Instead of complaining about it, do something about it. 

If enough of you file complaints on unfair business practices to the point that Kansas takes action, the news article resulting from this action would pretty much do BFL in far as the BitCoin world is concerned.

My suggestion to any of you taking issue with BFL over your pre-order is to get in contact Derek Schmidt, Attorney General of Kansas, to file a consumer complaint.  http://ag.ks.gov/contact-us/file-a-complaint is where you can go to file one online.  Keep in mind that BFL is located in Johnson county when filling out the complaint.  You can also file with the Johnson Country Consumer Protection Division http://da.jocogov.org/sites/da.jocogov.org/files/CONSUMER%20COMPLAINT%20FORM.pdf

There is a lot of legal grey that I think BFL keeps trying to wiggle around in with all of this pre-ordering.  They say all sales are final yet option #3 on their automated phone system is for refunds.  While I did not go down this part of their menu system, I do find it rather odd they'd contradict themselves in this manner.

All sales are final are not in the state of Kansas.  I do not know where they are getting this idea that the consumer is locked in, but they are not.  In Kansas under statute 50-627, it could be argued that BFL entered into an agreement that is excessively one sided not in favor of the consumer.  Pre-order a product with no specified date of delivery that the consumer is unable to cancel said transaction with full refund of money at any point.  The term "all sales are final" has a very narrow scope with a product actually being delivered to a consumer and a transaction being concluded.  It typically pertains to buyer's remorse or consumers trying to return their product for money after they have used it.

Restocking fees won't come into play in this scenario as majority of consumers that have ordered BFL product have yet to receive them.

Now as you have indicated should BFL indeed be using pre-order money in a deceptive manner for financial gain and can be proven then they'd run afoul of statute 50-626.