At the time, they weren’t worth $ 10,000. I ordered for 3200 dollars a piece. I also bought 200 ZEС at the same time. But ASICs brought me more in a year and a half and I can sell them now for more than I bought. This is the math.
I’m about 40, I have 2 higher educations (economics and financial) and 4 businesses in a country where effective demand tends to zero. I’m not a theoretician, but a practitioner. What you think will not work.
You can already do whatever you want with the coin. I’ve already made my decision. This is not what good investment looks like, it sucks. I’ve talked to many people here and they think so too. The switch will provoke a colossal collapse in the price of real holders. And these are tens of thousands of coins. If this is the task, then it will be completed. Large investors who bought Zсash bought it for the fact that it has an absolutely identical economic model that Bitcoin has. A model that has shown itself to be working. In which it was interesting to invest in the early stages. If you break the model as an experiment, simply guided by your gut feelings, it scares a large investor. You will not get the effect of the rising price, you will get surrender. I specifically cited the distribution, because it shows that there are more large investors in Zсash. They do not even know about the Z-addresses in the mass, about the existence of this forum. Thank goodness they don’t read the crypto news, but when what you plan happens, they’ll find out and leave Zcash. Investments do not like course changes (shocks), they like stability.
It’s clear you have invested too much in mining equipment that you cannot accept Zcash moving to PoS. Becoming validators is still much cheaper than buying hardware from heavily centralized (and easily co-opted) production line.
Obviously, I have invested too much in Zcash to calmly watch you try to devalue it.
Only cheese in a mousetrap is free. If you think that getting ZEC for free is a cool idea, then you have already fallen into a mousetrap. I could get steaks for my coins, but I’d rather get rid of them. Because, if I get something without paying anything in return, then this something becomes cheaper every day. This is apparently very difficult to understand, I do not know how else to explain it.
Let me try to use mathematical methods. Let’s say that the price of the coin at which you bought it is $100
Let’s say you get one coin for this every day. After 30 days, you have additional 30 coins. But you still didn’t spend anything other than $ 10,000 for all coins.
The market went down and traders drove the price below $100. You are surprised, because everyone had to hold coins. Who is selling!?? Hint: the derivatives and futures market is much more complicated than you expected. It is able to drive the price of oil into a negative zone, even when the cost price is above $30.
But you are smart and have calculated that taking into account the free coins, your break-even point is equal to:
100x + 30х = 10000$
130х = 10000$
Х= 76,9$ per coin
But the brutal market is going even lower.
Markets can stay irrational longer than you can solvent
John Maynard Keys
After that, your nerves give up and you also sell.
I’ve seen all this before. You can’t convince me that it won’t affect us.
I know that this is a provocation. What I will answer has nothing to do with what the market thinks at the moment. And if you think that this is what ensures success, and turn a blind eye to other components of success, then this is very arrogant behavior for the market.
In a year or two, you will be amazed, but ycash will overtake zcash in terms of capitalization. No cool exchanges, no funds. Simply thanks to the cost model. CPU is more expensive in mining than GPU (that’s why Monero got ahead so much), GPU is more expensive in mining than ASIC. And PoS is generally “free mining”. The market gives all the keys to the doors of price growth. The higher the capitalization of the project, the larger the community. I switched to explaining banal things.
If we are allowed to vote, not this kind of voting of unknown people on Twitter, then I suggest voting with balances. So far, we have only been promised this type of voting. I think it will be fair. @zooko
We run a PoW mining operation in Australia, mostly powered by roof-top solar. We have focused on mining Zcash with ASICs we imported from China with a reasonable return on our investment.
Our process is to consolidate ZEC to sell on the pumps, which we then use to pay for electricity, hardware, finance and to book some profit.
Starting out on this journey 3 years ago has helped onboard us into the world of crypto and the ZEC community more specifically.
Knowing what we know now, we would support a shift from PoW to PoS. The challenge as a miner is needing to continually re-up your hardware’s hash rate to stay profitable.
From our perspective, if we had a 24 month official transition period from PoW to PoS, we would end new investment in ASIC hardware, pay-off our existing hardware during that period and then consider staking a large portion of our ZEC mining profits in the new PoS system.
