Most likely then this is just Version 2.0 of last September ...

Have some marketing ploy that's full of crap to negatively impact their competitors ... since people like giving them money for stuff LONG before they ever get it
They may well produce it- but given how long it took the 10 years of experience BFL hardware techs to make shippable 'Single's I'd not expect any true ASIC from them for quite a while.

----

Anyway back on the sha256 ASIC issue:
Um, there is a quite reasonably serious reason why we could dump sha256 and change to something else.
Exactly the same reason for NIST's directive that U.S. government agencies had to stop uses of SHA-1 after 2010.

Once problems are found with sha256, then we'll move on to the next choice (sha512 I'd guess - or sha-3 if sha512 is considered problematic at the same time as sha256)

So anyone looking to invest 100's of thousands (or millions) of dollars into making ASIC miners is taking a much larger risk than making FPGA hardware