Swedish ASIC miner company kncminer.com

[Tad3j]

Sam Cole of Kennemar & Cole and KNCMINER AB clarified the directors' situation in email to me.

The first announce regarding the KnC registration number was for Kennemar & Cole AB (they had registered the KNCMINER name to "lock" it), not KNCMINER AB which is a company created LATER. The five quoted directors form ORSoC and Kennemar & Cole AB are part of KNCMINER AB (which I have not verified at this point...better things to do ATM).

Why they willfully gave the wrong company number and gave a link to a privately held website and called it "official" was not said.

They won't discuss funding either, other than say that Kennemar & Cole is generating sufficient money and that KNCMINER AB will send the profits back to ORSoC and Kennemar & Cole AB.

It is my understanding that they are more willing to incur debt than put enough capital in KNCMINER AB. Why they would do that was not said.

They expect to have a sufficient margin to cover the delayed VAT returns but did not go into details. Not much of an answer here.

In short, though I appreciate the time M. Cole took to answer my emails, we don't really know more and there is nothing in M. Cole's answers to make me change my previous "analysis" of a very shaky project, since they won't discuss actual numbers.

Thanks for pursuing this and emailing. Is there anyway you can reiterate in a follow-up email for clarification? Or at least gain some perspective as to why they may not wish to discuss figures openly?

Well, let me put it this way: if you asked me to discuss the finances of my company, I would not answer you. My business is my business.

I cannot fault them for not willing to disclose the way they run their business, but given the few erroneous statements they made, their vague answers or dismissal of the questions, one might want more transparency in the process. They are avoiding the questions probably because they do not want to show how thin their company is. I'm sure they would have no problem disclosing the numbers, or some of them, if they had lots of money in the bank. Nothing new here. I just wish they'd come out and say it: "we're broke, but, pretty please, send us your money so we can finish this project". I value honesty a lot, alas it is not very common in the business world.

There is really nothing new going on, I'm waiting for the "open house" visit report but I wish they would disclose advancement a little bit. Also, I'd be wary about the lead times from the wafer factory. They haven't asked for money yet, meaning they are not about to order any wafers or FPGA's, so the late September/October date for the finished products seem to be slipping already.

I don't know their build capacity, but given the low numbers of the first batch, I doubt they can do both products shotgun style. It will probably be one after the other (again, speculating here). Avalon has a lot more money and they're still not shipping hundreds of products per month, because it's hard to setup a production line and size it properly to your market (and now they just won't do it, only sell chips).

Let me add my opinion. There's is totaly nothing, that we customers should care about. They do not take any money in preorders and they just anounce that they will build the machines. That's it! What this mean for us?

It means they can post whatever they want, whenever they want. Everything that we hope to see and also that we want to see and any evidence that we want, everything is expectation of every individual. So if you're not satisfied with the given information, you just may be on the wrong place. As this is how do you live your life.

They do not request that we do research on them, they do not want any kind of predictions, while every single person can came up with conspiracy theory. They will do what will, and IMHO, we can do the best for them, if we don't create any pressure.

[1714831809]

1714831809

[1714831809]

1714831809

[Rampion]

I think the project is quite intriguing, but the price might just be too high.

Even in the very unlikely event that knc can ship a 350 gh/s device with a power consumption of 1-2 kw, difficulty will explode in late summer when all the Avalon-chip based devices come online.

Of course nobody can predict where the btc price will be at that point, but if it stays around 120$, I don’t think it'll be trivial to make that money back...

Price too high?

350gh/s for $7,000 is $20 x GHs. Please let me know ASAP about a single ASIC product with a better cost per GHs.

Possibly the unannounced Avalon Gen 2?

Yeah, whatever, possibly the unannounced AMD 10nm chip.

And BTW, isn't the Avalon Gen 2 55nm?

[Bitcoinorama]

The FPGA is programable using software, the ASIC isn't. You use the FPGA to develop and refine a small batch and then copy the final design over to an ASIC. The ASIC is a semi-customised chip.

BFL, and Avalon, both had FPGAs prior, this is just a lot closer together.

Yeah, a lot closer together makes my point. They are going to do 2 productions runs of different products close together.

No, an FPGA naturally prequels the ASiC.

With FPGAs, engineers do not customize anything on the chips physically. They simply use software to program the FPGAs to interconnect their elements as desired.

With ASICs, engineers customize only the last few mask layers. These layers interconnect elements ASIC manufacturers predefine in standard base wafers.

