Optimal Bitcoin Mining Corp. now offering remote GPU use contracts!

[NetTecture]

Is your company floated / going to float on GLBSE ?

I can only wish you luck with that and once I havel ess stress we should see what you do marketing wise - I may be able to replicate this on our side of the globe (europe based) and we may be able to strike things in two markets... possibly with the same technical basis.

I am with luck (final negotiations with the power provider are happening while I speak this) signinf the lease on our data center. We got 350 square meters for a decent price (will be co-used by some import/export venture I am playing with) and a contractual guarantee to draw up to 500kw power from a trafo station that is 20 meters away Once we sign that, until end of August I plan to being 2 racks of 48 cards each online - then seeing how it goes on the AMD front either adding 48 per month, or waiting a month or two for the 7xxx series.

As a note: you can safely draw more than 80% of the amperage of a fuse.... if you prepare for that from the start. Most wiring is not prepared for that.

Together this should be a significant capacity either for mining or as OpenCl cluster - the later only needing actually customers.

No, no. Fully funded out of my cash flow. No intention to go GLBSE - first, here may be legal issues (we are a REAL company, registered with local laws)... I would have to make it a stock company (which Idont wnt) and hen GLBSE is not a real exchange for real stock at the moment, according to the law. There could be issues.

Second;) I just dont need investor funds at this stage.

Third, I am still in a phase where I can jsut call it off.

Fourth, seriously, GLBSE would not get me funds worth the effort. I like how someone here collected 15.000 USD equivalents, but I am investing about that amount every month.... GLBSE would have to pull ina a 100.000 USD value to make it worthwhile. I dont see that at the moment.

I may decide to change that, though.

[1713903892]

1713903892

[1713903892]

1713903892

[1713903892]

1713903892

[Syke]

The costs and profits detailed above are correct, except the electricity draw for each 4x HD 5870 machine would be about 900 W.

Where are you getting 5870's, and how much are you paying for them?

[optimalbitcoinminingcorp]

The costs and profits detailed above are correct, except the electricity draw for each 4x HD 5870 machine would be about 900 W.

Where are you getting 5870's, and how much are you paying for them?

Don't be silly.  Obviously I can't tell you that, because if I did there is a good chance they wouldn't be available anymore.  But I can tell you that the new cloud computing company is going to be half AMD and half nVIDIA hardware and I have a deal to get 40% off all nVIDIA hardware!  I am still sticking with AMD for half because I want to build an OpenCL cluster and I prefer AMD hardware myself.

.
.
.
As a note: you can safely draw more than 80% of the amperage of a fuse.... if you prepare for that from the start. Most wiring is not prepared for that.
.
.
.

This is good to know for sure.  I wish you luck as well.

I am potentially interested in buying more bonds, however, I need some financials from you ...

How many customers have you had so far, what is the total revenue from them and what is the total profit ?

I just finished closing my first customer.  I am charging 0.107 BTC/hour/computer.  I am making 25.7 BTC revenue renting one machine for 10 days.  ($360 revenue - $27.46 electricity costs=$332.54 profit)

Using the machines I have now, I have mined 604.3 BTC since 4/5/11, from which I have made $7203.  I don't have the exact electricity costs right here, but they cannot be greater than $1700, they are probably around $900, so profit is about $6630.

I am always looking for new customers... if anyone needs this service, please let me know!  Don't be shy, I know you are out there!  I still have 4 computers available right now and more will be available in the near future!

[optimalbitcoinminingcorp]

Update:

Our first customer received service and was happy with the service.  Their contract has ended.  I currently have 5 computers available for rental and am looking for new customers.  Please send me a PM if you are interested!

[Ten98]

Update:

Our first customer received service and was happy with the service.  Their contract has ended.  I currently have 5 computers available for rental and am looking for new customers.  Please send me a PM if you are interested!

This business model is flawed. If the miners are at all profitable, it doesn't make sense to rent them out. It only makes sense if mining is not profitable.

For example:

If I rent a computer from you for 24 hours for 1BTC, and I manage to mine 2BTC, then you lose 1BTC. You would have made more BTC by not renting it to me and simply using it to mine and keep the 2 BTC for yourself.

If I pay you 1 BTC to rent the computer but I only manage to mine 0.5 BTC then you gain 0.5 BTC.

The correct business model is:

Float the company on GLBSE with an IPO to raise the investment you need to buy enough computers to fill all availble space, then the company mines using this equipment and pays out any profits after covering electricity costs to shareholders. You do not own the company in this setup, the shareholders do, but as long as you keep 25-50% of shares then you keep 25-50% of all profit made, and use none of your own money to buy the computers.

If the company needs to liquidate (eg mining is no longer profitable), then you sell everything you bought with share capital and buy all shares back from shareholders (including your own shares) at as close to the initial IPO as you can afford with the proceeds from what you earn in selling the equipment.

[Ben Walsh (beamer)]

As previous posts seem to indicate that unrented GPUs are mining rather than switched off / idle - they are getting a return at all times ...

Let us be generous and assume 3 x 5830 GPU gives 1000 MHash/s ... that's ~0.6BTC / day (at current difficulty of 1805700.8361937), so ~$6.60/day (at $11 USD/BTC).

The current quote for the "remote GPU use contracts" is $1.50/hr for those 3 x 5830 GPU, so $36/day.

Whenever there is an offer for "remote GPU use contract" that is greater than ~$0.46/hr, it makes more sense to stop the mining and have them work on the "remote GPU use contract".

Update:

Our first customer received service and was happy with the service.  Their contract has ended.  I currently have 5 computers available for rental and am looking for new customers.  Please send me a PM if you are interested!

This business model is flawed. If the miners are at all profitable, it doesn't make sense to rent them out. It only makes sense if mining is not profitable.

For example:

If I rent a computer from you for 24 hours for 1BTC, and I manage to mine 2BTC, then you lose 1BTC. You would have made more BTC by not renting it to me and simply using it to mine and keep the 2 BTC for yourself.

If I pay you 1 BTC to rent the computer but I only manage to mine 0.5 BTC then you gain 0.5 BTC.

The correct business model is:

Float the company on GLBSE with an IPO to raise the investment you need to buy enough computers to fill all availble space, then the company mines using this equipment and pays out any profits after covering electricity costs to shareholders. You do not own the company in this setup, the shareholders do, but as long as you keep 25-50% of shares then you keep 25-50% of all profit made, and use none of your own money to buy the computers.

If the company needs to liquidate (eg mining is no longer profitable), then you sell everything you bought with share capital and buy all shares back from shareholders (including your own shares) at as close to the initial IPO as you can afford with the proceeds from what you earn in selling the equipment.

[Ten98]

Whenever there is an offer for "remote GPU use contract" that is greater than ~$0.46/hr, it makes more sense to stop the mining and have them work on the "remote GPU use contract".

Yes indeed, but this relies on people being stupid enough to pay so much. You won't get many repeat customers once they realise they lose coins overall.

[Ben Walsh (beamer)]

Now I've realised what the problem is ...

You are assuming the only use people would put "remote GPU use contracts" to is mining Bitcoins ... there are numerous uses for GPU clusters - Bitcoin mining is just a tiny fraction of what people are doing with GPU clusters.

Take a look at the OpenCL and OpenGL projects.

If I only needed a GPU cluster for a couple of hours in total, I would definitely consider making use of something like this, at the right price.

Perhaps OptimalBitcoin would like to reply with how the machine specs available at $1.50/hour compare to the equivalent provided by Amazon in terms other than Bitcoin mining performance ...

"Cluster GPU Quadruple Extra Large 22 GB memory, 33.5 EC2 Compute Units, 2 x NVIDIA Tesla “Fermi” M2050 GPUs, 1690 GB of local instance storage, 64-bit platform, 10 Gigabit Ethernet"

You also have the benefit that you can pay for these in Bitcoin ... I could easily see a Bitcoin business formed around using these in a "on-demand" fashion for something like an online video encoding service for example.

OptimalBitcoin might also want to consider further time/money investment in promotion/advertising of these "remote GPU use contracts".

Whenever there is an offer for "remote GPU use contract" that is greater than ~$0.46/hr, it makes more sense to stop the mining and have them work on the "remote GPU use contract".

Yes indeed, but this relies on people being stupid enough to pay so much. You won't get many repeat customers once they realise they lose coins overall.

[Ten98]

Perhaps OptimalBitcoin would like to reply with how the machine specs available at $1.50/hour compare to the equivalent provided by Amazon in terms other than Bitcoin mining performance ...

"Cluster GPU Quadruple Extra Large 22 GB memory, 33.5 EC2 Compute Units, 2 x NVIDIA Tesla “Fermi” M2050 GPUs, 1690 GB of local instance storage, 64-bit platform, 10 Gigabit Ethernet"

I should imagine Amazon offer a far superior service, and for $2.10 per hour.

[Ben Walsh (beamer)]

Possibly, I haven't yet used this service, so I won't comment on it's quality, but try getting the service from Amazon anonymously and paying in Bitcoin.

For Bitcoin businesses, the more costs they can meet through Bitcoin the better and the lower the volatility of Bitcoin price as a result.

Perhaps OptimalBitcoin would like to reply with how the machine specs available at $1.50/hour compare to the equivalent provided by Amazon in terms other than Bitcoin mining performance ...

"Cluster GPU Quadruple Extra Large 22 GB memory, 33.5 EC2 Compute Units, 2 x NVIDIA Tesla “Fermi” M2050 GPUs, 1690 GB of local instance storage, 64-bit platform, 10 Gigabit Ethernet"

I should imagine Amazon offer a far superior service, and for $2.10 per hour.

[optimalbitcoinminingcorp]

We just had another satisfied customer rent 3 computers for 1 day.  Once again 5 computers are available for rental if anyone is interested!

Now I've realised what the problem is ...

You are assuming the only use people would put "remote GPU use contracts" to is mining Bitcoins ... there are numerous uses for GPU clusters - Bitcoin mining is just a tiny fraction of what people are doing with GPU clusters.

Take a look at the OpenCL and OpenGL projects.

If I only needed a GPU cluster for a couple of hours in total, I would definitely consider making use of something like this, at the right price.

Perhaps OptimalBitcoin would like to reply with how the machine specs available at $1.50/hour compare to the equivalent provided by Amazon in terms other than Bitcoin mining performance ...

"Cluster GPU Quadruple Extra Large 22 GB memory, 33.5 EC2 Compute Units, 2 x NVIDIA Tesla “Fermi” M2050 GPUs, 1690 GB of local instance storage, 64-bit platform, 10 Gigabit Ethernet"

You also have the benefit that you can pay for these in Bitcoin ... I could easily see a Bitcoin business formed around using these in a "on-demand" fashion for something like an online video encoding service for example.

OptimalBitcoin might also want to consider further time/money investment in promotion/advertising of these "remote GPU use contracts".

Whenever there is an offer for "remote GPU use contract" that is greater than ~$0.46/hr, it makes more sense to stop the mining and have them work on the "remote GPU use contract".

Yes indeed, but this relies on people being stupid enough to pay so much. You won't get many repeat customers once they realise they lose coins overall.

Actually you might be surprised.

Amazon does not offer Cluster GPU computing for Windows, I do.  Amazon only offers Cluster GPU computing for Linux on the US East Coast. You also did not mention that Amazon charges for data transfer, which I don't.  You cannot pay for Amazon in Bitcoin, as far as I know.  I don't know about you, but I would rather pay 0.14 BTC/hour than $2.10/hour.

Comparison:  
nVIDIA Tesla c2050:  1288 GFLOPs Single Precision/ 515 GFLOPs Double Precision  3 GB RAM
AMD Radeon HD 5870:  2720 GFLOPs Single Precision/ 544 GFLOPs Double Precision 1 GB RAM
AMD Radeon HD 5970:  4640 GFLOPs Single Precision/ 928 GFLOPs Double Precision 2 GB RAM
AMD Radeon HD 6870:  2703 GLFOPs Single Precision/ 675 GFLOPs Double Precision 1 GB RAM

My machines dominate Amazon's nVIDIA Tesla machines in Single Precision calculations and my machines also win in Double Precision Calculations. Amazon's machines have greater CPU computations, but if you are renting for GPU use, as long as the CPU is not a bottleneck, it does not really matter as you need to compare GPU performance, not CPU performance.  The only real difference where nVIDIA Tesla have an advantage are more memory, which tends to only be a concern for rendering applications and not if you are using them for GPGPU applications such as password cracking, etc, so it really depends on the application.  Even so, the rendering capabilities of my machines are nothing to sneeze at and I can tell you they would perform quite comparably to the Tesla machines.  

My current machines use the following hardware:
1: HD 5970 and one HD 5870
2: one HD 5870 and one HD 6870
3: three HD 5870s
4: three HD 5870s
5: two HD 5870s

Each machine has either 4 GB or 8 GB of 1333 mHz RAM, a 2.8 GHz, 3.1 GHz, or 3.2 GHz Phenom II x4 or Athlon II x4.

Investors and those concerned about any advantages that nVIDIA cards might offer for rendering applications should keep in mind that I have a deal to get 40% off nVIDIA cards for my new cluster, half of which will be built using nVIDIA graphics machines, and include nVIDIA Tesla cards and GTX 590s to cover this base.

If you have specific hardware requirements let me know what they are and I will make sure they are included in the new cluster that is built, which will be very competitive with Amazon's specifications and rates and most importantly, we will accept Bitcoins.

I cannot spend any more time discussing hardware specifics.  If you are interested in using service or investing in my company, that is great, please let me know, but otherwise please do not waste my time asking questions that you can figure out yourself.  If you would like to make a larger investment than simply bonds on GLBSE, please send me a PM.

[optimalbitcoinminingcorp]

Last chance to purchase Optimal Bitcoin Mining Corp. bonds at 0.8 BTC!  On Sept 1st the bond prices will be increasing to 0.9 BTC!  Get them while they're hot!  Four Computers currently available for rental!

[legolouman]

Quite honestly, I'm interested, but your info just doesn't work. If you WERE able to put this together with the numbers that you provided, and everything went according to plan, then it might be possible to make money. I see this as flawed as you are "over-estimating", Your numbers change (slightly) per post, and the overall net is not high enough to offset the startup and upkeep as you would otherwise not profit much. Not to mention your "investors" are the ones bearing the costs, not you; if something goes wrong, or profitability disintegrates before your eyes you can just disappear, along with any net and tech.

I may seem naive, inconsiderate, or speculative (well I AM speculating) but without even thinking about the numbers, there are holes

[Nefario]

Update:

Our first customer received service and was happy with the service.  Their contract has ended.  I currently have 5 computers available for rental and am looking for new customers.  Please send me a PM if you are interested!

This business model is flawed. If the miners are at all profitable, it doesn't make sense to rent them out. It only makes sense if mining is not profitable.

For example:

If I rent a computer from you for 24 hours for 1BTC, and I manage to mine 2BTC, then you lose 1BTC. You would have made more BTC by not renting it to me and simply using it to mine and keep the 2 BTC for yourself.

If I pay you 1 BTC to rent the computer but I only manage to mine 0.5 BTC then you gain 0.5 BTC.

The correct business model is:

Float the company on GLBSE with an IPO to raise the investment you need to buy enough computers to fill all availble space, then the company mines using this equipment and pays out any profits after covering electricity costs to shareholders. You do not own the company in this setup, the shareholders do, but as long as you keep 25-50% of shares then you keep 25-50% of all profit made, and use none of your own money to buy the computers.

If the company needs to liquidate (eg mining is no longer profitable), then you sell everything you bought with share capital and buy all shares back from shareholders (including your own shares) at as close to the initial IPO as you can afford with the proceeds from what you earn in selling the equipment.

This is pretty much the model that most mining companies on GLBSE have taken(exception being centimine). And I think if you're going to get into mining this is the least risky way to go. Thus far none of the mining shares on GLBSE have repaid their capital in profit.

I might add that some operations(SIN) the operator charges a managment fee, which may considerably effect the profitability of the share.

[optimalbitcoinminingcorp]

Today is Sept. 1st and bonds prices are increasing to 0.9 BTC!  Buy them while you still can!

[DeaDTerra]

Are you guys still planing on buying up the shares for 1 BTC each?

