So I meant the depreciation would need to be low enough to make turning them off a worthwhile strategy.
Edit: I see what you mean about sunk costs, I had worded it badly but you were still arguing against my intended meaning.
So I meant the depreciation would need to be low enough to make turning them off a worthwhile strategy.
Edit: I see what you mean about sunk costs, I had worded it badly but you were still arguing against my intended meaning.
Understanding marginal economics is difficult because it is counter-intuitive. I am currently on a personal binge trying to help understand the economic theory because it helps me challenge whether I have understood and whether I can pass that understanding on to others.
Unfortunately marginal economics is poorly explained - the link I referenced was the only one of five I quickly skimmed that seemed to be free of gross errors and had no misleading content.
Edit: latchkey seems pretty froody and made a couple of relevant comments:
* Bitcoin OPEX (marginal cost) estimation of $7k to $9k per Bitcoin: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31797201
* CAPEX vs OPEX: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31796669
The only valid reason to continue mining would be that you expected that the price of Bitcoin would exceed the mining costs in the future. Then you would stockpile them and take advantage of the reduced hashrate as other market participants exited.