@CritAnime

If this helps in your thinking about chasing payments...

After we poured through hundreds of documents, we keyed in on this one line:

Quote:

the Company, SP by Design, Inc., the holders of a first right of pledge on the shares in the share capital of C= Holdings B.V. and the loans granted to Asiarim by Messrs. Ebben and Hoogstrate.

The only question was whether "right of pledge" equated to "first in line" to recover debts. When the initial suit (triggered by the licensing arm bankruptcy) got filed, by Messrs. Ebben and Hoogstrate it seemed to prove without question what we had deduced from the old Asiarim sec filings.

To be clear, I'm talking about Plaintiff C=Holdings B.V.

#6

Last edited by number6 on 18-Apr-2013 at 08:39 PM.

_________________
This posting, in its entirety, represents solely the perspective of the author.
*Secrecy has served us so well*

@number6

Well that is the mystery. The only thing I can think of is that the payments have defaulted in some way. But this is assuming that it is indeed interest or some other cost involvement. So long as payments have been made I would presume that the original agreement was been honoured. If defaults have happened then they would be entitled to chase payments. Regardless the length of time since the agreement was set up.

However this is presumption based on personal experience with things like this. For all we know someone within the plaintiff party might be trying to get hold of rights. And this might pose an easier route for that to happen. Who knows. But thought I would add my 2 penny's worth.

_________________
My personal blog - CritAnime.com

Admin at Commodore Gaming Wiki

@CritAnime

Then riddle me this...

Why are they only filing now? Surely a company with an interest would have known about this case a year ago. And, as I mentioned on a.org, why file against the plaintiff who filed against Asiarim?

If you can find any relationship between Tulip and Jan Hoogstrate, fine. But otherwise, we're talking about someone filing over an unpaid Tulip debt and against people who have nothing to do with Tulip.

Feel free to respond to what else I wrote here

#6

Last edited by number6 on 18-Apr-2013 at 07:30 PM.
Last edited by number6 on 18-Apr-2013 at 07:21 PM.

_________________
This posting, in its entirety, represents solely the perspective of the author.
*Secrecy has served us so well*

@number6

Wonder if there are outstanding interest payments. They may have cleared the invested amount but there could have been interest involved and administration costs. Not unheard of because I worked for a bank in collections. People would pay off the amount borrowed in order to give some breathing space and just make smaller payments against interest. Because isn't Leadgate a private investment consortium?

_________________
My personal blog - CritAnime.com

Admin at Commodore Gaming Wiki

@thread

And now the next circus arrives in town April 9, 2013:

Leadgate S.A. v. C=Holdings B.V.

@Seer

Silly me thinking we were at least done discussing Tulip. Leadgate S.A. was a temporary funder for Tulip according to Tulip documents. Tulip also claims they were repaid in full, which makes this lawsuit even more curious...

#6

Last edited by number6 on 18-Apr-2013 at 05:32 PM.

_________________
This posting, in its entirety, represents solely the perspective of the author.
*Secrecy has served us so well*

@thread

Quote:

From prior posts you'll see a massive amount of material through April of last year.Is it just -my- browser? Or are they all gone from the listings?

They were removed and later replaced by the same list

#6

_________________
This posting, in its entirety, represents solely the perspective of the author.
*Secrecy has served us so well*

@thread

A ton of documents removed?

From prior posts you'll see a massive amount of material through April of last year.
Is it just -my- browser? Or are they all gone from the listings?

#6

_________________
This posting, in its entirety, represents solely the perspective of the author.
*Secrecy has served us so well*

@Franko

Quote:

But why such interest in two companies whom in reality have nothing to do with what goes on in Amigaland these days...

Not much interest to me personally. I have more of a historical interest.
But honestly, all the owners examine how this could affect their interests, depending on the outcome. atm, that outcome is uncertain.
So, the longer any of these lovely lawsuits (and there are more than just this one) continue, the more difficult it is to make plans.
Let's not kid ourselves. This is not about the users. This is about each "owner" trying to cling to what they think they own. Look at where the energy is directed - lawsuits. Look at where the financial resources are directed - lawsuits. Look at where the time they could be applying to DOING something is directed - lawsuits.
I understand the owner's side of this too, but it's very hard to be sympathetic at this point.

Just my 2¢. I know nothing ®.

#6

_________________
This posting, in its entirety, represents solely the perspective of the author.
*Secrecy has served us so well*

@number6

Quote:

number6 wrote: right, but at least I've never claimed any of the owners cared about the users, so my conscience is clean. #6

Oooh, that almost sounds like you belong to or have a vested interest in one of the parties involved...

Not sure why you said that as I don't believe you have ever claimed such a thing so you conscience was perfectly clean to start with...

But why such interest in two companies whom in reality have nothing to do with what goes on in Amigaland these days...

_________________

@Franko

Quote:

not one of them shall be producing anything remotely "Amiga" like and of any use or interest to most Amiga users

right, but at least I've never claimed any of the owners cared about the users, so my conscience is clean.

#6

_________________
This posting, in its entirety, represents solely the perspective of the author.
*Secrecy has served us so well*

@number6

You know something, reading through all that nonsense between Commodore International Corp (CIC) and Asiarim Corporation there is only one logical conclusion you can draw from it...

Both parties are fighting over absolutely nothing...

Neither parties are actually producing anything that would be of use to an Amiga user or fan and all they have done is lock themselves in a never ending legal battle, where the only people who care about any of it are the law firms who are making a nice steady income from this nonsense...

Not sure what either of them actually hope to achieve at the end of it all but one thing is clear, if it ever does end not one of them shall be producing anything remotely "Amiga" like and of any use or interest to most Amiga users...

Seems pretty pointless and a total waste of money at the end of the day...

_________________

@thread

Once again, not all docs are listed on the website the day they are filed, so we have another new onslaught of docs appearing now.
9 new ones since the last appeared in April, but 1 not available electronically.

source

Enjoy!

#6

_________________
This posting, in its entirety, represents solely the perspective of the author.
*Secrecy has served us so well*

@number6

New doc just appearing on the list despite older April 12, 2012 date

#6

_________________
This posting, in its entirety, represents solely the perspective of the author.
*Secrecy has served us so well*

@terminills

Brief summary, current as of today, posted courtesy Barry Altman:

C=Holdings B.V. v. Asiarim Corporation et al

No sooner was this posted than another new document dated yesterday has been posted:

April 11, 2012

#6

Last edited by number6 on 12-Apr-2012 at 03:11 PM.

_________________
This posting, in its entirety, represents solely the perspective of the author.
*Secrecy has served us so well*

@terminills

Quote:

They charge you for the docs!!!!

Consider it a history course, and the charge is equal to your tuition. Heh.

#6

_________________
This posting, in its entirety, represents solely the perspective of the author.
*Secrecy has served us so well*

@terminills

Quote:

terminills wrote: @number6 They charge you for the docs!!!!

Of course...

They're just keeping up the long established tradition of anyone vaguely associated with the Amiga or Commodore names of screwing folk out of every penny possible from it's corpse...

Why break with tradition...

_________________

.

Last edited by terminills on 24-Jul-2014 at 02:16 AM.

_________________
Support AROS sponsor a developer.

"AROS is prolly illegal ~ Evert Carton" intentionally quoted out of context for dramatic effect

@thread

Quote:

C=Holdings B.V. v. Asiarim Corporation et al

quite a lot of new documents filed

#6

_________________
This posting, in its entirety, represents solely the perspective of the author.
*Secrecy has served us so well*

@thread

I tried to answer some questions and give a brief summary in layman terms:

http://www.amiga.org/forums/showpost.php?p=680262&postcount=188

It's not the complete story, nor can I guarantee others would agree with me, but it should be fairly accurate.

#6

_________________
This posting, in its entirety, represents solely the perspective of the author.
*Secrecy has served us so well*

@thread

Rather complete documentation just posted regarding the lawsuit linked to above:

Courtesy Barry Altman

Direct link to the .pdf

#6

_________________
This posting, in its entirety, represents solely the perspective of the author.
*Secrecy has served us so well*