HashFast announces specs for new ASIC: 400GH/s

[mgio]

...
There is nothing inherently wrong with the preorder model...

As far as miners are concerned, almost everything is wrong with the pre-order model.
It encourages operations like HashFast, players who enter the manufacturing field risking none of their own money.  If their gamble pays off, they become rich.  If it doesn't and the company fails, the actors have lost nothing, while profiting from the money they have paid themselves and their friends in salaries.

The problem is that no one has stepped up and sued one of these companies for fraud. Both BFL and Avalon should be out of business by now but they know their customers are lazy.

[mgio]

Hashfast are angels compared to them.

Losing 85% of your BTC investment is being an angel? Who lost 85% or even 50%+ with Avalon?

I lost almost 50% with Avalon in terms of BTC. We won't lose 85% from Hashfast once you take MPP into account.

[cedivad]

You are right, we will only lose 75% of it.

[cedivad]

Simons has a family and never had many problems showing that in public, they are like BFL, they can't disappear, they will stay where they are and it will be our duty to have them in front of a court.

Does anyone knows when they hired josh? Middle August, but if someone has a precise date it would be welcome.

[Bogart]

BitSyncom/Avalon also stole people's FPGA hardware.  They asked them to send it in for trade-in credit and then simply kept it.

[itod]

As for Avalon, I calculate Yifu stole on the order of 250 000 bitcoins fron his customers by keeping batch 2 for himself.  Simon has done a terrific job of promising things he can't deliver.  He hasn't stolen what he promised to deliver as of yet.

Yifu robed the customers of their profits, not of their paying BTC. There's enormous difference, since everyone was refunded the full amount BTC paid, both for batch #2 & batch #3 miners, and for chip batches. We all already said farewell to our HF profits, and are almost certain to get only 1/5 of paid BTC amount back in refunds. So I don't see how keeping 250.000 (or any amount you claim) of customers profits is worse than robing them of both profits and what they've paid.

As someone said this may be bit of topic who is bigger garbage, HF or Yifu, so I'm also out of this discussion.

[jspielberg]

As for Avalon, I calculate Yifu stole on the order of 250 000 bitcoins fron his customers by keeping batch 2 for himself.  Simon has done a terrific job of promising things he can't deliver.  He hasn't stolen what he promised to deliver as of yet.

Yifu robed the customers of their profits, not of their paying BTC. There's enormous difference, since everyone was refunded the full amount BTC paid, both for batch #2 & batch #3 miners, and for chip batches. We all already said farewell to our HF profits, and are almost certain to get only 1/5 of paid BTC amount back in refunds. So I don't see how keeping 250.000 (or any amount you claim) of customers profits is worse than robing them of both profits and what they've paid.

As someone said this may be bit of topic who is bigger garbage, HF or Yifu, so I'm also out of this discussion.

In hindsight... a better MPP would be to refund the miners any difference between the cost of the original system and what it would have mined in 90 days (in BTC of course).  I think many would have preferred that to more hashpower later.

[SolarSilver]

Losing 85% of your BTC investment is being an angel? Who lost 85% or even 50%+ with Avalon?

Batch #3 units cost about BTC 102, up to this date that same unit has delivered BTC 57. Close to 50% loss ;-) (OK 45%)

[ninjarobot]

In hindsight... a better MPP would be to refund the miners any difference between the cost of the original system and what it would have mined in 90 days (in BTC of course).  I think many would have preferred that to more hashpower later.

Absolutely. I suggested this to HF back in August but unfortunately they went with MPP instead. Remember the purpose of MPP was to protect against excessive hash rate increases, not delays.

Orders are taken in BTC, in the unlikely event we get to refunds they will be given in BTC.

This is a step in the right direction.

If you really want to do it right you should provide customer protection by providing refunds based on missed opportunity cost.

For example:

• HashFast promises to ship on October 30.
• Customer paid ~60 BTC for a pre-order unit.
• Customer registers a refund BTC address at the hashfast.com site.
• For every day HashFast misses their target shipping date, a partial automatic refund will be made based on what a 400 GH/s unit would have mined at the difficulty at that date.
• This would continue until either the refund is complete or the unit is delivered.

This would:

• Prevent a BFL-type pitchfork scenario and alleviate worries that HashFast might be hashing with customer hardware at customers expense.
• Give customers peace of mind; At worst they would have provided a free BTC loan to HashFast. At best they get a unit that has already started making some ROI before delivery.
• Provide a strong incentive for HashFast to deliver on time.

(Note that I made this suggestion before they added the December 31 'guaranteed delivery date' to their ToS.)

[jspielberg]

Now since the only payment option is in BTC Will I get the same ammount of BTC back should you fail to deliver by December 31st?

Orders are taken in BTC, in the unlikely event we get to refunds they will be given in BTC.

This response sounds an awful lot like a confirmation that the same amount of btc will be returned.  Thanks ninjarobot for bringing this quote back up.

[Xian01]

Now since the only payment option is in BTC Will I get the same ammount of BTC back should you fail to deliver by December 31st?

Orders are taken in BTC, in the unlikely event we get to refunds they will be given in BTC.

This response sounds an awful lot like a confirmation that the same amount of btc will be returned.  Thanks ninjarobot for bringing this quote back up.

 Let's hope they ship in the next few days. Otherwise, this sounds like a possible business-killer scenario if they are forced to refund in BTC if they cashed out preorder BTC to fiat for NRE costs.

 Not looking good for Dec 31 shipping given these last few thread pages

[jspielberg]

Well I think we have been getting mixed messages.

On the negative side:
1) we have not received any information that the machine they have assembled currently is ready for production (with final power and performance stats)
2) we have not heard that they are moving forward with the system as designed and are having a large number of boards shipped to CIARRA for mass  production.
3) no time lines have been shared as to what remaining items need to be finished to be ready to ship by the end of the year.

On the positive side:
1) gateway's visit showed that several days ago that had a configuration that would work to meet the minimum advertised specs

Ahh...  I guess that is it on the positive side.  Can anyone think of any positives?  I guess there is also the  statement that they will... but... ahh... See negatives above.

[jddebug]

Well I think we have been getting mixed messages.

On the negative side:
1) we have not received any information that the machine they have assembled currently is ready for production (with final power and performance stats)
2) we have not heard that they are moving forward with the system as designed and are having a large number of boards shipped to CIARRA for mass  production.
3) no time lines have been shared as to what remaining items need to be finished to be ready to ship by the end of the year.

On the positive side:
1) gateway's visit showed that several days ago that had a configuration that would work to meet the minimum advertised specs

Ahh...  I guess that is it on the positive side.  Can anyone think of any positives?  I guess there is also the  statement that they will... but... ahh... See negatives above.

Someone a few pages back had a conversation with them on the phone and was told they would ship them all starting the day after Christmas through the 31st. iirc

[itod]

Now since the only payment option is in BTC Will I get the same ammount of BTC back should you fail to deliver by December 31st?

Orders are taken in BTC, in the unlikely event we get to refunds they will be given in BTC.

This response sounds an awful lot like a confirmation that the same amount of btc will be returned.  Thanks ninjarobot for bringing this quote back up.

I would honestly like an explanation where in that response you've found a confirmation that the full amount of BTC would be returned? Cycloid asks if he will "get the same amount of BTC back", and Simon Barber answers "refunds ... will be given in BTC." Just for a second make an assumption that Simon Barber is a ruthless scammer and that he made a vague answer on purpose, where do you read "same amount of btc" in his answer?

[matthewh3]

Well I think we have been getting mixed messages.

On the negative side:
1) we have not received any information that the machine they have assembled currently is ready for production (with final power and performance stats)
2) we have not heard that they are moving forward with the system as designed and are having a large number of boards shipped to CIARRA for mass  production.
3) no time lines have been shared as to what remaining items need to be finished to be ready to ship by the end of the year.

On the positive side:
1) gateway's visit showed that several days ago that had a configuration that would work to meet the minimum advertised specs

Ahh...  I guess that is it on the positive side.  Can anyone think of any positives?  I guess there is also the  statement that they will... but... ahh... See negatives above.

Someone a few pages back had a conversation with them on the phone and was told they would ship them all starting the day after Christmas through the 31st. iirc

Or are they just buying even more time to woo new pre-order customers just like BFL and possibly Cointerra?

[fubly]

[joshv06]

So has anyone at hashfast posted here?

[bitcoinermax]

I would honestly like an explanation where in that response you've found a confirmation that the full amount of BTC would be returned? Cycloid asks if he will "get the same amount of BTC back", and Simon Barber answers "refunds ... will be given in BTC." Just for a second make an assumption that Simon Barber is a ruthless scammer and that he made a vague answer on purpose, where do you read "same amount of btc" in his answer?

Does it matter if they don't have the funds to repay and all the BTCs have already been spent? As far as i can see, the only chances of BTC refunds is if they self mine. The question is which is the least worst option. Waiting for a refund that might never come or Taking the kit whenever it is finally delivered, assuming they can everything to work in the end

[jspielberg]

So has anyone at hashfast posted here?

On very rare occasion.  These hashfast threads were started by HF people.  They could lock them and let them fall of the map... But I suspect they like the "publicity."

[Bogart]

Now since the only payment option is in BTC Will I get the same ammount of BTC back should you fail to deliver by December 31st?

Orders are taken in BTC, in the unlikely event we get to refunds they will be given in BTC.

This response sounds an awful lot like a confirmation that the same amount of btc will be returned.  Thanks ninjarobot for bringing this quote back up.

I would honestly like an explanation where in that response you've found a confirmation that the full amount of BTC would be returned? Cycloid asks if he will "get the same amount of BTC back", and Simon Barber answers "refunds ... will be given in BTC." Just for a second make an assumption that Simon Barber is a ruthless scammer and that he made a vague answer on purpose, where do you read "same amount of btc" in his answer?

I'd say that his quoting a guy asking precisely the question "Will I get the same ammount of BTC back"? leaves very little room for playing games with semantics.