Topic: is cloudhashing.com a scam?? - page 17. (Read 46873 times)

Proves nothing because you're hiding the delivery name and address so the assets many not even belong to the LTD company but directly to Emmanuel Abiodun.

Since you have posted the image of your order showing that the minirigs would be delivered to the UK,. This contradicts  what you have stated on your previous posts that the minirigs would be housed in a US location close to BFL, thus reducing downtime within a 24hr window. Please explain.

Yes. I am not changing my opinion of this looking like a scam until an actual user of the service reports otherwise.

Someone that can make a nice website such as cloudhasing.com can also alter documents for proof in Photoshop with ease.

That document proves nothing IMO.

Well, I guess the only way that we will know is if people actually use it & give reports. There is no point in speculating whether it is or is not.

forum posts use bbcode, not html.

https://picasaweb.google.com/104878918886305681953/ProofOfPurchase?authuser=0&feat=directlink

Proof of last 3 Mini rigs for cloudhashing.com.

Enjoy

If I knew the answer to that, I would be a Bitcoin hardware manufacturer than a service provider :-). However, we are looking to use additional mining hardware to limit our exposure to BFL. Unfortunately Avalon's solution is not workable as the power requirements is sky high to be scalable. We will continue to monitor the market for such opportunities.


That is not what that sentence means. Its is a general maintenance contract phrase. If the service can no longer be supported for one reason or another, for mining its down to profitability, then we can decide to do 2 things

1)  sell the hardware and return the sales proceeded to our customers.
2) Use our cash reserve to continue till no more money is available.


It is not there because we would be foolish to promise something we have no measure of yet. Once the hardware arrives and we have it running for a while, these kind if things can be written into the T&C.

Scenario 3: BFL closes shop and no longer can support your SLA.

What generic hardware can be used in this scenario to replace components on your minirig if this was to happen?

EDIT
=====

From your T&C:

"This contract shall expire when bitcoin mining becomes unprofitable at which time the parties may extend it by agreement in writing."

Does this mean the contract holder needs to fork more money out to maintain the business model?

In your T&C, there is no mention of what availability you would promise to contract holders. What percentage of availability do you promise on contract holders? 90%? 99%? 9.9999%?

Scenario 1 : Full device failure - we will be given a replacement within 24hrs by BFL as per our SLA. Our host partner is in the same city as BFL.
Scenario 2: Hash rate is less than quoted i.e. 1450 instead of 1500. - we have a 20-30% tolerance with each machine. Meaning our cut of the machine gets hit. Not our clients.


As above, we have a 24 hour agreement. Same day if possible. This means minimal down time.

Hope that answers your questions

Kind regards

I have posted this in the cloudhashing thread but it seems not to appear so i'll repost here. (To Moderator, please delete which ever of the two if my previous post does appear.)

What are your fault tolerance policies if a minirig failed? I assume that one minirig could hash at a rate of 1500GH/s (as per BFL's advertising) and assuming that 1GH equates to a minimum of one contract per GH, then 1500 contracts would be affected.

BFL have not issued the specifications of the minirig and I am assuming it has no fault tolerant hardware or High Availability hardware either; such as hot swappable PSU's or ASIC racks if there was a failure within the minirig. If this was the case, perhaps you should look into having a redundant fail over cluster to deliver the hashing capacity as promised by your contracts.

[Edit 13th April]
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/coincanaryorg-no-longer-updated-all-known-vendors-and-status-176262

We have been reviewed and cleared

I doubt you will ever get an ASIC Mini Rig the power specs put them at crazy watts and they've been 2 weeks away from delivering since October
2012.

"I doubt' meaning your opinion.

A private limited liability company just means we cannot sue you personally so not that impressive.

Nip picking here. What would you prefer? Even when Lehman went bust, who is seeing the individuals? Look a limited company makes the best sense for what we are doing. There are many people who do the same. Besides, your point is no entirely true. If I am found to have run a fraud, I can face jail time. This is law, period!!!

Date of Incorporation: 25/02/2013 only a month or so ago, so no trading history, no accounts, there could be £1 in the company which means as soon as someone sues it folds leaving outstanding creditors with nothing.

As the proof documentation sent to 2 HERO members show, I bought the hardware before selling a share to the public.

A private limited company is restricted from selling shares to the public so you call them "Contracts" but the fact you offer "pay-out" and "reinvestment" makes them sound like shares, instead of a product or service.  

