There's one major thing missing from this list... a timeline as to when each comment was written. The OP seriously seems to think that these are current claims, when several of them were made months ago. Call it was it really is, a lack of updating the website with current information.
A timeline is irrelevant because most of these statements were made after KNC shipped and began working on their next gen chip.
Please don't pretend the lack of updating the site with accurate information is anything but deceit. They seem to have no problem updating other parts of the site and are incredibly active on these forums and their own.
I challenge the OP with this: Show me an ASIC company that has not told ANY lies. Let's not focus on one, let's put them all on the table. Otherwise, this is simply another hate thread intended to incite riot because the OP is just another troll.
Challenge accepted and completed: Bitmain.
We don't need to put them all on the table because this is a thread to focus on BFL. I am not going to argue that every asic manufacturer is perfect in fact most are the complete opposite.
I think just about everyone would agree BFL is competing for worst asic manufacturer. (tied with hashfast currently)
So, you're saying KnC shipped in mid-August? Damn, I must have missed that in all the Avalon whining in the KnC thread.
Deceit is intentional, meaning it was originally posted with the intent to deceive. Procrastination/laziness is a more accurate description and is hardly deceit. It is a bad business model, but you and so many others seem to think everything needs to be perfect.
Yes, I can see it's 'purpose' is to focus on BFL, couldn't use one of the 50+ threads already out there, had to create another to add to the mess.
As to the trolling part, #1 This one is a tough call, as your examples didn't have existing product (except for Avalon) when it was made, but the problem comes about with companies underpowering chips to reach those power specs. Until there is a fully working Monarch in hand running at the stated 600GH to see actualy power specs, you technically cannot claim this a lie. They were shooting for .7W/GH at the time of conception and now it looks like they will beat that, but you nitpick other statements to call it a lie.
#2, I can technically give this to you as ASICMiner had thousands of those little USB stick toys they sold. Considering they were pfft for hashing power and vastly overpriced (2BTC back in May and would have earned less than .7BTC as of today.) Discounting AM though, the statement was true when made.
#3, On one of my visits to KC, I noticed their board noting a record 1 day shipping of over 1000 units and the weekly record was over 4000. At that point in time, there was NO other ASIC manufacturer that had that much production capability, and unless you again count the little USB sticks, which wouldn't be put together in a workplace like BFL has but in a much bigger/vastly automated place, it's doubtful any of the current companies could match this output.
#4. Your failing to account for time means that you think this is still accurate to this day, but Bitmain was not around posting about a $3/GH claim back in August. What was true in August is no longer true today, if the statement had read: "The Competition at least $ 17.50 /GH, AND WILL NEVER GET LOWER", then you could indeed say it was a lie.
#5, back in August, 65nm technology WAS powering the majority of the bitcoin network.
#6, So, back in August KnC had a working 1st gen ASIC was was developing a 2nd Gen?
#7, AM, really?!? Wow. You love to throw Bitmain out there, but you can only point to Nov when they started posting on the forums. Considering they were 'founded in 1Q 2013' and nothing was heard until November, you cannot in truth say they had no delay, you can only state that they worked out their delays BEFORE announcing anything.
#8, Technically a lie because they were overly optimistic about their foundry/testing timeline.
#9, You missed the word plan. True, they suck at timelines, but that isn't lying.
#10, Until you have a fully working 600GH monarch in hand, you cannot call this a lie. While you pulled the .6 number from their product page, their forum posting says:
Power & Performance better than expected
The initial power consumption numbers for Monarch are in and they're about 20% better than anticipated, meaning we expect the Monarch to consume 0.45W/GH at the chip level. This translates to about 300W per 600GH at the wall. Chip performance of all systems is as good as or better than predicted. To put this in perspective, this makes the Monarch chip nearly twice as power efficient as compared to our 28nm competition whose products operate between 0.9 and 1.0w per GH at the wall.
.45 at chip level = 270 watts which leaves 80 watts available to reach their 350W listing on the product page. So much for your 'chips alone are .6w' statement.
I think Avalon wins as worst myself, but that's a judgement call due to the 800k chip fiasco.
I challenge you to argue that any specific point I made was inaccurate. Otherwise it is you who is the troll.
Challenge accepted and completed.