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

Thanks Bill. To test my understanding (and I expect I’m not the only person struggling to follow this all!):

- MMWX used to be in business with Art as investors in the company.
- MMWX invoked a clause in their contract with Art saying that they can take control if Art defaults on some payment.
- Per Dan’s testimony, they removed a whole load of parts and IP in some clandestine raid.
- The CNC machine, which was a major asset against which loans had been secured, was saved from “repossession” by the MMWX guys by Art managing to move it to alternative premesis.
- The court case Dan had to testify in was all about the MMWX guys getting their CNC machine back.
- The judge ruling is that Art gets to keep the CNC machine.
- On the surface, this looks like a win for Art, but I think you’re saying that that this might not be the case, as the judge might just be fixing to say to Art that instead of giving the CNC machine back, he could just offer a cash sum or provide an equivalent CNC machine.

So did I get much right?

(I’m much happier being an engineer than a lawyer!)

 

The court transcripts could be super duper entertaining.

“We took almost everything in the middle of the night, no meeting, no process, no professionalism. And we brought some other soft doughy dudes to back us up today. We need that CNC.”

Judge: “Hhhhmmm. No.”

 

I posted that on 2/27/24. It was obvious then, as it still is now, that Dan was using his audience to funnel prospects to Art by confidently declaring the product and partnership were great... while simultaneously knowing Art and EAG were rotten apples.

Dan ended this most recent video saying hindsight is 20:20, his viewers weren't in his shoes and didn't know what he knew, and he was a victim of Art like many others. In my opinion, rather than defending himself, he should have taken the opportunity to be accountable and simply apologize to his audience for advocating a business that he knew (and many, many others suspected) was being run as a Ponzi scheme by a criminal mind. There are plenty of entrepreneurs who start businesses and aren't up to their eyeballs in lawsuits; story after story shows Art brought it on himself... and my opinion is that Dan jumped in to try to make easy money without regard for the Customer or the hobby, knowing what he knew and when he knew it. He should just man up and say he was trying to take care of his family and he made a bad decision.

 

At some point, especially for weary investors who knew Art was a risk and handcuffed him with a contract that heavily protected them (perhaps intentionally to take the IP knowing he'd likely default), you'd think they'd cut him out of diplomatic conversation and just cut bait.

I may have missed it, but is the ruling along the lines of freezing the CNC machine's location while a remedy is determined, whether that is giving to the investors or giving them replacement value somehow? I don't think we're privy to that, but it doesn't necessarily sound like the judge said once-and-for-all that it belongs to Art permanently now? Or does it?

 

Precisely, all while going on about how the Fchatters are a bunch of *******s for calling out this stuff. Can we be abrasive at times? Sure, but at least we weren't intentionally deceiving people.

 

Right and now that this is public, Dan has to try to save his reputation. Wasn't the case when the best we could do was read between the lines (though it was obvious).

 

Dan has been one of the worst offenders here on FChat. To paraphrase @rob lay, he's one of the biggest douchebags ever in the history of the site. Multiple page watch thread: self promotion, non sponsor advertising, multiple user names, hid his affiliation with EAG for a long time here on FChat. And yet he whines about his treatment here every chance he gets, or so I'm told.

 

Oh he does. He even went on to say how we all just talk big **** behind a keyboard and how he would like to fly one of us out there to see if we would say that stuff to his face. @RedNeck and I gladly volunteered because getting ****faced and being obnoxious are two things we deeply pride ourselves on, but unfortunately Dan wouldn't follow through.

 

Really, wasn't it pretty much their idea, apparently even mentioned my name and when we said "ok, we'll do it", they wuss out. I think it'd be fun.
A couple plane tickets and a case or 4 of beer and they'd have one hell of a show...may even break the triple digit mark.

 

Imagine having that punchable of a face, AND backing it up with that whiny voice...ooph

 

Shmee?

 

It was their idea and they did mention you by name. Who better than their greatest hater. **** 4 cases would be a hell of a show. I can already imagine the title. "We Flew Some Fchat Haters Down To Talk To Them, But They Blackedout On Keystone And Tried Hugging A Rattlesnake"

Unfortunately they wussed out because "We Would Never Actually Do It" which they are sorely mistaken on, because you and I have a great track record of bad ideas.

 

That sounds a lot more fun than anything else they could come up with...of course I've never made it through a complete video of theirs.

 

Split it up into multiple videos:

1) Totally wasted: haters get destroyed
2) They tried to hug a rattlesnake. You won't believe what happened next
3) Amazing remedy for rattlesnake bites - doctors hate this trick!

 

Based on NGS Dan’s video, the context of his court appearance was a pre-trial motion from the plaintiff side, apparently seeking a preliminary injunction or some other form of equitable relief, e.g., restore possession. It might also have been a motion to foreclose on the CNC machine, based on its having been designated as a security for some contractual obligation on the part of the defendant Black Orchid. (EAG is a dba of Black Orchid.) Whatever the context, the important point is that a motion for pre-trial relief generally does not decide the merits of plaintiff's claims for relief. Rather, that is what happens at a trial.

