Quote from: dogie on February 28, 2015, 11:01:01 PM

Quote from: Finksy on February 28, 2015, 08:44:19 PM

What exactly prompted you to upgrade Bitmain's pre-order status anyways? The L1 pre-order is still part of this current generation, and they haven't released a new generation.

And I agree with SP-tech. They claim to sell next gen out of hand. If they even allude to changing this strategy and offering pre-orders, you can go ahead and down-grade on the spot. Why is Bitmain getting preferential treatment in this pre-order category?

So these are very different scenarios. I'll quote the criteria again so you know what I'm talking about.

Quote

Preorders are extremely bad for the industry and put all the financial risk on the buyer. This criterion does not act as a snapshot, but a longer term (both past and future) "does
this company engage in preorders". A company who's business model relies on preorders to fund development and new generations is still considered to utilise preorders even if
they intermediately sell some products from stock. Transitional scores may be used when companies have promised the exclusion of preorders but have yet to prove their business
model can operate without them.

What is essentially proposed here is that there are two conditions that must be true to be considered non preorder. The first is don't participate in preorders in the past or future within reasonable timescales. The exact time period is entirely subjective as its not stated specifically, but its not really a problem. The second condition is that the business model must be able to support preorders otherwise you get fishtailing. Imagine a company which between every preordered generation they had some left over stock they sold from stock. Are they a "no" preorder company even when everything is funded on preorders? That company only exists and can continue to exist by using preorders.

So now we've set out 2 conditions, as well as transition arrangements when one is moving from preorders to no preorders. Lets look at how it applies to the two companies.

Bitmain
Is there any evidence that Bitmain wants to be a preorder company? No. L1 was a bad decision and they knew that almost immediately. As soon as L1 was preordered, Bitmain lost its "no" preorders status.
When did they last take preorders? Novemberish, 3+ months ago.
Have customers been negatively impacted by preorders? No. When the scypt market failed, they pulled the plug to the benefit of the customer rather than locking people into negative prices. At the same time, they over refunded customers over how much they paid (105-110% IIRC). On top of that, because they were $ linked orders the customer made significantly more by being cancelled.
Were L1 preorders any significant amount of money? No. Compared to S3 S4 S5 C1 etc it was a meaningless amount.

So from that above, Bitmain satisfies the first condition. They held the penalty from preordering L1s for 4-5 months.

Does Bitmain have to prove that its business model can support a non-preorder model? No because we already know it can. That company is incredibly funded and can essentially do what its want. This is evidenced by HUGE non preorder 28nm runs and liquidity. There is no question that Bitmain can bring out products without needing preorders or investment.

Therefore Bitmain has satisfied both conditions and can be considered a non preorder company again.

Spondoolies
Is there any evidence that Spondoolies wants to be a preorder company? They say no, but I was troubled as to what happened in the first generation and its something I discussed with them at the time. Even when they were selling 'in hand' hardware via batches [fine], some batches were being sold 3-4 months in advance alongside future generation preorders. That's dangerous territory and that need for cash is worrisome.
When did they last take preorders? Probably Oct, but they were still delivering preordered units until December.
Have customers been negatively impacted by preorders? Yes. SP10's were preordered a sufficiently long period that there was unacceptable risk put on the consumer. SP30's were preordered far into the future and came in significantly under spec and late. SP31s came in under spec.

So from the above, Spondoolies is at best a boarderline satisfaction of the first condition. This is carried forward though and its considered to be a pass.

Spondoolies fails on the second condition. With all the want in the world, they just can't afford to run another generation without significant preorders, OR, significant investment. There is no evidence that their current business model can do preorders. You'll likely see in the coming months how this plays out. Essentially what this means is that Spondoolies needs to raise money, and its more than possible. That is why they're not simply swatted down and remain in a preorder score, they're given a transitional score which gives them the benefit of the doubt and the ability to prove they can raise the money.

Therefore Spondoolies has NOT satisfied both conditions and can not be considered a non preorder at this time.

And just for the record, I have no problem with discussing issues when its posed in this fashion. No one is name calling and an adult discussion is proposed. Now if there is an issue we can talk it out and work out what to do next for the better of the community.

Here's a situation I could've used one of your TLDR's. I'm going to base this discussion on the fact that you aren't biased towards any company, but to be fair it gets harder to believe every post. I am a fan and customer of both Bitmain and Spondoolies.

Anyways, with my second question I was questioning your model for evaluation, which is of course up to you it's your thread (though for the sake of transparency, don't call it a "Free resource guide". You auction off advertising space. It's like calling a YouTube channel a free community resource based on hardship and the goodness of one's soul. Traffic = money, cut the altruistim act) I still believe you are misleading potential customers by labelling them as taking pre-orders, your rating makes them look like they are selling pre-orders at present. If they do start selling pre-orders, I just don't see why it can't be changed to reflect their current business model in the same way Bitmain's was down-graded at the time they decided to. Consumers are generally smart enough to know if they are buying something physical or hopes and dreams, and even the shadiest hardware companies haven't lied about whether products were in stock or not.

As for the future criteria you have established, who the hell are you to decide whether a company can fund its next generation of hardware with or without pre-orders, are you their accountant? Also, to satisfy your criteria why do they have to be able to prove that they have the capital to produce an entire line of hardware? If anything that is biased towards smaller companies with less sales. I doubt even Bitmain has enough capital to design and produce every miner for their next generation without selling in batches, and nor should they otherwise there is money left on the table and better spent elsewhere. Even if someone doesn't have the capital (which again, how you would base this judgement is beyond me) and decides to seek outside investors or loans (still not pre-orders, as the risk still falls on the company) why the hell should it matter? It doesn't affect the customer at the end of the day.

Now, as far as upgrading Bitmain's rating. I assume you have looked at their balance sheets and statements to be assured that they have the capital to fund their next full generation of miners? Because they have clearly accepted pre-orders in the same time frame as SP-Tech w/ their L1. You are basing your "future" criteria in this instance on past performance by using their 28nm line-up, which shows how flawed that logic is. It's called speculation, at least have the decency to admit it.

Lastly, if you really want to be specific and follow the word of the law (which you have shown to whole-heartedly), Bitmain sells their miners as a pre-order, even if it's only a few weeks:

Antminer S2 goes on sale March 14th Expected ship date: April 1st
Antminer S3 goes on sale: June 30th Expected ship date: July 10th-20th
Antminer S4 goes on sale: September 16th Expected ship date: End of September

So tell me, exactly how does receiving funds and not shipping products for 2 weeks+ not qualify as a pre-order according to your criteria?

You claim to be bias-free, but all of your qualifying criteria are completely subjectively based. It appears you make up whatever qualifiers you need to justify your ratings and decisions instead of the other way around. That is not neutral.

MOST IMPORTANTLY, you keep telling SP-Tech that you will upgrade their rating when they release their next generation hardware and sell from stock. BMT SOLD PRE-ORDERS IN NOVEMBER, YET STRANGELY I STILL DON'T SEE THEIR 16NM LINE RELEASED? That my friend, is complete hypocrisy.

If nothing else, I ask that you please address this question directly: Why has BMT been upgraded without having released a new generation of miners without pre-orders, when SP-Tech is not being held by the same standard?