# Continuation of DotVPS brand - HTTP Group Proposed Take Over Cancelled



## Jack (May 30, 2013)

Dear Reader;


Firstly I'd like to thank everybody for their continued support and custom.


Over the past two Months DotVPS has been working with the HTTP Group in regards to their purchase of this company.

 

We have always had a strong vision of how we run and how we would like the DotVPS brand to continue, this includes the level of service and internal infrastructure.

 

Due to how strongly we care for our customers any deal had to be worked around terms which allowed DotVPS management to remain in place and our vision continued.

 

During the final stages of negotiation it became apparent that HTTP Group were not able to adhere to terms being set our by our management and eventually the decision was made to cancel the agreements we had in place.

 

Fortunately due to the "merger" processes we had in place we are easily able to operate under the DotVPS once again and all relevant changes have.

 

DotVPS and HTTP Group would like to apologise for any confusion or inconvenience caused by this situation, however we can promise that DotVPS is in a stronger position now than before the sale talks took place and we will continue to offer a great service and awesome pricing.

 

Thank you,
Jack Sephton
DotVPS Hosting


----------



## shovenose (May 30, 2013)

Sorry to hear it fell through but glad to hear your company is doing better now. Hopefully not too many customers will get freaked and leave


----------



## Francisco (May 30, 2013)

Good try Jack.

Can't believe so much crap was started over $50.

Francisco


----------



## Jack (May 30, 2013)

shovenose said:


> Sorry to hear it fell through but glad to hear your company is doing better now. Hopefully not too many customers will get freaked and leave


I don't think anyone would leave over it, at least I hope not.


----------



## Jack (May 30, 2013)

Francisco said:


> Good try Jack.
> 
> 
> Can't believe so much crap was started over $50.
> ...


Thanks and I know.


----------



## mikho (May 31, 2013)

I feel sad for you that the purchase didn't happen but at the same time glad to read that you will continue your brand.


I wish you all the best and hope you can/will continue add value to us users.


----------



## drmike (May 31, 2013)

WTF is the $50 @Francisco is chattering about?

Why didn't this merger thing happen?


----------



## Marc M. (May 31, 2013)

Merger didn't happen, no big deal, so what is the problem then? Everything looks okay from a distance...


----------



## Ash (May 31, 2013)

I thought they had controlled the brand for about a month now. This must be a financial mess in terms of tax purposes etc.


----------



## Reece-DM (May 31, 2013)

Looks like they just got some nice publicity out of the "Merger" that didn't happen.

All the best Jack


----------



## wlanboy (May 31, 2013)

buffalooed said:


> Why didn't this merger thing happen?


Any hint would be appreciated.

PS Nice UK location.


----------



## Jack (May 31, 2013)

buffalooed said:


> WTF is the $50 @Francisco is chattering about?
> 
> Why didn't this merger thing happen?


Just some disagreement which was the final straw with it going pear shape, I don't want to say to much.



marcm said:


> Merger didn't happen, no big deal, so what is the problem then? Everything looks okay from a distance...


Everything's fine in the eyes of the public, Just a few person disagreements between myself and HTTPZoom.



GetKVM_Ash said:


> I thought they had controlled the brand for about a month now. This must be a financial mess in terms of tax purposes etc.


They didn't have access to anything other than a limited WHMCS account don't you worry, I'll throw you a PM shortly with some more info on it and how far it actually got.



Reece said:


> Looks like they just got some nice publicity out of the "Merger" that didn't happen.
> 
> All the best Jack


Thanks bud.



wlanboy said:


> Any hint would be appreciated.
> 
> PS Nice UK location.


Can't say too much and thanks.


----------



## nunim (May 31, 2013)

If I was one of your customers I would be jumping ship..


It was a sale not a merger. Not really sure why you posted this on multiple forums either, shouldn't this be an email to your actual customers?


----------



## Jack (May 31, 2013)

nunim said:


> If I was one of your customers I would be jumping ship..
> 
> 
> It was a sale not a merger. Not really sure why you posted this on multiple forums either, shouldn't this be an email to your actual customers?


It's a copy of the email I sent to customers, It was a sale due to a reason that was out of my control, I didn't want to sell but I had no choice.

I wouldn't really call it a 'sale' as such either.


----------



## Chronic (May 31, 2013)

I'm actually somewhat glad about this. I picked up one of the DotVPS offers on LET that was posted by the HTTPGroup representative and from reading their comments, they seemed like they didn't know what they were selling - made me a tad suspicious. We'll see what kind of an impression I get of DotVPS, but so far so good and the service itself has been great as well.


----------



## Alto (May 31, 2013)

Strange times. HTTPZoom always seemed like a pretty professional outfit in the past, so all of this seems a little bit odd. 

Shame it didn't work out for you Jack, but from a consumer point of view I'd prefer there to be a bit more competition in the UK lowend market, so it's good you're sticking around and not just shutting up shop.


----------



## Jack (May 31, 2013)

Chronic said:


> I'm actually somewhat glad about this. I picked up one of the DotVPS offers on LET that was posted by the HTTPGroup representative and from reading their comments, they seemed like they didn't know what they were selling - made me a tad suspicious. We'll see what kind of an impression I get of DotVPS, but so far so good and the service itself has been great as well.


Fantastic. 



Alto said:


> Strange times. HTTPZoom always seemed like a pretty professional outfit in the past, so all of this seems a little bit odd.
> 
> Shame it didn't work out for you Jack, but from a consumer point of view I'd prefer there to be a bit more competition in the UK lowend market, so it's good you're sticking around and not just shutting up shop.


