Bitcoin Forum
June 24, 2024, 01:27:14 AM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 27.0 [Torrent]
 
  Home Help Search Login Register More  
  Show Posts
Pages: « 1 ... 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 [146] 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 ... 218 »
2901  Bitcoin / Hardware / Re: Butterfly Labs Forced "On Hold For Refund" for all my Single SC orders on: May 27, 2013, 05:28:52 PM
If it took them 11 months to accumulate their current order queue. Then, for them to catch up and clear it out they would need to satisfy orders at a faster clip than they received them.

If they received on average 200 orders for every day for 11 months. Then they must ship out 201 orders for every day for the next 11 months.


Question: Do you currently see this happening?
Stop scaring the BFL customers. You do realize they're holding on by a thread. Such logic can be like telling a 5 year old there is no Santa. Have you ever see that happen?

jokes
I am sorry!

I thought no one (the customers at least) know this much.

I will quit being the boogey man. I apologize to BFL customers for letting them in on the....

Oops:

https://forums.butterflylabs.com/bfl-forum-miscellaneous/2925-how-can-refund-i-have-lost-confidence-were-fooled.html
2902  Bitcoin / Hardware / Re: Butterfly Labs Forced "On Hold For Refund" for all my Single SC orders on: May 27, 2013, 05:14:38 PM
Lets say I took in 4000 orders from June 23rd, 2012.

200 Jally's
800 Little Singles
2998 Singles
2 Minirigs.

Lets say the current date is April 1st 2013. Okay? Good.

Then lets say I ship out 2 Jally's on April 1st 2013. Great.
Then lets say I ship out 35 Jally's on April 23rd 2013. Yippee!
Then lets say I ship out 100 Jally's on May 23rd 2013. Excellent.

Problem. See above, most of my queue hasn't even been executed. It took me the better part of two months to clear out 1 week of received orders [for Jallys only] from 1 year ago....SIGH.

What if I ordered a Jally a whole month after the initial orders being received....well damn...at the current clip of speed...It will take about...<calculates an approximation>...TOO LONG. LOL (On the order of about 2 months to execute every 1 week of received orders = 8 months)

Thats not even talking about the most popular line of products. Yikes. Unless Jody starts blogging about 1000+ orders going out each day, the order queue will never be cleared out anytime soon.
2903  Bitcoin / Hardware / Re: Butterfly Labs Forced "On Hold For Refund" for all my Single SC orders on: May 27, 2013, 04:56:43 PM
What I currently see is that they are:
--Shipping out their (I think) least popular product at a very slow clip. Certainly slower than they received the orders.

--Have yet to begin shipping out their most popular product line (the Single SC and Little Single).

--Have many months of orders in a backlog and haven't a hope in hell of exceeding their intake. (In my opinion)

Edit: Unless they exceed their intake speed for orders in a given period of time...they will perpetually never be able to catch up to current orders placed just today...in any reasonable time frame.

They aren't even telling anyone what the status of the bulk wafers are.

I'll give you a hint, the silence from BFL over the last two months on any details is probably NOT because they don't have any updates. It's probably because the truth of the matter is INCONVENIENT.

Right now everyone (BFL customers) are high on fumes of a few measly orders being shipped on the (I think) least popular line of products which means it is the smallest order queue.

There is so much spin going on at BFL labs in the way they even release ongoing developments that they could probably start a centrifuge center. (In my opinion.)
2904  Bitcoin / Hardware / Re: Butterfly Labs Forced "On Hold For Refund" for all my Single SC orders on: May 27, 2013, 04:53:38 PM
If it took them 11 months to accumulate their current order queue. Then, for them to catch up and clear it out they would need to satisfy orders at a faster clip than they received them.

If they received on average 200 orders for every day for 11 months. Then they must ship out 201 orders for every day for the next 11 months.


Question: Do you currently see this happening?
2905  Bitcoin / Hardware / Re: Butterfly Labs Forced "On Hold For Refund" for all my Single SC orders on: May 27, 2013, 04:50:32 PM
ok here's what I found so far and hope to help everybody understand what their rights as a consumer are:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=217036.new#new

drlukacs ty for your offer to moderate it for me Smiley you are an awesome person Smiley

Well IF I was STILL an existing customer of BFL I would cancel my order NOW! or buy another product to be able to gauge an expected consideration of loss through BFL's inability to deliver.

I think that is what I got from that marathon or reading I just did. Good job on the post for that work.

Cancel now, when they are on the cusp of delivering. Sounds like a good plan - I bet you have no ulterior motives in your most saged advice.

I for one have ABSOLUTELY no intention of cancelling. Watching you guys thrashing around like drowning rats has convinced me that all of this is a deliberate campaign to make as much noise as possible to distract people from throwing down their money on black and waiting for the wheel to finish spinning. As the wheel slows and the balls bounces less its funny how the volume has increased.

Day 3 - 15 left ... time to articulate that bet k9taint - my 10 BTC are waiting. And YipYap thanks for your PM. As indicated you have a few hours to "out" me.. with verification. Get on it. Chop Chop. Tick Tock. . etc

Hopefully, someday, you realize that for a company to satisfy their order queue.....


.....Wait for the bombshell....


....They have to ship out faster than they receive the orders over a given time span.
2906  Bitcoin / Hardware / Re: President of Walletbit confirms Avalon does not ship fairly on: May 27, 2013, 04:37:23 PM


I approached Walletbit by email again to see if they could offer any help (they, at least, verified my order, a month and a half after sending them 225BTC), and this is what Adam Herding, President, had to say:

Quote from: Walletbit
Hello,

I apologize for the delay in confirming your order. I have sent a walletbit confirmation email for your records. Should you have any problems with Avalon this is what you can use to prove that you have paid. Unfortunately it appears Avalon is not shipping in the same order they were placed which is beyond our control. I apologize for any inconvenience this has caused.

Regards,
Adam

I know it's not news that the Avalon crew does not particularly care for its customers, but that they're also (apparently) completely ignoring Walletbit and reneging on such a simple promise given to us is infuriating.

There is still some missing correspondence you have to fill in.

The above quoted text, for example, is missing from your redacted emails.

-------------------

Second, pardon me, but your conclusion that Avalon is "ignoring" wallet bit sounds like it isn't supported in your emails. As far as I have read, Wallet bit only comes to a generalized conclusion out of thin air. They don't even make any remark in the email of trying to contact Avalon.

They only "suppose" they [Avalon] may be shipping out of order.

This is why I asked you for your email correspondence. Since your conclusion seems like a forced one. I think it is only fair to say that Avalon is shipping units with some unknown pattern. But to extend that and also say they Ignored WalletBit (The Payment Processors emails) is disingenuous and probably overreaching as a conclusion.
2907  Bitcoin / Legal / Re: Miners, Consumer Protections (UCC), and Pre-orders on: May 27, 2013, 02:21:22 AM
Endlessa posted the questions here:

http://www.expertlaw.com/forums/showthread.php?t=159009&p=713115

Feel free to review the case they posted and see if they actually did a good job of posing all the questions (with relevant material) attached.

The results sound fairly biased but who knows.
2908  Bitcoin / Hardware / Re: Butterfly Labs Forced "On Hold For Refund" for all my Single SC orders on: May 27, 2013, 01:06:15 AM
https://forums.butterflylabs.com/bfl-forum-miscellaneous/2909-i-am-considering-selling-mr-three-500gh-boxes-sept-28th-2012-order-takers.html
2909  Bitcoin / Hardware / Re: Butterfly Labs Forced "On Hold For Refund" for all my Single SC orders on: May 27, 2013, 12:58:13 AM
@ Firefop

The only thing I can determine is that the stack of possible dangers BFL faces is getting larger with every [additional] week that this "situation" goes on.

Honestly, I don't see how they are going to extricate themselves from all the mishaps. It just keeps getting worse as time goes on.

----------------

I can't even begin to imagine how their luck has held out this long. I can't even imagine an exit strategy where the customers end up happy and still get their devices...in lets say a month. I have run the numbers (guesstimates) and I keep coming to the conclusion that unless BFL ships out thousands of units per day, they simply won't be able to fulfill the backlog in any reasonable time frame.

The only scenario that BFL can possibly win is:

A) They send out all orders immediately or within a month (not going to happen based on what I can see).

B) They somehow prevent anyone from complaining or seeking judgements against them. <-- Unlikely

I can't imagine a realistic scenario where this ends well.

