Their promised date to offer a refund is September 30th. That’s only 1 month before Obelisk. Obelisk is currently on track to ship units as early as August, however we’ve learned to put some buffer days in because things can go wrong during manufacturing. This may just be a case of Innosilicon being less conservative with the number of buffer days they are using.
The Innosilicon machines make a 2.5x TMTO in order to support CC32. That means that their machine will be able to produce more weight per second on CC31 until May 2020. That gives any competition over a year to come up with a superior CC32 miner, and that competition has an automatic advantage because they will likely not need a TMTO.
In my appraisal, Innosilicon’s CC32 functionality does not add any practical value, especially because the TMTO is so heavy.
No offense but Obelisk has a track record of delivering nothing on time. First to market has a huge advantage. If both companies ship on time and Innosilicon delivers 10,000-20,000 units, what’s the ROI look like for an Obelisk miner two months later?
If Innosilicon delivers 10,000 units, every single Innosilicon unit will lose money even if Obelisk doesn’t ship at all. This is why Innosilicon’s lack of commitment to a production volume should be an extremely large red flag. You have no idea how many miners are coming, but if it’s more than 3,000, there is no opportunity for those miners to make their money back.
Innosilicon has never made a sustainable number of miners for a small altcoin like Grin. If their sale is successful, I believe it’s reasonable to expect that every single one of their customers will lose money, even if they have the only miner on the market.
If Innosilicon makes 10,000 units, then the GRN1 will not be profitable.
Obelisk is offering transparency around production volumes, is offering conservative shipping dates, and is offering conservative specifications. Obelisk is also offering official audits to reassure customers of our process and that our claimed specs and architectures are accurate.
We are doing everything we can to assure our customers, if you think that there is more we could be doing, we are open to suggestions.
You can be the most transparent company in the world but acting like a child and mocking your competition can only hurt your reputation. IMO, being beat to market on a third ASIC may demonstrate that you guys should go back to decentralized storage. I, like many people, have lost interest in Siacoin because of the Obelisk scandals/distractions.
We are raising awareness about their deceptive and predatory business practices. We have seen through many of their products in the past that they will act and produce in a way that is toxic and damaging to their customers. We see bad things happening and we feel that the right thing to do is to call them out on it.
Why do you think we can expect Inno to make at least 5,000 G32-1800 units? That’s $45 million spent to capture a total block reward of $30 million. Whoever funds that production is strictly losing money.
So by that logic Obelisk should cease selling unprofitable “toxic” preorders that will ultimately damage their customers? Or should a free market be allowed to be a free market? You can’t fork your way out of getting beat to market this time.
I hope so. Both sides have seemingly priced their units on inflated future values.
I would imagine its far better to self-mine then sell units in depressed market. So price the units high enough that you make good money on sales if they sell, and self mine as backup in case they don’e find buyers… I suppose that’s what will happen, unsold units will go to self-mining. Until the price recovers.
You are right on the notion of potential self-mining.
Manipulation of peoples’ perception and the overall market is problematic in this unregulated space.
-wash-trading to create an artificial volume,
-paper tigers to inject FUD or mis-direction… until it is too late
-emergence of “new” member IDs and posts.
-secret-mining and then dumping of those very same miners to customers
Perhaps, this Grin ASIC rollout has validated one thing. There must be something of real value here to create this food fight between the players.
Someone will come out on-top. Will it be the dirtiest player? Or will there be space for more than one player?
Wouldn’t you agree that selling preorders for Obelisk miners that you admit will not ROI is “toxic and damaging to their customers”? The very same critique that you have of Innosilicon practices. Are you no better than Innosilicon now?