I'm not questioning the professionalism of HTTPZoom, the direction I have been taking and want to take was different to the direction that HTTP Group were looking to take the business, So different that the purchase would not have been beneficial for customers of DotVPS.


----------



## Zen (May 31, 2013)

It's nice to see that this was resolved without any blood baths


----------



## Alto (May 31, 2013)

Jack said:


> I'm not questioning the professionalism of HTTPZoom, the direction I have been taking and want to take was different to the direction that HTTP Group were looking to take the business, So different that the purchase would not have been beneficial for customers of DotVPS.


 

I didn't intend to imply you were, I was the one making that suggestion (mainly based off the fact they started selling under the new brand/company before the deal was done). It's the sort of thing I'd expect from some of the less professional players in the market, but not from a company that previously always seemed pretty spot-on.

I'm also curious how things got to such an advanced stage given that there were clearly big differences in your approaches; again, I would have expected a company of their stature to walk away from a deal immediately if it was clear the brand they were taking on wasn't a good fit for their business model.


----------



## DearLeaderJohn (May 31, 2013)

Alto said:


> I would have expected a company of their stature to walk away from a deal immediately if it was clear the brand they were taking on wasn't a good fit for their business model.


That is a very good point; surely you would've evaluated what each brand envisioned as it's ideal client


----------



## Lee (May 31, 2013)

I smell suspicion in the air.  That is all.


----------



## Jack (Jun 1, 2013)

Alto said:


> I didn't intend to imply you were, I was the one making that suggestion (mainly based off the fact they started selling under the new brand/company before the deal was done). It's the sort of thing I'd expect from some of the less professional players in the market, but not from a company that previously always seemed pretty spot-on.
> 
> I'm also curious how things got to such an advanced stage given that there were clearly big differences in your approaches; again, I would have expected a company of their stature to walk away from a deal immediately if it was clear the brand they were taking on wasn't a good fit for their business model.


I see, I didn't really understand what you were implying then.

They didn't really get to advanced stages all that had changed was site designs as many clients were asking when it was changing. HTTPZoom *NEVER *got access to anything server wise and had a limited account with WHMCS/SolusVM to do support issues.



DearLeaderJohn said:


> That is a very good point; surely you would've evaluated what each brand envisioned as it's ideal client


----------



## Lee (Jun 1, 2013)

What you are saying is that for the last 2 months 24k has not had any access to the servers or full access to WHMCS, so how have they managed the hardware and clients with such limited access?

It just all seems very suspicious that's all, to have a sale 2 months ago and to now all of sudden appear back with the old brand, making offers and such, hmmm.


----------



## notFound (Jun 1, 2013)

24k? Oh and Jack was still there helping out during the process, and also it wasn't a take over or complete sale as such anyway.


----------



## Lee (Jun 1, 2013)

notFound said:


> 24k? Oh and Jack was still there helping out during the process, and also it wasn't a take over or complete sale as such anyway.


Huh?

http://lowendtalk.com/discussion/9545/dotvps-announcement/p1

Sounds like a complete sale to me, quote:

"And last but not least we are informing you that DotVPS' has been bought out by a much larger business that can provide us the support we need"


----------



## Jack (Jun 1, 2013)

ServerCubes said:


> What you are saying is that for the last 2 months 24k  HTTPGroup has not had any access to the servers or full access to WHMCS, so how have they managed the hardware and clients with such limited access?
> 
> It just all seems very suspicious that's all, to have a sale 2 months ago and to now all of sudden appear back with the old brand, making offers and such, hmmm.


HTTPGroup isn't as big as you think it's just James, like DotVPS was and still is just me, I was still there all the way through and managing the hardware and clients if you really want I'll share the logins to all the hostnodes to show its all me  



notFound said:


> 24k? Oh and Jack was still there helping out during the process, and also it wasn't a take over or complete sale as such anyway.


Not sure who 'notFound' is but they seem to know what went on.. who are you?



ServerCubes said:


> Huh?
> 
> http://lowendtalk.com/discussion/9545/dotvps-announcement/p1
> 
> ...


I was still there all the way through.


----------



## Hassan (Jun 1, 2013)

Nice to see you back Jack, good luck.


----------



## httpzoom (Jun 2, 2013)

Hey,

Sorry to step in but there is a lot of dis-information going on in this thread.

Firstly HTTP Group is not just myself (James). If anyone wants details they can PM myself.

As Jack has stated the direction that HTTP Group wanted to take DotVPS was at odds with the old management.

Te stepped in at a very difficult time for DotVPS shortly after we made an initial agreement things got much better. The purchase no longer made sense, the whole process was never managed in the way we would have liked or on a schedule that was best for customers.

Jack was staying with the business and was still going to be the driving force behind the brand and therefore absolutely nothing has changed within the business. HTTP Group at no point had access to the servers, the only real changes implemented was around dealing with the UK datacentre and again this was minimal.


----------



## wlanboy (Jun 2, 2013)

@httpzoom

Thank you for your imput.

@httpzoom/Jack

Looks like a premature announcement to me.


----------



## httpzoom (Jun 2, 2013)

@wlanboy, indeed.


----------



## Jack (Jun 2, 2013)

httpzoom said:


> Hey,
> 
> Sorry to step in but there is a lot of dis-information going on in this thread.
> 
> ...


I wouldn't say a lot of dis-information.

I have only ever spoken to yourself and you've never mentioned anyone else involved therefore I assumed it was just yourself.

Other parts are correct.


----------

