ASICMINER: Entering the Future of ASIC Mining by Inventing It

[John (John K.)]

AM has an obligation to shareholders to maximize profits by mining at whichever pool is the fastest and most reliable.  Right now, that's BTC Guild.

AM has only begun their roll-out/ramp-up process.  They need to use Guild as a benchmark for testing and optimization, before introducing more variables into the equation.

AM should not lose focus and drift away from their core competencies by messing about with P2Pool or homegrown solutions.  Look at CoinLab to see why...   

Would it be a win-win for BTC Guild to share their code and and other details with ASICMINER to set up something as reliable for AM use?  With the slight modification that any guest can publicly see the hashrate from the miners (All AM in this case) -- this preserves the need for transparency, and relieves the pressure that BTC Guild is feeling when it is approaching 50% of total hashing power.

For craps sake... Just threaten btcguild with leaving unless they charge less. Not rocket science.
I am also amazed a company can design an asic but cannot setup a pool to mine at and even let others join for lower variance.

Well, the major reason why AM mined at an independent pool is to prove their hashing speed. If AM mined at their own pool, people can accuse friedcat of artificially inflating their hashrates by changing the site.

[fcmatt]

AM has an obligation to shareholders to maximize profits by mining at whichever pool is the fastest and most reliable.  Right now, that's BTC Guild.

AM has only begun their roll-out/ramp-up process.  They need to use Guild as a benchmark for testing and optimization, before introducing more variables into the equation.

AM should not lose focus and drift away from their core competencies by messing about with P2Pool or homegrown solutions.  Look at CoinLab to see why...   

Would it be a win-win for BTC Guild to share their code and and other details with ASICMINER to set up something as reliable for AM use?  With the slight modification that any guest can publicly see the hashrate from the miners (All AM in this case) -- this preserves the need for transparency, and relieves the pressure that BTC Guild is feeling when it is approaching 50% of total hashing power.

For craps sake... Just threaten btcguild with leaving unless they charge less. Not rocket science.
I am also amazed a company can design an asic but cannot setup a pool to mine at and even let others join for lower variance.

Well, the major reason why AM mined at an independent pool is to prove their hashing speed. If AM mined at their own pool, people can accuse friedcat of artificially inflating their hashrates by changing the site.

So u trust him enough to send ur btc but not to be honest enough to pay out proper divs?
And dont you mean deflate hash rate and skim from the top?
Anyway, you guys are losing min 3% which has added up to an amazing sum now. No reason for it. Tell btcguild 1% max or u leave.

[John (John K.)]

AM has an obligation to shareholders to maximize profits by mining at whichever pool is the fastest and most reliable.  Right now, that's BTC Guild.

AM has only begun their roll-out/ramp-up process.  They need to use Guild as a benchmark for testing and optimization, before introducing more variables into the equation.

AM should not lose focus and drift away from their core competencies by messing about with P2Pool or homegrown solutions.  Look at CoinLab to see why...   

Would it be a win-win for BTC Guild to share their code and and other details with ASICMINER to set up something as reliable for AM use?  With the slight modification that any guest can publicly see the hashrate from the miners (All AM in this case) -- this preserves the need for transparency, and relieves the pressure that BTC Guild is feeling when it is approaching 50% of total hashing power.

For craps sake... Just threaten btcguild with leaving unless they charge less. Not rocket science.
I am also amazed a company can design an asic but cannot setup a pool to mine at and even let others join for lower variance.

Well, the major reason why AM mined at an independent pool is to prove their hashing speed. If AM mined at their own pool, people can accuse friedcat of artificially inflating their hashrates by changing the site.

So u trust him enough to send ur btc but not to be honest enough to pay out proper divs?
And dont you mean deflate hash rate and skim from the top?
Anyway, you guys are losing min 3% which has added up to an amazing sum now. No reason for it. Tell btcguild 1% max or u leave.

Inflate, not deflate. People had qualms during AM's earlier deployments about the viability of their miners - mining at a public pool will instantly crush such claims. I trust friedcat here, but probably BTCGuild is the only pool strong enough to handle huge mining hashrates. I agree that friedcat should negotiate for better rates though.

[rudrigorc2]

AM has an obligation to shareholders to maximize profits by mining at whichever pool is the fastest and most reliable.  Right now, that's BTC Guild.

AM has only begun their roll-out/ramp-up process.  They need to use Guild as a benchmark for testing and optimization, before introducing more variables into the equation.

AM should not lose focus and drift away from their core competencies by messing about with P2Pool or homegrown solutions.  Look at CoinLab to see why...  

Would it be a win-win for BTC Guild to share their code and and other details with ASICMINER to set up something as reliable for AM use?  With the slight modification that any guest can publicly see the hashrate from the miners (All AM in this case) -- this preserves the need for transparency, and relieves the pressure that BTC Guild is feeling when it is approaching 50% of total hashing power.

For craps sake... Just threaten btcguild with leaving unless they charge less. Not rocket science.
I am also amazed a company can design an asic but cannot setup a pool to mine at and even let others join for lower variance.

Well, the major reason why AM mined at an independent pool is to prove their hashing speed. If AM mined at their own pool, people can accuse friedcat of artificially inflating their hashrates by changing the site.

well this only confirms that the told hashrate by friedcat operator and what is shown on btcguild is the same... the told hash can be anything we choose to believe cause we trust him.  asicminer own pool would be fantastic or reduction in fees.
not that im not satisfied with dividends, but isnt 5% in fees more or less like btcguild owning 20.000 shares ?

[237]

AM has an obligation to shareholders to maximize profits by mining at whichever pool is the fastest and most reliable.  Right now, that's BTC Guild.

AM has only begun their roll-out/ramp-up process.  They need to use Guild as a benchmark for testing and optimization, before introducing more variables into the equation.

AM should not lose focus and drift away from their core competencies by messing about with P2Pool or homegrown solutions.  Look at CoinLab to see why...  

Would it be a win-win for BTC Guild to share their code and and other details with ASICMINER to set up something as reliable for AM use?  With the slight modification that any guest can publicly see the hashrate from the miners (All AM in this case) -- this preserves the need for transparency, and relieves the pressure that BTC Guild is feeling when it is approaching 50% of total hashing power.

For craps sake... Just threaten btcguild with leaving unless they charge less. Not rocket science.
I am also amazed a company can design an asic but cannot setup a pool to mine at and even let others join for lower variance.

Well, the major reason why AM mined at an independent pool is to prove their hashing speed. If AM mined at their own pool, people can accuse friedcat of artificially inflating their hashrates by changing the site.

well this only confirms that the told hashrate by friedcat operator and what is shown on btcguild is the same... the told hash can be anything we choose to believe cause we trust him.  asicminer own pool would be fantastic or reduction in fees.
not that im not satisfied with dividends, but isnt 5% in fees more or less like btcguild owning 20.000 shares ?

How did you come up with 5% Fees?

1. It's 3% Fees
2. TX-Fees are payed out
3. Very realiable mining possible

So do your math again please.

[zeocrash]

I was just wondering if someone could explain why the price of the ASICs is so high.
People are paying the same price as an avalon batch 3 for something that's only 1/6 of the power.
Also apparently BFL jalapenos will be shipping in the next couple of weeks which have half the hashing power but cost like 20-30x less.

Is it just that ASICMiner are the only company with Asics ready to go now (Avalon having sold out and BFL doing their usual).

Don't get me wrong, i'm only too pleased people are paying so much for the asics, the price of my ASICminer-PT stock has shot up. I'm just curious as to why

[John (John K.)]

I was just wondering if someone could explain why the price of the ASICs is so high.
People are paying the same price as an avalon batch 3 for something that's only 1/6 of the power.
Also apparently BFL jalapenos will be shipping in the next couple of weeks which have half the hashing power but cost like 20-30x less.

Is it just that ASICMiner are the only company with Asics ready to go now (Avalon having sold out and BFL doing their usual).

Don't get me wrong, i'm only too pleased people are paying so much for the asics, the price of my ASICminer-PT stock has shot up. I'm just curious as to why

People are sick of waiting for their ASICS and having BFL stringing them along for so long.

[hammurabi]

I was just wondering if someone could explain why the price of the ASICs is so high.
People are paying the same price as an avalon batch 3 for something that's only 1/6 of the power.
Also apparently BFL jalapenos will be shipping in the next couple of weeks which have half the hashing power but cost like 20-30x less.

Is it just that ASICMiner are the only company with Asics ready to go now (Avalon having sold out and BFL doing their usual).

Don't get me wrong, i'm only too pleased people are paying so much for the asics, the price of my ASICminer-PT stock has shot up. I'm just curious as to why

Having the very first and legendary ASICs as trophy is the key to understanding
And this trophy is unique in the way that it will most likely pay for itself.

[Minor Miner]

I was just wondering if someone could explain why the price of the ASICs is so high.
People are paying the same price as an avalon batch 3 for something that's only 1/6 of the power.
Also apparently BFL jalapenos will be shipping in the next couple of weeks which have half the hashing power but cost like 20-30x less.
Is it just that ASICMiner are the only company with Asics ready to go now (Avalon having sold out and BFL doing their usual).
Don't get me wrong, i'm only too pleased people are paying so much for the asics, the price of my ASICminer-PT stock has shot up. I'm just curious as to why

People are sick of waiting for their ASICS and having BFL stringing them along for so long.

