Topic: HashFast announces specs for new ASIC: 400GH/s - page 49. (Read 880726 times)

hindsight on the LB deal....but weird that there wasn't a back and forth where some cash might have come forward..."this deal or no deal". Especially since there wasn't anything waiting in the wings.

where are the new ideas to use the declining value chips? Is there an email address for the CRO to send some ideas too because it sure seems like there are none?

I feel like this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=amGJwP2p7D8

 

Will this nightmare ever reach a conclusion, I want some money back?

Judge: GGL and BGL, please approach the bench.
GGL: Here is comes. I wonder how much it's going to cost us. I bet 5%?
BGL: I'm guessing 15.
Judge: Hey, guys, I can't believe it's already ten o'clock. Before we get started today I just wanted to say my grandchildren read her first book cover-to-cover yesterday. It was Ten Little Indians. I believe that by the time she gets to be ten, she'll be pretty smart. In fact, she, herself, is already getting into Bitcoin. Just look what she gave me. A bitcoin wallet address. Go ahead and keep it, she has plenty. I can't wait to get home tonight to read to her MOMO. That'll be all.
GGL: When the fuck did the Judge learn code?
BGL: Not sure, but it'll only cost us 10%. BTW, you owe me coffee for losing the bet.

The main problem was that it was they weren't offering to pay cash.  They wanted to pay a very small amount to a select few companies to get their hands on the chips and then if they decided to build a mine and after they got their investment back they would maybe pay up to 6 million dollars back to creditors.  So the likely outcome for customer creditors was that we would have ended up with $0.  If you have a choice between keeping something that is worth a few million and declining in value so you could look for another buyer or $0 for it right now which would you take?

What was the big idea behind killing the liquidbits deal?
Was there an alternative that would have delivered more money to the creditors?

collusion seems like alot of professional risk for the GGL(?creditors committee lawyer?). That thing we all know is untrue that she said during the hearings concerning the chips not depreciating was a tactic to kill the liquidbits deal......well that worked.

now what? where are the good ideas?

When HF promises BTC refunds, customers expect BTC refunds.

They the fuck don't care how the company would manage to provide them, it's not of their business. For all they care maybe each time a HF employee takes a dump, one newly created bitcoin comes along with it. It's not of their concern, it's HF responsibility to live up to their part of the agreement, as we customers did ours.

- Was there risk involved in pre-ordering from HashFast? Yes, as there is with many bitcoin investments. A lot of scammers, liars, mismanagement and incompetence out here.

- Does that mean WE as customers are responsible for putting our trust and money in that company? Of course not, they are responsible for their own promises and mistakes.

- IOW does it make us greedy bastards to demand BTC refunds as per our agreement?  Absolutely not.


So Icebreaker, you were told about the "Windfall" concept by some gal and you probably thought "Yes, that's something I can use", and now you use a million times it in all your replies as your only defense for your failed company.

Yeah, I know that type of person. The words childish and ridiculous comes to mind, as does the expression "doesn't know what the hell he's talking about".


So please, take you shitfall and go play elsewhere. It's time for you to invent a new scam.


Kisses,
HR  


PS: I paid in fiat.

Obviously, those involved in the blatant collusion had to be paid. I see it! You see it! Even the judge sees it, but it's not his position to make such an opinion, for he's ONLY the judge. Both sides' lawyers see it, but guess what comes to mind? You guessed it: Blatant collusion.

Good Guy Lawyer: I'm going to do A, B and C to try to get this over with ASAP, while you...
Bad Guy Lawyer: ...do X, Y and Z to slow you down. Is it safe to assume we're both getting paid the same hourly rate?
Good Guy Lawyer: Yes, of course, Silly, but sadly the clown wearing the robe doesn't benefit so handsomely.
Bad Guy Lawyer: True, that! But we don't get to don a robe. Guess that's the price we have to pay to remain in our lowly positions.
Good Guy Lawyer: The only saving grace is that our clients pay that price - in spades!

Judge: What's the latest?
GGL: Your Honor, we need to do A, B and C ASAP.
Judge: Any objections, BGL?
BGL: Yes, your Honor. X, Y and Z.
Judge: See you all next month. Adjourned!

GGL: Coffee?
BGL: Can't! Toga party at Long Dong Skropenis and CockMeyers' pad. I'll email you pics.
GGL: Guess I'll have my paralegal email my suckers the latest and ask for next month's payment for legal. Wait, toga party?
BGL: Yep, but don't tell the judge, for I'll be donning a robe - with nothing underneath.
GGL: You always get the good clients!
BGL: Yep! It's not who you know, but who you...

Check the company’s executive’s expense accounts.... 

The bigger picture question is how do you take in $18M+ from pre orders, fulfill a small percentage of your customers (1/2 of the first batch) and apparently have next to nothing in $ or BTC to show for it?

Not sure now which one is it, but on here http://www.plainsite.org/dockets/28mzy2tfp/california-northern-bankruptcy-court/hashfast-technologies-llc/ you'll find the assist statement showing 0 BTC on account, unless they lied to the judge that is.

Just mixed up the name back then, meant Icebreaker, not Icedrill...


and: I asked for a refund for my upgrade kit using their refund form, giving up any BTC refund claims (which I didn't anticipate or claim anyways) and guess what: didn't receive anything as well.

Have you actually read any of the egomaniacle/flamboyant garbage MP spouts?

MP is not a financial educator/prophet. He's a manipulative scammer bent on taking money from the ignorant. Anyone with even the slightest amount of real world financial knowledge would see through his facade.

You're really trying to blame the victim for some reason while it's clear as day that hashfast is to blame for this.

There were no "blatantly false promises" and if there were you surely didn't speak up about it.

There were promises HF failed to uphold due to their incompetence/scamming but that doesn't mean the promises were unrealistic or unfulfillable.  Any competent company could have come through with the exact same promises HF made.

No, it appears that icebreaker is some guy named Ralph that worked at Hashfast and also posted under the Hashfast_CL name  which is why some posts from Hashfast_CL have the same moronic tone as the stuff Icebreaker posts.

No, but I can imagine it's meaning. I don't care if I become as mad as Don Quixote. He was an interesting guy, and Pirateat40 agrees that you shouldn't fuck with the community too much.

has it finally been established that icebreaker = simon

Are you familiar with the expression tilting at windmills? 
Also if you want to find the responsible person all you have to do is look in the mirror.  Relying on blatantly false promises is as much the responsibility of the one pretending those promises are worth something as well as the one making them.  A good post about that is below.  Granted MP rubs people the wrong way but that doesn't make some of what he says any less true.
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/personal-responsiblity-and-the-ponzi-scam-106391

You are the one doing a disservice now.

We will fight tooth and nail until when we get our money back or the responsible are in prison. Hopefully both.

I see that people are still posting in this thread...

We won't get our money back.

Get over it. It's that f*cking simple. Period .

Just leave it... :-)