[ActiveMining] Official Shareholder Discussion Thread [Moderated]

[drawingthesun]

Just to make my position clear, I am 100% against involving the authorities and think that is the stupidest thing possible.

Bitcoin is the wild west and if this company fails it's just that, another startup that failed.

I made the mistake of investing far more than the 10 - 20% that should have been the limit. I am not so pissed that we are failing, but pissed at the trade block that has been in place for months now.

Ken's blocking of trading is a first, as far as I know ActiveMining is the only security where the investors have been barred from getting out. Even in the vally you can shift your shares off to someone else unless you're an employee.

We all knew what we were getting involved in and that's where great promise lay.  

I knew I might be getting into a gamble that fell flat on its face. But I had no idea a blockade would be put in place fixing my shares in stone and preventing any ability to day trade, sell off, etc...

[runam0k]

Again you miss why most of us are angry. Ken is blocking our ability to trade shares, he won't even allow transfers using the forum. He has stated to me that we are not allowed to trade until CT and now that is not happening for certain.

So it's a block.

We are being blocked, even in a startup the owners can move their ownership to another investor, we can't even do that.

Whilst I agree and it is incredibly frustrating, you have to wonder what Ken has to gain by blocking share trading. It's not like Ken will lose money if and when we are able to trade shares. I am inclined to believe share trading is low priority because Ken is simply overwhelmed by everything else that needs to be done.

None of this means I am anything other than extremely disappointed by the lack of progress and the failure or refusal to disclose important information to investors. A lot of money was poured into this project and frankly I am not at all surprised someone decided to act.

We currently stand to endure several months of this at a minimum -- and that's assuming things go really, really well.

[drawingthesun]

Selling the 100 bitcoin worth of shares at 0.0005 was what he had to gain up until a few days ago when he sold them all. Releasing our shares would have caused a massive crash.

[minerpart]

Releasing our shares would have caused a massive crash.

What with you quoting prices 75% below what people were buying at? You don't say!

Again DTS there is no point having your shares back if no-one is going to buy them. You have repeatedly talked the company down so what 'idiot' would want to buy these shares now?

The one thing that will increase the value of your shares (we are trading now) is hard evidence from Ken about his UMC order. I suggest you focus on getting that rather than endlessly slagging this company down. Your company.

[VinceSamios]

104 wafers. That's good, can anyone work out how many chips that will be in total.

A few other things to process there. I guess an info request from regulators is a good thing. Ken can you show them sufficient paper work for your orders and work in progress?

1.9 Gh/s per chip
6,800 chips per wafer
104 wafers
707,200 chips
1.344 Ph/s

Some of those chips won't work properly though so the numbers will actually be lower.

6800 chips was the expected yield rate per wafer.

[finlof]

please discuss:

Hi Ken,

Two questions:
1. How much of the eASIC NRE funds are available for use elsewhere if we no longer go with eASIC
2. Would you mind posting some kind of documentation of tapeout - personally I'd find it interesting, and others seem very keen to see it so they can stop wetting themselves.

Best,

Vince

We are working with our vendors to use any of the funds we may have paid them on our new 28nm project, our vendors seem to want to work with us and meet our other vendors prices.  The project manager has been meeting with them last week and will be meeting with them again this week to get a quote.  We want to get started on the 28nm ASAP.

I don't have any documentation on the tapeout.  This was for the shuttle run and prototypes which we have canceled and have now changed to the production run.  See my weekly update for the wafer delivery dates.

[zumzero]

Ken, as we know, isn't the best communicator in the world.  We've all had many months of analysing his language and studying him to try and work him out.  He's a complicated beast I'll say that much, and I mean that in the kindest way possible.  I just don't read deception in what he's saying.  I don't see a scam whatsoever.  I see someone who has taken on an enormous task and has spread himself too thinly.  I am hoping that he's actually quite organised underneath it all, and is skilled at prioritising things, and I suspect he probably is.  I think there is still hope and within two months we'll all know one way or the other.  I'm not convinced anyone will be trading until there are ActM miners hashing away, although Ken is full of surprises so we'll just have to wait and see.

[stenkross]

Ken, as we know, isn't the best communicator in the world.  We've all had many months of analysing his language and studying him to try and work him out.  He's a complicated beast I'll say that much, and I mean that in the kindest way possible.  I just don't read deception in what he's saying.  I don't see a scam whatsoever.  I see someone who has taken on a enourmous task and has spread himself too thinly.  I am hoping that he's actually quite organised underneath it all, and is skilled at prioritising things, and I suspect he probably is.  I think there is still hope and within two months we'll all know one way or the other.  I'm not convinced anyone will be trading until there are ActM miners hashing away, although Ken is full of surprises so we'll just have to wait and see.

I hope you are right.
Personally, I don't really care if we are trading or not tbh.
I can understand that some people do, they might need the money or just want to walk away and never look back. I completely understand both reasons for wanting to sell.

If we will be able to trade soon, the price will probably be too low for me to sell anyway, so either way I'll just wait for future div's, if any... I'll take my chances.

[minerpart]

please discuss:

We are working with our vendors to use any of the funds we may have paid them on our new 28nm project

I don't have any documentation on the tapeout.  

Well it looks like the 1Mill of NRE paid for a 28nm eASIC project that has failed. End of, it failed. Ken has restructured that as a full custom chip and is getting quotes from different suppliers for the tape out and production of that 28nm custom chip. It seems eASIC are able to offer the best price out of either responsibility to a previous customer or because some the the cost of this custom chip they will off-set againt the previous projects payment (1Mill). I think that's right.

No documentation on the (55nm) tape out - well there should be some for of agreement or contract between ACtM and UMC. I can't see how there would be no paperwork.

[zumzero]

Pre-Order 55nm Chips Shipping April 17,2014

[wasubii]

please discuss:

We are working with our vendors to use any of the funds we may have paid them on our new 28nm project

I don't have any documentation on the tapeout.  

Well it looks like the 1Mill of NRE paid for a 28nm eASIC project that has failed. End of, it failed. Ken has restructured that as a full custom chip and is getting quotes from different suppliers for the tape out and production of that 28nm custom chip. It seems eASIC are able to offer the best price out of either responsibility to a previous customer or because some the the cost of this custom chip they will off-set againt the previous projects payment (1Mill). I think that's right.

No documentation on the (55nm) tape out - well there should be some for of agreement or contract between ACtM and UMC. I can't see how there would be no paperwork.

Just an FYI

I asked Ken about this via PM. I haven't received a reply to my latest message.

Hi Ken,

Thanks for the update - things are getting pretty agitated on the thread.

How much capital did we lose in the first deal with eAsic? For the nExtreme 28nm that we have decided to bin?

Thanks,
Wasubii

We have not lost any as of this time.

Are we expected to lose any eventually? Is not losing any dependent on choosing them to design our custom 28nm? If we choose to go with someone other than eAsic then how much would we lose front he nExtreme NRE?

Thanks,
wasubii

[arousedrhino]

Active Mining Corporation is a Belize company, I doubt Missouri has any jurisdiction.

@Ken - If your in missouri you have to abide by missouri law. What your saying is equivalent to me saying ' oh well I am from Amsterdam so I can smoke weed in Boston'. You can't be this naive surely?

I am glad that mine and others complaints to the SEC are being listened to, perhaps we still have a chance of you seeing the inside of a prison cell.

Why are you dodging the questions about where the $1mill you were supposed to hv paid eASIC with already has gone? What happened to the 28nm project that you were supposedly working on back in September?? You have lied to your shareholders repeatedly in almost every press release you have issued. This is not legal in any country no matter where you are registered Ken, it is called fraud and I will continue to pressure the police and SEC to have you arrested before you scam any more money from the community.

You haven't even started the 28nm project, you haven't shown a working chip, you haven't transferred shares. You have failed at every single hurdle time and time again and I will continue to pay my lawyers exorbitant fees until you provide full answers to all shareholders questions and proof of all funds active mining has in its possession. If you don't do this my next step will be to file for lien on the shares of mine you are with holding, funny how that system works both ways hey Ken.

Great so because you are rich and don't need any money back you are willing to give up your shares in an attempt to put someone in prison. I really appreciate all the hard work you are putting in to bring down a ActM. Thanks!!! Its not like you invested in a really risky startup with a risky currency. No that would be crazy talk.

[VinceSamios]

If we still have $1mil NRE (which Ken suggests we have) and 1400 BTC from the avalon refund (which IIRC we have) - then the company currently holds 0.00034 BTC/share (only counting the 10mil) - And there is value in the 55nm IP, and there is value in the eASIC deal, and there is value in the pre-orders (even if some need to be refunded)

So is 0.0005/share reasonable? No, it's unreasonably low.

[4ju5tice]

Pre-Order 55nm Chips Shipping April 17,2014

Too bad I missed the pre-orders last summer for the 28nm miners.

Now I can pre-order 55nm though!

I'm not trying to troll too bad, it's just super easy. The pre-order situation is ironic to me. I really hope that this company turns into something, because it is nothing now. I would have made a lot more investing in my own cex.io contract. And let's face it, while I don't believe Ken is a scam, he has definitely said some deceiving things. Ken, just get us some frickin chips! You said we'd have 55nm in fall last year, you led us to believe that we'd have 28nm by early this year by the latest, you talked of intellihash but it sounds like it is not at all complete, you said releasing shares are #1 priority. Damn, if they were your #1 priority then I'd hate to see how the chips and this 'game-changer' technology are coming along.

As unhelpful to our cause as getting the gov involved will be, I can understand why some scared little 'government-save-us' fellow may have done it.

Edit: As minerpart corrected me, 55nm chips were only announced three weeks ago. I was thinking of the 45nm chips that were announced March 26, 2013

[minerpart]

You said we'd have 55nm in fall last year,

Are you sure about that? I think that might be wrong considering that he only announced the 55nm project on the 21st January 2014 (3weeks ago) and previous to that there had been no mention of 55nm.




https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=297543.msg3220847#msg3220847

'PRESS RELEASE

Springfield, MO and Santa Jose, CA – January 21, 2014 – Active Mining Corporation (Belize) (AMC) a bitcoin Mining and Hardware Manufacture, and  People's ASIC a stealth Silicon Valley startup founded by two veteran engineers is proud to announce today the tape-out of their 55 nm UMC Bitcoin Mining ASIC.  The ASIC features SHA256 optimizations according to a scientific paper by Dadda et al.

Simultaneously, AMC has acquired the Intellectual Property (Verilog code, test bench, GDS-II data, etc. for the 55nm UMC Bitcoin Mining ASIC.  Delivery of chips is expected in Q2/2014.  Also, AMC will use the same design team and code which successfully taped out the 55 nm on AMC's eASIC's 28 nm.  EASIC's 28 nm development has been upgraded to a full custom 28 nm.'

[4ju5tice]

You said we'd have 55nm in fall last year,

Are you sure about that? I think that might be wrong considering that he only announced the 55nm project on the 21st January 2014 (3weeks ago) and previous to that there had been no mention of 55nm.




https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=297543.msg3220847#msg3220847

'PRESS RELEASE

Springfield, MO and Santa Jose, CA – January 21, 2014 – Active Mining Corporation (Belize) (AMC) a bitcoin Mining and Hardware Manufacture, and  People's ASIC a stealth Silicon Valley startup founded by two veteran engineers is proud to announce today the tape-out of their 55 nm UMC Bitcoin Mining ASIC.  The ASIC features SHA256 optimizations according to a scientific paper by Dadda et al.

Simultaneously, AMC has acquired the Intellectual Property (Verilog code, test bench, GDS-II data, etc. for the 55nm UMC Bitcoin Mining ASIC.  Delivery of chips is expected in Q2/2014.  Also, AMC will use the same design team and code which successfully taped out the 55 nm on AMC's eASIC's 28 nm.  EASIC's 28 nm development has been upgraded to a full custom 28 nm.'

