The issue, say with ASICminer as an example is that they are now so powerful, they have to limit their deployment until some competition catches up. That's not catches up with ASICminer, they just need to increase the cumulative hashrate so much so ASICminer can then deploy more ASICs for themselves.
Because there is zero real competition for them currently, they have decided to sell their old stock, which is exactly what their blades are, old used parts if their mining process.
They sell at inflated prices to what manufacturing costs were under the guise of allowing the free market to dictate value. They then also sell worthless USB novelty trinkets based on their old ASIC design in the meantime preparing for their gen 2 chips.
The free market has decided the value of these blades are equal to the blade not making any real profit until a point when there is likely to be competition. Instead of just buying coins, those put purchasing their blades ensure the funds are continuously paid to the ASICminer monopoly. At the same time their funds are tied up free of alternative investment as and when it appears. Although that's largely down to impatience on their part.
Avalon have zero non recurring engineering costs, but are throwing out thousands of heavily marked up chips to people as they have no competition there under the guise of decentralisation. The fact is their chip buying wallet has enough funds for 760,000 of their overpriced chips. There has been a handful of griup buys on this forum. Where is the rest going to?
What are the chances ASICminer are selling off old stock to kit themselves out with their new gen2 chips those people paying OTT prices for their current blades are paying for to deploy before they think their blades will become profitable for them.
There is no fairness in this. This isn't about not being affluent enough. It's a shady business model that doesn't benefit Bitcoin.
We need some new and serious contenders and we need them now.
Avalon and ASICminer and even BFL have good point about them, but Avalon and ASICminers pricing structure is not one of them...
Topic: ASICs are Over priced - page 3. (Read 5023 times)
Sorry if I'm missing something, but http://www.asicminer.co/ doesn't seem to have anything for sale. Is there another website? Are they out of stock?
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/asicminer-blade-sales-temporarily-out-of-stock-204030
Nothing at all in my post suggested centralization. ASICs are already in the hands of hundreds if not thousands of people. How do you figure anything close to centralization is going on right now?
Together, ASICMiner and BTCGuild could attempt a 51% attack. Presuming of course that there is some hash power on BTCGuild that is discrete from ASICMiner.
The ASICMiner deployment alone controls over 20% of the network.
His issue is with the price of ASICs, not with the percentage of the hash rate amongst the pools as I understood it. People are free to mine where they like. If you want 1000 pools contributing to decentralization, good luck with that. I'd rather mine in a pool that has a reasonable chance at finding a block.
Really ! you still insist that they are worth that money ? allot of people here would agree on my point, only some owners of an ASIC are defending their position !!! It is not only about me not able to afford one, you are really ignoring allot of facts here.
You are rehashing the same stuff now. As I said, a widget is worth what the market will pay. Right now, people are happy to pay 49.99 for a blade that will be profitable in 6 months or less. It's hard to argue something is not worth what something is selling for like hotcakes, but you are attempting to do so. Good luck. I disagree.
and I do respect your point of view, but this doesn't make it right.
Sorry if I'm missing something, but http://www.asicminer.co/ doesn't seem to have anything for sale. Is there another website? Are they out of stock?
Really ! you still insist that they are worth that money ? allot of people here would agree on my point, only some owners of an ASIC are defending their position !!! It is not only about me not able to afford one, you are really ignoring allot of facts here.
You are rehashing the same stuff now. As I said, a widget is worth what the market will pay. Right now, people are happy to pay 49.99 for a blade that will be profitable in 6 months or less. It's hard to argue something is not worth what something is selling for like hotcakes, but you are attempting to do so. Good luck. I disagree.
Quote
I gotta disagree, it's over priced to make the few (manufacturers) a profit based on all the earnings possible until the point at which they believe real competition is likely to enter, not based on manufacturing costs and reasonable profit. This is centralisation.
+1
this is my hole point thank you for expressing it
Nothing at all in my post suggested centralization. ASICs are already in the hands of hundreds if not thousands of people. How do you figure anything close to centralization is going on right now?
