Interesting that you still choose to hang out with those greedy and dumb MF guys...
I didn't realize you owned an MF company. Sorry about that.
Now, regarding the original poster's question of H3D vs D800 E, I own both Phase/Mamiya P45+, a Nikon D3x, and a D4. I have done some testing with Phase cameras and models later than my P45+, and with Hasselblad, and think that if you want to go MF a current model Hassy (H4) is a good choice because it focuses well. Focus is much more critical with MF than with dSLRs because of the more shallow intrinsic depth of field which assists the "MF look". The older H3 models do not yet have the H4 TrueFocus system which is useful because MF systems do not have multiple AF sensors spread out across the field.
Regarding the question whether MF is worth it, well that depends on your work. The sensors are very good if you have enough light and then the files are astonishing, the viewfinders are superb, tethered shooting works, the lenses are very good if you like the look of your brand, but the bodies themselves don't handle as quickly as dSLRs, focus is slower and not always foolproof, shot to shot is of the order of one shot per second rather than the 10 or so of a dSLR, mirror slap can be horrendous, camera ergonomics are disturbingly bad eg. try holding an H body in portrait format for an extended period of time, the carry weight of the camera and lenses is HEAVY, and your tripod and its head had better be solid.
If you have good light eg. full daylight or studio flash, a fairly slow moving subject eg. a building, a diamond ring or a model, a good tripod and a strong assistant/porter, and the money, I would recommend MF unreservedly because when the files are good they are very very good. However if you use big flash, then current dSLRs will allow you to work at ISO 800, easily saving you half the weight and cost of lighting equipment to lug around, and also the focus and available light abilities of the new dSLRs are impressive compared to MF, and this can have advantages even in the studio, as can the liveview abilities and the video recording.
Last not least, MF requires a good dealer to support you. SLRs are more of a known quantity and can be more easily bought, fixed and repaired.
As far as I'm concerned, always good enough beats sometimes very good. An insight which I reached, I guess, after my son was born.
I hope this helps the OP, and wish all of you a very good day
PS. None of the disadvantages of the MF, apart from weight are really intrinsic to the format, they are the effect of a slow moving industry which is investing more in marketing than in engineering. There are in particular no reasons why modern CMOS sensors cannot be incorporated into current MF cameras.