HashFast announces specs for new ASIC: 400GH/s

[perezoso]

Alright, well, this is what I hear.  I don't think any of this is secret, it's just secondhand information.  I assume it's accurate, but I have no personal knowledge.

Hashfast's debt to customers is significantly into 8 digits, i.e. > US $10,000,000.  Maybe even $15 million.

Hashfast also has debt to suppliers, perhaps around $2 million.  The suppliers may physically control some Hashfast assets, cough, like the important ones.

Emerging from bankruptcy will require a large infusion of cash.  It is not clear if anyone is prepared to make such an investment at all, much less on terms acceptable to the creditors.

The obvious question is where all the damn money went.  I have nothing new about that.  I've previously posted my own suspicions.

It also brings to mind Hashfast's later apologists, like Amy A. and now, the "dog".  What bullshit they are full of.  

Come on, Amy, claiming Hashfast was solvent until the day before you were fired?  Lie.

Dog, you're trying to rewrite events into a narrative that makes you feel better about what happened, and which I doubt has much to do with reality.

[cedivad]

Dog, you're trying to rewrite events into a narrative that makes you feel better about what happened, and which I doubt has much to do with reality.

It's an useful feedback. 90% of what Fred posts can be easily denied, with no effort at all. They don't have working cover story for this disaster, and even while you can see that they tried to make one, they are failing and will keep failing miserably in doing so.

Around $15M of debts? What is this, a ponzi scheme? Because a ponzi wouldn't be this bad, actually.

Oh, yes. And I want a copy of that declaration of Edward that HF had plenty of monies to pay every claim, the one made during the LB arbitration. I need to put it in a frame.

[kleeck]

Alright, well, this is what I hear.  I don't think any of this is secret, it's just secondhand information.  I assume it's accurate, but I have no personal knowledge.

Hashfast's debt to customers is significantly into 8 digits, i.e. > US $10,000,000.  Maybe even $15 million.

Hashfast also has debt to suppliers, perhaps around $2 million.  The suppliers may physically control some Hashfast assets, cough, like the important ones.

Emerging from bankruptcy will require a large infusion of cash.  It is not clear if anyone is prepared to make such an investment at all, much less on terms acceptable to the creditors.

The obvious question is where all the damn money went.  I have nothing new about that.  I've previously posted my own suspicions.

It also brings to mind Hashfast's later apologists, like Amy A. and now, the "dog".  What bullshit they are full of.  

Come on, Amy, claiming Hashfast was solvent until the day before you were fired?  Lie.

Dog, you're trying to rewrite events into a narrative that makes you feel better about what happened, and which I doubt has much to do with reality.

Perhaps I'm being naive, but wouldn't the court look into this before allowing the Chapter 11? If it were clear that HF could not come out of this scenario solvent and in line with creditors then I'd imagine the logical process would be liquidation. I can't imagine the court granting Chapter 11 if these numbers were true unless HF receives the funds it would need form an outside source.

[perezoso]

Perhaps I'm being naive, but wouldn't the court look into this before allowing the Chapter 11? If it were clear that HF could not come out of this scenario solvent and in line with creditors then I'd imagine the logical process would be liquidation. I can't imagine the court granting Chapter 11 if these numbers were true unless HF receives the funds it would need form an outside source.

That's my understanding too.  If they can't present a credible plan, they go into liquidation.

I imagine that Eddie's getting ready to board a flight to Venezuela or wherever he came from (I don't personally know where).  With his credentials maybe Maduro would be interested in hiring him.

[cedivad]

That's my understanding too.  If they can't present a credible plan, they go into liquidation.

Liquidation might be worse than a non-credible plan...

So, LB, that was ready to place 28k chips into boards...

[fredthedog]

Alright, well, this is what I hear.  I don't think any of this is secret, it's just secondhand information.  I assume it's accurate, but I have no personal knowledge.

Hashfast's debt to customers is significantly into 8 digits, i.e. > US $10,000,000.  Maybe even $15 million.

Hashfast also has debt to suppliers, perhaps around $2 million.  The suppliers may physically control some Hashfast assets, cough, like the important ones.

Emerging from bankruptcy will require a large infusion of cash.  It is not clear if anyone is prepared to make such an investment at all, much less on terms acceptable to the creditors.

The obvious question is where all the damn money went.  I have nothing new about that.  I've previously posted my own suspicions.

It also brings to mind Hashfast's later apologists, like Amy A. and now, the "dog".  What bullshit they are full of.  

Come on, Amy, claiming Hashfast was solvent until the day before you were fired?  Lie.

Dog, you're trying to rewrite events into a narrative that makes you feel better about what happened, and which I doubt has much to do with reality.

I doubt customer liabilities are over $10 million, but I don't know how bad it is in total. I'm sure it's bad though. There seemed to be some huge commitments made to appease big customers. As for suppliers... Well... In a bankruptcy context it may not matter, as those suppliers may be ordered to hand over the goods that are already finished and their debts end up treated like any other creditors. That won't make those suppliers very happy though.

The only thing I will flat out deny above is that Amy A was lying.
She came on very late in the game with the best of intentions, and she has taken a lot of flack for a situation she had ZERO part in creating.

She was shown financials that put X value on assets and hadn't accounted for all the liabilities, because those were the numbers that existed at the time. The value of a chip over the last few months has a lot of room for debate. The value of a gigahash has plummeted rapidly. Very few rank and file people at the company had a grasp on the economics of mining. Hell, most people who are miners don't have a grasp on it. For the most part I would say top management and some of the core tech team does have a pretty good grasp on it. But they had a certain overestimation of how strong their lead was and what the company could really pull off with the cash from preorders.

Towards the end top management seemed to be grasping at straws and avoiding elephants in the room. There was always the promise of some huge chip deal that would bring in a bunch of cash. Apparently, from the filings, there still seems to be this possibility.

 I have a feeling they are only now finally tallying up how bad the liability situation is. The chapter 11 filing will have to reveal this.  

[perezoso]

I doubt customer liabilities are over $10 million, but I don't know how bad it is in total. I'm sure it's bad though. There seemed to be some huge commitments made to appease big customers. As for suppliers... Well... In a bankruptcy context it may not matter, as those suppliers may be ordered to hand over the goods that are already finished and their debts end up treated like any other creditors. That won't make those suppliers very happy though.

The only thing I will flat out deny above is that Amy A was lying.
She came on very late in the game with the best of intentions, and she has taken a lot of flack for a situation she had ZERO part in creating.

She was shown financials that put X value on assets and hadn't accounted for all the liabilities, because those were the numbers that existed at the time. The value of a chip over the last few months has a lot of room for debate. The value of a gigahash has plummeted rapidly. Very few rank and file people at the company had a grasp on the economics of mining. Hell, most people who are miners don't have a grasp on it. For the most part I would say top management and some of the core tech team does have a pretty good grasp on it. But they had a certain overestimation of how strong their lead was and what the company could really pull off with the cash from preorders.

Towards the end top management seemed to be grasping at straws and avoiding elephants in the room. There was always the promise of some huge chip deal that would bring in a bunch of cash. Apparently, from the filings, there still seems to be this possibility.

 I have a feeling they are only now finally tallying up how bad the liability situation is. The chapter 11 filing will have to reveal this.  

I'm calling BS on you again, Freddie.

First off, I'll take my source on the debt any day of the week over you.  Mine has greater credibility, frankly.  And I have slightly understated what I was told.

Pretty much everything else you say is ridiculous.  

It is possible that Amy was lied to, but you know what?  Let's say she was lied to in the way you assert... that is, that Hashfast was only "solvent" based on fake numbers about chips?  Guess what?  She still knew there was no money to get out of the hole, and that Hashfast was only "solvent" if it realized impossible gains on hypothetical sales.  Sorry, if you just parrot what you are being fed, but what you are being fed doesn't pass the simplest smell test, well, that's pretty much lying in my book.  If you want to compromise, let's say that she "spread lies and should have known better".  That's about as charitable as I can get with her.  And your story implicates the temporary CFO, because Amy said that was who showed her the figures.

Hashfast doesn't want to sell up to 1,000 chips as a "huge chip deal that would bring in a bunch of cash".  1000 chips isn't huge anyway.  It's quite obvious from the filings that Simon doesn't have enough money to meet payroll, pay the lawyers, pay a CRO, and present a credible plan.  No, this "huge chip deal" is just about keeping the phones working, a temp to check the voicemail, and the legal process alive, and that's about it.  

And back to those financials you say Amy was shown.  You offer as an excuse that "the numbers that existed at the time" were not a proper accounting?  What are we to glean from that?  That it's okay to lose money and forget liabilities on your balance sheet?  That you and Amy were content to toil away at a company with hundreds of irate customers beating down the door and accounting that you knew was falsified?  That doesn't sound like an excuse, that sounds like negligence (or worse).

I agree with you that, on the scale of culpability of Hashfast people, and on the basis of what we know, Amy is perhaps the least tainted.  But even giving her the benefit of the doubt, I'm not letting her slide on broadcasting obvious falsehoods. There were naive customers that believed that, that still believe that. "Why did you file the bankruptcy suit, they stopped shipping?"  Of course, there was no money in the bank, a debt to suppliers, a debt to customers, a payroll to meet, lawsuits to defend against, etc.  She gave false hope to people with statements she knew, or should have known, were inaccurate. That's probably why she's catching so much flak.  Sure, a few of those naive customers would have gotten (late, money-losing) machines before Hashfast hit the wall at the speed of sound, but they were going to hit the wall, and most of the creditors were not going to get paid.

[pmorici]

I doubt customer liabilities are over $10 million, but I don't know how bad it is in total. I'm sure it's bad though.

I don't doubt it.  We know for a fact that Liquidbits alone is owed $6 Million.  The other customer creditors in that court room were owed at least a couple million between them and that's just the people who have seen fit to get a lawyer.

She was shown financials that put X value on assets and hadn't accounted for all the liabilities, because those were the numbers that existed at the time. The value of a chip over the last few months has a lot of room for debate. The value of a gigahash has plummeted rapidly. Very few rank and file people at the company had a grasp on the economics of mining. Hell, most people who are miners don't have a grasp on it. For the most part I would say top management and some of the core tech team does have a pretty good grasp on it. But they had a certain overestimation of how strong their lead was and what the company could really pull off with the cash from preorders.

So previously you indicated that you were sure this wasn't fraud and now you are saying that rank and file employees were shown phony numbers to get them to go out and make statements that the company was doing well.  That sure sounds like fraud to me.  In fact that sounds like exactly what Hashfast has been doing from day one lying their butts off and deceiving customers.

[armyof1ne]

Well, I've been informed that the financial situation at Hashfast is perhaps even worse than we have been told or I personally imagined.  I'll leave it to somebody more directly in the know to say it out loud.  If nobody comes by to enlighten us, I'll post what I've heard later.  I'd rather it be less heresay and more from somebody directly present in the bankruptcy proceedings.

speak... for us lower beings need this information too

[aasl]

if what perezoso said is true, hashfast is doomed! If HF goes bankrupt, how can we small investors/customers protect ourselves? Maybe many of us only pre-ordered less than 10 rigs, compared to those big creditors, we are tiny neglectable long tails... but what should we do?

[cedivad]

if what perezoso said is true, hashfast is doomed! If HF goes bankrupt, how can we small investors/customers protect ourselves? Maybe many of us only pre-ordered less than 10 rigs, compared to those big creditors, we are tiny neglectable long tails... but what should we do?

You will be protected once that there will be a way to file for your claims and you do it. You won't need Gallo and such. I'm quite sure that the big creditors would rather be in your situation, too.

[Collider]

I will just leave this here:
http://www.coindesk.com/hashfast-staves-involuntary-bankruptcy-san-francisco-court/

Basically, they narrowly avoided chapter 7 "involuntary" bankcruptcy.

They are now allowed to do business within a very limited volume again, but hey, who wants to do business with such a shitty company?

Right now they are atleast as bad as BFL, although BFL shipped at some point and you were able to get refunds if you really wanted to.


It is somewhow sad that american companys are unable to provide any competition in this market but hey, that´s the free market.
If you are unable to compete or produce at all, your company dies a painful death and you will be sued for all kinds of fraud.
At least these boons will hopefully never be able to get into any management position ever again.

Bitfury will kill any competition
Did you know about the 3.5TH Bitfury rigs with 0,8W/GH at the wall and intake temperature tolerance of up to 35°C?
HF can go home (if they still have one )

[cedivad]

CoinDesk doesn't know what they are talking about. Read the last few pages of this thread for the real narrative.

So, BitFury raised capital for $20M.

[TooDumbForBitcoin]

This story will not be over 'til IceBreaker says it's over.

[perezoso]

It is somewhow sad that american companys are unable to provide any competition in this market but hey, that´s the free market.
If you are unable to compete or produce at all, your company dies a painful death and you will be sued for all kinds of fraud.
At least these boons will hopefully never be able to get into any management position ever again.

I agree with the latter sentiments entirely.  But I always thought calling Hashfast an American company was a bit of an oversimplification.  Yes, of course, it is incorporated in the US and is, legally, an American company.  But Americans were not calling the shots.  Among the leaders you have a Brit (Simon), a Canadian (Amy the 1st), and a Latin American CEO (Eddie).  People that came to the US for business opportunity.  And the people that blew the first board, if Hashfast's narrative is to be believed, were in Australia. And one time I saw it mentioned that the CFO for a while, in that middle period, was from Hong Kong (don't know if that's true).  Well, then call it failure of half the Anglophone world!

The point is not to get into national finger-pointing, but more to add a little nuance, because a few times people have come on here with anti-American rants about Hashfast which I found a little misplaced.

If, as I posit, there was a secret pronster (or other) investment behind Hashfast, and those investors walked away with a lot of our money, it will be interesting to see where they came from.  Unfortunately, those guys might be the "real Americans".

But no matter where you come from, for fraud I'm sure a judge can find a nice place for your nationality in an American jail!  :-)

[Unacceptable]

Lets see.......BFL (American),Cointerra (American),Hashfast (American).........any others

They all suck !!!!!! Greedy & ignorant is the new American way anymore 

Good luck to you folks!!!!!   

BTW,I AM an American     

[Flying Hellfish]

Lets see.......BFL (American),Cointerra (American),Hashfast (American).........any others

They all suck !!!!!! Greedy & ignorant is the new American way anymore  

Good luck to you folks!!!!!  

BTW,I AM an American    

Don't forget AMT and Terrahash, they be representing the USA as well!

Edit: And one of the ORIGINAL scams bASIC!!!!!!!

[Syke]

Don't forget AMT and Terrahash, they be representing the USA as well!

Edit: And one of the ORIGINAL scams bASIC!!!!!!!

In one sense bASIC was the best of the bunch. Tom actually refunded everyone.

[aasl]

some blacksheeps do not represent all.

[cedivad]

$644... What a bubble... HashFast assets are actually rising in value instead of decreasing... It basically bought HF another month of "life".