[BTCT][BFMINES] - Mining Contracts Now Available - Bonus Divs First Months

[eltopo]

Difficulty doesn't need to increase for such a long time to deplete your asset. If we'd have another few weeks with difficulty increasing 15%+ each change, it doesn't matter if it normalises afterwards to e.g. an average 5% increase. The asset will be exploited already (meaning dividend and price will be much smaller).

[furuknap]

Difficulty doesn't need to increase for such a long time to deplete your asset. If we'd have another few weeks with difficulty increasing 15%+ each change, it doesn't matter if it normalises afterwards to e.g. an average 5% increase. The asset will be exploited already (meaning dividend and price will be much smaller).

Of course they will be smaller with difficulty increases. However, the asset pays around 15% per month assuming a network hashrate of 220TH and delivery on August 1 (100TH claims to be ready next week, those are the same chips used for this miner).

A 30% drop will still make this very profitable, at above 100% per year (15%*0,7 = 10.5%/month = 130% per year). Keep in mind, NASDAQ composite yields somewhere around 5-7% per year. Exxon pays dividends to the tune of around 3% per year.

Difficulty can go up by quite a lot before you lose money.

A sustained 30% growth, however (15%+ per change), will put every Bitcoin miner out of business, so that is an equally unlikely scenario as a zero growth scenario. Even a 10% per change growth is extremely unlikely over time and assumes either incredible advanced in chip design (think 10x more efficient chips than today). More likely, the growth will slow down. It may flatten out. It may even drop. It will not continue on at this pace. Physics prevent that and barring some billionaire being tired of seeing so many numbers on his bank statement, nobody is going to invest 10x what they can possibly get in return.

Like I've said, I try to refrain from speculating in difficulty.

.b

[Mabsark]

If we assume a 10% difficulty increase per round, then the next 10 rounds will take just 12.7 days each, so say 13 days of dividends for each round. So, over those 130 days, a total of 0.00207722 BTC would be mined. In fact, with a constant 10% difficulty increase each round, over the next 57 successive rounds (next 2 years), only 0.00336580 BTC would be mined.

To that point, any mining investment, hardware or security, would suffer exactly the same fate.

Keep in mind that 10% perpetual increase per change is insanely huge. In fact, if you extrapolate that, the network will reach 240+ PH/s by the next halving. Assuming that would be bought with the most efficient hardware scheduled today (KnC Jupiters) at a 50% discount, that would mean mining investments of $2.7 billion dollars, for an economy that is barely a third of that.

In fact, if you just account for 20% monthly increase over the next 12 months, you'll need $200 million worth of Jupters in fresh investments, or just over $15M per month. That will completely dwarf any mining investments so far. Even the 10K USB miners that AM spend 2 months not selling completely would be a drop in the ocean (20K BTC = $2M). You would need to sell the cash equivalent of 3,000 AM Erupter Blades per month for 12 months for that to happen.

Also keep in ming that a lot of the growth we see now has been sold months and years ago. Even combined, the entire natural growth of the network was wiped out when AM went down for service for a few hours.

I've previously argued against the perpetual growth theory in this article:
http://coin.furuknap.net/are-perpetual-mining-bonds-scams-not-really/

A reasonable price right now would be around 0.002 as that should actually allow investors to make a profit. If you insist on that 0.004 BTC share price, then all you are going to do is waste 5 BTC on the listing fee.

That will be your choice, and others will make their choices based on what they think is reasonable. Again, if you believe in the perpetual proportinal growth theory, stay away from any mining investments, hardware or assets.

.b

Like I said, I don't believe that difficulty will increase 10% each round, especially later in the year. It was just a simple model to show what profits could be expected under those circumstances if you were paying dividends right now. If those 10 rounds began in August, they'd make about 0.001 BTC.

There's plenty of profit to made, even if difficulty did increase 10% each round. You just have to stop trying to make obscene amounts of profit for yourself. A Metabank BitFury provides 120 Gh/s for 2,160 USD. You'll be offering 100,000 shares at 0.004 BTC for a total of 400 BTC.

You paid no more than 35 BTC for a Metabank BitFury. You're trying to make 360 BTC in profit from 40 BTC (including the listing fee) while claiming you're not trying to rip people off. You can quite clearly afford to lower that price and still make a decent profit, which would in turn allow investors to make a profit as well. Instead you insist that your price is fair, even though dividends wont start paying till August at the earliest and that there is already a cheaper PMB on the market. I just don't see things working out for you.

