Topic: Alpha Technology Litecoin (Scrypt) ASIC Miner Order Batch 1 Now! - page 128. (Read 529107 times)

That would be me I also sent a heads up to CCN but they have yet to write an article. It will be interesting to see their take on it.

After speaking to paypal yesterday the advisor quoted that they are not with holding funds
from alpha technology. So i do not understand why alpha tech would say this.
and hi bumface

a well written and informational piece, with logic and proper investigation and wording.

All the trolls here can take a lesson from it

Heh...

American Express was very interested in the coindesk article on alpha tech

better start considering them refunds alpha

here is the link for use with your own disputes with cc companies or whatever

http://www.coindesk.com/alpha-technology-blames-paypal-dispute-bitcoin-asic-delivery-delay/

thanks to whoever flag'd down www.coindesk.com on this

Searing

what the hell are you talking about man,i am a customer. "shut down my warning posts" what does that even mean? i am not a moderator on this forum

not everything is black and white, if you actually read my comments here, you would know that i am quite critical aswell. but i remain reasonable like an adult

Just because i refuse to join in a childish frenzie of useless speculation does not make me an affiliate. everybody pretends to be an expert on what happens behind closed doors, but you simply know as little as the rest of us.

If you want to fill the void in your logic with fud, thats your buisness , but dont include me in your tinfoil hat theorys please

er huh..missed that line.....roflmao....of course shares in a 'soon to be defunct' company has a certain charm compared to owning 'vaporware' ....at least I would feel less an idiot

result it the same thou 'squat for me'

Searing

Personally, I don't believe AT's response regarding the recent problems. If AT prides themselves on transparency, then a few points:
- You can't just reinstate everyone you dismissed off your boards (permanently and by IP no less) to claim transparency again.
- Let's see the documentation from the foundry on what went wrong. Right now we have AT's word, which has lost our trust.
- Let's see the Pay Pal documentation as well. Let's see the finances. If "we" are part owners, then I want to see what I am a part of. (That said, I am not likely sending another dime their way.)
- How about an explanation on why Fiaz deleted all of his posts here
- How about an explanation on why his family members are suddenly no longer a part of the company?
- Fill in some more...

I'm just wondering, if "we" become part owners, when AT gets sued, do we have to pay all parties involved, including ourselves. LOL
As it is, it makes ZERO sense to pay any more money when you can for less money NOW, buy more Mh/s (which still probably doesn't even break even.) The mining game has changed.

Its about sharing

ps - Thanks to you guys who really helped throughout this process

I actually don't think he is.  It's an unusual phenomenon that seems to occur when people get caught up in a scam.  Deep down inside they realize they were ripped off, but they can't accept the reality of the situation so they attempt to convince themselves that the scam is not a scam.  It's the same sort of thing that gambling addicts do when they run low on money. 

Shares of a failed asic company!? Wow, thats just insane. I hope no one agrees to their offer.

I really think they never had the intention to deliver a working product, it wad always just talk and hot air. There was never a prototype.

Dont agree to that scam! But maybe its too late to get your money back.

  Wow.  Just...wow.  I have no dog in this hunt but I have been studying the various pre-order startup tech mining companies and this is the first one to use what ostensibly looks to be the equivalent of a pinksheet stock manipulation scheme.  A typical ps stock racket is to dangle shares, hook buy-ins, then fold while "apologetically" lamenting that they were upbeat and optimistic but the money's "gone".  Sometime later a new company is written up on paper and the process starts again.  Investors beware, be very ware. That is all.

Aha, Fiaz has learned something and tries to play a new Game with his customers.
It´s called "Divide et Imperia"

I can't believe bumface is here defending AT still! Look back through his posts, look for when he was arguing that they were a good legitimate deal six + months ago with me, trying to shut down my warning posts about these scammers. Pretty obvious that he is affiliated with AT at this point. Fucking scammers.

Well considering how much money they pulled in for nothing, and the fact that almost no one is doing anything to try and get it back, I would say the first scam is a resounding success.  It makes perfect sense, now that they have a complete list of gullible idiots, to target those same people with a second scam.  

I was a student in Manchester not-so long ago (and lived near Rusholme for four years), as I'm sure has been previously mentioned the location of the shop-front was always a massive turn-off for anyone with local knowledge. It's at the end of the officially named 'curry mile' and is basically a terraced house with converted lounge to shop.

People should be aware that enforcing DSR and similar rules in the UK just does not happen. You can take your case to small claims, and maybe win. But getting your money back is still a different story completely, enforcing the judgement when it comes to money is not as simple as winning or loosing in small claims. Criminal proceedings against the director is also extremely unlikely. In the end bailiffs could encourage the company to appoint administrators, and offering shares to creditors now already seems unusual to me.

Here is a case where people were deliberately scammed out of millions, the key point is below (the guys in charge did a runner)
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-28013148
The dynamics of the case are not the same (the above case was a deliberate scam from day one) but the lack of investigation demonstrates how little the local authorities will do to help anyone who claims laws have been broken at their expense.

You could try to report to Action Fraud in the UK, because you have paid an advance fee for something that hasn't turned up as promised. Looking forward to seeing how they plan this issue of shares, they obviously have fantastic lawyers and are experts in this kind of thing, so no doubt I will learn a lot about just how easy it is to do as proposed.

This thread...is amazing.
I got my refund a few weeks ago but I keep coming back to see what's going on with this shit show.

He really seems to think that Alpha will be the next Bitmaintech. He thinks all of his customers are morons for not REALIZING HOW AMAZING THIS OFFER REALLY IS!

these people farted on your money!!!!!!!!

Yeah alpha tech wants to come across that they are unbanning people out of the kindness of their hearts.  The reality is they want to maximize their source of new capital by pitching them a new scam because the first one failed.

Welcome back unbanned friend.  Oh by the way we would like to introduce you to a new exclusive once in a lifetime opportunity.

This won't end well.  Much scam wow!

Disregarding the rest of the "we did you a favour" bullsh*t in the post, notice Fiaz says shares in the company "for the rest of its existence".


Fiaz has played word games before, what's to stop the Akram boys starting a new company, dissolving Alpha and dropping their customers/shareholders like a hot potato as soon as they have all paid. This has got bad idea written all over it.

Just gets better every time I come in here for an update.

Well, Alpha paid for risc-lot chips, and they got what they paid for. Whenever a company opens its doors to everyone to buy in, that's an immediate black flag in my book. Cashflow issues = no-go.

Good to hear some folks have been able to get chargebacks.

Got it, thanks. Un-fvcking-unbelievable …

You basically have two groups of people now - Alpha T owners and those Alpha-T customers who have already paid in full (group A) and those who have only paid a deposit (group B). The first group is already exposed to maximum risk and they are trying to convince group B, who currently only have deposits at risk,  to pay up because they think this will reduce their own risk by improving the chances of eventual delivery.

In a nutshell, group A is trying to off-load some of their risk onto group B. They are doing this by offering group B a carrot (shares in a company that doesn't have a viable product) and threatening them with a stick (the loss of their deposit).

Now, If I were a member of group B, I'd find this insulting to my intelligence. 1 - because why would I want to assume more risk without a commensurate reward ? and 2 - I can take my 70% and buy off the shelf Zeus miners and start mining in a few days.

And, I were a member of group B, i'd be insulted by the cynical and self serving strategy of group A and continue my efforts to obtain a refund or legal redress.

But that is just one person's view ...