Topic: AMHash1: Cost-Effective Mining Contract - page 84. (Read 304259 times)

 Apparently I gave you more credit for intelligence than you deserve.
This thread is for discussions of AMHash.  Move along!

Cold fusion.   Boom.

who knows if we think gen 4 is magical i can only imagine what the gen 5 will do that will be some serious sweet deals, well sweat deals is referring to the maintanance fees. I am sure the cost to buy them up wont be so magical i am sure will be on the rough side as people get profit upfront in many ocasions

Dude, learn reading. We were talking about Zeus, not AMHash

  AMHash has clearly laid out the terms in the first post so you know exactly what you are buying.  There is no scam to be found here.  Move along.
 

 I doubt that many in here know what "Peter, Paul and Marys" are and reiteration isn't gonna help them either.

 AMHash will terminate the contract when:

bitcoin difficulty divided by the bitcoin value(in USD)  is less than or equal to 324251573.3670911659816247582205 for a period of 10 days.

I think that's a good summary

But they´re "legitimate" right? Not a ponzi, according to self-appointed vigilantes around here? Just scamming their customers "legally". That makes losing money with them so much more bearable.

Even if every other cloud mining company would have to do the same (more or less), as a customer of Zeus I would feel double-f*cked.

At first they cancelled the production of scrypt gen3 asics and converted the company into a cloud mining service, offering to convert pre-orders to scrypt cloud shares. After the LTC crash, they cancelled the contracts so customers instead of having a device in-hand, got nothing (except a free 5 GH/s SHA256 share). Then they offered those customers, who lost a lot of money, better to buy SHA256 mining shares as they are way more profitable. And now the same appears again.

they would have to update every diff change

Must be a huge relief for AMHASH stakeholders that they´re going to supposedly last 35% more down than these guys

Just to clarify, when the next difficulty changes the $136 will change as well. I think it would hard for amhash to say yes this is the cut off and keep updating it. Its so easy to work out, you can do it yourself when ever you want.

BTC is down 35% over the last 30 days and another 35% takes us down to that supposed cutoff point (according to statements made by those anonymous people carrying the company sign). A formal statement would remove uncertainty and make for much more efficient trading of the stakes. Needless to say; this being such a big dog in the BTC marketplace

it would be very, very useful for those trading BTC itself.

simple mathematics could should have confirmed that for anyone before they invested into this......

At this point it would be helpful for the stakeholders here if the company issued a formal statement regarding at which BTC price they anticipate ceasing this cloud mining service. I doubt that many have read the TOS. And for those who have, a reiteration would probably be good and useful. Some peter paul and marys here (carrying the company´s sign) have been claiming that this cessation will occur at $135 and if that is correct it should be confirmed.

I sure hope you two screwballs never be called up for jury duty 

Or most likely you live in a country that has a very primitive judicial system. This explains your reprehensible views. Shoot first, maybe ask questions later. Works every time.

So how many cloudmining outfits are left standing at this point?   I don't think it's fair to blame their failure on some non-existent "systemic campaign of hate and fearmongering".  Why add "systemic" to that sentence anyway?  It moves you away from ranting about something that actually happened, towards some crazy conspiracy theory.   I don't think a couple people trolling should be cause enough to go out of business for a legit company anyway.   They could have also just succeeded and proved the trolls wrong...if they were wrong.

There would be no "systematic campaign of hate and fearmongering" if those "legitimate companies" provided proof of legitimacy instead of acting exactly like other "legitimate companies" that have already ran away with peoples money. If those "legitimate companies" fail because of that then they only have themselves to blame for acting like "legitimate companies" instead of acting like actual legitimate companies.

This person seems to agree that even legitimate companies can be driven out of business by a systematic campaign of hate,slander and fearmongering. If enough customers can be driven from them so they can´t stay in business, well then the objective of the hatemongers has been met and they can conclude that is was a scam after all. Never mind that nothing at all will be determined in any court of law.

I think you need to do some research into new enterprise success ratios.

Outside of Crypto-currency business, professional funds lending to new business ventures only expect a 1 in 20 ventures they fund to become a profitable success in medium to long term. A small amount of those new ventures are scams, but most are genuine economic failures.

On those statistics, why do you expect new crypto-currency ventures to have a higher success ratio? Saying every crypto venture failure is a "scam" is the same as saying "I'm a moron, who doesn't know anything about macro economics or maths or can do the research".

A lot of these are genuine bankruptcies or venture failures. You need to spread you investments between different mining operations (amhash, genesis mining, etc), different big crypto currencies (BTC, DRK, LTC, FTC, VTC, etc) and new crypto currencies (plenty of these to choose from, LOL).

Gensis mining paid mbtc 4.59 yesterday and AMhash paid 3.18mbc yesterday. Both manufacturers' ASIC farms are in Iceland. Clearly, Gensis has the better mining equipment (they also negotiated a 40% reduction in their electricity price, which was passed onto their customers).

Another manufacturer Zeus mining has put out a warning not to buy its' BTC cloud mining offerings, clearly its' mining equipment is not very good. The manufacturer's scrypt cloud mining (10,000 people) customers recently lost their contracts under the 10 day unprofitably rule when LTC plunged in price. That was a genuine business failure, it was not a scam. People in this forum keep calling everything a "scam" or a "ponzi scheme", because they lost money on a investment, but this is what happens as a norm in real economies with relation to new economic ventures.