-

[Lab_Rat]

Dividend payout this week was just shy of 100 coins.  I'd like to see it go over 100 in the near future.

Just to point out.  LRM paid out ~0.002BTC per bond this week.  That comes out to be a 0.002/0.15 = 1.333% per week on an investment.  There isn't a single bank in the US that will give you that on a years interest, and LRM's payout will only keep climbing.

[fractal02]

Thank you LabRat for the news !

I'm pretty agree with "The proposition"  

Every solution that can be good for the Company, i take.

I'm here for the long term  

PS: For others manufacturers, HashFast and KNCminer doesn' inspire trust for you ? (i'm a miner...if i can bet on the good horse...i take too   )

[||bit]

Hey everyone,

NEWS/INFORMATION
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

My apologies for it being so long since the last update.  Yes, Dave is now mining for us.

With the news Dave gave me as to a time frame on receiving hardware, I realized I needed to hurry up on getting the second hosting location up and going.  I'm almost ready and by mid Oct it should have a virtual boatload of BitFury gear hashing away in it.

There were two minor hiccups in the last week.  One was a small networking issue that I fixed within 30 minutes, but the other was out of my control.  For the first time in the many months I've been mining in James' pool, it went down.  It wasn't that the pool went completely down, but James was doing upgrades/updates to the pool and it kept flashing off and back on at random when he restarted it.  This made it appear that the hashrate went down due to the moving average on the pool.  In a few occasions the pool went down for a split second too long and some miners switched to another pool.  It appears he is done with the updates/upgrades, but to be sure I split the hardware between BTCGuild (I didn't want to do that) and James' pool.

BTCGuild is far overpowered at almost 43% of the network and the 100TH mine is going up pointed at them which doesn't help.  I don't want to help throw them over the edge by pointing more TH at them, so this solution isn't permanent.

I have learned a lot about mining at scale in the last couple weeks and Dave (BitFury) and I have discussed our issues to make sure the other one doesn't run into the same issues.

PROPOSITION
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dave has given me information that could gain LRM a far greater amount of hardware than originally intended as long as everything goes to plan.  There are a few individuals who hold a very large amount of LRM bonds who have all given me the same idea.  Although my contract gives no one voting rights, I'm not the type of individual to veto the masses vote. (This is me showing I'm not looking to screw over the public for a few bucks   )

This idea states that (and my contract allows for) LRM to mine for 2 full weeks with new hardware without paying dividends from it.  What I would do if the public will generally agree to this is use this hardware to mine and scoop up a large sum of BTC.  ~5% would be necessary for power consumption and ~5% would be requested as a management fee for setting up hundreds and hundreds of h-cards and getting everything mining in a very speedy manner.  The other 90% would go straight into the hardware that Dave can give me a killer deal on.

If you would consider this, it could mean wonders for the company in the long run getting a better head-start.

NEWS REGARDING OTHER MANUFACTURERS
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

CoinTerra -- VP of sales with CoinTerra and I have been in contact and will remain in contact.  We will be trying to work out a deal to maybe get some Dec and Jan equipment.  Things looked good when I spoke to him.

If people want my opinion on which 28nm company will deliver on time (or even at all) it will likely be CoinTerra, which is why I'm interested in remaining in contact with them.

BFL -- Their recent announcement to host by the GH is exactly the opposite of my beliefs when it comes to PMBs.  If you purchase a defined hashrate, your payout will only continue to go down.  My intention is to keep up with the difficulty (to an extent) until it begins to level off.



I hope everyone can understand how much time and effort it takes to put together an operation of this size and can forgive me for not being as public as I used to be.

-Lab_Rat

Lab Rat. How much funding is tied up in BFL Monarch pre-orders? Have you considered seeing if you can cancel out of that?

[bigasic]

I just want to remind everyone what bargraphics said a few posts up. I thought the same as most of you at first glance, why would I pay .15 for a bond when i can get 1ghs for .08?

The answer is pretty simple.

If you dont think about it, it looks like a good deal, but when you spend 10 seconds and look at the details its a no brainer... the bfl deal is TERRIBLE..you will lose value quickly, while lab rat will continue to grow.  So, in april, you are still hashing away at 1ghs, while we could be at 2ghs. Also, the bfl deal is for one year, then you have to pay "enter your inflated price here" for another year.

[mmmerlin]

I just want to remind everyone what bargraphics said a few posts up. I thought the same as most of you at first glance, why would I pay .15 for a bond when i can get 1ghs for .08?

The answer is pretty simple.

If you dont think about it, it looks like a good deal, but when you spend 10 seconds and look at the details its a no brainer... the bfl deal is TERRIBLE..you will lose value quickly, while lab rat will continue to grow.  So, in april, you are still hashing away at 1ghs, while we could be at 2ghs. Also, the bfl deal is for one year, then you have to pay "enter your inflated price here" for another year.

Also BFL delivering both on (power) spec and in February is a dream 

[Lab_Rat]

Hey everyone,

[What I said earlier...]

-Lab_Rat

Lab Rat. How much funding is tied up in BFL Monarch pre-orders? Have you considered seeing if you can cancel out of that?

Maybe 20% at this point, but I'd like to point out:

This is a pre-order. 28nm ASIC products are shipped according to placement in the order queue, and delivery may take 3 months or more after order. All sales are final.

I may be willing to sell the order to another individual and not for the fact that I don't trust BFL to ship them. (It will happen eventually) and probably sooner than people are giving BFL credit for as they've already made the chip, just have to shrink it.  I just know that individuals with LRM want more hashpower NOW, not in 3-4 months.

[mmmerlin]

PROPOSITION
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dave has given me information that could gain LRM a far greater amount of hardware than originally intended as long as everything goes to plan.  There are a few individuals who hold a very large amount of LRM bonds who have all given me the same idea.  Although my contract gives no one voting rights, I'm not the type of individual to veto the masses vote. (This is me showing I'm not looking to screw over the public for a few bucks  )

This idea states that (and my contract allows for) LRM to mine for 2 full weeks with new hardware without paying dividends from it.  What I would do if the public will generally agree to this is use this hardware to mine and scoop up a large sum of BTC.  ~5% would be necessary for power consumption and ~5% would be requested as a management fee for setting up hundreds and hundreds of h-cards and getting everything mining in a very speedy manner.  The other 90% would go straight into the hardware that Dave can give me a killer deal on.

If you would consider this, it could mean wonders for the company in the long run getting a better head-start.

I'm not against this but it's a bit sparsely populated with details as it stands to get a vote of either yay or nay from me at the moment. Could you furnish this with a little more detail? Obviously PM/email is fine for the parts that can't/shouldn't be public (if any).

NEWS REGARDING OTHER MANUFACTURERS
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

CoinTerra -- VP of sales with CoinTerra and I have been in contact and will remain in contact.  We will be trying to work out a deal to maybe get some Dec and Jan equipment.  Things looked good when I spoke to him.

If people want my opinion on which 28nm company will deliver on time (or even at all) it will likely be CoinTerra, which is why I'm interested in remaining in contact with them.

BFL -- Their recent announcement to host by the GH is exactly the opposite of my beliefs when it comes to PMBs.  If you purchase a defined hashrate, your payout will only continue to go down.  My intention is to keep up with the difficulty (to an extent) until it begins to level off.

I am glad that CoinTerra get your vote, they would also get mine (pun intended). Also glad to hear you are not intending to allow more money to "flutter-by" BFL's mining contract offering is just another method to lock people's money away whilst they sit around missing specs and deadlines all over the place. I am really unsure as to how their business practices are legal... :/

Very glad to hear you are in touch with the CoinTerra people, that is a relationship worth maintaining.

[mmmerlin]

they've already made the chip, just have to shrink it.

This is not how it works, and they haven't made the chip at all. There is no die-shrink possibility between 65nm and 28nm, this is a full redesign, with all the disasters that will entail. Yes, they've gained some experience, but there will be many hiccough along the way!

[Lab_Rat]

I just want to remind everyone what bargraphics said a few posts up. I thought the same as most of you at first glance, why would I pay .15 for a bond when i can get 1ghs for .08?

The answer is pretty simple.

If you dont think about it, it looks like a good deal, but when you spend 10 seconds and look at the details its a no brainer... the bfl deal is TERRIBLE..you will lose value quickly, while lab rat will continue to grow.  So, in april, you are still hashing away at 1ghs, while we could be at 2ghs. Also, the bfl deal is for one year, then you have to pay "enter your inflated price here" for another year.

Also BFL delivering both on (power) spec and in February is a dream 

Maybe not this time... They learned a lot of hard lessons on the 65nm gear. Including not to be optimistic.

PS: Simple math states a theoretical efficiency of (28^2)/(65^2) = 784/4225 = 0.185 or ~1/5.4 the power consumption if they didn't optimize their power issues.  So it could easily do 600GH @ 511W without breaking a sweat. If they optimized their power consumption it could get down to something closer to 350W without it being too far of a stretch.

[Lab_Rat]

PROPOSITION
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dave has given me information that could gain LRM a far greater amount of hardware than originally intended as long as everything goes to plan.  There are a few individuals who hold a very large amount of LRM bonds who have all given me the same idea.  Although my contract gives no one voting rights, I'm not the type of individual to veto the masses vote. (This is me showing I'm not looking to screw over the public for a few bucks   )

This idea states that (and my contract allows for) LRM to mine for 2 full weeks with new hardware without paying dividends from it.  What I would do if the public will generally agree to this is use this hardware to mine and scoop up a large sum of BTC.  ~5% would be necessary for power consumption and ~5% would be requested as a management fee for setting up hundreds and hundreds of h-cards and getting everything mining in a very speedy manner.  The other 90% would go straight into the hardware that Dave can give me a killer deal on.

If you would consider this, it could mean wonders for the company in the long run getting a better head-start.

I'm not against this but it's a bit sparsely populated with details as it stands to get a vote of either yay or nay from me at the moment. Could you furnish this with a little more detail? Obviously PM/email is fine for the parts that can't/shouldn't be public (if any).

NEWS REGARDING OTHER MANUFACTURERS
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

CoinTerra -- VP of sales with CoinTerra and I have been in contact and will remain in contact.  We will be trying to work out a deal to maybe get some Dec and Jan equipment.  Things looked good when I spoke to him.

If people want my opinion on which 28nm company will deliver on time (or even at all) it will likely be CoinTerra, which is why I'm interested in remaining in contact with them.

BFL -- Their recent announcement to host by the GH is exactly the opposite of my beliefs when it comes to PMBs.  If you purchase a defined hashrate, your payout will only continue to go down.  My intention is to keep up with the difficulty (to an extent) until it begins to level off.

I am glad that CoinTerra get your vote, they would also get mine (pun intended). Also glad to hear you are not intending to allow more money to "flutter-by" BFL's mining contract offering is just another method to lock people's money away whilst they sit around missing specs and deadlines all over the place. I am really unsure as to how their business practices are legal... :/

Very glad to hear you are in touch with the CoinTerra people, that is a relationship worth maintaining.

CoinTerra is by far the best bet for 28nm... They have some goodies in store that I can't share that will blow away everyone.

EDIT: I'll pretty well answer anything you need to know about that proposition publicly except when Dave expects to get me HW by because that's technically speculation and I don't speculate or everyone gets mad... (seen that before)  Shoot me a call today if you want to know more mmmerlin

[mmmerlin]

Maybe not this time... They learned a lot of hard lessons on the 65nm gear. Including not to be optimistic.

No, they didn't. The main lesson they seem to have learned is that you can repeatedly lie to/mislead people and they will continue to believe these lies, and that making promises that you can't deliver on is a great way to lock-in a customer base you have no right to if you were being honest, and that there is no penalty for doing so, so why not do it again as it worked so well last time. What have they got to lose?!

PS: Simple math states a theoretical efficiency of (28^2)/(65^2) = 784/4225 = 0.185 or ~1/5.4 the power consumption if they didn't optimize their power issues.  So it could easily do 600GH @ 511W without breaking a sweat. If they optimized their power consumption it could get down to something closer to 350W without it being too far of a stretch.

But unfortunately it doesn't follow simple maths at all though. "Simple maths" tells me that if I put twice as many BHP in my car it goes twice as fast, but it doesn't. 511W on a chip of any size will more than "break a sweat", it will usually result in letting out the magic smoke. Also, thermal runaway is a big issue in these things when calculating the power draw dynamics in transistor circuits. The situation is not linear, and your argument is therefore overly simplistic and reductive. Serious modelling is required to get decent numbers out, and it can be both better or worse than the simple case you outline depending on many factors...

Either way, it's academic as we agree that BFL for the bin - CoinTerra for the win!

[Lab_Rat]

Maybe not this time... They learned a lot of hard lessons on the 65nm gear. Including not to be optimistic.

No, they didn't. The main lesson they seem to have learned is that you can repeatedly lie to/mislead people and they will continue to believe these lies, and that making promises that you can't deliver on is a great way to lock-in a customer base you have no right to if you were being honest, and that there is no penalty for doing so, so why not do it again as it worked so well last time. What have they got to lose?!

PS: Simple math states a theoretical efficiency of (28^2)/(65^2) = 784/4225 = 0.185 or ~1/5.4 the power consumption if they didn't optimize their power issues.  So it could easily do 600GH @ 511W without breaking a sweat. If they optimized their power consumption it could get down to something closer to 350W without it being too far of a stretch.

But unfortunately it doesn't follow simple maths at all though. "Simple maths" tells me that if I put twice as many BHP in my car it goes twice as fast, but it doesn't. 511W on a chip of any size will more than "break a sweat", it will usually result in letting out the magic smoke. Also, thermal runaway is a big issue in these things when calculating the power draw dynamics in transistor circuits. The situation is not linear, and your argument is therefore overly simplistic and reductive. Serious modelling is required to get decent numbers out, and it can be both better or worse than the simple case you outline depending on many factors...

Either way, it's academic as we agree that BFL for the bin - CoinTerra for the win!

Their Monarch isn't a single chip... It's either 2 or 4. They came out with a "300 GH unit"

[M31]

Thanks for the update Lab_Rat.

I completely agree with your plan.  Go for it!  (and I'm a fairly large shareholder).

A head start is all that matters at this point, and you seem to have a magic knack for making this happen.

I'm glad CoinTerra is finally allowing PP and CCs, as I had many emails with them over the topic, nagging for such to be put in place.  Now that they have it, and you're in touch with them, I have a question, and it kinda goes out to all of the LRM bondholders:

Would it be possible for us to contribute to a cash fund with CT for you to buy equipment?  For example: I use my CC to give CT $5000, it goes into a pooled fund under LRM rather than buying a miner directly, and we get a better deal than a direct purchase due to the volume.

This would allow an easy avenue for those wishing to buy on credit and have a simple transaction (great for those not living in the USA who'd otherwise need to pay ridiculous taxes).

On your end it would allow you to have a giant cash fund to work with in a very short time.  Some custom arrangement would have to be worked out with CT, but perhaps it's worth considering.

Just an idea off the top of my head and probably not thought out too well...

Keep up the great work!

[mmmerlin]

Maybe not this time... They learned a lot of hard lessons on the 65nm gear. Including not to be optimistic.

No, they didn't. The main lesson they seem to have learned is that you can repeatedly lie to/mislead people and they will continue to believe these lies, and that making promises that you can't deliver on is a great way to lock-in a customer base you have no right to if you were being honest, and that there is no penalty for doing so, so why not do it again as it worked so well last time. What have they got to lose?!

PS: Simple math states a theoretical efficiency of (28^2)/(65^2) = 784/4225 = 0.185 or ~1/5.4 the power consumption if they didn't optimize their power issues.  So it could easily do 600GH @ 511W without breaking a sweat. If they optimized their power consumption it could get down to something closer to 350W without it being too far of a stretch.

But unfortunately it doesn't follow simple maths at all though. "Simple maths" tells me that if I put twice as many BHP in my car it goes twice as fast, but it doesn't. 511W on a chip of any size will more than "break a sweat", it will usually result in letting out the magic smoke. Also, thermal runaway is a big issue in these things when calculating the power draw dynamics in transistor circuits. The situation is not linear, and your argument is therefore overly simplistic and reductive. Serious modelling is required to get decent numbers out, and it can be both better or worse than the simple case you outline depending on many factors...

Either way, it's academic as we agree that BFL for the bin - CoinTerra for the win!

Their Monarch isn't a single chip... It's either 2 or 4. They came out with a "300 GH unit"

Yeah, with their current design spec (the one I'm saying they will miss) they are looking for a factor of 75x increase in speed AND the reduction in power draw. Should be easy right?

[bigasic]

Lab,

I hope that you got the 25 percent off voucher for the monarchs.. I dont know if you can use them retro, but I have one if you can... Im so glad all my orders are done with the BFL night mare...... I probably wouldnt purchase something from them even if the cost was 10 percent of the nearest competitor...but, maybe they will surprise us and deliver a timely and good product... like you said lab, I dont want to wait 3 months to get our hash rate up, but whatever is best for LRM, im in...

[mmmerlin]

Lab,

I hope that you got the 25 percent off voucher for the monarchs.. I dont know if you can use them retro, but I have one if you can... Im so glad all my orders are done with the BFL night mare...... I probably wouldnt purchase something from them even if the cost was 10 percent of the nearest competitor...but, maybe they will surprise us and deliver a timely and good product... like you said lab, I dont want to wait 3 months to get our hash rate up, but whatever is best for LRM, im in...

Don't worry, vouchers were used for everything, nobody pays face value for anything from BFL!

[Bargraphics]

I would be willing to give up my two weeks worth of dividends if Lab_Rat included his 5% management fee in it as well for those two weeks.

From what I'm gathering "Every Bitcoin Counts". I think this would show a lot of good faith towards shareholders.



That being said, we would be looking at around ~200 Coins from two weeks worth of dividends to be reinvested back into LRM.

In all honesty, that's NOT that much. Would ~$26,000 really get that much of a better deal with Bitfury?

[sparky999]

If you waive the management fee I would be happy with reinvestment, I don't know if I count as a big shareholder I have a little over 500 bonds. It seems to me that you would also benefit from increase in hashing power through a larger management fee in the following months and if we are going for a 'we are all in this together' mentality then it shows a lot of good faith on your part imo.

[mmmerlin]

If you waive the management fee I would be happy with reinvestment, I don't know if I count as a big shareholder I have a little over 500 bonds. It seems to me that you would also benefit from increase in hashing power through a larger management fee in the following months and if we are going for a 'we are all in this together' mentality then it shows a lot of good faith on your part imo.

It puts you in the top 20, and with more than 1%, so you certainly have more of a voice than many! Should "larger" read "smaller" or have I misunderstood your point?

Basically I just want a bit more info on the specifics of the deal that this particular extra investment would gain LRM before I cast my vote, but in general it's probably a yes from me...

[M31]

I would be willing to give up my two weeks worth of dividends if Lab_Rat included his 5% management fee in it as well for those two weeks.

From what I'm gathering "Every Bitcoin Counts". I think this would show a lot of good faith towards shareholders.



That being said, we would be looking at around ~200 Coins from two weeks worth of dividends to be reinvested back into LRM.

In all honesty, that's NOT that much. Would ~$26,000 really get that much of a better deal with Bitfury?

Isn't Lab_Rat talking about using the upcoming hardware as a source of this two weeks worth of funding?  If that's the case, then it would generate far more than $26,000.  If it's only with current hardware, then that's not much, as you say Bargraphics.  

I'm actually all for paying Lab the management fee because (1) it will be a hell of a lot of work for him to set this up, physically, and (2) yes, it will benefit him in the future, but most of the benefit is for bondholders - and he's trying to pull together the best deal possible for us.  5% seems insignificant in light of this, and the goodwill he is showing by not just doing it without asking... IMHO.

Are you able to clarify the point about which hardware is proposed for use Lab_Rat?