Whats the status?

[LorenLuke]

The biggest thing is that this whole thing is all so tragic for the community. This single statement by Ron has created this massive rift between the ED playerbase, and ALL the vendors. RB can say 'We want to assure you that it has never been nor will it be our intention to abandon our products', but I don't know how 'We're not adding features, fixing bugs, or doing jack until this is resolved' is in any way a commitment to your customers. If I were to buy the Strike Eagle or the Harrier today, where's the ongoing commitment to me as a customer if your development is paused? Hell, if your BUGFIXES are paused?

If they want to complain about non-/partial-payment for all their work... can they explain to me how they'll now still happily take (near) full-price for a project that they've not exactly made clear they aren't just going to walk away from, half-done? You know, besides 'I'm totally not doing what my actions are saying'.

And even worse, because of this craptacular behavior, now people are gun-shy. Those angry at ED won't buy another ED module, and those that have seen this infantile temper tantrum are so stunned by the idea that something they bought for full price could be abandoned half-completed, they don't want to buy any module until it leaves Early Access. What does this do for the SANE third parties that are already ED partners? Folks like Aerges, Deka, Heatblur? What about the NEW ones who haven't even built their customer bases here, and arguably need that money the most? Grinelli, MilTech, Red Star, Flying Iron? All these people are affected and ironically, that single RB statement about developers not getting paid may lead to far more of those developers not getting paid because a famously short-tempered CEO acted out (because of circumstances I personally believe were wholly catalyzed by his own poor actions), and now every customer is paranoid of another developer doing the same thing; and EVERY SINGLE OTHER THIRD PARTY DEV has to suffer as a result.

It's just a goddamned travesty.

[nessuno0505]

I think Zambrano made a mistake. Maybe he thought to bring the community and other 3rd party (he cited Heatblur) by his side, but Heatblur immediately stepped aside and the community doesn't give a s**t about Razbam issues with ED: Razbam does not work for ED, Razbam works for the community, and the community expects to have upgrades and bug fixes from Razbam for Razbam's modules. Now he is a bit against the wall and I think that, however he comes out of this, it will be difficult to regain confidence among the community. Regarding ED, everything will depend on how the issue is handled once Razbam's position is clarified: refunds for those who purchased razbam modules? taking charge of razbam modules? direct assistance to razbam if they were to resume work, given that they have lost key figures among the developers? These could all be valid solutions; leaving the razbam modules indefinitely as they are now would instead not be appropriate.

Edited April 24 by nessuno0505

[Rainmaker]

1 hour ago, LorenLuke said:

The biggest thing is that this whole thing is all so tragic for the community. This single statement by Ron has created this massive rift between the ED playerbase, and ALL the vendors. RB can say 'We want to assure you that it has never been nor will it be our intention to abandon our products', but I don't know how 'We're not adding features, fixing bugs, or doing jack until this is resolved' is in any way a commitment to your customers. If I were to buy the Strike Eagle or the Harrier today, where's the ongoing commitment to me as a customer if your development is paused? Hell, if your BUGFIXES are paused?

If they want to complain about non-/partial-payment for all their work... can they explain to me how they'll now still happily take (near) full-price for a project that they've not exactly made clear they aren't just going to walk away from, half-done? You know, besides 'I'm totally not doing what my actions are saying'.

And even worse, because of this craptacular behavior, now people are gun-shy. Those angry at ED won't buy another ED module, and those that have seen this infantile temper tantrum are so stunned by the idea that something they bought for full price could be abandoned half-completed, they don't want to buy any module until it leaves Early Access. What does this do for the SANE third parties that are already ED partners? Folks like Aerges, Deka, Heatblur? What about the NEW ones who haven't even built their customer bases here, and arguably need that money the most? Grinelli, MilTech, Red Star, Flying Iron? All these people are affected and ironically, that single RB statement about developers not getting paid may lead to far more of those developers not getting paid because a famously short-tempered CEO acted out (because of circumstances I personally believe were wholly catalyzed by his own poor actions), and now every customer is paranoid of another developer doing the same thing; and EVERY SINGLE OTHER THIRD PARTY DEV has to suffer as a result.

It's just a goddamned travesty.

Who you think controls the store?  So whom is happily still accepting money for them?  These kinds of questions take about 2 seconds of thought.  

[Hiob]

20 minutes ago, Rainmaker said:

Who you think controls the store?  So whom is happily still accepting money for them?  These kinds of questions take about 2 seconds of thought.  

There are multiple responsibilities in a contract between business partners like ED and Razbam. One party violating an agreement, doesn't (necessarily) justify the other party breaking other parts of the contract. Eye for an eye doesn't apply in business (or at least it shouldn't). Just food for thought, I obviously have no clue what is going on.

[Rainmaker]

21 minutes ago, Hiob said:

There are multiple responsibilities in a contract between business partners like ED and Razbam. One party violating an agreement, doesn't (necessarily) justify the other party breaking other parts of the contract. Eye for an eye doesn't apply in business (or at least it shouldn't). Just food for thought, I obviously have no clue what is going on.

I don’t understand your post’s relevance here.  I commented about the module still being for sale. 
 

Lets do simple math here. 
- Entity A says they have not been paid. 
- Entity B makes no denial of withgolding payment. 
- likely equals entity A not being paid.

-Entity B makes claim of IP infringement. Likely the justification being used to withold payment. ‘IP infringement’ being something typically decided by a judge in a court of law. You see any rulings around here?  Or are we using the ‘it is because I said so’ rule of law?  So far, that’s the only actual ruling. 
- Entity A stops support due to not being paid for work.  Again, no denial from opposing party that money is not changing hands. 
- Entity B continues to sell module on store and presumably make income from said module. Entity A seeing apparently seeing no percentage from sales.  Again, based on ‘IP infringement’ not decided in court of law, only by an involved party. 
 

Again, there was blame being put at an entity that doesn’t control the store and apparently is seeing no money from sales.  That makes sense how exactly?  

Edited April 24 by Rainmaker

[Hiob]

1 minute ago, Rainmaker said:

I don’t understand your post’s relevance here.  I commented about the module still being for sale. 
 

Yes, that's what I meant. Offering Razbams module in their store is most likely a contractual obligation.

[Rainmaker]

2 minutes ago, Hiob said:

Yes, that's what I meant. Offering Razbams module in their store is most likely a contractual obligation.

So if one was withholding payments to someone based on supposed IP infringement based on a completely unrelated module/modules, I think we are already past the point of going tit for tat on things. That ship has sailed. 

[LorenLuke]

1 hour ago, Rainmaker said:

Who you think controls the store?  So whom is happily still accepting money for them?  These kinds of questions take about 2 seconds of thought.  

My issue with this whole thing is just how much of this whole thing doesn't make sense. And I do mean the WHOLE thing.

You talk about accepting money, or the like, but that just feeds the narrative that swirled this whole soup sandwich. You have the issue of payment and demonization of ED, with some of the RB devs claiming not to have been paid for some time, despite the product still being sold. People come out to say 'Oh, Nick Grey is stiffing RAZBAM to go buy another airplane'... I'm just surprised there's not more 'Famously quick-tempered Ecuadorian CEO might have made poor decisions, blames others' narratives floating around. I mean, if people are going to go full speculation mode, I'm surprised there's not any 'The third party got managed into the ground and the head dude stiffed his employees and blamed their client to cover his own posterior' rumors.

As for going 'tit for tat', mind whose statement started this. I don't think it'd be defamatory to describe the more-vocal party here as 'hotheaded', and there's a not-insignificant amount of evidence to this fact. If he's truly been wronged, what legal ground would enhanced by such a public statement? Why have a public statement, if you have rock-solid legal/contractual standing? If he has the receipts as he claims, just deliver them (to your lawyer or to the public, doesn't matter... just be consistent). But while the ED reply (probably not most professional, but still far more restrained) calls the whole thing a 'breach of contractual obligations', then we find out one of the devs mentioning a Supertucano project that (via those same devs' wording) people speculate to have used ED Intellectual Property in some unauthorised way. If someone took my work as a contractor and used it for someone else, I don't think anyone would say I shouldn't be upset and seek remedy. Perhaps not-paying isn't the answer, but I bet you whatever answer exists is there in bold print in the contract. Which, unless there's ANOTHER provision to void itself on breach, I imagine it's still in effect with all the relevant parts in play.

All of the claims about what's even going on are based on the slimmest of information (which no right person could call 'evidence') and yet you have so many people up in arms based on simply Zambrano's say-so. I pieced together the handful of statements out there. I could be wrong, but I don't think the conclusion I arrived at is that crazy.

And this still doesn't address ultimately that it's not going to just be ED that suffers over this. You'll have both the community in terms of trust, and the other 3rd party developers being held to even HIGHER standards, because some other company was being stupid about their contract. And for the breakout 3rd parties, that money could be the difference between having the fleshed out module people would love, and them going under because everyone wants a guarantee of more for their purchase price than they otherwise would have.

[Rainmaker]

1 hour ago, LorenLuke said:

My issue with this whole thing is just how much of this whole thing doesn't make sense. And I do mean the WHOLE thing.

You talk about accepting money, or the like, but that just feeds the narrative that swirled this whole soup sandwich. You have the issue of payment and demonization of ED, with some of the RB devs claiming not to have been paid for some time, despite the product still being sold. People come out to say 'Oh, Nick Grey is stiffing RAZBAM to go buy another airplane'... I'm just surprised there's not more 'Famously quick-tempered Ecuadorian CEO might have made poor decisions, blames others' narratives floating around. I mean, if people are going to go full speculation mode, I'm surprised there's not any 'The third party got managed into the ground and the head dude stiffed his employees and blamed their client to cover his own posterior' rumors.

As for going 'tit for tat', mind whose statement started this. I don't think it'd be defamatory to describe the more-vocal party here as 'hotheaded', and there's a not-insignificant amount of evidence to this fact. If he's truly been wronged, what legal ground would enhanced by such a public statement? Why have a public statement, if you have rock-solid legal/contractual standing? If he has the receipts as he claims, just deliver them (to your lawyer or to the public, doesn't matter... just be consistent). But while the ED reply (probably not most professional, but still far more restrained) calls the whole thing a 'breach of contractual obligations', then we find out one of the devs mentioning a Supertucano project that (via those same devs' wording) people speculate to have used ED Intellectual Property in some unauthorised way. If someone took my work as a contractor and used it for someone else, I don't think anyone would say I shouldn't be upset and seek remedy. Perhaps not-paying isn't the answer, but I bet you whatever answer exists is there in bold print in the contract. Which, unless there's ANOTHER provision to void itself on breach, I imagine it's still in effect with all the relevant parts in play.

All of the claims about what's even going on are based on the slimmest of information (which no right person could call 'evidence') and yet you have so many people up in arms based on simply Zambrano's say-so. I pieced together the handful of statements out there. I could be wrong, but I don't think the conclusion I arrived at is that crazy.

And this still doesn't address ultimately that it's not going to just be ED that suffers over this. You'll have both the community in terms of trust, and the other 3rd party developers being held to even HIGHER standards, because some other company was being stupid about their contract. And for the breakout 3rd parties, that money could be the difference between having the fleshed out module people would love, and them going under because everyone wants a guarantee of more for their purchase price than they otherwise would have.

To the point, it all certainly comes down to legal matters in which case, its all decided by the court, not parties involved.  Not one going ‘I’m keeping money because….’   
 

The initial statement probably had to be made at some point as the modules were losing support if things had just gone dark, it was in no way going to work in RB’s favor. The mobs would have just assumed that there was no work being done, the company was getting paid, and just not producing any results. Obviously, it has somewhat come to light that is not the case. There is obviously more to that single narrative that would have been the initial thoughts. Again, party B has almost admitted to the fact that money is not changing hands. 
 

Whether either party handled it correctly is up for debate. But, to the point of my initial post where ai quoted you, asking why it was still for sale and laying that in RB’s lap as a responsibility is poor as they don’t own the store front.  We’ve already seen a host of issues with the store when it was put on sale, etc when it should not have been. It can be derived by comments from both parties that money was/is not going to RB at the current time. Would you want someone being able to take/utilize profits at your expense when you are not being compensated at the moment?  Would you continue to support something knowing future sales are still being withheld?  I certainly wouldn’t.   If in fact its being withheld because of a completely different product based on different circumstances, without a legal decision to do so, that should tell you a lot of what you need to know at this point.  Holding things for ‘ransom’ to circumvent legal action if you think someone is in IP violation, specially when it doesn’t involve said product, is a poor way of doing business, regardless of who is right or wrong in the court of law that is in no way decided yet. 

Edited April 24 by Rainmaker

[Swiso]

On 4/24/2024 at 2:54 PM, Rainmaker said:

Who you think controls the store?  So whom is happily still accepting money for them?  These kinds of questions take about 2 seconds of thought.  

Should we talk about when will RB finally provide a complete and decent manual, worthy of this name, for the Harrier ?.... it's been 7 years since the release of this module and the latest document named "Harrier Manual CH 1-15" is still full of "please refer to XXX section for detailed explanation of this page "

Obviously "XXX section" is still to come ! 

7 years is not enough time to complete a manual ? Still ED fault for that ?

Edited April 29 by Swiso

[Wacko_ZA]

I am not holding my breath, it seems the sausage factory is back up to its old tricks. 
How nice would it be to get a refund for anything with their name on it?

[Flia]

is this for DCS ?

[Wacko_ZA]

5 minutes ago, Flia said:

is this for DCS ?

he does not say on the 60, on the small bell he says no.

[Flia]

34 minutes ago, Wacko_ZA said:

he does not say on the 60, on the small bell he says no.

ok

[huchanronaa]

A tragic rivalry between two companies! But it’s the consumers who suffer

[Ignition]

16 hours ago, huchanronaa said:

A tragic rivalry between two companies! But it’s the consumers who suffer

I believe we all suffer, even both companies.

[LordOrion]

No (good) news so far?

[imacken]

On 4/25/2024 at 6:30 AM, Swiso said:

Should we talk about when will RB finally provide a complete and decent manual, worthy of this name, for the Harrier ?.... it's been 7 years since the release of this module and the latest document named "Harrier Manual CH 1-15" is still full of "please refer to XXX section for detailed explanation of this page "

Obviously "XXX section" is still to come ! 

7 years is not enough time to complete a manual ? Still ED fault for that ?

 

I think we can give up on that, just like the long-promised - by Baltic Dragon - updates to the Training Missions.  They have been badly out of date for years and, for new users, are of VERY limited use.

[bruto12]

I experienced similar case in the financial environment. The best case is that the case is solved between ED/Razbam. The worst scenario is that no agreement is reached and due to the lack of trust from the customers, ED suffers lack of financial assets. Imagine what this would mean.... 

[primus_TR]

1 hour ago, bruto12 said:

The worst scenario is that no agreement is reached and due to the lack of trust from the customers, ED suffers lack of financial assets. Imagine what this would mean.... 

In my opinion, damage to ED will be minimal, if they can implement better vetting of 3rd parties and prevent harm to Mudhen customers. The impact on Razbam, on the other hand, may be expected to be that either they will disappear from the scene entirely, or return to the obscurity of 'his' pre-DCS days as a solo developer of mediocre addons for MSFS.

[LordOrion]

In my opinion, damage to ED will be minimal, if they can implement better vetting of 3rd parties and prevent harm to Mudhen customers. The impact on Razbam, on the other hand, may be expected to be that either they will disappear from the scene entirely, or return to the obscurity of 'his' pre-DCS days as a solo developer of mediocre addons for MSFS.

Not so sure that ED damage will be minimal as you think, however I'm 100% sure I won't buy another Razbam module.


Inviato dal mio iPad utilizzando Tapatalk Pro

[Gizmo03]

If there was a competitor i would be a bit worried about that but there isn't. For people who are really into mil. flight simulations there is only DCS at the moment. And i think there are much more people who are really exited about the upcoming modules and maps which we can expect within the next 2 or 3 month than there are people who say they will not purchase modules or even play DCS until that RB thing is solved in a good way.
I don't know how often i already said i will not buy this or that anymore which lasted for a couple of weeks and then i bought it anyway because i just wanted it. At the moment there is no choice. Stopping with DCS means stop playing mil. flight sims (serous ones) at all because there is no competition at the moment.

[HWasp]

1 hour ago, primus_TR said:

In my opinion, damage to ED will be minimal, if they can implement better vetting of 3rd parties and prevent harm to Mudhen customers. The impact on Razbam, on the other hand, may be expected to be that either they will disappear from the scene entirely, or return to the obscurity of 'his' pre-DCS days as a solo developer of mediocre addons for MSFS.

Well, reading reactions at other places, this does not seem to be the case.

I personally don't like it at all, how this whole thing was dealt with by either side. Usually I just buy all the modules, that look half decent, even if I know, that I'll only fly them a couple of hours maybe, like the CH-47 for example. Not going to happen from now on.

Edited April 29 by HWasp

[LordOrion]

I understand Razbam's point: not being paid for your hard work is not nice. On the other hand, however, the decision "take revenge" on the Users by blocking the development of the modules they payd (good money) for "doesn't seem fair" to me. 

This istuation looks like those strikes in which a group of people blocks the road traffic to protest against the government: if you think that people stuck in their cars will start to support your cause then you are wrong.

Edited April 29 by LordOrion

[Rudel_chw]

2 hours ago, LordOrion said:

Not so sure that ED damage will be minimal as you think, however I'm 100% sure I won't buy another Razbam module.

 

I agree, since this RB issue started I have skipped on pre-purchasing both Afghanistan and the Chinook, where I previously used to pre-purchase almost every module.

 

Now, I'm really torn with the upcoming Kola Map, which as a big fan of the Viggen I have looked forward to having for a long time now: on one hand I'd like to stick to my resolution on no purchases until the RB issue is solved, but on the other I really really wanted to fly on Kola .. probably I will wait until I can see a full review before deciding one way or the other (while prior to the RB issue I would have bought at first chance).

 

Hopefully ED will realize that it is losing sales, however small or large they may be, and strive to fix this dispute quickly.