[LABCOIN] IPO [BTCT.CO] - Details/FAQ and Discussion (ASIC dev/sales/mining)

[TheSwede75]

Your entire "asset" consists of Burnside pasting fake trades to create an illusion of interest, and that's all.

a statement like that requires evidence.  

There is no evidence, and the claim itself is a case study on the loser's struggle for continued relevance.

Oh common now, play along. It makes perfect sense that Burnside (owner of Litecoinglobal, BTCT.CO and board seat member in ASICMINER) would fake-trade shares (not even sure how that would be done) just to 'fake interest'. He obviously has nothing to lose...  

Edit; Sorry, off topic and I will not continue the 'daycare' level poo-throwing. I just can't help myself when it comes to some people sometimes.

[1713445325]

1713445325

[1713445325]

1713445325

[1713445325]

1713445325

[1713445325]

1713445325

[str4wm4n]

 

swede when do you predict share price will be .01?

[radiumsoup]

Everyone, just stop with the die size comparisons. They're completely useless for differentiating profitability. They'd be useful for expressing differences in package size or interface speeds, but they do not belong in the conversation for profitability.

Do you mean die size or feature size?  28nm and 130nm are feature sizes, how big the transistors are.  Die sizes are how big the chips themselves are, and thus how much they cost to manufacture.

Smaller feature size means you can cram more transistors per mm², which means you can get the same hash power with smaller, cheaper dies.

So in other words, the shipping company with the electric trucks and solar panels will have a much higher startup cost, but in the long run they will be able to charge less in the long run once that cost is amortized because they won't have to pay for gas or electricity.  They can continue to charge less until their competitors go out of business, if they feel like it.

But anyway, that doesn't really matter that much at this point, because there is so much profit available everyone can make money.  For now. But labcoin is going to have to keep up with the technology curve in the long run.

You missed the point entirely - forest for the trees, I think, so let me try to explain it differently. Die size, feature size, color of the box, etc. are irrelevant to profitability.

Sum of costs taken from sum of income is profit. Costs are easily controllable by not going with bleeding edge technology. Income is not easily controllable, but is dependant on the market, and the market wants hashrate regardless of the type of technology. If you can make a device that hashes faster NOW cheaper or at the same price as a "better technology" device 2 months from now, you will gain market share and therefore more profit. The key here is that the hash rate per chip is not as important as the cost of manufacturing that same hash rate with the cheapest method possible. To simplify the example, if I can ship (pulling numbers out of my ass for simplicity) 10 chips at 10 Gigahashes/sec/watt at a cost of 10BTC, or I can ship 1 chip at 10 Gigahashes/sec/watt at a cost of 12BTC, I make more money shipping the 10 chips - because the market price would be the same, as people are buying the hash/power rate, not the chip count. This is ESPECIALLY true if I can ship them sooner rather than later. Remember, this is not an engineering race to find the smallest single chip, this is a business race to find the most efficient devices for the power, which is what matters to the market - and 130nm versus 65/28/whatever nm is not the important variable. It is a variable, yes - but it's a small piece of the big picture.

Additionally, it's considerably more important to have an efficient chip design than it is to have smaller transistors - just because a race car uses a carbon fiber frame doesn't mean jack if there's insufficient engineering in the motor. This is what the Labcoin folks are promising: speed to market, superior engineering in the layout, and a price point as good as *future* deliveries of what is billed by others as "better" technology simply based on the technology size. Success is not predicated on 28nm, it's all on whether or not the devices have the best rate of return for the end customer (be that self mining or selling hardware.) Whether they deliver is another matter entirely, but that's what they're putting it out as.

And no, of course they're not going to rest forever on what works best for the market today - they're going to chase after the most efficient manufacturing source as quickly as possible whenever the cost to manufacture supports that change.

---

merv's anecdotal quip about the NASA pen versus the Soviet solution of using a pencil is spot on - I saw it while reviewing new posts after I started to reply. Probably should have used that example rather than the shipping truck one for brevity. And no, it's not exactly true from an historical standpoint, but look at the story there, which is absolutely relevant: sometimes it's not as useful to spend a lot of money developing a new solution when there's a cheaper alternative already available.

