ASICMINER: Entering the Future of ASIC Mining by Inventing It

[empoweoqwj]

The fact that Gen 3 hasn't even taped out yet and we are dealing with a company that is batting .50 on successful ASIC designs.

They may have a cool hosting system in place, but if Gen 3 doesn't pan out this stock is done.

why is that all of the people that pumped Labcon are now trolling the AM thread?

Let's not have a trolling argument please. Thankfully this thread is relatively free of them. The 'ignore' button is always an option

[velacreations]

Let's not have a trolling argument please. Thankfully this thread is relatively free of them. The 'ignore' button is always an option

I just find it interesting that the last few pages are filled with posts from those people.  I wonder if it is related to the surge in price?

[dhenson]

The fact that Gen 3 hasn't even taped out yet and we are dealing with a company that is batting .50 on successful ASIC designs.

They may have a cool hosting system in place, but if Gen 3 doesn't pan out this stock is done.

why is that all of the people that pumped Labcon are now trolling the AM thread?

Lol Vela, I'm not a Labcoin pumper... I'm a Labcoin victim.

However, I do find it interesting that your tune seems to have changed regarding AM.  What turned you around?

[Mabsark]

I appreciate the bullishness but price rising too fast for such a slow process. 12 days to TAPEOUT and not reciving your dividents. So take it easy guys and be more wise about your investments. Not saying ASICMINER isnt great but too fast too high, it smells bubbly....

Some AM shareholders have been telling people that the new chips will be available in January. Seems like the most logical reason for the rise to me.

[Draino]

i don't get why folks--who claim to have nothing invested--argue with passion about how the share price should be going a certain way

it can't be just so they can feel smug when eventually the trend turns, can it?

[empoweoqwj]

i don't get why folks--who claim to have nothing invested--argue with passion about how the share price should be going a certain way

it can't be just so they can feel smug when eventually the trend turns, can it?

People are not rational beings 100% of the time. Wouldn't worry about it.

[dmcdad]

Some AM shareholders have been telling people that the new chips will be available in January. Seems like the most logical reason for the rise to me.

Seriously doubtful on that one.

Are you just referring to the November quote from SmiGuel you dug up? I pretty confident everyone knows that January is just tapeout and hardware is still months away.

If anyone on here is expecting hardware in a few weeks please speak up so we can get a count for maths.

[velacreations]

Lol Vela, I'm not a Labcoin pumper... I'm a Labcoin victim.

is that why you were passing around an ignore list with everyone that was warning newbies about the Labcon scam?  You certainly were pumping it.

When a good number of people were calling "scam", you were saying "not scam, ignore those people!"

I was there, remember?

However, I do find it interesting that your tune seems to have changed regarding AM.  What turned you around?

what tune?  I haven't changed anything on AM.  I just find it interesting that Labcon pumpers like you and Mabsark are hanging around on the AM threads trying to push the price down.  It's interesting, and very telling.

[Mabsark]

Lol Vela, I'm not a Labcoin pumper... I'm a Labcoin victim.

is that why you were passing around an ignore list with everyone that was warning newbies about the Labcon scam?  You certainly were pumping it.

When a good number of people were calling "scam", you were saying "not scam, ignore those people!"

I was there, remember?

However, I do find it interesting that your tune seems to have changed regarding AM.  What turned you around?

what tune?  I haven't changed anything on AM.  I just find it interesting that Labcon pumpers like you and Mabsark are hanging around on the AM threads trying to push the price down.  It's interesting, and very telling.

You said that 6 months ago as well when you were claiming shares were worth at least 5 BTC and I explained why such prices were insane. Was I just trying to push the price down then as well? Looking back now, would you still claim my argument was flawed.

My arguments were perfectly valid back then, even though you couldn't or wilfully refused to understand them. The arguments I recently made are also perfectly valid.

Also, why would me telling people to do the maths themselves push the price down? Wouldn't that only be the case if the maths showed that the shares were overpriced?

[dhenson]

Vela, I'm not trying to push the price down.  I honestly have no intention of buying AM shares.  I was simply pointing out that the price movement was unsustainable and it would be coming back down.

The tune change comment was because I had you mixed up with someone else.  In my vodka addled brain, I thought you were Vycid.

As to the Labcoin statement, I honestly thought they were legit in the beginning.  Having over 200 coins invested tends to make someone blind to the obvious signs.  I fully admit that I was wrong and you guys were right.

[velacreations]

You said that 6 months ago as well when you were claiming shares were worth at least 5 BTC and I explained why such prices were insane.

and yet, I was right, we did hit 5 btc.

The arguments I recently made are also perfectly valid.

and how about your arguments saying that Labcon would be worth 10x what they were sold for?  Those didn't hold up, either.  

