Keep in mind that even if a 54 GH bASIC uses 150W (2.5x) and a 60 GH BFL Single uses 60W, they're competitive for the first year of operation (assuming $0.12/kwh), regardless of the difficulty factor:
bASIC: $1099.99 + $157.68, $23.29/GH
BFL: $1333.00 + $63.07, $23.27/GH
And surely both will be obsolete within a year, so don't tell me about how many pennies you'll save after the first year.
And if it turns out the bASIC will use 250W, CablePair can simply lower the price by 10% or overclock to 60 GH to regain competitiveness.
The important factors to be considered when
investing in ASICs is price per GH and delivery speed. The big question one should ask right now, is will a
new BFL order be delivered before or after a
new bASIC order, as that will affect the bottom line far far more than power cost. We have some estimates when each will ship the earliest orders, but in BFL's case especially, the delivery date of new orders is a wild guess. The sooner BFL figures out and publishes estimates of when they'll catch up with all pre-orders, the more sales they'll take from bASIC.
This is a good point, but I think your missing the point of the ASICs. If you invest in a high power consumption ASIC, it ceases to become profitable much faster than a lower power one. You say that they will both be obsolete in a year, but that just doesn't make sense. They become obsolete when they no longer have a positive ROI - so naturally, the one with the lower power consumption becomes obsolete later. In the case of a 2x bump in power consumption that means your device becomes completely useless much sooner than a comparable device.
I dunno about you, but I'd rather mine on a device for 3 years than 1 year and have to fork out more money to stave off obsolescence. Not everyone can keep investing money year after year. That's why power is the most important aspect of an ASIC device and it literally defines if the device is viable or stillborn. Tom is basically the only hold out on the ASIC front as far as power figures go and it makes me question why that would be. Either he or his engineers have a rough estimate (or at least I would hope so!), and putting that out there would be the transparent thing to do, even if it's with the caveat that "it's only an estimate and may change by 20%" or something similar.
I understand what you are trying to say, but there are two large issues to your position on this matter.
Respectfully, the first issue is that BFL and bASIC are both selling a
tethered device which means it must be connected to a desktop PC, Laptop PC, or other mobile device.------------------------------
The average desktop PC at idle consumes about 150watts.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Desktop_computerThe average laptop (depending on specific design) consumes anywhere from 30watts (ultra portables) to 90watts (DTR's [DeskTop Replacements]).http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Desktop_replacement_computerhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultra-mobile_PCSo you are never actually running a BFL device with a mere 60 watts. You are consuming 60 watts plus the overhead for the tethered PC. At best your total power consumption is greater than 60watts. Either it is at 30watts extra or closer to 210watts.* Not including the Host PC
monitor which ads anywhere from 20 to 80watts depending on monitor quality.
The same will be true for bASIC mining hardware. This is why I chose Avalon instead of BFL or bASIC. As long as their standalone system comes somewhere near 200 to 300 watts they are pretty much in the same neighborhood as BFL and bASIC actual operating expense. If they do better than that they are still competitive.
------------------------------
The second large issue is that you ?appear to assume? the individual
isn't going to make a sufficient amount of BTC or Fiat Money to cover the costs of an upgrade to a second or third generation BitCoin mining device in a years time.
If the Mining device is that unprofitable over the span of a single year...then why bother selling them if you can't replace the cost of the device plus a healthy profit margin within 1 year?? (Heck, even in 3 months of mining)
This ultimately means that unless the device is seriously underperfoming or consuming a significant amount of power, it will make it's ROI (Return on Investment) with ample profit. There will be those with a few hundred dollars less in their pocket due to higher electrical costs. While others with a few hundred more in their pocket due to power efficiency.
The difference is relatively minimal (IMO) considering the overall net income from mining over 1 year.