[Pale Phoenix]

Your entire "asset" consists of Burnside pasting fake trades to create an illusion of interest, and that's all.

a statement like that requires evidence. 

There is no evidence, and the claim itself is a case study on the loser's struggle for continued relevance.

Oh common now, play along. It makes perfect sense that Burnside (owner of Litecoinglobal, BTCT.CO and board seat member in ASICMINER) would fake-trade shares (not even sure how that would be done) just to 'fake interest'. He obviously has nothing to lose... 

Edit; Sorry, off topic and I will not continue the 'daycare' level poo-throwing. I just can't help myself when it comes to some people sometimes.

LOL. I guess if I didn't know how many of my real coins were floating around in burnside's "fake trade scam" I might be more concerned.

Perhaps I should be more tolerant of manic, shrill bullies like PRBot. It must be quite tragic to be so sure that you stand at the center of the universe, only to realize that you're just another decaying bit of yesterday's news.

[Panterino]

I just read Labcoin's miners will be USB connectable. A plug and play miner will sell big time.

[physalis]

I just read Labcoin's miners will be USB. A plug and play miner will sell big time.

I don't think USB miners exclusively, but yeah, they plan to sell USB miners too.

[Panterino]

I just read Labcoin's miners will be USB. A plug and play miner will sell big time.

I don't think USB miners exclusively, but yeah, they plan to sell USB miners too.

Sorry, I meant USB connectable.

[physalis]

I just read Labcoin's miners will be USB. A plug and play miner will sell big time.

I don't think USB miners exclusively, but yeah, they plan to sell USB miners too.

Sorry, I meant USB connectable.

Oh... where did you get that?

[Panterino]

I just read Labcoin's miners will be USB. A plug and play miner will sell big time.

I don't think USB miners exclusively, but yeah, they plan to sell USB miners too.

Sorry, I meant USB connectable.

Oh... where did you get that?

http://labcoin.com/presentation.html#

"I/O interface : USB / Serial"

[Ytterbium]

I will post more chip images, pictures of running miners, specs, documentation etc. as soon as it becomes available. I would also like to point out that the 'TheSwede' on bitbet.us is NOT me. I have made if clear before and I stick by the fact that I do NOT trade, bet or in any other way personally profit off any access to news or events regarding Labcoin. Doing so would in my opinion be unfair and dishonest. I also will not ever comment on development or share price etc. through personal messages or emails in any form.

No, you are not betting on it because you know it's a scam.

Your entire "asset" consists of Burnside pasting fake trades to create an illusion of interest, and that's all.

OMG DID YOU HEAR LABCOIN FAKED THE MOON LANDING!?


I'm sure we'll see a bubble pop any moment now:

[drawingthesun]

OMG DID YOU HEAR LABCOIN FAKED THE MOON LANDING!?

Damn you Ytterbium! You know what Labcoin "investors" are like!

Looks like we are going back down to 0.002!!

[dvdrewritable]

For the test run we opted for QFP packaging, 44 pin, no exposed heat pad, here is a small preview :

Did i miss something?

2)  Post simulations yielded positive results on a 130nm, 300Mhz, Power 0.8W, 6.5x6.5mm design.
    
     The team is working on HDL optimizations to get 16 cores for chip.

     Some math, quoted from the tech team

    "300M*16=4.8G, 0.8*16=12.8W, Area=130,0000*16=2080,0000, make the utilization ratio to 50%, the chip size will be about 4160,0000um2, about 6.5mm x 6.5mm"

     "Power consumption per GHash is 12.8W/4.8G=2.7W/GHash"

      "Estimated selling price for chip, 8-9 USD"

What does this mean ? i think it's not hard to get.  130nm process and 5GH speed at slightly higher power consumption, but competitive prices.

At what percentage of the estimated data do you want to test the chip? Remember, BFL missend their power goal with great success and bitfury was a little of the planned data.

12,8 W in a QFP-Package without heat pad?

