They didn't deliver. I asked for my money back in November as the 'December 31st delivery date' did not exist when I bought my BJ. They told me to go sell my pre-order on the 'Bitcoin forums' instead.

I wonder what the strategy is with the 'imminent dramatic price increase' email. Do they want to discourage customers asking for refunds and give them the impression they can sell their pre-orders to other suckers for more in the future? BFL just dropped their prices so I really don't see HF raising their prices.. just more mindf*ck tactics to create confusion in order to bridge the 2 week refund window if you ask me.

Maybe they are ecstatic because now they only have to ship 2 or 3 dies per Golden Nonce chip instead of the original allocated 4. That means they will have extra dies that they can send to customers later to cover MPP. Let's hope that is not what HF is playing at but I would not put it beyond them at this point.

Regarding refunds:




Seems pretty clear to me.

Now contrast that to the refund email from today:


I think 'payment' is the keyword here. Not 'pricing'. Payments were made in BTC and HashFast committed to full payment refunds in the order confirmation.

The original advertised specs when I bought were <350W at the system level:


So I don't know why they are gloating over 450W, that is well outside of the 20% tolerance @425 GH/s

According to Cypherdoc (who was being paid by HF at the time) HF has been holding the customer pre-order BTC until the end of year (as they should since they are not allowed to use it to fund development anyway since we are not investors or backers).


https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=270363.msg2894478#msg2894478

Exchange rates should not even factor into refunds. If there was an exchange from BTC to USD then HF took that exchange risk. Not us.

I am not surprised. HF simply does what benefits them. Screw the customers. Full speed BFL mode.

According to MPP they will give you up to 400% more hashing capacity than the Baby Jet you purchased. They calculate the ROI based on network difficulty adjustments, the estimated hashrate, and what hashrate the average Baby Jet achieves.

You purchased a BJ, not 400GH/s. If it turns out the nominal speed of a BJ is 700GH/s then that will be the baseline for the MPP calculations. Personally I think whatever the BJ runs at at 350W at the wall should be the nominal speed.

HF really should communicate directly. They probably don't want to take the legal risk and prefer to use loosely affiliated messengers. Not cool.

* Cypherdoc was shilling like a pro in August and then did a 180 in September when he re-sold all his orders to some poor sap.
* Icebreaker is clearly living in a parallel universe where HF is amazing.
* TacoTime is the only one who has been acting with integrity, and this thread is another example of that. So kudos for that.

When the time arrives and it makes sense. Sure I'd like to help you out FWIW. At the moment, I think you are just pounding your chest trying to intimidate HF to deliver more and disagree with that strategy. That said, I think HF should find a way to compensate for the delays and give their customers a fighting chance.

Come on Cedivad. While I agree with you on many things I do think you are going overboard with the drama sometimes. If you are going the legal route, go the legal route. No need to tell us every day on the forums.

If HF is able to achieve a stable 800GH/s with a single module that would be quite an achievement. It won't put us in the green but hey good news is good news. Let's hope this is the case and not more smoke and mirrors. I'll give them the benefit of the doubt for now.

This hole is getting deeper and deeper.

Instead of delivering a product we just got more excuses and our personal details leaked?

Should I bend over some more?

Some burn-in testing makes sense. ~24h or so. It is good form to do this on testnet of course.

Otoh, I'd be fine with HF doing burn in testing for a year with my machine on the real network as long as customers receive every coin mined by the machine. Call it hosting if you will

This is not an accident. I received a 2nd 'order confirmation' a week after my purchase that came with the updated 'guaranteed delivery' date and some more legal boiler plate that was absent in the one I agreed to a week before.

It is also not an accident that they removed versioning & dates from their online ToS. This way the customer is not even aware of which ToS they agreed to.

Be honest HF.

I can not find this clause in the original TOS. Can you point it out? http://pastebin.com/EfS9vmRf


Just because something is in a TOS does not mean it is enforceable.
http://griesslaw.com/blog/enforceability-of-web-based-terms-of-sale.html



Yes, and I preferred to pay in USD but they did not offer that option. Cypherdoc was pretty clear HF only wanted to take BTC. See: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=270363.msg2894478#msg2894478


The problem is that HF does all their communication through 'liasons' so they are not on the hook for any of these statements made on their behalf.

And you came to this conclusion based on what exactly?

It should not matter if you paid to a bitcoin address trough BitPay or any other means. You paid in BTC. period.

The merchant can decide what to do with BTC payments via BitPay:

https://bitpay.com/bitcoin-direct-deposit


HF should not have touched the customer funds until after delivery. However they likely did use those funds to cover NRE so I assume they converted to USD. If they did, that money is likely spent and they are unable to provide full refunds in BTC to all Batch 1 customers that might request one after the missed delivery date.

That does not mean I agree with this (I don't) but this is the reality we will have to deal with. I would not be surprised to see them settle and provide full BTC refunds to select customers that take the legal route, but this will be the minority.

Yes, but there is also this thing called reality. And reality is a bitch.

I agree. But if HF converted BTC to USD at the time of payment AND/OR used customer funds during development they will most likely be unable to provide full BTC refunds. So they try to avoid that if possible. There is a reason why they added the USD refund clause to the recent ToS update.

If they ship after the guaranteed deadline you have 3 options:

1) Accept miner -> Good luck making your BTC back! (never going to happen)
2) Request refund -> Get refunded in USD -> Instant 80% loss of initial BTC investment
3) Request refund in BTC -> get denied -> fund legal action -> hope to settle before others/insolvency -> Good luck with that.

None of the options is particularly attractive.

It was never stated publicly (on the website, forum, or twitter) by HF afaik.

* Simon stated refunds will be done in BTC
* John told me full refunds will be done in BTC
* Updated ToS states refunds will be done in USD at the BTC exchange rate at the time of the sale.

Someone from HF needs to write down under what terms refunds will be provided to Batch 1 customers so there is 0 confusion. The should do this *before* the Dec 31st deadline.


It is in the original one:


btw, I never edited any TOS.. not sure what you mean by that?

HashFast's continued silence after missing their Saturday shipping deadline indicates they have at least one skeleton in the closet.

HF really needs to start communicating with their customers NOW.

Here is what I'd like to see:

* Full Final HW Specs.
* Clear Shipping dates.
* Clarity on refunds for Batch 1 customers.
* Clarity on MPP