HashFast announces specs for new ASIC: 400GH/s

[JWU42]

But if HF converted BTC to USD at the time of payment AND/OR used customer funds ..

Again, this has nothing to do with me or any other customer. Whatever they did after I sent them BTC directly (no 3rd party service) is on them, not me. If they converted to USD, that's their mistake , not mine.

If you paid via Bitpay you will not see a BTC refund in the same amount as paid -- it will be refunded in BTC at the prevailing exchange rate.

If you paid HF directly with BTC then there is a chance you will get a BTC refund in the same BTC amount as paid.

My $.02  

[1714869762]

1714869762

[1714869762]

1714869762

[1714869762]

1714869762

[1714869762]

1714869762

[jjiimm_64]

So to all you people that paid in BTC and want refunds in BTC.. What would you want as a refund if Bitcoin was way less than you paid? Say 30$/BTC?

Would you all still be demanding BTC refunds?

This indirect investment idea is dumb. If you didn't invest in BTC, expecting the price to go up, than that's it..

I'm not defending HF. We should be focusing our anger in getting what we paid for and perhaps being compensated for the lies.

Yes, I would still want my bitcoins back... I want to hold bitcoins, not USD.  I learned a valuable lesson after the BFL fiasco....  I ordered in june of 2012.. paid in btc.. also sold 220k ltc for bitcoins to order in Sept 2012.....

When it came time to order from another asic manufacture.. I decided on HF.. and wanted a guarantee that I would either get the equipment or my bitcoins back.. regardless of the exchange rate..


on a side thought of not wanting the usd's..... has anyone considered shorting the big banks

[JWU42]

on a side thought of not wanting the usd's..... has anyone considered shorting the big banks

http://www.proshares.com/funds/skf.html

[cedivad]

Someone really believed that the exchange rate could go lower than 100$ after that we ordered? I bought from HF because i wanted to do a BTC investment, and i repeated this point to josh when he was trying to calm me down at amsterdam because i was pissed off by what i was seeing. (BTC around 140)

I will want my BTC back, as it was promised, all of them. I don't care about anything else.

[joshv06]

Someone really believed that the exchange rate could go lower than 100$ after that we ordered?

The why the hell didn't you just buy BTC?

You don't invest in BTC by buying something in BTC. You invest in BTC by buying BTC.

It's like wanting to roll back BTC you sold for really low on Mt Gox and wanting the Bitcoins back instead of what you would get in USD.

Or losing at a casino table and wanting a refund.

You didn't invest in Bitcoin. You invested in an Asic rig. Lets focus on getting what we paid for.

[cedivad]

The why the hell didn't you just buy BTC?

I was holding BTC, genius.

[ninjarobot]

But if HF converted BTC to USD at the time of payment AND/OR used customer funds ..

Again, this has nothing to do with me or any other customer. Whatever they did after I sent them BTC directly (no 3rd party service) is on them, not me. If they converted to USD, that's their mistake , not mine.

If you paid via Bitpay you will not see a BTC refund in the same amount as paid -- it will be refunded in BTC at the prevailing exchange rate.

If you paid HF directly with BTC then there is a chance you will get a BTC refund in the same BTC amount as paid.

My $.02  

And you came to this conclusion based on what exactly?

It should not matter if you paid to a bitcoin address trough BitPay or any other means. You paid in BTC. period.

The merchant can decide what to do with BTC payments via BitPay:

https://bitpay.com/bitcoin-direct-deposit

Merchants can receive settlement in their local currency with a guaranteed exchange rate, or keep the bitcoins, or a percentage split. If you choose to keep bitcoin, BitPay will forward your bitcoins to your wallet address on file.

HF should not have touched the customer funds until after delivery. However they likely did use those funds to cover NRE so I assume they converted to USD. If they did, that money is likely spent and they are unable to provide full refunds in BTC to all Batch 1 customers that might request one after the missed delivery date.

That does not mean I agree with this (I don't) but this is the reality we will have to deal with. I would not be surprised to see them settle and provide full BTC refunds to select customers that take the legal route, but this will be the minority.

[cedivad]

I ordered after the tapeout. All of the fab payments had to be already done by then. So they need to have my BTC.

[itod]

That does not mean I agree with this (I don't) but this is the reality we will have to deal with. I would not be surprised to see them settle and provide full BTC refunds to select customers that take the legal route, but this will be the minority.

There's a clause in original TOS that says they can change TOS in the future. I don't know if this is legal or not, it would be very useful if we can get qualified legal opinion on this issue.

If this is legal, legal actions against HF are questionable. How can you win against someone who can change the rules while the game is on? There was a quote on this thread where HF CEO said he talked with Josh, and Josh told him that not a single customer won a legal action against BFL. It's obvious they want to go the same route, so it is totally unimportnat if they have or have not the BTC to do the full refunds, they don't *want* to do the full refunds. Look it from their perspective: Why would they do it if they don't have to do it?

