AMT_Miners, should I send this back again? Please advise? I have all the records that I am telling the truth about calling you for a week to pick up this miner when you did not. I also have the records it sat in the FedEx warehouse for another full week. It would be in your best interest at this point to get a move on things here.

Captain, I have no hard feelings buddy. The only one I have hard feelings here is AMT because I paid $6,000 in 2013 and nothing to show for it but a bunch of broken parts which keep getting returned to me.

... they could be better than MaidSafe or released before.

What will be the value of MaidSafecoins then ?

Yes, I have totally been fallowing the drama / AMT thread. I guess what I was trying to say is would you rather have them take back your fucked up machines and replace them with other fucked up machines of the same type or see what your other options are for getting a more stable machine or whatever your choice may be.

I wasn't trying to stir the pot, in fact now, after thinking about it I can't believe I even said anything based on AMT's long history of never fallowing through with anything. But it does appear they are making an attempt to get things back on track. I guess we will all see what happens as this thing plays itself out.

I certainly didn't mean to offend you. I apologize if I did. I totally feel for you, They are into me for three of them and I am way lower number than you.

Opieum is a nice helpful guy. He is OK in my book. Please lets focus on trying to get a solution here first.

While we still are waiting I think 2.4Ths per miner is I think a more than reasonable exchange (seeing as it also fully honors the MPP in full and closes the door to any future litigation on that point). My opinion of course. Not gonna get greedy either. But if they provided me with 2.4THs per miner (meaning if you bought two miners you get 4.8Ths) I would consider the whole matter closed from my perspective. Its not a perfect situation for anyone here. And for $5599 2.4Ths is not bad. Not great but still within a decent range. Considering that AMT is likely operating at a loss at this point, they can always write it off on next years taxes and get that money back as claimed losses (which will likely generate a refund anyway in that case). But IF and ONLY IF we had to compromise lower. I would settle for no less than 2Ths at this point. I think under the circumstances that would be the bare minimum we should accept. That and working hardware. My .2 satoshi on that. But what is proposed above would be enough I think to settle the matter for most of us provided the hardware works and is in working order when it arrives.

The problem with this whole situation is that we started to settle for less for our money. The DIY kits were a terrible compromise in things like shaving off the case and PSU, in my case close to 800 bucks cost between PSU and cases, faulty hardware that barley worked for 5 minutes on default settings before burning out (only 4 of 10 cards are working at this point and even those very conservative settings to avoid cooking them. Now we are in a situation where they are going to put forth a proposal. I think if they fulfil their end in full (MPP) it would be the only surefire way to avoid any more problems and close this whole thing out. We get what we were originally were told we would get, and they can go back to doing business and we can move all move on and put this behind us.

Hopefully they are reading this and can apply this to the option 2 proposal we are supposed to be looking at now. (first thing in the morning is now 2:15PM as of this writing)

+1 also

Unfortunately the Coincraft chips just seems to suck no matter who tries to make them work. 

Right, with the long wait and price paid, the competition already is way ahead by a gigantic margin and we are left behind if these are/were our only purchases. Still its alot of money we burned through. With the amounts paid for 2x 1.2ths miners one can get an SP30 from spondoolies that hashes at 5.4Ths. that's more than 4x the hashing power I would be getting from AMT. Plus they offer a free month of hosting prior to shipping as an option.

Alternately one could get bitmaintech's S2 Antminer at 2599 for 1ths (2199 with $400 coupon if you bought from them before). So 2Ths at 5198 vs 5599 for 1.2Ths with an already better efficiency per GHs/watt all things considered (seeing as the current AMT miners require at least 1600Watts to run.

There are other vendors but IMO those would be the two most noteworthy from a price point. From a money perspective we pretty much got screwed in a big way if all we get is the 1.2Ths per miner we paid for (assuming 1.2Ths is what was bought).

Makes sense why so many people would want refunds....even IF we got what we paid for we lose anyway. If they throw in more hardware to make up for the loss, then it will help close that gigantic gap and restore some customer confidence.

It hasn't crashed yet since the change but I haven't seen a filtering message yet. I'm monitoring the logs and when I get one of these without a crash following I think we can safely assume it is fixed.

mmpool.org can donate the remaining 10,000 IXC to help improve ixcoin. Friction, can you provide an ixcoin address and I'll send the coins.

But we need a deadline on this. The last update should have taken a couple weeks and it literally took 5 months and people complained about problems with the client for weeks after that.

That statement COULD be used to enforce the MPP. But by itself is not an explicit mention of it. If its being addressed in court and we get something more out of it to address this then great. If not well best we can hope for is to walk away with our hardware. But its clearly stated that they did misrepresent things and now have to compensate for that. As they have not addressed the MPP yet we don't know what is going on there. It would be good for us to know what we are getting in regards to that.

HELL YES!
Do you know of another way they can be tested under load? Dinna think so...
They could either contact us for a pool address & worker name/pw or just use testcoins.

@AMT
Seeing that image....a concern was brought up....how will those be cooled? Looking at the designs marto74 has they have pretty large heatsinks and fans.....how much different will be the cooling solution for this reworked design? Will it be the same as technobits? or will it be similar to the old design? What sort of burn in tests will be performed to ensure we dont get miners that burst into flames?

Too much entitlement man. They at bare minimum from a legal perspective would need to fulfill what they need to to satisfy the legal complaint. There is no part of the legal complaint that states they need to make good on the MPP....which explains how they appear to dodge that question when it comes up. If you really feel so strong about it might want to start a separate complaint or work with the legal team of the class action to amend the complaint. It might be too late for that. I am just looking at this as it is not as I would want it to be. Believe me I really wish we could all get the MPP fulfilled and the hardware we are supposed to get based on that. But unless AMT states otherwise and definitively it's not likely happening.

I am looking at this pragmatically from a legal perspective...not from what I would like to have. At best all we can hope for is that we get the THs we paid for.

In their Complaint, Plaintiffs allege they and hundreds of other AMT customers ordered and paid for bitcoin miners which they never received from AMT.  After weeks and months of undue delay, Plaintiffs unsuccessfully attempted to cancel their orders and get refunds.  As a result, Plaintiffs allege economic damages including, but not limited to, loss of the purchase price and the lost opportunity to mine bitcoins.
 
According to the Complaint, AMT’s alleged conduct amounted to unfair, deceptive and fraudulent business practices, a breach of contract, a breach of express warranty, common law fraud, negligent misrepresentation, breach of the duty of good faith and fair dealing, unjust enrichment, and violations of various state consumer protection laws.  The Complaint alleges that by concealing material facts and making false and misleading statements, AMT was able to wrongfully acquire millions of dollars from customers since mid-2013.