ASICMINER: Entering the Future of ASIC Mining by Inventing It

[explorer]

...but a hugely successful gen4 could also mean a return to 1btc/shares.

More than the all-time ~0.60btc/share from the good days of mining when people were spending money recklessly? How did you got the 1btc/share number? How much revenue is needed in $ or BTC for that big big dividends?

10% of the network reward is about .0063 per share weekly IIRC, which would generally support a share price around 1.0.  Cost deductions offset by higher network % and/or sales profits could put it in the 1.0 - 1.5 range  if mining works out at all like friedcat has planned.  There's a few 'if's' in there, for sure, but thats my current view.

[Mabsark]

For the believers in "patience" here, those saying that AM will eventually deliver a profit, honest question:

What is your criteria for when you will no longer believe this? What evidence would make you cut your losses and run? A length of time that passes with no news or no dividend? A certain point in the share price? The failure of gen 4 to materialize in 2015? Or is it a matter of eternal unquestioning belief unless friedcat comes out and says that he is calling it quits?

Your questions don't really make much sense because AM delivered a profit long ago. Share price at IPO was 0.1 BTC/share and 0.60289304 BTC/share has been paid out in dividends.

[jdany]

I'm trying to remember back in 2013.

They were still selling Gen1 in July 13.
When did they start development on Gen2?
When did they pull the plug on it?

[Bonam]

Your questions don't really make much sense because AM delivered a profit long ago. Share price at IPO was 0.1 BTC/share and 0.60289304 BTC/share has been paid out in dividends.

And yet not everyone who is a current shareholder in AM bought at IPO. In fact I would guess that the majority of shares held today are not held by the same person who bought them at IPO. Nor does it even matter if they were. The fact that a company was successful in the past says nothing about its future success. Many companies have delivered spectacular profits, only to decline later. The relevant question for those individuals who hold shares today, or those considering buying or selling shares, is not what profits AM delivered in the past, but what profits it will deliver in the future.

[Rival]

The fact that a company was successful in the past says nothing about its future success. Many companies have delivered spectacular profits, only to decline later.

This is not strictly true, and it is regrettable that so many keep repeating this demonstrably untrue position. There are many conclusions that can be drawn from past performance. They guarantee nothing, however, they most certainly can be indicators that can help the investor make more informed decisions. Previous success is an indicator that the company at least has the capability to be successful, unlike a company with no track record which may not be capable of success at all and simply be a scam.

"If history teaches us nothing else, it is that we learn nothing from history"

[Rival]

Additionally, I would like to posit this simple formula for investing in a bitcoin company:

1) Is the management honest? Well over 99% have proven in the end to be scams. It appears FC is honest in that he did shower IPO purchasers with rewards. He has also delivered products, unlike most other IPO offerings. Rate them as you choose on this catagory, but I don't see anyone rating higher at this point.

2) Is the management competent?  Can they deliver on promises? Once again, FC appears to pass this test. While not every expectation is achieved, AM has assuredly produced massive amounts of product and brought them to market. You cannot give them 100% on this, but once again, what company that you can buy shares in did better?

3) What is the growth potential? I suppose the growth potential for any company is pretty high, but AM has bank, distribution channels, name recognition, and a much higher chance of actually achieving that growth than just about anyone else.

From a long term standpoint AM is probably the best game in town. For the short term, there are plenty of opportunities that may offer a higher short-term reward. However, with that short-term reward comes higher risk. AM is not ideal for the short-term pump-and-dump crowd, although many still try to play it that way.

That said, even though AM is in my opinion the best of breed for stocks, simply purchasing and holding bitcoins is probably the superior long-term investment choice at this time.

[Bonam]

Additionally, I would like to posit this simple formula for investing in a bitcoin company:

1) Is the management honest? Well over 99% have proven in the end to be scams. It appears FC is honest in that he did shower IPO purchasers with rewards. He has also delivered products, unlike most other IPO offerings. Rate them as you choose on this catagory, but I don't see anyone rating higher at this point.

2) Is the management competent?  Can they deliver on promises? Once again, FC appears to pass this test. While not every expectation is achieved, AM has assuredly produced massive amounts of product and brought them to market. You cannot give them 100% on this, but once again, what company that you can buy shares in did better?

3) What is the growth potential? I suppose the growth potential for any company is pretty high, but AM has bank, distribution channels, name recognition, and a much higher chance of actually achieving that growth than just about anyone else.

You do make some good points. Let me provide my thoughts on them:

1) Certainly, friedcat has demonstrated honesty over a fairly long term. No one can reasonably accuse AM of being a scam.

2) In regards to delivering on promises... the old standy was that friedcat always underpromises and overdelivers. That was, of course, completely true with his gen1 product and self-mining in 2013. However, it has not been true since then. Gen2 turned out to be a complete write-off and gen 3 came in sufficiently far below promised specifications and sufficiently late so as to not allow AM to make any real profit selling it, forcing them to try to go back into self-mining, a strategy that friedcat had hoped to abandon. For the past year, AM has generally not delivered on its promises. That, in my mind, significantly tarnishes its prior record of overdelivering.

This is further compounded by AM's longstanding failure when it comes to communication, customer service, advertising, online presence, etc. While one could perhaps overlook a deficiency in one area, it is clear that AM's technical team has been underperforming over the past year, just as have been its communication and customer service teams (if such teams even exist at all). Many have commented that friedcat could benefit from better management skills/training. I would suggest that evidence points to management not being very competent.

3) As for the growth potential... this is the bitcoin mining industry, one of the few industries in the world that actually has a very well defined cap to its growth, at least in the medium term (likely next few years) while transaction fees remain a small part of block rewards. Not only does that bound any potential growth, it also makes the competition even more fierce, since competing companies can't simply expand into new and bigger markets or create new demand where demand didn't exist before, rather, they all compete for the same fixed, predetermined, amount of mineable bitcoins.

[RoadStress]

...but a hugely successful gen4 could also mean a return to 1btc/shares.

More than the all-time ~0.60btc/share from the good days of mining when people were spending money recklessly? How did you got the 1btc/share number? How much revenue is needed in $ or BTC for that big big dividends?

10% of the network reward is about .0063 per share weekly IIRC, which would generally support a share price around 1.0.  Cost deductions offset by higher network % and/or sales profits could put it in the 1.0 - 1.5 range  if mining works out at all like friedcat has planned.  There's a few 'if's' in there, for sure, but thats my current view.

You got it wrong. It's not about the cost of 1 share. It's about the dividends! jommothy stated that a successful gen4 chip could bring in 1BTC per share in dividends form. I would like to know how he got to that number so I can see it's not just an attempt to raise the share price.

[dhenson]

You got it wrong. It's not about the cost of 1 share. It's about the dividends! jommothy stated that a successful gen4 chip could bring in 1BTC per share in dividends form. I would like to know how he got to that number so I can see it's not just an attempt to raise the share price.

1btc per share in dividends for Gen3 is ridiculous, admittedly.  However, If Gen3 hits 15% of the network and Gen 4 hits power/Gh estimates then it is entirely possible that 1btc/share market value is possible.

[RoadStress]

You got it wrong. It's not about the cost of 1 share. It's about the dividends! jommothy stated that a successful gen4 chip could bring in 1BTC per share in dividends form. I would like to know how he got to that number so I can see it's not just an attempt to raise the share price.

1btc per share in dividends for Gen3 is ridiculous, admittedly.  However, If Gen3 hits 15% of the network and Gen 4 hits power/Gh estimates then it is entirely possible that 1btc/share market value is possible.

No no. Not for Gen3. For Gen4! Gen3 will never hit 15%. Willing to bet some BTC on it!

I will ask you the same question that I've asked jimmothy: would you like to elaborate on the 1btc/share market value statement?

[dhenson]

No no. Not for Gen3. For Gen4! Gen3 will never hit 15%. Willing to bet some BTC on it!

I will ask you the same question that I've asked jimmothy: would you like to elaborate on the 1btc/share market value statement?

FC claimed that 40nm should have hit .35W/GH if they hadn't made mistakes (that they have now identified and corrected).  AM is the only publicly traded company producing mining chips.  Once 28nm Gen 4 is announced and power estimates are realized, you will wish you had invested at these insanely low prices.

I'm already betting on it.

[BitHub]

Can we just admit that this company once had a great run but its now completely over. We will never see this company ever do well like that again. This stock is now rated a trash stock. Hopefully you get the chance to get out before it completely collapses.

[dhenson]

Can we just admit that this company once had a great run but its now completely over. We will never see this company ever do well like that again. This stock is now rated a trash stock. Hopefully you get the chance to get out before it completely collapses.

Lol bithub, you show up every so often to bitch about AM/FC and then you disappear.  Nice to see you are still following along.

[lophie]

Additionally, I would like to posit this simple formula for investing in a bitcoin company:

1) Is the management honest? Well over 99% have proven in the end to be scams. It appears FC is honest in that he did shower IPO purchasers with rewards. He has also delivered products, unlike most other IPO offerings. Rate them as you choose on this catagory, but I don't see anyone rating higher at this point.

2) Is the management competent?  Can they deliver on promises? Once again, FC appears to pass this test. While not every expectation is achieved, AM has assuredly produced massive amounts of product and brought them to market. You cannot give them 100% on this, but once again, what company that you can buy shares in did better?

3) What is the growth potential? I suppose the growth potential for any company is pretty high, but AM has bank, distribution channels, name recognition, and a much higher chance of actually achieving that growth than just about anyone else.

From a long term standpoint AM is probably the best game in town. For the short term, there are plenty of opportunities that may offer a higher short-term reward. However, with that short-term reward comes higher risk. AM is not ideal for the short-term pump-and-dump crowd, although many still try to play it that way.

That said, even though AM is in my opinion the best of breed for stocks, simply purchasing and holding bitcoins is probably the superior long-term investment choice at this time.

To start being fair to AM since I have been lashing on them recently, All your points are very much valid and ASICMINER is really one of the best. We all know that this silence of the cat is bringing much much more profits and good business but it is with no doubt.... deafening.....

F.C. missed his own time line to pay divs..... I have a part in me desperately waiting for an update so it could vouch for AM for the rest of my mind that is screaming (AM is over).

How much exactly does one share worth to price on the market? The reason no one knows is because no one can really estimate at this point. Calculate all the information you want but we don't know when and if any will be given back as divs and at what rate, Which means all estimates are just playing with numbers to make us feel good, or bad.

[ThunderSheep]

...but a hugely successful gen4 could also mean a return to 1btc/shares.

More than the all-time ~0.60btc/share from the good days of mining when people were spending money recklessly? How did you got the 1btc/share number? How much revenue is needed in $ or BTC for that big big dividends?

10% of the network reward is about .0063 per share weekly IIRC, which would generally support a share price around 1.0.  Cost deductions offset by higher network % and/or sales profits could put it in the 1.0 - 1.5 range  if mining works out at all like friedcat has planned.  There's a few 'if's' in there, for sure, but thats my current view.

You got it wrong. It's not about the cost of 1 share. It's about the dividends! jommothy stated that a successful gen4 chip could bring in 1BTC per share in dividends form. I would like to know how he got to that number so I can see it's not just an attempt to raise the share price.

Dude, you should reread the post you quoted.  He said a return to 1BTC/share not a return of 1BTC/share.

[arnuschky]

3) As for the growth potential... this is the bitcoin mining industry, one of the few industries in the world that actually has a very well defined cap to its growth, at least in the medium term (likely next few years) while transaction fees remain a small part of block rewards. Not only does that bound any potential growth, it also makes the competition even more fierce, since competing companies can't simply expand into new and bigger markets or create new demand where demand didn't exist before, rather, they all compete for the same fixed, predetermined, amount of mineable bitcoins.

A very good point. Haven't considered that before.

[RoadStress]

No no. Not for Gen3. For Gen4! Gen3 will never hit 15%. Willing to bet some BTC on it!

I will ask you the same question that I've asked jimmothy: would you like to elaborate on the 1btc/share market value statement?

FC claimed that 40nm should have hit .35W/GH if they hadn't made mistakes (that they have now identified and corrected).  AM is the only publicly traded company producing mining chips.  Once 28nm Gen 4 is announced and power estimates are realized, you will wish you had invested at these insanely low prices.

I'm already betting on it.

Nicely argument

You got it wrong. It's not about the cost of 1 share. It's about the dividends! jommothy stated that a successful gen4 chip could bring in 1BTC per share in dividends form. I would like to know how he got to that number so I can see it's not just an attempt to raise the share price.

Dude, you should reread the post you quoted.  He said a return to 1BTC/share not a return of 1BTC/share.

My mistake then!

[Rival]

3) As for the growth potential... this is the bitcoin mining industry, one of the few industries in the world that actually has a very well defined cap to its growth, at least in the medium term (likely next few years) while transaction fees remain a small part of block rewards. Not only does that bound any potential growth, it also makes the competition even more fierce, since competing companies can't simply expand into new and bigger markets or create new demand where demand didn't exist before, rather, they all compete for the same fixed, predetermined, amount of mineable bitcoins.

A very good point. Haven't considered that before.

Although the bitcoin reward over any given time is limited, the amount of good and services that can be purchased with it is not. A dividend of .006 may not buy much at $10/btc. At $65,000/btc it is another story altogether. Like any other medium of exchange, it is the goods and services we desire, not the currency itself.

[webbrowser]

I think you know the counter to that argument - if you believe bitcoin will go to the moon, just hodl bitcoin.

As for whether ASICMINER will ever return 0.17 btc over the rest of its lifetime, that's a bet that havelock traders are currently split on.

[triptamine]

As for whether ASICMINER will ever return 0.17 btc over the rest of its lifetime, that's a bet that havelock traders are currently split on.

Which makes the question:

Does one believe that AM's total dividend payments will be > BTC 68k (the amount above 68k representing ones desired ROI) within ones desired period of investment return?

If they, last year alone, paid out BTC 240k in dividends, this doesn't appear to be -wildly implausible- even considering stiffer competition over hash rate. The time scale is key here.

As another example: To justify a price of BTC 1 per share, AM needs to pay out > BTC 400k (the amount above 400k again representing ones desired ROI) in dividends within ones desired period of investment return, whatever it is. Whether or not one deems this scenario to be plausible is up to each individual shareholder, and in a rational market (which this is clearly not), this will determine the share price.

(obviously this doesn't account for any tradable assets accumulated by the company, but it's a simple and way of looking at AM share valuation)