Butterflylabs Huge SCAM

[Frizz23]

You guys have seen the videos of working Jalepeno miners, right?

Yes. They did send prototypes to family&friends, developers and magazine authors to create a media frenzy.

That. Is. It.

After that they stopped shipping again.

[1714839364]

1714839364

[1714839364]

1714839364

[1714839364]

1714839364

[1714839364]

1714839364

[1714839364]

1714839364

[daemonfox]

You guys have seen the videos of working Jalepeno miners, right?

Yes. They did send prototypes to family&friends, developers and magazine authors to create a media frenzy.

That. Is. It.

After that they stopped shipping again.

Not that it amounts to much but no, there were a handful of customer orders that went out as well.

You are right that shipping stopped after that, won't argue as that is fact... sadly.

[shubhank008]

And I actually thought to go to US/ask a friend just to buy one of the Butterfly server (25GHs one for now) as it was only available to US when I check pre-order

I cant say much as I havnt seen any other complaints yet but tbh I have a better idea to make your own server to mine bitcoins


Someone should start a prize giveaway/raffle service via bitcoins, make a pool, have people participate and mine aand award weekly prizes (like PSP, ps3, games, laptop) etc to random 3-10 winners depending on how much pool makes

Ofc rather then being paid BTC for mining, people will get a chance to earn prizes instead



@Ontopic, anyone has received their Butterfly server and tested it for a few days ?

[MooC Tals]

1) There are codes of conduct a company needs to follow with pre-orders
2) Pre-orders are stating a product has been developed.
3) There was no product in the first place

What were they advertising in Oct? What product was near to completion that pre-orders were needed to be placed? Look at the dates

Please before you tell someone their opinions are incorrect broaden yours to allow better understanding. The scam is not over the existence of the product NOW it was its existence then.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=114329.msg2139947#msg2139947

Show me in your first response above where you stated "it was very narrow minded"... because you did not. You plainly stated that I blatantly said someone's opinion was incorrect... you should read and reread more thoroughly before flaming me for something that did not happen.

So my opinion is invalid. The point that BFL tells advertisers that products are almost ready in Oct of 2012 is not true? or the point where BFL has been taking in pre-orders for products that did not exist? or maybe it was something else that you found that I erred in?

Second I did not say your opinion was wrong I said it was very narrow minded. As I tried to broaden yours by feeding relevant factual evidence. You did see that link right?

I also never stated that any of the FACTS you are basing your OPINION on were not true... in fact I applaud you because in reality, all those facts are true... and I do sympathize with some... just not the ones repeatedly crying SCAM! What I did try to relate is this:

The facts about delays, bad announcements about product availability and shipping, bad PR and CRM, the prices doubling and even more shipping delays are all true 100%. That still doesn't equal BFL being a scam... I am sorry but those are all mistakes and miss-steps taken in the creation of cutting edge technology. It happens... if people are uncomfortable with that, they get refunded.

THAT is my opinion, whether you believe it to be valid or not... what is not valid is all those facts ending up with BFL as a scam... sorry just doesn't pass the logic test.

I embolden them. Also I go into detail of how it is a scam. It is the use of pre-orders until the investor customer refuses to wait any longer and demands a refund. That is a 0% interest loan for an average period of 3 to 4 month (PayPal limits time for a resolution process) however people that put it on their CC have to pay if they don't cover the ballance right away. I know you may have missed most of my previous posts here. (you could go back and check) However I will not hold it against you if you choose not to.

Where I have issue is you feel it is not intentional and that is why I suggested broadening your views. Delays are natural however to insinuate that its complete incompetence is also untrue.

BFL Josh/Inaba w/e his name is has been approached by knowledgeable people in the field that do this work for other manufactures and offered to help them with designs and also cautioned that the power figures are somewhat impossible. However it is my opinion that the low prices and the hubris expectations of power consumptions  were intentional to prevent competition.

That is my opinion and it maybe a stretch for you to accept. Here is hoping....

[InSpades]

Take a step back and consider some of the vitriol being posted on various forums.  It is one thing to write truthfully about your experiences with BFL, observations tied to those experiences, or those based on research of personalities/history of the company.  Some of what I am seeing here is a different matter altogether and could land some posters in legal hot water.

