Author

Topic: ASICMINER: Entering the Future of ASIC Mining by Inventing It - page 1212. (Read 3917029 times)

full member
Activity: 177
Merit: 100
Yes, but it doesnt make any sense. If thats true, unsold shares received dividends. But why would shares that have not been sold be entitled to ipo break-even privileges??
They haven't been entitled to any privileges. The "you" in "you break even first" mean merely investors, not ASICMINER shares themselves. In another word, we have paid all net profits before the investors break even to the circulating 163,962 shares. Otherwise the date of finishing our first clause couldn't have been so early given that we had paid all the emergent debts and balance payments.

Thank you for clarifying this!
legendary
Activity: 1162
Merit: 1000
DiabloMiner author
friedcat, exactly how much GH is currently operating atm?
donator
Activity: 848
Merit: 1005
Yes, but it doesnt make any sense. If thats true, unsold shares received dividends. But why would shares that have not been sold be entitled to ipo break-even privileges??
They haven't been entitled to any privileges. The "you" in "you break even first" mean merely investors, not ASICMINER shares themselves. In another word, we have paid all net profits before the investors break even to the circulating 163,962 shares. Otherwise the date of finishing our first clause couldn't have been so early given that we had paid all the emergent debts and balance payments.
legendary
Activity: 2674
Merit: 1083
Legendary Escrow Service - Tip Jar in Profile
Part of my day-to-day work is running a data center, if you guys are in Toronto, more than willing to volunteer my time ~~

^This.  AM should have planned out exactly which data centers to deploy at ahead of time.

The data centers should be selected on the basis of cheap power and proximity to their pools' hosts.

Scrambling around building their own is a big loss of time and focus from their core competency of designing, producing, and running ASICs.

I think these are problems that couldnt be foreseen easily. In such projects you always have something coming up you never thought about before.

Im a not small shareholder myself but i dont think shareholders should get an advantage for buying asics. That wouldnt lead to the maximum price. And i think selling the asics will mean a fair price. Only you have it in an instant instead having to mine for a year or so.
full member
Activity: 177
Merit: 100
Yes, but it doesnt make any sense. If thats true, unsold shares received dividends. But why would shares that have not been sold be entitled to ipo break-even privileges??

This is a valid question. However it does not mean anything now since we already broke-even the IPO price.

It does mean something. If dividends were paid, I would like to know what happened to them.
hero member
Activity: 924
Merit: 1001
Unlimited Free Crypto
Yes, but it doesnt make any sense. If thats true, unsold shares received dividends. But why would shares that have not been sold be entitled to ipo break-even privileges??

This is a valid question. However it does not mean anything now since we already broke-even the IPO price.
hero member
Activity: 756
Merit: 500
Update

Clarification of Unsold Shares
Now ASICMINER controls 163,962/400,000 of the whole identity, while Bitfountain controls 236,038/400,000. The former shares will not be diluted, while the latter will. Whenever we need to sell shares to raise funds or giving potential core employees shares/options, only our (Bitfountain's) shares will be reduced.

We consider it to be very fair to investors, because while either letting the investors break even first or protecting the investors from dilution are seen everywhere, having both at the same time is not that common, especially when the portion at the investors' side is already large.

Device Selling
After careful consideration, we decided to address it as a very important decision ahead. There are two factors that serve as the motivation of selling our devices earlier than what we planned before:

1. Vacuum of Deployment. We are now experiencing one. The unconventionally high power density makes our devices hard to be deployed to professional data centers, which also have very high rent charges as their extra downside. So we had and will have to build them of our own. It's a difficult task in a sense that besides the long cycle, unexpected incidents will create a period that we have a lot of devices lying there waiting to generate hashes.

2. Quantity in the Future. The price negotiation of the full mask is almost finished, so if there are no surprises, we will have virtually no third-party limitations on how many chips we could produce in this year. If the exchange rate of BTC against USD further shoots up in the next few months, we could even produce hundreds of wafers each month. Deploying all of them in time is out of our reach unless we expand significantly, which might be pre-mature and inflexible.

