Bitcoin Forum
October 05, 2022, 12:04:43 AM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 23.0 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  

Warning: Moderators do not remove likely scams. You must use your own brain: caveat emptor. Watch out for Ponzi schemes. Do not invest more than you can afford to lose.

Warning: One or more bitcointalk.org users have reported that they strongly believe that the creator of this topic is a scammer. (Login to see the detailed trust ratings.) While the bitcointalk.org administration does not verify such claims, you should proceed with extreme caution.
Pages: « 1 ... 965 966 967 968 969 970 971 972 973 974 975 976 977 978 979 980 981 982 983 984 985 986 987 988 989 990 991 992 993 994 995 996 997 998 999 1000 1001 1002 1003 1004 1005 1006 1007 1008 1009 1010 1011 1012 1013 1014 [1015] 1016 1017 1018 1019 1020 1021 1022 1023 1024 1025 1026 1027 1028 1029 1030 1031 1032 1033 1034 1035 1036 1037 1038 1039 1040 1041 1042 1043 1044 1045 1046 1047 1048 1049 1050 1051 1052 1053 1054 1055 1056 1057 1058 1059 1060 1061 1062 1063 1064 1065 ... 1348 »
  Print  
Author Topic: ASICMINER: Entering the Future of ASIC Mining by Inventing It  (Read 3914431 times)
Mabsark
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 826
Merit: 1004


View Profile
June 02, 2014, 10:29:09 AM
 #20281

There will be three modes of orders: Immediate delivery, 2-month delivery and 3-month delivery, with the price getting lower one by one. For 2-month and 3-month delivery, premium + balance payment may be supported to enhance liquidity and enable larger orders.
1664928283
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1664928283

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1664928283
Reply with quote  #2

1664928283
Report to moderator
1664928283
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1664928283

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1664928283
Reply with quote  #2

1664928283
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
1664928283
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1664928283

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1664928283
Reply with quote  #2

1664928283
Report to moderator
1664928283
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1664928283

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1664928283
Reply with quote  #2

1664928283
Report to moderator
1664928283
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1664928283

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1664928283
Reply with quote  #2

1664928283
Report to moderator
El Cabron
Gnomo
VIP
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 840
Merit: 1000



View Profile
June 02, 2014, 10:48:49 AM
 #20282

The level of troll in this thread is too damn high.  Not that I want an eco chamber, but would anyone be for moving more thoughtful conversation and speculation elsewhere?  To where, I do not know... but it seems Goat's signature is more then accurate.

If there is a good core group of you who want to join cryptocrypt.org we can set up your own thread or even subsection if you want. The forum is moderated and the only rules are pretty much is no trolling and be respectful. I like to troll as much as others but there is a time and a place for it. It is really hard to know what is going on with AM with all this noise. The other forum has much more signal and from a decent group of guys.

Let me know.

Sorry El Cabron, you are banned from posting or sending personal messages on this forum.
Trolling
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=622250.msg7030081#msg7030081
minerpumpkin
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 686
Merit: 500


A pumpkin mines 27 hours a night


View Profile
June 02, 2014, 11:11:58 AM
 #20283

About 0.35 US$ for the lazy ones Smiley
Like suggested earlier, even 0.4 $/GH/s will be difficult to achieve. As long as the estimated production costs are not that far off, AM will make a profit but can hardly issue a dividend.

So 0.4$GH sold by the distributors? Do the distributors have a bigger profit margin than AM?

Hum? I'm asking how AM is possibly going to sell for more than $0.4 if the "retail" (even preorder) price for June is already at $0.35. I used a price of $0.4 in my optimistic-realistic calculation on the last page. I don't see a scenario where we are selling chips for more than $0.4 after June. And even for June it's questionable.
And yes, my sentiment has changed since the financial report.

I should have gotten into Bitcoin back in 1992...
El Cabron
Gnomo
VIP
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 840
Merit: 1000



View Profile
June 02, 2014, 11:13:48 AM
 #20284

About 0.35 US$ for the lazy ones Smiley
Like suggested earlier, even 0.4 $/GH/s will be difficult to achieve. As long as the estimated production costs are not that far off, AM will make a profit but can hardly issue a dividend.

So 0.4$GH sold by the distributors? Do the distributors have a bigger profit margin than AM?

Hum? I'm asking how AM is possibly going to sell for more than $0.4 if the "retail" (even preorder) price for June is already at $0.35. I used a price of $0.4 in my optimistic-realistic calculation on the last page. I don't see a scenario where we are selling chips for more than $0.4 after June. And even for June it's questionable.
And yes, my sentiment has changed since the financial report.

We are selling chips to other umbrella operations, I have seen some of the IPOs listed on the forum. Did they happen to prepay for all the stuff we are going to make? Is this known to us?

Sorry El Cabron, you are banned from posting or sending personal messages on this forum.
Trolling
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=622250.msg7030081#msg7030081
minerpumpkin
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 686
Merit: 500


A pumpkin mines 27 hours a night


View Profile
June 02, 2014, 11:22:31 AM
 #20285

About 0.35 US$ for the lazy ones Smiley
Like suggested earlier, even 0.4 $/GH/s will be difficult to achieve. As long as the estimated production costs are not that far off, AM will make a profit but can hardly issue a dividend.

So 0.4$GH sold by the distributors? Do the distributors have a bigger profit margin than AM?

Hum? I'm asking how AM is possibly going to sell for more than $0.4 if the "retail" (even preorder) price for June is already at $0.35. I used a price of $0.4 in my optimistic-realistic calculation on the last page. I don't see a scenario where we are selling chips for more than $0.4 after June. And even for June it's questionable.
And yes, my sentiment has changed since the financial report.

We are selling chips to other umbrella operations, I have seen some of the IPOs listed on the forum. Did they happen to prepay for all the stuff we are going to make? Is this known to us?

What are you implying? i.e., how does this affect the price at which we are able to sell chips after this month / in the general future? The price is simply determined by the difficulty, BTC/$ price, and competitors. And 2 of them won't stop working "against" AM. The BTC price may make the chips more desirable, yet will slash dividends which are priced in BTC.
Long story short: Things aren't getting better with time. Chip manufacturers need to work as fast as possible. Promises of $0.5-$1.0/GH/s won't become reality anymore, things took too long.

I should have gotten into Bitcoin back in 1992...
El Cabron
Gnomo
VIP
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 840
Merit: 1000



View Profile
June 02, 2014, 11:29:22 AM
 #20286

About 0.35 US$ for the lazy ones Smiley
Like suggested earlier, even 0.4 $/GH/s will be difficult to achieve. As long as the estimated production costs are not that far off, AM will make a profit but can hardly issue a dividend.

So 0.4$GH sold by the distributors? Do the distributors have a bigger profit margin than AM?

Hum? I'm asking how AM is possibly going to sell for more than $0.4 if the "retail" (even preorder) price for June is already at $0.35. I used a price of $0.4 in my optimistic-realistic calculation on the last page. I don't see a scenario where we are selling chips for more than $0.4 after June. And even for June it's questionable.
And yes, my sentiment has changed since the financial report.

We are selling chips to other umbrella operations, I have seen some of the IPOs listed on the forum. Did they happen to prepay for all the stuff we are going to make? Is this known to us?

What are you implying? i.e., how does this affect the price at which we are able to sell chips after this month / in the general future? The price is simply determined by the difficulty, BTC/$ price, and competitors. And 2 of them won't stop working "against" AM. The BTC price may make the chips more desirable, yet will slash dividends which are priced in BTC.
Long story short: Things aren't getting better with time. Chip manufacturers need to work as fast as possible. Promises of $0.5-$1.0/GH/s won't become reality anymore, things took too long.

What if we already have a whole bunch of chips ordered and paid for by these umbrella operations we are working with at a higher than fair market price. wont that be good for us?

Sorry El Cabron, you are banned from posting or sending personal messages on this forum.
Trolling
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=622250.msg7030081#msg7030081
Lohoris
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 630
Merit: 500


Bitgoblin


View Profile
June 02, 2014, 11:51:51 AM
 #20287

What if we already have a whole bunch of chips ordered and paid for by these umbrella operations we are working with at a higher than fair market price. wont that be good for us?
Let me see if I understand, you mean that if the buyer pre-paid those chips and then difficulty rose more than expected, well he has already paid so that's good for AM, right?

1LohorisJie8bGGG7X4dCS9MAVsTEbzrhu
DefaultTrust is very BAD.
minerpumpkin
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 686
Merit: 500


A pumpkin mines 27 hours a night


View Profile
June 02, 2014, 11:56:02 AM
Last edit: June 02, 2014, 03:25:51 PM by minerpumpkin
 #20288

What are you implying? i.e., how does this affect the price at which we are able to sell chips after this month / in the general future? The price is simply determined by the difficulty, BTC/$ price, and competitors. And 2 of them won't stop working "against" AM. The BTC price may make the chips more desirable, yet will slash dividends which are priced in BTC.
Long story short: Things aren't getting better with time. Chip manufacturers need to work as fast as possible. Promises of $0.5-$1.0/GH/s won't become reality anymore, things took too long.

What if we already have a whole bunch of chips ordered and paid for by these umbrella operations we are working with at a higher than fair market price. wont that be good for us?

Assuming projected batch sizes (May April: 8.5 PH/s, June May 33.5 PH/s) and assuming that the reported chip sales ($3,691,731) are the May batch and the Hardware in stock ($1,420,233+ $6,104,800=$7,525,033) is the June batch, we can conclude that AM achieved a price of: $0.43 for April and $0.22 for May. I know, at least the June numbers suggest that something doesn't add up and we may still expect payments for them. But it doesn't seem that AM is achieving the prices it has hoped for. And they won't increase. Even accepting a delayed payment won't do the trick. And that's the reason why the financial report seems worrysome.


I should have gotten into Bitcoin back in 1992...
El Cabron
Gnomo
VIP
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 840
Merit: 1000



View Profile
June 02, 2014, 12:00:54 PM
 #20289

What if we already have a whole bunch of chips ordered and paid for by these umbrella operations we are working with at a higher than fair market price. wont that be good for us?
Let me see if I understand, you mean that if the buyer pre-paid those chips and then difficulty rose more than expected, well he has already paid so that's good for AM, right?


Well, it means we wont take the loss, the other company will. Right now I don't know who is absorbing the loss. Does anyone know? Is this info even public?

Sorry El Cabron, you are banned from posting or sending personal messages on this forum.
Trolling
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=622250.msg7030081#msg7030081
vortex1878
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 492
Merit: 500


View Profile
June 02, 2014, 12:07:56 PM
 #20290

What are you implying? i.e., how does this affect the price at which we are able to sell chips after this month / in the general future? The price is simply determined by the difficulty, BTC/$ price, and competitors. And 2 of them won't stop working "against" AM. The BTC price may make the chips more desirable, yet will slash dividends which are priced in BTC.
Long story short: Things aren't getting better with time. Chip manufacturers need to work as fast as possible. Promises of $0.5-$1.0/GH/s won't become reality anymore, things took too long.

What if we already have a whole bunch of chips ordered and paid for by these umbrella operations we are working with at a higher than fair market price. wont that be good for us?

Assuming projected batch sizes (May: 8.5 PH/s, June 33.5 PH/s) and assuming that the reported chip sales ($3,691,731) are the May batch and the Hardware in stock ($1,420,233+ $6,104,800=$7,525,033) is the June batch, we can conclude that AM achieved a price of: $0.43 for May and $0.22 for June. I know, at least the June numbers suggest that something doesn't add up and we may still expect payments for them. But it doesn't seem that AM is achieving the prices it has hoped for. And they won't increase. Even accepting a delayed payment won't do the trick. And that's the reason why the financial report seems worrysome.



Inventory is listed as production cost, NOT sales price.
minerpumpkin
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 686
Merit: 500


A pumpkin mines 27 hours a night


View Profile
June 02, 2014, 12:14:18 PM
 #20291

What are you implying? i.e., how does this affect the price at which we are able to sell chips after this month / in the general future? The price is simply determined by the difficulty, BTC/$ price, and competitors. And 2 of them won't stop working "against" AM. The BTC price may make the chips more desirable, yet will slash dividends which are priced in BTC.
Long story short: Things aren't getting better with time. Chip manufacturers need to work as fast as possible. Promises of $0.5-$1.0/GH/s won't become reality anymore, things took too long.

What if we already have a whole bunch of chips ordered and paid for by these umbrella operations we are working with at a higher than fair market price. wont that be good for us?

Assuming projected batch sizes (May: 8.5 PH/s, June 33.5 PH/s) and assuming that the reported chip sales ($3,691,731) are the May batch and the Hardware in stock ($1,420,233+ $6,104,800=$7,525,033) is the June batch, we can conclude that AM achieved a price of: $0.43 for May and $0.22 for June. I know, at least the June numbers suggest that something doesn't add up and we may still expect payments for them. But it doesn't seem that AM is achieving the prices it has hoped for. And they won't increase. Even accepting a delayed payment won't do the trick. And that's the reason why the financial report seems worrysome.



Inventory is listed as production cost, NOT sales price.

Which would perfectly foster the claim of a wafer cost of $0.2/GH/s for batches after the first one.
Chip sales are sales, though. And achieving 0.43 for the first batch in May isn't exactly good and definitely below expectations. How is the price supposed to up from there?

I should have gotten into Bitcoin back in 1992...
KS
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 448
Merit: 250


View Profile
June 02, 2014, 01:02:21 PM
 #20292

Given the time sensitivity of this market, FC might have chosen to sell at a lower price to bring in the cash sooner in order to ramp up production faster.

Speculation is like religion. You either believe or you don't. If you don't, get out.

Or maybe FC is trying to suffocate the comp with underpriced ghs

I'm not sure which competition you're referring to. There is the one that is already shipping (and took your money already) and the one that has taken pre-orders (and also took your money already).

I think everyone has enough money for the next round (possibly two) and some are building or have built their own mining operation (and are thus less likely to suffer from AM's pricing in the short term). Besides, you don't win by selling at, or under cost unless you have bigger cash reserves than the competition and I doubt AM's in the best position there.

They must also preserve their profit margin as the move to 28nm and lower will be tricky. It will be costly and will require experienced professionals (Gen3 is child's play in comparison).
NotLambchop
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 378
Merit: 254


View Profile
June 02, 2014, 01:06:17 PM
Last edit: June 02, 2014, 01:48:15 PM by NotLambchop
 #20293

...
OK, jimmothy:

You own stock in company A, which makes widgets.
I own company A, and want to make your shares worthless.
I form company B, and form a contract to sell it my widgets at laughably low prices.
This bleeds out company A, while I get to keep all muh munyz through company B profits.

So now you know Smiley


Well, What if "I", the owner of company A, himself possesses more than 50% shares of company A? And "I" take a risk by collude with all the board members, who possess another 30% shares, only to bleed the rest 20% of the company out...

The TL;DR answer is you don't own 50% of company A, or any company.

What you do own is a few ASICMINER sharez, worth ~50% less than they used to be just a couple of days ago.  That's also bragworthy, in its own way.

Why start with outlandish hypotheticals when equally lulzy personal examples are at hand?

*Now that we're on the same page, what exactly did you wish to know?

Sorry, I'm not English native speaker, maybe I failed to express myself clear.
What I really want to mean is: FC himself already possesses more than 50% shares of AM through BitFountain. I don't find any good reason for him to take a risk by collude with all the board members, who possess another 30% shares, only to bleed the rest 20% of the AM out.

Hi, not a native speaker either, though I don't think we have a language problem.  
Since we're dealing purely with hypotheticals (you don't own 50% of company A), i'll offer a few of my own:

As I have mentioned before, the board members, along with FC, could have unloaded their shares, used those shares to back additional funding, or funding for starting new companies--any number of things.  So assuming that 80% of ASICMINER shares are in the hands of those in control of the company, whose interests are aligned with yours, is simply unreasonable.

Then there's the risk you referred to, begging the question "WTF are you talking about?"  In countries with draconian securities regulations, bleedouts of the type I've described happens all the time.
What of a Hong Kong firm with an anonymous CEO, trading on an unlicenced Panamanian exchange, funded by selling its stock to non-qualified investors?  What, exactly, is the risk?  This thread gets a few angry posts and FC's Bitcointalk trust rating turns red?  The horror!

Finally, if your reasoning is sound, it surely must apply to other touchstones of Bitcoin finance, like NeoBee?  Local finance enthusiasts tripped over each other to mock me and fling invectives when I suggested that Mr. Brewster was anything less than capable and sincere.

Finally, consider that remaining 20%--the reward side of teh risk equation.  That's millions of dollars.  Many in this thread would do more than cook the virtual, unaudited books of a virtual company to lay their hands on such sums Undecided
aahzmundus
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 644
Merit: 500


Invest & Earn: https://cloudthink.io


View Profile
June 02, 2014, 02:01:06 PM
 #20294

The idea that friedcat somehow unloaded his shares is absurd.  Anyone who noticed him unloading his shares would realize that in him unloading his shares, the value of those shares is near nill... with the liquidity on havelock, the thought of being able to sell a few thousand shares is absurd.  Being able to unload 200,000 shares?  Impossible...  And we would notice 200,000 shares moving. 

Chris_Sabian
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 896
Merit: 1001



View Profile
June 02, 2014, 02:19:39 PM
 #20295

The idea that friedcat somehow unloaded his shares is absurd.  Anyone who noticed him unloading his shares would realize that in him unloading his shares, the value of those shares is near nill... with the liquidity on havelock, the thought of being able to sell a few thousand shares is absurd.  Being able to unload 200,000 shares?  Impossible...  And we would notice 200,000 shares moving. 

If it was a direct sale, then how would you notice since the shareholder list is based off of dividends and there were 0 since March?
Groc
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 560
Merit: 250


Bounty manager (https://t.me/Gudwinn)


View Profile
June 02, 2014, 03:01:26 PM
 #20296

How is the price so low  Huh Time to load up on shares  Huh
El Cabron
Gnomo
VIP
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 840
Merit: 1000



View Profile
June 02, 2014, 03:03:57 PM
 #20297

How is the price so low  Huh Time to load up on shares  Huh

i have been doing the same

Sorry El Cabron, you are banned from posting or sending personal messages on this forum.
Trolling
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=622250.msg7030081#msg7030081
KarmaShark
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 595
Merit: 507



View Profile
June 02, 2014, 03:12:45 PM
 #20298

How is the price so low  Huh Time to load up on shares  Huh

i have been doing the same


Ditto.
Mabsark
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 826
Merit: 1004


View Profile
June 02, 2014, 03:13:29 PM
 #20299

Assuming projected batch sizes (May: 8.5 PH/s, June 33.5 PH/s) and assuming that the reported chip sales ($3,691,731) are the May batch and the Hardware in stock ($1,420,233+ $6,104,800=$7,525,033) is the June batch, we can conclude that AM achieved a price of: $0.43 for May and $0.22 for June.

The May batch was around 30 Ph/s given the value of 5,727,500 USD spent on wafers in the cash flow report. At 0.2 USD/Gh (friedcat said less than 0.2 though) you'd get a hashrate of 28,637,500 Gh/s (28.64 Ph/s).

Each wafer gives around 40 TH/s [url-https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=99497.msg5025133#msg5025133]according to Jutarul[/url]. If we assume a 30 Ph/s total hashrate then that gives 750 wafers. Some nice round numbers to work with:

750 wafers,
40 Th/s per wafer,
30 Ph/s total hashrate.

Given that we know 5,727,500 USD was spent on wafers and assuming the hashrate of those wafers to be 30 Ph/s, the cost per G would be 0.19092 USD/Gh. The price for chips in that batch is 0.49-0.99 USD/Gh depending on the size of the order. That's a total of between 14,700,000 and 29,7000,000 USD in chip sales for the May batch.



minerpumpkin
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 686
Merit: 500


A pumpkin mines 27 hours a night


View Profile
June 02, 2014, 03:24:44 PM
 #20300

Assuming projected batch sizes (May: 8.5 PH/s, June 33.5 PH/s) and assuming that the reported chip sales ($3,691,731) are the May batch and the Hardware in stock ($1,420,233+ $6,104,800=$7,525,033) is the June batch, we can conclude that AM achieved a price of: $0.43 for May and $0.22 for June.

The May batch was around 30 Ph/s given the value of 5,727,500 USD spent on wafers in the cash flow report. At 0.2 USD/Gh (friedcat said less than 0.2 though) you'd get a hashrate of 28,637,500 Gh/s (28.64 Ph/s).

Each wafer gives around 40 TH/s [url-https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=99497.msg5025133#msg5025133]according to Jutarul[/url]. If we assume a 30 Ph/s total hashrate then that gives 750 wafers. Some nice round numbers to work with:

750 wafers,
40 Th/s per wafer,
30 Ph/s total hashrate.

Given that we know 5,727,500 USD was spent on wafers and assuming the hashrate of those wafers to be 30 Ph/s, the cost per G would be 0.19092 USD/Gh. The price for chips in that batch is 0.49-0.99 USD/Gh depending on the size of the order. That's a total of between 14,700,000 and 29,7000,000 USD in chip sales for the May batch.

I'm sorry, please change May to April and June to May.
Okay, please explain the following issue at hand: The April (not May as I erroneously stated) batch had 8.5 PH/s. Why do we only have $3,691,731 in chip sales? This would translate (as mentioned earlier) to a price of $0.43/GH/s for May. We should have yielded more revenue.
- What makes you think we achieved a price of $0.50-$1.00/GH/s (we all know this used to be the target)
- How can we achieve a price exceeding $0.40 for June+ batches, when the market price (although preorder) is supposedly at $0.35 and we probably haven't even achieved that price for the earliest (April) batch?

I should have gotten into Bitcoin back in 1992...
Pages: « 1 ... 965 966 967 968 969 970 971 972 973 974 975 976 977 978 979 980 981 982 983 984 985 986 987 988 989 990 991 992 993 994 995 996 997 998 999 1000 1001 1002 1003 1004 1005 1006 1007 1008 1009 1010 1011 1012 1013 1014 [1015] 1016 1017 1018 1019 1020 1021 1022 1023 1024 1025 1026 1027 1028 1029 1030 1031 1032 1033 1034 1035 1036 1037 1038 1039 1040 1041 1042 1043 1044 1045 1046 1047 1048 1049 1050 1051 1052 1053 1054 1055 1056 1057 1058 1059 1060 1061 1062 1063 1064 1065 ... 1348 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!