EaseVPS covertly sells customers to MyRSK

[JayCawb]

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.

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]

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]

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]

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]

@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]

@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.

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]

^--- 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]

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]

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]

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]

You missed chargebacks.


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


Francisco

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]

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]

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.