is anyone paying more in maintenance than making profit in Cex.io?

[dcarnelutti]

I have 53 ghs with them and now maintenance charges and bigger than profit... anyone having same issue?

[DrG]

I have 53 ghs with them and now maintenance charges and bigger than profit... anyone having same issue?

Well unfortunately this is how it is in the real world as well.  If you are solo mining with 20 Antminer S3s you need to pay for their electricity every day but you only get income when you find a block.

If ghash.io is having a bad luck spell then they still need to pay for the electricity despite not making any income - hence the continual fees.

Having said that yes it is assinine that customers should be charged that high a fee unless ghash.io were to mine with $0.50 electricity while mining in Beverly Hills, CA... but the customers chose to buy that hash...

I would suggest selling and taking your BTC while you have the chance.

[zdaz14]

I have 53 ghs with them and now maintenance charges and bigger than profit... anyone having same issue?

I sold yesterday at 10GHs. I wasn't losing money but the maintenance charges were taking like 80% of anything I mined...so it just wasn't worth while for me to keep them.

[Bitsaurus]

It's just a matter of time before fees completely erase mining income for those who own cloud hashing.

[CliveK]

It's just a matter of time before fees completely erase mining income for those who own cloud hashing.

Not that I disagree with you, but lets be fair to Cloudhashers (is that even a term, if not I HEREBY CLAIM IT  ). This has nothing to do with cloud hash, it has to do with difficulty going up and the price of BTC not increasing. I know you agree with me based on your comment on another thread: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=737629.20

"The home user obviously can't mine if difficulty goes up but the fiat price doesn't - they can't get BTC ROI currently and then they may not even get fiat ROI."

My personal opinion is cloudhashing offers the least risk to any "investor" but this is all dependent on scale and assuming legitimate cloud vendor.

As part of my experiment, I have some GHS at Cex.io and in my experience fees being higher than share reward is an exception, not the rule.

CK

[DrG]

It's just a matter of time before fees completely erase mining income for those who own cloud hashing.

Not that I disagree with you, but lets be fair to Cloudhashers (is that even a term, if not I HEREBY CLAIM IT  ). This has nothing to do with cloud hash, it has to do with difficulty going up and the price of BTC not increasing. I know you agree with me based on your comment on another thread: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=737629.20

"The home user obviously can't mine if difficulty goes up but the fiat price doesn't - they can't get BTC ROI currently and then they may not even get fiat ROI."

My personal opinion is cloudhashing offers the least risk to any "investor" but this is all dependent on scale and assuming legitimate cloud vendor.

As part of my experiment, I have some GHS at Cex.io and in my experience fees being higher than share reward is an exception, not the rule.

CK

Risk and Reward.

Risk is pretty much money spent on the outlay for the investment when buying cloud hashing.  For physical mining it would also include people's time.

Reward should be the same for both assuming both have the same hashrate and we make the assumption that the pools should have negligible effect on the end total of income.

So the only difference in Risk/Reward is the higher or lower Risk.

Physical mining always carries a lower risk since even with miners placed in a colocation center the total outlay would be less than that of any cloud hashing.

Physical hardware has risk of hardware failure and cloud hashing has risk of getting scammed.

Buyer decides which is greater Risk.

[CliveK]

Though I don't disagree this is also disingenuous  towards cloud mining.

Physical hardware has risk of hardware failure and cloud hashing has risk of getting scammed.

Buyer decides which is greater Risk.

Surely you should be saying:

Physical hardware has the risk of hardware failure as well as getting scammed, and cloud hashing has a risk of getting scammed. Finding a reputable vendor means you don't get scammed on either side, so you are just left with hardware failure on the physical side.

[Sophie.Greek]

Could mining just buy some ghs? thats good, I'll took a look.

[dcarnelutti]

well, i sold all the ghs in Cex.io and bougth 149 ghs in hashnest.com.

[leannemckim46]

It's just a matter of time before fees completely erase mining income for those who own cloud hashing.

