necro_nemesis
|
|
March 06, 2014, 02:14:42 AM |
|
What gen would have been dropped into Allied Controls immersion facility?
|
|
|
|
shawshankinmate37927
|
|
March 06, 2014, 02:41:33 AM |
|
What gen would have been dropped into Allied Controls immersion facility?
Gen1 chips. That's all that AM has produced up to now. Gen2 was skipped.
|
"It is well enough that people of the nation do not understand our banking and monetary system, for if they did, I believe there would be a revolution before tomorrow morning." - Henry Ford
|
|
|
Lloydie
|
|
March 06, 2014, 03:06:07 AM |
|
Would anyone like to provide a guesstimate of AM's percentage of total market hashrate with gen3 chips @ 0.5w/ghs over the next 12 months? thanks.
Ok modify the above query to: what percentage of total bitcoin hashrate will be using AM's chips within 12 months?
|
|
|
|
jimmothy
|
|
March 06, 2014, 03:20:26 AM |
|
Would anyone like to provide a guesstimate of AM's percentage of total market hashrate with gen3 chips @ 0.5w/ghs over the next 12 months? thanks.
Ok modify the above query to: what percentage of total bitcoin hashrate will be using AM's chips within 12 months? 25-75% Assuming chips meet estimated specs. Competition will not be able to compete with the price and efficiency. As of now I think knc will be the biggest competitor. Bitfury and bitmain next gen are looking a bit lacking.
|
|
|
|
aahzmundus
|
|
March 06, 2014, 03:52:55 AM |
|
Nearly every other ASIC manufacturer has a horrible track record. KNC is mostly positive but they are branching out and offering wallet software and is now working with newspapers in Chicago. Asicminer is lean, focused, and has a proven track record. We are in for good times.
|
|
|
|
Lloydie
|
|
March 06, 2014, 04:10:15 AM |
|
Has anyone done ROI calcs on chip selling at current price versus outright mining?
|
|
|
|
jimmothy
|
|
March 06, 2014, 04:19:51 AM |
|
Has anyone done ROI calcs on chip selling at current price versus outright mining?
Yes, that person would be friedcat.
|
|
|
|
Chris_Sabian
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 896
Merit: 1001
|
|
March 06, 2014, 05:03:01 AM |
|
KnC has taped-out their new chips: https://www.kncminer.com/news/news-78I think there is going to be 30-40% increases in difficulty in the coming months. The 3-4% increase right now a nice bonus before the storm.
|
|
|
|
Lloydie
|
|
March 06, 2014, 05:12:48 AM |
|
KnC neptune at around 1.46 w/ghs. Quite far off.
|
|
|
|
|
chriswilmer
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1008
Merit: 1000
|
|
March 06, 2014, 06:02:13 AM |
|
I'm dying of suspense here.
|
|
|
|
rudi
|
|
March 06, 2014, 08:19:45 AM |
|
I think there is going to be 30-40% increases in difficulty in the coming months. The 3-4% increase right now a nice bonus before the storm.
Which 3-4% increase "right now"? See the last two plots here http://bitcoin.sipa.be/ The daily growth rate has been steadily falling since November last year. It really looks like the explosion in network difficulty is seriously slowing down. Not so long ago we were speculating the total network hashrate could quickly reach 1000PH/s. Now we're at 30PH/s and even 100PH/s seem far off. Friedcat indicated in the "Chinese girl interview" that he would deploy/sell at least a few hundred PH/s. So: What percentage of total bitcoin hashrate will be using AM's chips within 12 months? More than 50% does not seem unreasonable.
|
|
|
|
Lloydie
|
|
March 06, 2014, 09:16:07 AM |
|
I think there is going to be 30-40% increases in difficulty in the coming months. The 3-4% increase right now a nice bonus before the storm.
Which 3-4% increase "right now"? See the last two plots here http://bitcoin.sipa.be/ The daily growth rate has been steadily falling since November last year. It really looks like the explosion in network difficulty is seriously slowing down. Not so long ago we were speculating the total network hashrate could quickly reach 1000PH/s. Now we're at 30PH/s and even 100PH/s seem far off. Friedcat indicated in the "Chinese girl interview" that he would deploy/sell at least a few hundred PH/s. So: What percentage of total bitcoin hashrate will be using AM's chips within 12 months? More than 50% does not seem unreasonable. Assuming selling chip ROI >= mining ROI (else FC should't be selling chips) then 50% of total hashrate = 650,000 coins = more than 1 Btc per share
|
|
|
|
Lohoris
|
|
March 06, 2014, 11:17:07 AM |
|
You'll also recall that I always stated that pricing AM100 at 95% of AM1 was a poor method.
While you have proven to be a good manager and never stole anything so far AFAIK, which is something I praise, I fail to see how can you honestly repeat this nonsense. AM100 pays 5% less than AM1, its price should be 5% less than AM1. Simple math. Denying math will get you nowhere. AM1 other pro is that it can be converted to direct shares, while AM100 cannot. AM100 only pro is that since it's a smaller denomination, you can buy it with leftover change. But holding more than 100 of them makes no sense in any situation.
|
|
|
|
minerpumpkin
|
|
March 06, 2014, 01:30:37 PM |
|
I keep on wondering how many shares all our 'new' friends around here managed to acquire. The shares have been, and still are, rather cheap right now. BUT, the BTC price rose quite a bit 4 months ago and now it's a lot more expensive to buy shares at about 400$. This is even almost more expensive than when AM was over 4 BTC and BTC at about 100$. Of course, people buying at IPO prices only paid 1-2$. Keep in mind, I don't want to do the old "let's price everything in US-$", I rather lay out, why it is more difficult acquiring AM shares in respect of the FIAT you have to invest.
|
I should have gotten into Bitcoin back in 1992...
|
|
|
nycgoat
Member
Offline
Activity: 117
Merit: 10
|
|
March 06, 2014, 02:01:56 PM |
|
You'll also recall that I always stated that pricing AM100 at 95% of AM1 was a poor method.
While you have proven to be a good manager and never stole anything so far AFAIK, which is something I praise, I fail to see how can you honestly repeat this nonsense. AM100 pays 5% less than AM1, its price should be 5% less than AM1. Simple math. Denying math will get you nowhere. AM1 other pro is that it can be converted to direct shares, while AM100 cannot. AM100 only pro is that since it's a smaller denomination, you can buy it with leftover change. But holding more than 100 of them makes no sense in any situation. AM100 makes more sense if you are looking to trade the shares IMO. We have basically seen share price track the dividend since inception, the AM100 shares have offered a great trading vehicle.
|
|
|
|
necro_nemesis
|
|
March 06, 2014, 03:57:04 PM |
|
IMHO AM100 is the better asset due to liquidity regardless of the trival 5%. There aren't preferred shares and there are no additional rights to the AM1 shares other than the privelage of sitting in on the board to get first hand knowledge should you be one of the select high percentage owners.
Liquidity is why stock are split. It's to allow movement of shares without drastically affecting the price of the asset.
Unless your thinking this is going to be the next Birkshire Hathaway ala Buffet to buy and hold for ever IMHO the benefit is trading in the fractional shares.
|
|
|
|
elmwar
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 33
Merit: 0
|
|
March 06, 2014, 04:52:45 PM |
|
There are only 3,205 (full share) units of AM100 while AM1 has 19,679. This should be taken into account when determining liquidity. You may not be able to buy or sell the same value of AM100 when you want.
|
|
|
|
|
necro_nemesis
|
|
March 06, 2014, 05:18:33 PM |
|
The apportionment in terms of distribution of equity is higher in the full share but the units in trade remain 320500 to 19679. The volume in either is relatively low for a tech stock with a significant spread on the order book only to be filled with annoying bots further affecting the spread.
|
|
|
|
|