Members EdgeOfDarkness Posted April 10, 2012 Members Share Posted April 10, 2012 Mark III > POS mark V Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Tone Monster Posted April 10, 2012 Members Share Posted April 10, 2012 Oh hai!!! Just thought I'd add my $.02 as a CCV owner. IMO, due to the fact Brad owns the tainted Cameron name, I feel it could've been handled differently. He should've guaranteed the "owed amps" guys their amps if he was gonna use the Cameron name. This would've fully redeemed the name. Simple and somewhat silly? You bet!! So are people and their emotions. Or he should've changed the name and bought the designs/circuits and started with a clean slate. Brad is a good dude and a stand up guy, but I bet he would do it differently if he had it to do over. I would've never kept the Cameron name from a business point of view. Whatever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members seajay Posted April 10, 2012 Members Share Posted April 10, 2012 KIng Loudness and EDuiuema09820581 both sold theirs due to excessive shop time over reliability issues. I've read several others that had the same deal, but can't remember who they were. Hmmm, that's not very encouraging. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members redeye5 Posted April 10, 2012 Members Share Posted April 10, 2012 Psychodave respectful of peoples opinions? {censored}ing hilarious. Sticking up for a known criminal/scammer/meth addict... yup Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members "psychodave" Posted April 10, 2012 Members Share Posted April 10, 2012 Brad is a good dude and a stand up guy... Yeah, a great guy... he brough a good friend down from Canada, helped cover his expenses and was going to share a loft in CA. I wonder how that deal ended up... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members NaturalBornBoy Posted April 10, 2012 Members Share Posted April 10, 2012 Yeah, a great guy... he brough a good friend down from Canada, helped cover his expenses and was going to share a loft in CA. I wonder how that deal ended up... You talking about Mark Day??? What's the 411 yo? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members charveldan Posted April 10, 2012 Members Share Posted April 10, 2012 In B4 the donbarzini RT butthurt........eh, nevermind, too late. :soapbox: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members guitarbilly74 Posted April 10, 2012 Members Share Posted April 10, 2012 All this would matter if the amps were actually really awesome. But they're not. Decent yes, but I wouldn't pay more than $1000 for one. Cock rock tone in a box, now there's a new concept Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Ron Burgandy Posted April 10, 2012 Members Share Posted April 10, 2012 All this would matter if the amps were actually really awesome. But they're not. Decent yes, but I wouldn't pay more than $1000 for one. Cock rock tone in a box, now there's a new concept you mean hot rodded Marshall tones aren't new???can I make my plexi sound like Steve Stevens?? that {censored} is revolutionary! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Mr. Brady Posted April 10, 2012 Members Share Posted April 10, 2012 So wait, what's the deal with our friend from Canada and is that the reason we've seen less of his guitar faces lately? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members telephant Posted April 10, 2012 Members Share Posted April 10, 2012 Sounds to me legally Brad doesn't owe anyone a goddamn thing. Sucks to be those who payed for an amp and got scammed by Mark. The fact that Brad is still honoring part of the agreement while making them pay the balance on the new price is still doing more than he is legally required. As Tone Monster mentioned I think keeping the name was a bad call. License the schematics and give Mark his cut but use a different name. Now if Psycodave is right and they're (Metro) actually changing the circuit then continuing to use the name is even more disingenuous and that is pretty lame. It sucks Mark turned out to be such a dickbag, cause his amps sound great IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Tone Monster Posted April 10, 2012 Members Share Posted April 10, 2012 Sounds to me legally Brad doesn't owe anyone a goddamn thing. Sucks to be those who payed for an amp and got scammed by Mark. The fact that Brad is still honoring part of the agreement while making them pay the balance on the new price is still doing more than he is legally required. As Tone Monster mentioned I think keeping the name was a bad call. License the schematics and give Mark his cut but use a different name. Now if Psycodave is right and they're (Metro) actually changing the circuit then continuing to use the name is even more disingenuous and that is pretty lame. It sucks Mark turned out to be such a dickbag, cause his amps sound great IMO. The current situation is the ONLY POSSIBLE WAY that the people that got screwed by MC would even have a chance of getting their amp. I believe 2 have already got theirs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Mr. Brady Posted April 10, 2012 Members Share Posted April 10, 2012 The current situation is the ONLY POSSIBLE WAY that the people that got screwed by MC would even have a chance of getting their amp. I believe 2 have already got theirs. I don't quite agree with that. If Brad was truely committed to the people that got scammed they would get their amps at dealer cost when there was money in a fund set aside from Marks share to cover the cost of manufacturing an amp. If you take on a business/name with bad debts, you need to clear the bad debts first before moving forward. That needs to be your priority and factored in as part of the business expense. Otherwise you get a cluster {censored} as we have seen here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Hardvalve Posted April 10, 2012 Members Share Posted April 10, 2012 My impression of that thread was that they were keeping the components the same, but Mark had designed the board for the components to be under it rather than on top like most amps. The redesign is flipping the components onto the top of the board so it can be maintained and produced more economically, but supposidly wouldn't alter the sound. I think people on both sides are obscuring the facts a bit.I don't quite agree with that. If Brad was truely committed to the people that got scammed they would get their amps at dealer cost when there was money in a fund set aside from Marks share to cover the cost of manufacturing an amp. If you take on a business/name with bad debts, you need to clear the bad debts first before moving forward. That needs to be your priority and factored in as part of the business expense. Otherwise you get a cluster {censored} as we have seen here. Nailed it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Tone Monster Posted April 10, 2012 Members Share Posted April 10, 2012 Oh oh oh, let me clarify....I meant Brad being involved with continuing the line... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members knucklefux Posted April 10, 2012 Members Share Posted April 10, 2012 lets look at the math for a bit cost to build=$1800 (estimated, but probably pretty accurate)sale price=$3600profit per amp=$1800 1800 x 25= $45000 $45K profit. 10 amps at cost would be $18K. if 10 people paid the $1K upcharge, that's $8K. i'm sure MC's cut is enough to get those 10 amps out, but only two have made it so far. something's stinky. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members guitarbilly74 Posted April 10, 2012 Members Share Posted April 10, 2012 My impression of that thread was that they were keeping the components the same, but Mark had designed the board for the components to be under it rather than on top like most amps. The redesign is flipping the components onto the top of the board so it can be maintained and produced more economically, but supposidly wouldn't alter the sound. I think people on both sides are obscuring the facts a bit.I don't quite agree with that. If Brad was truely committed to the people that got scammed they would get their amps at dealer cost when there was money in a fund set aside from Marks share to cover the cost of manufacturing an amp. If you take on a business/name with bad debts, you need to clear the bad debts first before moving forward. That needs to be your priority and factored in as part of the business expense. Otherwise you get a cluster {censored} as we have seen here. Yep, especially in a extremely small niche industry like boutique amps. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members ~Abstract~ Posted April 10, 2012 Members Share Posted April 10, 2012 lets look at the math for a bitcost to build=$1800 (estimated, but probably pretty accurate)sale price=$3600profit per amp=$18001800 x 25= $45000$45K profit.10 amps at cost would be $18K. if 10 people paid the $1K upcharge, that's $8K. i'm sure MC's cut is enough to get those 10 amps out, but only two have made it so far.something's stinky. Mark's cut is frozen pizzas and mt.dew. What's the current exchange rate? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members almightycrunch Posted April 10, 2012 Members Share Posted April 10, 2012 Yeah, a great guy... he brough a good friend down from Canada, helped cover his expenses and was going to share a loft in CA. I wonder how that deal ended up...I hear that Mark is still stuck in customs at the border, might be there for a couple of months before he is released. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members "psychodave" Posted April 10, 2012 Members Share Posted April 10, 2012 lets look at the math for a bitcost to build=$1800 (estimated, but probably pretty accurate)sale price=$3600profit per amp=$18001800 x 25= $45000$45K profit.10 amps at cost would be $18K. if 10 people paid the $1K upcharge, that's $8K. i'm sure MC's cut is enough to get those 10 amps out, but only two have made it so far.something's stinky. There was some crazy thread on RT by one of the "owed" people and someone tried saying that the first 25 CCV amps didnt generate any profit. lol. I agree with your math although there were probably some design fees, but couldnt have cost that much. I wonder where Mark's share is going now that he is out of the picture? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Ron Burgandy Posted April 10, 2012 Members Share Posted April 10, 2012 Sounds to me legally Brad doesn't owe anyone a goddamn thing. Sucks to be those who payed for an amp and got scammed by Mark. The fact that Brad is still honoring part of the agreement while making them pay the balance on the new price is still doing more than he is legally required.As Tone Monster mentioned I think keeping the name was a bad call. License the schematics and give Mark his cut but use a different name. Now if Psycodave is right and they're (Metro) actually changing the circuit then continuing to use the name is even more disingenuous and that is pretty lame.It sucks Mark turned out to be such a dickbag, cause his amps sound great IMO. he wanted to use the name, because he knew it was the only way to sell the amps. He's not providing anyone with amps. he's just holding the cut Mark was supposed to get until there are enough funds to cover the build. Except, now he's wanting them to pony up another $1k to cover his profit margin. essentially he got a free list of leads to sell 12 more amps. he wanted to sell Cameron amps, not deal with any of the negative things, yet reap all the positive benefits of selling under "Cameron". he wanted to have his cake and eat it too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members telephant Posted April 10, 2012 Members Share Posted April 10, 2012 If you take on a business/name with bad debts, you need to clear the bad debts first before moving forward. That needs to be your priority and factored in as part of the business expense. Otherwise you get a cluster {censored} as we have seen here. I agree with this. I'm not going to assume I know all the little details of the situation (on either side). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members guitarbilly74 Posted April 10, 2012 Members Share Posted April 10, 2012 lets look at the math for a bitcost to build=$1800 (estimated, but probably pretty accurate)sale price=$3600profit per amp=$18001800 x 25= $45000$45K profit.10 amps at cost would be $18K. if 10 people paid the $1K upcharge, that's $8K. i'm sure MC's cut is enough to get those 10 amps out, but only two have made it so far.something's stinky. IMHO, Mark's "cut" should be the fact he managed to stay out of jail after running a $40k + scam. The fact that he is still making any money on this after what he did to everyone he scammed (including 2 friends of mine) is preposterous. And again, the amps are nothing special. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members almightycrunch Posted April 10, 2012 Members Share Posted April 10, 2012 He did not take over a business^ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Tone Monster Posted April 10, 2012 Members Share Posted April 10, 2012 He did not take over a business^ Not actually or legally. BUT thats where keeping the name was a mistake. It gives the impression the he did take it over. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.