[furuknap]

There's plenty of profit to made, even if difficulty did increase 10% each round. You just have to stop trying to make obscene amounts of profit for yourself. A Metabank BitFury provides 120 Gh/s for 2,160 USD. You'll be offering 100,000 shares at 0.004 BTC for a total of 400 BTC.

You are, of course, free to buy a miner yourself, host it, maintain it, replace it if it fails, leave aside buffers for unforeseen maintenance, and essentially commit yourself to always be online during difficulty changes for as long as the bond exist. You must also always leave a buffer large enough to pay for at a minimum one week of dividends, which will be around 30BTC. Your estimates are way low, but of course this is turning a profit for me. Do you think I would give it away at cost and work for free just to be a nice guy?

You'll need to find someone willing to sell, of course, who would be fine with accepting that paying for a pre-order with the risks involved (remember, I paid for this before the chips were done and anyone knew whether they would work at all) will not yield a reward. Investors could have accepted that risk when they had the chance, but they didn't.

Of course, you are comparing raw materials to finished product. You must feel cheated when you buy a car that is made of $1000 worth of aluminium and you have to pay 20x that much. After all, car manufacturers are trying to make an obscene amount of profit for themselves.

What you are arguing is that investing in a potential gold mine is a waste of time because the mine owner should just sell the mine once gold is discovered for the rate he himself paid. The risk the mine owner assumes by buying a license, not knowing whether there is gold or crap in the ground, should not have any upside, according to you.

But the final argument is really this: If I believe this mine will turn a profit at 0.004, why on earth would I sell it for less? I would give money to investors that I would otherwise mine for myself.

So, your opinion and objection is duly noted, in public, and I believe investors are capable of both reading and making informed decisions based on your arguments and mine.

.b

[Ac3Upz]

Hello furuknap,
I have a few questions for you:

1) I remember that you defended the PAJKA.BOND several days ago (at the time it was cca 0.08 for 3 MH/s share), are you still holding the shares? Or did you managed to sell them with profit or loss?

2) What is your estimate of avarege difficulty rise in 3-12 months?

3) What is your estimate of difficulty rise from now to August when you start mining?

4) What do you think is the probability that the amount you can gain from IPO would be bigger than the total amount paid in dividends? (the price of share will fall unless the difficulty drops, which is almost impossible with ASICs arriving).

[furuknap]

Hello furuknap,
I have a few questions for you:

1) I remember that you defended the PAJKA.BOND several days ago (at the time it was cca 0.08 for 3 MH/s share), are you still holding the shares? Or did you managed to sell them with profit or loss?

2) What is your estimate of avarege difficulty rise in 3-12 months?

3) What is your estimate of difficulty rise from now to August when you start mining?

4) What do you think is the probability that the amount you can gain from IPO would be bigger than the total amount paid in dividends? (the price of share will fall unless the difficulty drops, which is almost impossible with ASICs arriving).

Thanks for your questions (and to everyone who witnessed it, sorry about the sniping fire yesterday),

1. I still hold PAJKA shares, but I also bought and sold some shares in the meantime (so far with a profit). I have held some shares for a long time, and rebought immediately after they were bought just over a month ago. Like many investors, the first thing I do after I buy any asset is put them up for sale at the price I would sell them. In my case, someone came in a couple of months after I bought and bought those shares at that price.

Whether I make a loss is stil to be decided, I'm in no rush to sell them, but I realize that with the latest difficulty changes and the new assets on the market, that prices have dropped.

2. I'm still hesitant to predict difficulty changes, but I've been pretty open about the fact that I'm far less pessimistic on behalf of mining investments than seems to be the case for a lot of investors. I specifically think that the perpetual proportional growth theory is bullshit.

3. When I did my initial calculations during the design of this contract in late May, I estimated a total network hashing power of 250TH/s on August 1. That included the addition of 100TH plus a 10% growth per month, which may have been too low. I'm still hesitant to speculate in difficulty :-)

4. I believe dividends paid out will exceed any IPO funds by a reasonable amount, which is why I made this asset the way it is and have no problem selling this to long-time friends who want to get on board.

The most comparable and competitive asset on the market right now is TAT.VM, which has fallen to about the same level as BFMines since I announced this asset. Obvioiusly, and like I've written in previous articles, the most important thing in evaluating a mining contract is price, but I also believe that competition is vital to a fair pricing, like I wrote in the announcement blog post. I believe this asset will make a profit for investors, and thus I also hold the same opinion for TAT.VM at these levels.

