Topic: 0.19 J/GH - CoinBau looks for investors in German mining technology (Read 22388 times)
December 23, 2015, 07:41:27 PM
Any update on theses chips ?
September 13, 2015, 04:56:40 AM
Are there any of this "Wolfblood" ASIC's in the wild?
September 10, 2015, 10:49:52 PM
Last post was ~54 weeks ago apologizing for not posting the week prior. Is this project dead?
Considering that BITMAIN has better efficiency I think it is safe to say that this project is dead.
Quote
Our target is holding 15% of the global hash rate in 2016
So funny!
September 10, 2015, 09:43:09 PM
Hello all,
@ensurance982: we did not post the last week because we were very busy keeping contact to interested investors. But we are still here and it seems it is time to respond.
There have been heavy discussions about the hasrate development. Fur111 predicts a hashrate development of up to 107'753 PH/s n 18 months. Do you know what this means? Let' summarize it in numbers:
- the prize per GH/s is now 0.87$ at the cheapes seller. But let's assume it goes down to 0.5$ per GH/s. Bringing 100'000 PH/s into the market would require 50 billion USD investment in the Bitcoin mining market. A market which currently brings 650 million USD per year. Bitfury raised 'only' 20 million USD. So, where do you find an investor who spends 50 billion USD which he will never see again? It is impossible for a market to grow exponentially without end, at some point it must end, the question is where. About this point we can discuss but not in such an unrealistic manner as 100'000 PH/s.
- the point of fees for mining is a legal one raising the hash rate above the limit we expect. BUT: we would benefit from this in the same way as all other miners would, too. So, this would have no negative influence on the investment.
The investment:
The
1. this is the dividend after 3 years. But one year later you have another 30 % dividend payout, and one year later again. So, over 5 years you get roughly 20% per year as dividend becoming better with every year.
2. you ingore the share value. With a turnover of 50 million USD and a profit of 20 million USD after 3 years the company is worth much much more than the initial value. So your real return rate is the rise in the share value AND the dividend payout resulting in a much higher return rate after 3 years.
Best regards
Markus
@ensurance982: we did not post the last week because we were very busy keeping contact to interested investors. But we are still here and it seems it is time to respond.
There have been heavy discussions about the hasrate development. Fur111 predicts a hashrate development of up to 107'753 PH/s n 18 months. Do you know what this means? Let' summarize it in numbers:
- the prize per GH/s is now 0.87$ at the cheapes seller. But let's assume it goes down to 0.5$ per GH/s. Bringing 100'000 PH/s into the market would require 50 billion USD investment in the Bitcoin mining market. A market which currently brings 650 million USD per year. Bitfury raised 'only' 20 million USD. So, where do you find an investor who spends 50 billion USD which he will never see again? It is impossible for a market to grow exponentially without end, at some point it must end, the question is where. About this point we can discuss but not in such an unrealistic manner as 100'000 PH/s.
- the point of fees for mining is a legal one raising the hash rate above the limit we expect. BUT: we would benefit from this in the same way as all other miners would, too. So, this would have no negative influence on the investment.
The investment:
The
Here's my opinion: 10% per year (30% after 3 years) isn't bad, but no one knows how much the investment will return. When a prospectus says the goal is 10%/yr, I assume it's more likely to be 5%/yr. Ie. I would like some margin of error for their claim, and at 5%/yr it's way too risky (I'd rather buy Intel or Berkshire Hathaway stock, which have roughly the same year-on-year return).
Intel has proven that it can get a 5-10% return per year on capital: http://ycharts.com/companies/INTC/pe_ratio
This company is simply claiming it can get 10%/year.
I'd much rather invest in an established company with a 5%/yr return than a new, unknown company who claims 10%/yr returns.
This is a quite simple look, you have forgotten a number of things:Intel has proven that it can get a 5-10% return per year on capital: http://ycharts.com/companies/INTC/pe_ratio
This company is simply claiming it can get 10%/year.
I'd much rather invest in an established company with a 5%/yr return than a new, unknown company who claims 10%/yr returns.
1. this is the dividend after 3 years. But one year later you have another 30 % dividend payout, and one year later again. So, over 5 years you get roughly 20% per year as dividend becoming better with every year.
2. you ingore the share value. With a turnover of 50 million USD and a profit of 20 million USD after 3 years the company is worth much much more than the initial value. So your real return rate is the rise in the share value AND the dividend payout resulting in a much higher return rate after 3 years.
Best regards
Markus
Last post was ~54 weeks ago apologizing for not posting the week prior. Is this project dead?
April 08, 2015, 06:48:51 AM
Giving this thread a little nudge. Getting back to some numbers...
Presuming the die stays the same size and the Gh/s/mm² figures are correct:
100Gh/s / 1.4Gh/s/mm² * 2.1Gh/s/mm² = 150Gh/s
Alternatively, if the 125Gh/s figure is correct:
125Gh/s / (100Gh/s / 1.4Gh/s/mm²) = 1.75Gh/mm²
If they don't correlate ... what would the correlated values be?
nominal mode 1.4 GH/mm² and 0.19 J/GH. [...] high performance mode realizing 2.1 GH/mm² at an energy consumption of about 0.29 J/GH.
If taking the J/Gh as authoritative, the other figures would seem incongruous.Presuming the die stays the same size and the Gh/s/mm² figures are correct:
100Gh/s / 1.4Gh/s/mm² * 2.1Gh/s/mm² = 150Gh/s
Alternatively, if the 125Gh/s figure is correct:
125Gh/s / (100Gh/s / 1.4Gh/s/mm²) = 1.75Gh/mm²
If they don't correlate ... what would the correlated values be?
I always thought this was an interesting venture, but always had the feeling that they didn't really factor in the growth of the hash rate, and maybe the declining BTC price of the last 15 months.
April 02, 2015, 03:40:52 PM
Giving this thread a little nudge. Getting back to some numbers...
Presuming the die stays the same size and the Gh/s/mm² figures are correct:
100Gh/s / 1.4Gh/s/mm² * 2.1Gh/s/mm² = 150Gh/s
Alternatively, if the 125Gh/s figure is correct:
125Gh/s / (100Gh/s / 1.4Gh/s/mm²) = 1.75Gh/mm²
If they don't correlate ... what would the correlated values be?
nominal mode 1.4 GH/mm² and 0.19 J/GH. [...] high performance mode realizing 2.1 GH/mm² at an energy consumption of about 0.29 J/GH.
If taking the J/Gh as authoritative, the other figures would seem incongruous.Presuming the die stays the same size and the Gh/s/mm² figures are correct:
100Gh/s / 1.4Gh/s/mm² * 2.1Gh/s/mm² = 150Gh/s
Alternatively, if the 125Gh/s figure is correct:
125Gh/s / (100Gh/s / 1.4Gh/s/mm²) = 1.75Gh/mm²
If they don't correlate ... what would the correlated values be?
January 26, 2015, 12:21:32 PM
Any news on the chips / miners??
Their website doesn't give much information.
thanks
Their website doesn't give much information.
thanks
Now that the btc price is on the rebound,
Any news on this company?? or their chip / miner???
Please define "rebound".
Bitcoin was about $600 when this thread started...
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/rebound
Should read:
Quote
Please define "rebound" wrt BTC rate
January 26, 2015, 11:36:12 AM
Any news on the chips / miners??
Their website doesn't give much information.
thanks
Their website doesn't give much information.
thanks
Now that the btc price is on the rebound,
Any news on this company?? or their chip / miner???
Please define "rebound".
Bitcoin was about $600 when this thread started...
January 14, 2015, 02:24:57 AM
Any news on the chips / miners??
Their website doesn't give much information.
thanks
Their website doesn't give much information.
thanks
IMHO all bitcoin mining projects are on hold for now, because of the low btc rate.
January 13, 2015, 08:49:10 PM
Any news on the chips / miners??
Their website doesn't give much information.
thanks
Their website doesn't give much information.
thanks
Are you joking?
November 04, 2014, 06:21:13 AM
i have not been to DD yet to visit their facility, but two guys from their team, who are also on their homepage with pictures, have been to our regular bitcoin meeting in Leipzig around two months ago.
they brought some of their costum asic chips and two fully equipped mining boards from their first MPW run to get an impression.
both guys were also really nice and answered all our questions.
if there is still public interst i can ask them for a visiting date and get back to this thread with a couple of pictures etc.
they brought some of their costum asic chips and two fully equipped mining boards from their first MPW run to get an impression.
both guys were also really nice and answered all our questions.
if there is still public interst i can ask them for a visiting date and get back to this thread with a couple of pictures etc.
November 04, 2014, 02:34:26 AM
so many seniors discussing.. short version, is this for real?