Disclaimer: My company and I do not have a dog in this fight as we have elected to go elsewhere with our resources after our conversation with BFL's Dave.  We play by the rules and expect everyone else to do so as well.

These are some of the red flags we see:

Ethics of this company has been called into question over business practices.
Our company found BFL to be in willful violation of state law and as a result may be playing fast and loose with others laws.
The company does a poor job on its public relations.
The delays, regardless of reason why, are wearing thin on the public and those that have pre-ordered. 
The time period from when the order was placed to actual delivery of ordered product is considered by many an opportunity cost that can't be made up.


The violation with the law is with the collection of sales in the state of Kansas.  Regardless of how your company conducts its business transactions, a physical presence in Kansas requires you to collect sales tax from any individuals and business entities physically present in the state of Kansas as well.  Conducting online sales only does not preclude a business entity from collecting sales tax from customers physically present in Kansas as the Supreme Court decision, Quill Corp. v. North Dakota, has been extended to online retailers as well.  Forming said business in a different state does not exempt you from this either as the law very clearly mentions 'physical' presence.  Given the nature of product being sold by BFL, exemption from collecting this sales tax from entities physically present in Kansas, as defined by Exception Certificates Pub KS-1520 coupled with KS-1510, Kansas Sales and Compensating Use Tax, is not possible as it is a finished product destined for end use by the consumer and does not fall within the several tax exempt product categories defined in these publications.

There are fines w/penalties and interest and possible jail time in the state of Kansas under KSA 79-3615 in regards to this violation.  Worse case scenario would be the suspension of online sales until BFL incorporates a sales tax collection system into their online store in addition penalties listed under KSA 79-3615


Now ignoring what we have found so far, this violation would only inconvenience BFL at best.

Should BFL pull through and deliver their products to the masses hence fullfilling their legal obligation in these commercial transactions, those that have been blasting BFL with SCAM this or SCAM without any basis in fact could then find themselves on the receiving end of a libel suit.

[MooC Tals]

Take a step back and consider some of the vitriol being posted on various forums.  It is one thing to write truthfully about your experiences with BFL, observations tied to those experiences, or those based on research of personalities/history of the company.  Some of what I am seeing here is a different matter altogether and could land some posters in legal hot water.

Disclaimer: My company and I do not have a dog in this fight as we have elected to go elsewhere with our resources after our conversation with BFL's Dave.  We play by the rules and expect everyone else to do so as well.

These are some of the red flags we see:

Ethics of this company has been called into question over business practices.
Our company found BFL to be in willful violation of state law and as a result may be playing fast and loose with others laws.
The company does a poor job on its public relations.
The delays, regardless of reason why, are wearing thin on the public and those that have pre-ordered. 
The time period from when the order was placed to actual delivery of ordered product is considered by many an opportunity cost that can't be made up.


The violation with the law is with the collection of sales in the state of Kansas.  Regardless of how your company conducts its business transactions, a physical presence in Kansas requires you to collect sales tax from any individuals and business entities physically present in the state of Kansas as well.  Conducting online sales only does not preclude a business entity from collecting sales tax from customers physically present in Kansas as the Supreme Court decision, Quill Corp. v. North Dakota, has been extended to online retailers as well.  Forming said business in a different state does not exempt you from this either as the law very clearly mentions 'physical' presence.  Given the nature of product being sold by BFL, exemption from collecting this sales tax from entities physically present in Kansas, as defined by Exception Certificates Pub KS-1520 coupled with KS-1510, Kansas Sales and Compensating Use Tax, is not possible as it is a finished product destined for end use by the consumer and does not fall within the several tax exempt product categories defined in these publications.

There are fines w/penalties and interest and possible jail time in the state of Kansas under KSA 79-3615 in regards to this violation.  Worse case scenario would be the suspension of online sales until BFL incorporates a sales tax collection system into their online store in addition penalties listed under KSA 79-3615


Now ignoring what we have found so far, this violation would only inconvenience BFL at best.

Should BFL pull through and deliver their products to the masses hence fullfilling their legal obligation in these commercial transactions, those that have been blasting BFL with SCAM this or SCAM without any basis in fact could then find themselves on the receiving end of a libel suit.

There we go so the customers by default are investors now I assume! Right? There are laws to that as well. Yes?

[animalxp]

Take a step back and consider some of the vitriol being posted on various forums.  It is one thing to write truthfully about your experiences with BFL, observations tied to those experiences, or those based on research of personalities/history of the company.  Some of what I am seeing here is a different matter altogether and could land some posters in legal hot water.

Disclaimer: My company and I do not have a dog in this fight as we have elected to go elsewhere with our resources after our conversation with BFL's Dave.  We play by the rules and expect everyone else to do so as well.

These are some of the red flags we see:

Ethics of this company has been called into question over business practices.
Our company found BFL to be in willful violation of state law and as a result may be playing fast and loose with others laws.
The company does a poor job on its public relations.
The delays, regardless of reason why, are wearing thin on the public and those that have pre-ordered. 
The time period from when the order was placed to actual delivery of ordered product is considered by many an opportunity cost that can't be made up.


The violation with the law is with the collection of sales in the state of Kansas.  Regardless of how your company conducts its business transactions, a physical presence in Kansas requires you to collect sales tax from any individuals and business entities physically present in the state of Kansas as well.  Conducting online sales only does not preclude a business entity from collecting sales tax from customers physically present in Kansas as the Supreme Court decision, Quill Corp. v. North Dakota, has been extended to online retailers as well.  Forming said business in a different state does not exempt you from this either as the law very clearly mentions 'physical' presence.  Given the nature of product being sold by BFL, exemption from collecting this sales tax from entities physically present in Kansas, as defined by Exception Certificates Pub KS-1520 coupled with KS-1510, Kansas Sales and Compensating Use Tax, is not possible as it is a finished product destined for end use by the consumer and does not fall within the several tax exempt product categories defined in these publications.

There are fines w/penalties and interest and possible jail time in the state of Kansas under KSA 79-3615 in regards to this violation.  Worse case scenario would be the suspension of online sales until BFL incorporates a sales tax collection system into their online store in addition penalties listed under KSA 79-3615


Now ignoring what we have found so far, this violation would only inconvenience BFL at best.

Should BFL pull through and deliver their products to the masses hence fullfilling their legal obligation in these commercial transactions, those that have been blasting BFL with SCAM this or SCAM without any basis in fact could then find themselves on the receiving end of a libel suit.

the proof is in the pudding. as MooC quite rightly proved.
the fact they have illegally invested customers money into their company is one thing and (THAT IS FACT!!!) the speculative question (which is not really speculative at all when they admit that they will keep a percentage of the machines to prevent whatever...)
obviously they're going to be running these machines themselves which equates to embezzlement. earning off of someone elses money without their consent when the funds have passed hands for a limited agreement.
i LOL`d over their T&C`s after buying then sat there in my chair stunned by their FAQ`s.

GAINING ANY FUNDS THROUGH DECEPTION IN MY COUNTRY IS FRAUD.
and im pretty sure thats the definition globally.

[Exoskeleton]

Should BFL pull through and deliver their products to the masses hence fullfilling their legal obligation in these commercial transactions, those that have been blasting BFL with SCAM this or SCAM without any basis in fact could then find themselves on the receiving end of a libel suit.

Im glad you did not go with an insult but instead you go with deflect. Its carrot and then stick, right?

Its called free speech. If I think its a scam, I have evry damn right to say I think its a scam. If I say I have definative proof of a scam and I write an article in the New York Times about it, that's way different. People posting their honest opinion on an internet forum (many not in the US remember) is so obviously a case of free speach your threat falls flat.

[InSpades]

Customers by default are investors?  No  You have ordered a product via commercial transaction, nothing more.  Unless BFL makes it very clear during the order process of said product that you are investing in their company via stock or interest, you are only ordering product as a consumer.

Given that BFL is incorporated, to be an investor in the traditional sense would involve the sale of stock or investment agreement signed and witnessed by multiple parties.

[MooC Tals]

I am a journalist writing for coindesk.com, and I have tried contacting BFL several times with no response. I have been watching this thread, and we are interested in putting together an article about it, particularly around their customer service and attitude on this thread. I am interested in hearing both from BFL representatives, but also from people who can provide evidence that they have logged pre-orders with the company (including dates). Please contact me, using the address danny@itjournalist.com.

I sent him a pm stating my experience here in the last 6 months. I did not want to use my email or send him any personal information. I still have not received any correspondence from him since.

I assume it could have been a sock puppet of BFL or someone else.

To Danny If you're a real journalist I'm going to suggest you keep an eye on this topic as it will be a story if it turns out that BFL does not deliver all products.

To anyone who would like to share their stories he would be willing to accept them.

Edit here is the forum from a quick google
http://forums.circusponies.com/
http://forums.circusponies.com/users/show/1647 << Profile

[animalxp]

customers are beneficiaries of a temporary trust (contract) created at the time of sale.

customers are NOT investors.

[InSpades]

Should BFL pull through and deliver their products to the masses hence fullfilling their legal obligation in these commercial transactions, those that have been blasting BFL with SCAM this or SCAM without any basis in fact could then find themselves on the receiving end of a libel suit.

Im glad you did not go with an insult but instead you go with deflect. Its carrot and then stick, right?

Its called free speech. If I think its a scam, I have evry damn right to say I think its a scam. If I say I have definative proof of a scam and I write an article in the New York Times about it, that's way different. People posting their honest opinion on an internet forum (many not in the US remember) is so obviously a case of free speach your threat falls flat.

I see no reason to insult.  This isn't person, just business far as I am concerned.  I'm just stating what I see, no more no less.

Yes, you have the right to say anything you want within the rules of these forums.  It does not matter whether or not your statements are posted in the New York Times or on these forums.  Should the preponderance of evidence show that your comments (proven false by delivery of product) caused harm to BFL, then under civil law BFL has the right to file a tort against you.  Would they?  Depends on their mood I guess.

This goes back to yelling fire in a crowded theater when there is no fire.

[daemonfox]

I embolden them. Also I go into detail of how it is a scam. It is the use of pre-orders until the investor customer refuses to wait any longer and demands a refund. That is a 0% interest loan for an average period of 3 to 4 month (PayPal limits time for a resolution process) however people that put it on their CC have to pay if they don't cover the ballance right away. I know you may have missed most of my previous posts here. (you could go back and check) However I will not hold it against you if you choose not to.

Where I have issue is you feel it is not intentional and that is why I suggested broadening your views. Delays are natural however to insinuate that its complete incompetence is also untrue.

BFL Josh/Inaba w/e his name is has been approached by knowledgeable people in the field that do this work for other manufactures and offered to help them with designs and also cautioned that the power figures are somewhat impossible. However it is my opinion that the low prices and the hubris expectations of power consumptions  were intentional to prevent competition.

That is my opinion and it maybe a stretch for you to accept. Here is hoping....

Nicely put. Thanks for taking the time to clarify how you feel. I just take issue with the statement "broaden yours" as you are telling me I should broaden my opinion?

It is ok, we don't know each other so we have no clue how much we have each read and absorbed on this subject. Please understand that I have kept up with the facts and made my decision to pre-order after I waited a good amount of time to collect the data I needed to feel comfortable enough with the risks.

As for your talking points, consider the below rebuttals:

Ever heard of a restocking fee? Did you know if you agree to purchase something that has not been made yet, and the sales receipt includes verbiage detailing a restocking fee, even if the item was never physically in stock at the local depot, or even if it was on back order at the manufacturing facility, legally they can still charge the fee if you request a refund... because in the order first, fulfill on X time frame model, the purchase monies are immediately used to secure your place in line at the manufacturer.

I know this for a fact because the company I used to work for had this policy... it is a bad policy but it is not like the customer was not told that their purchase was a manufacturer direct purchase... they are told and have to sign off that they understand we didn't stock 95% of the product and the moment we finalize paperwork, we order the item from the manufacturer. Not my policy, I hated it, but I watched so many get charged like that... and even the BBB couldn't do anything as the customer signed the contract. Glad I left there... they had another paragraph that stated all dates were estimates and subject to the manufacturers time frame and supply blah blah... let them get away with murder...

The point is, whether BFL anticipated having to refund customers or not, it is not their fault if someone chose to use their credit line to secure their pre-order... that was the customer's decision... and to boot, I was unable to use any of my credit lines with purchase protection to order... I ended up using PayPal... and even they would not let me use a credit card... decided to just use available funds from cashing some coin in and 50% from my best friend to go in with me on this. The same goes for any other payments in fiat... you don't get interest back from a cancelled purchase even if the seller couldn't ship to you on time... you get the amount you paid and that's it... show me a retailer that refunds more than the purchase price because they ran out of stock or could not get stock in the time frame you desired? They might offer a gift card or something else Customer Service related... but not straight cash on top of your purchase price.

I agree it is not complete incompetence... but not everything is 100% in your control when you don't have feet on the ground in the foreign countries that are producing some of your parts. You can't control everything, as a prime example the first company producing the chips gave them a date before Chinese New Year... then subsequently screwed off and almost made Josh have to go sit in their office while they did the job... not something you plan to have to do when you are having millions of $s worth of silicon fabricated. While a good portion of it is due to lack of judgement, and not taking assistance when it was offered, some pieces of it just could not be avoided, like having to transport the remaining wafers to a new facility since the first one caused problems.

The only people I do feel real sympathy for are the average miners who spent all of their BTC minings on these, only to ask for a refund and be cashed at at about 1/7th the amount the total coin is now worth... only the miners though... if someone bought BTC then immediately used it for a miner, they got refunded the same amount of cash they put in. IDC if they could have held the coin and made a killing... their choice to do it that way.

No hard feelings... but nothing in life is 100% the way people plan it to be... another example, I am on a multimillion dollar project right now launching a new manufacturing and warehousing operation on the east coast... and we just got set back a whole year because a drainage ditch sprouted some cattails in it... now the county calls it a wetlands preserve rofl... some 10,000+ feet away from the ACTUAL wetlands preserve, with nothing but high and dry grassy fields between them. Never saw that coming, no sir.

[MooC Tals]

Should BFL pull through and deliver their products to the masses hence fullfilling their legal obligation in these commercial transactions, those that have been blasting BFL with SCAM this or SCAM without any basis in fact could then find themselves on the receiving end of a libel suit.

Im glad you did not go with an insult but instead you go with deflect. Its carrot and then stick, right?

Its called free speech. If I think its a scam, I have evry damn right to say I think its a scam. If I say I have definative proof of a scam and I write an article in the New York Times about it, that's way different. People posting their honest opinion on an internet forum (many not in the US remember) is so obviously a case of free speach your threat falls flat.

I see no reason to insult.  This isn't person, just business far as I am concerned.  I'm just stating what I see, no more no less.

Yes, you have the right to say anything you want within the rules of these forums.  It does not matter whether or not your statements are posted in the New York Times or on these forums.  Should the preponderance of evidence show that your comments (proven false by delivery of product) caused harm to BFL, then under civil law BFL has the right to file a tort against you.  Would they?  Depends on their mood I guess.

This goes back to yelling fire in a crowded theater when there is no fire.

Like I said before if they do I will have a chance to bring forth information and the discovery process is open to point out my statements in previous posts. That will expose all accounting processes of the company and open cans of worms. I believe it would be welcomed however it will also damage any opportunities of existing customers from getting their products. Me suggesting that the BFL company has had to use its funds in pre-orders to RnD and preventing any progress from continuing. This will inherently damage all credibility of the company if there was any to begin with. Then collection of said monies would be quite difficult as well.

Damage to the company by angry customers is not cause of action as far I can see because the breach in contract was initiated by the said company by failling to deliver.

edit
I was given the opportunity to make a decision that was advertised as a delivery was soon to be happening. I based my decision on that information which was incorrect. Where would I be liable in this is beyond me. I ordered a product that was reasonably waited. I being upset offer my opinions to others that also are experiencing the same issues. The problem is still apparent of BFL accepting pre-orders of products that are still being Developed 6+months later and not corrected so by me stating a concern of a continuing problem is NOT the problem here.

[animalxp]

i will also jump in and request for RAW accounting info to be submitted to the courts for proof of claim should a libel suit come to light.

