Quote from: mrpark on May 07, 2014, 12:45:39 PM

Quote from: FrictionlessCoin on May 07, 2014, 11:17:07 AM

Quote from: mrpark on May 07, 2014, 10:57:25 AM

Quote from: dreward on May 07, 2014, 04:27:19 AM

When I ordered back in November I thought the original delivery date was extremely aggressive but I was repeatedly assure that the dates were good. I honestly expected delivery in early February and I would still have made money. I also have a butterfly labs miner on order (at heavy discount due to their previous late deliveries). They are also 5 months late but they are going to deliver approximately 400% of the hash rate they originally offered (and have offered 100% refunds).
I understand that AMT may not have the money to offer 100% refunds immediately (this would be my preferred option at this point). I would take the the 6 months payout if I believed that I had a good chance of receiving the money, but I don't.
Not delivering a power supply and offering no refund for that cost is crazy.
Personally I think AMT should offer at least 3.6TH to replace the 1.2TH ordered. The difficulty has actually risen 8 fold since January so a threefold increase in performance is not even meeting us half way.
I do understand the difficult situation these guys are in, equally they should have some recourse to their suppliers (for example by receiving free chips from the chip designer).
I look forward to seeing some suggestions from AMT that give us some hope of a return of funds which they are required to offer by law.
I have brought things on Kickstarter and I understand the dangers of that type of purchase. This purchase was not made with those caveats and should not be subject to those risks.
I have to this point been extremely patient and generally supportive of AMT but I believe their current suggestions for resolution are a prime example of too little being offered.

+1 well said. I also think providing a 1.2T would be only 1/3 compensation at this point in the game. I think you are not alone, many of us feel because of the price drop an additional T's should be added, especially since AMT claims to be sooo good and have the best chips ETC. If companies that they (not us) think are not so good, like ANT S2 selling for $$2500 for 1T . They should be able to do much better and back up their claims of being so good and give is 3T for our $6000. They are talking out both sides of their mouth, on one hand telling us how they are better than spondoolies (which is not last years design but brand new design by the way); yet the don't want to beat their pricing. I am not even taking in account all the bitcoins we lost either.

Exactly, they have not delivered anything on our $6,000 purchase. If they are to deliver anything now, then they should deliver something that is worth $6,000. At current rates that at least a 3 THs system.

The fact that they have not changed the prices on their website appears to be a way to hide the reality that a 1 THs system can be bought for near $2,000. Yes, the defense lawyers are in on this scam by 'recommending' that the truth be manipulated. Is there any way to sue their lawyers as being accomplices?

You could also list a $100,000 house for $300,000 on a real estate website. A smart buyer would check the median price of houses in the area to come up with the true dollar amount. I think it could be easily proven that 1Th/s today is worth $2500 since there are more than 3 manufactures selling single units for this price to the public. I would imagine in a court this would be very easily to prove the price per Th/s. Perhaps you could have an argument if you had a super fancy custom build that ran on very low watts, it's not the case here.

Bottom line here really it would be about them honoring the MPP in what you are more or less describing. That is an advertised "feature" of their business designed to get customers. That would be a key component to honor, otherwise they run afoul of bait and switch tactics that are already covered on the books. If they compensate us for the time lost on the wait, damages and such then it works out. It would be hard to justify the value in that sense as pricing is market dependent and based on the speculative nature of bitcoin. They technically can charge whatever they want. The court likely will not interfere in that side of it. BUT they did advertise a compensation feature which is something they would need to honor.