Topic: [ActiveMining] The Official Active Mining Discussion Thread [Self-Moderated] - page 227. (Read 771288 times)

The only thing that bothers me is NOT that Ken was supposed to have share verification done, but that he has not come online to acknowledge that he is late, and to tell us his new expected deadline.  THAT is something to worry about... it shows that he does not care about breaking promises, and it just seems like "too much trouble" to pop his head in and say "hi, sorry for being late""

Ken can't be a one-man show in this operation... he has to have a few knowledgeable engineers/programmers, who are not his nephew and niece, working with him. eASIC had to have at least seen the FPGA prototype for the ASIC actually functioning, etc. before agreeing to this contract. Consider the statement from eASIC:

That is past tense... suggesting they had already seen a working prototype running on FPGA.

You are right Crumbs. But I don't think 1 million USD is a *enough* (In your sense of the word) to toss at eAsic to have them waste time doing something for someone they think is not qualified enough to not ruin their reputation; which is kind of at stake here. If Ken comes on here and screws up and finds a way to make it look like eAsic screwed up (Don't waste time trying to figure out how he can do this as I would not like to start another conversation about this, lets just assume this event happens), then eAsic could lose a potential market as ASIC's are on the rise in the BTC community.

I have experience selling brands and I know it's not just about money to get approval.  The application process can be very tough.  They want to know you're not going to go sell their shit on Ebay to drive down the price (they have dedicated people for that, if they need to get rid of product quick).  This includes other auctions as well, but they also want to know you're trustworthy because you need at least some ability to follow through with being the middle force of a warranty claim if somebody returns their item to you.  They also need to know you have previous retail experience, because if you don't, then you're more likely to hurt their reputation and product due to the first 2 reasons I mentioned.  There is a lot of other reasons too why the manufacturer won't just choose anybody -- including how they handle valuable information which may be useful to competitors.  A lot of applications have even set out the rule that you need a brick and mortar store, so you can't just go sell your favorite brands online.   Oh my god, the list goes on..

Sorry, crumbs you lose again.  Hard.

Actually many chain stores/restaurants want you to have far more than the necessary amount of cash to pay for the costs of opening the store. They also want you to have experience in owning and managing such a store along with the desire to open more than one. As it is cheaper and more efficient to have each person who is willing to open said store be able to afford to open more than one (as they will have less people to communicate with, support and train).

Well if we are going to use the same analogy, it would be like Ken going to Apple, and trying to purchase a million dollars worth of iPhones. In this case he would need to be a distributor. No random person can go up to Apple and do that, they would need to go through a distributor, a distributor which has gone through a verification process where they need to meet certain requirements.

I'm no wiz here, and it is probably a dumb move to trust the company I've invested in due to their relationship with another company. but I'm just saying I'm more confident in Active Mining since they are working with eASIC compared to another company.

Try opening a store selling apple products by walking into their headquarters and throwing cash at them.

i meant info regarding verification of shares, which was supposed to be done by the end of last week. 

You can look at Ken's silence in a couple ways... either he has no positive way to answer the questions or he would prefer that information to remain a mystery and is working hard on getting things hashing.

Has anyone attempted a burnt offering?

I understand the difference, though it was more of a semantic error on my part, so I've edited my post. Companies like eASIC do not take in just any company that wants to work with them, regardless of capital. They qualify companies to make sure they are a good fit. When they work with the likes of Seagate and other big players, qualifying companies is not optional, but a required process. This does not mean success is ever guaranteed, but it sure makes me more confident in the process, and progress.

Damn Vigil you are lucky.  In the last 3 days you are the only one worthy enough to feel the warm embrace of our great leader.  Perhaps tomorrow he will appear from the clouds and speak to us mere humans

I have a better idea. How about you provide me access to your email address associated with your Active Mining shares. I will then transfer the shares once they become active on crypto-trade.com to my account, and then I will transfer you the 1128 bitcoin.

Of course, this will be done without escrow, as any trusted transfer should.

Do you believe in life after Ken?...by Share?

Wait, wait, wait...here's a better one.

Hey diddle diddle, Ken had a fiddle,
With share holders with brains made of mash,
All the trolls laughed and had such fun,
While Ken ran away with all the cash.

I love it. I think you guys are too far gone.

What, like with fancy numbers you pulled out of your ass? We just need to trust Ken. He made promises, promises he won't break.

...I would continue this cause it's just too much fun, but I'm kidding man, just being sarcastic. This thread is a joke and I know you're just trying to bring some logic into it, but at this point I think it's just useless. Pankkake is right, this has gotten baddddd. Ken should not be linking to this thread as the official discussion on Active Mining, it's just too damn embarrassing.

EDIT: Not saying I don't trust Ken, cause I do, regardless of his poor PR moves in the past. Just saying this thread is a joke and should not be taken seriously, at all.

How about disputing the argument with some logic and facts?

Isn't it obvious VE? He just wants cheap shares. Don't sell your shares to this FUDster guys, make him pay.

mabstark that was a lot of effort just to tell us that!  You really sat down and gave those fingers a workout.  Wow... If anything, putting that much time into posting that actually puts upward pressure on the stock price.  After all, who would sacrifice that much of themselves if they didint have interest and motives

The samples were delivered according to Ken and had to be redesigned (BFL comes to mind, how long did it take them?).

Low volume production has now gone from December to February.
Normal volume production has now gone to late April/early May.

There'll probably be 1-2 thousand sample chips, enough to build a 24 Th/s miner. As previously shown, that'll provide about 80 Satoshis per share per day, with a 2.5% reduction per day.

Low volume production will probably be about 100,000 chips. With each chip capable of 16 Gh/s, that's 1.6 Ph/s, which will take a fair bit of time to build miners out of. That's about 67 x 24 Th/s miners. Let's be generous and say they'll finish bringing that hash power online when normal volume production commences beginning of May. With 50% mining that'd give them 0.8 Ph/s. The current 30 day rate of increase for the network is 78%, giving a network hash rate of around 116.2 Ph/s at the beginning of May, which would give ActM about 0.7% of the network hash rate.

With 1% giving 504 BTC, 0.7% would provide 352.8 BTC per round or 25.2 BTC per day. Distributed over 10 million shares, that's 252 Satoshis per share per day, with a 2.5% reduction per day.

It's not looking good for ActM share holders.   They've waited all this time and they're going to get less dust than the Avalons gave them.