[Exoskeleton]

Yes, you have the right to say anything you want within the rules of these forums.  It does not matter whether or not your statements are posted in the New York Times or on these forums.  Should the preponderance of evidence show that your comments (proven false by delivery of product) caused harm to BFL, then under civil law BFL has the right to file a tort against you.  Would they?  Depends on their mood I guess.

This goes back to yelling fire in a crowded theater when there is no fire.

Not the same thing at all and I won't even waste my time explaining why. You either get it or you don't.

A lawsuit from BFL would be the biggest oxymoron ever considering what they got coming. 

[animalxp]

Yes, you have the right to say anything you want within the rules of these forums.  It does not matter whether or not your statements are posted in the New York Times or on these forums.  Should the preponderance of evidence show that your comments (proven false by delivery of product) caused harm to BFL, then under civil law BFL has the right to file a tort against you.  Would they?  Depends on their mood I guess.

This goes back to yelling fire in a crowded theater when there is no fire.

Not the same thing at all and I won't even waste my time explaining why. You either get it or you don't.

A lawsuit from BFL would be the biggest oxymoron ever considering what they got coming. 

for us folk that know business law. this is the greatest post EVER!!

[MooC Tals]

I hope you forgive me on how I added my comment in yours It was quite a bit to process through. I believe it makes it easier for other to follow.

I embolden them. Also I go into detail of how it is a scam. It is the use of pre-orders until the investor customer refuses to wait any longer and demands a refund. That is a 0% interest loan for an average period of 3 to 4 month (PayPal limits time for a resolution process) however people that put it on their CC have to pay if they don't cover the ballance right away. I know you may have missed most of my previous posts here. (you could go back and check) However I will not hold it against you if you choose not to.

Where I have issue is you feel it is not intentional and that is why I suggested broadening your views. Delays are natural however to insinuate that its complete incompetence is also untrue.

BFL Josh/Inaba w/e his name is has been approached by knowledgeable people in the field that do this work for other manufactures and offered to help them with designs and also cautioned that the power figures are somewhat impossible. However it is my opinion that the low prices and the hubris expectations of power consumptions  were intentional to prevent competition.

That is my opinion and it maybe a stretch for you to accept. Here is hoping....

Nicely put. Thanks for taking the time to clarify how you feel. I just take issue with the statement "broaden yours" as you are telling me I should broaden my opinion?

It is ok, we don't know each other so we have no clue how much we have each read and absorbed on this subject. Please understand that I have kept up with the facts and made my decision to pre-order after I waited a good amount of time to collect the data I needed to feel comfortable enough with the risks.

As for your talking points, consider the below rebuttals:

Ever heard of a restocking fee? Did you know if you agree to purchase something that has not been made yet, and the sales receipt includes verbiage detailing a restocking fee, even if the item was never physically in stock at the local depot, or even if it was on back order at the manufacturing facility, legally they can still charge the fee if you request a refund... because in the order first, fulfill on X time frame model, the purchase monies are immediately used to secure your place in line at the manufacturer.

I know this for a fact because the company I used to work for had this policy... it is a bad policy but it is not like the customer was not told that their purchase was a manufacturer direct purchase... they are told and have to sign off that they understand we didn't stock 95% of the product and the moment we finalize paperwork, we order the item from the manufacturer. Not my policy, I hated it, but I watched so many get charged like that... and even the BBB couldn't do anything as the customer signed the contract. Glad I left there... they had another paragraph that stated all dates were estimates and subject to the manufacturers time frame and supply blah blah... let them get away with murder...

There was no additional information or fine print at the time I was purchasing and the email reciepts had no offering of information that I would have to wait 6 more months. I was told every update that the problem was soon to be corrected and deliveries were to ensue shortly. "Delivery was to occur in the week of"

The point is, whether BFL anticipated having to refund customers or not, it is not their fault if someone chose to use their credit line to secure their pre-order... that was the customer's decision... and to boot, I was unable to use any of my credit lines with purchase protection to order... I ended up using PayPal... and even they would not let me use a credit card... decided to just use available funds from cashing some coin in and 50% from my best friend to go in with me on this. The same goes for any other payments in fiat... you don't get interest back from a cancelled purchase even if the seller couldn't ship to you on time... you get the amount you paid and that's it... show me a retailer that refunds more than the purchase price because they ran out of stock or could not get stock in the time frame you desired? They might offer a gift card or something else Customer Service related... but not straight cash on top of your purchase price.

There is the grey area however how many times can you tell your landlord the rent will be late. It will come a time that reasonable expectation of needs must be met.



I agree it is not complete incompetence... but not everything is 100% in your control when you don't have feet on the ground in the foreign countries that are producing some of your parts. You can't control everything, as a prime example the first company producing the chips gave them a date before Chinese New Year... then subsequently screwed off and almost made Josh have to go sit in their office while they did the job... not something you plan to have to do when you are having millions of $s worth of silicon fabricated. While a good portion of it is due to lack of judgement, and not taking assistance when it was offered, some pieces of it just could not be avoided, like having to transport the remaining wafers to a new facility since the first one caused problems.

I agree with you here and as a responsible company that is not dependent on the pre-order monies would accept the loss of a truthful update with a reasonable confirm ship date as that would begin a torrent of refunds. This tends to strengthen my point a bit. Agree?



The only people I do feel real sympathy for are the average miners who spent all of their BTC minings on these, only to ask for a refund and be cashed at at about 1/7th the amount the total coin is now worth... only the miners though... if someone bought BTC then immediately used it for a miner, they got refunded the same amount of cash they put in. IDC if they could have held the coin and made a killing... their choice to do it that way.

Well ask Josh how he feels about people that believe in the bitcoin community. I believe he said and I quote "If you don't believe in BFL you don't believe in Bitcoin." - Micon


No hard feelings... but nothing in life is 100% the way people plan it to be... another example, I am on a multimillion dollar project right now launching a new manufacturing and warehousing operation on the east coast... and we just got set back a whole year because a drainage ditch sprouted some cattails in it... now the county calls it a wetlands preserve rofl... some 10,000+ feet away from the ACTUAL wetlands preserve, with nothing but high and dry grassy fields between them. Never saw that coming, no sir.

I hope everything works out and your very successful especially in these times. We need people succeeding and showing the way for other.

[MooC Tals]

i will also jump in and request for RAW accounting info to be submitted to the courts for proof of claim should a libel suit come to light.

Could we see another Black/Madoff accounting correction occur?

[InSpades]

Instead of complaining about it, do something about it. 

If enough of you file complaints on unfair business practices to the point that Kansas takes action, the news article resulting from this action would pretty much do BFL in far as the BitCoin world is concerned.

My suggestion to any of you taking issue with BFL over your pre-order is to get in contact Derek Schmidt, Attorney General of Kansas, to file a consumer complaint.  http://ag.ks.gov/contact-us/file-a-complaint is where you can go to file one online.  Keep in mind that BFL is located in Johnson county when filling out the complaint.  You can also file with the Johnson Country Consumer Protection Division http://da.jocogov.org/sites/da.jocogov.org/files/CONSUMER%20COMPLAINT%20FORM.pdf

There is a lot of legal grey that I think BFL keeps trying to wiggle around in with all of this pre-ordering.  They say all sales are final yet option #3 on their automated phone system is for refunds.  While I did not go down this part of their menu system, I do find it rather odd they'd contradict themselves in this manner.

All sales are final are not in the state of Kansas.  I do not know where they are getting this idea that the consumer is locked in, but they are not.  In Kansas under statute 50-627, it could be argued that BFL entered into an agreement that is excessively one sided not in favor of the consumer.  Pre-order a product with no specified date of delivery that the consumer is unable to cancel said transaction with full refund of money at any point.  The term "all sales are final" has a very narrow scope with a product actually being delivered to a consumer and a transaction being concluded.  It typically pertains to buyer's remorse or consumers trying to return their product for money after they have used it.

Restocking fees won't come into play in this scenario as majority of consumers that have ordered BFL product have yet to receive them.

Now as you have indicated should BFL indeed be using pre-order money in a deceptive manner for financial gain and can be proven then they'd run afoul of statute 50-626.