[ActiveMining] Official Shareholder Discussion Thread [Moderated]

[ActM Thread]

Image macros which contain text and are designed for comic effect are not allowed in this thread.  Posting images which are related to the business and are on topic are fine.

[1715155980]

1715155980

[1715155980]

1715155980

[1715155980]

1715155980

[PurpleTentacle]

Meanwhile, Counterparty's webwallet has gone live on testnet:

Counterwallet live on testnet

Link: https://testnet.counterwallet.co/

Report bugs here: https://forums.counterparty.co/index.php?topic=188.0
Get testnet XCP here: https://forums.counterparty.co/index.php/topic,184
Get testnet BTC here: http://tpfaucet.appspot.com/
Blog post outlining functionality: https://www.counterparty.co/counterwallet-live-testnet/

xnova has done a wonderful job developing Counterwallet and he deserves a big thanks from all of us. Let's all start testing and get Counterwallet on mainnet as soon as possible!

Thanks xnova. A truly remarkable job you've done on this.

[ab8989]

I have a question.

How come it is economical to buy somebody elses chips to manufacture miners when not so long ago it was decided that it is uneconomical to continue manufacturing own 55nm chips and that project should be cancelled?

At the point when the cancellation was made the NRE was already paid and production run started if we are to believe what Ken says. So those chips that were cancelled were going to be practically free since their costs had been already paid for and since the production run was already started that money was truly spent by the factory so no refunds possible. At the time of when the decision was made the money spent already is sunk costs and should be ignored in calculations and any decision whether to continue or not should be made solely based on costs happening in the future from the time of cancellation and in the case of ASICs already in fabrication those costs are very miniscule.

So almost free own chips determined to be uneconomical and project cancelled. Instead Ken has now bought somebody elses chips at a price that most probably represents all their NRE and production costs in full plus profit to whoever is selling them.

Can somebody explain the logic and economies comparing these two cases that explains why the cancellation made sense and also why this whats happening now makes sense?

Secondary question if there can be found some logic and economies where the first question makes sense, how come this explanation was not discovered already when the decision to START the 55nm project was made? That time is also not in very distant past and anything that is known now should have been able to predict at that time?

Continuing with the own chips would also serve as learning point towards the future 28nm chip which is much more difficult and risky to design considering for example the much higher NRE that means that the chip should be good on the first try as there likely is not enough money or time for a respin.

[addi]

I don't think I'll ever see my shares, I think Ken doesn't have the tender list.  Even if he does, he's never going to do it.  He can't even respond to questions properly, why would he sit and and organize that kind of thing?  I can't see it happening.  I guess it's good that Ken just didn't vanish and leave town like so many other Bitcoin company failures.  There's that...

+1

[Ozymandias2]

I have a question.

You have several

How come it is economical to buy somebody elses chips to manufacture miners when not so long ago it was decided that it is uneconomical to continue manufacturing own 55nm chips and that project should be cancelled?

It likely isn't. The nature of the chips is purely speculation. It is just as likely that a magic unicorn farted them into existence as it is we bought them as it is we made them. Until we know what those chips are, how they were obtained, and for how much they were obtained we can only speculate.

At the point when the cancellation was made the NRE was already paid and production run started if we are to believe what Ken says. So those chips that were cancelled were going to be practically free since their costs had been already paid for and since the production run was already started that money was truly spent by the factory so no refunds possible. At the time of when the decision was made the money spent already is sunk costs and should be ignored in calculations and any decision whether to continue or not should be made solely based on costs happening in the future from the time of cancellation and in the case of ASICs already in fabrication those costs are very miniscule.

First off it wasn't a production run but a shuttle run (i.e. very few chips just to see if they work vs. tens-hundreds of thousands of chips). We do not have details on the 55nm NRE so again, we can only speculate as to the costs but the decision to cancel the 55nm chips was made during a particularly brutal part of the bear market (a decision that I do not at all agree with, but can understand the reasoning behind) where the price per chip+board+misc. components would [theoretically since we again don't have numbers] outweigh the revenue.

