New on LowEndTalk? Please Register and read our Community Rules.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
Piohost have cropped my year long contract to 4 months and are charging way more.
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Until someone sends them an invoice for $1600.
Francisco
They've already said "get fucked", and "oh sorry"... what's next?
Oh Rollins- why does everyone think you are a badass?
Jawline.
It was virmach special, forgot the link. I don't know if they are still in stock now. Just search for it on LET. it's posted by a member here, not by virmach itself.
@jarland
It might be laudable from a human perspective to somehow put some sugar on an ex-colleage of yours (as admin) but I don't think your take matches what actually happened. And, sorry, turning the events into "actually ishaq just wanted to help" doesn't look realistic but totally overdone (to avoid saying "ridiculous").
And you are not fair ans straight re. piohost, it seems to me. Well, I did look into the thread you linked to as "evidence" of piohost sailing straight to the abyss - and what did I find?
_
(emphasis mine)_
In other words: piohost got their hands on a couple of cheap servers (possibly a dedi promo by zare) and they put 30 1$/mo clients on it. Openvz. 30. That's chickenlegs, that's not betting ones company.
Hey, there are plenty providers who sell that kind of special, some even do it as regular product, albeit with less disk and memory. Hell, I have quite some 1$/mo vps even with kvm.
And it seems to have worked, maybe not exactly making them rich, but they got, so it seems, quite some requests for the ca. 1.5$/mo "standard product" for which to create attention and interest the special was done.
Think about it. 30 customers on dual cpu box with ovz. Let me guess: 3rd hand boxen with ancient Xeons and a couple cheap sas hdd (30 * 50 -> 1.5 TB, not exactly forbiddingly big).
From what I see that was classical case of "hey, we haven them couple ancient boxen; but they still run ok. Why throw them away? Let's rent them for pocket money to a cheap VPS provider."
So, where's the evidence that piohost was all but belly up?
Plus: They (ishaq/aig) took over piohost. Or wait, no, they just bought the brand. Or no, wait, they bought the contracts. Or wait, no, yet another explanation ...
Matchingly the piohost account here has unknown "anyones" speak, then ishaq finally shows up and states i.a. that unknown "anyones" spoke and made "confusing" and unauthorized statements ... next thing, unknown "anyones" speak again using the piohost account and ishaq seems to stubbornly refuse to tell us who has what role and who speaks using the piohost account.
Oh and btw: What little credibility ishaq might have recovered with his nice words statement, has been destroyed again by more of the funny "who is speaking there?", "who has what role?" and "what has actually been sold?" games.
And I bet that's not the only point ishaq stated only to be found inconclusive (to avoid the word "lie"), wrong, meaningless.
jordan has been reprimanded? Pardon me but that's a joke, right? Did jordan make the ill decisions? Did jordan buy piohost, the contracts, the brand or whatever?
Pardon me, jordan has been unnerving with his blind loyalty and similarly blind defense of ishaq, and he didn't even do it exactly smartly, but beating up him and putting the whole clusterfuck on him is utterly nonsensical and only demonstrates clearly that jarlands perception of ishaq as the good samaritan and benefactor is utterly wrong.
2x X5687, bunch of ram and some cheapo sas disks in a dl 360.
If this was @cociu would you be defending instead of criticizing...? :-)
Flashback: https://www.lowendtalk.com/discussion/44568/greenvaluehost-gvh-vps-clients-being-sold-to-xfuse-solutions
You're welcome to disagree with me, and you're not wrong for doing so. I thought this about them long before they were "acquired." I've developed a sense for these things, same as most members here have. I don't think I'm alone in that I didn't expect them to last a year. I just learned long ago to pop up and say "Yeah, I had a feeling this would happen" afterward rather than make the accusations before they happen. It's never worth arguing with the new provider that thinks they'll go the distance when you see in them the signs of someone who won't weather the summer.
If someone honestly sat here and observed Piohost before the "acquisition" and said to themselves "This is a host that will go the distance" then fair enough. That wasn't me. I sat here and observed, and my expectation was the opposite. So I applied it to my theory. My theory involves the lack of clear public evidence of such a thing and how a lack of it influenced perception here. Should it have been an issue and not been made evident, that would give weight to my theory. It is unknowable by me, so it remains merely my theory. Whether you should give weight to my theory is a decision you can make, I make no effort to intervene in that.
I'm being perfectly fair, I'm just sharing my thoughts. You or anyone are welcome to disagree with them. As long as they are providing services that were paid for, I am speaking merely as an individual commentator and someone who has worked closely with @Ishaq for some time now, I have no interest in the matter as moderator or administrator.
Ha, yeah. Bottom line for me here is if you're going to rescue a client base with good intentions, you better have the deep pockets and you better let things get bad for the clients before you do it. Otherwise if you have to make tough decisions, all of the blame falls on you.
Moral of the story: acquiring customers via amazing refugee offers is a lot less headache than buying a basket case.
@jarland
I mean, as I said, offering refuge is one way to go at it, buying customer data and contracts kind of means youre going to have to honour them.
Exactly. So if (emphasis on that word) my theory was to be sound, then the correct action would have been to review the data and say "Well, no. We're not going to acquire the brand. However, if you announce to your customers that you can no longer maintain this service and you are handing it over to us to attempt to salvage customer services as best as possible, then we will take on the job and take it off your hands."
@jarland Ah, k. I misunderstood your previous comment.
** piohost are no longer a host, the company has stopped trading, they are therefore not a provider, by allowing it to remain active essentially means one can 'buy' a provider tag, which given a number of scammers around here is not a great thing**
**In this particular case, due to the confusion around the on again, off again, goal post shifting sale this account has been used by both the new owners and the old owners during the transition, it's just confusing. **
I think this right here has been overlooked by everyone, but Ant of course. If PioHost's assets were sold and they are going to be no longer trading, as a host, then the account should be disabled.