The FPGA is suited to small batch prototype and trial run of sub 10,000 chips. FPGAs are expensive, but they allow you to refine your design prior to committing it to ASIC.

[Bitcoinorama]

Open Day! They've been busy.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=214285.new#new

[stripykitteh]

The FPGA is programable using software, the ASIC isn't. You use the FPGA to develop and refine a small batch and then copy the final design over to an ASIC. The ASIC is a semi-customised chip.

BFL, and Avalon, both had FPGAs prior, this is just a lot closer together.

Yeah, a lot closer together makes my point. They are going to do 2 productions runs of different products close together.

No, an FPGA naturally prequels the ASiC.

With FPGAs, engineers do not customize anything on the chips physically. They simply use software to program the FPGAs to interconnect their elements as desired.

With ASICs, engineers customize only the last few mask layers. These layers interconnect elements ASIC manufacturers predefine in standard base wafers.

The FPGA is suited to small batch prototype and trial run of sub 10,000 chips. FPGAs are expensive, but they allow you to refine your design prior to committing it to ASIC.

Thank you for that, I already understood the difference between the two and how they relate. My point remains - they are still going to end up doing 2 production runs of similar, yes, but still different products. My original point was that if they had investors helping out they could have finished producing the FPGA in small quantities to validate the design, then move straight on to producing ASICs. The path they've chosen is going to cost them time. I presume they've chosen it because they have to, if they had VC offered to them they would have been mad not to take it.

[Bitcoinorama]

The FPGA is programable using software, the ASIC isn't. You use the FPGA to develop and refine a small batch and then copy the final design over to an ASIC. The ASIC is a semi-customised chip.

BFL, and Avalon, both had FPGAs prior, this is just a lot closer together.

Yeah, a lot closer together makes my point. They are going to do 2 productions runs of different products close together.

No, an FPGA naturally prequels the ASiC.

With FPGAs, engineers do not customize anything on the chips physically. They simply use software to program the FPGAs to interconnect their elements as desired.

With ASICs, engineers customize only the last few mask layers. These layers interconnect elements ASIC manufacturers predefine in standard base wafers.

The FPGA is suited to small batch prototype and trial run of sub 10,000 chips. FPGAs are expensive, but they allow you to refine your design prior to committing it to ASIC.

Thank you for that, I already understood the difference between the two and how they relate. My point remains - they are still going to end up doing 2 production runs of similar, yes, but still different products. My original point was that if they had investors helping out they could have finished producing the FPGA in small quantities to validate the design, then move straight on to producing ASICs. The path they've chosen is going to cost them time. I presume they've chosen it because they have to, if they had VC offered to them they would have been mad not to take it.

Dude, I don't get your point, that's exactly what they are doing. Proving the design with a small FPGA run based on investors helping out to validate the design. Then moving straight on to producing ASICs. They haven't had VC, they are crowdsourcing from the community, same as all the other companies.

[stripykitteh]

Dude, I don't get your point, that's exactly what they are doing. Proving the design with a small FPGA run based on investors helping out to validate the design. Then moving straight on to producing ASICs. They haven't had VC, they are crowdsourcing from the community, same as all the other companies.

Perhaps we are in furious agreement? 

I understand the plan, I'm just questioning whether it's going to bite them having to divert effort doing the FPGA run to raise the funds to do the ASIC run. I could be completely wrong, I hope I am.

[KS]

Dude, you had to post there first didn't you? A full 67 seconds after the OP! You have antennas or sth?

[Bitcoinorama]

Dude, you had to post there first didn't you? A full 67 seconds after the OP! You have antennas or sth?

Yup!

[glowkeeper]

Dude, you had to post there first didn't you? A full 67 seconds after the OP! You have antennas or sth?

I was thinking the same! How'd you do that?

[Fiyasko]

yeah like, What the crap Spidey Senses

[stripykitteh]

Dude, I don't get your point, that's exactly what they are doing. Proving the design with a small FPGA run based on investors helping out to validate the design. Then moving straight on to producing ASICs. They haven't had VC, they are crowdsourcing from the community, same as all the other companies.

Perhaps we are in furious agreement?  

I understand the plan, I'm just questioning whether it's going to bite them having to divert effort doing the FPGA run to raise the funds to do the ASIC run. I could be completely wrong, I hope I am.

Prolly didn't explain myself very well.   At the point that they have a working FPGA (which seems like it's imminent), I feel like saying to them, here's my FPGA money, only don't build the FPGA, just build the damn ASIC, and give me a juicy discount as an early adopter. Does that make sense?

