On second thought, don't talk to me Inaba.
Talk to me when you actually have delivered 100 [ASIC] units of a product your company sells. Until that time shooo....I disown you as a legitimate vendor. Begone from my sight!
Edit: and uh, best of luck.
Wonderful PuertoLibre, does this mean you will leave this BFL thread and go to the actual ASIC vendor's thread? We will be deeply saddened by this loss.
It just means I no longer see BFL as a credible vendor of ASIC devices.
Nothing has changed other than telling Inaba to go and send his customers some lots to regain his [vendor] credibility.
The second wave of refunds are about to start (IMO). This is the
dangerous side of refunds IMO.
Unless their VC invested into BFL for the sake of massive orders of hardware....well, there is only so much in terms of refunds that BFL can afford. [Speculation]
---------------------------
Think of it this way, you are in the reps position and represent your company. You pay the fab for a 65nm process node and all the perks including a few "bullet runs". (matrix bullet time, not real speedy bullets).
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WhxbYTMNMxoThe bill comes out to 1 or 2 million (theoretical speculation). Great, they start the job, they use some fab techniques to keep their costs down. When they are sure it works, they go full throttle.
Problem, the throttle doesn't work, the Fab is evasive, the time grows longer and longer each day. Then you have your first round of refunds. That money backing your company as profits and as
repayment to the VC is shrinking.
Lets say you lose only 750,000 in the first round of refunds. Great, the loss is minimal. But you have to cover operating costs and dozens of other smaller expenses. Lets say you use VC money and not refundable customer money. (Think of it as two different pools)
Then, there is a screw up at the fab. The timeline shifts drastically with no end in sight. People lose confidence (rightly so IMO).
The second round of refunds come in. This time you lose 1.5 million.
-----------------------
You can only lose so much before you can't even pay back the VC. The VC won't come from BFL's own pockets but from their profits. Correct? Or am I mistaken?
People seem to think that panic should only start if 100% of the refunds go back into the hands of the customers. That would implode BFL.
But is that really the case?
Keep in mind they are paying money to their employees and the fab and everyone else in the pipeline (parts/location/ etc).
How much of their current customer pool can they refund before their debts outweigh the intake?
-----------------------
The only way out of this vicious circle is that BFL may have (speculation) a contract with the VC to provide them repayment in hardware. Or money _and_ hardware.
If that is the case, the true hash rate is probably much higher than what the forum facing side realizes.
OR
It could just be that BFL ends up giving too many refunds and they decide to fold up long before they hit 100% returns.
If they spend 2.1 million on the fab and all other expenses.
If they take in 3.1 million from customer orders.
What happens when they have refunded up to 1.5 million? What do they do at that point? Continue to operate at a staggering loss? Even if they still retain 1.6, who wouldn't close up shop?
This is why I am starting to imagine they have a different deal set up with the VC. Otherwise the VC would get helluva nervous won't they?
