Topic: Mining Equipment Manufacturers - page 8. (Read 55732 times)

Thanks for this new arrangement, I think it's quite a fair way to represent the list. I did notice that if you would sort them based on a higher difficulty rise (such as 20%) the table would look quite different. I'm not entirely sure why this is.

Today I got an email from someone today who is disturbed by the GH/BTC column. 
Many people may remember the time that I took that table down in favor of the % of profitability table.  The response was overwhelmingly negative.  The problem with it, though, is that it is a meaningless way to measure the competition.  This is because of the timing involved, compared with rising difficulty.  If a company says they are shipping a product in June 2014 with a great GH/BTC they will shoot to the top of the list.  It won't matter if they are profitable or not.

For the most part companies are pricing their equipment in a way that reflects a GH/BTC that puts them in a reasonable place.  I would like to switch over, though, because I don't want to give anyone the impression that this is a good way to measure.  The column itself is a vestigial part of the table left over from before I had enough lead times to be able to put down ROI.

The main table now will be % of ROI, or profitability.  The reason it took me a while to be able to switch to this, is that I needed to have the information about each manufacturer posted on their own page.  Since I finished that this week, and got reminded in the email I mentioned to do this, I think it is time.

Let me know if you have any concerns,
FCTaiChi

We have already addresses it previously and we aren't locking up customer's funds under no basis. Customers will have the option of requesting a refund month's before we start shipping and we also added a 30% escrow deposit option that will provide prospective customers with more options.

We already have completed a highly competitive IC design and sent it out for MDP but until we start opening sales to the public we reserve the right to limit what we publish due to a number of reasons.

I do, which is why, with all sincerity I don't know how you can launch pre-orders imminently and lock people's funds in escrow on the basis you may deliver something in the future, and without the most crucial element in place; a team of ASIC experienced IC designers.

You're coming from a women's fashion retail webstore background and not that of the IC industry, and the odds of hitting a very very specific deadline with minimal if any room to manuvre a very finite timescale are not in your favour.

They're non existent without a design team, so how can you open for pre-orders guaranteeing a future delivery date? This is not a dig, this needs addressing.

We will always have an ongoing recruitment operation as we are always interested in talking with as many talented design and verification engineers as possible.

Do you really believe that similar companies such as ASICMINER or Avalon stop recruiting as soon as they complete the final iteration of their ASIC?

If you'd knew anything about this industry then you would know how difficult and time consuming it is to recruit engineers in this space that are familiar with the latest geometries and methodologies.

The main problem is the fact that in the last month so many "companies" popped up with "very efficient" and "cheap" devices. And none of them released anything "real" its all just big talk and nothing exists. As long as they dont release something real, in quantities bigger than just 10 prototypes they are as trustworthy as him

Nor do they have any kind of design team to speak of; they're still running ads for IC designers, let alone any with any real ASIC experience.

they announced tomorrow on twitter, not sure for what. But maybe they are releasing some "big numbers" tomorrow. Just wait and see.

But i am with you in the point of "the numbers are just not right" seems too good in my opinion.

Please remove xCrowd from your chart. The numbers are just not right. The xCrowd website isn't even available atm. Let them announce final numbers first.

Just an FYI - VMC and AMC merged into one company - ActiveMining - which is on the stock exchanges. VMC is the hardware division of ActiveMining

I've had it with intervals of 5 starting at 10 before, it's an informative set.  I'll show you what it looks like day after tomorrow.  I don't want to switch just yet with all the other new changes happening today.  Tomorrow is xCrowd day.  Today was HashFast, and 'OMG what is Avalon going to do' day.

Agreed... 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% would be way more useful.  Right now you are doing your readers a disservice by showing clearly overly optimistic numbers.  Your readers are going to quickly see that these charts are less useful when they actual growth rate is so much larger than your worst cast scenario (at least for the next 5 months).

lol yeah, the reason the 8% is there is because the timespan is a year.  If I went down to 6 month it would make a little more sense, and I'd be able to add the higher short term numbers.  I think it's unlikely we will be at 20% average over the next year.  Not impossible, but 30% seems pushing it.

It would be fun to eventually have a couple different time spans.  I think I'll need to automate the picture posting somehow before I can add too many more pictures.  Someone I know said Drupal could probably do it, but I'm not sure I want to spend the time to figure all that out.



-edit Added KnCMiner's December pricing, very interesting, I thought it wouldn't make a difference.

Would you consider 25% and 30% difficulty growth columns?  If you need space you likely can drop the 8% column.  If difficulty only grows 8% every two weeks for the next year well nobody needs a chart to see how insanely profitable they are because they will be laughing all the way to the cold storage.  Then again it is never going to happen.

Excellent site.

Thanks, fixed

edit-
About VMC I was advised by a couple people to watch out for them when they first went public, but I haven't seen any reason.  Especially if you take into account their connection with AM.

edit-
Didn't see that you had challenged me on not adding them, they are there, with their own page and all.  Was going to add it earlier, after I did the research last night, but got caught up with other things.

They just have a complicated setup - two companies VMC and AMC, one has shares on a virtual stock exchange the other sells rigs with chips created by an FPGA->ASIC process at 28nm, apparently.

Seems kind of hard to parse what exactly is going on. I don't even see their ship date listed on their website.

Everyone seems to have written off VMC as a scam. However, I'm not so sure... I see them as the dark horse in this arms race. Sure, they may be a little weird.. (which is to be expected IMO from IT-geeky type guys.) Sure, their approach might be a little unorthodox. However, you have a lot of unproven companies on this list and I don't think it's fair you exclude them.

Tell me what evidence you have that they are an obvious scam? I have seen no empirical evidence stating that is the case. A lot of hot air and theories, but no actual evidence. Shouldn't all these companies be treated the same until proven to be scams? You are possibly touting scams over legitimate businesses if you don't include them all.