Also, why would me telling people to do the maths themselves push the price down? Wouldn't that only be the case if the maths showed that the shares were overpriced?

you and I both know you can make the math say whatever you want to say, because you selectively pick data and numbers for calculations.  Kinda like you saying Labcon would hit 1btc or more.  You had math to back that up as well.  

It seems like your math and reality don't match up too well.

[velacreations]

I fully admit that I was wrong and you guys were right.

I appreciate you saying that.  That increases your credibility, IMO.  Cheers.

[jimmothy]

You said that 6 months ago as well when you were claiming shares were worth at least 5 BTC and I explained why such prices were insane.

and yet, I was right, we did hit 5 btc.

The arguments I recently made are also perfectly valid.

and how about your arguments saying that Labcon would be worth 10x what they were sold for?  Those didn't hold up, either.  

Also, why would me telling people to do the maths themselves push the price down? Wouldn't that only be the case if the maths showed that the shares were overpriced?

you and I both know you can make the math say whatever you want to say, because you selectively pick data and numbers for calculations.  Kinda like you saying Labcon would hit 1btc or more.  You had math to back that up as well.  

It seems like your math and reality don't match up too well.

Can we stop quoting mabsark? Would love to have a serious discussion with someone who is not a troll/has more than 0.01btc invested.

Just hit ignore and move on.

As for the share price, I expected a small increase before news regarding tapeout but not this dramatic. Was expecting 0.5/share after news that tapeout was on schedule not before.

[Mabsark]

You said that 6 months ago as well when you were claiming shares were worth at least 5 BTC and I explained why such prices were insane.

and yet, I was right, we did hit 5 btc.

Yes it did hit 5 BTC, but my argument was not that it wouldn't hit 5 BTC, it was that all the upcoming competition would force AM to sell hardware at lower prices and decrease AM's network share as well. This would obviously cause divs to decrease which in turn would cause the share price to decrease.

So, was my argument wrong?

The arguments I recently made are also perfectly valid.

and how about your arguments saying that Labcon would be worth 10x what they were sold for?  Those didn't hold up, either.  

Of course it didn't hold up, Labcoin was a scam. If it was legit though, the shares would have easily sold for 10x IPO.

Also, why would me telling people to do the maths themselves push the price down? Wouldn't that only be the case if the maths showed that the shares were overpriced?

you and I both know you can make the math say whatever you want to say, because you selectively pick data and numbers for calculations.  Kinda like you saying Labcon would hit 1btc or more.  You had math to back that up as well.  

It seems like your math and reality don't match up too well.

As far as I can remember I never claimed Labcoin would hit 1 BTC, so I'll you you to quote me on that one. No, in fact don't bother, because it's completely irrelevant. You are just trying to distract people from my actual argument.

Sure, you can use crazy numbers in your equation if you want to get some specific result, but people will challenge the validity of those numbers. Is that what you think I've been doing with my arguments here? I told you were my numbers came from:

* the genesis block for network hash rate,
* friedcat for gen 3 hash rate, and
* previous manufacturers time frames for time from tape out to receiving sample chips.

What numbers are you claiming I'm selectively picking?

Just because the maths gives results you don't want to see, doesn't mean those are wrong.

[velacreations]

So, was my argument wrong?

yes, it was wrong.  Your argument was that AM was already overvalued around 2.5 btc or so, and that upcoming competition would limit the profits and share price.  While competition eventually materialized, it only did so after several competition failures and share prices increased more than 100% after you were claiming they would start decreasing.

That's like saying the world will come to an end, and sure, you're eventually right, but only after being wrong for a very long time.

Just because the maths gives results you don't want to see, doesn't mean those are wrong.

and how about the maths for ActM and Labcon you were so fond of? reality didn't follow your theoretical examples, did it?

just because you can tweak the math to match your argument doesn't make you right (as history has shown)

[hdbuck]

@ mabsark:

Hello, i might not be here for a long time but as far as im concern, your/my math is crystal clear. As i am working in an investment company this is basically all we need to make a decision: hence i am not buying for now (but i certainly will in the future, and i am not saying it will drop back to 0,3 or even lower).

However, you may underestimate the possible outcomes of AM's overall strategy. They were the first mover so if anyone should be 3 steps ahead in the bitcoin world, its them.

Finally, i found it quite unnecessary all this anger in response of your fair calculations. People tends to be even more passionate when it comes to their investment/money (which isnt wrong at all, i completely understand it as i may also be quite nervous sometimes). So to me it does not matter whether you where previously wrong before and about other subjects (labcoin, blablabla..). People learn from their mistakes and then sharpen their understanding and analysis. I would be much more suspicious if someone is always right (although some people can).

Anyho, since this is an AM thread, could we please move on to some more relevant conversation? Or should we create a topic named "discrediting mabsark"...

thx  

[Mabsark]

So, was my argument wrong?

yes, it was wrong.  Your argument was that AM was already overvalued around 2.5 btc or so, and that upcoming competition would limit the profits and share price.  While competition eventually materialized, it only did so after several competition failures and share prices increased more than 100% after you were claiming they would start decreasing.

