[ActiveMining] Official Shareholder Discussion Thread [Moderated]

[minerpart]

This...I think [is] relevant so I'll re-post it here.

Hi stenkross, thanks for mentioning this. Yes we should take note of this sort of thing. Although it may well scare away pre-order clients once we have the hardware ready to ship there will be no shortage of customers. I have posted on Doggies thread hopefully he will provide an explanation.

Hi Doggie,

I admire your work here it is potentially a good resource. But as an investor in the parent company of VMC I am interested as to where you get this information from:

'VMC set         B. Demoted to E, refunds are being refused [ignored] and no products on the horizon. Potentially a scam. Promotion to D if refunds begin to be resolved.'


I would like to point out that according to the CEO of VMC currently there are two chips in production, one a full-custom 55nm has been taped out and is being fabbed by UMC for bulk reel sale and for miners. These 55nm chips have in the past week been listed for pre-order on the VMC website where full specs have also been stated:
http://virtualminingcorp.com/shop1/index.php?id_product=35&controller=product

The other chip in production is a 28nm full-custom and has been given over to a vendor with tape-out expected in 8 weeks.  The chip will be used in a PCI card, it will be 'air cooled and use a double slot.  The estimate speed of the new card will be 432 GH/s and will be listed at $1499.00.'.

I could understand you saying that VMC product has been delayed but to say there is 'none on the horizon' seems factually incorrect to me.

As to the refunds being ignored I have no information on that, can you say how many people have reported that to you and out of that number how many have shown you evidence of their order? I only ask because the company is plagued by Trolls some of who have previously lied about having orders, having machines, having refunds refused etc.

Regards,
minerpart

[ActM Thread]

Reposting a comment without the giant spammy text. The concern of customers receiving refunds is legitimate.

This was already posted in the unmoderated thread, but I think it's relevant so I'll re-post it here.
VMC's rating was demoted from B to E, because of refunds being ignored and no products on the horizon.
I can't blame them on the "no product on the horizon", but refunds being ignored can't be good for business.

Ken, can you address this?

[kslaughter]

Reposting a comment without the giant spammy text. The concern of customers receiving refunds is legitimate.

This was already posted in the unmoderated thread, but I think it's relevant so I'll re-post it here.
VMC's rating was demoted from B to E, because of refunds being ignored and no products on the horizon.
I can't blame them on the "no product on the horizon", but refunds being ignored can't be good for business.

Ken, can you address this?

We have processed refunds this week and mailed out checks.  With the volume of refunds being processed, we are running behind.

[Desmond.Paris]

No trading-->Not So Good

Weekly PR now in response to pressure from Share Holders--> Yes Good!

Team of Engineers hired--> Yes Good!

Real plan for 55 nm chips--> Yes Good!

Real Plans for 28 nm chips--> Yes Good!

Being investigated by Missouri Securitires Division--> No big deal, they are dealing with something new. After they investigate, they will move on to something else.
 
Several technologically knowledgeable shareholders in frequent communication with Ken--> Yes Very Good!

Someone else commented on why someone would buy a miner that would not reach ROI.
Actually, at $1500 for 432 GH, even a couple of months out, it will reach ROI. At that price it is still competitive with what other companies are offering. ActM is primarily a mining company, so if not a single miner is sold, and all ActM's production is directed to just go online to mine for the company, ActM will make lots of money for its shareholders.

For everything to be Yes Good! Ken merely has to hold to his promises to get this out by Q2 2014.
It is not Q2 yet, and everything seems to be on schedule.

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

No trading and being investigated by the Missouri Securities Division - not so good.

[finlof]

BTW - Why are you estimating starting hashing at the start of June, even Ken's prediction was that tapeout would be 8 weeks after a vendor is chosen (so late April) with chips in Q3.

It's just an estimate, the beginning of June is a full 14 weeks away and I don't think that is an unreasonable date. Remember Ken made the prediction about Q3 before choosing the vendor so I am assuming that was a rough estimate on his part as not all vendors will offer the same time to delivery of product. The beginning of Q3 is 18 weeks away and the end of Q3 is 26 weeks away so feel free to do an analysis based on those dates. At the moment we just don't know what the vendor is quoting Ken for a timeline.

Ken has made predicted dates ever since last March and none of the target dates have been hit.  i think it would be safer to assume that we use the latest of the dates as the expected ones.

[MrTeal]

BTW - Why are you estimating starting hashing at the start of June, even Ken's prediction was that tapeout would be 8 weeks after a vendor is chosen (so late April) with chips in Q3.

It's just an estimate, the beginning of June is a full 14 weeks away and I don't think that is an unreasonable date. Remember Ken made the prediction about Q3 before choosing the vendor so I am assuming that was a rough estimate on his part as not all vendors will offer the same time to delivery of product. The beginning of Q3 is 18 weeks away and the end of Q3 is 26 weeks away so feel free to do an analysis based on those dates. At the moment we just don't know what the vendor is quoting Ken for a timeline.

Ken has made predicted dates ever since last March and none of the target dates have been hit.  i think it would be safer to assume that we use the latest of the dates as the expected ones.

Even if the deadlines are met, hashing on 28nm at the start of June would be unbelievable. That would put tapeout at April 16th, and would leave less than 7 weeks to:
1. Get the wafers started.
2. Finish the wafers.
3. Get the wafers sawn and packaged.
4. Get the chips tested and the boards brought up.
5. Start volume production
6. Assemble finished miners.

That's not a 7 week process.

[Bargraphics]

BTW - Why are you estimating starting hashing at the start of June, even Ken's prediction was that tapeout would be 8 weeks after a vendor is chosen (so late April) with chips in Q3.

It's just an estimate, the beginning of June is a full 14 weeks away and I don't think that is an unreasonable date. Remember Ken made the prediction about Q3 before choosing the vendor so I am assuming that was a rough estimate on his part as not all vendors will offer the same time to delivery of product. The beginning of Q3 is 18 weeks away and the end of Q3 is 26 weeks away so feel free to do an analysis based on those dates. At the moment we just don't know what the vendor is quoting Ken for a timeline.

Ken has made predicted dates ever since last March and none of the target dates have been hit.  i think it would be safer to assume that we use the latest of the dates as the expected ones.

Even if the deadlines are met, hashing on 28nm at the start of June would be unbelievable. That would put tapeout at April 16th, and would leave less than 7 weeks to:
1. Get the wafers started.
2. Finish the wafers.
3. Get the wafers sawn and packaged.
4. Get the chips tested and the boards brought up.
5. Start volume production
6. Assemble finished miners.

That's not a 7 week process.

28nm chips* won't be available until about end of July at the earliest more than likely. A completed miner would likely come a month after receiving the chips.

55nm miners will be available by the end of April with Chips in hand around the middle of April most likely.

[MrTeal]

28nm chips* won't be available until about end of July at the earliest more than likely. A completed miner would likely come a month after receiving the chips.

55nm will be available by the end of April with Chips in hand around the middle of April most likely.

That would be more in line with my expectation. 28nm customers should likely expect to receive their products early September if all goes well and there aren't any large problems that force several redesigns.

@Ken: For the 55nm chips, are there any plans to open source the board and firmware for the design you will be commissioning? The pricing you have for chips is completely nonviable right now, but if it gets down closer to $1/GH/s it might be viable to someone to make boards based on them as long as the development process is quick and cheap.

[stenkross]

We have processed refunds this week and mailed out checks.  With the volume of refunds being processed, we are running behind.

Do you anticipate liquidity problems from this?

[kleeck]

We have processed refunds this week and mailed out checks.  With the volume of refunds being processed, we are running behind.

Do you anticipate liquidity problems from this?

Bargraphics swered this in his report from his visit to VMC:

Q. Refunds
A. They have received refunds and have been giving out refunds as they are requested. They are still very good financially and have no concerns about mass refunds.

[minerpart]

In addition to that, all pre-orders paid for in FIAT have been banked in FIAT so we will have no problems like the Hashfast debacle.

[SebastianJu]

did we lose the eASIC "MILLION DOLLAR" NRE?

We are expecting to recover most of the eASIC NRE.

Am i understand that correctly that you already paid 1 million USD for 28nm to eASIC and now this goes to waste because you want to use a different engineering company?
If so what is so important that its worth that price?

[kleeck]

did we lose the eASIC "MILLION DOLLAR" NRE?

We are expecting to recover most of the eASIC NRE.

Am i understand that correctly that you already paid 1 million USD for 28nm to eASIC and now this goes to waste because you want to use a different engineering company?
If so what is so important that its worth that price?

How could you come to the conclusion that "this [NRE] goes to waste" when he says what you quoted above?

