Can we trade jump off this burning ship soon?
Topic: [ActiveMining] The Official Active Mining Discussion Thread [Self-Moderated] - page 28. (Read 771276 times)
February 06, 2014, 09:08:01 PM
February 06, 2014, 08:26:32 PM
Can we trade soon?
February 06, 2014, 08:06:23 PM
I would make the decision; however, taking in to account all the factors including the engineering teams input. I wouldn't worry to much about the 20nm, as all I said was that we were looking into it.
No probs, I'm not against anything that pushes us forwards (at some point we will need to go to 20nm) but just want to be sure we are making the right decisions and are not putting ourselves in a position of being 100% reliant on an unproven technology which may yet encounter industry-wide delays.
February 06, 2014, 07:53:33 PM
Thanks Ken, this will reassure many shareholders.
February 06, 2014, 07:42:55 PM
Sure, we are just looking into it. We would only go to that if it makes since, which means GH/s, Power, and time to market. With time to market being the most important. Yes, I try to do that, but sometime when we are working on deals I forget. I been thinking about a professional PR person; however, it is not on the top of my list of things to do. As far as eASIC, they are working with us to get the most out of our 28nm custom chip.
Ken, will your engineering team be making the final decision on whether we go with a 28nm or a 20nm? I see this as an engineering issue first and foremost. We need to be sure that a 20nm chip is capable of being designed and manufactured in good time and that it will show definite benefits over a 28nm chip. The problem is 20nm tech is an incredibly complex undertaking and is still an unproven technology from what I've read. You need to make sure we are following not just say TSMC's predictions about chip timelines and specs, but also independent expert advice too (some of which questions the benifits of 20nm over 28nm). Thanks.
I would make the decision; however, taking in to account all the factors including the engineering teams input. I wouldn't worry to much about the 20nm, as all I said was that we were looking into it.
February 06, 2014, 07:26:36 PM
Also Ken, can you give me access and moderator privileges to this thread please?
I would be happy to quit my day job and spend 24 hours a day deleting the trolls in here. I would be totally biased and delete anyone who spoke out of turn and would find it very therapeutic indeed.
I would be happy to quit my day job and spend 24 hours a day deleting the trolls in here. I would be totally biased and delete anyone who spoke out of turn and would find it very therapeutic indeed.
Yes, and you may wear the hall monitor sash
February 06, 2014, 07:25:31 PM
Sure, we are just looking into it. We would only go to that if it makes since, which means GH/s, Power, and time to market. With time to market being the most important. Yes, I try to do that, but sometime when we are working on deals I forget. I been thinking about a professional PR person; however, it is not on the top of my list of things to do. As far as eASIC, they are working with us to get the most out of our 28nm custom chip.
Ken, will your engineering team be making the final decision on whether we go with a 28nm or a 20nm? I see this as an engineering issue first and foremost. We need to be sure that a 20nm chip is capable of being designed and manufactured in good time and that it will show definite benefits over a 28nm chip. The problem is 20nm tech is an incredibly complex undertaking and is still an unproven technology from what I've read. You need to make sure we are following not just say TSMC's predictions about chip timelines and specs, but also independent expert advice too (some of which questions the benifits of 20nm over 28nm). Thanks.
Ask the engineers, huh? Good thing you chimed in there, Tiger, 'coz Ken was thinking of consulting his charwoman. You saved the day.
Your idea about considering time to market is a real eye-opener, and reading about your readings was pure joy!
That's what makes you so special.
You may now swallow.
February 06, 2014, 07:24:16 PM
Also Ken, can you give me access and moderator privileges to this thread please?
I would be happy to quit my day job and spend 24 hours a day deleting the trolls in here. I would be totally biased and delete anyone who spoke out of turn and would find it very therapeutic indeed.
I would be happy to quit my day job and spend 24 hours a day deleting the trolls in here. I would be totally biased and delete anyone who spoke out of turn and would find it very therapeutic indeed.
February 06, 2014, 07:16:36 PM
Sure, we are just looking into it. We would only go to that if it makes since, which means GH/s, Power, and time to market. With time to market being the most important. Yes, I try to do that, but sometime when we are working on deals I forget. I been thinking about a professional PR person; however, it is not on the top of my list of things to do. As far as eASIC, they are working with us to get the most out of our 28nm custom chip.
Ken, will your engineering team be making the final decision on whether we go with a 28nm or a 20nm? I see this as an engineering issue first and foremost. We need to be sure that a 20nm chip is capable of being designed and manufactured in good time and that it will show definite benefits over a 28nm chip. The problem is 20nm tech is an incredibly complex undertaking and is still an unproven technology from what I've read. You need to make sure we are following not just say TSMC's predictions about chip timelines and specs, but also independent expert advice too (some of which questions the benifits of 20nm over 28nm). Thanks.
February 06, 2014, 07:14:52 PM
...
The shareholder reaction to your latest update surely demonstrates to you that having a professional PR advisor would be a great asset. I'd go as far as to say that you might have been surprised that people didn't embrace the idea of moving to 20nm. I do think you should give some thought to employing a professional.
The shareholder reaction to your latest update surely demonstrates to you that having a professional PR advisor would be a great asset. I'd go as far as to say that you might have been surprised that people didn't embrace the idea of moving to 20nm. I do think you should give some thought to employing a professional.
Ignore the haters, Ken! You're doing a bang-up job, I'm enjoying this immensely.
I still feel this venture could be better monetized with a concession stand and a modest door charge, but i'm sure you're already on top of that.
~Your humble fan
February 06, 2014, 07:09:58 PM
Ken could you shed some light on the 20nm idea please? Where would this leave us with eAsic?
Also I think it would be fair to inform the shareholders of an actual date that they'll be able to trade shares. I know you recently did as much however you never then explained the reason for not sticking to it. I would encourage you to inform us in advance any time you are unable to meet a deadline. It's much easier to accept disappointment if it's accompanied by an explanation rather than silence. This way you are more likely to keep people on side.
The shareholder reaction to your latest update surely demonstrates to you that having a professional PR advisor would be a great asset. I'd go as far as to say that you might have been surprised that people didn't embrace the idea of moving to 20nm. I do think you should give some thought to employing a professional.
Also I think it would be fair to inform the shareholders of an actual date that they'll be able to trade shares. I know you recently did as much however you never then explained the reason for not sticking to it. I would encourage you to inform us in advance any time you are unable to meet a deadline. It's much easier to accept disappointment if it's accompanied by an explanation rather than silence. This way you are more likely to keep people on side.
The shareholder reaction to your latest update surely demonstrates to you that having a professional PR advisor would be a great asset. I'd go as far as to say that you might have been surprised that people didn't embrace the idea of moving to 20nm. I do think you should give some thought to employing a professional.
Sure, we are just looking into it. We would only go to that if it makes since, which means GH/s, Power, and time to market. With time to market being the most important. Yes, I try to do that, but sometime when we are working on deals I forget. I been thinking about a professional PR person; however, it is not on the top of my list of things to do. As far as eASIC, they are working with us to get the most out of our 28nm custom chip.
How's it going with the shares verification process?
February 06, 2014, 07:07:20 PM
Ken could you shed some light on the 20nm idea please? Where would this leave us with eAsic?
Also I think it would be fair to inform the shareholders of an actual date that they'll be able to trade shares. I know you recently did as much however you never then explained the reason for not sticking to it. I would encourage you to inform us in advance any time you are unable to meet a deadline. It's much easier to accept disappointment if it's accompanied by an explanation rather than silence. This way you are more likely to keep people on side.
The shareholder reaction to your latest update surely demonstrates to you that having a professional PR advisor would be a great asset. I'd go as far as to say that you might have been surprised that people didn't embrace the idea of moving to 20nm. I do think you should give some thought to employing a professional.
Also I think it would be fair to inform the shareholders of an actual date that they'll be able to trade shares. I know you recently did as much however you never then explained the reason for not sticking to it. I would encourage you to inform us in advance any time you are unable to meet a deadline. It's much easier to accept disappointment if it's accompanied by an explanation rather than silence. This way you are more likely to keep people on side.
The shareholder reaction to your latest update surely demonstrates to you that having a professional PR advisor would be a great asset. I'd go as far as to say that you might have been surprised that people didn't embrace the idea of moving to 20nm. I do think you should give some thought to employing a professional.
Sure, we are just looking into it. We would only go to that if it makes since, which means GH/s, Power, and time to market. With time to market being the most important. Yes, I will try to do that, but sometime when we are working on deals I forget. I been thinking about a professional PR person; however, it is not on the top of my list of things to do. As far as eASIC, they are working with us to get the most out of our 28nm custom chip.
February 06, 2014, 06:57:13 PM
Ken could you shed some light on the 20nm idea please? Where would this leave us with eAsic?
Also I think it would be fair to inform the shareholders of an actual date that they'll be able to trade shares. I know you recently did as much however you never then explained the reason for not sticking to it. I would encourage you to inform us in advance any time you are unable to meet a deadline. It's much easier to accept disappointment if it's accompanied by an explanation rather than silence. This way you are more likely to keep people on side.
The shareholder reaction to your latest update surely demonstrates to you that having a professional PR advisor would be a great asset. I'd go as far as to say that you might have been surprised that people didn't embrace the idea of moving to 20nm. I do think you should give some thought to employing a professional.
Also I think it would be fair to inform the shareholders of an actual date that they'll be able to trade shares. I know you recently did as much however you never then explained the reason for not sticking to it. I would encourage you to inform us in advance any time you are unable to meet a deadline. It's much easier to accept disappointment if it's accompanied by an explanation rather than silence. This way you are more likely to keep people on side.
The shareholder reaction to your latest update surely demonstrates to you that having a professional PR advisor would be a great asset. I'd go as far as to say that you might have been surprised that people didn't embrace the idea of moving to 20nm. I do think you should give some thought to employing a professional.