To go deeper in the weeds, it is only at trial that a court will resolve disputed issues of fact. Although a state's Constitution and statutes are controlling, generally a trial includes a right to trial by jury. And it is the jury's task to resolve disputed issues of fact. In a pre-trial motion, the judge must either assume the truth of the facts as alleged in a complaint or an affirmative defense, or make a finding that neither side disputes the truth of a given set of facts. The judge then applies the law, as he or she sees it, to this set of facts. Sometimes this ruling will entirely "toss" plaintiff's claims (or a defendant's affirmative defense). But if the case survives all pre-trial motions, plaintiff's claims proceed to trial, and all disputed issues of fact remain unresolved.

I agree with most of your takeaway, although I do not believe that MMWX is the plaintiff in the case in which NGS Dan testified. It is my recollection that MMWX is an entity created after Black Orchid's investors raided EAG's shop and took away all that they could carry. MMWX is now using the EAG tools and IP to convert F1 Ferraris for fun and profit. But it is my understanding that the plaintiff or plaintiffs in the present action are individual investors in EAG.

We can also agree that a creditor or investor (in substance a sub-set of creditors) routinely requires the debtor to put up tangible property as security for the performance of the terms of the agreement. When that security is personal property, because it is portable and therefore easily concealed, sub rosa repossession is a common remedy for the debtor's default. To color this practice as somehow unlawful or unethical is false or misleading.

Your final remark about engineering versus lawyering as a career path made me think that EAG Art would have made a better lawyer than an engineer. In my 30 years in the legal field I learned repeatedly that sociopathy is a tremendous career advantage for a lawyer, and Art certainly excels in that regard.

 

Hello everyone, If you have been following this thread you will probably know me. I started this thread when I was CEO of EAG. Before I get into what happened in court I think it is important to point out that I testified under oath and Art did not even show up to court… Art has a history of not showing up for EAG related lawsuits. That is why he has multiple default judgments against him. Additionally I have told my story on this forum and publicly dared Art to sue me if I am lying.

When I started this thread I thought Art was just bad at business and needed help with basic things. The problems EAG faced were not uncommon, they had no inventory management system, poor customer service, bad financial management, and wildly inaccurate timelines. These are all issues that are well documented on this forum.

My approach to these issues was simple:

1. Stop lying to customers.

2. Stop taking deposits until we caught up on back orders.

3. Stop ignoring upset customers.

4. Stop spending customer deposits on $1k sushi dinners.

5. Stop wasting money on unnecessary employees.

6. Return customer cars when asked.

7. Maintain an inventory management system

8. Stop chasing new projects and focus on building a foundation with the current product line.

9. Communicate with the public and own up to the issues.

After being on the job for about 2 months I noticed a pattern of lies. This is simple, Art took customer money and spent it on personal items. Art drove customer cars but told me and the investors that the cars he was driving were his property. I spoke with at least 2 dozen very upset customers with the same story. Art took their cash and then started to ignore them. Many of the customers I spoke with were not in EAG financial records. In some instances the customers produced documentation showing they sent money to places other than EAG's accounts. I found multiple sets of accounting records labeled "Art's Books" and "EAG Books" The problem with that is that he was using EAG invoices for all transactions but sending money to non EAG accounts. Simply put, Art was and probably still is embezzling money. After I had enough evidence I approached the investors about my concerns. The plan was to watch what he does and gather more concrete evidence and then explore legal options. Once I realized that Art was a compulsive liar and a thief I felt obligated to stop him from stealing from more customers and the investors. I arranged significant customer refunds and the return of cars. On multiple occasions I discovered Art had removed parts from one car to complete conversions on someone else’s car. With absolute confidence I will publicly state the Art delivered cars with parts he had stolen from other customer cars.

On or around July 7th 2023 Art logged in to an employee's email account and requested money from the line of credit to pay off his personal vehicle. The investors realized it was complete BS and didn't send the funds. When I got into the conversation Art fired me. On top of that he said in text messages that he would not honor my employment contract. In short, I got fired for raising red flags about his obvious embezzlement.

Jumping forward to the court date, the one Art did not show up for….

I was questioned first. Art’s attorney questioned why I quit, and about my “bonus contract”. I told the lawyer that Art fired me and why he fired me. I told him I did not have a “bonus contract” . When the lawyer asked how I knew I was fired I told him “I have a text message from Art saying “you are fired” , would you like to see it? And then I told him I never had a bonus contract, I had an employment contract and offered to show it to him. The look on the lawyer's face was hilarious, he clearly realized while he was questioning me that Art had lied to him. That line of questioning stopped. The summary of my testimony was basically listing times when Art lied to the investors. Art clearly lied to his own attorney.

Art did not “ win” the case. Actually the Judge found that Art did in fact lie to investors and violated the agreement. The mill was collateral and is a UCC listed asset. The Judge did not say Art can keep the mill. The Judge decided it was not an emergency. This lawsuit is far from resolved.

Art is a scam artist, thief, compulsive liar, and embezzles money.

Bill and Art’s response to this is very predictable. They will say that I am a disgruntled employee or that I did a bad job and deserved to be fired.

I’ll leave you with a an excerpt from a text message Art sent me on 4/16/23“I think the angle you guys play with Farah is, Art had some ****ty employees carried everyone’s weight for long time which caused him to mismanage and make mistakes" Leaders never blame their team. To all the guys at Art's shop, this is how we talks about you behind your backs.

Bill, if you want to know the real reason your car took so long you should give me a call….

 

Chris.
He doesn't even have... a driver's license
And, you and I are not enemies.
Remember when I spoke w/Matt Farah and gave him a reality check on all his EAG conspiracy theories?

The one and only place to take your case is court.
Bring tangible evidence.
I remain super happy with my EAG converted 599.

Did you see Art converted a Murci, and now the others are scrambling to follow? That's business as usual; Art leads and innovates, leaches swarm him to get in on it, then leave burned and cry on the internet when he doesn't follow whatever direction you/they want to take his company. I feel bad for you guys, consumed and obsessed with his progress (with all your "operational expertise") while getting nowhere in court. So far. If you have the heart, and the evidence, don't give up.

P.S.
Did I mention I LOVE my EAG converted 599?
They are, after all, still the world leader in manual conversions (TM).

 

This is the oddest reply I have heard to something like this in my life.

 

This a message from Art to me on 3/8/23 with a redacted name "XXXXX XXXXX car is in the shop. Please don't tell this guy his car isn't done. I told him we were making final parts after revisions. He wanted a refund."

If I am lying Art should sue me. Bill, when I worked at EAG Art did not have a driver license. You are clearly trying to poke at me because I mentioned that in the past. Weird, but ok...I never said or implied that we are enemies. I remember when I spoke to Matt Farah and confirmed the accurate rumors.

Bringing suit against Art is a waste of money. He gets default judgments and never pays because he has no assets to go after. This is the reason that he uses other peoples names on legal documents and loans.

People have taken Art to court and won default judgments because he never shows up. His history of lies and theft is well documented in multiple cases.

Art is doing nothing innovative. Cloning factory parts is easy. Naturally, he will claim that his parts are an improvement on the factory design.

I'll say it again, if I am lying Art can sue me. Concerning the Merci... Art bought a merci engine and trans. If I remember correctly he found them on Facebook market place. Design files for a lot of the parts were included with the drivetrain purchase. The Merci components had residual residue from a white spray that is used to coat certain types of parts so they can be laser scanned. So, Art bought reverse engineered design files for Merci parts from someone he met online. This does not qualify as innovative. These files were not very good, as a result I had to have one of my engineers fix them. My guys made the actually usable design files for the merci. (Art, sue me if I am lying) Art's former engineer made design changes to the files my engineer made. Side note, I lent another one of my engineers to EAG to model the torque tube on the 599.

The court date was actually a partial success for the investors that Art lied to.

I heard that he converted a Merci from a friend. I actually don't keep up with Art or EAG at all. I am only posting here now because of the recent court case. I didn't even know that you had personally insulted me here until a few days ago.

Art (sue me if I am lying) has a history of blacking out or hiding check engine lights. I obviously don't know if he is doing that on the merci and I am not saying he is. I am just saying that he has done that in the past. The hard working blue collar techs raising families that you call "leaches" left when Art's lies caught up with him. The team you call "Leaches" are the only reason 40+ customer cars got returned.

The documents that are "evidence" are with the appropriate people and I will not elaborate on that. The users of this forum are smart enough to understand what that means. Bill, I was just in court under oath. Art didn't even show up to defend himself.

The audience I am speaking to are the people considering doing business with Art, not you Bill. Some of my comments are directed at you but I honestly don't care. I just want to warn people about Art's thievery and update the Fchat users about the court case.

Bill, call me and I will tell you what he says about you behind your back. You can imply that I am lying as much as you want. It simply does not matter. The people reading this forum can make up their own mind. Again, Art can sue me if I am lying and he did not even show up to court.

 

@Austintxch is the Bill you are referring to @mrp_e ?

 

Yes sir

 

It gets worse, Mrp_e is supposed to be a PR person haha

 

I (and likely many of us) suspected he was more than just a random party to this. Is there anybody defending this business aside from people who are invested/tied to it in some way?

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stockholm_syndrome

 

You could do PPV. It would be better than the Tyson fight.