[cedivad]

I really can't wait to sue them. 20k, 50k, whatever the cost is, i will find a way to destroy them. And i will be an happy and poor bitcoiner after that.

[DPoS]

 You paid in BTC. period.

you guys have to accept that the miner was priced in $$$$$   not   BTC

if you gave them 40 goats you wouldn't get the same goats back if the price of goats shot up 10x

[cedivad]

Sure, expect for the fact that the people who took our goats promised us to give back the same amount of goats. A promise that was repeated, and never withdrawn so far. So yes, sure, you are free to eat your promise, and i'm free to sue you to death.
All of what i was scared of in October is becoming true, but i'm ready for that.

[jjiimm_64]

you guys have to accept that the miner was priced in $$$$$   not   BTC

NO, they have to accept that they owe the first batch buyers X bitcoins.  As I have told you, they promised me in writing that this is the case and I would NOT have ordered otherwise..


edit:  this is not what worries me.... I am pretty sure they will get the rigs out the door before the 31st...

I think what I am mad at is myself for drinking the fukin 'october' coolaid... and on top of that.. not fully realizing how much the hashrate would be by Jan1. 

(I think i always knew it would be around xmas delivery)

[jjiimm_64]

you guys have to accept that the miner was priced in $$$$$   not   BTC

NO, they have to accept that they owe the first batch buyers X bitcoins.  As I have told you, they promised me in writing that this is the case and I would NOT have ordered otherwise..

Can you post that here, please?

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=262052.msg4155681#msg4155681

[ninjarobot]

There's a clause in original TOS that says they can change TOS in the future. I don't know if this is legal or not, it would be very useful if we can get qualified legal opinion on this issue.

I can not find this clause in the original TOS. Can you point it out? http://pastebin.com/EfS9vmRf

If this is legal, legal actions against HF are questionable. How can you win against someone who can change the rules while the game is on?

Just because something is in a TOS does not mean it is enforceable.
http://griesslaw.com/blog/enforceability-of-web-based-terms-of-sale.html

you guys have to accept that the miner was priced in $$$$$   not   BTC

Yes, and I preferred to pay in USD but they did not offer that option. Cypherdoc was pretty clear HF only wanted to take BTC. See: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=270363.msg2894478#msg2894478

no, they want only those committed to leaving their BTC with HashFast until the end of the year.  if they fail to deliver, they have said they will give full refunds in BTC.

The problem is that HF does all their communication through 'liasons' so they are not on the hook for any of these statements made on their behalf.

[DPoS]

Sure, expect for the fact that the people who took our goats promised us to give back the same amount of goats. A promise that was repeated, and never withdrawn so far. So yes, sure, you are free to eat your promise, and i'm free to sue you to death.
All of what i was scared of in October is becoming true, but i'm ready for that.

If that said that, damn they are total lying scammers...  surprised you all aren't on a plane to San Fran by now

[DPoS]

Yes, and I preferred to pay in USD but they did not offer that option. Cypherdoc was pretty clear HF only wanted to take BTC. See:

I understand that, but that is just the delivery of the $$$ value but as the others said, HF was so full of bullshit that they also stated they would pay the same amount of BTC back..

that is a crazy and you all should sharpen your pitchforks

[jjiimm_64]

Meh, doubt you have it then.

if your being serious.. you have just made my mental ignore list.

if your just goading me to post it.. i respect that..

[perezoso]

What an f'ing mess.  

Although there are things that only HF knows, assuming the company really has a working miner, lately I keep concluding that Hashfast's least worst option is to double down on the MPP.  If they don't, it's not a question of if they will be sued, it's only a question of when - January 3, 4, 5? Or shortly thereafter. And the likelihood of those suits being more expensive and damaging to HF than "giving away" extra boards is high.

If they can just put working miners in peoples' hands in the next few days and, having done that, unambiguously pledge enough more MPP boards (like 8x or something) delivered faster to MPP customers, then it's going to defuse 85, 90, 95% of the bloodlust.  And they can compete with KNC et al moving forward without the dark cloud of hate hovering over them.

I don't see many other options.  Stonewalling and abusing your customers ala BFL just isn't going to work for the boys from San Francisco.

[itod]

There's a clause in original TOS that says they can change TOS in the future. I don't know if this is legal or not, it would be very useful if we can get qualified legal opinion on this issue.

I can not find this clause in the original TOS. Can you point it out? http://pastebin.com/EfS9vmRf

Can't find it in that copy (August 8th) either, don't know when it was introduced. In current copy (https://hashfast.com/checkout/terms-of-sale/) they claim this:

20. ENTIRE AGREEMENT; SEVERABILITY. These Terms, together with the order confirmation(s) sent from Hashfast to Buyer, are the entire agreement between Buyer and Hashfast with respect to its subject matter and supersedes all prior oral and written understandings, communications, or agreements between Buyer and Hashfast.

I can't see how that can be legal, but as I stated I would like an expert opinion.