Re: Ordinals and other non-monetary "use cases" as miner reward on 2140+
⭐ Merited by d5000 (2)
If we look at the 2024 halving from a reward perspective, it was less devastating for miner income than 2016 and 2020, because the reward is already so low that transaction fees are increasing their share, so it's no more a 48-50% income reduction but more close to 40-45%.
Income! That's the problem!
I mined at 45 cents/th back in 2021, I could take a 66% drop because I would still be profitable even at 15 cents/th.
If I would still have mined at 10 cents/th (before halving) and got even a 33% I would be losing money!
Income at 45 cents and expenses at 8 cents/ths means a cut of 50% I still make 18cents/s profit!
Income at 10 cents and expenses at 8 cents means that a 50% I'm in red by 3 cents!
In 2020 we also had much more bearish conditions than now in 2024, if we take into account that the price in 2019 had reached almost $15.000 and at halving date was around $10.000, and also there was price stagnation for some months (and the real bullrun only began in November).
A lot of different things, profitability was still higher by 40%.
The s19 was shipping in May after a shitton of preorders because it was outperforming the s17 from 0.045j/Gh to 0.034j/Gh.
The summer had cheap energy from China, which is not here anymore see the power curtailing in the US now .
ROI at 0 costs for the s19 was still just over a year, not two and a half years for the s21 as now.
Another argument could be that the current hashrate is "inflated" due to publicly listed mining companies like Riot who diluted their shares but are probably mining on a loss actually, i.e. operating close to a "ponzi" but preserving a high hashrate. This would be more convincing for me, as I already wrote in the last post. But does that apply to all bigger miners? I have some doubts here.
Well Riot has never made money, Stronghold is for sale, Core is taking a $75m loan not to enter bankruptcy again, Mara is sitting on 600 million of debt and "investors" money.....
Edit: If I understand your posts well then your argument is that "attack cost" variable is going to lower with each halving, as hashrate could be going up but the attack cost not. I sorta agree here but don't think it will come into dangerous territory as long as we have significant transaction fees.
Exactly, each halving when the price doesn't double means less security overall, and even if does double it still means 1/2 security to market cap.
As for the fees, they are 4% of the reward, if you expect people to pay 30 million for 400k tx day, well, how can I say it... don't!
