ASICMINER: Entering the Future of ASIC Mining by Inventing It

[bitfair]

I believe discounts on purchasing mining gear for investors on the ASICs would be hugely unfair to those shareholders who are not interested in personally buying ASIC equipment. It would be like offering extra benefits for just a single group of investors at the expense of the rest.

However, if a shareholder purchases mining gear from the company, he will automatically get an indirect discount in the form of the dividends payed on the shares at a later date - part of which is profit from his own purchases. This will not favor any particular group of investors at the expense of another, and IMHO is a better approach.

And it also avoids all the complications of proving ownership, discounts proportional to the number of shares, etc., that have been distracting this thread for the last week or so...

[puffn]

If you own 10% of shares, and you purchase company equipment, you will receive a 10% discount of the profits of the sale anyway from your ownership. No other discount is needed.

In fact, if you sell at a discount especially at the beginning, you will not be maximizing revenue for the company. This sort of policy will make much more sense when demand slackens and the marginal board cannot be sold immediately.

[bitfair]

If you own 10% of shares, and you purchase company equipment, you will receive a 10% discount of the profits of the sale anyway from your ownership. No other discount is needed.

In fact, if you sell at a discount especially at the beginning, you will not be maximizing revenue for the company. This sort of policy will make much more sense when demand slackens and the marginal board cannot be sold immediately.

+1

[friedcat]

Maybe only friedcat sold shares for everyone that bids at least 0.1BTC for a share? Or a shareholder sold his shares because he knows he can still get more shares for 0.1BTC from friedcat? But i tip on friedcat because selling the shares for exactly 0.1BTC wouldnt make sense for a shareholder.

Anyway... i sent a pm to you, friedcat, on thursday but didnt get an answer while i see you online all the time.

Thanks!
Sebastian

I'm sorry for replying late. As I promised, timely reply will resume from today. And I will reply to all unanswered PMs and mails.

[niko]

I believe discounts on purchasing mining gear for investors on the ASICs would be hugely unfair to those shareholders who are not interested in personally buying ASIC equipment. It would be like offering extra benefits for just a single group of investors at the expense of the rest.

However, if a shareholder purchases mining gear from the company, he will automatically get an indirect discount in the form of the dividends payed on the shares at a later date - part of which is profit from his own purchases. This will not favor any particular group of investors at the expense of another, and IMHO is a better approach.

And it also avoids all the complications of proving ownership, discounts proportional to the number of shares, etc., that have been distracting this thread for the last week or so...

How about no discounts, but prioritized processing/shipping? Perhaps give shareholders a day or two of advantage to place orders before it opens for general public.

[friedcat]

Jutarul... i dont think that a investor was it. Because he sold exactly everything till 0.1BTC. That means he has to pay the fee, which means a small loss, and he couldnt sell all his shares this way because he could only sell to offers that are open. So i doubt its an investor that feared something. Friedcat seems to me still has the highest probability.

And why should friedcat start a motion about it? Thats not necessary. Because it was clearly stated that 200,000 shares will be sold to the public. And the already sold shares doesnt have a higher value when the rest isnt sold. Because the rest of the 200K are still owned by bitfountain and they would get the dividend for them like the rest of the shareholders of the 200K. Which means there isnt a motion needed because there is no devalue of the already sold shares.

I have sold no more shares after I announced the close of the IPO and the execution of all pending pre-orders. And that was more than 1 week ago.

If we will ever sell the rest ASICMINER shares, it would be after a fully appreciation of the price and we are in need of money to do large expansions. In this round, the fund raised is enough to cover the NRE cost and offer necessary backups, thus selling more is just diluting Bitfountain with not much benefits.

By the way, the number of the total ASICMINER shares in circulation (not reserved in the account ASICMINER) could be accessed by anyone without the need of paying small dividends or screenshots or any hassles:
https://glbse.com/api/quantity_trading/ASICMINER

[friedcat]

By the way, the number of the total ASICMINER shares in circulation (not reserved in the account ASICMINER) could be accessed by anyone without the need of paying small dividends or screenshots or any hassles:
https://glbse.com/api/quantity_trading/ASICMINER

It is necessary to mention that the number returned by the API doesn't have the manually maintained shares with private contracts included.

[matauc12]

By the way, the number of the total ASICMINER shares in circulation (not reserved in the account ASICMINER) could be accessed by anyone without the need of paying small dividends or screenshots or any hassles:
https://glbse.com/api/quantity_trading/ASICMINER

It is necessary to mention that the number returned by the API doesn't have the manually maintained shares with private contracts included.

which is pretty relevant so makes that api number useless, no?

[friedcat]

which is pretty relevant so makes that api number useless, no?

Because the manually maintained shares came from original sold one. It is for people who would prefer us than a third-party to do the book-keeping of shares and payments for them.

Therefore if the second round of fundraising do not happen, the number of shares in circulation queried by the API could only decrease.

[SebastianJu]

Out of interest... how many manually maintaned shares are there that arent handled in glbse?

[LazyOtto]

Out of interest... how many manually maintaned shares are there that arent handled in glbse?

I consider that a fair/reasonable question.

[friedcat]

Out of interest... how many manually maintaned shares are there that arent handled in glbse?

I consider that a fair/reasonable question.

Yes it is.

It's 5,600 shares from one investor.

It was originally handled by GLBSE, then returned back to us for manual maintaining.

[LazyOtto]

Thank you, friedcat.

Although now I'm a bit confused. (Either due to my poor reading or ignorance no doubt.)

I thought 30,000 shares were offered for general purchase through GLBSE and 170,000 were offered via bulk private/direct sales.

Did it turn out that a lot of those 'private/direct sales' were handled by using GLBSE as a facilitator?

[friedcat]

Thank you, friedcat.

Although now I'm a bit confused. (Either due to my poor reading or ignorance no doubt.)

I thought 30,000 shares were offered for general purchase through GLBSE and 170,000 were offered via bulk private/direct sales.

Did it turn out that a lot of those 'private/direct sales' were handled by using GLBSE as a facilitator?

Almost all of them are handled with GLBSE, except those 5,600 shares (also in GLBSE initially).

[Deprived]

Thank you, friedcat.

Although now I'm a bit confused. (Either due to my poor reading or ignorance no doubt.)

I thought 30,000 shares were offered for general purchase through GLBSE and 170,000 were offered via bulk private/direct sales.

Did it turn out that a lot of those 'private/direct sales' were handled by using GLBSE as a facilitator?

They were done using the GLBSE transfer shares mechanism rather than sold via an ask-wall on the market - that way the bonus shares could be transferred as well (would have been impossible to do it otherwise).  i.e. private buyers sent BTC then were transferred shares - without it ever showing up in market listings or market volume.

[LazyOtto]

Thank you friedcat and Deprived.

I appreciate your helping me to more fully understand how things were transacted.

[keystroke]

Hi everyone,

Is manufacturing on schedule to begin sometime this month?

[puffn]

Can you give a ballpark on the power requirements of the 50 ghash module? I want to know what kind of capital I need to invest to max my house power out.

[Jutarul]

Can you give a ballpark on the power requirements of the 50 ghash module?

friedcat may want to correct this with updated data, but based on their preliminary specs it'll be about 500 W (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=91173.msg1062854#msg1062854).

That's 50GH/s = 1.25 GH/s / chip * 40 chips.
and 40 chips * 13.3 W / chip = 532 W

Of course you'd also need to add power consumption of the periphery.

[friedcat]

Can you give a ballpark on the power requirements of the 50 ghash module?

friedcat may want to correct this with updated data, but based on their preliminary specs it'll be about 500 W (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=91173.msg1062854#msg1062854).

That's 50GH/s = 1.25 GH/s / chip * 40 chips.
and 40 chips * 13.3 W / chip = 532 W

Of course you'd also need to add power consumption of the periphery.

We have done a lot in the past month and the power consumption is already much less than it.

I'm now collecting the tech details for announcement.