Calling them contracts is not an issue last time I checked legally. Pay out is in virtual 'currency' not cash. Reinvestment is in additional hardware.

If you want to sell financial contracts in the UK the law says you need to register with the http://www.fca.org.uk or you could go to jail if someone reports you to them first!

Reading my terms and conditions, if you bothered to....you will see I am selling computing processing power. Its more like a service. Nothing to do with financial instruments. And I am very proficient with financial instruments.

Warmest regards

Copy of my post from the other thread on this subject...

I received some emails from him after having expressed reservations about this project.

I haven't had (or got today) time to look at them in great detail - but on the face of it, it definitely seems as though he DOES have orders for the hardware he claims to have ordered (I have order numbers, screen-shots of amounts paid etc) and that at least the majority of those were ordered and paid for before he began selling shares to the public.

That's obviously a vast step up from most such offerings.  And the way he's dealt with my criticisms/comments IS what I'd expect from someone who was legitimate rather than a scammer.

I can't say with certainty that what I was sent wasn't edited/faked - but if he gives permission I could ask BFL to verify that the orders he's shown to me exist, are in his name (which I have) and are for what he claims they're for.

I've also seen some evidence of sales - though that's harder to verify.

Whilst I'm not going to vouch for this or anything I'd say there's a very high chance that he intends to do *and is capable of doing) what he's offering to do.  How profitable it wil be is for investors to decide for themselves (and largely depends on what BFL do - which is beyond anyone's ability to predict).

I have expressed my concerns in the thread he's advertising his services on here: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/cloudhashing-asic-mining-contracts-uk-ltd-company-now-mining-paying-bitcoin-173316

This is awful fishy

Sent you a series of emails as discussed.

Thanks

Well the company exists - i.e. is registered.

Whether they actually have orders for the claimed hardware is unknown - seems very likely they ordered something from BFL, but whether 1 Japaeno or 20 mini-rigs is anyone's guess.  Most likely GUESS (and that's all it is) would be that they've ordered some gear are planning to buy rest with funds they raise but are claiming to have ordered all as it sounds better.  Whether they intend to actually pay out is also anyone's guess - exactly same chances as when you send money to anyone else without any track-record or history here.  Some of them are genuine - a lot aren't.  Are the odds good enough to gamble (which is what it is - as there's a significant non-zero chance it's a scam)?  Depends how much you like gambling.

Address seems to be a mail-forwarding address which is never a good sign but not exactly hard evidence of anything wrong.

Will you make a profit if you invest?  Can't verify their figures but IF they have preordered the hardware and IF BFL deliver before too long and IF they aren't scamming then you'd probably make profit if you're in the first bunch of shares.  Later batches (where hardware DEFINITLEY isn't ordere yet) it's highly unlikely the profit will justify the risk until you're sure they're paying out - at which point it's too late anyway.

My recommendation?  If you're serious about investing then require proof they bought ALL the hardware they claim to have ordered BEFORE the date they started taking orders.  If they can't/won't prove it then walk away - there's no reason for them not to prove if they actually ordered.  And if they haven't ordered all but are doing a pre-order thing then they already lied once so zero reason to trust them again.  If, on other hand, they DID order it all then there has to be very good chance they're genuine - which is certainly unlikely to fail to make a profit (whether anywhere near what they estimate depends very much on how early their orders were and just how soon BFL actually ship).

Do also make sure to check WHEN they'd start paying.  Is it as soon as they start mining or is it a few months later after taking the best profits for themselves - from memory there was something on the site that suggested they wouldn't pay anything until July even if the machines arrived tomorrow.  And make sure to get clarification on what happens if BFL don't ship on time, the machines break down etc - if you have a 1 year contract then it ain't much use if you end up not mining at all for some of it (is it 1 calendar year or 1 year of actual mining?)

All these unresolved details are one reason why you should always be very wary of dealing with anyone who posts stuff up and offers only the choice of order/don't order - without any clear mechanism for resolving/clarifying queries BEFORE parting with cash.

hey guys i found this new site called cloudha...... oh .. you are already talking about it -_-


Anyways, I agree with most of the critics here. So cloudhashing is somewhat similar to Asicminer .. the only difference is that they dont create their own ASIC's ... Biggest loophole in this is the fact that Cloudhashing is relying on (apparently) BFL products, a company who is more interested in winning the beauty pageant contest with their rigs rather than actually deliver them.
I wont blame them, Who would wanna sell a MINT ? right ? hahaha


IF this cloudhashing thing is real I'd like to sell my kidney & invest hopefully if BTC is priced at 1000k by next year I SHOULD get enough money to get a new KIDNEY and then some

But who is gonna tie the knot around the cat's neck ? in other words WHO will verify this company's existence and authenticity ?

Those comments were not so much addressed at you as at potential investors - who should always be wary of any investment claiming likely returns without revealing the basis on which they were estimated.  If you've been around here for a while you'll likely be well aware of how badly people got burned investing in fixed-rate mining bonds (in particular - but mining investments in general) before.

Any credible model has to address issues well beyond just hash-rate - things like projected BTC/USD exchange-rate are critical.  It only needs a badly wrong estimate on one such factor (or totally ignoring its impact) to make an otherwise reasonable projection entirely useless.  As you refuse to explain how you arrived at your suggested returns it's pretty hard for anyone to verify them.

There's also some detail in your contract which could use clarification.  As an example, consider the situation where the price of new hardware makes purchasing it non-profitable.  Do perpetual contracts still invest 30% in expansion even though it won't make a profit?  If not, where does the 30% go?  Does that change if the issue is seen as likely to only be short-term?

Is a 10% management REALLY expected to cover ALL costs?  Even if BFL rigs end up failing after only a year?  Seems hard to see how 10% can cover all costs AND also cover replacement for ALL units when they eventually fail.  Or is that when "perpetual" ends?

Are investors paid on what you actually mine or on PPS?  That's kind of an addendum to the previous point - as if their machine breaks down do they then get zero income from 1 GH/s of non-functioning hardware?

Is the 30% reinvestment done at cost - or at a similar markup to the original investment?  The contract is strangely silent on specifically how the increase in capacity is applied.

What happens if BFL fail to deliver by July?

etc etc

The devil's always in the details - and you've provided very few of those.  Choosing whether to invest or not is about far more than whether something is a scam.  There's also the minor issue of whether it will be profitable.  That's even more critical on an investment like this which appears to offer no exit strategy.

Hi,

Its one thing to question our legitimacy. However, management consultancy or business advice is not what we are requesting. Merely not to be painted in a negative manner.

Warmest regards

A very glib answer - which totally misses the main issues.

First off, your results CAN'T be duplicated by using the bitcoin profitability calculator - as difficulty isn't the only factor which comes into play, especially for the perpetual contract.

With the perpetual contract a lot of the potential comes from the reinvestment.  But what that deliver isn't ONLY affected by difficulty - but also by the price of additional hash-power.  Without knowing what price you're assuming expanded capability will be able to be bought at there's no way anyone can possibly attempt to validate your projections.  If you're estimating returns of 6 BTC on a 1 BTC investment in first year then with the returns only representing 60% of mining output that means 3 BTC minimum must have been reinvested.  So depending on how you believe expansion will be priced the actual mining power/contract at the end of a year is going to be somewhere within a large range very much higher than the initial power bought.

And on pricing you face a bit of a two-edged sword:

If supply is (as at present) totally unable to meet demand then price for hardware will continue to rise (on the secondary markt if not the primary) and delivery will take a long time - meaning the benefit from extra investment will be a lot less (and a lot later) than a naive model may assume (and I've seen some terrible models where cash available for reinvestment was assumed to automagically instantly turn into active hashing power).

At the other extreme, once supply surpasses demand then mining will return to where it has historically been - with more miners joining rapidly until profits are slim to non-existent.  At which point reinvestment just becomes throwing good money after bad with, as usual for mining companies, yourselves taking your 10% cut from TURNOVER even when no profit is being generated (due to payments to contract owners going out at a rate slightly slower than the assets they own depreciate).

That's why my question about selling it in the first place (if it exists - glad to see you ordered at least something, but it could be 1 Jalapeno for all a quoted email proves).  The returns you've offered MAY be possible on what you've currently ordered - but definitely WON'T be possible on later batches.  Shocking as it may be, there's loads of other people planning to do the same thing - and once you all try doing it, none of you end up with the expected profits.  That's the nature of BTC mining - that it's very briefly NOT the case is an exception caused by a lack of supply during the transition to new technology.