Some cloud hashing services force you to pay for electricity in advance, making the actual cost of mining a moot point once you have purchased the contract (PBmining is an example of this).

With CEX.io on the other hand they make you pay for the maintenance fees as you go so over time the maintenance fees will make up a larger percentage of the bitcoin they mine. I do believe however that ghash (CEX) has a policy that says the max maintenance fee per day will be the amount of bitcoin the GH/s mines that day

[balk]

Fees are now 90% , and in the next difficulty rise which is expected to rise 20%, fees also increase that amount, 0.90*1.20= 108% fees , that means,if you hold GHS, you have to PAY!, yes you have to pay for every block solved.

Then CEX.IO ,term of use topic, 11.5 kicks in, "11.5. Mining with using User's Gigahashes can be stopped by CEX.IO if the amount of the Maintenance Cost exceeds rewards for each mined block or if the mining is economically inexpedient. The decision to renew Bitcoins mining is made by CEX.IO, taking into account calculations of mining effectiveness."

watch the ghs price fall

[dcarnelutti]

wow ghs price is going down very fast...

[Bejkn]

whether do you ghs too little force?

[Slark]

I have 53 ghs with them and now maintenance charges and bigger than profit... anyone having same issue?

That is why I think GAW's Hashlet is better. ROI is there. Not just constant maintenance fees.

[snappa4ever]

Fees are now 90% , and in the next difficulty rise which is expected to rise 20%, fees also increase that amount, 0.90*1.20= 108% fees , that means,if you hold GHS, you have to PAY!, yes you have to pay for every block solved.

Then CEX.IO ,term of use topic, 11.5 kicks in, "11.5. Mining with using User's Gigahashes can be stopped by CEX.IO if the amount of the Maintenance Cost exceeds rewards for each mined block or if the mining is economically inexpedient. The decision to renew Bitcoins mining is made by CEX.IO, taking into account calculations of mining effectiveness."

watch the ghs price fall

In other words once the maintenance costs rise above the amount each GHs mine, the GHs will be turned off. This effectively makes it impossible for the OPs problem to be a reality

[zdaz14]

I don't have enough BTC in cex to withdraw so I went ahead and bought some GH yesterday...I've lost .00000090 so far lol.

Oh well. Not even a penny yet.

[astronomino]

I used to have GHS on CEX about a year ago, but moved to greener pastures. Was looking at them today and realized the GHS price is lower than anything I've seen lately... but then I remembered they have maintenance fees...
So quick math: dustcoin.com says 1 GH/s makes $0.08/month but cex.io/maintenance says fees are $0.105/month for 1GHS.
Is this for real? shouldn't they shut down their inefficient miners at this point as the terms and conditions state? Am I missing something?

[clownius]

I used to have GHS on CEX about a year ago, but moved to greener pastures. Was looking at them today and realized the GHS price is lower than anything I've seen lately... but then I remembered they have maintenance fees...
So quick math: dustcoin.com says 1 GH/s makes $0.08/month but cex.io/maintenance says fees are $0.105/month for 1GHS.
Is this for real? shouldn't they shut down their inefficient miners at this point as the terms and conditions state? Am I missing something?

Last i heard they had unless users specifically asked to keep mining and agreed to pay any fees not covered by the mining.

There was some talk of restarting if difficulty dropped enough and BTC price rose enough though.  Havent seen any discussion on here about that so i doubt its happened at least yet.

Im guessing most GH/s trading is done on hope of a restart?  That or the fact crypto traders would trade dead rats if they thought they could pump and dump a little lol

[picolo]

I have 53 ghs with them and now maintenance charges and bigger than profit... anyone having same issue?

Now they are not even mining.

[juliogf]

Im guessing most GH/s trading is done on hope of a restart?  That or the fact crypto traders would trade dead rats if they thought they could pump and dump a little lol

What do you mean "trading is done on hope of a restart?" ?
Thanks