[optimalbitcoinminingcorp]

Initially I was going to, but I now I see that people bought up a large amount of shares to try to take advantage of the fact that they will be repaid in 5 days and turn a quick profit.  This was never the purpose of the bonds and as I stated earlier, the bonds were intended to raise capital for the company.  Additional funds are of no use to me to have for 5 days at this point.  In any case, I have been unable to access my account lately and have been in contact with Nefario to try to access my account.  I have not heard from him recently, so I am taking the following course of action:

If Nefario does not get back to me by December 1st, I will have no way to access my account, thus the bonds cannot be repaid.  If Nefario does get back to me by December 1st, the bonds will be repaid such that only those bonds that were purchased in the 30 days prior to December 1st will be repaid at 1 BTC each and bonds purchased in the past 30 days will receive the original 0.9 BTC only, which (without being able to view my account) is about 163 BTC total.  There were 63.78 BTC purchased in the last 30 days, so a total of 219.7 BTC will be paid out, with each bond will receiving 0.97 BTC.  If the number of bonds purchased in the last 30 days is greater than 71 on December 1st, that means that people are trying to take advantage of me and, therefore, everyone will only receive 0.9 BTC at maturation on Dec 1st, and you can thank the few people that don't play by the rules for screwing it up for you, (this assumes Nefario gets back to me by Dec 1st).

[DeaDTerra]

Initially I was going to, but I now I see that people bought up a large amount of shares to try to take advantage of the fact that they will be repaid in 5 days and turn a quick profit.  This was never the purpose of the bonds and as I stated earlier, the bonds were intended to raise capital for the company.  Additional funds are of no use to me to have for 5 days at this point.  In any case, I have been unable to access my account lately and have been in contact with Nefario to try to access my account.  I have not heard from him recently, so I am taking the following course of action:

If Nefario does not get back to me by December 1st, I will have no way to access my account, thus the bonds cannot be repaid.  If Nefario does get back to me by December 1st, the bonds will be repaid such that only those bonds that were purchased in the 30 days prior to December 1st will be repaid at 1 BTC each and bonds purchased in the past 30 days will receive the original 0.9 BTC only, which (without being able to view my account) is about 163 BTC total.  There were 63.78 BTC purchased in the last 30 days, so a total of 219.7 BTC will be paid out, with each bond will receiving 0.97 BTC.  If the number of bonds purchased in the last 30 days is greater than 71 on December 1st, that means that people are trying to take advantage of me and, therefore, everyone will only receive 0.9 BTC at maturation on Dec 1st, and you can thank the few people that don't play by the rules for screwing it up for you, (this assumes Nefario gets back to me by Dec 1st).

It sounds like a fair deal but for next time don't issue more bond then you can sell simply issued in batches of shares until the market seems saturated. Nefario has been online and has been talking to the community recently, Please send him a pm on this forum and on the GLBSE and I am sure he can help you

[ovidiusoft]

Initially I was going to, but I now I see that people bought up a large amount of shares to try to take advantage of the fact that they will be repaid in 5 days and turn a quick profit.  This was never the purpose of the bonds and as I stated earlier, the bonds were intended to raise capital for the company.  Additional funds are of no use to me to have for 5 days at this point.  In any case, I have been unable to access my account lately and have been in contact with Nefario to try to access my account.  I have not heard from him recently, so I am taking the following course of action:

Not trying to be mean, but the GLBSE problems were only intermittent and in the past few weeks. It was your responsibility to cancel the sell orders on nov 1st or 15 or whenever you wanted. Nobody is "taking advantage" if you don't, and you are expected to stand by your contract, even if the shares are sold on Nov 30th, 23:59:59. Changing the rules just because you feel like it is childish.

So how about you take is as a business man, cancel the sell orders (GLBSE works perfectly now) and repay 1 BTC/share on dec 1st as per your contract, no matter when they were bought?

Full disclosure: no, I didn't buy shares in the past days, and I don't intend to buy. I have exactly 10 shares bought on august 30th.

[Ben Walsh (beamer)]

The term bond is very clear.

I agreed a contract with you which very clearly states that I will receive 1 BTC for the significant number of bonds I purchased from you at the time when they were first issued.

I have not purchased any subsequent bonds.

You are massively damaging any possible future business I (and I suspect many others) will consider conducting with you - including further bond purchases, other investment in your business (other businesses) and purchases of products / services you offer through your businesses. This is possibly the best form of anti-advertising you could possibly have come up with.

I demonstrated massive faith and trust in you, considering you to be an honest and trustworthy person.

The "rules" you mention are the contract terms and conditions we both agreed to when I purchased the bonds.