# EaseVPS covertly sells customers to MyRSK



## drmike (Oct 7, 2013)

If you frequent the low end sites, surely you are familiar with Jacob who ran EaseVPS.   He had several European locations along with Kansas City.  

Jacob was mentoring / operating from the technical competency side, Dominic's PremiumVM brand.  See ---> http://vpsboard.com/topic/2161-premiumvm-up-for-sale.

PremiumVM just went trying to sell themselves on WHT, thus the above thread.

Now at the same time, as of October 5-6th,  EaseVPS has imploded.   Yeppers EaseVPS has "shuttered" itself.  Migrated or to be migrating all customers to MyRSK.com.

Here's the docs to support this:



> Email: 5th October 2013 -----
> 
> Dear, $CLIENT
> Our 2CheckOut Merchant Account was disabled as of Wednesday, we have been working diligently to finding a alternative for accepting PayPal.
> ...


In other news, EaseVPS was being shopped around in backchannels in past few weeks.   Buyout money was VERY low.


----------



## peterw (Oct 7, 2013)

Can anyone provide an overview about all abandoned locations and sold companies?


----------



## rsk (Oct 7, 2013)

buffalooed said:


> Now at the same time, as of October 5-6th,  EaseVPS has imploded.   Yeppers EaseVPS has "shuttered" itself.  Migrated or to be migrating all customers to MyRSK.com.


Hello,

We tried to do it in the best way for our clients.

My partner and I decided that a best way is to do a manual approach and we have moved all clients with active VPSs into our system and sent them an email about this. This resulted in 0 downtime and a flawless approach.

So, everything has been migrated and we look forward to giving the best quality of support and services as we always do.

Regards,

R. Alkhaili


----------



## AnthonySmith (Oct 7, 2013)

Covertly send an email to all customers informing them.... how u do that?


----------



## drmike (Oct 7, 2013)

Customers go to bed and wake up and they are now a customer of MyRSK...  That's how the covert part happened.  It was a covert sale/handover.  

Truth be told, as a customer, I don't support being tossed around as if I am the product.

If a company I  deal with were to pull this, or any sale unannounced, I'd be moderately pissed.   Why?  Because for whatever reasoning, I was the original company's customer.  If I wanted service over there, I would have bought over there.   

Proper thing is to ask customers if they want refund or to be inherited by new company.

There are a privacy issues abound in deals like this.  Mind you not inferring trustworthiness of either party in this transaction.

I can hear the argument already --- company has the right to sell the customers, their details, etc.  Maybe if your ToS and other public facing legalese says so   Call me blind, but I don't see policies over there at EaseVPS.


----------



## drmike (Oct 7, 2013)

So guess I should ask directly, do the providers around here and over on the low end view customers as their product to sell at will?


----------



## AnthonySmith (Oct 7, 2013)

Well I am only saying you make it sound more dramatic than it really is.

I agree with you it would have been nice to have been given a pro-rated refund option however frankly the pre sale discussions and deal is frankly none of your business.

I think a middle ground would have perhaps been to say, on the xx date your services will be moved over to xx company, here is why and here is why it is a good thing etc. Then you have some notice to quit, leave, request refund etc. I suppose I get your point but it was not covert at the point of finalisation customers were informed.

Regarding your question, no I don't see customers as a commodity to sell at will, I do however consider a company, services and any assets as a saleable item and as a direct and obvious result the clients are now clients of a new company or in fact the same company simply under new ownership that requires no discussion or input form the customers that use it should said company come up for sale, unless of course you are a share holder in which case a discussion is needed.

I suppose it may feel a little more personal when its an internet based service but I promise you that 90% of your none internet related services i.e. gas/elec/phone/bb/misc will have been sold and bought in to more times than you could count without you being made aware and usually to foreign companies.


----------



## Jack (Oct 7, 2013)

Refunds wouldn't be possible...

Jacob's 2CO account was closed...

Refunds are ~45 days from transaction on paypal transactions at least so yearly clients would be stuck.


----------



## AnthonySmith (Oct 7, 2013)

Jack said:


> Refunds wouldn't be possible...
> 
> Jacob's 2CO account was closed...
> 
> Refunds are ~45 days from transaction on paypal transactions at least so yearly clients would be stuck.


So 2CO keep your balance as well?

Not sure I understand this, assuming they don't keep your balance then they move your money to paypal or what ever you choose so you can refund from there, paypal/skrill/bank directly etc etc.


----------



## Jack (Oct 7, 2013)

AnthonySmith said:


> So 2CO keep your balance as well?
> 
> Not sure I understand this, assuming they don't keep your balance then they move your money to paypal or what ever you choose so you can refund from there, paypal/skrill/bank directly etc etc.



When I spoke to Jacob the information provided were they closed his account without any warning and that they kept his pending balance.


----------



## rds100 (Oct 7, 2013)

Any explanation why they did this? Too many chargebacks?


----------



## notFound (Oct 7, 2013)

Jack said:


> When I spoke to Jacob the information provided were they closed his account without any warning and that they kept his pending balance.


Similar thing happened to @Alex_LiquidHost, account wasn't closed but suspended or disabled I believe, but either way pretty much useless. As far as I remember he had a few Brazillian spammers who performed chargebacks, and subsequently 2CO did their thing. Let that serve as a warning to anyone with the possibility of a few charge-backs who is still using 2CO..


----------



## Jack (Oct 7, 2013)

rds100 said:


> Any explanation why they did this? Too many chargebacks?


[06/10/2013 16:38:51] Jack: Why did they close your account?

[06/10/2013 16:39:10] Jacob: High fraud percentage

[06/10/2013 16:39:22] Jacob: Had like 10 chargebacks on the account

[06/10/2013 16:39:32] Jacob: We did not exceed the limit

[06/10/2013 16:39:40] Jacob: But they account failed transactions

[06/10/2013 16:39:42] Jack: so they just closed the account?

[06/10/2013 16:39:43] Jacob: So yeahh

[06/10/2013 16:39:47] Jacob: Yep.

[06/10/2013 16:39:57] Jack: did you get the last pending payment?

[06/10/2013 16:40:02] Jacob: Nope.

[06/10/2013 16:40:14] Jacob: They hold everything for 90 days.

 

 

So I don't get jumped on by Aldryic:

 


[07/10/2013 19:35:07] Jack: Hey?

[07/10/2013 19:35:17] Jack: Am I OK posting on forums what you told me?


[07/10/2013 19:35:57] Jacob: Yeah


----------



## Jack (Oct 7, 2013)

Infinity said:


> Similar thing happened to @Alex_LiquidHost, account wasn't closed but suspended or disabled I believe, but either way pretty much useless. As far as I remember he had a few Brazillian spammers who performed chargebacks, and subsequently 2CO did their thing. Let that serve as a warning to anyone with the possibility of a few charge-backs who is still using 2CO..


The Reason 2CO have this:


----------



## Lee (Oct 7, 2013)

I have not used 2co in years, for the exact reason that too many were finding their accounts suspended and balances kept due to some chargebacks.  They have long been known for doing this so it's no surprise.

That said, how can he not use paypal directly or someone else?  More to this than is being let on.


----------



## rds100 (Oct 7, 2013)

Yes, the hosting business is quite risky. There are some quite unpleasant potential customers out there, you have to control your greed and say "no" when your guts tell you to say "no".


----------



## AnthonySmith (Oct 7, 2013)

Ah ok, makes sense.

So if the company does not have enough in the float for refunds then it would either fall on the new owner who then gets refunded by original owner after 90 days or clients get a direct refund from the original company after 90 days.

Either way it is a mess.

begs the question though.. why not just use paypal directly to begin with?


----------



## Aldryic C'boas (Oct 7, 2013)

AnthonySmith said:


> Ah ok, makes sense.
> 
> So if the company does not have enough in the float for refunds then it would either fall on the new owner who then gets refunded by original owner after 90 days or clients get a direct refund from the original company after 90 days.
> 
> ...


This is all assuming there's actually a significant positive balance to hold.  Many of the skid hosts pretty much live 'week to week'.


----------



## Coastercraze (Oct 7, 2013)

Jack said:


> The Reason 2CO have this:


Yeah but sadly, they didn't let me know about that until after they closed my account a while ago lol. Same reason - Brazilian ordered like 10 different times all at once and boom - account closed.


----------



## peterw (Oct 8, 2013)

AnthonySmith said:


> I agree with you it would have been nice to have been given a pro-rated refund option however frankly the pre sale discussions and deal is frankly none of your business.
> 
> I think a middle ground would have perhaps been to say, on the xx date your services will be moved over to xx company, here is why and here is why it is a good thing etc. Then you have some notice to quit, leave, request refund etc. I suppose I get your point but it was not covert at the point of finalisation customers were informed.


But this is about selling customers. Noone would be interested in taking over only the hardware or brand. Refunds would have lower the value which was sold.


----------



## JayCawb (Oct 8, 2013)

I think there's a few hundred USD in the held balance so refunds would of been possible but the servers are still in the same location, and aren't being migrated and no services was interrupted. So I fail to see why anyone would need a refund?

I'm working 40 hours a week now at a job that will have me set for a £30-40K salary within the next 5 years. And with everything else, girlfriend, life in general I had zero time for providing support to the customers.

I've literally come out of the sale with hardly anything to show for it, but atleast I know the customers are in safe hands with Rashed and Mohammed.

The dedicated and colocation customers are staying with me, but in a seperate brand and for anyone pissed off with me for whatever reason just drop me a message and let me know, don't go shouting and screaming publicly since It's not going to achieve anything.



Aldryic C said:


> This is all assuming there's actually a significant positive balance to hold.  Many of the skid hosts pretty much live 'week to week'.


----------



## astutiumRob (Nov 13, 2013)

drmike said:


> So guess I should ask directly, do the providers around here and over on the low end view customers as their product to sell at will?


Wouldn't you rather wake up being an acquired client of a new provider, than wake up and all your services/software/apps/data has gone to the bit-bucket in the sky ?
I regularly handle 'rescue' acquisitions in the domain registrar, web hosting, vps and colo areas, where the options available to the provider seem to be:

* run away and screw people over

* transfer the clients to another provider

So for some, it's less a case of the clients being a 'product' to sell, and more a case of looking for a solution that means less stress/problems for the client.


----------



## concerto49 (Nov 13, 2013)

drmike said:


> So guess I should ask directly, do the providers around here and over on the low end view customers as their product to sell at will?


No, but then I guess that would make me rich. To me, clients and their feedback are important. I get annoyed when we get a cancellation due to something that we could have improved on.

Making money is easier, but that's not all. Might as well trade shares or do something easier in that case.

Technology is here to improve lives and it's meant to be exciting.


----------



## devonblzx (Nov 14, 2013)

To be honest, this happens in business all the time.  It isn't specific to hosting companies, and customers do not have a choice really.  If the company, or contracts, are acquired, then your contract is valid through the new company.

This is the same as if you have a loan from a bank and a new bank purchases the loan, or when Verizon purchased AllTel, it isn't like AllTel customers had a choice of a refund or continuation.  They had a contract with AllTel, so now they had the same contract with Verizon.


----------



## drmike (Nov 14, 2013)

@astutiumRob  glad to have you on board.  Thanks for the comment.

Ditto for @concerto49.

You both strike me as folks who "get it".  

@devonblzx,   

*" If the company, or contracts, are acquired, then your contract is valid through the new company."*

Thats not true.  It depends on wording of agreed to contracts truly.  Legally, I probably can get anyone out of any inherited contract whether bought, sold or freely traded.   Laws are very exact in true practice and hardly anyone shuts the door tight enough.

It's funny you mentioned the Verizon and Alltel deal    Once upon a time I was a happy customer of Alltel, frankly that company got it for a very long time.   Was quite content with them.

When VZ took over all hell broke loose.   I had inherited services, absent contracts. Choose wrongly to deal with Verizon.  Nothing but sorrow since.

What can I say about Verizon other than insulated fiefdoms of idiots.   No joke, on landline side (data services) not too long ago, they asked me which company acquisition I was a former customer of.   As if anyone around here remember GTE.   You need to be quite a bit older to even remember their acquisitions.

I have people lost in time and space who don't like change, so up until oh, well, a few months now in the future, well still stuffed in the arse with Verizon and their moron behavior.  Worst segmented company in the US.  Makes Sprint + Nextel lousy integration look done well.

Point is, customer service.  Verizon doesn't get it.  They are a government created monopoly until the end of time.  Do better than that and care about customers.


----------



## devonblzx (Nov 14, 2013)

drmike said:


> @astutiumRob  glad to have you on board.  Thanks for the comment.
> 
> Ditto for @concerto49.
> 
> ...


Yes, it does depend on wording for contract only sales.  However, if the entire business entity is acquired, wording doesn't matter because the new company owns the old company outright, including its name, assets, and customer contracts.  You have a contract with AllTel Wireless, Verizon buys AllTel Wireless.  Now all contracts through AllTel Wireless are now owned by Verizon, and since they acquired the entire business entity, no actual legal contracts have changed hands in the eyes of law.

For contract only sales, lets say, they didn't acquire AllTel but only AllTel's customers, then they would have to have a provision in the contract allowing it.

One of the many reasons organizations have separate subsidiary corporations, for an exit strategy and easy disposal.  Example: All your contracts were with AllTel Wireless, not AllTel, Inc.


----------



## drmike (Nov 14, 2013)

^--- true and that's why I am not for LIMITED LIABILITY rackets or indefinite corporate pig cultures where you can rape and pillage and hide behind corporate veils.

If we operated under STRICT LIABILITY --- personal liability, these tricksters, fraudsters, etc. wouldn't dare pull what they do (emphasis on hit and run VPS companies and their big corps and their mASS acquisitions).


----------



## devonblzx (Nov 15, 2013)

It would be pretty hard to have strict liability firms.  First, business creates jobs and more businesses create competition that help consumers, so decreasing the desire to start a business by making your personal assets liable would not necessarily be a good one.

This would also be near impossible with public companies, as you would be saying every stockholder would be liable for a company's actions.


----------



## devonblzx (Nov 15, 2013)

I guess I should add, fraud and criminal activity isn't protected by limited liability, if a person is committing fraud through a business, then that is a criminal act not a civil act.

Part of the blame lies on the consumer, by supporting low end hosts annual plans.  No company can realistically make a profit on these ridiculous $12/year plans on a VPS.  No matter what they do and how many resources they provide, you will be losing some to transaction fees then losing the majority to handling a few support tickets, because realistically you can't expect to have a customer never need support in a year.

A lot of these companies probably throw 300 VPSs on a server on a $12/year plan and see all the money rolling in those first couple months and think everything is good, but they have no long term or business sense.   They plan it out, hey I'll make a small profit if I continue doing it this way as the server costs $250 and I'm making $300/month.  They aren't planning for transaction fees, the costs  to maintain the server and support 300 customers, marketing, licensing, etc.

Not to mention after a few months of customers getting their server ready, and actually using the systems, they see a large load increase and that one server can no longer handle 300 small VPS.


----------



## Francisco (Nov 15, 2013)

You missed chargebacks.

Chargebacks are transaction + $25+ ($35 on paypal?). A lot of these hosts are a chargeback or two from the red.

Francisco


----------



## Jack (Nov 15, 2013)

Francisco said:


> You missed chargebacks.
> 
> 
> Chargebacks are transaction + $25+ ($35 on paypal?). A lot of these hosts are a chargeback or two from the red.
> ...


Depends on how many you get within a period of time...

2CO is $25 per CB but if you challenge it is is $15 but if you lose it you get charged $25 + $15 + Transaction..

If you get over 3 CB's in 30 days it goes up to $50/CB then to $75/CB then Closed account.


----------



## Francisco (Nov 15, 2013)

Jack said:


> Depends on how many you get within a period of time...
> 
> 2CO is $25 per CB but if you challenge it is is $15 but if you lose it you get charged $25 + $15 + Transaction..
> 
> If you get over 3 CB's in 30 days it goes up to $50/CB then to $75/CB then Closed account.


Right. So it's even worse than I said if you're not careful >_>

If your business model has you making ~$50/month profit per node, you're really walking the line and hoping for no chargebacks or disputes.

Francisco


----------



## SPINIKR-RO (Nov 15, 2013)

I don't really understand why people try to get 3rd and 4th parties to accept PayPal. There is clearly a large issue for someone if they cant get direct PayPal as well as another party. 

In three or four years I have only had to deal with like 2(edit* perhaps 3 or 4) bank/card level chargebacks. Clearly a huge issue if there is a overwhelming amount.

I wish the consumer did not have to worry about stuff like this.


----------

