Network Protection statement from KNCMiner - page 4.

Paladin69

hero member

Activity: 784

Merit: 1000

Quote from: Elokane on July 18, 2013, 10:10:04 AM

This is hilarious.

"We would like to state that If any of our competitors continues to add large amounts of hashing power to the network during December, January or February. We will continue to release our devices as competitively priced as we can to protect our customers share of the network."

How will reacting with the release of MORE mining devices protect their customers?

If they want to take a breather to design and manufacture their next gen they can just say so.

The statement does seem a bit like damage control...for what reason, I'm not sure.

dogie

legendary

Activity: 1666

Merit: 1185

dogiecoin.com

Quote from: SirWizz on July 18, 2013, 12:33:21 PM

Quote from: dogie on July 18, 2013, 12:21:08 PM

This also smells like limited supply troubles.

^ This also smells like dog poo... the supply should be limited because you can't crank out gazilions of chips all competing for the same daily 3,600 pool of bitcoins, it makes no sense. It also would make sense to take a wait and see approach and release Gen 2 when the buyers of Gen 1 actually have the funds to buy Gen 2 hardware.

I have to agree with Bitcoionorama, density is at an all time high around here, it seems.

That logic only applies when accompanied by illusion of grandeur.

yeemartin

member

Activity: 95

Merit: 10

This statement is meaningless.

People only care if KNC can keep their word to start shipping in September.

but i think they are little crazy, 28nm technology chips use for only 3 months production and will then be superseded by the 2nd gen chips ? I guess the 2nd gen KNC chip will be 20nm? no 20nm is not exotic enough, 14nm. KNC 2nd gen must be 14nm!

SirWizz

full member

Activity: 173

Merit: 100

Quote from: dogie on July 18, 2013, 12:21:08 PM

This also smells like limited supply troubles.

^ This also smells like dog poo... the supply should be limited because you can't crank out gazilions of chips all competing for the same daily 3,600 pool of bitcoins, it makes no sense. It also would make sense to take a wait and see approach and release Gen 2 when the buyers of Gen 1 actually have the funds to buy Gen 2 hardware.

I have to agree with Bitcoionorama, density is at an all time high around here, it seems.

Bitcoinorama

hero member

Activity: 532

Merit: 500

Quote from: Raize on July 18, 2013, 11:57:45 AM

Quote from: af_newbie on July 18, 2013, 10:53:21 AM

Look what happened to Avalon. I don't think there will be many people ordering batch 4.

I'm pretty sure that if there's anything Avalon has taught us, it's that from now on no legitimate company will be doing preorders. Avalon was better off selling the chips to others that would make their own ASICS, and that's exactly the route they eventually pursued, albeit a bit too late. Sad

Yifu did say it was a huge undertaking that they weren't entirely prepared for, especially when a big player could have come out of nowhere, and I am glad they've succeeded in having an almost completely successful Batch 1, almost successful Batch 2 (lack of communication on the SMT was a huge faux paus), not very successful trade-in (most of us have lost about 3 BTC per Icarus over the last three months and still haven't gotten a trade-in email yet), and successful only-because-they-allowed-a-refund Batch 3. Of course, this pales in comparison to the disappointment from BFL, but there's still room for a mining manufacturer that can provide troll-resilient customer service.

Legitimate companies that don't take preorders need serious funding, or equity on tap to cover NRE from the hundreds of thousands to the millions. For such a niche product, unfortunately it's had to happen this way w.r.t. pre-orders...

dogie

legendary

Activity: 1666

Merit: 1185

dogiecoin.com

This also smells like limited supply troubles.

af_newbie

legendary

Activity: 2702

Merit: 1468

Quote from: minternj on July 18, 2013, 12:01:02 PM

how about getting gen 1 chips made first before this shit.

+1

Talk is cheap. Maybe they've jumped a tiny shark with this one.

minternj

sr. member

Activity: 434

Merit: 250

This is getting very late night telemaketing-ish.

Buy now while supplies last! But wait theres more - Gen2 + better hash/$.

how about getting gen 1 chips made first before this shit.

Raize

donator

Activity: 1419

Merit: 1015

Quote from: af_newbie on July 18, 2013, 10:53:21 AM

Look what happened to Avalon. I don't think there will be many people ordering batch 4.

I'm pretty sure that if there's anything Avalon has taught us, it's that from now on no legitimate company will be doing preorders. Avalon was better off selling the chips to others that would make their own ASICS, and that's exactly the route they eventually pursued, albeit a bit too late. Sad

Yifu did say it was a huge undertaking that they weren't entirely prepared for, especially when a big player could have come out of nowhere, and I am glad they've succeeded in having an almost completely successful Batch 1, almost successful Batch 2 (lack of communication on the SMT was a huge faux paus), not very successful trade-in (most of us have lost about 3 BTC per Icarus over the last three months and still haven't gotten a trade-in email yet), and successful only-because-they-allowed-a-refund Batch 3. Of course, this pales in comparison to the disappointment from BFL, but there's still room for a mining manufacturer that can provide troll-resilient customer service.

