Topic: BF Labs Inc. WILL process ALL backlogs by September 30, 2013! (Read 5547 times)
This is a bullshit thread, thus I am not locking.
Sept 15th is rollin up on us!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 
A pre-order is an order placed for an item which has not yet been released. Everything since is an order and won't be shipped until the pre-orders are taken care of. The only way YOUR version makes sense is if I word it "wont be shipped until the pre-order BACKLOG is taken care of" No need to "change the rules" you already stated it above, which I highlighted. Placed to order = not pre-ordered. Feel free to contradict yourself.
Simple solution. Don't post in the thread titled "BF Labs Inc. WILL process ALL backlogs by September 30, 2013!" where this whole conversation got started. If you only want to talk about orders before April 5th...*NOW* moved to backlog.
Now, by using YOUR DEFINITION, I could place an order on Sept 29th, and when they did not ship it on Sept 30 I could scream and yell and holler that they did not meet their stated aim of shipping their backlog. Sorry, it does not hold water. To estimate clearing ANYTHING you have to have a set figure. If you are constantly adding to this figure, the time will therefore increase as well. You are now claiming BFL can see into the future to know what orders will be placed and KNOW they can satisfy it. Typical troll.
New orders would not change the fact that they cleared their backlog, it would just create a second backlog. If at any time they shipped all outstanding orders, the backlog is cleared. Plus they would ship your order Sept. 30 if they had cleared their backlog. They would actually have inventory of assembled units. They could have same day turnaround just as real companies such as Newegg.com. Whoa, I need wikipedia here.... The twenty-foot equivalent unit (often TEU or teu) is an inexact unit of cargo capacity often used to describe the capacity of container ships and container terminals. There is a lack of standardisation in regards to height, ranging between 4 feet 3 inches (1.30 m) and 9 feet 6 inches (2.90 m), with the most common height being 8 feet 6 inches (2.59 m)... AMAZING! 20' long, 8' wide and 4'3" to 9'6" tall. 680 to 1520 CUBIC FEET. Quite a range there bud. That'd hold 1360 to 3040 of the large .5 cubic foot USPS flat rate packages measureing 12 by 12 by 5 1/2. Yea, I see a HUGE need for those TEUs.
A TEU is just a unit of shipping. Also, if you have 300 boxes, you need to put them on pallets otherwise they would roll around inside the truck and they couldn't efficiently move them around. The point is, they would need a large truck instead of the normal little USPS trucks you see arriving in the pics. Maybe they only took pictures on small shipping days. However, they were bragging about how big the piles were. Also, the guy who posted the pics left the company and there haven't been any pictures posted since. 
When were these pictures taken? For 2 months only Jalapenos left the building, would really need that container for those! And gee, the post office would NEVER think to change the vehicle size they pick up with if the orders started ramping up, that'd be silly! Let's make 10 trips! And of course EVERYTHING is shipped by USPS as well! Why use Fed-Ex and UPS and DHL like the customers want for their expedited shipping? That'd make WAY too much sense.
Not my fault BFL uses USPS. Jalapenos are the smallest boxes. Obviously, 300 singles would take up more space and require even more space in trucks.You are looking a bad data and making assupmtions. That 15.5 Jalapenos a day average could be well over 100-150, we'll never know. The lowet Jan. Jala order is 15742 and the highest is 18379. 83 Jalapenos from 68 orders. All told, 182 orders spread over 2600 order numbers. Using the minimum they shipped 21 a day since Jan was cleared in 4 days.
My point was to use how fast BFL claims they can ship to demonstrate we can estimate the size of their backlog.
I'd bet my next paycheck against your next paycheck they are closer to 7000 devices shipped than your piddly estimate.Keep chanting your mantra, . You refuse to acknowledge anything but your limited point of view, even though you are wrong.
I have acknowledged everything almost you have posted (some of the more vapid stuff I just reply with a PSA).It seems that you are just here to derail threads for your lord and master Inaba. Exhibit A, you didn't even post this response in the thread it belongs in:
BF Labs Inc. WILL process ALL backlogs by September 30, 2013!
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/bf-labs-inc-will-process-all-backlogs-by-september-30-2013-268055
Did you get lost? Derailing so many threads you can't keep track anymore?
Counted a few hours of Josh in these forums firefighting posts from people who think BFL is a joke... doesn't he have to get out orders? What the hell is he doing here? They need to fire his ass and replace him.
Pre-orders are the life blood of BFL. If they don't derail threads, they run the risk of word getting out.
I am nobody's sock puppet.
What products have you registered with the FCC and what are there registration numbers, Josh?
What products have you registered with the FCC and what are there registration numbers, Josh?
Ok, so Bick is your sock puppet, got it.
is for FAILED your BBB rating.http://www.bbb.org/kansas-city/Business-Reviews/electronic-equipment-and-supplies-wholesale-and-manufacturers/bf-labs-inc-in-overland-park-ks-1000002011#reasonrating
Counted a few hours of Josh in these forums firefighting posts from people who think BFL is a joke... doesn't he have to get out orders? What the hell is he doing here? They need to fire his ass and replace him.
Yea Josh:
Josh which testing lab do you guys use to certify your products?
https://apps.fcc.gov/oetcf/eas/reports/TestFirmSearch.cfm
You probably use this one, the only one in Kansas, right?
Rogers Labs, Inc.
Louisburg
06/27/2016
Scot Rogers
4405 West 259th Terrace
Louisburg Kansas 66053
United States
[email protected]
913-837-3214
913-837-3214
See I looked through the 302 tests he's done and I can't seem to find any for "Butterfly Labs". Did you certify the hardware under a different name??
https://apps.fcc.gov/oetcf/eas/reports/TestFirmSearch.cfm
You probably use this one, the only one in Kansas, right?
Rogers Labs, Inc.
Louisburg
06/27/2016
Scot Rogers
4405 West 259th Terrace
Louisburg Kansas 66053
United States
[email protected]
913-837-3214
913-837-3214
See I looked through the 302 tests he's done and I can't seem to find any for "Butterfly Labs". Did you certify the hardware under a different name??
I am nobody's sock puppet.
What products have you registered with the FCC and what are there registration numbers, Josh?
What products have you registered with the FCC and what are there registration numbers, Josh?
Ok, so Bick is your sock puppet, got it.
Inaba why don't you answer for your companies actions instead of deflecting legitimate questions. You are the ultimate sock puppet in your own actions, up to and including calling your customers idiots and being a defensive penile douche.
How does it feel to have Butterfly Labs be the laughing/hating stock of the entire mining industry? Since there are many more vendors to choose from up and coming, I hope you and your scammer CEO get your fill before your order books suddenly go empty.
Even if it does deliver. Will it be profitable by now? Maybe I can recoup some of the money I spent.
Inaba,
Q: Were any of your current gen ASIC products granted FCC approval ? What sort of certification processes did you go through ?
Q: Will your next generation PCIe products be undergoing formal certification and compliance testing ?
Q: On what legal grounds are you refusing to honor refunds, in apparent violation of FTC regulations ?
Q: Were any of your current gen ASIC products granted FCC approval ? What sort of certification processes did you go through ?
Q: Will your next generation PCIe products be undergoing formal certification and compliance testing ?
Q: On what legal grounds are you refusing to honor refunds, in apparent violation of FTC regulations ?
+
Interestingly those questions are not on his agenda and has seen fit to ignore. Great questions be nice to see companies actually come to the forums and answer the community.
Inaba,
Q: Were any of your current gen ASIC products granted FCC approval ? What sort of certification processes did you go through ?
Q: Will your next generation PCIe products be undergoing formal certification and compliance testing ?
Q: On what legal grounds are you refusing to honor refunds, in apparent violation of FTC regulations ?
Q: Were any of your current gen ASIC products granted FCC approval ? What sort of certification processes did you go through ?
Q: Will your next generation PCIe products be undergoing formal certification and compliance testing ?
Q: On what legal grounds are you refusing to honor refunds, in apparent violation of FTC regulations ?
+
Timer removed. End time: 2013-09-30+23:59:59
Tick tock Josh... time to get out of the forums and back to the production line. People want their refunds oops products.
36 days left do you know where your BFL COO is wasting his time?
Josh which testing lab do you guys use to certify your products?
https://apps.fcc.gov/oetcf/eas/reports/TestFirmSearch.cfm
You probably use this one, the only one in Kansas, right?
Rogers Labs, Inc.
Louisburg
06/27/2016
Scot Rogers
4405 West 259th Terrace
Louisburg Kansas 66053
United States
[email protected]
913-837-3214
913-837-3214
See I looked through the 302 tests he's done and I can't seem to find any for "Butterfly Labs". Did you certify the hardware under a different name??
https://apps.fcc.gov/oetcf/eas/reports/TestFirmSearch.cfm
You probably use this one, the only one in Kansas, right?
Rogers Labs, Inc.
Louisburg
06/27/2016
Scot Rogers
4405 West 259th Terrace
Louisburg Kansas 66053
United States
[email protected]
913-837-3214
913-837-3214
See I looked through the 302 tests he's done and I can't seem to find any for "Butterfly Labs". Did you certify the hardware under a different name??
