When mining difficulty increases as many scrypt ASICs come online from companies like KnCMiner and Fibonacci it will affect scrypt.cc just like any other hosted service. I think a service like scrypt.cc using GPUs is more vulnerable, we will see. Companies like Bliss Devices are also developing scrypt ASIC miners that are more efficient than any GPU and can also mine scrypt-N.
Read again, I did both sets of computations. Using the share values, scrypt.cc is still 1.7x better. It isn't even close to equal.
04.26.2014
6.33101774 BTC 0.00415967 BTC
04.29.2014
1.23418776 BTC 0.00069807 BTC
Call it 3 days.
.00069807 BTC / share / 65 KHS / share / 3 days = .00000357 BTC / KHS / day <========= THAT TOTATLY SUCKS
For those 3 days here are the real values from scrypt.cc. (Just choose your days!) I'm in Japan so I'm a day ahead most times.
4/25 .00000874
4/26 .00000634
4/27 .00000624
4/28 .00000620
4/29 .00000665
Even the worst day at scrypt.cc is much better than ScryptsMining.com. 620 / 357 = 1.74
You assumptions about how scrypt.cc will be impacted are pure speculation as none of us have a clue as to what will really happen. However the Gridseed ASICs are real and coins moving away from pure scrypt is also real. If you need further proof about what is going on, just look at how much money people are paying to lease rigs to mine X11. https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/discontinued-cryptoday-mining-revenue-stats-scrypt-scrypt-n-x11-x13-514242 Anyway ASIC companies will always be behind as coin algorithms are easier to change than creating an ASIC.
That fact is you are pushing pure ASIC resellers and ASIC direct and claiming they are better than scrypt.cc because of the relative cost difference. However the data shows a completely different story. Besides that you do not correctly compute the cost of KHS at scrypt.cc, unlike the ASIC farms, the scrypt.cc KHS can be sold. This actually makes the scrypt.cc KHS a lot cheaper.