EAG, the good, the bad, and the ugly.

Good one.

 

It just seems further down the hole we go, would not help him, but hurt him, with this thread and your posts (but, the path to hell, as they say).

 

That sounds terrible. I'm sorry, as a fellow Ferrari owner. But it's totally irrelevant to what happened here.

 

Fair. If what I am posting is accurate, does it not cause you to pause and re-think at all? I'm not here to convince you in particular, I'm just wondering if sharing facts about what actually happened is a fruitless lost cause here.

 

As a neutral party, it's irrelevant what you state as accurate vs. opposition from the group.

My only point is it isn't going to help in any shape or form when this gets uglier and uglier.

Sadly, that is what we have judges and courts for, they get to determine who is more right in their argument based on presented facts from the plaintiff(s) and defendant(s).

 

Can't argue, very fair points.

 

Here you go, the moment you’ve been waiting for. There was such ****ery beyond this I completely forgot about it.

When I told Art that I was going to make all of this public he threatened to retroactively adjust the price if I did and was even dumb enough to send me an invoice!

He threatened to charge me an additional $5,000.




Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

I'm sorry, sounds ****ty, you have every right to feel burned it seems. But that's from June of 2020. Has absolutely nothing to do with what happened here with the investor, the company and apparent total lack of due process.

 

Bill P (mrp_e) - why are you defending art here so fervently? Have you talked to the former tech you know and asked for their opinions on art?

 

Well, there you have it folks.

I would encourage any other readers to consider his comments based on his evaluation of Art threatening me with a $5,000 penalty if I speak up as “but that’s from June 2020. Has absolutely nothing to do with…” when giving anything he says any weight whatsoever.

 

There is no shortage of opinions about Art, I'll grant you that. But my and anyone else's opinion of Art is irrelevant. I'm repeatedly referring to what appears to have happened here with the company.

 

What does your experience with him back then and this receipt conclude about what went down with the company recently?

 

Bill - why are you taking art’s videos at face value? You constantly speculate on other posters motives, but just happily accept anything art says as the truth.
Art has motives to play the victim card here.

 

I saw in those videos texts that confirm the conspiracy. And then the "new EAG" posted confirmation here that they are setting up a new thing. And as far as any of us know, so far, there was no due process. But yes, you raise very fair points, Art might not be telling the whole truth in those videos. Could he have fabricated those texts? Of course. Photoshop isn't hard. I'm reacting to what is being shared, I am very aware that real evidence might appear that justifies what happened to him. That's not what we've seen so far.

 

No one care about this. We aren’t friends with him.

He has many peoples cars that are incomplete and has no ability to finish them. How that happened is of no consequence to anyone but him. His customers want their cars finished, period.

Also, this thread is about EAG as a whole, not just what art caused by defaulting on his loan/agreement (from the sound of it).

You can try to control the narrative all you want but it’s not your thread nor is what you are trying to direct it towards the intent of it. The thread is for people to give their experiences with EAG.

Stop shilling for Art, no one believes you.

 

So which one is it?

EAG as a whole (which included 4-5 people who are peeling off to do EAG part 2) is leaving customers hanging, or Art is leaving customers hanging?

Of course it's not my thread. Or yours. Free speech.

Art's world is his responsibility not mine, I'm not his guardian. But what allegedly went down is way wrong.

 

Just a reminder. this is a chat site, not the front steps of your local courthouse. No such thing as free speech here. The chats are moderated, and there are limits to what you can and can not say that far exceed those rights granted to you in a public forum that would not be bound by a TOS and a TOU agreement as well.

FerrariChat ain't a bastion of free speech, although the limits are set pretty damn wide, there are still limits.

D

 

I appreciate that my pov is deeply inconvenient for others on this board and I'm aware that sticking my neck out might be foolish. And, I appreciate the reminder that I could be putting myself at risk by raising these points and questioning the validity and relevance of some posts/claims. I suppose the risk applies to me, as well as to everyone else who has posted unsubstantiated theories about fraud of some sort here. But yes, I really do need to take your advice at some point. This is both terrifying and exhausting. And depressing. And wrong.

 

Hypothetically, if I’m an investor and enthusiast who sees potential in a business that has been trudging through challenges tied to Art for four years, I’m not signing a partnership agreement that gives him anything but the tightest leash; especially if I’m the third round of investment in that short time - which Art has to have acknowledged as a miracle and lifeline when it came through and accepted. Hard to imagine he had much pride left at that point. His social media persona clearly isn’t his business (if that what’s you call it) persona.

So investor #3 gives it a go, Art continues to try to exploit his luck, and they respond to his inability to be reeled-in, presumably leaning on said tight-leash contract with an asset seizure. And then Art “cries” about it. How else are you supposed to deal with a partner who has gone off the rails and can’t be placed back on course?

Hypothetically.

 

Great points. So let's assume for a second Art didn't control the books. What does "reel-in" mean? He was outnumbered 5 to one in the company; people who are presumably doing something with cars, customers, money, so on. In other words, it was a company where everyone plaid a role in its operations. What behavior, specifically, does "gone off the rails mean"? What do you know? Did he commit fraud? Did he singlehandedly over-rule the investor and his colleagues, consistently, in a manner that put the company at risk and led to this alleged seizure? If you know, don't hold back.

 

I remember being the conduit for Art's side of the story on FChat and FB. I guess you've taken my place.. Thanks, I can't do it anymore. I guess you could accuse me of being a bit bitter after taking all the slings and arrows for a couple of years defending EAG with nothing to show for it and being left with empty promises.

 

I get why you retired! I haven't even been offered an EAG t-shirt. I'm asking questions about things we have all been presented with over the last week. I'm raising doubts about some of the theories and claims (sorry, Chris. My favorite so far is still HE DOESN'T EVEN HAVE A DRIVERS LICENSE). Txts that confirm the take-over. No due process. I don't deny customers have been burned in the past. It doesn't justify what appears to have happened. And as a small business investor and owner, it scares me to the bones. No, I have not nor will I invest in auto parts or services. I prefer to be a customer.

 

He doesn't have a DL according to him and he favored a sovereign citizen argument on his Youtube post defending his lack of a DL. So please, stop that line of argrument. Art has already admitted he doesn't have a DL on his own damn video.

There is no due process for an asset seizure by a partner. WTF are you on about?

 

I hesitate to even post this and get involved, as it seems like an impossible battle - but you make claims that there was no due process relative to the contracts signed? How do you know that? How do you know there wasn’t a major issue/breach which forced their hand?

How do I know there WAS? I don’t - but not one of us know what happened exactly - trying to pull “proof” out of anyone other than the few people directly involved is silly - no one has it. The screenshots (from both sides) are only part of the story and don’t have context - intentionally or otherwise.

If you just came in and said “I don’t know, I think there could be more to this and from what I know; Art might be being treated unfairly here - he has great integrity and is being unfairly treated” - not one person would attack you for saying that - maybe they would disagree (and have evidence to support their line of thinking - just like you do for your perspective).

But - what do I know. Nothing - and that’s fact! Haha!


Sent from my iPhone using FerrariChat

 

Proceeds to be here all day again