It may have gotten lost in yesterday's distractions, but the other comparatively priced asset DMS.Mining behaves like a mining contract in terms of dividends but not in terms of pricing. I don't see that as a directly comparable asset due to this as it requires a more hands-on management from investors and carries more risk of price swings than straight mining contracts. As such, for investors that want an exit possibiity, DMS.Mining is a more risky proposal.

.b

[Mabsark]

There's plenty of profit to made, even if difficulty did increase 10% each round. You just have to stop trying to make obscene amounts of profit for yourself. A Metabank BitFury provides 120 Gh/s for 2,160 USD. You'll be offering 100,000 shares at 0.004 BTC for a total of 400 BTC.

You are, of course, free to buy a miner yourself, host it, maintain it, replace it if it fails, leave aside buffers for unforeseen maintenance, and essentially commit yourself to always be online during difficulty changes for as long as the bond exist. You must also always leave a buffer large enough to pay for at a minimum one week of dividends, which will be around 30BTC. Your estimates are way low, but of course this is turning a profit for me. Do you think I would give it away at cost and work for free just to be a nice guy?

You'll need to find someone willing to sell, of course, who would be fine with accepting that paying for a pre-order with the risks involved (remember, I paid for this before the chips were done and anyone knew whether they would work at all) will not yield a reward. Investors could have accepted that risk when they had the chance, but they didn't.

Of course, you are comparing raw materials to finished product. You must feel cheated when you buy a car that is made of $1000 worth of aluminium and you have to pay 20x that much. After all, car manufacturers are trying to make an obscene amount of profit for themselves.

What you are arguing is that investing in a potential gold mine is a waste of time because the mine owner should just sell the mine once gold is discovered for the rate he himself paid. The risk the mine owner assumes by buying a license, not knowing whether there is gold or crap in the ground, should not have any upside, according to you.

But the final argument is really this: If I believe this mine will turn a profit at 0.004, why on earth would I sell it for less? I would give money to investors that I would otherwise mine for myself.

So, your opinion and objection is duly noted, in public, and I believe investors are capable of both reading and making informed decisions based on your arguments and mine.

.b

I've been mining since 2011 and have no problem maintaining my own hardware. I also have ASICs on order. You try and make it sound like running a miner is difficult, but it isn't. It's no more difficult than running a PC. If you think that is worth 360 BTC then you are quite clearly insane.

I'm not comparing raw materials to a finished product at all. That's completely ridiculous. You are buying a finished product for x and trying to sell it for 10x, so stop trying to obfuscate this fact by talking nonsense.

If you believe that your stock will make a profit selling at 0.004 BTC when your miner wont even be online till August at the earliest, then you are obviously delusional. Why would anyone buy your stock when they can buy the exact same offering from your competitors at a lower price?

[furuknap]

I've been mining since 2011 and have no problem maintaining my own hardware. I also have ASICs on order. You try and make it sound like running a miner is difficult, but it isn't. It's no more difficult than running a PC. If you think that is worth 360 BTC then you are quite clearly insane.

I'm not comparing raw materials to a finished product at all. That's completely ridiculous. You are buying a finished product for x and trying to sell it for 10x, so stop trying to obfuscate this fact by talking nonsense.

If you believe that your stock will make a profit selling at 0.004 BTC when your miner wont even be online till August at the earliest, then you are obviously delusional. Why would anyone buy your stock when they can buy the exact same offering from your competitors at a lower price?

Thanks for your input again, I believe I have responded to these comments already, so I'll leave your characteristics for others to evaluate.

.b

[Mabsark]

I've been mining since 2011 and have no problem maintaining my own hardware. I also have ASICs on order. You try and make it sound like running a miner is difficult, but it isn't. It's no more difficult than running a PC. If you think that is worth 360 BTC then you are quite clearly insane.

I'm not comparing raw materials to a finished product at all. That's completely ridiculous. You are buying a finished product for x and trying to sell it for 10x, so stop trying to obfuscate this fact by talking nonsense.

If you believe that your stock will make a profit selling at 0.004 BTC when your miner wont even be online till August at the earliest, then you are obviously delusional. Why would anyone buy your stock when they can buy the exact same offering from your competitors at a lower price?

Thanks for your input again, I believe I have responded to these comments already, so I'll leave your characteristics for others to evaluate.

.b

You claim to have answered the questions I've asked, but I can't find those answers. So could you give us a summary. I'd like to know the following:

How much would I have received in dividends by the end of the year according to your predictions?
What do you expect the share price to be at the end of the year?