So almost free own chips determined to be uneconomical and project cancelled. Instead Ken has now bought somebody elses chips at a price that most probably represents all their NRE and production costs in full plus profit to whoever is selling them.

Addressed above.

Can somebody explain the logic and economies comparing these two cases that explains why the cancellation made sense and also why this whats happening now makes sense?

Ken is likely the only one that could since he has data that none of us shareholders have.

Secondary question if there can be found some logic and economies where the first question makes sense, how come this explanation was not discovered already when the decision to START the 55nm project was made? That time is also not in very distant past and anything that is known now should have been able to predict at that time?

The decision to start the 55nm project was made when btc/usd was at or near the point of profitability. When btc/used fell, so did the projected revenue for the 55nm chips and thus the project was cancelled (though this is again mere speculation).

Continuing with the own chips would also serve as learning point towards the future 28nm chip which is much more difficult and risky to design considering for example the much higher NRE that means that the chip should be good on the first try as there likely is not enough money or time for a respin.

ActM has retained the engineers that designed the 55nm to do the 28nm. Your point about the learning point would have to be weighed against the losses of going through with the 55nm chip. Perhaps (not my opinion but likely the reasoning used) the losses would have been too great to be worth the learning experience, perhaps it was some other reason based on information to which I am not privy.

[ab8989]

First off it wasn't a production run but a shuttle run (i.e. very few chips just to see if they work vs. tens-hundreds of thousands of chips). We do not have details on the 55nm NRE so again, we can only speculate as to the costs but the decision to cancel the 55nm chips was made during a particularly brutal part of the bear market (a decision that I do not at all agree with, but can understand the reasoning behind) where the price per chip+board+misc. components would [theoretically since we again don't have numbers] outweigh the revenue.

This shuttle vs production run is another thing that really does not make any sense. The published timeschedules for mass deployment of mining gear were such that there really was not time to do a fresh start for a separate production run after seeing the first chips. The only way to meet the mining gear deployment timeschedule was to use whatever run was ongoing. Either the massproduction was planned to happen using the shuttle run chips or alternatively there was a production run ongoing. No other option except the third one which is that Ken was lying about something, eg about the timeshedules.

Also it is totally silly to let few tens of percents changes in bitcoin price to make big strategic decisions. The expectation is that bitcoin price is going to go up and down 3 times in a month. Also the price at this very moment is not that much higher than where it bottomed few weeks ago.

[Ozymandias2]

First off it wasn't a production run but a shuttle run (i.e. very few chips just to see if they work vs. tens-hundreds of thousands of chips). We do not have details on the 55nm NRE so again, we can only speculate as to the costs but the decision to cancel the 55nm chips was made during a particularly brutal part of the bear market (a decision that I do not at all agree with, but can understand the reasoning behind) where the price per chip+board+misc. components would [theoretically since we again don't have numbers] outweigh the revenue.

This shuttle vs production run is another thing that really does not make any sense. The published timeschedules for mass deployment of mining gear were such that there really was not time to do a fresh start for a separate production run after seeing the first chips. The only way to meet the mining gear deployment timeschedule was to use whatever run was ongoing. Either the massproduction was planned to happen using the shuttle run chips or alternatively there was a production run ongoing. No other option except the third one which is that Ken was lying about something, eg about the timeshedules.

Also it is totally silly to let few tens of percents changes in bitcoin price to make big strategic decisions. The expectation is that bitcoin price is going to go up and down 3 times in a month. Also the price at this very moment is not that much higher than where it bottomed few weeks ago.

I largely agree. Without all of the information at best I can speculate which is what I did.

[thefunkybits]

Who is it that does the technical analysis here again? You views on a triple bottom at $400? I think we are definitely on our way to $540, likely by end of March.

I have been short since above $600 and still haven't fully bought back yet (but ask me again in an hour, I am constantly analyzing and reacting). Your call of $540 is pretty spot on. I think $550 will be tested as it would fall perfectly in line with the recent trendline, but we could definitely go lower short term. My mid-term predictions are very bullish and I'm expecting to see another exponential run-up in July-September based on my own analysis (Some of the best traders I know are expecting this as well).