September 24, 2014, 05:48:49 PM
Markus, ignore the haters. You seem like you know a shitton about chip technology. The current/future state of bitcoins is very uncertain and hard to predict.. everyone "WANTS" stability, but most people rely on the fluctuations to make their money-- or buy in at a cheap rate and HOLD hoping for "moon". Well, I believe in you, and although I'm not a serious lender.. I wish you the best of luck on your endeavors. Perhaps the sea of trolls on BTCtalk isn't the best place to start. I do hope, in the future, our paths shall cross.. you're definitely on the right track!
September 01, 2014, 11:31:36 PM
Even if they have too many chips, the cost of the chip is likely much less then what they can get from mining on a NPV basis.
So you think they are selling hardware at no profit as a charity because they have extra chips?
There is an obvious reason for selling hardware instead of using it to mine. (profit)
There is an obvious reason for selling hardware instead of using it to mine. (profit)
I think you got it both wrong. Unless FC expected to sell out all the chips in 2 months then not starting mining 3 months ago is a big business and profit mistake. I am not saying that he should have done one thing. I am saying that he should've mined and sell hardware in the same time. Picking only one was a very big mistake.
jimmothy selling at no profit doesn't automatically means that you are doing charity work. It means that you are moving forward and looking into the future and trying to gain at least your investment in order to pursue other plans. Selling at no profit only occurs when selling at a profit isn't working as you expected. Having all/majority of liquidity invested in bare chips doesn't let you start/pay another chip design/mask. Getting your liquidity back does let you move on. Bitcoin and mining taught me to never put all my eggs in a basket and to decentralize! FC/AM did exactly the opposite.
September 01, 2014, 10:30:39 PM
Thinking that AM is the only one that can sell hardware at less than 50c and still make a profit would be incredibly naive (especially since that you know the AM case already).
I wouldn't go that far. I don't think they are making a profit out of that cost. They need to get rid of the 40nm chips asap.
Why would they sell hardware for no profit while they are trying to accumulate hardware for their massive datacenter?
Because they ordered too many chips?
The question that you should ask should be why would they sell hardware from the first place when they could mine with a part of it from the start?
So you think they are selling hardware at no profit as a charity because they have extra chips?
There is an obvious reason for selling hardware instead of using it to mine. (profit)
September 01, 2014, 10:22:42 PM
Thinking that AM is the only one that can sell hardware at less than 50c and still make a profit would be incredibly naive (especially since that you know the AM case already).
I wouldn't go that far. I don't think they are making a profit out of that cost. They need to get rid of the 40nm chips asap.
Why would they sell hardware for no profit while they are trying to accumulate hardware for their massive datacenter?
Because they ordered too many chips?
The question that you should ask should be why would they sell hardware from the first place when they could mine with a part of it from the start?
September 01, 2014, 10:19:50 PM
Thinking that AM is the only one that can sell hardware at less than 50c and still make a profit would be incredibly naive (especially since that you know the AM case already).
I wouldn't go that far. I don't think they are making a profit out of that cost. They need to get rid of the 40nm chips asap.
Why would they sell hardware for no profit while they are trying to accumulate hardware for their massive datacenter?
Because they ordered too many chips?
The question that you should ask should be why would they sell hardware from the first place when they could mine with a part of it from the start?
September 01, 2014, 05:17:10 PM
Thinking that AM is the only one that can sell hardware at less than 50c and still make a profit would be incredibly naive (especially since that you know the AM case already).
I wouldn't go that far. I don't think they are making a profit out of that cost. They need to get rid of the 40nm chips asap.
Why would they sell hardware for no profit while they are trying to accumulate hardware for their massive datacenter?
September 01, 2014, 04:53:54 PM
Thinking that AM is the only one that can sell hardware at less than 50c and still make a profit would be incredibly naive (especially since that you know the AM case already).
I wouldn't go that far. I don't think they are making a profit out of that cost. They need to get rid of the 40nm chips asap.
September 01, 2014, 04:02:39 PM
But let's assume it goes down to 0.5$ per GH/s (what is pretty close to the limit).
Could you elaborate on how you got to this number?Maybe with the current technology...even if AM broke that limit. I still see a Markus who has no idea what he is talking about...which makes me sad.
Yeah, simply assuming companies like AM achieve that price with 40nm node sizes, imagine what they'll do with node sizes of 20nm or even 14nm, maybe below that some day... And of course further optimizations... I'm certain we will see single digit cent costs in 2015.
Jump to: