strategy of reinvestment here
(2) and the idea is more or less to increase or at least preserve the % of hashrate of the network as the difficulty grows.

If you sustain your "this is bullshit", please claim that (1) or (2) is wrong (or both), and give a rationale.

The rest of your sentence, while true, is not relevant to what you quoted from me. When you see people buying milk at the supermarket, do you tell them they are stupid because they could just move to a farm and milk their own cows?

[killerstorm]

This is bullshit. You can as well invest into mining hardware and reinvest some part of proceedings into more hardware. Sure, it requires some work, but really not that much, I guess.

(1) Unlike PMBs or plain mining hardware, there is a strategy of reinvestment here
(2) and the idea is more or less to increase or at least preserve the % of hashrate of the network as the difficulty grows.

Why can't you use same strategy?

You're buy from exactly same market creativex is buying from. He doesn't get any special deals. You can do exactly same thing which he does, following same strategy.

The only difference is that he had 1800 BTC to spend, initially.

If you sustain your "this is bullshit", please claim that (1) or (2) is wrong (or both), and give a rationale.

Honestly, I see no logic in your reasoning. Do you imply that strategy is secret or something? WHY can't you use it?

The rest of your sentence, while true, is not relevant to what you quoted from me. When you see people buying milk at the supermarket, do you tell them they are stupid because they could just move to a farm and milk their own cows?

You didn't understand what I meant. Creativex buys at market rate, that's OK.

But people who are buying BASIC-MINING shares now buy at 10x market rate. (I.e. there is only 0.1 BTC in BASIC-MINING assets for 1 BTC worth of shares.) This is NOT efficient in any imaginable way.

You get 10x more ROI if you do it directly.

Or if you don't want to do that, you can find shares which aren't that much overpriced. Do the math.

[matt4054]

Sorry, I got lazy out of tiredness and I won't go the full quoted reply way...

Your post is quite right actually, my argument was that you can't just say the price of a BM share should be the same as its equivalent hashrate, just like for ASICMINER. When you buy an AM or BM share you buy more than just the mining revenue / dividends. It only makes sense when the price has chances to go higher, of course, but that's another story: that is yours, actually, I think

[killerstorm]

Your post is quite right actually, my argument was that you can't just say the price of a BM share should be the same as its equivalent hashrate, just like for ASICMINER. When you buy an AM or BM share you buy more than just the mining revenue / dividends.

I agree, it's not so much about current hashrate as it is about hashrate in future, and that depends on many factors, such as available capital, work of people who run company, etc.

This is why I find it is so strange that BASIC-MINING price jumps so much when more hashpower is added. In theory, it should barely affect price since it doesn't change future hashrate projections (unless those projections were total shit in the first place). Sure, when ASIC miner is delivered it is good news since there is no longer a risk that it was a scam or unit is DOA, so price can go up a bit, but not that much...

[matt4054]

In other words, one can be perfectly correct in theory about the "right" price, but the market is often irrational, because it includes much speculation, emotional decisions (panic sell / panic buy), and ignorance...

[creativex]

The cluster of three singles stopped mining at some point over night, it looks like about two - three hours revenue was lost. I'm looking into the cause of the problem. The three Avalons and remaining single were not affected.

Cheers.

[creativex]

I'm going to lower the expected output of the BFL units. Their real hashrate over the past 18 hours has been closer to 55Gh/s than 60. Perhaps if they're better cooled they can reach higher speeds, but we're not getting 60 out of them at this time.

Cheers.

[killerstorm]

I'm going to lower the expected output of the BFL units. Their real hashrate over the past 18 hours has been closer to 55Gh/s than 60. Perhaps if they're better cooled they can reach higher speeds, but we're not getting 60 out of them at this time.

Nasty Mining also gets about 55 Gh/s from each such units.

[creativex]

I'm going to lower the expected output of the BFL units. Their real hashrate over the past 18 hours has been closer to 55Gh/s than 60. Perhaps if they're better cooled they can reach higher speeds, but we're not getting 60 out of them at this time.

Nasty Mining also gets about 55 Gh/s from each such units.

Yeah, I think he's stripped them nekked too...the stock cooling isn't cutting it. I just got spoiled by the slick way in which Avalon designed their boxes, with them it's not a question of whether they meet spec or not, but by how much they exceed them. The singles are going to make me work to meet their rated speed.

Cheers.

[creativex]

Growing pains aside, we still mined 7.81012571 of which 70%(5.46708800) will be paid out to virtual shareholders today.

Cheers.

[dexX7]

Well, the magical 1.00000000 Bitcoin mark wasn't touched yet, so I save the champange pictures for now, but BASIC-MINER surpassed AM in volume, at least for the last 24 hours.

creativex, not really a need, but maybe nice to have: do you keep hashing statistics somewhere? Like daily average? Those 445 GH/s from the spreadsheet aren't live, right?

[creativex]

Well, the magical 1.00000000 Bitcoin mark wasn't touched yet, so I save the champange pictures for now, but BASIC-MINER surpassed AM in volume, at least for the last 24 hours.

creativex, not really a need, but maybe nice to have: do you keep hashing statistics somewhere? Like daily average? Those 445 GH/s from the spreadsheet aren't live, right?

Hi deX7. No they're not live. I've been logging data from the Avalons into a spreadsheet since the first two were delivered, but in tuning them I've been more concerned with diffa/time than questionable hashrate displays since that's how we get paid. For the BFLs I still have very little data.

Cheers.

[creativex]

I've stripped one of the singles and replaced one of the two fans(intake) with a beefier adda unit. It's only been hashing for about 15mins in this state, but temps are down 5-6c with a slight drop in HW errors. The cases are trapping heat, but it remains to be seen if they're better off with higher performance fans with or without enclosures.

Cheers.

[djjacket]

I'm going to lower the expected output of the BFL units. Their real hashrate over the past 18 hours has been closer to 55Gh/s than 60. Perhaps if they're better cooled they can reach higher speeds, but we're not getting 60 out of them at this time.

Nasty Mining also gets about 55 Gh/s from each such units.

Yeah, I think he's stripped them nekked too...the stock cooling isn't cutting it. I just got spoiled by the slick way in which Avalon designed their boxes, with them it's not a question of whether they meet spec or not, but by how much they exceed them. The singles are going to make me work to meet their rated speed.

Cheers.

Yes - it looks like he has.

https://twitter.com/NastyMining/status/352519209223335937/photo/1

[creativex]

All four singles are caseless and 4-8c cooler. It remains to be seen if and how much increased performance this will translate into.

Cheers.

[bobboooiie]

When the next avalon arrives can we get a "family photo"  ? Or they are far to apart ?