ASICMINER: Entering the Future of ASIC Mining by Inventing It

[cs54]

As far as financial statements, perhaps those are coming this Friday (or more likely, Friday-ish)?

July 23, 2013 - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=99497.msg2788821#msg2788821
Oct 27, 2013 - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=99497.msg3422086#msg3422086
Jan 25, 2013 -  
Apr 25, 2013 -  

[Franktank]

As far as financial statements, perhaps those are coming this Friday (or more likely, Friday-ish)?

July 23, 2013 - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=99497.msg2788821#msg2788821
Oct 27, 2013 - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=99497.msg3422086#msg3422086
Jan 25, 2013 -  
Apr 25, 2013 -  

I notified Jutarul about this on the 15th and he said that he would consult friedcat about this. Now knowing that 850k chips are on the way, friedcat may be really busy for the rest of the month. Jutarul will post more about this once he gets more info.

[empoweoqwj]

4) When are the new chips expected to start mining in ASICMiner datacenters and what hashrate are you currently planning on deploying?
re 4) May-June for air cooling and June-July for immersion cooling. They are only capable of 3PH. Most should go franchising or as chips for other vendors' OEM products.

I dont understand why only 3PH, are we going back to the days of mining in a pool?

Because AM (a small organisation) don't want to focus any more on running mining farms, with all the complexities, risks and difficulties involved.

Instead they are focused on chip manufacturing.

Entirely sensible to me. Much more nimble strategy.

Sell millions of chips. Deliver big dividends for shareholders. Design and manufacture new chips. Repeat.

[jimmothy]

I agree that creating a pool should be the least of AMs priorities but there is really no better advertising than a goliath sized AM hardware only pool.

[necro_nemesis]

Playing the devils advocate. Why would KNC go to the lengths mining in which they did? I'm just finding the space issue being a little difficult to appreciate; particularly in the instances of air cooled operations. The cost to lease space has got to be a very small percentage of the cost of equipment being put inside; almost to the point one would think it's inconsequential.

I agree that creating a pool should be the least of AMs priorities but there is really no better advertising than a goliath sized AM hardware only pool.

Edit: Well here's an opportunity to make mining even more user friendly. The equipment could already be configured to mine off the pool directed at a worker assigned from the factory and registered in the pool. All one would need to do is register that worker to their account. Done!

I wouldn't close the door to other equipment. It's all revenue and just strengthens recognition of AM. Maybe this gen of miners they have aren't AM but I'm sure it would have them looking at them the next time they come around to buying. The site could even promote AM product while people peruse their way through their earnings.

[sngwinner]

I would like to know what capacity our current franchise partners have for bringing new chips online. Is it another 3ph, 30ph or more?  This would give us insight into what we can expect for future AM mining income. It looks like this will be dominated by franchising income.

[minerpumpkin]

I really, really don't see the point in selling shares now. Things are looking pretty bright and the first round of gen 3 dividends may literally come any day now! The price can only go higher if things aren't somehow derailing due to something completely unforeseen.
It may still take a couple of weeks but the chip capacities look really promising.

[Franktank]

I would like to know what capacity our current franchise partners have for bringing new chips online. Is it another 3ph, 30ph or more?  This would give us insight into what we can expect for future AM mining income. It looks like this will be dominated by franchising income.

Based off of this document (pg 9-10), here are the supposed specifications:

Example 2.4PH 1.2MW Mining Container (ASICMiner Gen3)

● 6 tanks per container, 200kW-240kW each
● 400 boards each tank, 500W per board, 2,400 boards total
● Equivalent to 600 4U boxes
● Shipping container footprint instead of 60 racks in high density facility
● 2-3PH/s at estimated hashrate (based on reports from China24)
● No thermal throttling, possible performance increase to be tested with actual hardware
● Fixed and predictable cost, no matter if fully or only partially populated

So for those who can afford/access 1.2 MW, they may be able to franchise with ASICMiner. Keep in mind that the only "franchisees" so far have been board members, though it's likely to expand to other parties via contract.

EDIT: Fixed link

[Franktank]

I really, really don't see the point in selling shares now. Things are looking pretty bright and the first round of gen 3 dividends may literally come any day now! The price can only go higher if things aren't somehow derailing due to something completely unforeseen.
It may still take a couple of weeks but the chip capacities look really promising.

Manipulation, it's their last chance to grab up cheap shares.

[rudi]

I would like to know what capacity our current franchise partners have for bringing new chips online. Is it another 3ph, 30ph or more?  This would give us insight into what we can expect for future AM mining income. It looks like this will be dominated by franchising income.

Based off of this document (pg 9-10), here are the supposed specifications:

Example 2.4PH 1.2MW Mining Container (ASICMiner Gen3)

● 6 tanks per container, 200kW-240kW each
● 400 boards each tank, 500W per board, 2,400 boards total
● Equivalent to 600 4U boxes
● Shipping container footprint instead of 60 racks in high density facility
● 2-3PH/s at estimated hashrate (based on reports from China24)
● No thermal throttling, possible performance increase to be tested with actual hardware
● Fixed and predictable cost, no matter if fully or only partially populated

So for those who can afford/access 1.2 MW, they may be able to franchise with ASICMiner. Keep in mind that the only "franchisees" so far have been board members, though it's likely to expand to other parties via contract.

Thanks, that's some really good info!

Also realized that:
1) the total hashrate of the bitcoin network is equivalent to 25 such shipping containers -> That's not a whole lot of space
2) you could power the whole network with 30MW -> that's a bit less than a fourth of a Boeing 747 according to Wikipedia. Also not that much.

[minerpumpkin]

Thanks, that's some really good info!

Also realized that:
1) the total hashrate of the bitcoin network is equivalent to 25 such shipping containers -> That's not a whole lot of space
2) you could power the whole network with 30MW -> that's a bit less than a fourth of a Boeing 747 according to Wikipedia. Also not that much.

Yeah, but the hashrate will, again, increase and AM/franchisees will have to work harder than ever to gain a decent amount of the network.

If we leave out the full nodes and 'true infrastructure', you could power the network with an AM Block Erupter USB. Hashrate is merely a limited good in order to establish a distributed consensus.

[spinoff]

The price can only go higher if things aren't somehow derailing due to something completely unforeseen.

well, if chips are being sold for $ which are then converted to BTC and distributed as dividends, the price of BTC going up (potentially) will have a downward force on dividends, thus on share price.

Infact, I remember reading here, last year, friedcat or someone else saying "miners make only sense to be priced in bitcoins", which makes sense since they will produce bitcoins... Why are they being sold for dollars now?

[CanaryInTheMine]

The price can only go higher if things aren't somehow derailing due to something completely unforeseen.

well, if chips are being sold for $ which are then converted to BTC and distributed as dividends, the price of BTC going up (potentially) will have a downward force on dividends, thus on share price.

Infact, I remember reading here, last year, friedcat or someone else saying "miners make only sense to be priced in bitcoins", which makes sense since they will produce bitcoins... Why are they being sold for dollars now?

Foundry takes dollars, not btc.

[Mabsark]

The price can only go higher if things aren't somehow derailing due to something completely unforeseen.

well, if chips are being sold for $ which are then converted to BTC and distributed as dividends, the price of BTC going up (potentially) will have a downward force on dividends, thus on share price.

Infact, I remember reading here, last year, friedcat or someone else saying "miners make only sense to be priced in bitcoins", which makes sense since they will produce bitcoins... Why are they being sold for dollars now?

AM isn't selling miners, it's selling chips and as Canary pointed out, it costs dollars to produce those chips

[smilence]

You two didn't understand Spinoff.

Foundry takes USD or BTC doesn't matter.

Here is the question:

The chips price is calculated by BTC or USD ?

like Spinoff said: "the price of BTC going up (potentially) will have a downward force on dividends"

If chips price is calculated by BTC, then no downward force on dividends.

 

[elmwar]

I believe you guys are assuming a BTC price per chip would stay constant.  June chips wouldn't produce as much as May's and would not be worth as much BTC.  Therefore price would have to lower and dividends would be affected.  However, the USD cost is the same from month to month.  If value of BTC goes up, there should be more orders and a premium price. 

I think FC felt it was easier to give a range in USD and tie that to production costs.  But, in the end it's 6 of one and half dozen of the other.

[kaerf]

I believe you guys are assuming a BTC price per chip would stay constant.  June chips wouldn't produce as much as May's and would not be worth as much BTC.  Therefore price would have to lower and dividends would be affected.  However, the USD cost is the same from month to month.  If value of BTC goes up, there should be more orders and a premium price. 

I think FC felt it was easier to give a range in USD and tie that to production costs.  But, in the end it's 6 of one and half dozen of the other.

That is essentially pricing in bitcoin. If the USD price per chip increases as the exchange rate increases then it is the same as pricing in bitcoin. However, customers don't like to see their prices going up, so psychologically pricing in bitcoin is better if the exchange rate goes up.

However, if priced in bitcoin and the exchange rate goes down, AM makes less USD. Therefore, it is safer for AM to price in USD since their costs are in USD. Of course if you price in bitcoin you could increase bitcion prices if the exchange rate drops, but then you face that psychological problem again.

[101111]

If the btc price moves significantly FC could reallocate chips to wherever it is most profitable: direct chip sales, franchising, or mining.

[jimmothy]

I believe you guys are assuming a BTC price per chip would stay constant.  June chips wouldn't produce as much as May's and would not be worth as much BTC.  Therefore price would have to lower and dividends would be affected.  However, the USD cost is the same from month to month.  If value of BTC goes up, there should be more orders and a premium price. 

I think FC felt it was easier to give a range in USD and tie that to production costs.  But, in the end it's 6 of one and half dozen of the other.

That is essentially pricing in bitcoin. If the USD price per chip increases as the exchange rate increases then it is the same as pricing in bitcoin. However, customers don't like to see their prices going up, so psychologically pricing in bitcoin is better if the exchange rate goes up.

However, if priced in bitcoin and the exchange rate goes down, AM makes less USD. Therefore, it is safer for AM to price in USD since their costs are in USD. Of course if you price in bitcoin you could increase bitcion prices if the exchange rate drops, but then you face that psychological problem again.

All this talk about pricing in btc vs usd is useless.

FC will sell the chips for exactly the max price people are willing to pay regardless of what currency is displayed.

What FC will never do (which many seem to think is an option) is pricing in btc without adjusting for btc value change.

"Psychologically" pricing in btc will return less profit than usd no matter which way the value of btc swings because it will either end up too cheap (value of btc down/less profit per sale) or too expensive (value of btc up/less sales)

[minerpumpkin]

Really, the US-$/BTC problem has been discussed and addressed by fc before (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=99497.msg5025133#msg5025133, 2))

fc simply prices the chips in US $ because that is a currency you can declare and compare some value over time. It also depends on the BTC price how much miners are willing to pay. Effectively this is something that's stabilizing itself. Furthermore, it is protecting fc from sheer price drops or increases. Hedging.

In the end a lower BTC price means increased dividends BTC wise in the short term.