Also Avalon is selling in-hand ASICs for 30BTC 750 GHs (see here), estimated additional price to produce working miners is around 20 BTC (burnin is testing the prototype in a few days). 50 BTC 750 GHS = 0.06-0.07 BTC/GHs. They are less efficient than Bitfury chips so you have to add electricity price to it. Yifu's reputation aside, this have to affect the GHs price a bit.

Price flirting with .12 today...I personally sold off my shares @ .116 since I didn't think the upward trend would continue. Will probably buy back in if the price goes below .11 again.

I noticed that period 25th - 27th September you mentioned on the other thread and wondered what had happened. I rather naively thought it was just bad luck but was surprised as I also mine with BTC Guild and although there can be erratic patches, in the time I have been using BTCG, there hasn't been anywhere near that amount of time passed without a block being found. Quite the opposite really, BTCG is very smooth, even for PPLNS

Like some of the other commentators above, it's sometimes hard to take seriously some of the price movements on the CEX order book. Whilst there's no way to tell for sure, it feels that someone is playing both sides of the ledger.

It would be good to hear an explanation from the company, something longer than just a couple of lines of rebuttal. Your analysis really does require addressing by CEX as it's all out there in plain sight and if there is diversion of client hashing for nefarious uses, it's completely distasteful.

Perhaps CEX needs a genuine competitor to 'keep them honest'?

 

No, you can't double-spend easily by just putting a higher fee. Transaction replacement is disabled in the reference client, so once the transaction is broadcast and is accepted to nodes mempools, the nodes will reject double-spends that come later.

That's why you still need hashpower to include double-spends into blocks.

Let's assume for the sake of the discussion that what is alleged to have happened did actually happen. What would be the benefit of doing such a thing? Are they alleged to have 'won anything' while supposedly gambling or was the act more of a 'flexing of muscles to see what was possible'?

I didnt say pool mined no blocks, I said they didnt mine any to their address. Supposedly they used different address which I mentioned in my post.

im confused abut this as well. i expected the .12 peak, but i was genuinely suprised when the market moved beyond that and even touched .14 with brief support. rode from .083 to .095, got off, got back on at .099 and rode til .118. i want to reenter but the price is much too high at the moment/violates my internal rubric for purchase.

when it does crash (current selling pressure + thin buy side) it will be messy.

and i will sift though the rubble and hash again.


just takes one panic seller with a large enough position to bring it all down.

I think its because the Hardware Redeem option, people like to have hardware they can control...IMHO

price of btc is moments away from its historic peak. ppl will be liquidating positions to peg to fiat in case the price of btc falls. expect a slight dip in the price of cex ghs if it breaks the ceiling. its pretty obvious its gonna go higher than 250 eventually, so not that concerned.


but yeah, don't know what's up with these prices. perhaps this is the unmanipulated market at work? selling pressure is starting to increase a bit. price support at .1, .095, .083, .08. if it breaks .08. it going right to .07 with that massive wall sitting there. lesser walls beyond that, but at that point, unless you purchased at the bottom of market last change you are already at a loss.


still waiting to feast.

I'm looking at the official CEX thread from time to time but this thread has been running for longer and being unofficial it remains free from the sycophancy and fanboy mentality that official threads sometimes develop.

The interests of clients and management are not always the same and I'm not going to be posting on the official thread as in my opinion they've offered rather weak replies to comments raised there, particularly those by RoadTrain earlier here:

https://bt.irlbtc.com/view/321630.0

The topic was raised on the official thread and CEX seem to think that the inquiring minds of bitcoinland will be fobbed off with a couple of ill-conceived sentences from their support staff (who I have to remark have been very quick, helpful and proactive in all my direct dealings with them) but it's not good enough just to ignore this matter when it's raised on the supposed official thread:


I'm less interested in what people think are market-moving factors (although speculative observations are always interesting to read) than I am in CEX management responding to genuine client concerns as ignoring matters like this just further weakens the perception of integrity that CEX has. And like IYFTech says above, I'm not interested in taking any sides or making accusations either, but serious questions have been asked, so serious answers are required.