As the saying goes Incompetence is tantamount to fraud.    So when there is so much "fraud" or incompetence going on in asics, it only make sense that people pay a premium for something that is actually real.

[SebastianJu]

I was just wondering if someone could explain why the price of the ASICs is so high.
People are paying the same price as an avalon batch 3 for something that's only 1/6 of the power.

Avalons sold cheaper but later they sold for a multiple of that price on ebay. So avalon lost income. Asicminer doesnt want this so they auction it from the start.

[nebulus]

People just want to do business with AM. I think its a good thing.

[rudrigorc2]

How did you come up with 5% Fees?

1. It's 3% Fees
2. TX-Fees are payed out
3. Very realiable mining possible

So do your math again please.

You are correct we are not on PPS!  I appreciate you warned me about this.
I know we are supporting one of the most reliable pools, but as the thing gets big and big, solo mining sounds good too, , and with this hashrate variance sould not be a problem and imagine all the good luck we can get, at least a better deal regarding fees, like others said above.

[ex-trader]

The bigger ASICMiner gets the less variance it will have in earnings, therefore the less value being part of a pool provides, other than in terms of making the true production rate visible.

There is only one statistic that truly matters above all else and that is share of global hashrate. It doesn't matter what the actual difficulty level is provided that pool share can be maintained. That should be a big factor in how they decide between selling/operating any units that are produced.

[JimiQ84]

The bigger ASICMiner gets the less variance it will have in earnings, therefore the less value being part of a pool provides, other than in terms of making the true production rate visible.

There is only one statistic that truly matters above all else and that is share of global hashrate. It doesn't matter what the actual difficulty level is provided that pool share can be maintained. That should be a big factor in how they decide between selling/operating any units that are produced.

That's true. Actually, when AM deploys rest of batch 1, it's gonna be bigger than any pool except BTC Guild. So... what variance? It's gonna have smaller variance than pools!

[velacreations]

looks like share price is dropping back down... 

people selling while they can.

[wtfvanity]

looks like share price is dropping back down...  

people selling while they can.

Already sold

Might be the only time I've ever timed this crap right. Make up for some sdice losses.

[ex-trader]

Here's the simple maths of valuing ASICMiner:

There are 10Mn BTC unmined approximately.
ASIC Miner have 400,000 shares.
If ASIC Miner could mine 10% of all coins forever, then they mine 1Mn BTC for a total of 2.5 BTC/share (ie 1Mn/400k)
Assuming that an investor wanted a positive net return then they'd pay less than 2.5BTC to buy that income stream, probably nearer 1BTC, for a roughly 25% IRR over the long holding period.

The question therefore is what hash-share can ASICMiner hit and maintain, if they can go well over 10% then they're a good buy.

Note all the above is very simple, since it excludes running costs for ASICMiner (incl electricity), but also excludes other sources of income such as fees and profits from selling devices.

[Minor Miner]

Here's the simple maths of valuing ASICMiner:

There are 10Mn BTC unmined approximately.
ASIC Miner have 400,000 shares.
If ASIC Miner could mine 10% of all coins forever, then they mine 1Mn BTC for a total of 2.5 BTC/share (ie 1Mn/400k)
Assuming that an investor wanted a positive net return then they'd pay less than 2.5BTC to buy that income stream, probably nearer 1BTC, for a roughly 25% IRR over the long holding period.

The question therefore is what hash-share can ASICMiner hit and maintain, if they can go well over 10% then they're a good buy.

Note all the above is very simple, since it excludes running costs for ASICMiner (incl electricity), but also excludes other sources of income such as fees and profits from selling devices.

and what if they kept 30% of the mining share? 

[ex-trader]

and what if they kept 30% of the mining share? 

Then it's be worth at least 3BTC per share right now.

From the above you can also see that the theoretical value is capped at 5BTC on the basis of a max 50% share.

Of course if there's another use for ASICs, like mining another coin, or selling the computational power to another type of user (military/commercial/financial) then there's more upside.

[Minor Miner]

and what if they kept 30% of the mining share? 

Then it's be worth at least 3BTC per share right now.

From the above you can also see that the theoretical value is capped at 5BTC on the basis of a max 50% share.

Of course if there's another use for ASICs, like mining another coin, or selling the computational power to another type of user (military/commercial/financial) then there's more upside.

and what if they sold 50TH at 7BTC per GH?