[CANiSLAYu]

I have no horse in this race, but doesn't hurt to be informed. I'll just leave this here (NSFW for language).

 

[McMadface]

There is no proof there that Rob left with the money. Slander...

Technically, it would be Libel, since it's published, and not spoken, words that we're talking about. The elements to libel (defamation) typically are: (1) defendant made a false and defamatory statement concerning the plaintiff; (2) the defendant made the statement to a third party knowing it was false; and (3) and the defendant acted at least negligently in publishing the statement.

Here, @Aevum seems to genuinely believe that the statement that IMR Bob is a coward and a thief, having taken the money from the Trinity backers to start IMR. If true, the 2nd element of Libel is defeated. Second, the evidence available seems to back up the statement that IMR Bob basically stole the Trinity backers' money to start up IMR free and clear of the obligation to provide the backers with a product.

Therefore, I, McMadface, presiding Permanent Supreme Judge of the Court of Public Opinion hereby declare that based upon the available evidence, there was no slander or libel or defamation.

 

[MrLocoLuciano]

Who exactly knows where the money went ?
Can someone proove the money was stolen ?
I know a lot of firm that close without honouring all orders or jobs... And no one is stealling money.

Talking without knowing is normal I guess...

For shure I understand injured buyers, but it does not give right to say everything.

 

[duaned]

Who exactly knows where the money went ?
Can someone proove the money was stolen ?
I know a lot of firm that close without honouring all orders or jobs... And no one is stealling money.

So if people have paid money to a person, company or organisation and they do not receive goods or services for money paid then how is that not stealing? I bet if you sent me $500 and I gave you nothing in return you would be onto the poll-eece claiming I stole your money!

 

[CANiSLAYu]

You're taking this way too seriously. It's like if someone pissed on your boots and told you it's raining and you bought it because you didn't see them in the act. Any reasonable person can observe the facts and connect the dots and come to the conclusion.
*Backers gave 130K GBP (roughly $168K USD on today's exchange rate) for a product they never received
*The company offered no explanation at all about what was happening and where the money went. They went radio silent.
*The same guy mysteriously starts a new company

What conclusion would you come to with given those circumstances? It was like the Michael Scott Paper Company and he blew through the money in abject failure and then just started all over again hoping for a better outcome?

 

[MrLocoLuciano]

I'm not defending Rob here as I don't have the answer / explanation.

So i can only say what I said in my last post. I give up trying to explain my point further.

 

[McMadface]

Who exactly knows where the money went ?

IMR Bob

Can someone proove the money was stolen ?

Not really unless someone files a lawsuit and obtains Trinity's, IMR's, and IMR Bob's financial records.

I know a lot of firm that close without honouring all orders or jobs... And no one is stealling money.

Yes, I actually think it's likely that IMR Bob is not that good at running a business and ran Trinity into the ground. He probably was taking too high of a salary for himself and his wife, leaving the company with not enough funds to produce all of their orders to the promised level of quality. Because of the upside-down financials, he probably could not get any investment funding for Trinity. However, an investor might not have a problem using Bob's engineering and marketing chops to start a new company -- IMR -- with the investor controlling the operations. All of this is completely conjecture on my part.

But you have to admit, the optics on the situation are terrible. From the facts that are publicly known, it looks like IMR Bob looted Trinity, thereby receiving capital to start IMR without the burden of having to fulfill promised orders or share any of the profit with anyone. Coupled with the lack of communication from IMR Bob on exactly what happened, it looks and feels and sounds like the dude found a scummy way to steal money to start a different venture.

Regardless of what actually happened, @Aevum did not commit defamation (slander/libel) if he actually came to that conclusion and believes that is what happened, which is the same belief held by most of the people responding to this. I don't know what really happened and don't want to really comment on it, but if it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck...

 

[jsmiller58]

So if people have paid money to a person, company or organisation and they do not receive goods or services for money paid then how is that not stealing? I bet if you sent me $500 and I gave you nothing in return you would be onto the poll-eece claiming I stole your money!

Simple issue. Trinity did not honor its obligations. Bob was an employee of Trinity. Trinity was in part at least owned by Bob's wife. Bob starts a new company making IEMs

The above are the facts. Everyone then conflates those facts with conjecture that Bob must have stolen the money, and treats that conjecture as facts. You really should know the difference.

I really feel sorry for those ripped off by Trinity. But, unless you have hard facts, then state what you are saying as your guesswork. This is a human being you are talking about. And mob rule and cyberbullying should be beneath each and everyone of you.

If you have FACTS directly tying Bob to malfeasance then take that to the appropriate authorities. Otherwise, just bear your little cross life gave you to carry.

 

[Levanter]

Everyone who was scammed should just spam the IMR threads until Bob gives an answer/feedback. After all, if he/his wife owns/co-owned Trinity, they are bound to have knowledge of what happened even if they allegedly "did not cheat",

 

[MrLocoLuciano]

Simple issue. Trinity did not honor its obligations. Bob was an employee of Trinity. Trinity was in part at least owned by Bob's wife. Bob starts a new company making IEMs

The above are the facts. Everyone then conflates those facts with conjecture that Bob must have stolen the money, and treats that conjecture as facts. You really should know the difference.

I really feel sorry for those ripped off by Trinity. But, unless you have hard facts, then state what you are saying as your guesswork. This is a human being you are talking about. And mob rule and cyberbullying should be beneath each and everyone of you.

If you have FACTS directly tying Bob to malfeasance then take that to the appropriate authorities. Otherwise, just bear your little cross life gave you to carry.

Indeed ! Happy to see i'm not the only one to think that...

 

[mvvRAZ]

I do agree that you need proof before you make any definitive statements, but this is a *very* dodgy situation where the owner of the company was involved in a case where 150k went missing.

That money disappearing is a fact, and his wife being a shareholder is also a fact

Sure innocent until proven guilty is a sound principle, but to be proven guilty someone needs to start a lawsuit first, so that can't really happen. To be absolved of any responsibility for that situation just because nobody sued him isn't really that reasonable either - imo he should at least provide an explanation for what happened there

 

[RSC08]

You have to understand that most of the people defending IMR on this conversation (jsmiller58, mrlocoluciano and kdphan) are also individuals that pre-ordered his last IEM, the Rah (which is also another IEM that was always under a "fake discount" and whose "exclusive pre-order" was supposed to end on September 9th but ended up going all the way to October 18th, at least). So they do have cat in this fight, cause if other backers start pulling their money, who knows what can happen.

 

[MrLocoLuciano]

You have to understand that most of the people defending IMR on this conversation (jsmiller58, mrlocoluciano and kdphan) are also individuals that pre-ordered his last IEM, the Rah (which is also another IEM that was always under a "fake discount" and whose "exclusive pre-order" was supposed to end on September 9th but ended up going all the way to October 18th, at least). So they do have cat in this fight, cause if other backers start pulling their money, who knows what can happen.

You just keep talking for strange purpose...
Not defending, just saying you and others are taking shortcuts.
If someone has à problem with IMR then they don't buy, but talking bulls*** all the time is a little useless. Kind of thing that does seems hard for some...

If it turns out to be a fiasco like the Trinity one, i'll surely be angry like you. And ask for explanation and reasons to Bob directly. Not just talk on Head-Fi.

 

[mvvRAZ]

You have to understand that most of the people defending IMR on this conversation (jsmiller58, mrlocoluciano and kdphan) are also individuals that pre-ordered his last IEM, the Rah (which is also another IEM that was always under a "fake discount" and whose "exclusive pre-order" was supposed to end on September 9th but ended up going all the way to October 18th, at least). So they do have cat in this fight, cause if other backers start pulling their money, who knows what can happen.

You just keep talking for strange purpose...
Not defending, just saying you and others are taking shortcuts.
If you someone has à problem with IMR then they don't buy, but talking bulls*** all the time is a little useless. Kind of thing that does seems hard for some...

If it turns out to be a fiasco like the Trinity one, i'll surely be angry like you. And ask for explanation and reasons to Bob directly. Not just talk on Head-Fi.

Doesn't it make sense for members of community to inform one another about previous/potential scams in order to avoid future ones?

The way I see it there's a massive abundance of choices in the IEM market, from companies and people that have proven their trustworthiness, why purchase from ones that have a shady business history?

It's your money of course and you can spend it any way you like but I for one am happy to have been informed of this past case

 

[gLer]

I can only say that from my perspective, Bob has been nothing but kind, generous and forthcoming with information and advice whenever I've spoken to him. I didn't know the Trinity background before I "met" him, and now that I know, it doesn't make me respect him any less for the respect he's shown me. I don't have a view on his past because I wasn't there and wasn't affected, but can only speak to his present and my current dealings with him, all of which have been fair. Say what you want about the guy, but you can't argue that, with IMR at least, he's delivered as promised, made some very decent products that many people I know of use and enjoy, and that's about all that can honestly be said until someone comes forward with real evidence to the contrary.