Topic: ASICMINER: Entering the Future of ASIC Mining by Inventing It - page 1121. (Read 3917568 times)

BitMinter doesn't cope with increased hashrate that well. All new blocks are interpreted as stale until enough blocks from competition confirm that they aren't stale. And since BitMinter has incredible luck last hour, there are not enough blocks from competition.

That means:

20+ TH/s total!  

1000+ BTC/day!  

6 TH/s on Bitminter

Shares rapidly becoming more valuable, glad I bought a dozen at 1.25. This is going to be a good investment.

Now >5 TH/s on BitMinter + >14 TH/s on BTC Guild that is nearing 20 TH/s. Keep it coming and pump it up

I think I would buy shares even above 1.5 if I hadn't invested it all already...

interesting discussions nonetheless .. 

helixone, that entire post is gold (like many others here) but this had me ROFLMAO:


 

1) It depends. Do you plan to trade? If so buy shares on passthroughs. If not, it seems to generally makes no difference. (Buy where cheap, sell where dear, and above all try to build a long position at a price lower then everyone else.)

Long term, I have a growing respect for Friedcat, and feel that he is building a company for the long term. (As much as I liked short term swings). Friedcat has managed to get himself in the drivers seat, and it is his game to lose. I think I can speak about Avalon. They went with an older tech and didn't lock down production guarantees with their fab as well as Friedcat did, so volume and efficiency (due to older tech) is a challenge. As far as BFL goes, they can go to hell, and by the time they are ready to ship, my guess is that despite spending almost as much on marketing as they did on engineering, they will have lost so many orders due to their incompetence. I'm kinda betting that AM USB sticks (and AM shares) will be the new hotness that leaves BFL in the dust.

There will be winners and losers in the btc world. Friedcat is a winner. BFL is a loser. Avalon is somewhere in between.

2) Short term AM seems on a strong uptrend, which may have gotten ahead of itself. That said, I wouldn't risk betting against it. IE: I am overall long at this time.

I'll also say AM shares, seem almost too good to be true. We've got a company that isn't in it for the short term, that is paying an estimated 37% a year divs. Do your own mach as it's all variable.

As an aside, I keep saying to myself, oh AM shares are worth X, and I'll sell em all when it reaches that price. However Friedcat keeps pulling tricks out of his hat, so I dare not project a fair market value.

IE: I feel like AM shares are too expensive now, but at this time, I just can't bring myself to sell. (And kinda am kicking myself for saying this in public).

-helixone

p.s. - I have no idea what I am talking about.
p.s.s. - I have been trading in and out of AM since 0.69, at this point I am all in.

Anyways, in an effort to move the discussion more towards the intended topic, do you guys recommend keeping shares as a passthrough on BTC-TC or Bitfunder, or requesting to exchange them to normal direct shares?

Also, what do you all think about Asicminer in the near future (less than two weeks) and long term future (2+ months?). Will they keep on kicking butt, will they fall due to BFL/Avalon, or not much will change?

Also, furuknap, thanks for responding to my question about possible implications! For some odd reason, and I am not saying this sarcastically, totally forgot about a possible lawsuit possibly obliterating the asicminer. Heh, this is what happens when I spend too much time reading here.

Short term, what would you think the following headline on Reddit would do to share prices: "US$50 million lawsuit from Avalon against ASICMiner over corporate espionage! ASICMiner operation seized by Chinese government."


Well, he did actually claim that a Chinese web page had evidence of this collusion, or at least it could easily be interpreted that way, possibly due to poor English written skills. This is why I asked for clarification so that we could make absolutely sure and hear it from the claimer that there is no such evidence.

He later confirmed, as I interpret his post, that there is no such evidence and he did not intend to bring Dr Zhang into this or suggest that Dr Zhang had any covert interest in ASICMiner.

This horse is dead, there is no evidence of any wrong-doing, and yes, let's stop polluting this thread with "Ya'know, I'd be fine with this as long as it made me money" posts.

Look! What's that shiny thing over there! I think it's today's dividend money! Let's go roll in it!

.b

Yeah, but Avalon screwing with Avalon doesn't even make financial sense. The rumour was not very believable, but Avalon screwing itself at the expense of another company is even less so.

Anyway, agreed let's just move on.

Unfair advantage in this case is a nice way of saying stealing technologies or cheating. In this case, AM would have achieved their proven, demonstrable hashrates and concrete products because they got someone in Avalon to screw with Avalon.

It is not a matter of personal opinion any more than manslaughter would be open to interpreting whether there was actually any 'slaughtering' involved.

There's no point in beating a dead horse; there's no evidence of wrong-doing, and I'm sure that a lot of people would be freaking out far more than they are if there was anything substantiated in these rumors.

Let's just move on and enjoy our piles of ethically and legally earned dividend Bitcoins!

.b

(My apologies to the room for feeding the troll)

Furuknap, just read this before saying too much more: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intellectual_property_in_China#Difficulties

I suggest we stop polluting friedcat's thread with unbased theories. He's been kicking A$$, and I don't want his stock to bubble above it's true value based on some whackamole theory. (I want cheap AM shares for as long as we can get them.)

Please let this one go.

-helixone

Ah, I was under the impression that the idea was that ASICminer and Avalon as a company were secretly in a collaboration to give priority to asicminer orders over normal orders, not that someone in Avalon was doing this without Avalon's collective permission. In which case, attorneys ahoy!

I guess I am not sure of the possible implications, care to say what you think could happen to cause people to loose interest in Asicminer? Also, please remember that I said in the short term, not in the long term.

Also, like the previous poster said,
Just for anyone visiting this thread later: These claims were probably made in error and there is no evidence of any wrong-doing in this.
This idea floating around was formed by a random poster who has no ties with either companies and the poster did not even state this as a rumor, but as his personal theory!

Not sure why we are being so reactive or twitchy over this unsubstantiated rumour? Unless somehow we buy into it? I think we have to consider the source of this rumour and do some thinking. Is it more or less likely that the people would be unethical? Is it more or less likely that companies will even have the time to collaborate yet in this startup/wild west environment?

Also, do we know that someone is getting inside information from someone else? Or are we just making unfounded assumptions?

Basically, this should be a non-issue unless there is proof. Responding to such rumours/trolling only give them more legs.

I was just making the point that if the two companies collaborated, I'm not sure how that could be considered "illegal" or detrimental to the share price. Companies collaborate all the time, and as a shareowner of ASICMINER, if there is a positive outcome from a collaboration, I welcome it.


Using Lance Armstrong to compare to this situation probably isn't the right analogy. Probably you could use the analogy of IBM and Microsoft in the early PC days.

Also, what is one's definition of "unfair advantage"? Someone looking at ASICMINER right now as a potential shareholder would conclude that ASICMINER has an "unfair advantage". They have proven, demonstrable hash rates with mining, and concrete products that are shipping out right NOW - with warranties. Compared to the competition, they are killing them with this two-pronged approach. Should we ask ASICMINER to reduce their "unfair advantage"?

Should we not separate our own personal opinions on what is "unfair advantage" and just let the market dictate things?

This isn't a matter of collaboration. This is a claim that someone deep inside Avalon covertly working for ASICMiner and holding back Avalon shipping to benefit ASICMiner. In other words, purposely hurting Avalon so ASCIMiner could gain an advantage.

And you would have no problems with that because you think it could make more money? Do you not understand the gravity of such accusations were they to be found even remotely possible?

Just for anyone visiting this thread later: These claims were probably made in error and there is no evidence of any wrong-doing in this.

.b

I personally feel that if you are looking at such a possible situation based on only, and absolutely nothing else, how much money you make by being an asicminer shareholder, then ASICminer collaborating with avalon in such a manner would be only a good thing. I feel that most other shareholders would feel the same, assuming they care only about gains by being a shareholder. If such an act is moral or immoral is a totally other topic of discussion which can last hours, even more so once you realize many have different definitions of moral.

If ASICminer was found to be using legal yet still considered by some unethical practices to put them in a VERY advantageous, then I sure as heck would buy more shares from them for the short term. Looking at the longterm is more difficult regardless of whatever situation you are looking at. It would make me more money, it would be illogical of me, as well as probably others as well, to sell at a tanking price when ASICminer will be doing so well due to their advantage.

I personally do not feel that the market would sell shares of ASICminer if they were to be found to be collaborating with Avalon in such a manner, and I feel even more strongly that the shares would not fall in value catastrophically if such information were to be found. Also, I am very doubtful of this rumor being true, just as furuknap said. If Asicminer were making their own ic's, why would they be buying from avalon? Maybe to satisfy a very strong demand for short term hash rate increases, but otherwise it does not make sense. Based on how large ASICminer's needs are for hashrate, it makes sense for them to design and fab their own chips.

You mean like a court of law? Again, I have no idea how the legal system works in China, but I imagine that any lawyer would have a field day if it turned out AM had earned millions from someone in Avalon leaking information or manipulating Avalon's results.

.b

And you think Avalon would just say "Oh, dang, well, let's move on..." after that? They would rip AM a new one in any jurisdiction of any civilized country, probably shutting down AM forever.

At the very least, they could sue for any revenue AM has made.

.b

In this case, Dr Zhang is a primary insider, and the claim was that Dr Zhang had ties to and sat on the board of ASCIMiner and that because of this, Avalon was delayed in deliveries somehow. In other words, a primary insider in Avalon was hampering Avalon's deliveries to benefit ASICMiner.

I'm sure you can see why this would be a huge problem for the credibility of AM, regardless of whether this is illegal in certain jurisdictions. I am not a lawyer and have no idea how corporate laws are in China, but at the very least it would cause problems for investors outside of China where this would be highly unethical and cause for legal action.

This isn't a case of getting a little help; this is a case of Microsoft getting insider information from the a member of the board of directors in Apple and using that information to launch iPhone 6 or whatever the next number is.


And if the market believed the performance was based on an unfair advantage? See how the market treated Lance Armstrong after he was caught cheating.

Would you still want to buy shares, knowing that the results you've seen until now is not going to last after the cheating is exposed?

I believe the matter is closed, though, so no point in pursuing further speculation. The poster admitted, as I interpret it, to not knowing of any evidence to support his speculation.

.b