Topic: [ActiveMining] The Official Active Mining Discussion Thread [Self-Moderated] - page 428. (Read 771288 times)

? Did you mean me or ken?

BFL started shipping my 60gh single two days ago and if they've been 'burning it in' since March then there should be a bloody law against it.  When I placed the order they told me it would take three months to deliver and I'd calculated 3btc per day.  If it arrived yesterday I would mine 0.11 btc per day (ironically the same as I was getting from two 7970's earlier in the year, lol).

Unless the price of BTC goes MUCH higher than it is today, the NRE for a smaller node in 2014 wouldn't be worth it.

28nm is the end all be all currently until you start seeing ASICs sell off the shelf for $0.35/GH

At that point it still will be unlikely that the jump from 28nm to 14nm (This is assuming 14nm is even fully ready by then for anyone besides very large companies to use) would only bring margins of extra hashrate. The market so saturated at that point that to recoup their NRE on this would take many many batches. Some companies may want to take this risk but it doesn't seem liable currently.

eASIC wasn't the first company to offer 28nm (They are actually kind of late in the game considering) So I doubt they will have the next node available before anyone else does it if it was indeed worth doing.



As far as burn ins are concerned, Crumbs is correct. There's no law that states how long one is, hell there's no way you would even know if it was Used or Not.
From what I'm hearing, some of you would prefer to receive it off the assembly line without any testing at all hah. (Plug and Pray)

Either way, like I said before as long as the company delivers as promised on the dates as promised for the money as paid the receiver will have no issues if the units was previous hashing before, as long as it has the same warranties.

"New" is made up from the manufacturer, guess who that is.

Who also thinks, as I have hinted at, and Bargraphics said recently, 'we shareholders won't know anything until there is a physical device ready'?

If indeed Ken's strategy is to keep schtum, what advantage's might this bring, or otherwise?

Anyone have any ideas about the next gen. asics in terms of moving to a smaller manufacturing process?  If there was potential for this in the future, would this rule out eASIC?

Anyone have the energy to speculate on the likely scenario which would see the leveling off or even retracting of 'difficulty'?

Surely the discussion is valid if you are only fairly certain of your prediction?

A burn in in this scenario would be a bench test for 30mins. A 'burn in' in your scenario would be several weeks of online hashing. You can't do that legally and then sell the item as new.

Where did VBS go? MIA?

What do you think a burn in is?

The units have to be tested working.

I doubt anyone cares if their machine was used for mining prior as long as it works as described and is sent by the date promised when they ordered.
This is only an issue that trolls try to pick apart because of some morally binding obligation they believe companies should have.

Having a product that isn't a pre-order but ready now would be a key selling point for ActM. But I'm fairly confident that ActM will sell out of the unit allocated to sell to the public very quickly once they have a working prototype so this discussion is probably not even valid.

True but you might need to sell the units as 'nearly new' if we had used them?

I know many suspect BFL for doing this with machines that were ready to ship. I guess if you do go this route and make it clear the machines have been 'run in' and give a guarantee AND no one is waiting for these units it's OK.

Why would you want to,

The machines are not branded for customers.

Any excess we would mine with and then as orders pop up we could just take it off the mine and ship it.

Ken may not want to do this for bookkeeping purposes since he's technically "Selling" the machines to VMC from AMC but this makes the most sense as more money will be made from mining with them (Generating Income instead of the machines just sitting there) and then selling the units (Money in Hand Now to buy more chips in the next batch)

Thanks for correcting and informing me.  

As you can see I am trying to encourage a speculative discussion away from the usual noise on this thread, and if we learn anything along the way, it is very welcome.  

Since Vbs is no longer around you've been a handy asset Bargraphics.

And we can sell excess chips right?

I'm sorry but I'm not understanding what you are trying to say here.

The NRE for eASIC is the backend design of the chips and PROBABLY a small batch run.

The cost for the Chips Themselves (Wafers) is probably around $10k-$15k per Wafer with a minimum of 10 or 25 wafers ($100,000 - $300,000)

You don't pay $1,000,000 every time you want more chips..... you just pay for the wafer cost (There is usually a minimum amount of wafers that can be ordered)

The more Wafers you order the cheaper the PER WAFER price is.

If Ken gets the Small Batch Run in, they work, he will likely order as many Wafers as his pocketbook allows to get better pricing and have the chips ready.

A bit of discussion about this the other day, you might have missed it. We wont need anywhere near another 1Mill.

It looks like 100k USD would get us around 15k chips.

Yes, you are correct.  The $1,000,000 NRE we paid includes eveything apart from the production of the chips themselves.

So if we need another $1,000,000 for the first batch and have only raised $800,000 in sales, then we are in big trouble.

I would love someone to take an education guess of a price for X number of chips as I just plucked the above numbers out of thin air.

Let's try and get a decent discussion going guys.

Any takers?

At last some serious discussion. What is going on today?

The quarterly accounts will show how much we can take from the web orders and pump into further industrial miner production - obviously after making the retail units and shipping them on time. However once we start shipping, orders will flood in, it will be like turning on a tap and there is nothing preventing us from shipping just development time now.

I was under the impression eASIC were paid in full for development. Anyone else agree? Then we just make orders with eASIC for batches and pay for them when we have funds available?

Why are you still going on about this? Are you upset or something? You are making the same point over and over.

My question was simple, if I knew where they Klondike chips were coming from I wouldn't have asked where they were coming from.

Now forgive me but from the quote Bargraphics used Ken was having to explain the Klondike situation as recently as 2nd of this month (October) so it's obviously been an area of uncertainty. You didn't know and I didn't know. The difference is you are still on your high-horse about it. Grow up FFS.

you said (paraphrasing - see exact quote below) if we had our chips refunded, what chips will be going into the klondikes?


had you researched the company you invested in, you would know that the klondike order was including chips.  i am still AMAZED that you are invested in a company that you (apparently) haven't even read the 1st page of postings about.  and not even just invested, but cheering for it like you had basically help start and build the company and it was the best company in the world.  this isnt your alma mater, you dont have a 4 year degree from it.

disclaimer:

HA HA HA HA HA Bloody Yanks.

25th October 2013 is today's date.

Within the next six days Ken will release the much anticipated quarterly accounts.  

Ken might also reveal the status of the first chip batch order, as from the P&L and Balance sheet, we should be able to know if there was enough money raised to pay eASIC.  One would expect that part of the NDA restriction may be lifted once the money has been transferred, so this would indeed be a good time for Ken to update his shareholders, if we are in pre-production.

Conversely, consider that this money has been paid already and the chip run has started in earnest. If that's the case then I'd expect Ken to continue to withhold information while advancing the production schedule behind closed doors.  This is certainly a strategy that Ken has hinted at recently.

P.S.  Thanks for the spell check idea finfloss. My browser now has the squiggly lines popping up although it's set to US spelling, eek!

I'm off to get me a donut, cowboy.