Oh sorry, it was 45 nm not 55 nm.

kslaughter dated March 26, 2013:
"The team has been involved with Bitcoins since 2009. AMC has purchased and will operate Application Specific Integrated Circuit (ASIC) Bitcoin mining machines and is developing an ASIC chip and PCB that it will license to VMC for use in their Fast-Hash series of Bitcoin Mining Machines. AMC is developing ASIC chips on the 45nm and soon the 28nm process. AMC's ASIC 45nm chips will have fast speeds of 6 to 9 GH/s with low power usage. The 28nm chips are estimated to have speeds of 9 to 15 GH/s per chip which will be in VMC's Fast-Hash-XXT series of machines which will have even more speed and even lower power usage. VMC may purchase ASIC chips from different vendors if available."


https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=158806.0

[minerpart]

That's more like it. So, this 45nm proposal was openly cancelled in favour of the 28nm only project. Sadly that project failed for whatever reason. The remains of that failed project has become a full-custom 28nm chip.

In addition to the 28nm full custom, there is now also a full-custom 55nm in late-stage development. Hope that helps.

[VinceSamios]

That's more like it. So, this 45nm proposal was openly cancelled in favour of the 28nm only project. Sadly that project failed for whatever reason. The remains of that failed project has become a full-custom 28nm chip.

In addition to the 28nm full custom, there is now also a full-custom 55nm in late-stage development. Hope that helps.

I don't think it's right to say it failed - the 28nm nextreme chips were too expensive and would not ROI, so the decision was made to go full custom and in the meantime get some 55nm chips out there.

Nextreme3 chips were over 10-20 times more expensive per GH than the 55nm chips.

[minerpart]

I don't think it's right to say it failed

The aim of the project was to create an economical 28nm ASIC in conjunction with eASIC and roll out that chip into our mining rigs sometime in late 2013. No chip was presented to Ken, no machines were created - so that project failed. The failure is complete and indisputable.

I can't see any point in putting positive spin on it. We need to accept the facts and move on. I've never done anything on this forum other than present the facts as they have been given to us. Some of that information has been misunderstood but when we do know the facts we should not shy away from them whether good or bad. Project 'A' failed and has been cancelled.

Now we have project 'B' - 55nm full-custom UMC fabbed ASIC which is at an advanced stage.

And we also have project 'C' - 28nm full-custom which has yet to be taped out by a yet to be chosen supplier/SC firm.

[kleeck]

With Ken releasing the official specs of the 55nm chip it's time to again assess our potential position in the mining race. I'd like to aim this post specifically at AsicMiner who announced their chip specs at the end of last week.

Exhibit A: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=438359.msg4816701#msg4816701

Specification
Process node: 40nm
Package type: QFN64 8mmx8mm (with another option of QFN64 7mmx7mm possible)
I/O: Standard SPI protocol with clk, in, out and cs.
Rated Hashrate: 12.8GHash/s per chip, with a wide range of overclock/downclock options
Rated Voltage: 0.72V, recommended voltage range is 0.55V-1V
Power Consumption: 0.2J/GHash low voltage, 0.35J/GHash rated voltage

Price range
0.49$/G-0.99$/G, depending on order size and delivery speed of choice.

Exhibit B: http://virtualminingcorp.com/shop1/index.php?id_product=34&controller=product

Pre-Order Fast-Hash-One 55nm Reel (3,500 Chips) +/- 1%.
BitLadder-55 Specifications:
Technology:  UMC Technology: 55 nm
Die size: LPDie size: 3.126 x 3.558 mm
Substrate package: 11 x 11 mm
Package type: QFN-132 with thermal pad
Design type: Routed for density and performance
Performance: 1.8 GH/s (active cooling), 1.7 GH/s (passive cooling)
Power Consumption (Est.) 4.8 W @ 455 MHz (*active cooling) 4.5 W @ 425 MHz (**passive cooling)
 
Performance design: 4 engines @ 455mhz nominal

Digitally programmable between 200 MHz and 480 MHz Hash performance

Price
$20,055 per 3500 chip reel, or $20,055 for 6.3TH
$3.18/Gh

What do you guys think? I'd love to hear from the EEs among us regarding both sides of this issue.