February 06, 2014, 06:35:17 PM
@Miner
Lets just see how it goes. Ken said himself that he spends some time checking the forum for FUD. Might as well make some use out of it. I think we would all rather have Ken's opinion and responses on some of the more dire concerns of the shareholders. I think this is one of those more dire concerns. Ken should tell us before he unloads certain shares over others.
Lets just see how it goes. Ken said himself that he spends some time checking the forum for FUD. Might as well make some use out of it. I think we would all rather have Ken's opinion and responses on some of the more dire concerns of the shareholders. I think this is one of those more dire concerns. Ken should tell us before he unloads certain shares over others.
February 06, 2014, 06:24:22 PM
Yes sure but that means accusations of scamming can hang around for 6 full days before Ken (might) refute them with info/facts. Meanwhile I'm sitting on the info and I don't post it? Doesn't seem a sensible way to support a company you are invested in.
I do totally get you about giving Ken space and opportunity to answer real questions. I'm waiting for him to pipe up with more info on what he sees as the the potential benifits of 20nm.
I do totally get you about giving Ken space and opportunity to answer real questions. I'm waiting for him to pipe up with more info on what he sees as the the potential benifits of 20nm.
February 06, 2014, 06:19:14 PM
How about we stop giving Ken the answers and we wait to see what he comes up with? I think this is a grand idea, and it will allow us to gain more insight on Ken's thought process and help us understand where his head is at.
We could do but you would be waiting for a long time as he's too busy running the business to be replying to every question that crops up on here. We have given him plenty of space to answer the 28nm vs 20nm question today and he hasn't shown so how long do I or anyone wait when I have what I think is the answer to a spurious allegation?
So I am 90% sure I know the answer and post it. Seems fairly reasonable to me especially as other people are posting their views (that he's secretly selling his own shares). A frankly ridiculous accusation as these figures are the official ones from our CT isting. It does seem a lot of Drama Queens on here don't like it when there is a sensible answer to an extravagant accusation of Ken being some sort of master criminal or scammer.
Finlof - like I said I'm 90% sure this is correct. I'm sorry if simple facts annoy you so much but I'm not making excuses just informing people.
Hmm.. Good question. Maybe wait until after Ken's next update. You know, because the Wednesday announcements are supposed to answer shareholder questions and concerns.
February 06, 2014, 06:14:08 PM
How about we stop giving Ken the answers and we wait to see what he comes up with? I think this is a grand idea, and it will allow us to gain more insight on Ken's thought process and help us understand where his head is at.
We could do but you would be waiting for a long time as he's too busy running the business to be replying to every question that crops up on here. We have given him plenty of space to answer the 28nm vs 20nm questions today and he hasn't shown, so how long do I or anyone wait when I have what I think is the answer to a spurious allegation?
So I am 90% sure I know the answer and post it. Seems fairly reasonable to me especially as other people are posting their views (that he's secretly selling his own shares). A frankly ridiculous accusation as these figures are the official ones from our CT isting. It does seem a lot of Drama Queens on here don't like it when there is a sensible answer to an extravagant accusation of Ken being some sort of master criminal or scammer.
Finlof - like I said I'm 90% sure this is correct. I'm sorry if simple facts annoy you so much but I'm not making excuses just informing people.
February 06, 2014, 06:00:31 PM
320,600 - 232,000 (Ukyo) = 88,600.
So 88,600 must be the remaining unsold IPO shares. I thought there were 180k left unsold but it must be around 90k. It makes sense for Ken to sell them now too if he is on a fund raising exercise.
So 88,600 must be the remaining unsold IPO shares. I thought there were 180k left unsold but it must be around 90k. It makes sense for Ken to sell them now too if he is on a fund raising exercise.
How about we stop giving Ken the answers and we wait to see what he comes up with? I think this is a grand idea, and it will allow us to gain more insight on Ken's thought process and help us understand where his head is at.
February 06, 2014, 06:00:21 PM
320,600 - 232,000 (Ukyo) = 88,600.
So 88,600 must be the remaining unsold IPO shares. I thought there were 180k left unsold but it must be around 90k. It makes sense for Ken to sell them now too if he is on a fund raising exercise.
oh minerpart, you will always have Ken's back and provide an So 88,600 must be the remaining unsold IPO shares. I thought there were 180k left unsold but it must be around 90k. It makes sense for Ken to sell them now too if he is on a fund raising exercise.
February 06, 2014, 05:40:11 PM
320,600 - 232,000 (Ukyo) = 88,600.
So 88,600 must be the remaining unsold IPO shares. I thought there were 180k left unsold but it must be around 90k. It makes sense for Ken to sell them now too if he is on a fund raising exercise.
So 88,600 must be the remaining unsold IPO shares. I thought there were 180k left unsold but it must be around 90k. It makes sense for Ken to sell them now too if he is on a fund raising exercise.
Jump to: