Appointing a CRO is a voluntary action taken by a company.  If the CRO hasn't been officially hired yet even though HF's lawyer told the court last Friday they agreed to hire a CRO then that is because whomever is in charge at Hashfast is dragging their feet and hasn't signed the paperwork making it official.  I agree the run around we are getting is really old but lets not fool ourselves about where the problem lies.

Further more as has been repeated multiple times here, the LiquidBits deal would have in all likelihood resulted in $0 being paid out to customer creditors who are owed refunds.  The only people it would have benefited are a select group of Hashfast's suppliers and employees.  You can't get a worse deal than zero.

O, and by the way for anyone who still thinks that a different law firm should have been chosen to represent the creditors the choice that some other people were pushing made the legal news yesterday because they are being sued for hiding conflicts of interest and over billing in a bankruptcy case.

http://www.law360.com/bankruptcy/articles/567327