well you know an analysys is totally worthless when you know it was not thought about for longer than the actual post... and also making an analysys based on 100% arbrotrary numbers. And things like "I doubt bfl can pump out huge volume", without having any knowledge of the process, developpement and progress of that said company... why even say that?
For crying out loud. Are you the kinda guy who assumes a SINGLE paragraph can capture a complete market analysis based on a complete set of input data? That takes pages. The post was meant to point out the fact that the first in the market is pretty worthless if you can't compete on volume. I just used some numbers to indicate the magnitudes (*/10). It's a valid approach for napkin science.
Anyway to provide you with more constructive data I've created an excel sheet and put it online
http://ubuntuone.com/7BapyGzeikNy4SVvGKDOaxFeed it with your own set of arbitrary data to get a feeling for how mining rewards work.
And also refuting the "first to get there is important"... thats somewhat lame considering the first can most likely turn from day to day 60% of current hashrate. Everyday at owning that much is huge. And your counter point being its about sustained volume... You do realize the first actually has a HUGE impact on sustained right? Being multiple days at 100% gives you a pretty damn huge advantage that you (how suprisingly) forgot to include in your magical arbritrary formula backed up by pure logic thinking about important factors instead of speculations.
First, I didn't refute anything - just questioned the priority of being first. Second, you do realize that you're falling for the same kind of argumentative traps you're accusing me of here...
The above scripts provides a simple linear growth based yield analysis over 90 days with some arbitrary data (DISCLAIMER). It assumes the base TH to be 20 and two competitors A and B. A is first to the market and can add 1TH a day. A has 28 days head start before B starts putting out 2 TH a day. At day 28, A owns 60% hashrate. Hashrate of A and B is equal at day 55.
In this case total yield for A and B is 133K BTC and 91K BTC, respectively. To break even, B would have to add about 3TH a day instead of 2TH, leading to a yield of 118K BTC and 112K BTC for A and B, respectively.
Thus being second to the market by a month means you'd need to have a 3 fold volume output to break even with the profits of the leader on a 3 months schedule. It's less severe if you calculate on a 6 months schedule (only 2 fold volume required).
So yes first to the market is important, but if you can pump out a 10 fold volume, 1 month doesn't really matter in the long run.
And to actually answer to your request, unfortunatly, with the very small amount of information we have right now, its not even enough to think about doing some sort of market analyst. But as soon as there is relevant market information, I'll definitely give you guys some numbers that will give you a good idea.
With that attitude you never get a business started. You need ballpark figures to play with and get a feel for the market.
Meanwhile, we are predicting a 600k profit.
No, actually the prediction is 0
Calculating on a 3 month schedule with the 1THvs2TH scenario mentioned above the total split will be: 41% A, 28% B, 30% Base
Sorry, I just get annoyed by pseudo-intellectual, a few posts from the same guy, ok, just hopefully people dont take those as facts... But when the most active poster in a thread turns everything "i wish" as facts, its quite misleading.
Never claimed it and every individual who has a brain on its own is likely to get the picture. I am just sorry if I offended you in any way by providing some unsupported ballpark figures.