---------------------

There is a rumor on the forum that the boards had the wrong mosfets installed on them and they can't be used or need to be modified. So there again, they lose even more time. Honestly, I don't see how they can pull out of the nose dive. All I do know is we need someone from BFL to ship so that the competition can lower their prices. That is in my best interests.
2910  Bitcoin / Hardware / Re: Butterfly Labs Forced "On Hold For Refund" for all my Single SC orders on: May 27, 2013, 12:43:53 AM
I would have nothing to lose if I were you.

Just call the authorities and get this company shut down (they gotta be doing something illegal) after all if you can't have it why should anyone else. I cancelled my orders so no sweat off my brow.

Get the law involved if you want. Up to you. You're just an asshole to Josh remember?

I believe he is in breach of contract and pain and suffering has been endured. As long as you don't provide a paypal information you have them stuck in breach and possibly able to sue.

Call a lawyer! Tell him all about it.

In the same vein:

Lets assume that X's grounds for suit is valid in it's premise. (which imo it isn't).
Lets assume that X would win the suit.
Lets assume that BFL gets a judgement it can afford to pay.

So BFL pays X, his lawyer takes a good portion of it... everything is settled.

Now instead of assuming BFL pays him, lets look at what happens if they either honestly can't afford to pay him... or decide to use him as an excuse to roll up shop. Now they're declaring bankruptcy...

X gets paid some or all of his damages award and shortly afterwards all the other other pre-order customers who will never get a product file civil suits against X for depriving them of a working product which BFL would have been able to provide eventually if he hadn't put them out of business. Does X's previous award cover the potential damages from nobody else getting the product?

That's why this whole thing is based on a false premise.
The premise you put forth is untenable.

If BFL loses X number of customers cases and that drives them to bankruptcy, the affected Y number of customers cannot sue X number of customers because "BFL failed" or was bankrupted via litigation.

That isn't a possibility to start with. Y simply loses out and the only person to blame would be BFL, not anyone else.

Edit: I can only imagine considering the discussion going on, there are probably more than a few members getting legal advice. If it were zero that would indeed surprise me.

It would be (in my opinion) incredibly difficult to win as a defendant if you were BFL. As someone noted above, there are cogent points that would be difficult to navigate around in a court case.
2911  Bitcoin / Hardware / Re: Butterfly Labs Forced "On Hold For Refund" for all my Single SC orders on: May 27, 2013, 12:05:41 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=8vwuwibQ_tQ#t=380s
2912  Bitcoin / Hardware / Re: BFL upgrade now offered on 5ghz orders.(screenshot) on: May 26, 2013, 11:38:09 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=8vwuwibQ_tQ#t=380s
2913  Bitcoin / Hardware / Re: Butterfly Labs Forced "On Hold For Refund" for all my Single SC orders on: May 26, 2013, 11:19:37 PM
[A forward contract is precisely a "contract for sale of future goods." Xian bought a forward contract. Forward contracts need not specify an exact time in the future to be executed. The traditional measure of damages for a seller’s breach of contract is the difference between the market price and the contract price. The UCC retains this rule.

UCC broadens the damages, because it also allows incidental and consequential damages. It also explicitly allows for recovery of "cover" costs, that is, the purchase of a substitute item.
You mean I could buy an Avalon as a "cover cost". The law is a wonderful process. (I am joking/kidding)
2914  Bitcoin / Hardware / Re: Butterfly Labs Forced "On Hold For Refund" for all my Single SC orders on: May 26, 2013, 11:15:53 PM


A judge will be considering whether in light of an indicated delivery time of October 2012, non-delivery by May 2013 is "reasonable." All I can say that I would not want to be counsel for BFL at that hearing...
No kidding, I was thinking this exact same thought while reading your posts.

They would have one hell of a time coming out of that courtroom unscathed. Whats worse, I believe if a case is extremely similar to another case, the people asking for money can ask for a summary judgement by simply referring to another case where the decision went in their favor. (assuming they make the exact same scenario over again)

If that is the case, then this opens the door to Butterfly Labs opening themselves to a legal attack strategy and losing every time if they even lose once. It is conceivable (I think) that if the community prepared a pamphlet for how to execute an effective case against Butterly Labs then, they can very well get down to dealing with BFL in court for losses and damages incurred from lengthy and unreasonable promises.

I am of the thought that this may lead to BFL simply bending over with settlements every time a horde shows up in court. Then again, if you have a winning case, why would you settle in the first place?

Just some thoughts.
2915  Bitcoin / Hardware / Re: Butterfly Labs Forced "On Hold For Refund" for all my Single SC orders on: May 26, 2013, 11:04:28 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=8vwuwibQ_tQ#t=380s
2916  Bitcoin / Hardware / Re: President of Walletbit confirms Avalon does not ship fairly on: May 26, 2013, 10:15:51 AM
Show us what your wrote to them to elicit that response (no redactions please).
2917  Bitcoin / Hardware / Re: Butterfly Labs Forced "On Hold For Refund" for all my Single SC orders on: May 26, 2013, 01:51:23 AM


Now the final chestnut...

So Its all about us wanting to be able to mint coins and nobody else...Yeah you have totally got me their...lol

I do this purely so nobody else can mine.... Your argument is pure genius... I get it that this is your point of view but it is not mine ..sorry


Ugh, the stupidity of that conclusion flys in the face of all logic.

It assumes people can't find the silver lining regardless of the turnout of a situation.

--------------

By those geniuses (nottm28, Endlessa, where is that wrenchmonkey?) mode of thinking there is no way for a miner to profit from either situation. SIGH.

--------------

Whats interesting about their argument is that the premise itself doesn't ultimately make sense. If a miner were worried about the hashrate going through the roof making their miner unprofitable...then wouldn't a moment of thought applied to that logic....also lead a person to resolve the idea in their mind that "then no ASIC unit would be profitable" if that were the case?

Isn't that pretty obvious as a conclusion?

If mine were not profitable in that circumstance then, why would any other ASIC miner in another persons hands help?

They seem to miss the obvious. Or perhaps they have no actual idea of the various solutions you can come up with to resolve every situation. (Of which I am not going to say anything on...if you haven't figure it out, then that is good for me!)
2918  Bitcoin / Hardware / Re: Butterfly Labs Forced "On Hold For Refund" for all my Single SC orders on: May 26, 2013, 01:24:35 AM
seriously the nature of argument doesn't have to adversarial
It isn't my friend. You just make it turn out that way.

Almost all the interactions I have had with you were on the basis of practices employed and ethics. Personal didn't enter into it until private information was posted. Guess by who?

By me PL .. and I am not who you think I am ..

dig deep .. you will find the answer..

As far as I am concerned you are Inaba.

You used information that was only disclosed by him.
Which makes you wrong. Again.

You assume that I didn't disclose it to him ?



To use a phrase that the retard Inaba himself has used in his own defense.

"Well, it's all publicly available information."

And yes, you may send any postcards you wish to the last address. Leave out any anthrax or other dangerous substances, please.
you internet *anonymous* dumbasses don't realize that nothing isn't seen or identified.. . .go do defcon one time. . I dare you .. . come back and tell me your "anonymous"
Don't be stupid.

No one is anonymous dummy (unless they are somehow incredibly ignorant of various facts). Don't overlay your own [apparent] stupidity (or nonsense notions) unto others.
2919  Bitcoin / Hardware / Re: Butterfly Labs Forced "On Hold For Refund" for all my Single SC orders on: May 26, 2013, 01:15:35 AM
seriously the nature of argument doesn't have to adversarial
It isn't my friend. You just make it turn out that way.

Almost all the interactions I have had with you were on the basis of practices employed and ethics. Personal didn't enter into it until private information was posted. Guess by who?

By me PL .. and I am not who you think I am ..

dig deep .. you will find the answer..

As far as I am concerned you are Inaba.

You used information that was only disclosed by him.
Which makes you wrong. Again.

You assume that I didn't disclose it to him ?



To use a phrase that the retard Inaba himself has used in his own defense.

"Well, it's all publicly available information."

And yes, you may send any postcards you wish to the last address. Leave out any anthrax or other dangerous substances, please.
2920  Bitcoin / Hardware / Re: Butterfly Labs Forced "On Hold For Refund" for all my Single SC orders on: May 26, 2013, 01:08:40 AM
seriously the nature of argument doesn't have to adversarial
It isn't my friend. You just make it turn out that way.

Almost all the interactions I have had with you were on the basis of practices employed and ethics. Personal didn't enter into it until private information was posted. Guess by who?

By me PL .. and I am not who you think I am ..

dig deep .. you will find the answer..

As far as I am concerned you are Inaba.

You used information that was only disclosed by him.
Pages: « 1 ... 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 [146] 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 ... 218 »
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!