Let's see how they are similar:
1. BTCST was operated by one unidentified unknown person. BFL has nearly 20 employees and we know exactly who their CEO is or where he's located at.
2. BTCST promised something that was mathematically impossible to sustain for any extended period of time. BFL promises something that is very possible by utilizing known technology, and the same product is being worked on by several other companies.
1. wrong. people knew his name, face and address. he even personally met with his victims prior to the scam. regarding BFL, yes, we know their management. we also know that prominent members of BFL were convicted for a multi-million scam in the past.
2. feasibility of scammer's promises has nothing to do with his willingness to fulfill them.
it seems that Pirate and BFL guys have more in common than you previously thought, right?
Which victim did pirateat40 personally meet? also I thought we only have pirateat40's suspected name and address, not a confirmed one. Maybe I'm wrong about that.
True, feasibility does not guarantee it's not a scam, but non-feasible business is a guarantee that it is a scam. So BTCST = 100% scam. BFL = scam possible, but unlikely. Btw BFL just showcased their ASIC miner at CES: