HashFast announces specs for new ASIC: 400GH/s

[Ray E. Gallo]

Folks:  Simon has hired Ori Katz, not Chris Sullivan. While there are many lawyers, the good ones are not so many. And the best ones fewer still.  This is true of humans in every profession.  Ori happens to be one of a small group of excellent bankruptcy lawyers who regularly practice before this Court.  Ori did pitch the committee, and he was a better choice (though Mr. Sullivan was my first choice).  Unlike Ms. McDow, Ori has far more experience representing creditors' committees.  But he has no confidential information from the committee or any creditor---he pitched based on the public record info. So Simon was free to hire him.   The conspiracy theories are a little thick in some places here.  Mr. Edgeworth has (foolishly) failed to listen to me in many respects.  You may all come out as well as can be hoped despite some of those mistakes.  But they have consumed time and significant amounts of money. Committee counsel is, ultimately, paid by the creditors as a group.  So you are all paying for Mr. Edgeworth's decisions.  I won't be closely following this forum, so if I miss an insult or falsity, I will trust you all to be duly skeptical.  And if anybody wants accurate information, he or she is free to email me directly at rgallo@gallo-law.com or through www.hfrefunds.com.

[1713480781]

1713480781

[1713480781]

1713480781

[1713480781]

1713480781

[1713480781]

1713480781

[Minor Miner]

Folks:  Simon has hired Ori Katz, not Chris Sullivan. While there are many lawyers, the good ones are not so many. And the best ones fewer still.  This is true of humans in every profession.  Ori happens to be one of a small group of excellent bankruptcy lawyers who regularly practice before this Court.  Ori did pitch the committee, and he was a better choice (though Mr. Sullivan was my first choice).  Unlike Ms. McDow, Ori has far more experience representing creditors' committees.  But he has no confidential information from the committee or any creditor---he pitched based on the public record info. So Simon was free to hire him.   The conspiracy theories are a little thick in some places here.  Mr. Edgeworth has (foolishly) failed to listen to me in many respects.  You may all come out as well as can be hoped despite some of those mistakes.  But they have consumed time and significant amounts of money. Committee counsel is, ultimately, paid by the creditors as a group.  So you are all paying for Mr. Edgeworth's decisions.  I won't be closely following this forum, so if I miss an insult or falsity, I will trust you all to be duly skeptical.  And if anybody wants accurate information, he or she is free to email me directly at rgallo@gallo-law.com or through www.hfrefunds.com.

Give us some examples of mr edge worth's foolishness.   Otherwise you are just an idiot on the internet spouting off under a new name instead of armyofone.

[Entropy-uc]

Folks:  Simon has hired Ori Katz, not Chris Sullivan. While there are many lawyers, the good ones are not so many. And the best ones fewer still.  This is true of humans in every profession.  Ori happens to be one of a small group of excellent bankruptcy lawyers who regularly practice before this Court.  Ori did pitch the committee, and he was a better choice (though Mr. Sullivan was my first choice).  Unlike Ms. McDow, Ori has far more experience representing creditors' committees.  But he has no confidential information from the committee or any creditor---he pitched based on the public record info. So Simon was free to hire him.   The conspiracy theories are a little thick in some places here.  Mr. Edgeworth has (foolishly) failed to listen to me in many respects.  You may all come out as well as can be hoped despite some of those mistakes.  But they have consumed time and significant amounts of money. Committee counsel is, ultimately, paid by the creditors as a group.  So you are all paying for Mr. Edgeworth's decisions.  I won't be closely following this forum, so if I miss an insult or falsity, I will trust you all to be duly skeptical.  And if anybody wants accurate information, he or she is free to email me directly at rgallo@gallo-law.com or through www.hfrefunds.com.

Firstly Ray, it's Dr. Edgeworth.  If you're going to feign some level of civility, at least address me by the proper honorific.

Secondly, I am not making any decisions.  The committee makes the decisions, and all of those decisions have been by a solid majority.

Thirdly, we have good reasons for not taking your advice. You have no experience in bankruptcy law, and it shows.  The committee selected excellent bankruptcy counsel who has been very successful both in court and behind the scenes.  The fact that you happen to hate her and have spent weeks on a vendetta against our selection is just another example of how your actions have been consistently against the best interests of creditors in the case.

[Syke]

Please tell me the value of the chips if BTC is $1,000 a month from now and difficulty is 20% higher.
...
You cannot have mathematical proof by looking at one variable when there are two variables.

You forget the 3rd very important variable. Competitor chips. With Bitmain already shipping in bulk, and Spondoolies wrapping up their next gen, HF chips are increasingly non-competitive.

[Minor Miner]

Please tell me the value of the chips if BTC is $1,000 a month from now and difficulty is 20% higher.
...
You cannot have mathematical proof by looking at one variable when there are two variables.

You forget the 3rd very important variable. Competitor chips. With Bitmain already shipping in bulk, and Spondoolies wrapping up their next gen, HF chips are increasingly non-competitive.

Correct but you are complicating things since we were at the point just trying to explain to people there is MORE than ONE variable.
But definitely supply comes into it.   And the fact that you cannot buy any of these products right now AND that spondoolies missed (by how much we have not been told) would add value to the chips that are readily available.   They need to auction these things and lay off all of the management that is doing nothing and then let the lawyers go.

[cedivad]

You're offering no path of solution whatsoever... Good lord, lately it's to wonder if you're not hired by the competition to hinder any progress.

I ask perfectly legitimate questions about the obscure points of the deal and I get personal attacks. Right. It's interesting to say the least.

I understand what you are saying but you are wrong.   Look at the extreme.   Bitcoin is $1 Million.   Are these chips worthless?   The answer is, it depends.    You cannot have mathematical proof by looking at one variable when there are two variables.

Let's try to remember the per GH cost of the 100TH mine... What was it, $5? And when was it? 1 year ago? So the difficulty went up a thousand times and the price per GH went down only 5 times? What a nonsense.

I want to know the details of the new board design, damn. If it's $200/chip to bring it online and it doesn't require liquid cooling for some reasons, (I don't know, they splitted the chips into 4 separate ones with a sawboard), that would be a hell of a competitive product. Do I have to pay a lawyer to have that informations?

You speak of Ray in the same third person way that armyofone used to.

I noticed that as well. Just like Berlusconi. I wonder what the relationships between the two are. No, wait, I think I know it.


"Brief" (20+pages) of opposition to the sale from the committee:

http://hashfast.org/14-30725.156.pdf

I. INTRODUCTION
A theme has developed in this case. Hashfast Technologies, LLC (“HFT”) and Hashfast,
LLC (“HF”) (collectively, the “Debtors”) present half-cocked ideas and, once teed-up on
shortened time or an emergency basis, attempt to conceal or explain-away the absence of
evidence or a logical justification due to the purported exigency. With this may warrant quick
action in some instances, proclaiming that “the sky is falling” does not excuse the unconscionable
sale proposed by the Debtors to their insider/joint venturor Liquidbits, Corp. (“LB”)—a sale
negotiated on behalf of the Debtors by an individual poised to lead the purchaser after the sale is
consummated.
Essentially, and making every effort to avoid hyperbole, Debtors propose selling
substantially all of their tangible assets, granting an irrevocable and transferrable license
(including the right to create derivative works), and 33% of the net recovery from any avoidance
actions or suits against insiders to LB—items of substantial, quantifiable value—without any

I love creative legalese.

[kikaha]

Why is the creditor's committee taking so long to reach a decision on how to proceed forward?  In Bitcoin time, it is forever.  Meanwhile the attorneys (on all sides) continue to make money at the creditor's expense.  The longer the chip inventory sits, the less it will mine once turned into boards and mining systems.

Please tell me the value of the chips if BTC is $1,000 a month from now and difficulty is 20% higher.
...
You cannot have mathematical proof by looking at one variable when there are two variables.

You forget the 3rd very important variable. Competitor chips. With Bitmain already shipping in bulk, and Spondoolies wrapping up their next gen, HF chips are increasingly non-competitive.

[Minor Miner]

Why is the creditor's committee taking so long to reach a decision on how to proceed forward?  In Bitcoin time, it is forever.  Meanwhile the attorneys (on all sides) continue to make money at the creditor's expense.  The longer the chip inventory sits, the less it will mine once turned into boards and mining systems.

Please tell me the value of the chips if BTC is $1,000 a month from now and difficulty is 20% higher.
...
You cannot have mathematical proof by looking at one variable when there are two variables.

You forget the 3rd very important variable. Competitor chips. With Bitmain already shipping in bulk, and Spondoolies wrapping up their next gen, HF chips are increasingly non-competitive.

The creditor's committee does not set how fast things happen NOR what does happen.   HF management and lawyers do.   I think Ray Gallo has posted some things that may lead people to think that the committee is running the company, that is completely incorrect.    HF management is running the company and delaying things constantly.   You should listen to the hearings.
Simon went on vacation for a month.   And got a personal lawyer to slow things down.   
I think a good thing would be if the judge saw through these tactics and put the trustee in charge of the company.   Then we would get somewhere.

[cedivad]

The committee should move to have a trustee, not the judge (if I'm not mistaking). They said they wanted to almost a month ago and then changed idea, I'm sure for a good reason.

[Minor Miner]

The committee should move to have a trustee, not the judge (if I'm not mistaking). They said they wanted to almost a month ago and then changed idea, I'm sure for a good reason.

My preference would be for them to move for a trustee and then a liquidation.    Broken into tons of small lots that would allow a lot of people to bid on them like the peppermining people and others that might pop up.    maybe we could have 5-10 smaller manufacturers of solid hashing boards to supply hobbyists.    If the big players want to bid, they can buy all the lots but it will get us the maximize price and will get us CASH, not some promise that forces us to take huge risk.

[cedivad]

If the big players want to bid, they can buy all the lots but it will get us the maximize price and will get us CASH, not some promise that forces us to take huge risk.

I would say that the document posted yesterday by the committee proves that LB is a fraud, not only a possible mistake.

The problem of splicing HF into 100 lots is that you need coordination to build boards. It's not banal.

[Minor Miner]

"Brief" (20+pages) of opposition to the sale from the committee:

http://hashfast.org/14-30725.156.pdf

People need to read this document.
Ray Gallo, you seem to have left out a few details on this "great" deal you negotiated.   What is your angle in this?   You do not seem to represent people wanting to get their money back.
1.  Liquidbits and HF were partners in the past so it is likely that LB may not even be a creditor like the rest of us.   They were obligated to give HF part of their mining revenue.   That means their claim is likely going to be contested and is not as simple as a claim where a customer bought, paid and did not receive.   They started a business with Hashfast, that business did not work out.   Not sure they are owed their money back if that money as LB's equity investment in this new venture with HF and HF's equity was a below sale price and shipping them before ALL of us that financed the company.
2.  Liquidbits has taken delivery of many of these units AND HAS NOT GOT THEM HASHING or has not paid HF money they owe them if they did get them hashing.    So, how are they going to get 20 PH/s hashing for us when they didn't even do that in the last six months with less than what Icedrill got up and running?    Does anyone have these attachments that they cite to show just how many TH/s (and when) LB received?   
3.  Back to 1., LB may owe Hashfast money.   If you look at this partnership that started emerging now, LB OWES Hashfast part of the revenue they get from mining.   Whether they started mining or not, when they were priority delivered the means to mine, they had an obligation to start mining and START paying part of the revenue to the ESTATE (which belongs to us creditors).   VERY INTERESTING.    Maybe this is why there is such a rush to get this NO BID deal done and hidden as fast as possible.
3A.  LB has demanded to be released from all claims the estate has against it.   Do you think the estate may have a large claim against them?   25% of all the bitcoins mined since they received products before everyone and they agreed to build this mine in October (you read that right it says OCTOBER).   Maybe the $2M LB proposing to "invest" in NewCo is actually money we are owed anyway?   There is a line in there saying that LB owes Hashfast $400,000 plus whatever damages HF incurred when LB failed to produce bitcoins and pay HF.
4.  HF management has been OFFERED JOBS at this NEWCO.    So, LB is proposing to use all our money to get all the assets for free and then they are going to pay and employ the same people that lied, and stole from us in the first place.    I would like to know what Ray gets out of this too since now I know why some of the employees are all for it.
5.  Two supplers are ILLEGALLY holding inventory hostage demanding to be paid before other creditors.   Hashfast has done NOTHING to enforce the law and get these assets even though they claim these chips are losing TONS of value daily.   Because this is against the law, the estate could actually sue these two creditors (I think that is what it means) for damages BUT more importantly is was SIMPLE to get these released and HF did NOTHING to do so.   
6.   Point 5. further means that the "millions" needed to pay to get inventory released is not true.   Inventory would be simple to get released as it there are laws about this.
7.  Hashfast and their lawyers have not even done the research to see if LB could even perform on their term sheet.   No confirmation of money, facilities or even if they have staff that can perform on the proposal.   NOTHING SUBMITTED by HF nor LB.
8.  Someone on the committee has proposed a "franchise model" that is very similar to LBs proposal except we would have ownership instead of being an unsecured creditor.

I wish we had the information that Ray has but I find it interesting that he did not feel any of these points are relevant to point out to us.   Unless he is representing LB (ie. his clients are all LB shareholders), I do not see how this would benefit "the huge group of creditor's he represents",   Anyone have thoughts on this?

[Jutarul]

"Brief" (20+pages) of opposition to the sale from the committee:

http://hashfast.org/14-30725.156.pdf

People need to read this document.
Ray Gallo, you seem to have left out a few details on this "great" deal you negotiated.   What is your angle in this?   You do not seem to represent people wanting to get their money back.
1.  Liquidbits and HF were partners in the past so it is likely that LB may not even be a creditor like the rest of us.   They were obligated to give HF part of their mining revenue.   That means their claim is likely going to be contested and is not as simple as a claim where a customer bought, paid and did not receive.   They started a business with Hashfast, that business did not work out.   Not sure they are owed their money back if that money as LB's equity investment in this new venture with HF and HF's equity was a below sale price and shipping them before ALL of us that financed the company.
2.  Liquidbits has taken delivery of many of these units AND HAS NOT GOT THEM HASHING or has not paid HF money they owe them if they did get them hashing.    So, how are they going to get 20 PH/s hashing for us when they didn't even do that in the last six months with less than what Icedrill got up and running?    Does anyone have these attachments that they cite to show just how many TH/s (and when) LB received?   
3.  Back to 1., LB may owe Hashfast money.   If you look at this partnership that started emerging now, LB OWES Hashfast part of the revenue they get from mining.   Whether they started mining or not, when they were priority delivered the means to mine, they had an obligation to start mining and START paying part of the revenue to the ESTATE (which belongs to us creditors).   VERY INTERESTING.    Maybe this is why there is such a rush to get this NO BID deal done and hidden as fast as possible.
3A.  LB has demanded to be released from all claims the estate has against it.   Do you think the estate may have a large claim against them?   25% of all the bitcoins mined since they received products before everyone and they agreed to build this mine in October (you read that right it says OCTOBER).   Maybe the $2M LB proposing to "invest" in NewCo is actually money we are owed anyway?   There is a line in there saying that LB owes Hashfast $400,000 plus whatever damages HF incurred when LB failed to produce bitcoins and pay HF.
4.  HF management has been OFFERED JOBS at this NEWCO.    So, LB is proposing to use all our money to get all the assets for free and then they are going to pay and employ the same people that lied, and stole from us in the first place.    I would like to know what Ray gets out of this too since now I know why some of the employees are all for it.
5.  Two supplers are ILLEGALLY holding inventory hostage demanding to be paid before other creditors.   Hashfast has done NOTHING to enforce the law and get these assets even though they claim these chips are losing TONS of value daily.   Because this is against the law, the estate could actually sue these two creditors (I think that is what it means) for damages BUT more importantly is was SIMPLE to get these released and HF did NOTHING to do so.   
6.   Point 5. further means that the "millions" needed to pay to get inventory released is not true.   Inventory would be simple to get released as it there are laws about this.
7.  Hashfast and their lawyers have not even done the research to see if LB could even perform on their term sheet.   No confirmation of money, facilities or even if they have staff that can perform on the proposal.   NOTHING SUBMITTED by HF nor LB.
8.  Someone on the committee has proposed a "franchise model" that is very similar to LBs proposal except we would have ownership instead of being an unsecured creditor.

I wish we had the information that Ray has but I find it interesting that he did not feel any of these points are relevant to point out to us.   Unless he is representing LB (ie. his clients are all LB shareholders), I do not see how this would benefit "the huge group of creditor's he represents",   Anyone have thoughts on this?

Thank you for your continued effort to translate and communicate the state of affairs to the layman.

Regarding Ray Gallo, I doubt that Ray has any deep insight into the mechanics of the industry or the subtle ways by which the value of the assets can be transferred. He's a lawyer on contingency and that means optimize the revenue/effort ratio. So why spent 6 months getting 2 million when you can spend 1 month to get 1 million?

[minternj]

Very nice summary Minor.

[kikaha]

Is there any more info on "8.  Someone on the committee has proposed a "franchise model" that is very similar to LBs proposal except we would have ownership instead of being an unsecured creditor."?  Seems intriguing.

Very nice summary Minor.

[Minor Miner]

Is there any more info on "8.  Someone on the committee has proposed a "franchise model" that is very similar to LBs proposal except we would have ownership instead of being an unsecured creditor."?  Seems intriguing.

Very nice summary Minor.

Not that I have.   It is frustrating because when you listen to the court hearings and read the filings it is obvious that there is tons of information that we do not see.   
If I had to guess from looking at the committee, my guess would be will from ID or maybe the person from South America?   I do not know though.   We can eliminate the suppliers and LB so it narrows it down.   

[stan258]

"Brief" (20+pages) of opposition to the sale from the committee:

http://hashfast.org/14-30725.156.pdf

People need to read this document.
Ray Gallo, you seem to have left out a few details on this "great" deal you negotiated.   What is your angle in this?   You do not seem to represent people wanting to get their money back.
1.  Liquidbits and HF were partners in the past so it is likely that LB may not even be a creditor like the rest of us.   They were obligated to give HF part of their mining revenue.   That means their claim is likely going to be contested and is not as simple as a claim where a customer bought, paid and did not receive.   They started a business with Hashfast, that business did not work out.   Not sure they are owed their money back if that money as LB's equity investment in this new venture with HF and HF's equity was a below sale price and shipping them before ALL of us that financed the company.
2.  Liquidbits has taken delivery of many of these units AND HAS NOT GOT THEM HASHING or has not paid HF money they owe them if they did get them hashing.    So, how are they going to get 20 PH/s hashing for us when they didn't even do that in the last six months with less than what Icedrill got up and running?    Does anyone have these attachments that they cite to show just how many TH/s (and when) LB received?   
3.  Back to 1., LB may owe Hashfast money.   If you look at this partnership that started emerging now, LB OWES Hashfast part of the revenue they get from mining.   Whether they started mining or not, when they were priority delivered the means to mine, they had an obligation to start mining and START paying part of the revenue to the ESTATE (which belongs to us creditors).   VERY INTERESTING.    Maybe this is why there is such a rush to get this NO BID deal done and hidden as fast as possible.
3A.  LB has demanded to be released from all claims the estate has against it.   Do you think the estate may have a large claim against them?   25% of all the bitcoins mined since they received products before everyone and they agreed to build this mine in October (you read that right it says OCTOBER).   Maybe the $2M LB proposing to "invest" in NewCo is actually money we are owed anyway?   There is a line in there saying that LB owes Hashfast $400,000 plus whatever damages HF incurred when LB failed to produce bitcoins and pay HF.
4.  HF management has been OFFERED JOBS at this NEWCO.    So, LB is proposing to use all our money to get all the assets for free and then they are going to pay and employ the same people that lied, and stole from us in the first place.    I would like to know what Ray gets out of this too since now I know why some of the employees are all for it.
5.  Two supplers are ILLEGALLY holding inventory hostage demanding to be paid before other creditors.   Hashfast has done NOTHING to enforce the law and get these assets even though they claim these chips are losing TONS of value daily.   Because this is against the law, the estate could actually sue these two creditors (I think that is what it means) for damages BUT more importantly is was SIMPLE to get these released and HF did NOTHING to do so.   
6.   Point 5. further means that the "millions" needed to pay to get inventory released is not true.   Inventory would be simple to get released as it there are laws about this.
7.  Hashfast and their lawyers have not even done the research to see if LB could even perform on their term sheet.   No confirmation of money, facilities or even if they have staff that can perform on the proposal.   NOTHING SUBMITTED by HF nor LB.
8.  Someone on the committee has proposed a "franchise model" that is very similar to LBs proposal except we would have ownership instead of being an unsecured creditor.

I wish we had the information that Ray has but I find it interesting that he did not feel any of these points are relevant to point out to us.   Unless he is representing LB (ie. his clients are all LB shareholders), I do not see how this would benefit "the huge group of creditor's he represents",   Anyone have thoughts on this?

Uniquify, Signetics and Liquidbits can be leveraged to reduce their claim to avoid litigation.

The company saying it’s a great deal is in breach of contract. LB took preferential delivery so many of the regular orders didn’t get shipped on time or at all. COOL! You pay up now.

I am interested in who is paying LB legal fees.  I guess they can put that condo up for collateral.

Nice Monica and Greg are on a personal level in a formal setting page 11 line 28.  
 

[cedivad]

Details of the franchising program:

http://hashfast.org/14-30725.161.6.pdf

Now don't tell me that the bottleneck is the committee. It's Barber. It's raining here Barber, hope the same for London or wherever you are.

Points I would change of the program:

1) If I wanted to buy 5 boards, I need to be able to do so. I need to be able to have someone reputable (believe it or not, like HF) to produce the boards for me. I can't talk to a contract manufacturer for 5 boards. But I want them. And I want them cheap. Remember that a big crunch of the market buy only a few units.
2) If I wanted to invest into the franchasing program, but didn't want to see a single board or PSU or broken cooling system, I need to be able to do so. I hate the word "cloud", but that's what you have to offer. I put the money in, you care about everything else. "You" must be very trustworthy.
3) The PCBs have a long lead time. Order them now.
4) Is that pricing taking into account the v.3 board design?

The need for a trustworthy entity makes me think that you really need a trustee.

[Minor Miner]

Details of the franchising program:
http://hashfast.org/14-30725.161.6.pdf

Interesting.   I wonder when the committee proposed this?  It does not have a date on it.
BUT, it has a VERY interesting piece of information.   On Page 5, it has a chart showing how much money was lost by Hashfast sitting around doing nothing.
One of the bars shows how much Liquidbits should have produced from the 8,000 bitcoins.   That means they owe hashfast (the estate, creditors) over 2,000 bitcoins.

Ray Gallo gets all the committee stuff that the rest of us do not.  He has been pushing this Liquidbits deal and demanding it get approved quickly (and telling us that the committee members are stupid for not listening to Ray Gallo).   Since Ray had this presentation before we have see it, that means HE KNEW Liquidbits had liabilities to the estate and did not tell any of us that this "great deal Ray Gallo negotiated" was with someone that OWES the rest of the creditors money.

If this guy is your lawyer, I would really love to hear how you think he is representing you and your interests if he does not even disclose something as serious as this.   Or did he tell all of you guys and just the rest of us creditors were left in the dark?

TLDR:   There are more indications that liquidbits owes money into the estate from their PARTNERSHIP agreement with Hashfast,   They were not a simple customer but were in a joint venture with Hashfast that required Liquidbits to build a mine and share proceeds (25% of revenue) with Hashfast.    They did not make these payments.   That means Liquidbits likely owes the estate money that can be pursued.

[cedivad]

Unsurprisingly LB's position is that they were never able to put the chips they received at work (and that's the same reason why they were pushing that much to receive the remaining 20k or so (I mean, before the bankruptcy), because they were unable to make the first 2k work, makes sense).

It must be a really weak defence given how they were pushing their deal.