While there would be some short term pain, we would be excited about that transition in the medium to long term, as PoS is a more elegant, less wasteful consensus mechanism and it would overall likely increase the long-term value of our ZEC holding.
Hi! Cool! Solar energy is great! What is your total hashrate? May You share a few photos of how it looks?
Why do you think that you will have to get rid of the infrastructure? Is it so easy to do this? ZEN brings much greater profitability now, so you could mine ZEN and convert it to Zcash. In this case, you should not worry about the transition stage.
Wouldn’t PoS encourage a more “store of value” type use case for ZEC, since there’s an incentive to hold and accumulate interest?
Also, forgive my ignorance about the technical side of things, but what are people’s takes on the idea of hybrid PoS/PoW? How viable would that be and would it resolve the concerns of those dedicated to remaining Pow?
I see that this model causes a lot of positive emotions, but I will write here later why the consequences of switching to this model can very unpredictable. Don’t forget that Horizon and Pirate are currently on our algorithm. My fears are related to the fact that the hashrate as a result of these actions may be redistributed and the lion’s share will go to competitors. I’m not talking about the price behavior right now, I’m just asking a technical question. In the case of a hybrid model, how painlessly can the hashrate be reduced by half. Will this be the reason for increasing the number of confirmations for exchanges? I don’t know. @nathan-at-least
As for the price… I will give some examples of what has already happened, and because of what Zcash has lost a huge amount of hashrate this year. I need to prepare and I will edit this message a little later.
Having exactly the same economic model as ZEC, exactly the same emission schedule and PoW algorithm, ZEN grew 30 times over the year and constantly reduced the gap coefficient from ZEC.
As a result, the ZEN hashrate grew by leaps and bounds:
These were the hashrate-power that Zcash gave ZEN.
And now I will draw your attention to one small period of time. This is two week that marked the difference between Zcash Halving day and the Horizon Halving day. It is noteworthy in it how the hashrate of coins changed.
Let me remind you that Zcash halving took place on November 18, and the ZEN halving took place on December 2. What happens to the hashrate these days, when the reduction of Zcash reward has already fallen by half, and the reduction of the ZEN reward has not yet fallen by half?
(I have given a complexity graph for Zcash, but they are interrelated with the hashrate graph, however, there is no hashrate graph for Zcash on this resource. It can be found on other resources, but I chose the one that has both coins. Considering these graphs, it is necessary to average values of lines between days.)
On these charts, we can observe how after the reduction of the reward in Zcash network has occurred, the manners smoothly go into the ZEN network, in fact, more than doubling the ZEN hashrate chart. On the day when ZEN halving occurs, miners abruptly return to Zcash.
This my tweet about it - x.com
What I’m writing about here. It is very important to understand that the price and the amount of remuneration affects the hashrate. The hashrate of different coins on the same algorithm is communicating vessels. The increase in the hashrate contributes to the fact that competition among miners is growing and they will always be distributed to more profitable algorithms.
If we decide to take a part of their reward from the miners, to the funds or in favor of the holders, then we should expect that the miners will run away from you to another owner. I’m not talking now about those who have 500 K/sol in Australia, I’m talking about large numbers. One way or another, the profitability between coins on the same algorithm always tends to balance.
@Zooko I think it will be useful for you to read it too.
PS In Russia, there is a saying: measure 7 times, cut one off. This means that before making decisions that at first glance seem like a solution to us, it is necessary to justify your forecast with mathematical accuracy.
Ok, when we finally weighed all the pros and cons and realized that each side has weighty arguments, I am sure that there will come an understanding that a compromise needs to be found. I will take a pause to formulate some thoughts in case we do decide to change the alogrhythm of consensus. If somewhere I got excited, then I apologize. I just want the best for Zcash like the rest of us.
True, the hash from existing ASICs will find an alternate chain to mine. But there’s nothing to fear, it’s not like Zcash is stopping, ZEC will attract validators from several different staking projects who are managing multiple chains & this demand itself can be of a huge boost than another halving that can be years away. Thinking in terms of growing the Zcash user base will remove any fears.
Zcash would be upgrading from a Gen 1 blockchain to a the next Gen protocol without affecting the existing supply or distribution.