BudgetNode bought the rights to clients and the Hardware, but not the name I assume. They can not legally trade under this name at all, since it is not theirs. It still belongs to Aaron, and if he wants to sell it he can.
Letting this go on confuses things even more then they are already. It would be like me buying MxRoute's assets but not the name, not that it is for sale just an example, and then using jarland's account and my own. It should not be done. You may want to think about disabling the account at least until all this straightened out, it would make things much easier for all the people involved.
Personally I will never buy,trust either brand again. Too much back and forth and ambiguity for my taste, but that is my perspective.
Not miguel approved.
I don't buy that this is the case though. I realize that it's been clearly stated by the new owners, but to me it sounded like BS to explain away not having to maintain contracts. For all visible purposes, Piohost is very much alive and functioning. We know who owns it, we know they sell services, and we know now that they're willing to honor services that were purchased from them. In every sense of the word from my view, Piohost is a provider here.
I'm trying to take the emotionally disconnected approach because, frankly, I couldn't care less what happens to 1 of 3 accounts, but I don't see removing or disabling that account as doing anything but jabbing back at them for making those statements. Personally, I feel I've already made a strong jab at them for those statements.
I'm really not sure any of it matters. They can post offers, and they asked for the provider tag to be added back. By my usual standards that I couldn't find a reason not to honor it after the updates. But if they posted offers right now, the only correct response would be "Dude, read the room." No way they're posting offers here right now.
What a mass
Your call man and I respect it. It seems I upset @WSS as well, but you can not win them all.
I'm not criticizing piohost, I'm merely showing that a no matter how low the price special for 30 (!) clients is certainly not evidence for going belly up.
Btw, if one absolutely wants to see me as taking a parties side then what I wrote was actually defending piohost and not criticizing them.
@jarland
Oh, I didn't think you had any evil intentions. We just happen to have different views on this.
Please note that my positions hasn't changed. I'm still neither pro nor anti (the original, pre take over) piohost. It might quite well be that your take is right and they didn't do well.
One should recognize, though, that your view (piohost was moribund and samaritan ishaq just saved them) has TWO assumptions, namely that piohost was almost dead - and - that ishaq just stepped in as the friendly guy. The first might be true, the second, however, is extremely unlikely. And it's both ishaqs behaviour, statements, and widely absence and the confusion - that still is ongoing - to contradict your "benefactor" theory.
Well, for a start, we still do not really know who's who and who's in charge and responsible for what. Also communications still seem to be rather uncoordinated.
And btw, iff you "benefactor" theory were right we'd have to add "extremely shy" to the attributes decribing ishaq the benefactor - who was sooooooo nice and warm hearted that Bopie for some time even refused to talk with him.
I like the @bsdguy paragraphs. There is some passion there.
I didn't see Ishaq's post before posting this, or didn't understand what it was saying, and missed the edit window to update my post directly. Everything is cool now, and thanks Ishaq for stepping forward and handling it.
Not my president.
@jarland, I have respect for your attempts to stay impartial and unemotional about this, but please don't let that influence your judgement the other way.
It's probably not set down in the rules, but I feel that using a provider account to hide one's identity, shift blame back and forth, and make statements that could be classified as intentional lies is a sufficient reason to mute or ban that account -- especially since the persons in question still all have personal provider-tagged accounts that they can use to clarify this affair and post offers if they feel they need to.
Look at it this way: provider tags are required to be matched with verifiably existing companies (public whois and/or company registration). Can you tell me what company and particularly what person is currently using the @Piohost account? As far as I can tell, that's pretty much an impossible question to answer, which in turn disqualifies @Piohost from having a provider tag.
And beyond that, the hide-and-seek game being played by Ishaq, Jordan, and his/his/their Piohost account looks like intentional misinformation to me, so the Piohost account should be banned/muted.
Secondly, @jarland, please drop the act about Ishaq being such a valuable ex team member that you religiously avoid putting any blame on.
He committed multiple counts of fraud, bribery, and embezzlement. That's not something that simply vanishes by revoking his admin rights and writing a three-sentence post-adminuous eulogy.
I can understand that that information hit you out of the blue when it did, and that it's hard and painful to reconcile the evidence with your previous opinion about Ishaq. But I'm confident that you're able to deal with that without whitewashing Ishaq in front of the LET members.
So please stop doing that and instead make the evidence publicly available so everyone can decide for themselves if they want to do business with Mr Ishaq Azmi ever again.
Fraud, bribery, embezzlement.
Feel free to rearrange it into something that makes a funny acronym.
I'm a computer scientist, not a lawyer. I just call it like I see it.
Please don't make this one of those self-righteous posts in which you try to attempt to influence my decisions by calling my judgement into question. If you have a complaint about a mod/admin action, please open a new thread, a ticket in our support system, or post in the "cest pit" thread for more relaxed and "unofficial" chat about it.
Do you feel like you're having trouble knowing who runs Piohost right now? Because if you know who does, they're doing a terrible job of hiding it. The provider had an account before the acquisition, I'm not going to go write a new chapter into the rules about how to treat provider accounts post-acquisition where new owners have existing accounts to satisfy momentary feelings about one single thread. Stop being dramatic, or at least leave me out of it.
Don't tell me what to do. I know Ishaq better than you do and I'll talk about him as I damn well please. If you don't like it, skip my posts. You don't have to like everything you read.
Im going to have to agree with @jarland on this. The way he acted here was fine. I havent been a fan of AIG since I first used their services, but since they rectified the issue in this thread to no longer immediately and unlawfully cancel contracts, they should be allowed to keep their provider tags for now.