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.
Comments
From what I read Burst wasn't even mentioned? It was only Data Sales complaining, they included all the bills for the servers. I think Burst was just playing middle man.
@jarland - Yes it specifically states in the paperwork that they were not permitted to remove the equipment from 422 prescott avenue, scranton.
They have invoices outstanding back to Jan 2013 and owe the leasing company $116,000
It claims they are illegally in possession of 182 servers.
Essentially they want to access the equipment at 9 Market Street and take it all back.
Just curious why Burst decided to be the enforcer for Data Sales. I'm not sure I'd have the balls
Wait, which part was that in...? I must have missed it
I am not going back to check which page, you look. I am just stating what I was reading on my other screen.
Actually there is quite a lot of interesting info, especially on the inventory and others but meh, too busy.
Whoops, I skipped the top document. It does say they can't be removed from Burst's building.
I've got a tally across all four schedules of $237K - at least at time of purchase. The claim is only for unpaid interest/principal repayment (since feb, 2013) and the missing machines.
As for Burst.net, the lease agreement 14. Transporation and Installation states "The Equipment is to be installed at the location indicated on the Equipment Schedule." which clearly lists the address for Burst's DC in Scranton, PA. The title still belongs to Data Sales so they asked Burst to lock it down (albeit a bit too late).
Bottom line is that it's ligit. If Josh does not pay his bills and return the equipment all those customers on at least those 182 servers are going to get taken away, won't happen for a while but it will come.
From reading it through, paying the bills is not going to be enough, they want the equipment returned.
Geesh, VD barked up the wrong tree with this one... I wonder how long this'll span out for and if VD will actually be sued...
They were already sued. Now it has to go thru the court system.
Oh they were? I thought those were just threats...
Not sure its about them being the enforcer. It just seems that Burst agreed with the leasing company that they would not allow the servers to be removed from the Data Center as part of the deal. Makes the leasing company feel safer knowing the servers would not go missing, of course that failed.
I do wonder if Burst could be held accountable in any way given they agreed to this, but there is no mention of Burst getting tagged in that way.
I suppose it was good for burst to agree to as it meant they got a few cages filled, it should really not have been hard to prevent them taking servers never mind 182 of them out of the facility unchecked.
Although from the other thread it appeared Josh gave them a plausible story as to what he was doing whilst really just lying to them in order to get the equipment out.
If DataSales wants their equipment back, they will get it back. So this is no win situation for VD. They must return servers to DS sooner or later.
$116,000 is another issue, that is solvable. Very bad and almost unsolvable is informing clients about this issue and stay alive.
Wish you all best VD
I've always wondered how they were able to sustain those prices. Gave me headaches trying to price match.
@concerto49 those was really big headaches
No, not everyone in the US is suing everyone else for whatever reason.
so are we waiting for VD to deadpool? Not sure to celebrate or mourn.
Curious, BurstNet just moved everything into the new facility. As I remember VD hadn't moved their servers into that facility. So were they supposed to remain in the facility Burst moved from? How could they be sued for removing servers that were never installed in the new facility?
Did somebody say exotic cars?
No no it's ok if Burst moves them, as long as the two companies are ganging up on VD then anything goes.
I'm not sure why you'd want to celebrate someone's failure. I'm sure the VD guys aren't having the best of days, why kick someone when they're down?
I laugh at people in exotic cars when they speed past me and then get pulled over by the cops.
pics
Color me surprised in how small Volumedrive appears to be. Figured the amount of servers they had under management would be much higher.
@jbiloh It is quite possible they starting using another company perhaps after their payments starting catching up with them with this company.
Who knows.
Certainly possible. I really have no more insight into VD than anyone else here. Just my gut feeling tells me they are on the smaller side.
Also, does anyone know how long their client portal has been in 'beta' ?
Are you a lawyer? ;-)