but in no way is it PC Aviators fault.

 

Yes it is. Subscriptions were paid to PC Aviator so it's PC Aviator's responsibilty to ensure they are honoured.

Yes it is. Subscriptions were paid to PC Aviator so it's PC Aviator's responsibilty to ensure they are honoured.

 

You paid a subscription to the magazine, which was sold, and your subscription went with it.

 

 

Businesses and their customers get sold every day. PC Aviator, from what I can see, no longer has any control over the magazine. They can call the new owner and shake their fist as much as anyone else, but it won't change anything.

I am failing to see any legal wrong doing, or failings of PCA.

 

They sold their rights with an agreement that the new owners are liable for upholding, not PCA. It is also not PCA to uphold another companies values. The sale went through, PCA set stipulations that the new owners agreed on, and PCA approved and went ahead with the sale.

 

The issue needs to be taken up with the new owners, and of inside the US the BBB.

You paid a subscription to the magazine, which was sold, and your subscription went with it.

 

PC Aviator took subscriptions so the subscriber's agreement is still with PC Aviator as are the responsibilities. Unless, of cource, got the subscriber's agreement to novate all the ageements.

 

see

Yes and no. yes we took subscriptions from the public...

 

The issue needs to be taken up with the new owners, and of inside the US the BBB.

 

Given the new owners are based in Luxembourg, what do you think the BBB can do about them?

PC Aviator took subscriptions so the subscriber's agreement is still with PC Aviator as are the responsibilities. Unless, of cource, got the subscriber's agreement to novate all the ageements.

 

 

Either you're selectively reading PCAviator's posts, or you're purposely trying to deceive readers by leaving parts of their quote out of your replies.

 

What they actually wrote was this . . . .

 

Yes and no. yes we took subscriptions from the public when we owned and published the magazine. Of course we did, that is what magazines do. But please note that at that same time we were taking subscriptions, we were producing magazine and filling those subscriptions as part of that obligation. "Sold its obligations" - Yes in a sense that is correct, but its probably better described as saying that the new owner of the magazine agreed to take on those financial obligations as part of the sale. I can assure you that PC Aviator did not receive money for "selling its obligations" in any form. I can assure you that up until the time of the sale, PC Aviator filled all its obligations to subscribers up until that time. I think you are making it sound like we sold the magazine for a massive profit at the expense of subscribers (who are "out of pocket"). Sorry, this is simply not the case. If you believe it to be, then you are obligated to provide real evidence to support your claims.

 

 

As far as I can see, there is no argument to be had.

 

You are making claims against PCAviator that simply aren't true. You are distoring the facts to make your own case, and embarassing yourself in the process.

 

Since it appears you can't have a truthful conversation about this, I'm out of the discussion.

I have been dealing with PCA off & on for many years. Their honesty and integrity has never been in doubt, not to me anyway.

 

You seem to be on a crusade with this, and MGH, unless you have the contacts of sale in your hands, you should exercise caution with your claims.

 

This thread would look good with a padlock on it.

So it would be OK if owed you and when you came to claim it I told you that I sold the debt to a company in Luxembourg who'd agreed to pay you - so it's no longer my obligation?

 

iIf I'm crusading, it's on behalf of who paid money to PC Aviator and didn't get what they paid for - who are the rest of you crusading for?

Please note that we will not take any further part in this thread. We have mentioned and answered all queries at least once, and repeated parts several times. It is good to see that the process of the sale is making sense to the majority. mgh, we can appreciate your concern for readers, and perhaps for yourself, but please understand that the sale of a business is a legal process, and I think you might not be following on certain terms of this legal process in regard to the sale. I think if you read up on relevant laws and examples of buisness sales in history, you will find we have not done anything wrong in legal terms. At time of the sale, we fully expected the new owners to continue the magazine as normal. That has not eventuated to date, but we hope the new owners can pick it up and roll with it and get back on schedule, whereby all subscribers will continue to receive what they have paid for.

 

Again, for the final time in this thread... As part of the sale of the business, all financial obligations PC Aviator had to subscribers were transferred to the new publisher as part of the sale. The new owner/publisher is now liable to fill those obligations either by completing the agreement with subscribers to fill their subscriptions in full, or by offering some form of compensation if this is not possible. This is now fully and legally out of PC Aviator's hands.

 

Thanks for all your time, and I hope this has helped answer all of the questions raised.

PC Aviator had to subscribers were transferred to the new publisher

 

Did the subscribers agree to this?

 

The fundamental fact remains that, desite all the words about legallity, the subscribers paid PC Aviator for a magazine which some of them didn't get.

 

PC Aviator had their money but didn't deliver.

Did the subscribers agree to this?

 

The fundamental fact remains that, desite all the words about legallity, the subscribers paid PC Aviator for a magazine which some of them didn't get.

 

PC Aviator had their money but didn't deliver.

 

 

Ok, this is definitely the last post as this needs to be clarified, again.

The new publishers were essentially transferred any money PC Aviator had from subscribers as part of the sale. When PC Aviator had all the money from subscribers when we controlled and published the magazine, we delivered the magazine, full stop. The new owner now has the money subscribers paid. PC Aviator in relative terms does not have this money any more, and hence, once again, all obligations to subscribers are now in the hands of the new owner. You got it right when you said "PC Aviator had their money". Had is a past tense... we had it, we transferred it as part of the sale, we no longer have it. I don't know how much clearer we can make that point for you?

 

Over and out.

This thread is locked.