What this has to do with ACTM - our buying power could very well increase on top of the network increases at this point. For example, if BTC price increases by 6x from here but the network hashrate only increases by 3x in that same time period then our buying power would effectively be doubled. Having 1200 BTC sitting there if we really do have production runs available is incredible. Seeing hashpower on our team is very exciting, but Labcoin did that too (they even posted pictures of chips!). Its hard to say what would "shut up the skeptics" as there is a clear divide in here between those who believe Ken and those who don't and I'm still not 100% sold. It's not like Ken to keep so quiet about even remotely amazing news. We dont even know the chip specs?

[Ozymandias2]

Labcoin did that too (they even posted pictures of chips!)

Wasn't the start of the unraveling? When the chips/boards were so blatantly and obviously fake?

[thefunkybits]

Labcoin did that too (they even posted pictures of chips!)

Wasn't the start of the unraveling? When the chips/boards were so blatantly and obviously fake?

Yup

[LorenzoMoney]

Vince has a good idea. Eligius does NOT charge a pool fee.

In addition, it is easy for anyone to see how much is actually being mined if you have the mining address.

Eligius is run by Luke-jr and his crew and is reliable.

Given how many terrabytes ActM will be mining, and the fact that the amount paid by the pool fee increases the more you mine, it makes good economic sense to use Eligius Pool instead of BTCGuild.


Ken, please make that change.

We are currently running one of our Demo boards on BTCGuild and our total hashing rate:

Team AMC:

 211435   926.93 GH/s

Go on Eligius Ken - just use the mining address as the username on cgminer/bfgminer - no need for new accounts - 0% pool fee - NMC co-mined... much better.

[RoadStress]

@ken Which companies chips are in these 600Gh/s boards you speak of?

@ken why are you so deliberately vague and pick and choose the questions you can give the most ambiguous answers to?

Isn't it obvious from the name that these are HashFast's chips? lol

[Mabsark]

We are currently running one of our Demo boards on BTCGuild and our total hashing rate is:

Team AMC:

 211435   926.93 GH/s

""Our existing hardware assets from AMC liquidation
6 Avalon miners, currently running on BTC Guild under "Team AMC" for around 430 GH/s;
An order of Avalon chips from steamboat's batch #1, for 68 Klondike-16 boards, rated at 68*16*282 = 307 GH/s;
An order of 20,000 Avalon chips (end of May and beginging of June orders), for a combined hashrate of 20,000*282 = 5,640 GH/s.

In total, around 6,377 GH/s, expected to be fully operational in the middle of August."

taken from https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=252531.msg2685502#msg2685502     July 08, 2013, 10:46:58 PM

In a recent news video from about a month ago, it was clear you still had those machines. Thats 737GH so I dont know what to expect your demo board is worth - 190GH.

Without further explanation or (im serious) a photo, my assumption would be that you threw an antminer into your collection at a simple 375Mhz (190GH+/- 2GH) overclock.


nobody understands what is going on, and you are evidently a man of few and imprecise words. Maybe photography would be more your style if you actually want to post useful updates

+1

[Rodyland]

We are currently running one of our Demo boards on BTCGuild and our total hashing rate is:

Team AMC:

 211435   926.93 GH/s

""Our existing hardware assets from AMC liquidation
6 Avalon miners, currently running on BTC Guild under "Team AMC" for around 430 GH/s;
An order of Avalon chips from steamboat's batch #1, for 68 Klondike-16 boards, rated at 68*16*282 = 307 GH/s;
An order of 20,000 Avalon chips (end of May and beginging of June orders), for a combined hashrate of 20,000*282 = 5,640 GH/s.

In total, around 6,377 GH/s, expected to be fully operational in the middle of August."

taken from https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=252531.msg2685502#msg2685502     July 08, 2013, 10:46:58 PM

In a recent news video from about a month ago, it was clear you still had those machines. Thats 737GH so I dont know what to expect your demo board is worth - 190GH.

Without further explanation or (im serious) a photo, my assumption would be that you threw an antminer into your collection at a simple 375Mhz (190GH+/- 2GH) overclock.


nobody understands what is going on, and you are evidently a man of few and imprecise words. Maybe photography would be more your style if you actually want to post useful updates

AFAIK the kondikes were never delivered.  And the 20k chips were refunded because Avalon fucks their customers.  So all we have that is "old" is the 6 avalons, for 430GH/s.

[minerpart]

I have been short since above $600 and still haven't fully bought back yet (but ask me again in an hour, I am constantly analyzing and reacting).

Nice work. Have a look at my marked up chart:

http://imgur.com/SCFS7ra

It's the daily for this years pa (Bitstamp) and you can see obviously there have been two big moves this year. The first push up from $20 area to a spike at $260 was followed by a slightly ascending triple bottom with each touch of support equally spaced (3months apart).

Now 7 months after the first run-up we have had a very very similar pattern unfold. The big push, a 75% (approx) retrace to a quick touch of support followed by another spike down just over 2 months later onto a gently ascending support line. The chart says it all, we seem to be following the same game-plan, be it a bit more condensed. So I see another triple bottom forming in around 4weeks and would place it around $440. I'm also waiting to get back in closer to this level. I'm wondering is it worth advising Ken to cash out and get back in lower?

Even if he got out now and back in conservatively at 480 we would make over 200 coins. Providing we haven't already spent them all on these third-party chips???

[drasted]

Ken, we have been waiting on chips since the end of last year. You have kept us largely in the dark as our competition has been ramping up. Remember that you started ACTM so that you could provide a quicker solution to bitcoin mining? Is this going to happen? Or is all of the money going to drain out of this company before it does? Ken, get your act together. Get help where you need help to get this project completed promptly, or liquidate the public shares. Get people involved that have a passion for bitcoin mining and pay them with the company's half of the shares. I know that there have been a lot of mishaps and things out of your control. That's partly how the bitcoin world is right now, everything moves so fast. Either you can handle the task at hand in this environment and provide a return to the investors or you cannot. Do you have what it takes? If not, throw in the towel. If so, get us something to show for all this time and money.

Well written, so do I have what it takes you ask, well ask again in about 14 days.

So are we expecting this major announcement today? I assume it's the same one that zumzero and gjpminingco have been hinting that they know about that's meant to blow our socks off. So today will be his two week deadline right?

[kslaughter]

Vince has a good idea. Eligius does NOT charge a pool fee.

In addition, it is easy for anyone to see how much is actually being mined if you have the mining address.

Eligius is run by Luke-jr and his crew and is reliable.

Given how many terrabytes ActM will be mining, and the fact that the amount paid by the pool fee increases the more you mine, it makes good economic sense to use Eligius Pool instead of BTCGuild.


Ken, please make that change.

We are currently running one of our Demo boards on BTCGuild and our total hashing rate:

Team AMC:

 211435   926.93 GH/s

Go on Eligius Ken - just use the mining address as the username on cgminer/bfgminer - no need for new accounts - 0% pool fee - NMC co-mined... much better.

We will be converting to Solo Mining with this much hashing.

[minerpart]

So are we expecting this major announcement today?

We had the announcement already:

Here is the good news for March...

What are you expecting? Miracles? This is ACtM laddy.

[SebastianJu]

How are things coming along with the pre-ordered products?

We are getting ready to start issuing refunds again.  We are also using our new 600 GH/s board as we get them in full production to solve our refund problem.

Ouch... we have a refund problem that can be solved with the coins we get from the running boards? Sounds like the funds are pretty much gone already. I didnt think its that bad yet.

[bigdude]

We will be converting to Solo Mining with this much hashing.

Serious question Ken.

Given the complete disaster ActM has been so far, and your complete lack of achievement to date ... do you think going solo mining and hiding the hashrate will benefit investors?