Topic: [ActiveMining] The Official Active Mining Discussion Thread [Self-Moderated] - page 116. (Read 771512 times)

What? Jedi mind tricks don't work over the internet?

Just kidding, it's the way you write it.

Can you even call it a product if the full package hasn't been sent? Can I send you just a power supply when you order the whole PC and I say that I have shipped a product?

You guys need to stop acting biased, you're not helping anyone. Take your emotions out of the equation and look at the situation straight.

I really dont believe that. It would mean tapeout already happened. Ken once let it sound in IRC like we would have done a successful test with a prototype but since then nothing was heard from that miner. So i doubt there are chips at all yet. Tapeout should be the most expensive part in the Asic-Game and i dont think that he first develops a chip and then develops the next. If there was a tapeout for the old chips already then it would be cheap to create more of the old chips and we would already mine.
So i dont think he shipped chips. It would simply be too expensive to test 2 designs of chips. He mentioned no miner was shipped so it wasnt a prototype either. That let me asking what happened to the prototype. Or was there never one? And shipping empty cases for 8000USD? I would be angry if i get an empty case when i await running miners. Not one single customer complained about something like that.

Maybe he shipped some cables or stickers or so but nothing that would be worth mentioning in a status update and letting it sound that "the product" starts shipping. This is a miner producer so the product are miners. I agree that it would be really misleading when no own asic chips or miners were shipped.

Why would you ship empty cases in wait for cards that you knew were not even on the horizon?

He shipped product. Deal with it man.

Did he say he shipped miners? No.

Does he have to correct speculation on this thread? No.

'Case closed.'

I said what I wanted to say. What ken posted was clearly and intentionally misleading and he never replied to anyone until now despite numerous people asking about what was shipped and so on.

Now if he has a good reason (and he may) then he should come out with it, but having dealt with ken I expect it was for the reason I suggested, to help protect the company. That doesn't make it less illegal. Securities fraud includes spreading misleading information through the internet. You cannot get out of it by saying he didn't explicitly say miners, mentioned delayed chips, and so on. You can't claim it was a good pr job. He had plenty of time to put people right as well.

That doesn't mean he won't come good or that this the business is a scam, and for the record I don't believe this to be the case. However, it reflects extremely badly on the CEO and creates a legal minefield.

All bitcoin securities are in a legal grey area and particularly if based in Belize, but the sec do care about fraud or investors losing money. They would likely only make a move if it got serious enough and they thought they could wade through the grey areas, which is unlikely to be easy.

Even so, this cannot happen again and it's appalling that it happened in the first place. It was an incredibly stupid and risky thing to do.

I really hope he comes through in the next few weeks with a lot of good news.

Ken, for fuck's sake, you just have to tell it straight sometimes.

Wednesday 2345hrs GMT, recurring weekly.

See my post above Seb.

My personal view - it was chips from a first batch that were shipped. They would have some value and we clearly don't seem to be hashing with them so Ken filled an early order. If they met the advertised spec the customer will be happy - if not they would have got them at a discount I'm sure.

... so any actual real updates? or just more uncertainty

Maybe im missing something but VMC has a variety of products. All products are self developed miners and chips. Since the chips were delayed it couldnt be miners nor chips that shipped.
I dont see other products that could have been it: http://virtualminingcorp.com/shop1/index.php

It's called deceit.  Simple as that.  Ken did not ship anything to his customers, not even empty cases.

That's like ordering a computer and having them ship the empty tower first.  That makes no sense.  
I would be PISSED if someone sent me an empty case.  
So are these customers supposed to return the empty cases if they requested a refund?  LOL

Your theory is fucked bro

Exactly, this is typical knee jerk behaviour and to be honest I didn't expect this from FFS69.  Disappointed.  It makes me slightly suspicious of his intentions.  Just goes to show how you can change your opinion of someone over a single post.

I have to agree with minerpart in saying, "good luck with the court case".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Product_(business)

 

LoL Minerpart you posted that while i was typing mine

Me and you were thinking along the same lines

Did anyone Stop and think that maybe what had shipped Had been the Expansion Cases that People had Ordered so that All they had to Due Was Drop in the Fast-Hash Modules when the person Received them, No Everyone Jumped to the Automatic Conclusion that it was miners that were shipped



You folks do realize that VMC Sells More then just miners right? ? ?

I don't think a judge would be brave enough to deem 'product' as a miner and only a miner. ACtM and VMC are free to sell whatever they want and they can and do (as seen on the website) act as resellers of pre-fabbed and bought in expansion cases for VMC mining rigs.

http://virtualminingcorp.com/shop1/index.php?id_product=13&controller=product


Fast-Hash-One Expansion Case  Cyclone PCIe2-2709
PCIe Gen2 x16 Host Bus to Expansion System Bandwidth of up to 80 Gb/s
Sixteen PCIe Slots with Open Back Connectors (four x8, twelve x4)
One or Three Meter Cable to Host
Chassis/Power Supply Options
5U Rack Mount Chassis with 3240  Watt Power Supply in N+1 Configuration
System Monitoring (Optional)



The above is listed on the VMC site under 'Product'. I think that settles this legally. But please keep discussing your personal views. I've said already why this is what CEO's must do to support their company.

Zumzero, minerpart:

I find it misleading to write in an activemining or virtualmining company report that we've shipped product without specifying that it wasn't a miner of any sort preettttttty darn misleading.

I agree with the law. However I disagree that he has intentionally misled anyone. The language he used is very clear and concise. He said we had shipped 'products'. He did not say we had shipped miners!

Good luck with your court case! I'm sure your lawyer will take your money, I'm even more sure Ken has no case to answer.

When Microsoft say their new OS is 'the best operating system going' yet it turns out to be another load of crap do you think you could take them to court for misleading customers?! No.