The most significant factor in selling devices is pricing. Devices are extremely illiquid because the trading and transportation are great ways of wasting the precious hash-time. Therefore no one knows how they should be priced yet. We would like to do the price discovery with auction by small quantity. The total number used for discovering the price will be very small compared to the whole batch, and the slow deployment rate before the construction of the whole farm infrastructure of the rest and arriving devices provides another motivation.

Other Info
We met a temperal black out this morning. It's caused by the capacity expansion (installing cables and switches). The PCB of the main board and the power module have been finished. The assembling will start as soon as the chips are packaged and passed the automatic tester. Our use of ~0.5MW of power in the new place is also approved. The network bottleneck is not in the internet connection side, but in our local Ethernet. It could be solved by optimizing the firmware and the switch structure, but a simple hot-fix is to add more internet connection accounts and routers, which is what we are doing now. The slow pace of the infrastructure building is also a hard limit, and it forced us to scatter a small portion of our devices to temperal places. They should be put back as soon as the permanent place is OK.

Any ETA as to when AM will hit 12TH? 50TH?
full member
Activity: 177
Merit: 100
Clarification of Unsold Shares
Now ASICMINER controls 163,962/400,000 of the whole identity, while Bitfountain controls 236,038/400,000.

I was under the impression that 50% of all profits were to be distributed to the investors and the other half to the Bitfountain founders. Now it's become roughly 41% for investors and 59% for BF because you stopped selling shares early. Did the original contract allow for this?

What if ASICMINER had been fully funded after only 50k shares were sold instead of after 164k, because of a sudden rise in BTC price? Then we'd have 50k/400k = 12.5% share for investors and 350,000/400,000 = 87.5% share for Bitfountain now?

Doesn't look like a fair solution to me. To get back to a 50/50 ratio for investors and founders, as it was originally announced, you'd have to subtract the 36k unallocated shares from the 200k Bitfountain shares instead of adding them. No?

It has always been said that 1 share of ASICMINER would get 1/400000 th of the dividends.... And it still does.

There are still 200.000 Asicminer shares and 200.000 bitfountain shares.... Only bitfountain now holds 36.038 shares of Asicminer.... Nothing wrong with that

Yes, but it doesnt make any sense. If thats true, unsold shares received dividends. But why would shares that have not been sold be entitled to ipo break-even privileges??
full member
Activity: 146
Merit: 100
@WiRED
I also think that an auction shall be a great way to set a correct price for ASICs. Preferably with senior members and based on a some computation for expected ROI.

Thank you friedcat, for your patience and dedication. great update!
sr. member
Activity: 253
Merit: 250
Hi, I'm a ASICMINER share holder, from friedcat not a PT. I am very interested in buying one when available, could you put aside any for share holders first and maybe leverage their shares to buy one if short on btc?
hero member
Activity: 868
Merit: 1000
Clarification of Unsold Shares
Now ASICMINER controls 163,962/400,000 of the whole identity, while Bitfountain controls 236,038/400,000.

I was under the impression that 50% of all profits were to be distributed to the investors and the other half to the Bitfountain founders. Now it's become roughly 41% for investors and 59% for BF because you stopped selling shares early. Did the original contract allow for this?

What if ASICMINER had been fully funded after only 50k shares were sold instead of after 164k, because of a sudden rise in BTC price? Then we'd have 50k/400k = 12.5% share for investors and 350,000/400,000 = 87.5% share for Bitfountain now?

Doesn't look like a fair solution to me. To get back to a 50/50 ratio for investors and founders, as it was originally announced, you'd have to subtract the 36k unallocated shares from the 200k Bitfountain shares instead of adding them. No?

It has always been said that 1 share of ASICMINER would get 1/400000 th of the dividends.... And it still does.

There are still 200.000 Asicminer shares and 200.000 bitfountain shares.... Only bitfountain now holds 36.038 shares of Asicminer.... Nothing wrong with that
donator
Activity: 1120
Merit: 1001
I think the fairest pricing strategy would be auction.
newbie
Activity: 51
Merit: 0
Regarding selling devices.  I appreciate the cautious tone friedcat takes about pricing.  It would not surprise me if certain other ASIC companies never ship, as pre-orders were in $US that has now depreciated 90% against BTC since those prices were announced.  Pricing in BTC seems to mitigate the risk of error to me.

