I wouldn't say BFL is a scammer. They ran into problems building their systems and I can understand why after working on the units.
A real definition of "scammer" would be the numerous companies that promised stuff, took money, then either vanished, or returned 50 cents on the dollar. BFL may have been late, but they did deliver exactly what was promised. In my case, way way way more than what was promised (a 5gh unit that could be easily expanded to 30gh).
C
Some / Many would beg to differ.
Lies about shipping dates alone should give anyone pause to deal with them ever again. There are plenty of choices others than BFL and that is where you start looking. Do not buy from BFL. Go to the link below and see why someone took them to court and won.
BFL has now failed to respond to their loss of the suit and we are looking for ways to collect via lien, direct bank account deduction, etc. In addition we will be shortly expanding a second lawsuit based upon the proof of fraud whereby our bitcoins will be returned to us via a court procedure known as 'recession' [where the court orders that you are returned to the same position today that existed before the fraud occurred] and will seek to secure our bitcoins by way of a replevin order.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=394015.0We alleged that 1) BFL violated Kansas Consumer Protection Act 50-623 in part; 2) BFL knowingly made false representations; and 3) BFL engaged in breach of contract, all of which caused injury. We were prepared at trial to present documentation and evidence, and are convinced that our preponderance was greater than anything BFL could produce to the contrary. All attempts to communicate with BFL prior to filing were exhausted, so we had no choice.
http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/1u4v0o/i_sued_bfl_in_kansas_jurisdiction_and_won/BFL denied refunds that they had a legal responsibility to give. They are also just a generally shitty company with a co-founder who was indicted for fraud. But mostly, the refunds-issue. The FTC rules on refunds state that ambiguous wording makes a projected shipping date invalid and the default replacement for that is 30 days. BFL used "2 months or more" and due to the usage of "or more", the date becomes ambiguous and, even at the maximum of 90 days from the time of ordering if combining the 2 months and the FTC's default of 30, they should have given refunds when requested, as well as sending out a notice after 90 days offering a refund or to have the delivery date delayed by 30 days, and then continued to send that notice out every 30 days.
Instead, BFL gave one notice in April that refunds would no longer be allowed and asked everyone to agree with that. Which isn't allowed. BFL isn't showing up in court because they won't win.
So it's far more likely that all of the profits have been embezzled and the Monarchs will never appear.
