"This order is for the third batch with delivery in Q3, 2014." Not exactly the same thing. |
|
|
|
Literally full audit - suspended my account, when I called every day for 7 days... every single time I would get this response "Try again in a few hours sir our system is just doing a scan of your account to make sure it is you using it." "BUT THIS IS ME SPEAKING WITH YOU... FOR 7 DAYS NOW... WTF ARE YOU TELLING ME" lol I had to escalate it to the moon before they re-activated my account... Only after I said this.. "If you suspended my account because you saw Bitcoin in a URL I purchased I am going to sue you for gross negligence" "Hold on one moment sir let me see what we can do for you.." lol You hear that paypal? ... it is the sound of inevitability   Bitcoin 1 / Paypal 0 Yea I'm sure this really happened  |
|
|
|
Currently trying to figure out whether they don't really know about Bitcoin/Altcoins or whether they actually do mean other arbitrage opportunities. Also, Bitcoin is still to small of course - but only as of now! Had you actually read the paper, you would know the answer to that. It's usually a good idea to actually read what someone writes and understand it before blindly calling them all idiots. Just sayin. |
|
|
|
It was Alpha-T
Tired of waiting for Alpha-T's new forum administrator?  Oh noooo... guess i“m done with These guys anyway. And a new Mod could“nt say anything valuable exept bla bla.... Sometimes you gamble and loose... Life goe“s on Just this. "Don't spend more than what you are ready to loose to an unknown. Do take calculated risk." My words Bro It was definitely a calculated risk without a thought of loss involving consumer protections and rights present even though the company has violated them. The law is on the consumers side in this case, and the customers shouldn't loose their money when it's all done. Also remember that this startup received I think less than $8,000 from family members and have proven their negligence repeatedly. I didn't know any of that until I came to this thread. If I had read this thread before July 14th when they asked for final payment even though they knew about failed chips earlier in the month, I wouldn't have given them anything. There is not one photograph of any of the pieces of hardware, while 6 other companies have had chips and products being used by customers for 3+ months. Really, it was a calculated risk on your part? You just NOW realized that there is no evidence of any sort of hardware or prototype? You didn't think to look for that BEFORE sending them thousands of dollars? What surprises me so much about this whole thing isn't the direction this thing took, that was obvious many many months ago. What still to this day shocks me is the complete lack of any sort of due diligence performed by so many of their customers. As for getting your money back, that ship has sailed I think. Some months ago, when people were here calling them a scam, there was still a chance to get your money back. It is more difficult to hide assets when you are still actively taking in money. Now that there is no more money coming in for them, and probably no operating costs either, I am fairly sure they have long since hidden whatever money may have been left. They ARE accountants after all. No, you will get your judgement and your court orders and find that the company has no cash or assets to pay them. |
|
|
|
|
No, they just take your money and don't give you anything in return. Don't make it out to be more complicated than it really is.
|
|
|
|
I can't believe bumface is here defending AT still! Look back through his posts, look for when he was arguing that they were a good legitimate deal six + months ago with me, trying to shut down my warning posts about these scammers. Pretty obvious that he is affiliated with AT at this point. Fucking scammers.
I actually don't think he is. It's an unusual phenomenon that seems to occur when people get caught up in a scam. Deep down inside they realize they were ripped off, but they can't accept the reality of the situation so they attempt to convince themselves that the scam is not a scam. It's the same sort of thing that gambling addicts do when they run low on money. |
|
|
|
Anyways, as that guy said, there is little reason to argue about this. PTS is currently trading at 0.0069BTC on Cryptsy, we can all just come back in a month or two and see what new low it has achieved.
Well I guess you guys were right after all, PTS sure did double/triple in price, if by double/triple in price you meant lose 10% and still dropping. It was only me who specified a potential doubling in price by Aug 8th. I expected we would have a couple of snapshot announcements by then, as far as I can tell there are 2 snapshots that will be announced in Aug, but it's likely they will come after Aug 8th. And despite that you are still going to put your faith in a company that has as of yet produced nothing of value, and is nothing but promises? Some people never learn. Well good luck. |
|
|
|
Just gets better every time I come in here for an update.
Well, Alpha paid for risc-lot chips, and they got what they paid for. Whenever a company opens its doors to everyone to buy in, that's an immediate black flag in my book. Cashflow issues = no-go.
Good to hear some folks have been able to get chargebacks.
Yeah alpha tech wants to come across that they are unbanning people out of the kindness of their hearts. The reality is they want to maximize their source of new capital by pitching them a new scam because the first one failed. Welcome back unbanned friend. Oh by the way we would like to introduce you to a new exclusive once in a lifetime opportunity. This won't end well. Much scam wow! Well considering how much money they pulled in for nothing, and the fact that almost no one is doing anything to try and get it back, I would say the first scam is a resounding success. It makes perfect sense, now that they have a complete list of gullible idiots, to target those same people with a second scam. |
|
|
|
Anyways, as that guy said, there is little reason to argue about this. PTS is currently trading at 0.0069BTC on Cryptsy, we can all just come back in a month or two and see what new low it has achieved.
Well I guess you guys were right after all, PTS sure did double/triple in price, if by double/triple in price you meant lose 10% and still dropping. |
|
|
|
Indeed the news from AT today is crappy.
What makes it worse is in the release they are literally threateningly telling people no refunds, sucks to be you, we have a law firm.
They should get a new law firm though, lol, those TCs would get laughed out from any court.
Why would they get a new law firm? Except for a few emails, no one here has done shit to get their money back. So it looks like it's working quite well for them. |
|
|
|
put it on nicehash, 250 mh/s x 0.00482350btc =1,205875 btc per day
= 701.19 USD per day , making the roi :
9 254.18175 U.S. dollars (5450 gbp) / 701.19 = ROI 13,19782338595816 days.....
so whats the issue here exactly?
there will always be new coins, and a multipool takes full advantage of this
http://poolpicker.eu/Sorry bumface but 0.00482350 is for SCRYPT-N. Vipers are SCRYPT which is 0.00066000 currently. So you would get: 0,165 BTC a day.  are you sure alpha tech asics cant do N coins? flowertech asics can do it https://www.flowertechnology.com/about/Really? You spent your entire life savings on a product without even asking what it can be used for first? |
|
|
|
|
I'm not sure why you are going to debate with them via email whether or not you're a business. Contrary to popular belief, these people are not completely stupid. They know quite well you aren't a business.
But it serves their purposes quite well to have people waste time debating these and other points, and time is what they need more than anything.
|
|
|
|
Small bump on this.
I've just paid for another months hosting, so this is for sale with 4 weeks hosting.
Willing to listen to offers as stated above.
No one will offer anything close to what you want for it...but glwys anyways But just in case I'll offer 5btc Thanks, but no thanks. The price I'm asking, or willing to accept, will ROI within 4-5 months, which for any ASIC would be fantastic. I'm literally only selling because I need the BTC for various other ventures. If it doesn't sell, it'll carry on earning for me. Yea I'm sure difficulty won't go up at all |
|
|
|
...How will you be able to show proof of income to a bank in order to get loans for a house...
Tax statements. |
|
|
|
It proves that you posted it at least. My best guess is that those shutters are firmly closed, meaning no one is there to accept / sign for receipt of it !! So it may never be read by those it was intended for.
Keep the proof of posting you'll need this as proof.
Thanks, yes. I guess my question is - re in the states I go to the local PO and send Cert mail with Sig required. Is that the same process for International mail? Also I am wondering if This address Alpha Technology, 66 Dickenson Road, Manchester M14 5HF England UK is still a real place and should it be sent to a specific person at Alpha? My next wonder about them is what if they won't sign for the letter? -M The smart thing to do is not to sign for the letter..but then again if it is just an 'office flunky' at a desk getting mail the post man or whoever would have them sign it..as an employee it should be good enough..quess you will just have to send the letter to find out.....signing for it and them vs you on determining what is in the letter may be a whole nother deal..i suppose you could notarize your signature at your end and have the notary notoriaze your copy as well? others may know more about this kinda thing...send the letter see what happens nothing to lose if it ends up in alpha's shredder anyway....your in the same boat my 2c worth Searing The purpose of a certified letter is to be able to provide proof that you contacted them and requested your money back (since this is the first step in any legal proceedings that may follow). What AT does with the letter, be it they read it and ignore it, don't read it and throw it away, refuse to sign for it, etc. is of no concern to you. When you get to court you then have your proof that you sent the request. |
|
|
|
What I can't understand is why those of you who got ripped off are still playing games with this company? It is fairly obvious to anyone not emotionally invested in the outcome, that none of you will get the product you paid for, nor will AT ever willingly return your money. So why all the posturing and back-and-forth? File a claim, contact a lawyer, get your money back. Or not, I guess. But giving them deadlines and such isn't really all that productive as all it does is give them more time to move the money around, and also makes your position clear (i.e., not really willing to take legal action).
The process itself isn't that difficult. You send them a certified letter (or whatever it is called in your country, a letter requiring a signature to receive) stating what you ordered, what you paid, your wish to cancel your order and receive a full refund of whatever amount you paid and a deadline to receive the money, something like 7-14 days in the future. There is no need to give reasons or explanations why, as it isn't their concern (besides, they already know why), nor explain that you aren't a business (they already know that too) or anything like that. The whole thing should be like 5 lines long, if that. That's it, done. Then when they don't pay you, file against them.
If that isn't something you are comfortable with then hire an attorney, but really the whole thing can be done by yourself. You're not going to wake up tomorrow and have a meaningful update from AT sitting in your inbox, everyone knows that, so why wait?
Courts seriously frown upon cases where the claimant has made no attempt to negotiate with the defendant themselves. I've seen a case thrown out of court simply because the defendant said that they had posed a legitimate response to the claimant's request, and received no response, and the claimant couldn't deny it. If you do what you suggest, and Alpha-T responds with legitimate questions (whether you deem them legitimate or not), then you won't have a leg to stand on in court under any competent judge. It's perfectly reasonable, and I'd argue that it is the responsible approach to try to settle things with Alpha-T yourself before taking it before the law.
That said, it's about time everyone brings this before the law, and I generally agree with your sentiments. I think at this point it's more about understanding for many people. The money, meh... Me, I want to know what happened or is happening at Alpha. I do not know what the specifics are of the case you are referring to, but if person A owes person B money, and person B requests the money but does not receive it, they are not obligated to enter into lengthy negotiations with the debtor. UK law is very clear on this point, you are all entitled to a complete refund of your money. At issue is AT's contention that customers are not customers but are businesses and thus they are exempt from the distance seller regulations. A court's job is to adjudicate this, hence that is where this issue belongs. As well, until judgments are officially entered against the Company, no one will ever know what "happened over at AT". As evidenced by their refusal to provide any sort of meaningful update, they will not willingly give out information and thus need to be compelled to do so by a court of law. I guess the whole point was, whatever method you guys are using to try and get satisfaction from them obviously hasn't worked, and is not working, and there is little reason to think it will suddenly start working. So perhaps trying something else is in order. Assuming you are serious about actually getting satisfaction from them. |
|
|
|
|
What I can't understand is why those of you who got ripped off are still playing games with this company? It is fairly obvious to anyone not emotionally invested in the outcome, that none of you will get the product you paid for, nor will AT ever willingly return your money. So why all the posturing and back-and-forth? File a claim, contact a lawyer, get your money back. Or not, I guess. But giving them deadlines and such isn't really all that productive as all it does is give them more time to move the money around, and also makes your position clear (i.e., not really willing to take legal action).
The process itself isn't that difficult. You send them a certified letter (or whatever it is called in your country, a letter requiring a signature to receive) stating what you ordered, what you paid, your wish to cancel your order and receive a full refund of whatever amount you paid and a deadline to receive the money, something like 7-14 days in the future. There is no need to give reasons or explanations why, as it isn't their concern (besides, they already know why), nor explain that you aren't a business (they already know that too) or anything like that. The whole thing should be like 5 lines long, if that. That's it, done. Then when they don't pay you, file against them.
If that isn't something you are comfortable with then hire an attorney, but really the whole thing can be done by yourself. You're not going to wake up tomorrow and have a meaningful update from AT sitting in your inbox, everyone knows that, so why wait?
|
|
|
|
The thing is with the 1% of the bitcoin wealthiest, they don't control the rest of the network.
The 1% of the wealthiest fiat owners control money. They have a monopoly of money, and the 0.001% richest control the instruments that even make money itself (out of thin air and debt).
That's the really big important difference to keep in mind here.
That isn't true at all. The wealthiest individuals DO control the network, in exactly the same way as wealthy individuals control the fiat money supply. A few very large (in comparison to us anyways) companies not only control the majority of the network hash power, but they have the ability to control our ability to contribute to the network by withholding the tools needed to hash. Assuming you do not have the resources to design and build your own ASICS, you can only mine in so far as they allow you to, in an amount they control, at a price they set. In fact I would argue that they have a tighter control over bitcoin than the various wealthy fiat owners do over fiat money supply. |
|
|
|
if decentralization does not solve wealth inequality, what else will?
Well, why would it? |
|
|
|
"Groups like the Free Ross Ulbricht legal defense fund, which was started by his mother, Lyn Ulbricht, argue that this case needs so much attention and financial support from the public because it 'will set precedent for the 21st century and pave the way for new law and interpretations that could impact the future and freedom of the Internet.'" Oh, well his mother said it so it must be true. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