Perplexing.

[minerpart]

We are expecting to recover most of the eASIC NRE.

I can't see how that could be made any clearer - but I'll try: we should get most of the money back.

[SebastianJu]

Recover most sounds to me like Ken plans to make this loss back from future profits. Might be im damaged of Ken's past use of rhethorics so that i read the worst in it.

So you think he means that eASIC is paying the costs back? I wonder why they should. And "most" is a very flexible term which in the worst case might mean nearly half of the funds are lost.

Oh well... maybe im really too cautious... but then... its Ken... oh... its a rhyme... must have something...  

[Bargraphics]

did we lose the eASIC "MILLION DOLLAR" NRE?

We are expecting to recover most of the eASIC NRE.

Am i understand that correctly that you already paid 1 million USD for 28nm to eASIC and now this goes to waste because you want to use a different engineering company?
If so what is so important that its worth that price?

If eASIC is 5-10 times as expensive as the other choice then yes it would make sense to forego the eASIC NRE cost and go with another company. I assume Ken wanted to go with eASIC but they simply were not competitive with their 28nm Full-Custom pricing and likely made Ken go with certain Fabs/Packages at a premium.

I'm happy that we got away from eASIC for a Full-Custom as their only purpose was the Nextreme quick to market niche that was passed up already.

Hopefully Ken can get back the majority of the NRE.

[knybe]

did we lose the eASIC "MILLION DOLLAR" NRE?

We are expecting to recover most of the eASIC NRE.

Am i understand that correctly that you already paid 1 million USD for 28nm to eASIC and now this goes to waste because you want to use a different engineering company?
If so what is so important that its worth that price?

If eASIC is 5-10 times as expensive as the other choice then yes it would make sense to forego the eASIC NRE cost and go with another company. I assume Ken wanted to go with eASIC but they simply were not competitive with their 28nm Full-Custom pricing and likely made Ken go with certain Fabs/Packages at a premium.

I'm happy that we got away from eASIC for a Full-Custom as their only purpose was the Nextreme quick to market niche that was passed up already.

Hopefully Ken can get back the majority of the NRE.

The only reason I was ever drawn to and took this company seriously was the eASIC deal, anything other than that now is a copout.

like I've said before: if this really happens I'll be as thrilled as you guys… but alas, my hopes are nowhere near as high as they were last June no! August… oh wait! October, or was it! December... bahhh who cares anymore. (just wish I could right this off on my taxes)

[minerpart]

I have posted on Doggies thread hopefully he will provide an explanation.

Again thanks to stenkross for raising the dogie Trustworthiness Guide:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=456691.0

Dogie kindly looked into VMC again and has independently decided to revise his assessment of VMC. The new advice is as follows:


'VMC   Fast Hash One   Link   Link   No (yet)   No   D   Offered and honoured refunds from the start. Products still a long way away, nothing verified.'


I think that is fair and does accurately represent the current state of play. He says he will review this advice as and when necessary.
One thing Dogie did insist on was that prototype chips should be offered to the hardware community for verification at the earliest opportunity. I think that is a good idea and hopefully Ken and the engineering team will also think so and this will be possible. If there is no prototype (straight to first batch) then hopefully a few chips from this first batch could be offered out.

[MrTeal]

LOL... Can you all please stop deleting and reposting all those images? It keeps on bumping this thread with no new information in it.

[wasubii]

Reposting a comment without the giant spammy text. The concern of customers receiving refunds is legitimate.

This was already posted in the unmoderated thread, but I think it's relevant so I'll re-post it here.
VMC's rating was demoted from B to E, because of refunds being ignored and no products on the horizon.
I can't blame them on the "no product on the horizon", but refunds being ignored can't be good for business.

Ken, can you address this?

We have processed refunds this week and mailed out checks.  With the volume of refunds being processed, we are running behind.

No you haven't, I have been waiting 9 weeks for my refund and despite a vague promise to look into it I have yet to to receive a refund. You are a muppet.
No, I am a muppet for believing this scam in the first place.

You WILL be hearing from the Office of the  Attorney general's Consumer protection Division in Jefferson County quite soon (if not already)

Hmmm, So lots of people ask for refunds, Ken does nothing for 9 weeks UNTIL....

Firesale of Ukyos shares, 100BTC 'recovered'

100BTC used in order to pay out refunds.

There is probably no money left. We have never seen a proper set of accounts. Never.