Paladin69

hero member

Activity: 784

Merit: 1000

Seems like they are trying to create a panic rush of buyers before an undisclosed window is closed this year.

RoadStress

legendary

Activity: 1904

Merit: 1007

Bitcoinorama people are strange and usually understand things the way they want to, not objectively.

qwk understood that they will ship more devices "if they feel like it" although they said that they will ship more devices ONLY if their competitors continue to add large amounts of hashing powers.

dogie the same. He is saying that money>> character even if they are proving exactly the opposite thing with their statement. I mean if money >> character they wouldn't release such kind of statement and they would continue to ship units as they please.

Logic fail big time for both of them.

tlr

member

Activity: 86

Merit: 10

TLDR: "We won't ship any devices in Dec, Jan, or Feb (unless our competitors do (which they are likely to do))"11

af_newbie

legendary

Activity: 2702

Merit: 1468

First, let's see if they ship in September.

Why they even send this out is beyond me. Who cares what your intentions are?
Who are you trying to convince that you care?

Unless it is a scam and they want to milk more suckers before this thing goes belly up.

If I was doing H/W, I would want to get it out of my door as soon as possible because it COULD become obsolete
in weeks if not months. But then again, they pre-sold stuff months in advance so they don't care when they are going to ship.

Look what happened to Avalon. I don't think there will be many people ordering batch 4.

Bitcoinorama

hero member

Activity: 532

Merit: 500

I swear people in this forum are quite simply dense.

No where does this display any innate arrogance.

They want to play fair and protect customer ROI, but they aren't going to be walked over like little bitches by greedy competitors hellbent on making a quick buck and killing the hashrate in the process, therefore their response can only ever be to remain competitive.

How the f**k can you genuinely misconstrue their words to mean anything different?!?

If you're not a KnC customer, you should, by all accounts be breathing a heavy sigh of relief. Likewise if you are a KnC customer...

Elokane

hero member

Activity: 817

Merit: 1000

Truth is a consensus among neurons www.synereo.com

This is hilarious.

"We would like to state that If any of our competitors continues to add large amounts of hashing power to the network during December, January or February. We will continue to release our devices as competitively priced as we can to protect our customers share of the network."

How will reacting with the release of MORE mining devices protect their customers?

If they want to take a breather to design and manufacture their next gen they can just say so.

felente

full member

Activity: 147

Merit: 100

Quote from: Loredo on July 18, 2013, 09:31:42 AM

This is signaling, as much to the competition as to the customers, and it likely won't have any effect on any vendor's behavior.

of course )

Quote from: androz on July 18, 2013, 09:44:58 AM

seems that knc want play fare with their customers, but now the times are not mature for statements

sure ))

not that im against knc - considering by myself an order there.
but. have one more mailing conversation (short) with them, again about "all that fairness" regarding "all their customers"... (not need to quote here).
now to be honest i'm suspecting a knc-megalomania-case, well, in light form

ok. nobody is perfect.
counts only that they do their primary job as promised. i will be happy then Cool

androz

hero member

Activity: 728

Merit: 500

Crypto-ideologist

Quote from: Loredo on July 18, 2013, 09:31:42 AM

After equilibrium is reached, oligopolists don't conspire; they don't need to. They respond to each others' statements of intention and signals.

Before equilibrium is reached, they fight over their shares of the pie, and no agreement is possible.

This is signaling, as much to the competition as to the customers, and it likely won't have any effect on any vendor's behavior.

seems that knc want play fare with their customers, but now the times are not mature for statements

maybe in the near future we 'll see if the vendors play a cartel agreement for squeeze pragmatically more money from the costumers

Loredo

full member

Activity: 238

Merit: 100

Quote from: felente on July 18, 2013, 09:14:52 AM

how i have read this:

Quote

we are aware ... that we need our customers ... in order to purchase form us again.
therefore ... our plan is to do as follows:
With the scale of the supply chains ... we will not ship ... [as well as] ... any of our competitors ... [or We will (try to) ship again]...

wtf the arrogance.
is this an agreement between (at least some) competitors? or is this what?

After equilibrium is reached, oligopolists don't conspire; they don't need to. They respond to each others' statements of intention and signals.

Before equilibrium is reached, they fight over their shares of the pie, and no agreement is possible.

This is signaling, as much to the competition as to the customers, and it likely won't have any effect on any vendor's behavior.

felente

full member

Activity: 147

Merit: 100

how i have read this:

Quote

we are aware ... that we need our customers ... in order to purchase form us again.
therefore ... our plan is to do as follows:
With the scale of the supply chains ... we will not ship ... [as well as] ... any of our competitors ... [or We will (try to) ship again]...

wtf the arrogance.
is this an agreement between (at least some) competitors? or is this what?

dogie

legendary

Activity: 1666

Merit: 1185

dogiecoin.com

money>>character

Topic: Network Protection statement from KNCMiner - page 4. (Read 5513 times)