What does this mean ? i think it's not hard to get. we'll have to call Ed Trice to construct a system that will prevent the chips from melting before mining a block

[velacreations]

well, you know when a company has a bit of credibility when MPOE-PR tries hopelessly to label you as a scam.

that was a serious boost to the shareholder confidence in Labcoin.

[physalis]

well, you know when a company has a bit of credibility when MPOE-PR tries hopelessly to label you as a scam.

that was a serious boost to the shareholder confidence in Labcoin.

Haha, agreed.

[VolanicEruptor]

well, you know when a company has a bit of credibility when MPOE-PR tries hopelessly to label you as a scam.

that was a serious boost to the shareholder confidence in Labcoin.

I agree 100%.  Right after his little post I thought "wow, didn't he show this same distaste towards asicminer at one point?"  This was the biggest signal for me, and I bought up a shitload..

[velacreations]

well, you know when a company has a bit of credibility when MPOE-PR tries hopelessly to label you as a scam.

that was a serious boost to the shareholder confidence in Labcoin.

I agree 100%.  Right after his little post I thought "wow, didn't he show this same distaste towards asicminer at one point?"  This was the biggest signal for me, and I bought up a shitload..

I remember him saying AM shareholders wouldn't make any more profit way back in March/April. That was the trigger that made AM go nuts.

And now, today, he makes his scam statement.  I think we'll see LC hit 10 btc, now.

and just for the record, I think he's really good at running an exchange that has no securities.

[Ytterbium]

Sum of costs taken from sum of income is profit. Costs are easily controllable by not going with bleeding edge technology. Income is not easily controllable, but is dependant on the market, and the market wants hashrate regardless of the type of technology. If you can make a device that hashes faster NOW cheaper or at the same price as a "better technology" device 2 months from now, you will gain market share and therefore more profit. The key here is that the hash rate per chip is not as important as the cost of manufacturing that same hash rate with the cheapest method possible.

I don't think you're thinking clearly. Better technology is better because it's cheaper to manufacture (Per GH/s). Why else would people even use it?

The difference is the up-front cost. It might cost few hundred thousand dollars to design a 130nm chip, while costing about $2m to produce a 28nm chip.

But, the chips will cost (about?) the same per mm² to manufacture.

You can't say all that matters is manufacturing cost, and then say that feature size doesn't matter, because manufacturing cost depends on feature size.  The smaller the feature size, the cheaper the chips per hash.

Now, the one catch with that may be the demand for 28nm fabs.  AMD and Nvidia and lots of other companies are all going to be wanting access to a limited number of wafer runs.  So the cost for 28nm might be slightly higher then other levels. So 40 or 65nm chips may be cost competitive.

And, of course, there's turn around time.  Bitcoin mining, unlike pretty much everything else, time to market is absolutely critical.  One month of delay can mean the difference between success and failure. That's where 130nm tech is superior at the moment.  Labcoin may pay for all of it's 130nm chips, plus profit in the month or two before 28nm chips flood the market.

And furthermore, the MFG price of the chips isn't that important, at this point.  Next year, though it will start to matter more.

[klee]

well, you know when a company has a bit of credibility when MPOE-PR tries hopelessly to label you as a scam.

that was a serious boost to the shareholder confidence in Labcoin.

I agree 100%.  Right after his little post I thought "wow, didn't he show this same distaste towards asicminer at one point?"  This was the biggest signal for me, and I bought up a shitload..

I remember him saying AM shareholders wouldn't make any more profit way back in March/April. That was the trigger that made AM go nuts.

And now, today, he makes his scam statement.  I think we'll see LC hit 10 btc, now.

and just for the record, I think he's really good at running an exchange that has no securities.

What happened? Not informed on this...

10btc? Wow you are bullish!! Can you elaborate some more on this projection? That would be x10,000 the IPO price!!

[VolanicEruptor]

that's a market cap of over 10 billion dollars!
We have a new target ladies and gentleman!  We are now mining bitcoins, potash AND gold!... and buying lottery tickets!

[Ytterbium]

So guys when are the PCBs going to be ready?