Also, will any consideration be given to shareholders to purchase devices?  One can hope...  Cheesy
full member
Activity: 219
Merit: 100
Data centers in china are extremely expensive.  It isn't a 1:1 comparison.

All the more reason to start looking for cheap power at data centers outside of China.

Iceland, Canada, Washington, and Nevada all have cheap power.  So do Belarus and Ukraine, from what I hear around here.
Currently it might be more worthwhile to deploy it in China for faster turnarounds - no shipping, export/customs issues ..

^

This.  We can restructure for a lower cost structure later.
vip
Activity: 1316
Merit: 1043
👻
Data centers in china are extremely expensive.  It isn't a 1:1 comparison.

All the more reason to start looking for cheap power at data centers outside of China.

Iceland, Canada, Washington, and Nevada all have cheap power.  So do Belarus and Ukraine, from what I hear around here.
Currently it might be more worthwhile to deploy it in China for faster turnarounds - no shipping, export/customs issues ..
legendary
Activity: 2156
Merit: 1072
Crypto is the separation of Power and State.
Data centers in china are extremely expensive.  It isn't a 1:1 comparison.

All the more reason to start looking for cheap power at data centers outside of China.

Iceland, Canada, Washington, and Nevada all have cheap power.  So do Belarus and Ukraine, from what I hear around here.
full member
Activity: 219
Merit: 100
Part of my day-to-day work is running a data center, if you guys are in Toronto, more than willing to volunteer my time ~~

^This.  AM should have planned out exactly which data centers to deploy at ahead of time.

The data centers should be selected on the basis of cheap power and proximity to their pools' hosts.

Scrambling around building their own is a big loss of time and focus from their core competency of designing, producing, and running ASICs.

Data centers in china are extremely expensive.  It isn't a 1:1 comparison.
vip
Activity: 1316
Merit: 1043
👻
newbie question: if i want to buy some shares i see both bitfunder and btctco got them, any ups and down to buying on either? or anywhere else?

what happens if one of the exchanges pull a quick one and disappear, do i still have the stocks linked to my btc address or email?

sorry if this has been answered already.

The shares on the exchanges are passthroughs, so if you buy them you dont have a contract with asicminer, but with the owner of the passthrough. And this owner has a contract with asicminer. Till now i only know that deadterras Passthrough allows it that you can change the pt-shares into real shares once you have 240shares. (or around that number) The thread linked is for selling real asicminer shares.

https://btct.co/security/ASICMINER-PT

- Free transfers in and out with NO MINIMUM share requirement.
- Lower per-transaction fees than the competition.
- Documented dead man's switch (view btct.co/faq while logged in) that works 100% because of how btct.co shares asset lists with it's issuers.  All my co-workers have to do is forward friedcat the latest list that comes into my email.

Hope that helps!

BitFunder has zero per-transaction fees if all you do is buy and no dividend fees, but btct.co has lower fees overall Smiley
full member
Activity: 131
Merit: 100
So had a crazy idea. Presuming the reason that Friedcat is looking to sell boards, is because of the lack of power, space, manpower and cooling. Rather than straight selling of the boards at auction, thinking there are probably a number of mining corps that would love to get their hands on the boards. (Especially now that Avalon is hoarding theirs for their own mining operation and BFL looks really really late.)

How insane would it be if Friedcat sold boards at a reasonable markup (less than the maximum he could get) to selected mining operations, in exchange for a percentage of either the mining companies equity, or the coins they mine?

-helixone
newbie
Activity: 19
Merit: 0
Clarification of Unsold Shares
Now ASICMINER controls 163,962/400,000 of the whole identity, while Bitfountain controls 236,038/400,000.

I was under the impression that 50% of all profits were to be distributed to the investors and the other half to the Bitfountain founders. Now it's become roughly 41% for investors and 59% for BF because you stopped selling shares early. Did the original contract allow for this?

What if ASICMINER had been fully funded after only 50k shares were sold instead of after 164k, because of a sudden rise in BTC price? Then we'd have 50k/400k = 12.5% share for investors and 350,000/400,000 = 87.5% share for Bitfountain now?

Doesn't look like a fair solution to me. To get back to a 50/50 ratio for investors and founders, as it was originally announced, you'd have to subtract the 36k unallocated shares from the 200k Bitfountain shares instead of adding them. No?
Jump to: