It's just a matter of time before fees completely erase mining income for those who own cloud hashing.
Not that I disagree with you, but lets be fair to Cloudhashers (is that even a term, if not I HEREBY CLAIM IT
). This has nothing to do with cloud hash, it has to do with difficulty going up and the price of BTC not increasing. I know you agree with me based on your comment on another thread:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=737629.20"The home user obviously can't mine if difficulty goes up but the fiat price doesn't - they can't get BTC ROI currently and then they may not even get fiat ROI."
My personal opinion is cloudhashing offers the least risk to any "investor" but this is all dependent on scale and assuming legitimate cloud vendor.As part of my experiment, I have some GHS at Cex.io and in my experience fees being higher than share reward is an exception, not the rule.
CK
Risk and Reward.
Risk is pretty much money spent on the outlay for the investment when buying cloud hashing. For physical mining it would also include people's time.
Reward should be the same for both assuming both have the same hashrate and we make the assumption that the pools should have negligible effect on the end total of income.
So the only difference in Risk/Reward is the higher or lower Risk.
Physical mining always carries a lower risk since even with miners placed in a colocation center the total outlay would be less than that of any cloud hashing.
Physical hardware has risk of hardware failure and cloud hashing has risk of getting scammed.
Buyer decides which is greater Risk.