Alternative way of normalising hashing power to delivery date...

[dogie]

tldr:
Problem:
Hash rate today isnt the same as hash rate tomorrow
But hash rate itself doesn't help us compare

Solution:
Measure hardware in % of the network.

Example:
Ie an 82GH unit in hand today is roughly 0.0227%
This could be better displayed as 22.7pp's [percentage points]
Then we could say a 400GH KNC unit would be 61.5pps with an estimated network of 650GH

Result:
So in hash rate, the KNC unit is 4.9x more powerful, but in pp the KNC unit is only 2.7x more powerful

Why?
This should aid in market valuation

Limitations:
Based entirely off network hash rate. While people have some pretty sound best guesses, its only ever going to be an estimate.
This could be overcome by using xyz's conservative estimates, referring to some public spreadsheet with generally accepted network difficulties.

[gkm22d]

I like your idea, I think I might have heard it somewhere else...

[dogie]

I like your idea, I think I might have heard it somewhere else...

Probably, in fact almost certainly - someone must have posted this at some point.

[trigeek]

It makes sense, because it gives you a rough guideline of how much it will produce per day at the expected difficulty.  All you have to do is multiply the percentage by 3600, or if you have it specified in "pp", just divide by 27.777 (or 28 for a rough estimate). 

Simplified further, every 28pp's are worth 1 BTC per day.  This assumes block times of 10 minutes (which we've been under for quite a while) but it also assumes a fixed hash rate (which, well, yeaaah.)

[CoinHoarder]

Sorry dogie, but this will never happen. 

[TooDumbForBitcoin]

It's been happening on the front end for more than a year.  Vendors make an implicit promise to deliver a specified percentage of network hashrate for x$, and promise an "unspoiled" delivery date.  So far, no vendor has kept the promise.  Those who have delivered have delivered only a fraction of their promised network hashrate percentage, and at a date far too late, making the product "spoiled".  The first few shipped customers then come on the forums, all happy that they received 40% of what they paid for, saying "This fine company didn't scam me (very much), so therefore they're not a scammer".

The first ASIC vendor to sell a network hashrate percentage, then refund the price difference when they deliver a lower network hashrate percentage, will be the first ASIC vendor who is not a scammer.

The scamming ASIC vendors will stay in business until the very last unaware buyer sends in his pre-order payment.

The question that is not asked in this thread is, "why would any vendor sell a product for $x when he can keep it and make $3x by mining?"  There is no reasonable answer to that.  Unless the vendor is highly averse to dealing with IT infrastructure, electricity usage, cooling, and the other annoyances of mining, he is not a good businessman if he sells his shovel for less than what he can dig out of the ground with it.

The first "honest" ASIC vendor will be the one who figures out how to price his pre-order so that customers make 3x, or something, while leaving him with enough cash left over to make, and keep for himself, 6x, or whatever, of aggregate sold hashrate.  The dishonest ones we read about on these threads have succeeded in the latter, but failed in the former.

[Bicknellski]

The question that is not asked in this thread is, "why would any vendor sell a product for $x when he can keep it and make $3x by mining?"  There is no reasonable answer to that.  Unless the vendor is highly averse to dealing with IT infrastructure, electricity usage, cooling, and the other annoyances of mining, he is not a good businessman if he sells his shovel for less than what he can dig out of the ground with it.

The first "honest" ASIC vendor will be the one who figures out how to price his pre-order so that customers make 3x, or something, while leaving him with enough cash left over to make, and keep for himself, 6x, or whatever, of aggregate sold hashrate.  The dishonest ones we read about on these threads have succeeded in the latter, but failed in the former.

Can not agree more but DIY projects could be the best way to achieve this sort of ROI for both chip maker and miners. Obviously that sort of effort has been seriously damaged due to Avalon's failure to deliver chips but I suspect that more chip makers will recognize the DIY designers and builders are the best way to both profit and support the miners. Anything else seems to fit into the why would any vendor sell their miners for x BTC when you can make 3 times by mining at least for the next few months given the projects posted that are NOT DIY builds.