Well if that's the case(and it looks that way atm), then that's a win for customers of Avalon & bASIC, as well as investors of ASICMiner. ROI for the smaller ASIC vendors' customers would have been significantly lengthened if BFL had been able to get several TH of ASICs into miner's hands before the end of 2012.

You seem to discount BFL's role in this at nearly every turn and as this conversation is OT anyway I'm going to let it go, but will happily continue discussing it in an appropriate existing thread. Does BFL deserve a scammer tag...for instance.

Does this policy change apply also to the bonds you've issued at btct.co? I believe the contract there says monthly also, though I doubt the bondholders would mind if you paid dividends weekly instead.

Did you intend these as serious questions? I'll treat them as such, despite the fact that a couple seem self evident. First, I *AM* personally pleased that BFL is spinning it's wheels, because as you say I benefit from their failures. It does not however benefit the crypto community to have a product that would obsolete GPUs and eventually FPGAs promised for October shipping be delayed until Q1 2013. How many have based their purchase decisions off this (mis)information. Looking back I simply cannot be convinced there was any chance whatsoever BFL could ship a working ASIC in October, but it certainly wasn't obvious in August.

BFL locked up pre-orders based on a fairy tale shipping date they had zero chance of achieving. This is the second time they've done this with a product launch. How much damage has been done to Avalon, BTCFPGA, and ASICMiner by this tactic? Pre-orders paid for in BTC 6 months ago? What's the real cost of a BFL Single SC to those miners?

$1299/$6/BTC = 216.5*$12.25 = $2652.13

Now that's a serious chunk of change for 60Gh, but it would've still been easily worth it if those early adopters had been the sole ASIC hashers working on 50BTC blocks. A "fuzzy" shipping date of 1/13 will make it difficult to imagine those early adopters being repaid for many months as ASICs come online from other vendors that didn't sell pre-orders so far in advance and come much closer to meeting their shipping schedules. This is the kind of stuff that lawyers salivate over.

Just because you didn't order from them doesn't mean you're unaffected by their delays. I ordered from their competition, so I most definitely care if/when BFL ships. This effects the entire crypto economy.

For myself, I don't hate BFL, I'd just prefer they hadn't been able to capture such a huge piece of the ASIC pie with their dishonest tactics of promising what they have no chance of delivering.

Think it'd be prudent to wait at this point. Status update coming late Monday.

https://www.btcfpga.com/forum/index.php?topic=142.0

Have they ever?

No sweat...the October shipping schedule was "fuzzy" and the 5th week of November shipping schedule was "hairy" so you should just fall back to the early late January shipping schedule with regard to legal action against this ethical, but extremely unlucky company.

Thing is everyone that's serious about buying AU is going to run the numbers and the numbers have to be compared to gold bullion which is of course sold in Ozt. Sucks, but there it is and there's no escape. Couldn't you do a fraction of an Ozt just as easily to keep the cost of a single unit down?

No, the thread has been derailed by discussion about a typo. The thread is about BFL's explanation of one of their issues with their ASIC products.

Congrats! Good luck on the launch! You stated you were waiting for receipt of PM, can an investor be assured then that you won't double sell AU denominated in LTC and BTC?

I too wish you'd define shares around fractions of an Ozt rather than bringing grams into it, as it gets rather messy, but it's a minor concern. You get my vote.

I like the way ngzhang and Avalon is handling their product launch. They're the class act of ASICs thus far.

BFL? ...well they're on the other end of that scale.

Update:

I was able to raise NAV/U by liquidating most of the fund's position in SA-2 and buying back at lower levels. A stake was also taken in the very successful LTC-Arcade IPO. Those shares appear to be stabilizing around 7. Here's a snapshot of the fund's positions currently:

Doubt they'll make that either. They said this won't be like their botched FPGA paper launch, but it's exactly the same. They run the same playbook again and again. It's painfully obvious why they've been so secretive and why their delays are always just a couple more weeks...just a couple more weeks. Rinse...repeat.

Kh or Mh?

Not sure I follow. bASIC didn't open for pre-order until much later.

I saw the document he posted. Doesn't guarantee it's authenticity, but he did post a pic of a doc that was either the real deal or a really good fake.

True that. I guess we'll find out what they've been getting done while the chip saga unfolds soon enough. It'd be tough luck if they finally got working chips and then had to change the board layout. Josh had said they'd match competitors' shipping products at one point. I wonder how much they can juice they can squeeze out of it without requiring more chips or more power than current VR circuits can provide.

bASIC isn't, and I think BFL is receiving chips from China but doing assembly in the states. Not 100% on where BFL is getting chips, just that it's on the other side of the world and that they're not pringles.

Seems like it'd be a risk to complete boards without having final silicon to test with, but I guess we'll see soon enough.