Did you mean "buttery laws"? 
ROFL, that's what I got too!
Here's the page we need to read: http://www.fcc.gov/encyclopedia/equipment-authorization
Quote
Your search "bf labs" returned no results.
Did you mean "buttery laws"?
ROFL, that's what I got too!
Here's the page we need to read: http://www.fcc.gov/encyclopedia/equipment-authorization
Inaba has been dodging that question since November of 2012 when he made the claim that BFL was getting FCC certification.
You can read his claim here:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.1314335
Maybe two weeks? We are waiting for the test lab to issue the test report.
With the bump in power requirements on the MR and the new screen, we had to make changes, although the new screen is already certified. We are doing all the devices at once, since they all share the same board.
He said the Jalapeno (original form factor, not the new Single case) had gone to a lab and they were just waiting on the report. Of course, we all know that the original form factor Jalapeno never worked, but that is besides the point.
You can read his claim here:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.1314335
When is the Jalapeno getting FCC approval?
Maybe two weeks? We are waiting for the test lab to issue the test report.
With the bump in power requirements on the MR and the new screen, we had to make changes, although the new screen is already certified. We are doing all the devices at once, since they all share the same board.
He said the Jalapeno (original form factor, not the new Single case) had gone to a lab and they were just waiting on the report. Of course, we all know that the original form factor Jalapeno never worked, but that is besides the point.
Good news everybody!: http://www.fcc.gov/search/results/butterfly%20labs
Feel free to plug in BF Labs, too. (or any other variants you can think of)
Did you mean "buttery laws"?
Inaba has been dodging that question since November of 2012 when he made the claim that BFL was getting FCC certification.
You can read his claim here:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.1314335
Maybe two weeks? We are waiting for the test lab to issue the test report.
With the bump in power requirements on the MR and the new screen, we had to make changes, although the new screen is already certified. We are doing all the devices at once, since they all share the same board.
He said the Jalapeno (original form factor, not the new Single case) had gone to a lab and they were just waiting on the report. Of course, we all know that the original form factor Jalapeno never worked, but that is besides the point.
You can read his claim here:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.1314335
When is the Jalapeno getting FCC approval?
Maybe two weeks? We are waiting for the test lab to issue the test report.
With the bump in power requirements on the MR and the new screen, we had to make changes, although the new screen is already certified. We are doing all the devices at once, since they all share the same board.
He said the Jalapeno (original form factor, not the new Single case) had gone to a lab and they were just waiting on the report. Of course, we all know that the original form factor Jalapeno never worked, but that is besides the point.
Good news everybody!: http://www.fcc.gov/search/results/butterfly%20labs
Feel free to plug in BF Labs, too. (or any other variants you can think of)
Inaba has been dodging that question since November of 2012 when he made the claim that BFL was getting FCC certification.
You can read his claim here:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.1314335
Maybe two weeks? We are waiting for the test lab to issue the test report.
With the bump in power requirements on the MR and the new screen, we had to make changes, although the new screen is already certified. We are doing all the devices at once, since they all share the same board.
He said the Jalapeno (original form factor, not the new Single case) had gone to a lab and they were just waiting on the report. Of course, we all know that the original form factor Jalapeno never worked, but that is besides the point.
You can read his claim here:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.1314335
When is the Jalapeno getting FCC approval?
Maybe two weeks? We are waiting for the test lab to issue the test report.
With the bump in power requirements on the MR and the new screen, we had to make changes, although the new screen is already certified. We are doing all the devices at once, since they all share the same board.
He said the Jalapeno (original form factor, not the new Single case) had gone to a lab and they were just waiting on the report. Of course, we all know that the original form factor Jalapeno never worked, but that is besides the point.
oh shit!
Josh I think, for the community, this is a pretty important question for us to ask such an esteemed vendor as yourself.
What products have you registered with the FCC and what arethere their registration numbers?
Josh I think, for the community, this is a pretty important question for us to ask such an esteemed vendor as yourself.
What products have you registered with the FCC and what are
Inaba,
Q: Were any of your current gen ASIC products granted FCC approval ? What sort of certification processes did you go through ?
Q: Will your next generation PCIe products be undergoing formal certification and compliance testing ?
Q: On what legal grounds are you refusing to honor refunds, in apparent violation of FTC regulations ?
Q: Were any of your current gen ASIC products granted FCC approval ? What sort of certification processes did you go through ?
Q: Will your next generation PCIe products be undergoing formal certification and compliance testing ?
Q: On what legal grounds are you refusing to honor refunds, in apparent violation of FTC regulations ?
Jump to: