12-Nov-2019 00:45 GMT.
UNDER CONSTRUCTION
[Rant] Hostage NegotiationANN.lu
Posted on 27-Jan-2004 02:07 GMT by Greg Ford260 comments
View flat
View list
There are a group of people, at Amiga Inc, who have decided that their personal reasons are more important than the interests of the company, employees, investors, the customers, and even potential customers, and have ceased any and all effort to involve themselves in anything at all that doesn't directly relate to these personal reasons, even if it means earning an income against it's current mountain of debts. Amiga is being held hostage, and someone's looking to do something about it. The only people that were in any position to remedy this situation were a group of investors who had already lost fortunes in Amiga Inc, and were asked for more money. They were concerned over the money already invested, but told that unless they invested more, they'd never see any returns on these investments ever. The investors didn't like this at all, they felt, exactly like I said, that the small group of people at Amiga Inc, were literally holding Amiga hostage for more money. They did the only thing they could do, they hired Garry Hare to try to restart the company and salvage something for the investors who had already invested large amounts of capital into the failed company.

The problem was, those few at Amiga quickly realised that this was an attempt to get around Amiga Inc's demands for more investment capital, and completely refused to cooporate with Garry Hare, and even going so far as to publicly obfuscate to it's customers Garry's position in the failing company. Garry was instrumental in generating dozens of potentially profitable leads in his three month project that he spent representimg Amiga Inc at tradeshows and technology conferences. Many business contacts and developers became interested and attempted to follow up on these leads, only to be shunned by Amiga Inc who was making it very clear to the investors that they will not be subverted in this way. Either they would invest more capital like Amiga Inc demanded, or Amiga Inc would literally sit on their hands at Amiga Inc and do absolutely nothing, ensuring that the investors money would not produce any potential profits at all, and keeping Amiga Inc in a nonproductive stasis untill such a time when the investors will finally cave in to their demands and give them the investment capital.

To this day Amiga Inc. and the investors are still locked in a standoff, and it appears that neither will give in to the other. The investors are still looking for a way to controll the damage, to get at least a little back from their investment or even wrestle controll as to lead Amiga into promoting it's current technology, while Amiga Inc refuse to both (1) go bankrupt, instead hoping the investors will cave in to Amiga Inc's demands, or (2) try to generate an income, they will not do this as this would be giving in to the investors, who they want more money from.

There is no right or wrong being implied here, but the fact remains nothing will change untill someone gives in. It's quite apparent Amiga Inc believes that it will be the investors who will give in, as they speak quite publically about expecting the next round of funding to be recieved any day now. However I don't know if Amiga Inc realise that, as we speak, the leads that have been generated in spite of Amiga Inc's steadfast resolve to hold out against the investors are being contacted for information about the way in which Amiga Inc has shunned them when they tried to follow up on these leads. I myself have been contacted although I couldn't offer them anything other than telling them Amiga Inc simply refused to follow up on inqueries I've sent them.

All I could gather from these people is that they are determined to do something about the situation. Unfortunately I couldn't offer them much. It would be in my own interests as well for this to be resolved one way or the other as my own plans are in stasis untill something happens as well. Someone has to give. Seeing as how I can't help them much in any way, I'd like to hear from others who might have information that might help the investors in making their case that Amiga Inc is intentionally keeping the company in stasis. I'm not sure if they are preparing legal action or whatever, but to be on the safe side, if you could refrain from posting the details, and instead contact me and I'll give you instructions on contacting the interested parties.

You can contact me at GregFordEmbedded@hotmail.com, and we can start from there. Thank you for your time.

List of all comments to this article
Sorted by date, most recent at bottom
Comment 1Whoa27-Jan-2004 01:54 GMT
Comment 2Mr. Anonymous27-Jan-2004 01:56 GMT
Comment 3MarkTime27-Jan-2004 02:33 GMT
Comment 4Lando27-Jan-2004 02:53 GMT
Comment 5anon27-Jan-2004 02:54 GMT
Comment 6James Carroll27-Jan-2004 02:55 GMT
Comment 7anon27-Jan-2004 02:56 GMT
Comment 8MarkTime27-Jan-2004 03:03 GMT
Comment 9Halcion27-Jan-2004 03:13 GMT
Comment 10Lando27-Jan-2004 03:42 GMT
Comment 11Lando27-Jan-2004 03:51 GMT
Comment 12anon27-Jan-2004 03:59 GMT
Comment 13anon27-Jan-2004 04:20 GMT
Comment 14Lando27-Jan-2004 04:31 GMT
Comment 15Christian KempRegistered user27-Jan-2004 04:46 GMT
Comment 16anon27-Jan-2004 04:48 GMT
Comment 17Christian KempRegistered user27-Jan-2004 04:55 GMT
Comment 18027-Jan-2004 05:03 GMT
Comment 19anon27-Jan-2004 05:08 GMT
Comment 20anon27-Jan-2004 05:30 GMT
Comment 21Coder27-Jan-2004 05:46 GMT
Comment 22Lancelot27-Jan-2004 05:59 GMT
Comment 23samface27-Jan-2004 07:27 GMT
Comment 24Sam Smith27-Jan-2004 07:48 GMT
Comment 25anon27-Jan-2004 07:49 GMT
Comment 26Anonymous27-Jan-2004 07:56 GMT
Comment 27Seehund27-Jan-2004 07:56 GMT
Comment 28samface27-Jan-2004 08:01 GMT
Comment 29Anonymous27-Jan-2004 08:08 GMT
Comment 30Sam Smith27-Jan-2004 08:10 GMT
Comment 31anon27-Jan-2004 08:10 GMT
Comment 32Anonymous27-Jan-2004 08:10 GMT
Comment 3327-Jan-2004 08:23 GMT
Comment 34Anonymous27-Jan-2004 08:27 GMT
Comment 35samface27-Jan-2004 08:29 GMT
Comment 36samface27-Jan-2004 08:30 GMT
Comment 37Sam Smith27-Jan-2004 08:30 GMT
Comment 38Sam Smith27-Jan-2004 08:37 GMT
Comment 39Greg Ford27-Jan-2004 08:54 GMT
Comment 40anon27-Jan-2004 08:58 GMT
Comment 41samface27-Jan-2004 09:15 GMT
Comment 42Fabio AlemagnaRegistered user27-Jan-2004 09:36 GMT
Comment 43Greg Ford27-Jan-2004 09:50 GMT
Comment 44Greg Ford27-Jan-2004 09:54 GMT
Comment 45Kjetil27-Jan-2004 10:05 GMT
Comment 46Greg Ford27-Jan-2004 10:24 GMT
Comment 47Damien Naviliat27-Jan-2004 10:45 GMT
Comment 48Abuse27-Jan-2004 10:46 GMT
Comment 49Lennart Fridén27-Jan-2004 10:49 GMT
Comment 50Mikey C27-Jan-2004 11:04 GMT
Comment 51pixie27-Jan-2004 11:04 GMT
Comment 52Greg Ford27-Jan-2004 11:05 GMT
Comment 53Olegil27-Jan-2004 11:07 GMT
Comment 54Anonymous27-Jan-2004 11:13 GMT
Comment 55Don CoxRegistered user27-Jan-2004 11:27 GMT
Comment 56hooligan/dcsRegistered user27-Jan-2004 11:27 GMT
Comment 57Fabio AlemagnaRegistered user27-Jan-2004 11:37 GMT
Comment 58anon27-Jan-2004 11:49 GMT
Comment 59Aled Jones27-Jan-2004 12:10 GMT
Comment 60hooligan/dcsRegistered user27-Jan-2004 12:13 GMT
Comment 61samface27-Jan-2004 12:20 GMT
Comment 62anon27-Jan-2004 12:21 GMT
Comment 63Greg Ford27-Jan-2004 12:51 GMT
Comment 64Anonymous27-Jan-2004 12:53 GMT
Comment 65ghauberRegistered user27-Jan-2004 13:01 GMT
Comment 66Fabio AlemagnaRegistered user27-Jan-2004 13:18 GMT
Comment 67Sam Smith27-Jan-2004 13:22 GMT
Comment 68Sam Smith27-Jan-2004 13:34 GMT
Comment 69Sam Smith27-Jan-2004 13:35 GMT
Comment 70Mikey C27-Jan-2004 13:40 GMT
Comment 71Mikey C27-Jan-2004 13:42 GMT
Comment 72samface27-Jan-2004 13:44 GMT
Comment 73itix27-Jan-2004 13:46 GMT
Comment 74samface27-Jan-2004 13:52 GMT
Comment 75samface27-Jan-2004 13:56 GMT
Comment 76Lando27-Jan-2004 13:57 GMT
Comment 77Eva27-Jan-2004 14:05 GMT
Comment 78Mr. Anonymous27-Jan-2004 14:08 GMT
Comment 79Nate DownesRegistered user27-Jan-2004 14:14 GMT
Comment 80Lennart Fridén27-Jan-2004 14:23 GMT
Comment 81Lennart Fridén27-Jan-2004 14:26 GMT
Comment 82pixie27-Jan-2004 14:27 GMT
Comment 83pixie27-Jan-2004 14:28 GMT
Comment 84Mikey C27-Jan-2004 14:30 GMT
Comment 85Lennart Fridén27-Jan-2004 14:31 GMT
Comment 86pixie27-Jan-2004 14:31 GMT
Comment 87Darth_XRegistered user27-Jan-2004 14:36 GMT
Comment 88Nate DownesRegistered user27-Jan-2004 14:44 GMT
Comment 89BrianK27-Jan-2004 15:11 GMT
Comment 90Sam Smith27-Jan-2004 15:12 GMT
Comment 91Greg Ford27-Jan-2004 15:14 GMT
Comment 92Sam Smith27-Jan-2004 15:14 GMT
Comment 93Sam Smith27-Jan-2004 15:17 GMT
Comment 94MarkTime27-Jan-2004 15:21 GMT
Comment 95Greg Ford27-Jan-2004 15:32 GMT
Comment 96Greg Ford27-Jan-2004 15:46 GMT
Comment 97Greg Ford27-Jan-2004 15:55 GMT
Comment 98Donald Fisher27-Jan-2004 16:02 GMT
Comment 99samface27-Jan-2004 16:06 GMT
Comment 100MIKE27-Jan-2004 16:07 GMT
Comment 101Jack27-Jan-2004 16:09 GMT
Comment 102Matt ParsonsRegistered user27-Jan-2004 16:11 GMT
Comment 103Matt ParsonsRegistered user27-Jan-2004 16:12 GMT
Comment 104kalmar27-Jan-2004 16:16 GMT
Comment 105Abuse27-Jan-2004 16:20 GMT
Comment 106Anonymous27-Jan-2004 16:27 GMT
Comment 107Gregg27-Jan-2004 16:41 GMT
Comment 108Gregg27-Jan-2004 16:43 GMT
Comment 109Tigger27-Jan-2004 17:01 GMT
Comment 110Seehund27-Jan-2004 17:29 GMT
Comment 111Seehund27-Jan-2004 17:33 GMT
Comment 112Gregg27-Jan-2004 18:20 GMT
Comment 113Jack Perry27-Jan-2004 18:26 GMT
Comment 114Alkis TsapanidisRegistered user27-Jan-2004 18:40 GMT
Comment 115Alkis TsapanidisRegistered user27-Jan-2004 18:43 GMT
Comment 116Gregg27-Jan-2004 18:49 GMT
Comment 117Sam Smith27-Jan-2004 18:56 GMT
Comment 118Jack Perry27-Jan-2004 19:02 GMT
Comment 119Jack Perry27-Jan-2004 19:05 GMT
Comment 120MarkTime27-Jan-2004 19:36 GMT
Comment 121Gregg27-Jan-2004 19:37 GMT
Comment 122hooligan/dcsRegistered user27-Jan-2004 20:06 GMT
Comment 123Jack Perry27-Jan-2004 20:23 GMT
Comment 124Gregg27-Jan-2004 20:39 GMT
Comment 125Darth_XRegistered user27-Jan-2004 20:39 GMT
Comment 126Jack Perry27-Jan-2004 20:42 GMT
Comment 127Jack Perry27-Jan-2004 20:53 GMT
Comment 128Amon_ReRegistered user27-Jan-2004 21:00 GMT
Comment 129Amon_ReRegistered user27-Jan-2004 21:03 GMT
Comment 1303seas27-Jan-2004 21:04 GMT
Comment 131acg27-Jan-2004 22:05 GMT
Comment 132Bodie27-Jan-2004 22:23 GMT
Comment 133Bodie27-Jan-2004 22:24 GMT
Comment 134Martin27-Jan-2004 23:03 GMT
Comment 135Jack Perry27-Jan-2004 23:08 GMT
Comment 136Bodie_CI527-Jan-2004 23:48 GMT
Comment 137Bodie27-Jan-2004 23:53 GMT
Comment 138Bodie_CI527-Jan-2004 23:53 GMT
Comment 139Bodie_CI527-Jan-2004 23:56 GMT
Comment 140MarkTime28-Jan-2004 00:54 GMT
Comment 141Jack Perry28-Jan-2004 04:49 GMT
Comment 142Fabio AlemagnaRegistered user28-Jan-2004 07:27 GMT
Comment 143samface28-Jan-2004 08:03 GMT
Comment 144samface28-Jan-2004 08:42 GMT
Comment 145Anonymous28-Jan-2004 10:02 GMT
Comment 146samface28-Jan-2004 10:09 GMT
Comment 147anon28-Jan-2004 10:10 GMT
Comment 148enough is enough28-Jan-2004 10:11 GMT
Comment 149samface28-Jan-2004 10:21 GMT
Comment 150samface28-Jan-2004 10:25 GMT
Comment 151Oppressor28-Jan-2004 10:38 GMT
Comment 152Don CoxRegistered user28-Jan-2004 10:46 GMT
Comment 153samface28-Jan-2004 11:03 GMT
Comment 154Oppressor28-Jan-2004 11:17 GMT
Comment 155samface28-Jan-2004 12:07 GMT
Comment 156Jack Perry28-Jan-2004 12:21 GMT
Comment 157Jack Perry28-Jan-2004 12:37 GMT
Comment 158Jack Perry28-Jan-2004 12:39 GMT
Comment 159samface28-Jan-2004 12:46 GMT
Comment 160Lennart Fridén28-Jan-2004 12:59 GMT
Comment 161samface28-Jan-2004 13:09 GMT
Comment 162Kronos28-Jan-2004 13:35 GMT
Comment 163pixie28-Jan-2004 14:09 GMT
Comment 164Vitruvius28-Jan-2004 14:43 GMT
Comment 165Oppressor28-Jan-2004 14:52 GMT
Comment 166Oppressor28-Jan-2004 15:16 GMT
Comment 167samface28-Jan-2004 15:17 GMT
Comment 168samface28-Jan-2004 15:22 GMT
Comment 169samface28-Jan-2004 15:33 GMT
Comment 170Oppressor28-Jan-2004 15:37 GMT
Comment 171Oppressor28-Jan-2004 15:38 GMT
Comment 172Jack Perry28-Jan-2004 15:44 GMT
Comment 173Kronos28-Jan-2004 16:54 GMT
Comment 174Don CoxRegistered user28-Jan-2004 17:29 GMT
Comment 175samface28-Jan-2004 20:58 GMT
Comment 176Fabio AlemagnaRegistered user28-Jan-2004 21:47 GMT
Comment 1773seas28-Jan-2004 22:56 GMT
Comment 178Christer29-Jan-2004 06:28 GMT
Comment 179-D-29-Jan-2004 08:55 GMT
Comment 180samface29-Jan-2004 09:34 GMT
Comment 181Lennart Fridén29-Jan-2004 10:07 GMT
Comment 182samface29-Jan-2004 10:23 GMT
Comment 183samface29-Jan-2004 10:32 GMT
Comment 184samface29-Jan-2004 10:33 GMT
Comment 185samface29-Jan-2004 10:50 GMT
Comment 186Jack Perry29-Jan-2004 11:18 GMT
Comment 187Minuous29-Jan-2004 11:23 GMT
Comment 188Oppressor29-Jan-2004 12:00 GMT
Comment 189Vitruvius29-Jan-2004 12:36 GMT
Comment 190Anonymous29-Jan-2004 12:50 GMT
Comment 191Jack Perry29-Jan-2004 12:58 GMT
Comment 192samface29-Jan-2004 13:15 GMT
Comment 193Oppressor29-Jan-2004 13:39 GMT
Comment 194samface29-Jan-2004 15:14 GMT
Comment 195Fabio AlemagnaRegistered user29-Jan-2004 15:24 GMT
Comment 196samface29-Jan-2004 16:02 GMT
Comment 197Lennart Fridén29-Jan-2004 17:23 GMT
Comment 198Lennart Fridén29-Jan-2004 17:27 GMT
Comment 199samface29-Jan-2004 17:41 GMT
Comment 200Fabio AlemagnaRegistered user29-Jan-2004 20:17 GMT
Comment 201Fabio AlemagnaRegistered user29-Jan-2004 20:22 GMT
Comment 202samface29-Jan-2004 22:48 GMT
Comment 203samface29-Jan-2004 23:23 GMT
Comment 204Oppressor30-Jan-2004 01:16 GMT
Comment 205-D-30-Jan-2004 07:23 GMT
Comment 206Ketzer30-Jan-2004 12:43 GMT
Comment 207Fabio AlemagnaRegistered user30-Jan-2004 13:15 GMT
Comment 208samface31-Jan-2004 06:59 GMT
Comment 209samface31-Jan-2004 07:06 GMT
Comment 210samface31-Jan-2004 07:17 GMT
Comment 211samface31-Jan-2004 07:21 GMT
Comment 212samface31-Jan-2004 07:39 GMT
Comment 213Oppressor31-Jan-2004 13:33 GMT
Comment 214samface31-Jan-2004 14:31 GMT
Comment 215Lennart Fridén31-Jan-2004 15:21 GMT
Comment 216Lennart Fridén31-Jan-2004 15:26 GMT
Comment 217Lennart Fridén31-Jan-2004 15:29 GMT
Comment 218Oppressor31-Jan-2004 15:31 GMT
Comment 219Oppressor31-Jan-2004 16:17 GMT
Comment 220samface01-Feb-2004 14:05 GMT
Comment 221samface01-Feb-2004 14:31 GMT
Comment 222samface01-Feb-2004 14:47 GMT
Comment 223Oppressor01-Feb-2004 14:52 GMT
Comment 224Oppressor01-Feb-2004 16:25 GMT
Comment 225samface01-Feb-2004 16:46 GMT
Comment 226samface01-Feb-2004 16:55 GMT
Comment 227Oppressor01-Feb-2004 17:23 GMT
Comment 228samface01-Feb-2004 17:48 GMT
Comment 229samface01-Feb-2004 17:49 GMT
Comment 230Oppressor01-Feb-2004 18:25 GMT
Comment 231samface01-Feb-2004 18:50 GMT
Comment 232samface01-Feb-2004 18:57 GMT
Comment 233Oppressor01-Feb-2004 20:00 GMT
Comment 234Oppressor01-Feb-2004 20:11 GMT
Comment 235samface02-Feb-2004 09:37 GMT
Comment 236samface02-Feb-2004 09:57 GMT
Comment 237Oppressor02-Feb-2004 14:06 GMT
Comment 238Oppressor02-Feb-2004 14:09 GMT
Comment 239samface02-Feb-2004 18:12 GMT
Comment 240samface02-Feb-2004 21:06 GMT
Comment 241Oppressor02-Feb-2004 23:04 GMT
Comment 242samface03-Feb-2004 07:01 GMT
Comment 243Oppressor03-Feb-2004 11:24 GMT
Comment 244samface03-Feb-2004 12:57 GMT
Comment 245samface03-Feb-2004 13:04 GMT
Comment 246Oppressor03-Feb-2004 13:13 GMT
Comment 247Oppressor03-Feb-2004 13:29 GMT
Comment 248Oppressor03-Feb-2004 14:06 GMT
Comment 249Lennart Fridén04-Feb-2004 08:21 GMT
Comment 250samface04-Feb-2004 16:39 GMT
Comment 251samface04-Feb-2004 16:46 GMT
Comment 252Lennart Fridén04-Feb-2004 19:44 GMT
Comment 253Oppressor04-Feb-2004 21:27 GMT
Comment 254samface05-Feb-2004 00:12 GMT
Comment 255samface05-Feb-2004 00:32 GMT
Comment 256Oppressor05-Feb-2004 00:44 GMT
Comment 257samface05-Feb-2004 14:41 GMT
Comment 258samface05-Feb-2004 15:29 GMT
Comment 259.jon17-Mar-2004 03:59 GMT
Comment 260.jon19-Mar-2004 05:31 GMT
Back to Top