[Rampion]

Dude, I don't get your point, that's exactly what they are doing. Proving the design with a small FPGA run based on investors helping out to validate the design. Then moving straight on to producing ASICs. They haven't had VC, they are crowdsourcing from the community, same as all the other companies.

Perhaps we are in furious agreement?  

I understand the plan, I'm just questioning whether it's going to bite them having to divert effort doing the FPGA run to raise the funds to do the ASIC run. I could be completely wrong, I hope I am.

Prolly didn't explain myself very well.   At the point that they have a working FPGA (which seems like it's imminent), I feel like saying to them, here's my FPGA money, only don't build the FPGA, just build the damn ASIC, and give me a juicy discount as an early adopter. Does that make sense?

I hope you realize that is very much easier, cheaper and faster to develop an FPGA miner that an ASIC miner.

[Bitcoinorama]

yeah like, What the crap Spidey Senses

Ha, I found that amusing too, genuinely was browsing the forum though.

These have just been added to their site's product page. There's a couple of extra CAD pics.

Prolly didn't explain myself very well.   At the point that they have a working FPGA (which seems like it's imminent), I feel like saying to them, here's my FPGA money, only don't build the FPGA, just build the damn ASIC, and give me a juicy discount as an early adopter. Does that make sense?

I agree to the extent I think it's a shame it's such and expensive piece of kit that has such a finite period of usability with no means to reuse parts. This is why I was pushing a Litecoin miner, but I do appreciate it's function is more for refinement of ASIC final design. From what I understand it's not without purpose and more than just gaining trust.

[stripykitteh]

I hope you realize that is very much easier, cheaper and faster to develop an FPGA miner that an ASIC miner.

True, but I don't want 6GHash, I want 350+GHash (no point being bashful about it  ). From my perspective it'd have to be 60 times easier, cheaper and faster. Perhaps it is, I'm no engineer.

[KS]

"Bitcoin make the world go around".

Around??

[KS]

I hope you realize that is very much easier, cheaper and faster to develop an FPGA miner that an ASIC miner.

True, but I don't want 6GHash, I want 350+GHash (no point being bashful about it  ). From my perspective it'd have to be 60 times easier, cheaper and faster. Perhaps it is, I'm no engineer.

You're supposed to get a 2K discount on the Jupiter if you bought the Mars first.

OTOH, for the same level of investment, you could look at ≃150GH/s with a ghetto Avalon ASICs machine. Where you money is best spent will depend entirely on the timely delivery of either one.

Edit: you have to buy 4x Mars to compare to 150GH/s AASICs.

[Bitcoinorama]

I hope you realize that is very much easier, cheaper and faster to develop an FPGA miner that an ASIC miner.

True, but I don't want 6GHash, I want 350+GHash (no point being bashful about it  ). From my perspective it'd have to be 60 times easier, cheaper and faster. Perhaps it is, I'm no engineer.

You're supposed to get a 2K discount on the Jupiter if you bought the Mars first.

OTOH, for the same level of investment, you could look at ≃150GH/s with a ghetto Avalon ASICs machine. Where you money is best spent will depend entirely on the timely delivery of either one.

Basically do you either;

Want someone with relevant engineering experience to make it for you and trust in their ability to do so, rewarding them with a huge customer base and fast growing company, risking funds that they are true to their word and on time.

Or are you comfortable with managing the multiple streams of parts and entrusting a variety of people to acquire and deliver products that will work seamlessly together, and do you trust the wider community of DIYers both with and without experience (business and engineering) to come up with a faster solution. There's no doubt they will, but when, how refined and what happens along the way with many unknown hands is uncertain.

[dan99]

Ya, I prefer looking at the asic though, but any how this is a good start , butterfly start with the fpga, but avalon straight to the asic.. hope they will answer the hundreds of questions prepared for them

[stripykitteh]

You're supposed to get a 2K discount on the Jupiter if you bought the Mars first.

OTOH, for the same level of investment, you could look at ≃150GH/s with a ghetto Avalon ASICs machine. Where you money is best spent will depend entirely on the timely delivery of either one.

Edit: you have to buy 4x Mars to compare to 150GH/s AASICs.

Yeah, I've ordered the Mars primarily to get the discount. I think I could sell it for what it will cost me, bringing my buy price on the Jupiter down to ~5K. I just feel the incentives could have been worked out differently but I'll have to luxuriate being in the minority on that point.