[furuknap]

You claim to have answered the questions I've asked, but I can't find those answers. So could you give us a summary. I'd like to know the following:

How much would I have received in dividends by the end of the year according to your predictions?
What do you expect the share price to be at the end of the year?

Like I've said on several occasions, both in this thread and elsewhere, I am hesitant to provide predictions on difficulty. If you asked someone six months ago to predict the difficulty today, you'd have answers all over the board (including such from 100TH who said a minimum of 600TH on June 1). Trying to predict six months into the future now is as futile as it was then.

The price and earnings of mining contracts depend greatly on the difficulty evolution over time. If you believe in the perpetual proportional growth theory, you shuld not invest in any form of mining, mine included.

If you believe that suppliers will not be able to keep up proportional growth in the deliveries, then investing in mining makes sense, mine included. I lean towards this scenario far more than I lean towards the perpetual growth theory.

Keep in mind that for example BFL's or Avalon's effects on mining is also proportionally smaller with the same deliveries when difficulty grows. What seemed like a complete marketbreaker when BFL announced their minirigs at 1,5TH is now merely a Meh! Deliveries need to keep up with difficulty growth for the growth to continue. Has Avalon increased their predicted deliveries by 700% since February? If not, their predicted deliveries will now have a 700% smaller impact on the difficulty growth when they arrive. The 100TH mine was more than five times the total network hashrate when announced; now it's around 40% and dropping.

In short, I believe the difficulty growth will slow down over the next few months. How much is beyond my abilities to predict. Anywhere between those two scenarios, and it's a much more complicated question and those predictions tend to be all over the place again.

.b

[Mabsark]

You claim to have answered the questions I've asked, but I can't find those answers. So could you give us a summary. I'd like to know the following:

How much would I have received in dividends by the end of the year according to your predictions?
What do you expect the share price to be at the end of the year?

Like I've said on several occasions, both in this thread and elsewhere, I am hesitant to provide predictions on difficulty. If you asked someone six months ago to predict the difficulty today, you'd have answers all over the board (including such from 100TH who said a minimum of 600TH on June 1). Trying to predict six months into the future now is as futile as it was then.

The price and earnings of mining contracts depend greatly on the difficulty evolution over time. If you believe in the perpetual proportional growth theory, you shuld not invest in any form of mining, mine included.

If you believe that suppliers will not be able to keep up proportional growth in the deliveries, then investing in mining makes sense, mine included. I lean towards this scenario far more than I lean towards the perpetual growth theory.

Keep in mind that for example BFL's or Avalon's effects on mining is also proportionally smaller with the same deliveries when difficulty grows. What seemed like a complete marketbreaker when BFL announced their minirigs at 1,5TH is now merely a Meh! Deliveries need to keep up with difficulty growth for the growth to continue. Has Avalon increased their predicted deliveries by 700% since February? If not, their predicted deliveries will now have a 700% smaller impact on the difficulty growth when they arrive. The 100TH mine was more than five times the total network hashrate when announced; now it's around 40% and dropping.

In short, I believe the difficulty growth will slow down over the next few months. How much is beyond my abilities to predict. Anywhere between those two scenarios, and it's a much more complicated question and those predictions tend to be all over the place again.

.b

Earlier, you said:

I believe I have responded to the question on profitability already and why I'm hesitant to provide scenarios for profitability. However, I can tell you that I've run the numbers based on the same analysis model I did with 100TH (http://coin.furuknap.net/can-100th-really-be-the-next-asicminer/) and used that to design the asset to be fair to investors, with a reasonable chance of reasonable profit.

So, what answers did that analysis provide to the questions I just asked? You keep saying you've done the maths, yet I'm asking you to show me and you refuse. Why won't you show us your numbers?

I agree that perpetual proportional growth theory is flawed, especially for the later periods. For the next couple of months though, I think we'll see at least a few 10% increases per round. The current round is just over half way through and is just over a 5% increase. Now, factor in that BFL started shipping Minirigs last week which may not be online yet. The difficulty for the next round will definitely see at least a 10% increase.

July is set see 100TH and Avalon based systems come online. August is set to see AMC's Avalon based Fast Hash systems come online and Metabank's BitFury 120 come online. September is set to see KnC come online. You'll see difficulty spikes for all those periods so 10% increase per round for the next couple of months is entirely plausible.

[furuknap]

Earlier, you said:

I believe I have responded to the question on profitability already and why I'm hesitant to provide scenarios for profitability. However, I can tell you that I've run the numbers based on the same analysis model I did with 100TH (http://coin.furuknap.net/can-100th-really-be-the-next-asicminer/) and used that to design the asset to be fair to investors, with a reasonable chance of reasonable profit.

So, what answers did that analysis provide to the questions I just asked? You keep saying you've done the maths, yet I'm asking you to show me and you refuse. Why won't you show us your numbers?

Like I've explained, I don't know what those numbers are. I designed the asset to that it is reasonably proitable from somewhere in the middle of the perpetual growth and the 'everything is going to hell' theories.

For example, and I would like to stress that the following are merely examples and not predictions, starting with a 250TH hashrate on August 1 and seeing 10% per month growth, the full issue price will be repaid in June 2014 (one year) and yield a 47% profit over three years (until halving in 2016), the equivalent of ~16% per year. This is merely one example, and again, if difficulty goes up significantly (thus making any mining investment less profitable) then both the share price and dividends will go down.

On the other hand, if, let's say network hashrate flattens out at around 1PH/s, the asset yields far more profit (around 30% per year after initial price being repaid). If it continues to grow to 50PH/s until 2016, which is a 15% per month perpetual growth, the asset is not profitable (nor is any current mining investment) but flattens out at a return of 99.82% of initital investment.

I agree that perpetual proportional growth theory is flawed, especially for the later periods. For the next couple of months though, I think we'll see at least a few 10% increases per round. The current round is just over half way through and is just over a 5% increase. Now, factor in that BFL started shipping Minirigs last week which may not be online yet. The difficulty for the next round will definitely see at least a 10% increase.

July is set see 100TH and Avalon based systems come online. August is set to see AMC's Avalon based Fast Hash systems come online and Metabank's BitFury 120 come online. September is set to see KnC come online. You'll see difficulty spikes for all those periods so 10% increase per round for the next couple of months is entirely plausible.

I have already calculated in a growth of around 30% until August 1 which represents slightly under 10% per change until then.

.b

[furuknap]

On the other hand, if, let's say network hashrate flattens out at around 1PH/s, the asset yields far more profit (around 30% per year after initial price being repaid). If it continues to grow to 50PH/s until 2016, which is a 15% per month perpetual growth, the asset is not profitable (nor is any current mining investment) but flattens out at a return of 99.82% of initital investment.

Just as a follow-up on why I chose the 1PH number; we're currently at ~170TH and know about 200TH from Bitfury (100TH and Metabank/private investor). Further, I think I read that KnC has sold around 800 Jupiters, which is another 300TH. AM claims another 100TH is coming online from their next wafer. This comprises 670TH.

Avalon is a bit of an unknown because we don't know how many devices have already shipped and are thus already accounted for in the 170TH. Same with BFL; we know a large portion of their orders are Jalapenos ordered last summer, and BFL claims all those have shipped (the ones prior to August). We don't know what the remaining portion comprises. I really don't know how to evaluate BFL, but if we hipshot their deliveries at 50% of all the other mining, that comes out to just over 1PH/s.

At that point, we're talking about everyone having to move to next-gen technology and that may take months or years due to the increased difficulty of smaller processes and higher NRE cost. I would say all bets are off about whether there will be growth at all, and maybe we'll see less profitable miners (like AM BE Blades) being switched off, reducing the difficulty again.

Although minor, we also know that GPU mining has now finally reached the point of 'not worth it' for a lot of miners, so there may be some decline based on GPUs either stopping or moving to other coins. This, however, is likely a small number, perhaps <10TH/s which was half of what was running in February when AM started deploying ASICs.

.b

[Mabsark]

On the other hand, if, let's say network hashrate flattens out at around 1PH/s, the asset yields far more profit (around 30% per year after initial price being repaid). If it continues to grow to 50PH/s until 2016, which is a 15% per month perpetual growth, the asset is not profitable (nor is any current mining investment) but flattens out at a return of 99.82% of initital investment.

Just as a follow-up on why I chose the 1PH number; we're currently at ~170TH and know about 200TH from Bitfury (100TH and Metabank/private investor). Further, I think I read that KnC has sold around 800 Jupiters, which is another 300TH. AM claims another 100TH is coming online from their next wafer. This comprises 670TH.

Avalon is a bit of an unknown because we don't know how many devices have already shipped and are thus already accounted for in the 170TH. Same with BFL; we know a large portion of their orders are Jalapenos ordered last summer, and BFL claims all those have shipped (the ones prior to August). We don't know what the remaining portion comprises. I really don't know how to evaluate BFL, but if we hipshot their deliveries at 50% of all the other mining, that comes out to just over 1PH/s.

