Topic: HashFast announces specs for new ASIC: 400GH/s - page 55. (Read 880728 times)

This isn't some politician promising to end poverty and failing to accomplish that promise. This was a crucial term of sale. HF had no right to break that term of sale simply because it was "inconvenient" for them.

The offer for refunds was made at the end of a long period of ~$100 price stability.  The spike to $1000+ was unexpected and unfortunately timed for those of us who had just used BTC to purchase ASIC pre-orders.  Sorry you didn't get the 'windfalls are not legally actionable claims' memo months ago, like the rest of us (who wish they were not).

A scam doesn't make a record-smashing 28nm ASIC at TSMC or start converting MPP/backorders to chips, only to be halted by a lawsuit.

A scam does not get put into Chapter 11.  The DA isn't involved and your tired old off-topic Scam Accusation is defamation.

That defamation does not help us "victims" BTW.  HashFast is worth far more as a nearly-successful start-up with killer IP than a "scam" which got busted.

Thanks for admitting that you can't tell the difference between a company that ran out of money/time (legal) and a scam (not legal).   

So the offer for refunds was a lie from the start. Thanks for admitting they were a scam from the start.

You don't get to ask questions, and then tell me not to answer them.  At least not if you have any sense of fairness.   

I never said " not spending your BTC with HashFast" and "getting your equipment on time and yielding the same amount of bitcoins back which were used to purchase the equipment in the first place" are windfalls.  Although they would be in the financial sense, because the BTC price jumped up resulting in a large USD profit.  But you can't expect a company to honor an impossible interpretation of their refund obligations, that's unreasonable and referred to as a "windfall" in the legal domain, where it is not an actionable claim.  Most people got that memo months ago, and wisely dropped the topic.  Not sure why we're reaching back to it now... 

Even if they agreed with you, where was HF supposed to get the money to pay out 10x their orders, after spending millions to build an amazing chip and some less than amazing boards?  It was a start-up, not IBM.

I'm not insulting all HF customers here, just sharing lessons learned from being among them.

I am insulting the idiots you called "victims" who are still making off-topic Scam Accusations without evidence, and moaning about how they bear zero responsibility for sharing the unavoidable inherent risks of pre-ordering ASICs from a tiny new company.

DYODD and stop whining when you gamble more than you can afford to lose, only to lose.  It's just business, grow up and stop making it personal.  HF wanted to be the Nvidia of ASICS, not the 3dfx, and certainly not a scam.  It's not the first time having the best product was insufficient to maintain solvency.  If it's really your first personal experience of that phenomenon, consider this an expensive but valuable lesson (with my sympathies).

I got the date wrong, it's tomorrow, Wednesday. Sorry.

Anyone know how the hearing went today?

Yes, I was negotiating with... John?  just as I started arbitration.....

Ok. I'll bite. Where is the windfall in not spending your BTC with HashFast? Where is the windfall in getting your equipment on time and yielding the same amount of bitcoins back which were used to purchase the equipment in the first place?

I don't know which agenda you serve or which playbook you're drawing from. But logic certainly is not your friend. You come here and keep insulting the intelligence of HashFast victims and blame them for lending trust to people who nefariously abused it, instead of pointing the finger at those who acted in bad faith.

If you would have the least amount of decency you would just shut up and let the legal system deal with the fallout of this mess.

Fact: You foolishly chose to believe in a self-serving zero-risk interpretation of the BTC refund clause, which is an economic impossibility.
Fact: BTC suddenly went from ~$100 to ~$1000, and only an greedy idiot would actually expect a 10x windfall at HashFast's expense because of that.
Fact: HashFast was converting MPP and backorders to raw chips, when the bankruptcy filing short-circuited that process.

The correct course of action was allowing the firm to recapitalize and resume their normal course of business, not burning it down and giving the ashes to lawyers.

Fact: Hashfast promised BTC refunds.
Fact: Hashfast refused to honor BTC refund requests.
Fact: Hashfast cannot be trusted.

The correct course of action is to involve the lawyers.

That's just, like, your opinion man.

In reality, the bankruptcy filing (1) stopped the chips-for-MPP and chips-for-backorders processes dead in their tracks, (2) stopped HF's negotiations with potential sources of recapitalization, and (3) guarantees most of what is recovered will go to lawyers.

See, you keep getting it backwards. HashFast imploded long before the lawyers showed up. Without the lawyers, no one would be getting anything. With the lawyers, there's a small chance of getting something back.

Company risk is certainly one we customers must take into account and possibly bear.  You'd think buying ASIC pre-orders from start-ups was no different than ordering a Hello Kitty toaster from Amazon, given many of the Shock, horror! reactions posted in the Hardware sub.   

Sorry for your loss; IIRC you warned us months ago that the litigious scorched earth approach would benefit nobody except lawyers.

Too bad cedivad and the other lawyer-pimps didn't listen, and our chances of recovery are now much lower as a result.   

Did they offer you more than the USD purchase price?

Well I learned well the lesson from BFL about getting your bitcoins back in case of refund.. hence the email that I have from hashfast  promising my refund in bitcoins..

however I did not account for the company going bankrupt... ..  so yah.. it is my fault...  I shoulda taken their 40k offer in feb.

ASIC pre-orders are risky for a plethora of reasons.  Those who buy ASICs (myself included) share the risks involved with the manufacturer.

Abdicating responsibility with glib '100% not *MY* fault' statements only demonstrates lack of maturity and inability to think critically.

Only the most naive wishful thinkers among us would believe that zero-risk guaranteed-profit free-lunch opportunities actually exist.

That is 100% HashFast's fault, and your fault for pimping HashFast so much.

How can you ask such stupid questions?  Have you no brain?  Do you feel good that the only ones that are going to make money now are the lawyers?

How can you show your face in here? Have you no shame? Do you feel good that jjiimm_64 got scammed for 210 btc?