waiting for resolution RAZBAM Situation Post Archive (will be deleted)

[toilet2000]

On 8/31/2024 at 3:43 AM, Dallenbach said:

It's just an assertion from you without any evidence. Stop writing such rubbish already. You don't change anything with claims like that.
Although I own all the mods, I wouldn't be unhappy if this company finally disappeared from the market.

Go check for yourself on their Discord. It's not an assertion without evidence. The evidence is all there.

[toilet2000]

3 hours ago, Mizzy said:

Where did you get this from? Do you have evidence ED has done this with other developers and the circumstances for doing so? Please don't post something off reddit unless it's an official announcement. 

Leaked conversation between CptSmiley (Razbam's FM dev and a long time employee/contractor of Razbam) and Nicholas Dackard, CEO of Heatblur.

You can't pick and choose sources depending on how you feel.

[Oban]

Some people keep wanting to flog a dead horse.

[Dallenbach]

vor 5 Stunden schrieb toilet2000:

Go check for yourself on their Discord. It's not an assertion without evidence. The evidence is all there.

I'm sorry but i haven't seen a single piece of verified evidence on discord. it's all allegations, rumors and insults. It's a pile of garbage.

[draconus]

7 hours ago, PhantomHans said:

I don't know why we even have the Razbam forum at this point?

The modules are all abandoned and unsupported.  Why bother?

Because the forum is for the users mostly - to discuss, to share and to help others, and the modules are kept in as-is condition in DCS and you can still use them and fly.

[Blackeye]

8 hours ago, Mizzy said:

It's a simple question. It appears you replied, 'I believe what I want to believe' and that's fair enough but DO NOT say it as if it is a fact without evidence. So, where is your evidence?

Since you did ask for "official announcements only" there is not much point for me providing you the source is there?

But even if you don't want to take that evidence into account there's still the point of Nick promising to pay "next Wednesday" last August without any indication of IP trouble, but I guess since that's not an official announcement either you'll choose to ignore that as well.

I mean I get it, it feels better to be part of a community where the developers are great guys through and through, but discarding any and all evidence to the contrary just because it's not an official statement is a bit too far for me.

 

[HWasp]

2 hours ago, Dallenbach said:

I'm sorry but i haven't seen a single piece of verified evidence on discord. it's all allegations, rumors and insults. It's a pile of garbage.

Who is going to verify the "evidence" for you? How do you know, that the official statements are true? Just becuase they are "official"? There is no neutral 3rd party here to verify things for you. You can read both sides of the story, then decide for yourself. 

[Blackeye]

8 hours ago, wombat778 said:

  Any number of other scenarios are also possible.

Sure - but why focus on the most unlikely ones? This is not a criminal trial where you would want to take all unlikely possibilities into account in favor of ED.

9 hours ago, wombat778 said:

The point being that 3 text messages totally out of context tells us practically nothing about what happened and who is at fault.

It tells us pretty much what happened at that time: Ron expected payment prior to this conversation, Nick then promised to pay by next Wednesday and didn't.

Of course it doesn't solve "this case" or explains all details or intentions but I doubt any single evidence could do that - especially in this environment. It does shed more light on how ED conducts business though and combined with other pieces of information paints a picture where I find the "ED did nothing wrong" angle hard to maintain.

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Blackeye said:

Sure - but why focus on the most unlikely ones? This is not a criminal trial where you would want to take all unlikely possibilities into account in favor of ED.

What exactly do you think is “likely”?  Do you think it’s likely that ED simply continued to not pay for month after month with no explanation as to why? Do you imagine that the conversation between Ron and Nick continued that exact same way and there never a discussion in which Nick said we haven’t paid for X, Y and Z reasons?  And all this happened at the same time as ED was paying other developers and that there was no reason they singled out RB? 

The prevailing theory seems to be that ED just “ran out of money”, but that makes absolutely no sense to me.  I deal with companies low on cash all the time.  What they do is explain the situation and ask vendors to give them more time to pay. And/or they go and get a loan or equity financing to get some cash, which for a revenue generating business like ED shouldn’t be very hard.  They don’t give no explanation and then provoke a fight where lawyers have to get involved. Newsflash - a business argument involving lawyers is expensive, whether it happens in court or out of court. 

IMO, it’s obvious that there is MUCH more to this story than we are being told.  What I think is “likely” is that both sides have acted generally reasonably, rationally and in good faith, and that due to some miscommunication, misunderstanding, contract ambiguity, or unexpected change of circumstances have ended up in the dispute they have now.  That isn’t just wishful thinking — it is based on my personal experience being involved tons of these disputes.  The vast majority of the time, business people act in good faith and in a way that is rational given their circumstances. The number of times I have seen legitimate businesses engage in truly irrational behavior, fraud, willful misconduct, etc — which is what some people seem to believe ED did — is extremely small. 
 

EDIT: as to the “picture” the information paints, bear in mind that all the information that has been leaked has been leaked by one side, and clearly has been cherry picked to support their version of events.  The leakers are leaking what they did PRECISELY because they want you/the public to connect dots to draw a picture, even though the real facts and issues are almost certainly 100x more nuanced and complicated. Why do you think that only those 3 texts were leaked?  Almost certainly because if we saw all the texts between Nick and Ron we’d actually understand both sides of the issue.  That is the reason why I have such a problem with these cherry picked leaks — it’s a deceptive practice that manipulates the public into taking sides even though they have incomplete facts. 

Edited September 3, 2024 by wombat778

[Mizzy]

5 hours ago, Dallenbach said:

I'm sorry but i haven't seen a single piece of verified evidence on discord. it's all allegations, rumors and insults. It's a pile of garbage.

Yes it's all bollocks generated by two contractors (Mesh and Smiley) that are not even Party to the dispute, nullLooks like people posting links from DCS Exposed are breaking their forum rules, Rule 8 !! "Leaks..Just don't do it" @Blackeye I think you should re-ealuated posting links from the said forum !

Mizzy

Edited September 3, 2024 by Mizzy

[Blackeye]

11 minutes ago, wombat778 said:

What exactly do you think is “likely”?  Do you think it’s likely that ED simply continued to not pay for month after month with no explanation as to why?

A scenario where ED uses their position of strength to gain some advantage seems more likely than the IP issue cropping up just on that day - especially when you factor in the text from other developers, where it appears RB was not *that* singled out with delayed payments. And I don't think that's super uncommon especially if one side is unlikely to have the means to go for a full on legal confrontation.

As for the deeper reasons why: I don't know and the best I could come up with would be sarcastic remarks which I'll spare us all. And I'm not saying that ED is that fraudulent evil entity here; just that from what I've seen so far they do deserve some blame here for the whole fiasco.

 

 

[Guest]

59 minutes ago, Blackeye said:

A scenario where ED uses their position of strength to gain some advantage seems more likely than the IP issue cropping up just on that day - especially when you factor in the text from other developers, where it appears RB was not *that* singled out with delayed payments. And I don't think that's super uncommon especially if one side is unlikely to have the means to go for a full on legal confrontation.

But it hasn’t worked out that way at all — everyone is losing here.  ED’s reputation has been damaged, as has the DCS platform as a whole.  Key assets (the RB modules) are no longer real selling points, so the value of the platform is lower. And ED will almost certainly end up having to pay whatever amount is not in dispute, and in the meantime accounting rules mean they probably can’t spend it.  And of course RB isn’t developing new modules that would end up on the platform. My best guess is that ED will end up losing way more in sales than whatever the payments to RB are. 

The only logical reason why a company would pick this fight (and continue it after lawyers get involved) is if it was about more than just delaying a payment.  

As to the other third party that I won’t name, the fact that they appear to have resolved their differences with ED and are continuing to work and produce modules suggests to me that they don’t think ED are deceitful/fraudulent. 
 

59 minutes ago, Blackeye said:

just that from what I've seen so far they do deserve some blame here for the whole fiasco.

This I agree with 100%.  Both sides deserve blame for letting the issue get to where it has.  Business disputes should rarely if ever trickle down to customers, and neither side should have allowed that to happen. I have no reason to blame one side more than the other on that.  Though after the dispute spilled into the public, I do think ED has handled it far more professionally and responsibly (especially wrt leaking information).  

EDIT: small correction — if Nick’s official response is accurate and ED was not given a heads up by RB before going public, then I do place more blame on RB for that.  IMO there is almost no valid justification for blindsiding a party you are negotiating with like that, and it is practically guaranteed to make the situation worse. 

Edited September 3, 2024 by wombat778

[Guest]

Put another way - all the information I’ve seen, both official and leaked, is consistent with a completely ordinary good faith dispute between two businesses regarding payment and IP.  The only two things that I have seen that raise a red flag to me in terms of being deceptive/inappropriate/bad faith are:

1. That RB released a press release making the dispute public without warning; and 

2. The continued leaking of information from the RB side. Of course, RB does not necessarily have the ability to control its contractors, but the fact that it is happening so much and on official RB platforms makes me think that it is condoned/encouraged/coordinated by RB. 

[Smashy]

4 hours ago, HWasp said:

Who is going to verify the "evidence" for you? How do you know, that the official statements are true? Just becuase they are "official"? There is no neutral 3rd party here to verify things for you. You can read both sides of the story, then decide for yourself. 

The problem with sources like RB's Discord and most reddit subs is that the evidence presented in those places are invariably accompanied by sarcastic and hateful vitriol.  "lmaoooooo phuck ED bunch of dumbsh%ts can't code for sh&t.  They also lie and rob people....looolllll".

People there looking for a resolution and/or their own version of justice are their own worst enemy and are destroying their own credibility with this kind of behavior.

[Mizzy]

1 hour ago, wombat778 said:

1. That RB released a press release making the dispute public without warning; and 

2. The continued leaking of information from the RB side. Of course, RB does not necessarily have the ability to control its contractors, but the fact that it is happening so much and on official RB platforms makes me think that it is condoned/encouraged/coordinated by RB. 

If Nick Gray said that Razbam went public without warning, why would he lie, what motivation would a very respectable man have to lie!. And yes, it is condoned/encouraged/coordinated by RB while Zambrano stays in the shadows orchestrating it all on the negative DCS gossip forums on Reddit. 

Posts on this forum claiming unfinished work (like the manual for the Harrier), is Baltic Dragon's responibility and not Razbam's when it clearly IS Razbams responsibility to complete modules under their Brand name says it all. Spreading rubbish that Razbam has asked for the module in question be pulled from the ED Store knowing that Razbam have not shown any evidence that this is true, of course this is another fabricated story by Mesh and Smiley which is where all of this emanates from and condoned by Razbam, obviously.

This is the big one for me, Zambrano's Whats App messages make their way into Smiley and Mesh's hands and then 'leaked' obviously (because that's what has happened) intended to spread rumours and speculation and pass it on as 'evidence'.

Come on people, it's a smear campaign by Razbam and possibly because the game is up for them and they know it.

Mizzy

1 hour ago, Smashy said:

The problem with sources like RB's Discord and most reddit subs is that the evidence presented in those places are invariably accompanied by sarcastic and hateful vitriol.  "lmaoooooo phuck ED bunch of dumbsh%ts can't code for sh&t.  They also lie and rob people....looolllll".

That's not a sign of good will to me !

 

[Guest]

50 minutes ago, Mizzy said:

If Nick Gray said that Razbam went public without warning, why would he lie, what motivation would a very respectable man have to lie!.

I’m not making the assumption that ED is telling the whole story any more than I assume RB is.  There is a huge gap between a lie, half truth, cherry picked truth, disputable interpretation of events, etc.  It may be that Ron thought he implied at a public release, and Nick didn’t take the hint.  Or Ron told someone at ED and the message didn’t get passed along.  IDK, my base assumption here is that the statements from both sides are self-serving, and not what an objective outsider with all the facts would see as the truth.   

More reason why the public shouldn’t be involved in this kind of cluster****

[Gizmo03]

vor einer Stunde schrieb Mizzy:

This is the big one for me, Zambrano's Whats App messages make their way into Smiley and Mesh's hands and then 'leaked' obviously (because that's what has happened) intended to spread rumours and speculation and pass it on as 'evidence'.

Well, while i totally agree with you, it could be pretty plausible why Metal2Mesh has this picture which he posted on reddit:
Maybe he asked Ron Zambrano for his personal payment and he replied that he already asked Nick Grey for the payments to the company. By sending him a screenshot of this conversation he wanted to proof that he's not lying... and then, when all this started, M2M posted this screenshot on reddit - still very unproffessional and if i were Ron Zambrano i would be pretty pi**ed about that.
But all these pictures and screenshots of these conversations can also be just fakes.
I could easily start a whatsapp chat, calling myself "Ron" and asking a friend to call himself "Nick". Putting a DCS SE Cockpit Screenshot as a background and here we go....
I'm 100% sure there are lots of trolls out there in the WORLD wide web enjoying sh*t like this and spreading rumors, panic and false information.

Imo all this is not official and that means i don't care about these kind of information...

Edited September 3, 2024 by Gizmo03

[rob10]

Interesting in the screenshot of the 3 texts that the last one by Ron has an "edited" tag in the bottom corner (meaning the text itself was edited after it was originally sent).  Could be something as simple as correcting an auto-correct error or could be something else.  No way of knowing.

As for IP not being mentioned, why is it any less plausible that ED and Razbam were in negotiations over an IP issue and ED decided make a good faith partial payment to Razbam to move negotiations along (which could also explain why it was delayed while ED sorted out legal on doing so) vs ED screwing Razbam?  That's the problem with the leaks.  Even if the "evidence" is completely accurate and legit, it's completely without context and could be interpreted multiple ways.

IMO you pretty much have to pick which side you believe based on who you trust more because the "evidence" can be easily interpreted multiple ways.  I have no idea who's in the right on this, but I haven't seen much hard data to sway it one way or the other.

[Guest]

4 hours ago, Blackeye said:

A scenario where ED uses their position of strength to gain some advantage seems more likely than the IP issue cropping up just on that day - especially when you factor in the text from other developers, where it appears RB was not *that* singled out with delayed payments. And I don't think that's super uncommon especially if one side is unlikely to have the means to go for a full on legal confrontation.

One other thing -- the theory floated seems to be that ED is near bankruptcy and so needed to delay payment. And yet somehow ED is also in "position of strength" and has "the means to go for a full on legal confrontation."  That doesn't make sense to me.  ED either could be too broke to pay RB or could be so rich that they can outspend RB in frivolous legal actions...but they can't really be both at the same time.

[JuiceIsLoose]

I get the hesitation in not just blatantly believing everything that is being posted out there in non "official statements". But simply just ignoring everything doesn't seem open minded either. ED management has had to have seen this stuff, most of it gets linked here anyways. And ED hasn't refuted any of this stuff. Yea, they don't have to. But wouldn't you think they would refute this stuff if they were on the moral high ground? I don't think these leaks necessarily are "evidence" that RB did no wrong and that ED management is pure evil. But I do think it paints the picture that maybe ED management isn't and wasn't acting in good faith.

1 minute ago, wombat778 said:

One other thing -- the theory floated seems to be that ED is near bankruptcy and so needed to delay payment. And yet somehow ED is also in "position of strength" and has "the means to go for a full on legal confrontation."  That doesn't make sense to me.  ED either could be too broke to pay RB or could be so rich that they can outspend RB in frivolous legal actions...but they can't really be both at the same time.

This all depends on how much the ED owes RB... ED cut off a good portion of RB's revenue by not paying them, and not paying them for months. If ED has enough to cover the legal costs of stonewalling a broke RB, and that cost is less than ED owes RB then its not totally upsurd.

[Guest]

Just now, JuiceIsLoose said:

I get the hesitation in not just blatantly believing everything that is being posted out there in non "official statements". But simply just ignoring everything doesn't seem open minded either. ED management has had to have seen this stuff, most of it gets linked here anyways. And ED hasn't refuted any of this stuff. Yea, they don't have to. But wouldn't you think they would refute this stuff if they were on the moral high ground? I don't think these leaks necessarily are "evidence" that RB did no wrong and that ED management is pure evil. But I do think it paints the picture that maybe ED management isn't and wasn't acting in good faith.

Absolutely not.  Under no circumstances would I advise ED to refute any of the gossip.  Refuting just gives it more oxygen and yet will not convert anyone to your side.  Fighting this in the public is a terrible strategy, and IMO ED is 100% doing the right thing by staying quiet and letting the legal process run its course.

[Guest]

8 minutes ago, JuiceIsLoose said:

This all depends on how much the ED owes RB... ED cut off a good portion of RB's revenue by not paying them, and not paying them for months. If ED has enough to cover the legal costs of stonewalling a broke RB, and that cost is less than ED owes RB then its not totally upsurd.

Yes, it is totally absurd.  There is no way that any legitimate company, knowing it owes an absolute undisputed debt to a third party, would choose to engage in a legal battle and waste hundreds of thousands or possibly millions of dollars in legal fees, plus still have the risk of losing the case and then being subject to possible punitive damages and attorneys fees.  No way whatsoever.  If you were really that desperate, you would instead say "hey, how about I pay you ___% of what I owe,  which is more than you would have gotten if this escalates to a legal dispute."

If dispute goes to lawyers when it could instead have been settled without them, only the lawyers win.

Edited September 3, 2024 by wombat778

[Blackeye]

20 minutes ago, wombat778 said:

One other thing -- the theory floated seems to be that ED is near bankruptcy and so needed to delay payment. And yet somehow ED is also in "position of strength" and has "the means to go for a full on legal confrontation."  That doesn't make sense to me.  ED either could be too broke to pay RB or could be so rich that they can outspend RB in frivolous legal actions...but they can't really be both at the same time.

As you said that's one theory and not what I suggested at all - different theories as to why this happened don't need to be compatible with each other.

That said even if ED had a cash problem that doesn't mean that RB can afford a lawsuit and in that case ED would likely want to avoid giving them money because then they'd risk getting sued and being not able to fully defend themselves.

 

 

Edited September 3, 2024 by Blackeye

[Guest]

9 minutes ago, Blackeye said:

As you said that's one theory and not what I suggested at all - theories as to what happened don't need to be compatible with each other.

To be clear, I wasn’t suggesting that you personally were suggesting the out of cash theory, just that your theory seems quite incompatible with the prevailing theory.  And as to the 4d chess of gambling that somehow ED thought it could come out slightly ahead by getting involved in legal antics instead of spending cash to pay ED — is honestly ridiculous.  Legal disputes are messy, ugly, expensive things.  They are risky and unpredictable. And there are really no winners but lawyers.   Legal disputes for legitimate businesses are like playing Russian roulette.  At best you might not die, but there is no really no upside 

Edited September 3, 2024 by wombat778

[JuiceIsLoose]

12 minutes ago, wombat778 said:

Yes, it is totally absurd.  There is no way that any legitimate company, knowing it owes an absolute undisputed debt to a third party, would choose to engage in a legal battle and waste hundreds of thousands or possibly millions of dollars in legal fees, plus still have the risk of losing the case and then being subject to possible punitive damages and attorneys fees.  No way whatsoever.  If you were really that desperate, you would instead say "hey, how about I pay you ___% of what I owe,  which is more than you would have gotten if this escalates to a legal dispute."

If dispute goes to lawyers when it could instead have been settled without them, only the lawyers win.

 

So then you are saying that never in history, has a company with deeper pockets pushed another company into legal proceedings because they knew the smaller company couldn't afford it?