Together, ASICMiner and BTCGuild could attempt a 51% attack. Presuming of course that there is some hash power on BTCGuild that is discrete from ASICMiner.
The ASICMiner deployment alone controls over 20% of the network.
$1,500.00 for 68 Gh/s
should've had faith in Yifu
should've had faith in Yifu
should be an early adopter, I didnt even know what Bitcoin was when AVALON was taking orders.
I really don't understand the complaint. I can't afford a Ferrari or a Lamborghini, but I don't whine about it on a public message board.
If your concern was really about securing the network (as opposed to profit), you would just buy some ASIC Miner shares at an amount you could afford, or even some of the escrowed group buys that people on the forum have been advertising. Then your money is going toward increased hashing. I suspect you just want to make a ton of money though, and are bitter that you can't afford to buy an ASIC of your own. Am I right?
If your concern was really about securing the network (as opposed to profit), you would just buy some ASIC Miner shares at an amount you could afford, or even some of the escrowed group buys that people on the forum have been advertising. Then your money is going toward increased hashing. I suspect you just want to make a ton of money though, and are bitter that you can't afford to buy an ASIC of your own. Am I right?
Sorry to "intrude" but IMHO your missing the point. The network didn´t grow and prosper because of a few "investors" with enough money to take over a considerable amount of combined hashing power. As far as I know, one of the core principles of Bitcoin is the ability of as many participants as possible - the more the merrier. No trust issues because of the big big numbers of participants. The chance to earn new coins now and to earn from fees later. No centralized control. No centralized power over the currency.
When participating with CPU - no problem. Anyone with a computer could participate without considerable cost.
When participating with GPU - no problem. Anyone with a newer computer could participate without considerable cost.
ASICs are not only a completely new game, it´s completely new sport.
When buying shares from whoever, there is nevertheless a centralized huge hashing power beyond the control of many.
When buying ASICs now because of deep pockets of a few and profiting huge in the coming few month and "reinvesting" that money after massiv increase of difficulty bears the risk of centralizing instead of decentralizing.
A lot of people (and I assume the creators of Bitcoins) wanted a currency that depends NOT on the decisions of a few. You can call this "few" government, feds, Bundesbank or Oligipoly of rich ASIC "investors". Bitcoin is more than a network, more than a way to print your own money and more than a kindergarden of tech-freaks. If the community doesn´t respect the principles, Bitcoin will go down the road of any actual currency. I don't want a "FED" consisting of a handful of miners with hashing power no one with a computer can do anything about.
I trust a network build of thousands of family men with a computer a lot more than a network of elite ASICs.
No offense - just my two cents.
Nothing at all in my post suggested centralization.
Also, what is the problem with waiting a few more months until the price comes down to something he can afford?
This has nothing to do with centralization and everything to do with greed. He can't have what he wants right now, and therefore it is overpriced in his opinion.
Really ! you still insist that they are worth that money ? allot of people here would agree on my point, only some owners of an ASIC are defending their position !!! It is not only about me not able to afford one, you are really ignoring allot of facts here.
I really don't understand the complaint. I can't afford a Ferrari or a Lamborghini, but I don't whine about it on a public message board.
If your concern was really about securing the network (as opposed to profit), you would just buy some ASIC Miner shares at an amount you could afford, or even some of the escrowed group buys that people on the forum have been advertising. Then your money is going toward increased hashing. I suspect you just want to make a ton of money though, and are bitter that you can't afford to buy an ASIC of your own. Am I right?
If your concern was really about securing the network (as opposed to profit), you would just buy some ASIC Miner shares at an amount you could afford, or even some of the escrowed group buys that people on the forum have been advertising. Then your money is going toward increased hashing. I suspect you just want to make a ton of money though, and are bitter that you can't afford to buy an ASIC of your own. Am I right?
Sorry to "intrude" but IMHO your missing the point. The network didn´t grow and prosper because of a few "investors" with enough money to take over a considerable amount of combined hashing power. As far as I know, one of the core principles of Bitcoin is the ability of as many participants as possible - the more the merrier. No trust issues because of the big big numbers of participants. The chance to earn new coins now and to earn from fees later. No centralized control. No centralized power over the currency.
When participating with CPU - no problem. Anyone with a computer could participate without considerable cost.
When participating with GPU - no problem. Anyone with a newer computer could participate without considerable cost.
ASICs are not only a completely new game, it´s completely new sport.
When buying shares from whoever, there is nevertheless a centralized huge hashing power beyond the control of many.
When buying ASICs now because of deep pockets of a few and profiting huge in the coming few month and "reinvesting" that money after massiv increase of difficulty bears the risk of centralizing instead of decentralizing.
A lot of people (and I assume the creators of Bitcoins) wanted a currency that depends NOT on the decisions of a few. You can call this "few" government, feds, Bundesbank or Oligipoly of rich ASIC "investors". Bitcoin is more than a network, more than a way to print your own money and more than a kindergarden of tech-freaks. If the community doesn´t respect the principles, Bitcoin will go down the road of any actual currency. I don't want a "FED" consisting of a handful of miners with hashing power no one with a computer can do anything about.
I trust a network build of thousands of family men with a computer a lot more than a network of elite ASICs.
No offense - just my two cents.
Nothing at all in my post suggested centralization. ASICs are already in the hands of hundreds if not thousands of people. How do you figure anything close to centralization is going on right now?
Also, what is the problem with waiting a few more months until the price comes down to something he can afford?
This has nothing to do with centralization and everything to do with greed. He can't have what he wants right now, and therefore it is overpriced in his opinion.
I gotta disagree, it's over priced to make the few (manufacturers) a profit based on all the earnings possible until the point at which they believe real competition is likely to enter, not based on manufacturing costs and reasonable profit. This IS centralisation.
$1,500.00 for 68 Gh/s
should've had faith in Yifu
should've had faith in Yifu
I really don't understand the complaint. I can't afford a Ferrari or a Lamborghini, but I don't whine about it on a public message board.
If your concern was really about securing the network (as opposed to profit), you would just buy some ASIC Miner shares at an amount you could afford, or even some of the escrowed group buys that people on the forum have been advertising. Then your money is going toward increased hashing. I suspect you just want to make a ton of money though, and are bitter that you can't afford to buy an ASIC of your own. Am I right?
If your concern was really about securing the network (as opposed to profit), you would just buy some ASIC Miner shares at an amount you could afford, or even some of the escrowed group buys that people on the forum have been advertising. Then your money is going toward increased hashing. I suspect you just want to make a ton of money though, and are bitter that you can't afford to buy an ASIC of your own. Am I right?
Sorry to "intrude" but IMHO your missing the point. The network didn´t grow and prosper because of a few "investors" with enough money to take over a considerable amount of combined hashing power. As far as I know, one of the core principles of Bitcoin is the ability of as many participants as possible - the more the merrier. No trust issues because of the big big numbers of participants. The chance to earn new coins now and to earn from fees later. No centralized control. No centralized power over the currency.
When participating with CPU - no problem. Anyone with a computer could participate without considerable cost.
When participating with GPU - no problem. Anyone with a newer computer could participate without considerable cost.
ASICs are not only a completely new game, it´s completely new sport.
When buying shares from whoever, there is nevertheless a centralized huge hashing power beyond the control of many.
When buying ASICs now because of deep pockets of a few and profiting huge in the coming few month and "reinvesting" that money after massiv increase of difficulty bears the risk of centralizing instead of decentralizing.
A lot of people (and I assume the creators of Bitcoins) wanted a currency that depends NOT on the decisions of a few. You can call this "few" government, feds, Bundesbank or Oligipoly of rich ASIC "investors". Bitcoin is more than a network, more than a way to print your own money and more than a kindergarden of tech-freaks. If the community doesn´t respect the principles, Bitcoin will go down the road of any actual currency. I don't want a "FED" consisting of a handful of miners with hashing power no one with a computer can do anything about.
I trust a network build of thousands of family men with a computer a lot more than a network of elite ASICs.
No offense - just my two cents.
Nothing at all in my post suggested centralization. ASICs are already in the hands of hundreds if not thousands of people. How do you figure anything close to centralization is going on right now?
Also, what is the problem with waiting a few more months until the price comes down to something he can afford?
This has nothing to do with centralization and everything to do with greed. He can't have what he wants right now, and therefore it is overpriced in his opinion.
The higher price for those Blades and USB, the better 
(Got ASICMINER stocks..)
(Got ASICMINER stocks..)
Absolutely overpriced. Paying BTC2.5 for ~300 MH/s or even BTC50 for ~10 GH/s does not make sense. You can get 300 MH/s GPU equivalent for ~BTC1. Sure, the power cost is higher, but this is not the main factor at these initial prices of hardware. Also, GPUs at least have some resale value if you decide to get out. Overall, migrating to the new technology does not make sense yet, as market is far from equilibrium.
I am glad to see not everyone sees things my way, because that is exactly what makes my decision meaningful. Good luck to you all. I will wait for the right opportunity to get some ASICs.
I am glad to see not everyone sees things my way, because that is exactly what makes my decision meaningful. Good luck to you all. I will wait for the right opportunity to get some ASICs.
BLades are not so overpriced
for 49.95 btc (shipping free) in 3 days u got 13GH device wchich consumes only 120W
after one month from now they will payoff 16btc
until christmass it will be payed off for sure.
they can have also great resale value after few years. they can be at museum/collectors/auctions
disclaimer
i am erupter blade 1pcs bagholder, happy having silent (noctua fans nf-f12) device matching power of 20 radeons 7970, netbook size
i wouldnt get avalon cause it is noisy and ugly
I really don't understand the complaint. I can't afford a Ferrari or a Lamborghini, but I don't whine about it on a public message board.
If your concern was really about securing the network (as opposed to profit), you would just buy some ASIC Miner shares at an amount you could afford, or even some of the escrowed group buys that people on the forum have been advertising. Then your money is going toward increased hashing. I suspect you just want to make a ton of money though, and are bitter that you can't afford to buy an ASIC of your own. Am I right?
If your concern was really about securing the network (as opposed to profit), you would just buy some ASIC Miner shares at an amount you could afford, or even some of the escrowed group buys that people on the forum have been advertising. Then your money is going toward increased hashing. I suspect you just want to make a ton of money though, and are bitter that you can't afford to buy an ASIC of your own. Am I right?
Sorry to "intrude" but IMHO your missing the point. The network didn´t grow and prosper because of a few "investors" with enough money to take over a considerable amount of combined hashing power. As far as I know, one of the core principles of Bitcoin is the ability of as many participants as possible - the more the merrier. No trust issues because of the big big numbers of participants. The chance to earn new coins now and to earn from fees later. No centralized control. No centralized power over the currency.
When participating with CPU - no problem. Anyone with a computer could participate without considerable cost.
When participating with GPU - no problem. Anyone with a newer computer could participate without considerable cost.
ASICs are not only a completely new game, it´s completely new sport.
When buying shares from whoever, there is nevertheless a centralized huge hashing power beyond the control of many.
When buying ASICs now because of deep pockets of a few and profiting huge in the coming few month and "reinvesting" that money after massiv increase of difficulty bears the risk of centralizing instead of decentralizing.
A lot of people (and I assume the creators of Bitcoins) wanted a currency that depends NOT on the decisions of a few. You can call this "few" government, feds, Bundesbank or Oligipoly of rich ASIC "investors". Bitcoin is more than a network, more than a way to print your own money and more than a kindergarden of tech-freaks. If the community doesn´t respect the principles, Bitcoin will go down the road of any actual currency. I don't want a "FED" consisting of a handful of miners with hashing power no one with a computer can do anything about.
I trust a network build of thousands of family men with a computer a lot more than a network of elite ASICs.
No offense - just my two cents.
+1
I really don't understand the complaint. I can't afford a Ferrari or a Lamborghini, but I don't whine about it on a public message board.
If your concern was really about securing the network (as opposed to profit), you would just buy some ASIC Miner shares at an amount you could afford, or even some of the escrowed group buys that people on the forum have been advertising. Then your money is going toward increased hashing. I suspect you just want to make a ton of money though, and are bitter that you can't afford to buy an ASIC of your own. Am I right?
If your concern was really about securing the network (as opposed to profit), you would just buy some ASIC Miner shares at an amount you could afford, or even some of the escrowed group buys that people on the forum have been advertising. Then your money is going toward increased hashing. I suspect you just want to make a ton of money though, and are bitter that you can't afford to buy an ASIC of your own. Am I right?
Sorry to "intrude" but IMHO your missing the point. The network didn´t grow and prosper because of a few "investors" with enough money to take over a considerable amount of combined hashing power. As far as I know, one of the core principles of Bitcoin is the ability of as many participants as possible - the more the merrier. No trust issues because of the big big numbers of participants. The chance to earn new coins now and to earn from fees later. No centralized control. No centralized power over the currency.
When participating with CPU - no problem. Anyone with a computer could participate without considerable cost.
When participating with GPU - no problem. Anyone with a newer computer could participate without considerable cost.
ASICs are not only a completely new game, it´s completely new sport.
When buying shares from whoever, there is nevertheless a centralized huge hashing power beyond the control of many.
When buying ASICs now because of deep pockets of a few and profiting huge in the coming few month and "reinvesting" that money after massiv increase of difficulty bears the risk of centralizing instead of decentralizing.
A lot of people (and I assume the creators of Bitcoins) wanted a currency that depends NOT on the decisions of a few. You can call this "few" government, feds, Bundesbank or Oligipoly of rich ASIC "investors". Bitcoin is more than a network, more than a way to print your own money and more than a kindergarden of tech-freaks. If the community doesn´t respect the principles, Bitcoin will go down the road of any actual currency. I don't want a "FED" consisting of a handful of miners with hashing power no one with a computer can do anything about.
I trust a network build of thousands of family men with a computer a lot more than a network of elite ASICs.
No offense - just my two cents.
Absolutely overpriced. Paying BTC2.5 for ~300 MH/s or even BTC50 for ~10 GH/s does not make sense. You can get 300 MH/s GPU equivalent for ~BTC1. Sure, the power cost is higher, but this is not the main factor at these initial prices of hardware. Also, GPUs at least have some resale value if you decide to get out. Overall, migrating to the new technology does not make sense yet, as market is far from equilibrium.
I am glad to see not everyone sees things my way, because that is exactly what makes my decision meaningful. Good luck to you all. I will wait for the right opportunity to get some ASICs.
I am glad to see not everyone sees things my way, because that is exactly what makes my decision meaningful. Good luck to you all. I will wait for the right opportunity to get some ASICs.
Quote
By saying that you don't have the money to join the "club", but also saying you'd like to mine and earn to support your family, means that you need to mine and put all your coins back into mining and scale up - eventually you'd be able to afford more powerful hardware. For many of the people in the "club", that is exactly how it was done.
Why would you not invest the money if you had it? I'm not sure how you can complain about others being able to afford it, say that you want to mine to help your family with the profits, but also say that you wouldn't invest to do it even if you could. Huh? What exactly is this all about then?
Why would you not invest the money if you had it? I'm not sure how you can complain about others being able to afford it, say that you want to mine to help your family with the profits, but also say that you wouldn't invest to do it even if you could. Huh? What exactly is this all about then?
I see that allot of people are missing the point here or just ignoring it, lets say that I am buying a ATI 7950 cards and you are selling each for 1500 $ and you are the only one that have it on stock, I wont buy it even if had the money and even if there is some one out there willing to pay that price, this doesn't mean that the 7950 costs that much, it only means that you are using your position to make a shit load of profit on customers needs. this what I cant get , this is the hole point that you are all missing these prototypes are over priced , we could all have one if they just sold them for their real value
I cant afford a Ferrari as well, but I have allot of alternatives which suite my budget ... and I do not have the 9000 $ to join your club
So don't drop $9k then. You can get an AMD 7950 for ~$300 to get your feet wet.
... an alternative to suit your budget.
The conventional wisdom in GPU mining these days is to move to LTC.
Jump to: