Topic: [LABCOIN] IPO [BTCT.CO] - Details/FAQ and Discussion (ASIC dev/sales/mining) - page 691. (Read 1079974 times)

I'm still skeptical towards Labcoin, but you are most definitely right here, never mind MPOE-PR, you can't go more troll then that.

I don't get involved in poo-flinging with mentally unstable children, but I find it pretty 'rich' that the owner of an exchange where the only share traded is the exchange itself is accusing people of 'fake trading'. I hope you can get some help with whatever mental issues you are struggling with since apparently every single company except your own little dog and pony show is an outright scam.

I very much enjoyed your blog post on the 'failure' of ASICMINER by the way, very insightful 

Let's see if a pictographic description of reality has any better chances of getting through the fog inside them towers of genius than simple text:



via.

Get it? Nobody is actually buying this shit. You're all stuck in a lulzy alternate reality where Burnside is faking the trades and Labcoin is fleecing what few bitcents you've managed to collect by clicking on faucet sites and begging on dice sites.

Towering geniuses of powerlol.

(Mandatory reading for noobs: The anatomy of a scam; The positive market effects of the delivery bet.)

I will post more chip images, pictures of running miners, specs, documentation etc. as soon as it becomes available. I would also like to point out that the 'TheSwede' on bitbet.us is NOT me. I have made if clear before and I stick by the fact that I do NOT trade, bet or in any other way personally profit off any access to news or events regarding Labcoin. Doing so would in my opinion be unfair and dishonest. I also will not ever comment on development or share price etc. through personal messages or emails in any form.

No pictures of chips I lack the technical expertise to identify anyway, so I'm dumping everything



   --signed, An 'investor'

http://bitbet.us/bet/521/labcoins-own-130nm-design-sample-chips-will-be/
Show your chips are working and make an end to y'all haters
You can "hedge" yourself just in case! since you are the only one knows the result

awesome company 

Hey Update! BUY BUY BUY, last moment to grab your share before the FUDs!

UPDATE-ISH:

I have just got off talking to Sam (not that way you Pervs). As you know we had some problems connecting the last few days, part technical and part because apparently we both require the occasional sleep.

No, I have not been fired, quit, disappeared or been eaten by Chtulu. Everything is moving forward according to plan and the team is hard at work preparing for the initial roll-out in week one of Sept.

After the roll-out the plan is to release chip documentation, more specs/pictures, PCB reference design and move to full production orders and bulk chip sales.

I know there are quite a few people interested in buying bulk-chips and/or miners and as we get closer to bulk chip arrival we will get back to everyone. Focus right now is verification, mining, documentation and receiving chips IN HAND.

It has always been the team's belief that especially as an unproven project pre-orders are the bane of the bitcoin community, something that has just been underscored again by the recent unfolding regarding for example Avalons chip delivery "issues".

One of the clear advantages of 130nm is the readily available production runs and low bulk production cost. With this in mind Labcoin has decided to not go the "pre-order" route and only accept orders for hardware with delivery date less than 10 days from order placement. As we hope is clear Labcoins 1st gen chips are not 'state of the art' chips that will push the limits on power consumption and effective but rather Labcoin focuses on pushing the envelope in terms of chip cost and time to market. As it looks now, we should be able to compete in price/hash-rate with December competition, and deliver chips as early as 2 months ahead of them, something that should be ROI+ no matter power cost for the mining public.

That's all the information I have for now. I am not going to set a "hard date" for the next update as it is apparent that doing so only creates unnecciary drama and I feel it's not in anyone's interest to feed the trolls who believe that a 48 hour delay in update means the end of civilization.

That's all for this time.

TLDR; Everything is moving forward as planned. Mining start is planned for week 1 of Sept. Documentation, bulk orders etc. will follow in the coming week/weeks after mining start. Me and Chtulu had a few drinks and are now thunder-buddies for life.

Do you mean die size or feature size?  28nm and 130nm are feature sizes, how big the transistors are.  Die sizes are how big the chips themselves are, and thus how much they cost to manufacture.

Smaller feature size means you can cram more transistors per mm², which means you can get the same hash power with smaller, cheaper dies.

So in other words, the shipping company with the electric trucks and solar panels will have a much higher startup cost, but in the long run they will be able to charge less in the long run once that cost is amortized because they won't have to pay for gas or electricity.  They can continue to charge less until their competitors go out of business, if they feel like it.

But anyway, that doesn't really matter that much at this point, because there is so much profit available everyone can make money.  For now. But labcoin is going to have to keep up with the technology curve in the long run.

Are you afraid of calculators?

Assuming the 3-4TH mentioned is online before Sept 10., can we get a MH/share and a dividend calculation of that hashrate?

+1
that's right, we're not making smart phones or tablets and I think we're long way off before we're going to see pocket miners.

Labcoin have decided wisely to get hashing in shortest time possible.

You're wasting time trying to explain anything to the average 'investor' here.  They simply aren't smart enough to get it, though they imagine themselves to be towering geniuses.

It's better if they don't get it, anyway.  Cheaper shares for those of us  who do.

Everyone, just stop with the die size comparisons. They're completely useless for differentiating profitability. They'd be useful for expressing differences in package size or interface speeds, but they do not belong in the conversation for profitability.

Let me put it to you as an illustration:

There are two shipping companies that go into business at the same time, OldShip and NewShip. OldShip buys older planes and used diesel trucks, warehouses relatively far out from airports in a cheap industrial zone, and tries to be as lean and nimble as they can to compete, even if that means using older but reliable equipment to save on costs. NewShip uses brand new planes and electric trucks, puts their solar-powered warehouses right on the high-rent flightline for super-fast loading and unloading of their cargo planes, and emphasizes the use of new technology whenever possible.

Assuming both can get the undamaged package delivered in the same amount of time, which company do you choose to ship a critical 10-pound package overnight from Miami to Seattle?

If you said "well, that depends - what does it cost?", you're exactly right. People don't buy shipping services for the company's brand new planes or their electric trucks or their solar-powered warehouses, they buy shipping services to get a package of a certain size across the country undamaged in the time allotted. Similarly, serious bitcoin miners don't buy die size or flashy packaging (unless you want a shiny AsicMiner USB stick for the lulz), they buy hashrate per [insert currency here] from whatever costs the least amount today. So, to put this on investment terms, who makes more money, OldShip or NewShip? Well, that depends on their effective costs. If OldShip can provide the same service as NewShip for less per package and can therefore charge less, they're going to get the bulk of the business and probably the bulk of the profits. (It's more complicated than this, but this is just an illustration.)

As I'm sure you can guess, I'm suggesting Labcoin is like OldShip, using tried but true technology that's available virtually off-the-shelf. They're focusing on the end result being the fastest hash rate for the least amount of capital. Companies such as ActiveMiner are like NewShip, striving for bleeding-edge technology, but they have to wait in line for the factory to fulfill their infrastructure orders before they can start shipping, and they lose out on the few months they could have been in business while waiting. That 10 pound box is like 10 gigahashes/second - as a buyer, it doesn't matter how you get it, what kind of label is on it, or if you sign a paper or electronic clipboard on delivery... you just want the most hash rate for the least amount of money ASAP.

So, please - enough with the emphasis on die size. As long as Labcoin's design can provide the same hashrate for less money, even if it means using more physical chips to do it, they can use vacuum tubes* for all I care.

^{*Very, very small vacuum tubes. Or maybe orphans with a bunch of abacuses, that would probably be less heat to dissipate.}

TheSwede sold his shares before posting the news?   #joking

It's interesting that the smallest bit of news will shot the stock up, yet other (IMO) better stocks can actually have solid news and nothing changes..lol 

I believe that is easily explained by AM making much more and way easier money by selling the blades than by mining with them. They can sell them at a price that never sees ROI (for whatever strange reasons buyers have).
They can only do this because they have no competition, literally none. This behaviour will not survive this year, I'm 100% sure. Future miner sales will be at competitive prices when the different mining companies (including AM and LC) will have to battle for their customers. It will be interesting to watch how far down they can and will go with their prices before it's again more profitable for them to mine themselves.

People see "28nm" and lose their minds.  People don't realize that ActiveMining's chips are done using an FPGA-ASIC conversion process, and are going to be a lot slower per mm² then the chips from KnC/HashFast/Cointerra.  They get the energy and transistor switch advantages, but spread over a lot more area, but there chips aren't going to be that much better in terms of pure silicon cost then Labcoin's.

1. The current counter-party risk of ActiveMining is at least as high as Labcoin, and in my opinion higher; the "given that" is a little bit big.
2. If you deliver 2 months late, very probably that will reduce lifetime mining revenue by a factor of 4.
3. Labcoin isn't going to sit on the 130nm chips forever, and they are already working on 65nm. Granted it's not as good as 28nm, they won't be too far behind.

The 28nm chips need to have at least 16x earning potential to justify the current price. Just imagine, if Labcoin keeps 1% from October, then ActiveMining has to keep 4% from December. If Labcoin keeps 5% then ActiveMining has to be as big as ASICMINER.

On the other hand, ASICMINER has had staggered expansion rate beyond 40TH/s (though with 130nm hardware) despite continuous blade production, which at least means keeping 4x the mining rate is not just 4x more difficult. This can partly be explained by the diminishing returns of mining expansion; say the network has 1000TH/s, and you have 10% i.e. 100TH/s. Put in 100TH/s then you'll get around 18.182%. Put in another 100TH/s you only get 25%. You spent 3x as much money but only get 2.5x more return.