Payout is way too low

dysan819 · Post by **dysan819** » Fri Oct 10, 2014 7:39 am

I have been mining Prohashing for 12 hours with a consistent 325 Mh/s accepted at 98%+ efficiency. At the guaranteed payout 0.00073856 BTC/ Mh/s, I should have over 0.112 BTC, but I have just over half of that at 0.063 BTC.

Where is the problem here?

dysan819 · Post by **dysan819** » Fri Oct 10, 2014 8:17 am

I see overnight that your payout dropped overnight, but as I was calculating last night the amount was not near where it should have been.

yan7181 · Post by **yan7181** » Fri Oct 10, 2014 8:30 am

by Chris Sokolowski » Fri Oct 10, 2014 1:34 pm
The top of the page is the payout averaged over the past 24 hours. The chart is the instantaneous payout at the time listed.

y

dysan819 · Post by **dysan819** » Fri Oct 10, 2014 9:01 am

Well isn't that great. I don't see anything in the charts that would lead me to believe the 24 hour payout should have been anywhere near 0.00073. I guess I was duped.

Post by **Steve Sokolowski** » Fri Oct 10, 2014 9:04 am

The payouts dropped overnight because we crashed the Elacoin market, unfortunately.

The difference has to do with what PoolPicker wants for their listings. I agree that it can be confusing. In the next release, which is in testing, there is still time to modify these numbers.

To be specific, PoolPicker is asking for the average payout during a 24-hour period. If you look at what PoolPicker has listed today, the posted earnings are the average from midnight until now. Meanwhile, the pool has always posted what you would actually have earned if you had mined for 24 hours. Since Elacoins were so valuable yesterday, the number that considers part of yesterday is higher.

Months ago, in the first release, we had the top of the page listed as instantaneous earnings. There are several issues with that, the main issue being that the proportion of coins being mined and the market conditions are changing every second or two. If you refreshed the page, you could see a number twice as high as the one before. If you happened to visit when there was a "superblock" of some coin like Netcoins that offers superblocks, then you might see $1.00, but the pool was only earning $1.00 for 5 seconds before it dropped down to normal.

I'll take suggestions as to how to handle this. Instantaneous payouts could be misleading, but if we list the 24 hour payouts, it can also too heavily weight the past, whether profitability is going up or down. Does anyone have a suggestion?

dysan819 · Post by **dysan819** » Fri Oct 10, 2014 9:36 am

If instant is too short, and 24 hours is too long, it seems to me like something in between like 1 hour average is appropriate. I still do not understand what I'm looking at when it comes to this site. The charts don't seem to agree with the average. How can the 24 hour average ever reach 0.00073 if the 12 hour averages are under 0.0004 (which is just a guess because it is listed in ¢).
As a miner, I don't want to see $ and ¢. I want to see BTC or LTC or whatever I'm being paid in. The rest is basically meaningless. If I don't get a payout to my wallet in 24-48 hours, that $ number is just a distraction.
I'm a little bitter because I paid 0.15 BTC to rent miners based on what I thought I saw on the site and I'll be lucky if I end up with 0.11 BTC.
I didn't quite mind it when I thought I was going to be making a profit, but isn't 4.99% fees a bit extreme?

Post by **Steve Sokolowski** » Fri Oct 10, 2014 9:57 am

dysan819 wrote:Well isn't that great. I don't see anything in the charts that would lead me to believe the 24 hour payout should have been anywhere near 0.00073. I guess I was duped.

This should show why the payouts will be so high tomorrow:

https://www.cryptsy.com/markets/view/12

As you can see, Elacoins were worth 11,000 satoshi for three days. Eventually, we burned through that buy order and then crashed the market, which caused the algorithm to switch to different coins. We continue to crash Elacoins even now, but you can see that they are only worth half what they were before everyone joined in here.

Look at the trades for that market and you'll see our regular sells that occur every six minutes. We've been unloading Elacoins for days now. You can see that, before we started mining them, this market had close to zero volume. The green bars at the bottom of the chart represent volume. When hashrate went way up yesterday morning, our volume picked up until the buy orders were eaten through, which is when we stopped mining them.

Here's a list of the pool's budget from yesterday:

http://www.shoemakervillage.org/temp/pr ... -10-09.jpg

I want to make this chart public eventually, but it takes 5 seconds to run this query, which would place too much load on the server. The chart shows all the coins we mined and the percentage of the time we mined them. The bottom rows are the coins we owe to miners. Since none of those coins were profitable to mine, or they were non-scrypt coins, we had to buy all of them.

As you can see, there were several issues that we fixed yesterday: the rejected shares issue, the mining of coins that were too easy issue, and some other more minor problems. All in all, the problems cost us about $35, indicated by the lower right corner. We lost about 2.12% to slippage when the Elacoin market crashed. One of the advantages of a pay-per-share pool is that you don't take losses for our issues and your earnings are locked at the time of mining. Today, since those issues were resolved, we expect to turn a profit.

This chart should also help understand the fee structure. Pay per last N share pools can afford to charge lower fees because they do not guarantee payouts. We lock payouts at the time of mining regardless of what happens, so we need to charge more. We understand that might turn some miners away, but we believe that profitability will still be superior, especially once merge mining is available. The BTC guild charges 7.5% for its pay per share services.

If you have questions about this, let me know. Chris can help explain this chart, which can be confusing, if you have questions about what the columns mean.

Chris is always on the lookout for coins that have buy orders like Elacoins did. This happened about a week before, with Shadecoins. The algorithm picks up on these imbalances quickly and makes huge amounts of money and then switches away when the coins are no longer profitable. Most of the time, you'll probably find this pool to be of average competitiveness with the other pools (especially when we get merge mining working), but occasionally the profitability will skyrocket for coins that people are trying to pump up. There's no way to predict when that will happen; you were lucky to be around yesterday during one of these paydays.

InsertNameHere1 · Post by **InsertNameHere1** » Fri Oct 10, 2014 4:12 pm

The ups and downs of crypto.... Right now are tough times. I am still very interested in this site and wish you well.

bakedshibe · Post by **bakedshibe** » Sat Oct 18, 2014 5:20 pm

i miss the days where we had great payouts because we didnt burn through buy orders so fast. before we could have high profits for a few days if there was a big buy order on elacoin or whatever , now we burn through that in an hour. Ever since someone leaked this site to poolpicker the profits are average or below most other pools. So now we have a big influx of new people freaking out over things they dont understand. PPS pools always charge more because they are taking a much higher risk than a pplns pool. this is pretty basic crypto knowledge.

Payout is way too low

Payout is way too low

Re: Payout is way too low

Re: Payout is way too low

Re: Payout is way too low

Re: Payout is way too low

Re: Payout is way too low

Re: Payout is way too low

Re: Payout is way too low

Re: Payout is way too low