@Dandy

Quote:

Are you saying they preferred to scam their loyal customers instead taking apropriate steps against Hyperion, if they felt they urgently needed money?

no, that is what you are saying, obviously.

Quote:

Perhaps you should keep in mind that such coupon schemes are illegal in Europe btw, before you claim they had to do the coupon thing...

funny, i live in europe and have a coupon thingy, and the police are not after me. also, seeing as they did do the coupon thing, im quite sure they thought they had to do it, otherwise they wouldnt have done it.

Quote:

Wrong. They would never ever have sold one single AmigaOne, as this was Eyetech's task. And they would equally not have sold one single copy of classic PPC version of OS4, as this was Hyperion's task.

amazing! i talk about selling the different versions of OS4 and you think im talking about hardware.

back to my amiga burger again. say hyperion supply the meat for OS4 to amiga, and amiga spend 6 months coming up with their new amiga burger deluxe (os4.2) same burger but has some tomato, lettuce, maybe some cheese! Amiga now get money from every sale of the amiga burger deluxe in whatever version it is aimed for, and they can open franchises for versions where the orginal burger is not available.

maybe it should be an amiga royale with cheese.. hmm....

_________________

@Lou

Quote:

Lou wrote: @samface Where was the twist? You quoted what I was referring to which I specified to Tigger, which you missed. It seems you have your own interpretation of written English words.

Lou, in plain english, you made the following statement:

Quote:

Except the part where they claim that Amiga Washington was forced into bankruptcy because Hyperion didn't deliver OS4. That was quite laughable.

To which I responded with a quote from the court filing where they only said that Hyperion tried to force Amiga Washington in bancrupcy and that the attempt had actually failed, which is quite the opposite of claiming that Amiga Washington was forced into bankruptcy because Hyperion didn't deliver OS4. In a quite obvious attempt to divert the readers of this forum away from your misinterpretation of Amiga Delaware's claims, you responded with:

Quote:

Thank you for quoting one of the accusations. Perhaps now they can be sued for slander...

And now you seem to be pretending that what I told you was what you meant all along and that I would be the one who is misinterpreting things. Yes, I read your reference to the part I quoted for you in your response to Tigger. However, considering it was used as a response to Tigger's request for reference to where they had claimed that Amiga Washington was forced into bankruptcy because Hyperion didn't deliver OS4, it was quite apparent that you still didn't seem to realize that this was NOT what they claimed.

Just admit that you made a hasty conclusion because you didn't read carefully enough. It's a human mistake after all.

Last edited by samface on 06-May-2008 at 01:44 AM.

_________________
Sammy Nordström, A.K.A. "Samface"

MINDRELEASE.net - The Non-Commercial Network of Digital Arts.

Samworks D & C - Professional Web Development (in Swedish)

@Darth_X

Quote:

Darth_X wrote: Quote: While I can remember of the "OS4 on Sharp Zaurus" thingie, I can not remember having ever heard about "OS4 on IBM PDA"... Mentioned in the court docs

Thanx for the link!
"OS4 on IBM" did not ring the bell - "Arctic Agreement" did...

_________________
Ciao

Dandy
__________________________________________
If someone enjoys marching to military music, then I already despise him.
He got his brain accidently - the bone marrow in his back would have been sufficient for him!
(Albert Einstein)

@Derfs

Quote:

Derfs wrote: @Dandy Quote: Hmmm - something seems to be wrong with the timeline: nothing is wrong with the timeline, its just - once again - you seem to not understand the facts of the case ...

I understand the facts of the case quite well - don't worry.
It was just the way I understood the way you wrote it down.

I know - I myself repeatedly used misunderstandable wordings - I just found the way you wrote it rather confusing and tried to summarize what and how I got from that.

Quote:

Derfs wrote: Quote: It's common knowledge that verbal subsidiary agreements require written form - so where is that mysterious sheet of paper prooving that Amiga, Hyperion and ITEC agreed? no one said it was verbal. afaik hyperion have never disputed these claims.

Of course that was mentioned.
Or what else but verbal communication does "as that was said to have been agreed by amiga, ..." indicate?

Quote:

Derfs wrote: ... - In 2004, Amiga Inc (Amino) sold everything to KMOS (name, trademarks, AA etc) apart from OS4 contract as that was said to have been agreed by amiga, hyperion and ITEC to be superseeded by the 2003 agreement, and this is part of what the Washington case is about. ...

_________________
Ciao

Dandy
__________________________________________
If someone enjoys marching to military music, then I already despise him.
He got his brain accidently - the bone marrow in his back would have been sufficient for him!
(Albert Einstein)

@Derfs

Quote:

Derfs wrote: @Dandy Quote: Are you saying they preferred to scam their loyal customers instead of taking apropriate steps against Hyperion, if they felt they urgently needed money? no, that is what you are saying, obviously.

O.K. - but then please explain what else you meant with:
"ever think that they had to do the coupon thing as hyperion were late with os4? coupon date is after the original completion date of os4."

Who forced them to pull off that coupon scam?

Quote:

Derfs wrote: Quote: Perhaps you should keep in mind that such coupon schemes are illegal in Europe btw, before you claim they had to do the coupon thing... funny, i live in europe and have a coupon thingy, and the police are not after me. also, seeing as they did do the coupon thing, im quite sure they thought they had to do it, otherwise they wouldnt have done it.

You got me wrong.
I did not mean that YOU violated law by participating - AInc were the ones who violated the (European/German) law by conducting this coupon thingie here in Europe...

Quote:

Derfs wrote: Quote: Wrong. They would never ever have sold one single AmigaOne, as this was Eyetech's task. And they would equally not have sold one single copy of classic PPC version of OS4, as this was Hyperion's task. amazing! i talk about selling the different versions of OS4 and you think im talking about hardware.

Ahhh yes, you're right - sorry - my mistake!

Obviously I was reading a little bit too fast - what I read was "sell AmigaOnes and classic ppc version..."

Quote:

Derfs wrote: they would not have to do the coupons if they could sell amigaone and classic ppc versions of os4 instead.

Quote:

Derfs wrote: back to my amiga burger again. say hyperion supply the meat for OS4 to amiga, and amiga spend 6 months coming up with their new amiga burger deluxe (os4.2) same burger but has some tomato, lettuce, maybe some cheese! Amiga now get money from every sale of the amiga burger deluxe in whatever version it is aimed for, and they can open franchises for versions where the orginal burger is not available. maybe it should be an amiga royale with cheese.. hmm....

Yuck!
I don't like Fast Food...

(but I think I understood what you tried to say)

_________________
Ciao

Dandy
__________________________________________
If someone enjoys marching to military music, then I already despise him.
He got his brain accidently - the bone marrow in his back would have been sufficient for him!
(Albert Einstein)

@samface

Quote:

samface wrote: @Lou Lou, in plain english, you made the following statement: Quote: Except the part where they claim that Amiga Washington was forced into bankruptcy because Hyperion didn't deliver OS4. That was quite laughable. To which I responded with a quote from the court filing where they only said that Hyperion tried to force Amiga Washington in bancrupcy and that the attempt had actually failed,

Yes, but the reasoning in your quote sounds as if all Hyperion had to do to force Amiga Washington into bancruptcy was to hinder the OS 4 project.

"...a deliberate scheme calculated to undermine Amiga Washington's...financial status by hindering and delaying the OS 4.0 project...with the intent...forcing Amiga Washington into bancruptcy."

For me this implies Hyperion could force AInc into bankruptcy by hindering and delaying the OS 4.0 project.

And this is the part I find equally laughable as Lou.

I would never ever start a business if I only have one source of income (OS 4 sales).
In todays world you can't rely on business plans based on just one product
("No risk, no fun" is not really a serious business plan from my POV...).

Yes, I know there was the AmigaAnywhere project as well - but did they ever earn money with it?

What other sources of income did they have - aside from ITEC's cash injections?
No OS 4 sales, no AmigaOne sales anymore, no significant income from AA, ...

That's not a base for a serious business...

Quote:

samface wrote: which is quite the opposite of claiming that Amiga Washington was forced into bankruptcy because Hyperion didn't deliver OS4.

Well, as I wrote before, to me this seriously does not sound like the opposite:

"...a deliberate scheme calculated to undermine Amiga Washington's...financial status by hindering and delaying the OS 4.0 project...with the intent...[of] forcing Amiga Washington into bancruptcy."

Quote:

samface wrote: In a quite obvious attempt to divert the readers of this forum away from your misinterpretation of Amiga Delaware's claims, you responded with:

It's not clear to me where you think he misinterpreted Amiga Delaware's claims...

(B.T.W. - it leaves a bad impression if you always alledge different-minded people that they have a bad intention by replying this or that to you and certainly isn't suited to convince people like me)

Quote:

samface wrote: ... they had claimed that Amiga Washington was forced into bankruptcy because Hyperion didn't deliver OS4, it was quite apparent that you still didn't seem to realize that this was NOT what they claimed.

Then please just be so kind to explain what else you think they claimed and why you think so, as I would read and understand it the same way as Lou...

_________________
Ciao

Dandy
__________________________________________
If someone enjoys marching to military music, then I already despise him.
He got his brain accidently - the bone marrow in his back would have been sufficient for him!
(Albert Einstein)

@Seer

Quote:

Seer wrote: @Lou "delaying the OS 4.0 project with the intent to hijack it after forcing Amiga Washington into bancruptcy." means the plan was to force A inc into bankruptcy, and when that was done, hijack OS4... not that A Inc declared itself or was declared bankrupt.. Didn't you claim that A Inc somehow said that they were bankrupt in post 61 ? And isn't Tigger asking where A inc is saying that ? As the above quote doesn't say what you claim.

Gather the forces.
OMG! Someone is wrong on the internet!

I said "forced" rather than "attempted to force"

Ignore the shady behavior and unfounded allegations of lawyers regarding the case about the company who's site gets it's name from. No, the issue here is that someone is wrong on the internet.


Amazing how the real issues that makes one side look like liars get overlooked just so some people with no lives can prove themselves right on the internet...

Last edited by Lou on 06-May-2008 at 12:10 PM.

@Dandy

Quote:

Dandy wrote: @samface "...a deliberate scheme calculated to undermine Amiga Washington's...financial status by hindering and delaying the OS 4.0 project...with the intent...forcing Amiga Washington into bancruptcy." For me this implies Hyperion could force AInc into bankruptcy by hindering and delaying the OS 4.0 project. And this is the part I find equally laughable as Lou.

Really, all they said was that it would have been the intent of Hyperion which is by no means saying that Hyperion succeeded nor that they even had the chance to succeed in such endeavour. You are simply reading things that are not there.

Quote:

I would never ever start a business if I only have one source of income (OS 4 sales). In todays world you can't rely on business plans based on just one product ("No risk, no fun" is not really a serious business plan from my POV...).

Amazing. Sometimes they don't care about the classic and all they are interested in is the AmigaDE and sometimes they have no other business plans besides AmigaOS4. Interesting...

Quote:

Yes, I know there was the AmigaAnywhere project as well - but did they ever earn money with it?

The AmigaAnywhere/AmigaDE "project" has actually been their main product and business strategy from the beginning. Wether this has been a successful business plan or not is really not of interest for the issue at hand, I'm just pointing out the obvious flaw with your theory that they would have relied on AmigaOS4 sales or even implied that they did.

Quote:

What other sources of income did they have - aside from ITEC's cash injections? No OS 4 sales, no AmigaOne sales anymore, no significant income from AA, ... That's not a base for a serious business...

Apparently their investors disagree with you, to the point where they are willing to bet millions.

Quote:

Quote: samface wrote: which is quite the opposite of claiming that Amiga Washington was forced into bankruptcy because Hyperion didn't deliver OS4. Well, as I wrote before, to me this seriously does not sound like the opposite: "...a deliberate scheme calculated to undermine Amiga Washington's...financial status by hindering and delaying the OS 4.0 project...with the intent...[of] forcing Amiga Washington into bancruptcy."

For crying out loud, you cannot just filter out words to make them say what you want them to say. They keywords that changes the meaning of the entire sentence is "a deliberate scheme" and "with the intent", as in a claim for what was Hyperions plans and intent, not what Hyperion achieved or even could have achieved. On the contrary, they follow up that sentence by saying that Hyperion failed to achieve what they had intended. It's plain and simple english.

Quote:

It's not clear to me where you think he misinterpreted Amiga Delaware's claims...

He claimed that Amiga Delaware would have claimed that Amiga Washington was forced into bankruptcy because Hyperion didn't deliver OS4. The statement says no such thing. On the contrary, they conclude that Hyperion failed to force Amiga Washington into bankruptcy by not delivering AmigaOS4. Can I be more clear?

Quote:

(B.T.W. - it leaves a bad impression if you always alledge different-minded people that they have a bad intention by replying this or that to you and certainly isn't suited to convince people like me)

Always? That's really not true and you know it. Furthermore, I don't know if what I alleged really qualifies as bad intentions, I'm merely saying that he seems to have a problem with admitting that he misinterpreted the statement at hand. I don't view that as a bad intention at all.

Quote:

Quote: samface wrote: ... they had claimed that Amiga Washington was forced into bankruptcy because Hyperion didn't deliver OS4, it was quite apparent that you still didn't seem to realize that this was NOT what they claimed. Then please just be so kind to explain what else you think they claimed and why you think so, as I would read and understand it the same way as Lou...

Again, it was a claim for what was Hyperions plans and intentions, not a claim for what Hyperion had actually succeeded with nor a claim for what they could have achived. They even topped it off with a statement saying that Hyperion had failed with their plans and intentions. How you could possibly turn that into a claim that Hyperion would have been successful?

_________________
Sammy Nordström, A.K.A. "Samface"

MINDRELEASE.net - The Non-Commercial Network of Digital Arts.

Samworks D & C - Professional Web Development (in Swedish)

@Lou

Except the part where they claim that Amiga Washington was forced into bankruptcy because Hyperion didn't deliver OS4. That was quite laughable.

You go on about this without admitting you were wrong, play victim and go on demeaning the people that try to discuss things with you, but you don't get that.

If you just had said the first time, whoops you're right I made a typo..

Anyway, keep it up. Good luck with that.

Amazing how the real issues that makes one side look like liars get overlooked just so some people with no lives can prove themselves right on the internet...

Both sides are being just as bad in this whole thing, but with you it seem that you just think because it's your opinion you are right and if it's pointed out to you you're not and go in a different direction claiming something else.

And off course, asking a question "Didn't you claim that A Inc somehow said that they were bankrupt in post 61 ?" is a big attack on you and not asking for a clarification about the quote, instead of just answering that, you start being insulting again and write a page long reply. Just a, well, I made a type back then was enough.

Amazing how the real issues that makes one side look like liars get overlooked just so some people with no lives can prove themselves right on the internet...

Says a person who post more on this board in a day then the one he's replying to does in a month, give or take a bit.

Anyway, back on topic.

Last edited by Seer on 06-May-2008 at 12:48 PM.
Last edited by Seer on 06-May-2008 at 12:35 PM.

_________________
~
Everything you say will be misquoted and used against you..
~

@Lou

Lou, this is what you wrote:

Quote:

Lou wrote: @madtrekker Quote: madtrekker wrote: @AmigaPhil I'm at work so I've only read the first part summarising what happened. Is it my imagination or is this much clearer and more thought out than Amiga Inc's previous submissions? There doesn't seem to be any truly new information in there, but it puts everything together into a coherent timeline that makes Amiga Inc's actions seem to make a lot more sense. Except the part where they claim that Amiga Washington was forced into bankruptcy because Hyperion didn't deliver OS4. That was quite laughable.

By this, you made it clear that everything seemed to be much clearer and more thought out than Amiga Inc's previous submissions. That everything was put together into a coherent timeline in a manner that makes Amiga Inc's actions seem to make a lot more sense, EXCEPT for the issue we've been discussing here for the last couple of pages in this thread which even you now seem to admit yourself to be a misinterpretation on your part.

So it was actually noone but YOU who made this issue into the predominant issue.

_________________
Sammy Nordström, A.K.A. "Samface"

MINDRELEASE.net - The Non-Commercial Network of Digital Arts.

Samworks D & C - Professional Web Development (in Swedish)

@Seer

Quote:

Seer wrote: @Lou Except the part where they claim that Amiga Washington was forced into bankruptcy because Hyperion didn't deliver OS4. That was quite laughable. You go on about this without admitting you were wrong, play victim and go on demeaning the people that try to discuss things with you, but you don't get that. If you just had said the first time, whoops you're right I made a typo.. Anyway, keep it up. Good luck with that. Amazing how the real issues that makes one side look like liars get overlooked just so some people with no lives can prove themselves right on the internet... Both sides are being just as bad in this whole thing, but with you it seem that you just think because it's your opinion you are right and if it's pointed out to you you're not and go in a different direction claiming something else. And off course, asking a question "Didn't you claim that A Inc somehow said that they were bankrupt in post 61 ?" is a big attack on you and not asking for a clarification about the quote, instead of just answering that, you start being insulting again and write a page long reply. Just a, well, I made a type back then was enough. Amazing how the real issues that makes one side look like liars get overlooked just so some people with no lives can prove themselves right on the internet... Says a person who post more on this board in a day then the one he's replying to does in a month, give or take a bit. Anyway, back on topic.

I like your selective quoting here.
Here's what I wrote:
Quote:

I said "forced" rather than "attempted to force"

I do believe that that was an admission there.

Again, let me stress the fact that you, Samface and Tigger are using tactics to distract from the real issue. The issue is not whether I am wrong or not. The issue is, look at the topic now, the issue is a new document has been posted by Amiga Delaware's lawyers that paints a picture that misrepresents what was actually going on.

In not revealing Amiga Washington's true "business plan", they allege that Hyperion was capable of single-handily bankrupting Amiga Washington, but failed because Amiga Washington was able to secure loans from ITEC and eventually sold out to KMOS. They also don't reveal Amiga Delaware's full business plan as AA2, though shown in public, was not mentioned in this document. This is to present to the judge serious damages because Hyperion did not deliver the OS source code. This is the picture they paint. It's not word for word, just the picture they paint. It's misleading and misrepresentative.

What's also interesting is they skim over issues with H&P. I believe there are more OS3.9 sales than 4.0 so why don't they sue H&P? Infact, Hyperion have shown that the same types of contracts that were made with H&P regarding outside developers have been made with Hyperion. To my knowledge, H&P has not paid Amiga Washington any licensing fees. Where's that lawsuit?

Ps,
When your sole purpose in posting once a month is to prove me wrong, reflect upon yourself what you have become...

@Lou

Quote:

Lou wrote: Again, let me stress the fact that you, Samface and Tigger are using tactics to distract from the real issue. The issue is not whether I am wrong or not. The issue is, look at the topic now, the issue is a new document has been posted by Amiga Delaware's lawyers that paints a picture that misrepresents what was actually going on. .

I'm not using any tactic at all here Lou. You said AI has said they had been bankrupt in the "new" documnt. I asked where did they say it. My other post, was to point out that this "new" document is actually the same as Exhibit #1 from document #82. so we actually say it last year. Now you the document doesn't actually say AI was bankrupt, so you've decided that everyone called you on it has a secret agenda. It seems to me the one with a secret agenda, is the one posting that AI had admitted to being bankrupt in a document that doesnt say that at all.
-Tig

_________________
We played the first thing that came to our heads, it just happened to be the best song in the world.

@Lou

I do believe that that was an admission there.

Then why the need to go off topic, start posting off topic pictures etc etc like you always do if you can't admit you're wrong.

Again, let me stress the fact that you, Samface and Tigger are using tactics to distract from the real issue.

No, you just like to think that. They are all out to get you.

If your statement was correct it would have a big impact on these court procedings. But offcourse, they just want to see you hang.

When your sole purpose in posting once a month is to prove me wrong, reflect upon yourself what you have become...

Read again Lou, I asked a question, not trying to prove you right or wrong. Get of your victim routine, stop putting words in others mouths and get back on topic, this isn't about Lou the victim, it is about Lou making a claim that was not correct, a claim that could have been interesting if it was right. And you may want to lay of with the thin personal jabs at me and the other posters.

_________________
~
Everything you say will be misquoted and used against you..
~

@Seer

Quote:

Seer wrote: @Lou I do believe that that was an admission there. Then why the need to go off topic, start posting off topic pictures etc etc like you always do if you can't admit you're wrong. Again, let me stress the fact that you, Samface and Tigger are using tactics to distract from the real issue. No, you just like to think that. They are all out to get you. If your statement was correct it would have a big impact on these court procedings. But offcourse, they just want to see you hang. When your sole purpose in posting once a month is to prove me wrong, reflect upon yourself what you have become... Read again Lou, I asked a question, not trying to prove you right or wrong. Get of your victim routine, stop putting words in others mouths and get back on topic, this isn't about Lou the victim, it is about Lou making a claim that was not correct, a claim that could have been interesting if it was right. And you may want to lay of with the thin personal jabs at me and the other posters.

But yet you keep referring to me instead of the issues I elaborated on when I corrected myself.

@Tigger

Quote:

Tigger wrote: @Lou Quote: Lou wrote: Again, let me stress the fact that you, Samface and Tigger are using tactics to distract from the real issue. The issue is not whether I am wrong or not. The issue is, look at the topic now, the issue is a new document has been posted by Amiga Delaware's lawyers that paints a picture that misrepresents what was actually going on. . I'm not using any tactic at all here Lou. You said AI has said they had been bankrupt in the "new" documnt. I asked where did they say it. My other post, was to point out that this "new" document is actually the same as Exhibit #1 from document #82. so we actually say it last year. Now you the document doesn't actually say AI was bankrupt, so you've decided that everyone called you on it has a secret agenda. It seems to me the one with a secret agenda, is the one posting that AI had admitted to being bankrupt in a document that doesnt say that at all. -Tig

Hey Bill,
When you made a statement in the last lawsuit thread about not knowing about the April 1 date with regards to the ITEC case until just then, I informed you that about 3 weeks prior I had told you about it.

So yes, you too have been wrong on the internet. Congradulations.
Now I chucked it up to you just skimming my post back then. As we both post from work, that's what happened in my original post that you are now calling into question. I read the docs fast (skimmed) and that was what I got out of it the first time. I re-read it more slowly when you called me on it. I then elaborated about it in a few other posts to other people also calling me on it.

but all that matters is:

and it happened to be me this time...

and even though I realized it, I still need to be reminded of it by 3 or 4 people in every subsequent post, right?

Pathetic.

@Lou

wow, 3 pages for you to say your equivalent of "im sorry i was wrong, at no point did amiga say they were bankrupt".

but its just everyone picking on you, correct ?

_________________

@Derfs

Quote:

Derfs wrote: @Lou wow, 3 pages for you to say your equivalent of "im sorry i was wrong, at no point did amiga say they were bankrupt". but its just everyone picking on you, correct ?

What's pathetic is that everything else I said got ignored and will continue to be because as long as I am wrong once for skimming over something, I am wrong forever.

What's also pathetic is this post where I elaborated it to you shortly after but 3 others still decided to jump on the bandwagon...

Hey, why don't you, Seer, Tigger and Samwel just make a joint account for posting in this thread that way we save 4x the keystrokes...?

Last edited by Lou on 06-May-2008 at 06:16 PM.

@Lou

Well Lou, what is pathetic that you are playing the Lou vs the rest of the world game, and you do it poorly.

Instead of either answering Tigger and pointing to that post or say "I made an error" you go in a sarcastic/offensive attack mode. Well, I don't see anybody attacking you, I see people asking a question and trying to discuss that with you. But it seems you are paranoid or something and think people are out to get you.

But yet you keep referring to me instead of the issues I elaborated on when I corrected myself.

Yes Lou, I asked a question I found interesting if you could explain or point out where that what you claimed was said. I later also explained a little why. I am not interested in participating further, just wanted to know something I found interesting.

That's all Tigger, Samface also wanted, but instead of saying, I made a mistake, I meant something or point to where you corrected yourself (not really to be honest in that post) else you start saying they have agenda and you're a victim. The rest of what you bring up can then be discussed. However, the way you post make it very hard to discuss things.

Also note that so far the only moderating that was done was to ask to get back on topic, something you as well fail to do, instead you play the kids game and tell Tigger he was wrong you as well.

Back on topic, that goes for Lou, Derfs, Tigger and everybody else. This ends here, or face a restriction.

/Edit

Lou allready replied before I could edit this. But the next one to reply to this will face a restriction of 4 days.

Last edited by Seer on 06-May-2008 at 07:08 PM.

_________________
~
Everything you say will be misquoted and used against you..
~

removed: off topic and against moderator request,
And as said, I will restrict you for this, for 2 days.
Seer

Last edited by Seer on 06-May-2008 at 06:58 PM.

I find it interesting that no where is in these amended claim is mentioned the $2,000,000.00 buyout offer that Bill McEwen gave Hyperion in an email.

It seems even Yahoo requires written proof that an offer is legitimate...what a suprise...
http://finance.yahoo.com/tech-ticker/article/15033/Decker-We-Never-Got-33-Offer-in-Writing