whether it was promised, or estimated isn't of issue.  Just as much as any other asic company can predict in advance its performance and power consumption, so can asicminer, and to be honest, so did everyone else.  we shouldn't be holding asicminer to any standard thats different from any other asic company.  they suffered pretty much the same fate that others have done before them and will no doubt do after them.

read the spec that asicminer posted on their first post... it doesn't say estimated anywhere.  it doesn't leave much room for doubt.   it says what they expected the spec to be, and the reality, when the chips arrived back, was far from the expectation - perhaps as much as DOUBLE the power consumption of what they expected.  Not, that any other asic company got it any more right.  BitFury expected their chip to hash at 5 GH and even labelled it on the top and the chip can do approx 2.5 GH.  Cointerra expected their system to be 2 TH (using four 500 GH chips) and it ended up 1.6 TH (four 400 GH chips).  Spondoolies has also pre-warned us a few days ago that we should expect their spec will not fully live up to their expectations, etc.  in short, its not uncommon for asic companies to say what their expected performance and power requirements are, in advance - with their best will and best intentions - and when the reality sets in (after the chips arrive) then they have to announce what it actually is, rather than what it was predicted to be, and there's often a disconnect.

anyway, the first post in their thread shows what asicminer expected their perf/power of their chip to be...

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=438359.0

Declaration: Before physical chips are out and fully tested, all specs/dates/data are for reference only and subject to change.