New Official AMT Thread

[petermolloy]

Are all 1.2 Th customers that received nothing included in the lawsuit?  If not, whom do i contact to join class action lawsuit?
Thanks,
PM

[1715265842]

1715265842

[termonator61]

Are all 1.2 Th customers that received nothing included in the lawsuit?  If not, whom do i contact to join class action lawsuit?
Thanks,
PM

When I spoke with the lawyer, she said that unless you opt out of the lawsuit (to pursue your own personal legal action) then you are automatically included. They issued AMT a formal complaint which they responded to last month with a request for an extension (big surprise there) which the judge granted. They now have until mid-June to confer with their lawyer(s) in Philadelphia and proceedings will begin at that time. I can provide the information of the lawyer (with her permission) to anyone who wants their story to go on record.

[NotFuzzyWarm]

Guess Bitmain got fed up with shippers playing football with miners. Seems most folks shipping large miners have ran into this issue albeit the Ants are packed par-excellence vs ahem, others we've seen.... Now the S2 is only as kit. No case, no psu. Bet it flat packs great.

[AMT_miners]

As it is they have the pending lawsuit, which we all know about, makes it a massive pain in the ass to discuss anything openly.

That makes no sense. Which part of the lawsuit bans AMT from giving delivery dates? Which part of the lawsuit overrides FTC regulations? Which part of the lawsuit makes refunds illegal? People just want their refunds or delivery dates, the 2 things required by FTC regulations. No lawsuit could hinder those actions by AMT.

The part where plaintiff's counsel has directly threatened to file a motion in order to stop all of our business operations all together unless we settle with all clients via their class action suite. That's why we can longer discuss person order situations,refund options or settlement options via this forum or our public site.

[FrictionlessCoin]

As it is they have the pending lawsuit, which we all know about, makes it a massive pain in the ass to discuss anything openly.

That makes no sense. Which part of the lawsuit bans AMT from giving delivery dates? Which part of the lawsuit overrides FTC regulations? Which part of the lawsuit makes refunds illegal? People just want their refunds or delivery dates, the 2 things required by FTC regulations. No lawsuit could hinder those actions by AMT.

The part where plaintiff's counsel has directly threatened to file a motion in order to stop all of our business operations all together unless we settle with all clients via their class action suite. That's why we can longer discuss person order situations,refund options or settlement options via this forum or our public site.

Well then, why the delay in settling with your clients?  That's just how the world works,  you don't deliver on your promises,  we can take you to court to shut down your business.

You have no choice but to settle.   None of the options that you have offered have a snow ball's chance in hell of succeeding under the current market conditions.

[opieum2]

Guess Bitmain got fed up with shippers playing football with miners. Seems most folks shipping large miners have ran into this issue albeit the Ants are packed par-excellence vs ahem, others we've seen.... Now the S2 is only as kit. No case, no psu. Bet it flat packs great.

And in a sense more expensive without those things. Personally I think it would have taken a little bit of simple engineering to make it work. I suggested a few options....a metal plate to hold them in......I did also suggest the kit in an email I sent. I guess they went with that. Just didn't expect the price....kinda sucks. I got lucky and got both of mine in pretty good shape.

[AMT_miners]

Are all 1.2 Th customers that received nothing included in the lawsuit?  If not, whom do i contact to join class action lawsuit?
Thanks,
PM

http://www.chimicles.com/

Here are the lawyers heading the lawsuit, please contact plaintiff's counsel, i'm sure they will help you out.

[AMT_miners]

As it is they have the pending lawsuit, which we all know about, makes it a massive pain in the ass to discuss anything openly.

That makes no sense. Which part of the lawsuit bans AMT from giving delivery dates? Which part of the lawsuit overrides FTC regulations? Which part of the lawsuit makes refunds illegal? People just want their refunds or delivery dates, the 2 things required by FTC regulations. No lawsuit could hinder those actions by AMT.

The part where plaintiff's counsel has directly threatened to file a motion in order to stop all of our business operations all together unless we settle with all clients via their class action suite. That's why we can longer discuss person order situations,refund options or settlement options via this forum or our public site.

Well then, why the delay in settling with your clients?  That's just how the world works,  you don't deliver on your promises,  we can take you to court to shut down your business.

You have no choice but to settle.   None of the options that you have offered have a snow ball's chance in hell of succeeding under the current market conditions.

Again, we apologies but we can't discuss those things on a public forum. Please keep the conversation to more technical approach about future products or solving issues with current ones.

[NotFuzzyWarm]

Again, we apologies but we can't discuss those things on a public forum. Please keep the conversation to more technical approach about future products or solving issues with current ones.

Ok, considering as per last published the A1 has a max current of 20a per chip, if you want to save real estate and a bit of over all cost look at these from Intersil for Vcore regulators http://www.intersil.com/content/dam/Intersil/documents/isl8/isl8240m.pdf

Combines the regulator chip, mosfets, diodes, & buck inductor all into one 17x17mm chip. 4 can power an 8 chip A1 board either feeding each chip individually or feeding 4 pairs of A1's.

Straightforward & simple 2 resistor voltage programing - no dpot/tpot i2c coms needed & much much more. Combine with a TLam pcb and you can have one very hash-dense lil' power block...

btw: That is one excellently done data sheet. Everything spelled out. Wonder how much stuff like that was followed on the older boards...

Techy enough?

[FrictionlessCoin]

Well looks like the manufacturer has chimed in:

IMET is a reputable contract manufacturing and product development company that has been in business for 14 years.  Our reputation is utmost important, so we wanted to address the negative allegations presented by AMT and Josh Zipkin.  

IMET was contracted to build Printed Circuit Boards (PCBs) for AMT miners in February of 2014.  The Printed Circuit Boards (PCBs) were built to print from various design revisions that were supplied by AMT through Bitmine.  IMET did supply the parts and any part substitutions/placement changes were approved in advance by Bitmine and/or AMT.  IMET does not buy parts from the gray market.  Per our ISO-9000 requirements, we only purchase parts from approved vendors.

After thorough inspection including AOI (Automatic Optical Inspection), the PCBs were delivered to AMT.  Prior to delivery, IMET did verify that the individual PCBs would hash at approximately 200gh/s.  The only discrepancy seen was when there were bad cores in an A1 chip.  In this case, the hash rate was lower depending on the number of working cores.  

AMT was responsible for the mechanical designs, thermal designs (heatsinks), assembly, final test and QC.  The IMET engineering team can confirm that the boards (hash, main, and backplane) worked fine as delivered prior to processing by AMT.

IMET is very competitive in our industry and the prices we charged AMT were fair and reasonable for the work that we did.  Some engineering time was gratis to help keep things moving.  During our last meeting, Josh/AMT wrote a check for services rendered but the bank account had inadequate funds.  

The material that was still left in the shop is being held as collateral until final payment is made.  In the meantime, the IMET engineering team used new boards that were never in AMT’s possession to build up working miners.  The problem is not in the electronics hardware; however, there are opportunities for the PCBs to be optimized.  IMET will give the manufacturing plans to AMT after payment in full for previous and current services rendered.      

Note:  AMT was responsible for *thermal design*, assembly, final test and QC.    So they can't blame the pathetic thermal design and the sloppy assembly and lack of testing on IMET.  No way IMET is going to lose its ISO9000 quality certification.

Interesting that the IMET team were able to create working miners.  Need to get to the bottom of this.

I can't believe that there are working miners sitting with IMET that can't get delivered to customers because AMT refuses to pay their bill.

[Syke]

The part where plaintiff's counsel has directly threatened to file a motion in order to stop all of our business operations all together unless we settle with all clients via their class action suite. That's why we can longer discuss person order situations,refund options or settlement options via this forum or our public site.

So the motion hasn't been filed? So there is nothing actually stopping your business. You're simply taking the easy route by not delivering miners and not providing refunds.

[FrictionlessCoin]

The part where plaintiff's counsel has directly threatened to file a motion in order to stop all of our business operations all together unless we settle with all clients via their class action suite. That's why we can longer discuss person order situations,refund options or settlement options via this forum or our public site.

So the motion hasn't been filed? So there is nothing actually stopping your business. You're simply taking the easy route by not delivering miners and not providing refunds.

My thoughts exactly.   The business has yet to be forced to shut down,  but AMT has not been operating for over a month now?

Apparently, the working boards are sitting in IMET's premises but AMT refuses to pay the cash to get them. 

Meanwhile, a whole bunch of customers have yet to even receive miners that they purchased.

[AMT_miners]

The part where plaintiff's counsel has directly threatened to file a motion in order to stop all of our business operations all together unless we settle with all clients via their class action suite. That's why we can longer discuss person order situations,refund options or settlement options via this forum or our public site.

So the motion hasn't been filed? So there is nothing actually stopping your business. You're simply taking the easy route by not delivering miners and not providing refunds.

It would have been filed if we continued to publicly settle with clients.

[NotFuzzyWarm]

Note:  AMT was responsible for *thermal design*, assembly, final test and QC.    So they can't blame the pathetic thermal design and the sloppy assembly and lack of testing on IMET.  No way IMET is going to lose its ISO9000 quality certification.

Interesting that the IMET team were able to create working miners.  Need to get to the bottom of this.

I can't believe that there are working miners sitting with IMET that can't get delivered to customers because AMT refuses to pay their bill.

From a technical standpoint I'm very curious to know how the chips were cooled during testing and how long the boards were tested. Specifically, if AMT was responsible for the thermal and heatsink design/assembly after IMET's end, were the boards tested bare? If so not for very long or they go poof. Top & bottom cold plates used in lieu of heatsinks? If those were used for full speed testing then some rather important data could/should have been collected per-chip that could have been used to address the thermal issues we've seen. We know the the A1's are hotter'n Jalapenos.

[AMT_miners]

The part where plaintiff's counsel has directly threatened to file a motion in order to stop all of our business operations all together unless we settle with all clients via their class action suite. That's why we can longer discuss person order situations,refund options or settlement options via this forum or our public site.

So the motion hasn't been filed? So there is nothing actually stopping your business. You're simply taking the easy route by not delivering miners and not providing refunds.

My thoughts exactly.   The business has yet to be forced to shut down,  but AMT has not been operating for over a month now?

Apparently, the working boards are sitting in IMET's premises but AMT refuses to pay the cash to get them.  

Meanwhile, a whole bunch of customers have yet to even receive miners that they purchased.

Really?



This is what we do at night, (that was taken 5 minutes ago Carlos) we remove A1 chips from IMET produced boards, because yes, IMET is holding hostage all of the previously ordered boards, chips, and components. And I guess now they are holding the answer to how to make them work too. Aside from ordering brand new (2 ounce) boards, which was their suggestion at the end of march (another 60k easy) when we discovered there was too little copper (1 ounce) in the first 900 boards they ordered for us, after Giorgio asked every dumbass question in the book after asking all the intelligent one in order to figure out why they weren't working. No we don't think they've done anything new or different in order to make them work.And if they manage to show one working, they need to showing it working for a week. All miner assembly was held in their facility. There is no way to test a board without mounting it to a heat sink.

The design team, a reference from IMET were the designers we paid to design the rig, which they botched the first time around yes, and then again the second time around as well. Maybe third times the charm.

Why wouldn't they give us the answer to making the boards work so that we could continue the production in their facility instead of moving someplace else. Or why wouldn't they give the answer to their client who had a class action filed against them?  We had paid them almost a quarter of a million by that point, and we got nothing in return. Who in their right mind would continue to pay for such service?

The mistake was ours, and ours alone. We chose the wrong place to manufacturer plain and simple. We went to a different manufacturer 30 miles away, and we are now manufacture working boards there.

[NotFuzzyWarm]

If we are going to delve into contract manufacturers... What exactly they do depends on exactly what they are contracted to do. To the letter. If they are given a print and BOM with pick'n-place data to follow then by god they will follow them to the nth degree. Now whether or not said design specs provided to them were correct is another story.

Were they asked to review the designs and make suggestions for improvement? I'm rather sad to say that only unless it presents a manufacturing problem most contract manufacturers will NOT make suggestions of any sort that result in design modifications. eg., odds are the 1oz copper spec came from the original 2/4 chip boards and was never changed for the 8 chippers even though there is 2x the current being pushed around over longer paths. Same with spec'ing thermal via density and their copper content. If spelled out on a print then that is what it is

It simply is not their job to do more than assembly/test unless existing design review & improvement is part of the contract. Many customers can get get downright testy if their design choices are questioned. Not how I run a business but that is how contract manufacturing goes.

That is one reason I'm usually brought in when our customers are meeting with their customer when new projects are started. It's 'safer' for a 3rd party to mediate between end customer wants/needs (not always the same thing) and explain to them what is possible. Later comes the fun of proving how to achieve it on our equipment.

[rik_khaos]

Hi just don't understand why they would ship customers boards out of batches they knew were bad and likely to fail. My guess is so that they appeared to meet a deadline, which they still failed to do.

From a technical standpoint are the people who received boards we can't hash with conceded to have not received boards at all?

[Puppet]

IMET was contracted to build Printed Circuit Boards (PCBs) for AMT miners in February of 2014.

How did you ever expect to ship in January if you didnt even have a board manufacturer?

[rik_khaos]

IMET was contracted to build Printed Circuit Boards (PCBs) for AMT miners in February of 2014.

How did you ever expect to ship in January if you didnt even have a board manufacturer?

Don't be stupid. Obviously they have access to time travel.

[rik_khaos]

Also my chips were never resurrected.