Simple, they blew him off until it was posted in Public.Rob also could have chosen this method first if he wanted to. He tried the High road, and it failed him, DSB failed him, and simmarket after 4 days failed him.It was only the threads here that action was taken, well, if you consider it action. Read closely, follow the time line, and then judge.The only High road here was and is still Rob, in my opinion.The rest is smoke and mirrors in my opinion, but one has to be willing to read the whole thing, every word, every thread, in order.

or, it was the weekend and they were at the blackpool thing, I know Francois was there, so maybe they didnt see it untill now. How about holding judgment untill they explain why?And besides, why should they pull a product that "suspicious" and not "proven" yet?

>or, it was the weekend and they were at the blackpool thing,>I know Francois was there, so maybe they didnt see it untill>now. How about holding judgment untill they explain why?>And besides, why should they pull a product that "suspicious">and not "proven" yet?So just so we understand each other, are you implying "THEY" couldn't reply on a Thursday or Friday, for a show that was on a Saturday and Sunday according to the show website.The notification was sent on Thursday, the 7th. Thursday is NOT the weekend. The file was not pulled until Sunday, although it is not apparent as to the exact time... :-lolYou see, I posted at 1:40pm pacific on Sunday and the Harrier was not listed at simmarket. Now this time is after the closing time for the show which was 4:30pm Local UK. So someone found time to delete the ad on a Sunday, but couldn't find the time on a Thursday or Friday when the show was not Occurring.Or they didn't bother answering any support claims for four days.That is a bit of a reach, isn't it, and it doesn't make any sense.One would have to assume that the whole company shut down for four days. Sorry, I'm not buying it.Does that mean that they had no sales for those four days as well? ;-)And as for Francois, he's apparently not the owner of the simmarket site. That is listed as someone different:From:http://secure.simmarket.com/impressum.php"simMarket.com is a division of The simFlight Network owned by Miguel Blaufuks"Unless, we are back to fictitious names again, which I guess is possible. ;-)But why would a company lie about who runs it. I think you have to question why you would do business with anyone that hides that type of information. Follow the time line folks..... Follow the Time line....

I have not posted often, but been around for quite some time and decided this should be the time.It is too bad as I have bought many products from FSimmarket (The simFlight Network) and had planed to continue to do so for quite some time in the future. However, I do believe their actions over the last few days have shown the respect for the FS community they hold is not about progressing the element of discovery and excitment of flying but merely a view clouded with dollar signs(

Hi All,Theres something about this statement thats just not right. Unless my memory is totaly shot some time last year DB posted on the SOH forums that he had sold DSB and was no longer any part of the business. Now it seems he just took on a silent partner? He's always been running it. Confused I certainly was when I saw DB answering here.

>"simMarket.com is a division of The simFlight Network owned by Miguel Blaufuks">Unless, we are back to fictitious names again, which I guess is possible.I can 110% assure you that Miguel Blaufuks is NOT fictuous in any way, as I

The opening post of this thread is a very impressive attempt at damage limitation BUT the damage had already been done. From a company point of view and also it's customers peace-of-mind, this dispute should never have been allowed to reach these pages. I spent a lifetime in business and if any of my staff ever dropped a clanger - muggings here, ME learnt very early on in business to take urgent steps to stop anything like this happening.Two expressions spring to mind 'Mud sticks' and 'where there's smoke....a very sorry event from everyones point of view and nobody wins now.Shep

>Sheesh! Talk about beating a dead horse! Get a grip Rob. "Edam"What exactly is your problem with this?Rob has a ligitimate 'gripe' which he's brought to a public arena as attempts at a 'private' solution were failing/being ignored etc.And it's pretty obvious that the reason they finally responded in the way they now have is PURELY BECAUSE of the pressure brought on them by this community, not in spite of it.Sure, there are still unresolved issues and I hope they and Rob can sort them out in time.My point here is to highlight the important 'power' that the community weilds by publically debating issues like this. Without these debates, folks would continue to be conned or misled by some unscrupulous developers/publishers with little or no practical way of redress by those hurt.It's all about consumer awareness and support - why do you find that such a problem? You moaned about PT/Ariane threads and you're doing the same about this one.Rob's complaint is by no means "a dead horse" and if you were on the receiving end of what Rob and others have been, you might feel differently.Toni.

Quite simply someone is not telling the truth.Rob quotes an email from DSB:"For your information, whilst Mr Brice has had a contributing part in DSB Design in the past, he no longer does, apart from assisting in enquiries from customers. He has no financial gain from DSB Design apart from any sales made from his own products since the business was signed over to me earlier this year."The Australian Business Names register shows that DSB Design, DSB Direct, and Sigma Simulation Products are all trading names of David Richard Brice who is registered as an Individual/Sole Trader. His registration number is 54 044 292 336 and he is located in the State of Victoria with postcode 3095. His ABN status is active from 1 July 2005 and was last modified on 11 July 2005, so it's up to date.Given that DSB said that Max Monroe was the Chief Executive Officer (of an Individual/Sole Trader!) when there is no such person, who do you believe?

Thank you, Toni !!Being a bit biassed here :-), I probably could not have responded better to a remark like "Get a grip Rob".Cheers, Rob

Mgh,I have to jump to DSB Design's defense here.(what am I doing now :-) ) ??As Ms. Love has stated (and apologised for), this was mis-communication in her Email to me, to try and hide the business transfer that DSB Design is undergoing. Which, as she admitted, was not a good start.That is, I hope I have understood this properly .....Cheers, Rob

I feel that the statement "...the business was signed over to me earlier this year" is more than misrepresentation when David Brice still owns the business as of now - 11:20 BST 12 July 2005.How can there be any confusion over a simple fact like that?

No, the RUNNING of the business was turned over, not the ownership.CEO doesn't mean sole owner.

If Simmarket were to immediately stop selling anything based on a single complaint they'd soon be out of business.Competitors would complain (anonymously) about each others' products leading to those products disappearing from sale.Seems to me someone is out to harm Simmarket and DSB despite efforts by DSB (Simmarket is not involved in any way, they're a victim like DSB is) to find out what happened and rectify the situation if such is warranted.It's all been seen before. In the end everyone looses except the single individual whose mission it is to harm the hobby for everyone.

>>"simMarket.com is a division of The simFlight Network owned>by Miguel Blaufuks">>Unless, we are back to fictitious names again, which I guess>is possible.>>I can 110% assure you that Miguel Blaufuks is NOT fictuous in>any way, as I