At that point, we're talking about everyone having to move to next-gen technology and that may take months or years due to the increased difficulty of smaller processes and higher NRE cost. I would say all bets are off about whether there will be growth at all, and maybe we'll see less profitable miners (like AM BE Blades) being switched off, reducing the difficulty again.

Although minor, we also know that GPU mining has now finally reached the point of 'not worth it' for a lot of miners, so there may be some decline based on GPUs either stopping or moving to other coins. This, however, is likely a small number, perhaps <10TH/s which was half of what was running in February when AM started deploying ASICs.

.b

The 3 Avalon batches come to around 100 TH/s and chip orders come to around 150 TH/s.
AM claim that 200 Th/s will be incoming, 100 TH/s is just the first part of that.
For BFL, there's an unofficial pre-order list which shows around 400 Th/s incoming, their initial 75,000 chips come to about 300 Th/s though.

[furuknap]

The 3 Avalon batches come to around 100 TH/s and chip orders come to around 150 TH/s.
AM claim that 200 Th/s will be incoming, 100 TH/s is just the first part of that.
For BFL, there's an unofficial pre-order list which shows around 400 Th/s incoming, their initial 75,000 chips come to about 300 Th/s though.

This may very well be correct, and there are likely unknowns as well. Like I said, speculation is on whether all of these will be delivered in reasonable time (or at all). I don't have all the answers which is why I do not wish to speculate.

However, consider too that mining hardware will rapidly become unprofitable. For example, BFMines is already cheaper than buying AM blades and that doesn't even account for the cost of operating blades. This is, as far as I know, the first mining contract that IPOs below the price of available ASIC technology, which I feel it must be to offer a real alternative to operating your own mine.

.b

[Mabsark]

The 3 Avalon batches come to around 100 TH/s and chip orders come to around 150 TH/s.
AM claim that 200 Th/s will be incoming, 100 TH/s is just the first part of that.
For BFL, there's an unofficial pre-order list which shows around 400 Th/s incoming, their initial 75,000 chips come to about 300 Th/s though.

This may very well be correct, and there are likely unknowns as well. Like I said, speculation is on whether all of these will be delivered in reasonable time (or at all). I don't have all the answers which is why I do not wish to speculate.

However, consider too that mining hardware will rapidly become unprofitable. For example, BFMines is already cheaper than buying AM blades and that doesn't even account for the cost of operating blades. This is, as far as I know, the first mining contract that IPOs below the price of available ASIC technology, which I feel it must be to offer a real alternative to operating your own mine.

.b

All AM hardware in insanely overpriced so that comparison is completely meaningless. AM's USB miners have just been reduced in price though to 1 BTC and they do at least 330 Mh/s, so they now offer better value than your stock and are readily available.

[furuknap]

All AM hardware in insanely overpriced so that comparison is completely meaningless. AM's USB miners have just been reduced in price though to 1 BTC and they do at least 330 Mh/s, so they now offer better value than your stock and are readily available.

Then I strongly suggest you buy those if you value them higher.

.b

[Mabsark]

All AM hardware in insanely overpriced so that comparison is completely meaningless. AM's USB miners have just been reduced in price though to 1 BTC and they do at least 330 Mh/s, so they now offer better value than your stock and are readily available.

Then I strongly suggest you buy those if you value them higher.

.b

You say that like it's just an opinion of mine and not actually a fact. Those USB miners are clearly better value than your stock. You get at least 330 Mh/s compared to the 250 Mh/s you'd get from spending 1 BTC on your stock. You also get to start mining BTC now, not a couple of months from now.

[furuknap]

You say that like it's just an opinion of mine and not actually a fact. Those USB miners are clearly better value than your stock. You get at least 330 Mh/s compared to the 250 Mh/s you'd get from spending 1 BTC on your stock. You also get to start mining BTC now, not a couple of months from now.

I say that as if it is your opinion. Other's opinions may differ; they may not have a stable environment in which to mine, they may not want the burden of mining, they may have expensive electricity, they do not want the risk of hardware failure, they may not like the colors offered, or they may simply not like AM at all.

I'm not going to judge your opinion or that of anyone else.

.b

[eltopo]

Prices right now:

Code:

BFMines:      0,004 per Mh/s
TAT.VM:       0,0035 per Mh/s
DMS.MINING:   0,0032 per Mh/s
AM USB Miner: 0,003 per Mh/s (with new price 0.99 btc)

But anyway it's doubtful if BFMines will get approved, it's waiting for another YES vote since days...