Topic: [Active Mining] The UNofficial Active Mining Discussion Thread [UNmoderated] - page 50. (Read 75954 times)

January 13, 2014, is as good a date as any -- what have you got against it?

Like, 'if I go down, I'm taking you with me?'; who knows?

Also, can't your lazy-ass update the graphic? Can't exactly be prophetic when you have January 13 and February 13.

Are you suggesting something more sinister?

An antidote to the sour taste, here's Tink with her market update:

14:27 (S) 1589 @ 0.00180000 ACTIVEMINING
Bitfunder: 0.0005230

No, that wouldn't explain the correlation. (note: not saying there is causation here, just a small correlation.)

If you don't give a hoot about current trends, what are you doing in this thread?  I assumed your questions were sincere.  I was wrong.  Nice troll, bro.

Seems prophetic now, don't it?

BTCT: 14:27 (S) 1589 @ 0.00180000 ACTIVEMINING
Bitfunder:  Bitdust.

If you think its a better idea to buy shares after they went up and sell shares after they went down, I guess Im not interest in your investment advice.

I dont give a hoot about the current trend, Im interested in finding out about the fundamentals.

I'm not comparing them, as i tried to make clear in my last response.  I do not know enough about Labcoin.  As long as we agree that both Labcoin and ActM are risky investments, everything i said stands.


Edit after posting chart:  If you are convinced that ActM is a good bet, go for it. I would like to point out that if you haven't "invested" before making your post, you're about *twice as rich as you would have been*.

--Newsflash:



will update.  Edit: If talking to me has saved you from investing within the last 15 minutes, consider yourself *twice as rich*

I just cant see how you can compare them. Labcoin has no credibility, no proven trackrecord, nothing. Pictures of PCBs that couldnt possibly be functional PCBs.

Now IM not comparing that to AM, I dont know shit about the people behind AM either, but IM comparing it with easic and their public claims. What are the odds labcoin would bring a working asic to market and easic would fail? Zero. easic is using this chip to show off their brand new unannounced nextreme3 process. You can bet they will do anything to make it work!


No its not.  First proof of that is BFL. Second proof is Avalon.
Moreover, whatever AM sells as mining devices is icing on the cake, just mining themselves with this hardware at cost should give them a pretty darn nice ROI if they can deploy it before the end of the year.

So the only real risk I see, is turning working chips in to working miners. I guess BFL has proven how badly you can screw that up, so thats where Im looking for more info.

First, let's dispatch the accusations -- I started this thread, i can't possibly be trolling it.
As far as Labcoin, i simply do not know enough to weigh in.  I try to limit my comments to things that i'm sure about.

Perhaps people are waking up to the reality of investing in virtual entities, and to the notion that the wording on the exchanges claiming that nothing is real or verified, and the trades have no more footing in reality than the fairytales you used to hear as a child is more than just wording, but a grim fact?

I simply don't know enough about Labcoin to answer your first question, but i'll give the second one a shot.

I'm sure you agree that both Labcoin and ActM are risky bets, so the payoff -- hitting the jackpot -- has to be spectacular.  Unfortunately, for ActM, it is not.  If all the fears & concerns about ActM prove to be false and the chips are produced as promised, the company has proved itself absolutely incapable of managing PR & marketing, even when ready-made, turnkey solutions were presented to Kenneth *at zero cost as the advisory board quit in disgust*.  This is a hyper-competitive field, and bad marketing (which is unlikely to change) is as crippling as bad engineering.

But you started this thread to troll ActM. Where's your labcoin troll thread? Or your posts on their main thread?

For a while I've been concerned that whenever Lab drops or rises, so does ActM, and there's really no reason why that I can see..

First, let's dispatch the accusations -- I started this thread, i can't possibly be trolling it.
As far as Labcoin, i simply do not know enough to weigh in.  I try to limit my comments to things that i'm sure about.

Thats one reason Im interested. People seem to think activemining and labcoin are like the same, and are discovering one is an obvious scam and assuming the other one will therefore be one too.

I see no resemblance whatsoever, unless anyone wants to think a company like easic is in on it too.

Another reason people seem to vote down AM/VMC is because their list prices are too high. Well they are to high, but so what, all those 28nm prices are too high. As a shareholder thats a good thing and moreover they can just mine with anything unsold at cost.

Crumbs, you seem obsessed with Active Mining. Why don't you ever troll Labcoin.

There's a blowout sale going on right now, both exchanges.  Go!

Im only just looking in to this company, so bear with me.


Today even 65nm chips provide sellers a gigantic markup. Having "bad" 28nm available at cost before almost anyone else cant be a bad thing.


True; but you can make educated guesses based on this chart:
http://www.easic.com/Spatr7ve/website-wp1/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/Managing-Risk-and-Cost-Nextreme-NEW-ASIC-to-Standard-Cell-ASIC-Migration-v056.jpg

Granted its for the previous generation, but should give us some idea. The point were traditional cell based asics become cheaper than easic's nextreme is between 300 and 900K units according to them. Lets put it at 500K for arguments sake. That would mean 500K chips from AM would cost about the same as it would cost cointerra/KNC etc (although KNC is likely using a similar process) including NRE.

500K is a pretty decent amount that represents many millions of dollars in hardware sales (and/or mining revenue).


I could use some help here. What is their market cap? On btct I see 7,531. Is that right? ~$1M doesnt seem all that much to me. The asic design and masksets cost more and are worth a whole lot more if they can bring this to market this year.


Fair point. OTOH, this approach does have it advantages too, the work is more likely to be done by people who have experience and a clue, even if you have to pay them a premium. Given the nature of this market, paying a premium for hiring people's skill is not something to be avoided IMO.


ITs addressed in their faq, and seems like a reasonable/honest mistake.


Anyway, Im seriously considering investing in this.  I just want to find out a little more on how they intend to turn chips in to miners. Who is doing the PCBs, the software etc?

I agree, but this only reinforces the overall feel that this company is doing its best (no matter how innocently and artlessly) to obviate any chance of legal recourse for its shareholders if ActM goes belly-up.  

Edit:  AAaand a 52k dump on Bitfunder @.001000

They will be 0Gh/s at 0W/Gh since they will fail. This gets better every day. Shares move way down and kslaughter closes the main/original thread so he can open a new Moderated one. Very very funny!