Early in January 2015, CCN carried the decision of a Kansas judge who allowed Butterfly Labs to resume operations so that it could refund all its customers for not delivering their machines, or for delivering machines that had already been premined.
It appears that Butterfly Labs’ problems may not be over just yet. A series of posts (which can be seen here, here, here and here) on Craigslist would seem to indicate that Butterfly Labs is selling their assets in what appears to be a fire sale. There is a reason to believe that all of the items on the Craigslist posts come from the beleaguered company, because the address given in the posts is the same as Butterfly Labs’ address 10770 El Monte Street. The items include office chairs, tablets, and laptops. One of the pictures on the classified ad has a tablet that clearly shows the Butterfly Labs’ app.
Butterfly’s problems began in late September 2014 after the FTC shut down the company. This was pursuant to a court order issued by a court in Missouri, for engaging in unfair or deceptive business practices. In the wake of the court order, the FTC slapped Butterfly Labs with a lawsuit, which named the three directors of the company as defendants. When the matter came before the court, the US District Court Judge Brian Wimes directed the FTC and Butterfly Labs to work out a way in which Butterfly Labs would resume operations, but at the same time protect consumers from any unethical business practices.
In January 2015, the company resumed operations and began a program of issuing refunds to its customers. Butterfly Labs also began pushing miners such as the Monarch ASIC, as well as its cloud mining contracts at discounted prices. The company was also said to be keen on developing the BitSafe, which may have been overtaken by events with the launch of rival products such as Trezor.
Butterfly Labs did not immediately respond to our request for comment. It, therefore, remains to be seen what the latest sale on Craigslist might mean on the current state of the company’s finances, and more critically what this portends on the issue of customer refunds.
Last modified (UTC): February 26, 2015 15:16