That's like saying the world will come to an end, and sure, you're eventually right, but only after being wrong for a very long time.

I clearly stated that "By the end of the year, there will be plenty of competition" and  "AM share holders are going to get hit by a good dose of reality in the coming months". So what if the share price temporarily increased? What was the share price at the end of the year? Did those who bought shares at that time get a good deal or did they get burned?

Here's some of our discussions at the time:

Perhaps you should have paid attention to the part where I said:

The only reason why AM is able to charge such outrageous prices is because they've had no competition. By the end of the year, there will be plenty of competition.

I heard the same thing in April, then May, then June, and now July, and now by the end of the year.  When will this competition arrive, again?

Yeah, clearly for the rest of time, AICMINER will be the only company able to produce ASICs. 

well, the competition have been promising production for quite some time, and each one has failed to deliver.  Why should we assume they will eventually succeed.  Isn't the likely case that they will continue to fail?

Another person, not paying attention. I never said anything like what you're claiming. I pointed out that by the end of the year there will be a lot more competition and showed how that will compare to AMs current hardware. The point of that was to show that AM will no longer be able to sell 2 Mh/s for 1 USD once that competition is available because the competition will be offering 50 Mh/s for the same price. Nobody in their right mind would buy AM hardware under such circumstances.

you are making assumptions that competitors will actually arrive with hardware and numbers to be able to make a dent in AM's sales.    Will this eventually happen ?  probably.  When  will this eventually happen? no one knows.  To date, we've heard competitors announcing the release of their hardware every few weeks for almost 6 months.  But nothing has arrived.  So, what makes you think that they will eventually be able to get it done?

And really, comparing vaporware with real hardware you can buy right now is complete nonsense.  Vaporware is cheap to produce, cheap to sell, and cheap to promote.  That doesn't make it any more viable, though.

Face it, my argument was blatantly obvious and your arguments were quite clearly ridiculous. Shareholders were simply too blinded by greed to see the truth of that at the time. You are making the same mistake all over again.

[Mabsark]

@ mabsark:

Hello, i might not be here for a long time but as far as im concern, your/my math is crystal clear. As i am working in an investment company this is basically all we need to make a decision: hence i am not buying for now (but i certainly will in the future, and i am not saying it will drop back to 0,3 or even lower).

However, you may underestimate the possible outcomes of AM's overall strategy. They were the first mover so if anyone should be 3 steps ahead in the bitcoin world, its them.

Finally, i found it quite unnecessary all this anger in response of your fair calculations. People tends to be even more passionate when it comes to their investment/money (which isnt wrong at all, i completely understand it as i may also be quite nervous sometimes). So to me it does not matter whether you where previously wrong before and about other subjects (labcoin, blablabla..). People learn from their mistakes and then sharpen their understanding and analysis. I would be much more suspicious if someone is always right (although some people can).

Anyho, since this is an AM thread, could we please move on to some more relevant conversation? Or should we create a topic named "discrediting mabsark"...

thx  

It's good to know that at least one person here is willing to do maths for themselves. The security threads would be so much better if others would just do the same and actually start thinking for themselves.

The funny thing is, I'm not even saying that AM will definitely not be profitable. I created a specific scenario, which is fairly plausible, and showed that under those conditions, AM couldn't maintain a 5% share of the network.

Anyway, I think I'll just leave at that and take a break from here for a while.

[jimmothy]

Finally, i found it quite unnecessary all this anger in response of your fair calculations. People tends to be even more passionate when it comes to their investment/money.

Here are a few reasons many might be annoyed with mabsark:

- repeatedly advertised labcoin causing many to lose large amounts of money

- Uses highly speculative calculations as "proof" and gets angry when someone gives him an equally speculative response.

- Won't shut the fuck up about his speculative calculations.

- As soon as his bullshit math is disproven, he returns with some new bullshit math to "prove" that asicminer will fail and ultimately waste our time.


It is fine and dandy to speculate but when 20+ people disagree with you and not a single person agrees, you should really take a hint.

[velacreations]

Face it, my argument was blatantly obvious and your arguments were quite clearly ridiculous. Shareholders were simply too blinded by greed to see the truth of that at the time. You are making the same mistake all over again.

Like I said then, no one knows when.  You didn't know then, and you don't know now.  Saying a share price will fall isn't enough to make money.  It's the ability to know when it will fall.  

Look at when you were saying AM was overvalued, the price and profits increased significantly after your prediction.  You were advising to not invest in AM when you could have doubled your money. You were off by several months, which meant significant profits earned by a lot of us during that time frame.  

With Labcon, it was the opposite.  You were buying when you should have been selling.  You insisted that your math and arguments were valid, yet you were wrong.