Hostress, LLC has acquired GreenValueHost v2 Clients and domain.
- Thread starter tdale
- Start date
I'm still confused why anyone would assume Jonny's debt.
$17,500? That is insane. $5,000 would be insane. $1,000 would be insane.
I can see someone looking at Jonny's accounts and saying "ok, there are X number, here are the plans, half or more will quit, here is the price I'll pay and then I own your customers"...maybe.
Taking over his servers without prior debt...maybe. Maybe CC doesn't want to do that in which case the only sensible thing is to walk away. Or buy the customers and say "I'll make you a deal to move to my servers".
Becoming CC's bitch and saying "yes, I'll take Jon's servers and assume his debt" is just bizarre. Even if the customers were making profit, how long would it take to retire all that debt? Sheesh.
$17,500? That is insane. $5,000 would be insane. $1,000 would be insane.
I can see someone looking at Jonny's accounts and saying "ok, there are X number, here are the plans, half or more will quit, here is the price I'll pay and then I own your customers"...maybe.
Taking over his servers without prior debt...maybe. Maybe CC doesn't want to do that in which case the only sensible thing is to walk away. Or buy the customers and say "I'll make you a deal to move to my servers".
Becoming CC's bitch and saying "yes, I'll take Jon's servers and assume his debt" is just bizarre. Even if the customers were making profit, how long would it take to retire all that debt? Sheesh.
@raindog308 - I really doubt that is anything like the deal. More than likely Colocrossing doesn't want to lose the business and it get transferred to another datacentre operator, so better to do a write off or long term installments than think someone is just going to write a cheque for that sort of money.
The debt ultimately is with the legal entity and that has not been sold, its just the assets of the company; so legally the debt is still with GVH Inc.
The debt ultimately is with the legal entity and that has not been sold, its just the assets of the company; so legally the debt is still with GVH Inc.
That's what I would have thought, but Duke is talking about paying off large amounts of debt, etc. as if he took it on.
Another question is why a company like CC would extend $17,500 worth of credit to GVH.
Maybe it's just me, and slightly ot, but the new cc "filtering" resembles a paywall to me. Want to spam, we'll limit your connection. Want to spam and pay, we'll open that pipe full throttle.
For years cc has knowingly catered to spammers moving them from block to block whenever the lists caught up. This new system still allows that, by giving them control at the throttle to enable those willing to pay higher fees vs the $30 e3 spammers they had to deal with prior. Allows you to say you reduced spam by blocking those not willing to pay more while keeping the round robin spammers at full throttle with some extra cash.
As for the whole gvh/xfuse/tacvps/hostress debacle...all I can say is go back and read the statements when this first started vs the claims being made now and ask yourself who is really being honest. The story has changed so much it's ridiculous to think some of these individuals believe themselves competent to run an honest business.
For years cc has knowingly catered to spammers moving them from block to block whenever the lists caught up. This new system still allows that, by giving them control at the throttle to enable those willing to pay higher fees vs the $30 e3 spammers they had to deal with prior. Allows you to say you reduced spam by blocking those not willing to pay more while keeping the round robin spammers at full throttle with some extra cash.
As for the whole gvh/xfuse/tacvps/hostress debacle...all I can say is go back and read the statements when this first started vs the claims being made now and ask yourself who is really being honest. The story has changed so much it's ridiculous to think some of these individuals believe themselves competent to run an honest business.
drmike
100% Tier-1 Gogent
Yeah I am right there with you. Cause GVH as a company was never sold or inherited. It was a piece of it at best (customers + debt + future payables and related).
Trailing a debt around like has been done on this isn't legitimate. Debt inheritance isn't legal either. Folks like Duke and Tdale aren't liable for it, unless they sign into a real contract saying such. CC even being in that role to do such isn't legal.
Why GVH ever was allowed to carry such debt? Well back before it was changed initially I think GVH billable due to HVH per month topped $10k. So we are roughly talking about a month of money due only. Not really racking up debt, rather making crappy margins and unable to get the debt down.
Spot on. There were 200+ dedis with CC/HVH. No datacenter wants to see 200+ dedis walk out the door.
Welcome to the thinkers club! This is how I see this and others do also.
It went from alleged selling IPs to spammers for oh $8 a month and in bulk large commits several years ago.... now to ummm... who knows... They seem to be cutting back on that cash cow.
What I do know is the days of a cheap VPS doing spamming over there won't happen now
Clearly they never liked that - competed with their cash cow and soiled their network for almost free.Someday they'll come to realize that the mess they started with cheap VPS was a very bad idea. The story isn't over yet
Were. When I was done there was less than 90.
Well according to tdale 75% of that 90 should have been removed as well so again.. this whole thing stinks.
So.... what exactly was bought?
Either those nodes were already overcrowded as hell (and are going to get even more overcrowded) or a ton of people cancelled...
Well to be a bit more specific he said 75% of the loss on the GVH customers is due to abandoned or unsold dedi's that are being renewed anyway with CC/HVH but the customers stopped paying for them long ago, and this is after Duke did the initial sweep which ironically if true means GVH could have been in profit for a long time if it was not being managed by idiot kids all this time.
Essentially customer buys dedi, GVH took deal with HVH/CC, customer abandons dedi, GVH continued to pay HVH/CC anyway and did not notice, iirc Duke said that number was over 200, so it is not surprising they were losing money if only about 25 - 30 of them were ever being paid for by clients.
Essentially customer buys dedi, GVH took deal with HVH/CC, customer abandons dedi, GVH continued to pay HVH/CC anyway and did not notice, iirc Duke said that number was over 200, so it is not surprising they were losing money if only about 25 - 30 of them were ever being paid for by clients.
drmike
100% Tier-1 Gogent
Jumping on point - holding boxes but unpaid for. This was huge issue during Jonny's time in charge. Lots of boxes were ummm special priced boxes under what he or anyone else would get them at in the future.
Holding those made sense, where you managed the cancellations tightly and got the box wiped and up for sale to the next customer. If that got bogged down, easy to start eating months of losses. Lose that box due to stupid fubard accounting and eating quite a bit more.
Have issues where guys left and racked up 3 months or more of IOUs. Stings and eating big loss. Some of what Tdale is seeing / saying revolves around that I am sure.
As far as profitability goes, I've never seen the numbers from anyone. But the shop was profitable until that Eric lad was put in charge. At that point multiple things broke with more "sustainable" numbers. That never explained the debt racked up though which was like equivalent to a single month of HVH invoicing. I can infer someone was running a vacuum to their own bank account...
A lot of these problems, my guess are due to having due dates all over the place rather than pro-rata billing. Pro-rata works for the provider with discount first month (part of the intention to dip lower) and for customer who needs to move in and get moving. When you have floating days all over cash flow is neurotic and stressful.
Couple that with cash expanding annuals and you have a 1-2 punch that would knock most guys out.
In the background I detect shit talking going on... Guess Tdale can cough up numbers to public to substantiate his claims... Doubt he will. Dealing with assumptions without real data to audit. Without good accounting, there is no business and any profit would be a bit shy of a miracle.
DomainBop
Dormant VPSB Pathogen
Hostress Question: When Hostress relaunched last month its ads featured "the return of (ex CC/CVPS employee) Shinkle". Rumor has it (and his LinkedIn profile confirms it) he got a job at Cox Communications in May, so is he still involved in Hostress?
GVH profitability:
GVH profitability:
I remember a near death experience last summer, reports of of debt owed to DCs , and an emergency retreat to CC locations before Eric got involved...and going back to October (?) 2013 there was another near death experience because a transfer from a bank account to PayPal took a few extra days (search WHT for the thread).
Last edited by a moderator:
Hxxx
Active Member
Thank you thank you sir. Tears of joy.
drmike
100% Tier-1 Gogent
Shinkle is a goner. Shortest lived partner on the planet. A guy needs to make a living, so not faulting him for the corporate gig he took.
Profitability on GVH --- hard to divide JOnny's theatrics from the underlying financials. I don't think GVH was ever predictable cash flow and like I said last message, bill due dates 365 days a year and bills paid piecemeal to upstreams would make anyone crazy. Doubt you'd find financial folks or accounts that would adhere to such an insane schedule where margins were so lean.
Tales of GVH being broke were at times valid and the guy caught in between annual sales happening to float money. At point Eric jumped in the annuals got broken / slowed and I think using that trick became less frequent. Lots of guys told Spaz about the vileness of annuals and his own ability to float customers for the next X months prepaid.
Last edited by a moderator:
DomainBop
Dormant VPSB Pathogen
okaaaaaaay, how the F did he manage to corrupt data on five different nodes in three different cities???
Tyler
Active Member
He's that good!
drmike
100% Tier-1 Gogent
I woke up to this. I have been scratching my head for hours.
Limited options on this:
1. All these nodes have something that failed in common (hardware or more likely software).
2. Half awake admin or broken scripts firing missiles.
3. Rogue staff.
4. Insecure aspects in all these locations.
5. Upgrades gone wrong on software layer.
6. Hacker (more properly called cracker).
I reached out to Tdale, but I assume he's spent and resting.
Sad shituation to see any shops go up in flames with customer data. Clearly will have beneficial side of lowering container counts and requiring fewer real underlying servers.