Sondors Fact Finding. Due Diligence. Scrutiny.
- Thread starter Admin
- Start date
stevenast
Well-Known Member
The "sleazy" guy is still asking for more money. So perhaps people are being helped by reading this, because it prevents them from sending money to this person, or inspires them to ask for a refund from their credit card company.
@stevenast I don't think it matters what the result of any review would be, Sondors has the money of funders and that is that,did you see how the sale of the bikes progressively stalled, they hardly sold any bikes in the second wave at $649 honestly, to suggest Sondors will be trying to sell at $1299 is again misleading imo.
In relation to your last comment, there is a wave of scepticism from different quarters concerning Sondors claims and there always has been from the moment this Campaign started.
In relation to your last comment, there is a wave of scepticism from different quarters concerning Sondors claims and there always has been from the moment this Campaign started.
Surely Courts' job or at least his focus is to review bikes independently and impartially and I would expect him to do no less once or if he receives his bike - my experience of life has taught me to trust two things only - dogs and intuition. There will be another sting in the tail in this Campaign for sure, whether through the legal action and public spat with Agency 2.0 which is frankly embarrassing for both parties (I believe it may be purposeful) or something else will crop up for sure. Is there a news blackout on the May 6th hearing? Have you heard anything?
stevenast
Well-Known Member
Referencing the two quotes above, I agree with you, if he receives a Sonders as part of a regular shipment. But if it's some "special review bike", the way this program has gone, I think it would be best to leave it alone.
@stevenast I agree.
Anyone who had faith in a product they were taking to market would have made it available for the bike press to review as part of the Campaign launch - why didn't Sondors? There were two bikes at the one and only "demo" day but one bike was made available and you were not to ride it on the sand lol. There are two bikes in China, there are two bikes still in existence and only a fool would deny that the same bike is being dressed up and photographed in different guises and roles. There is every reason to be highly sceptical of everything to do with this Campaign and the false claims inherent within it.
Anyone who had faith in a product they were taking to market would have made it available for the bike press to review as part of the Campaign launch - why didn't Sondors? There were two bikes at the one and only "demo" day but one bike was made available and you were not to ride it on the sand lol. There are two bikes in China, there are two bikes still in existence and only a fool would deny that the same bike is being dressed up and photographed in different guises and roles. There is every reason to be highly sceptical of everything to do with this Campaign and the false claims inherent within it.
FTC Complaint
Active Member
Yes, and if you get injured on the Walmart bike you have two major companies you can sue, Walmart and the Manufacturer, each with deep pockets and adequate product liability insurance.
--In this regards the Sondors product is incomplete even if it is delivered. Ask for your money back if you purchased one.
PowerMe
Well-Known Member
Ian:
You've said at least a few times, if not more, on this thread and others on EBR, that you are passionate about this campaign because you want to prevent others from being taken by Sonders & his ilk on a scam, that you were almost a contributor but you saw the problems and didn't put your money down on that campaign and you want to alert others so they don't get taken. That fits neatly into the category of "trying to save others." Is it really necessary to do a search to find all the times you said this to explain the continued rants on EBR? That is what you claimed as your raison d'être.
Now you're backing away from that as if you never said it, and are claiming only a passing interest in the campaign and commented because you just happened to be on the Interwebs for your clients. Yeah, right. It's not illegal to be obsessed, btw, but that's what is going on.
You've said at least a few times, if not more, on this thread and others on EBR, that you are passionate about this campaign because you want to prevent others from being taken by Sonders & his ilk on a scam, that you were almost a contributor but you saw the problems and didn't put your money down on that campaign and you want to alert others so they don't get taken. That fits neatly into the category of "trying to save others." Is it really necessary to do a search to find all the times you said this to explain the continued rants on EBR? That is what you claimed as your raison d'être.
Now you're backing away from that as if you never said it, and are claiming only a passing interest in the campaign and commented because you just happened to be on the Interwebs for your clients. Yeah, right. It's not illegal to be obsessed, btw, but that's what is going on.
PowerMe
Well-Known Member
I'd say the same should hold true for every eBike being produced as a result of any CF campaign. Deep corporate pockets? Nyet. Product Liability Insurance? Hmmm...maybe but probably not so common. Why isn't there a concerted effort to get all (or at least most) eBikes or even just 'bikes' banned off crowdfunding campaigns?
@PowerMe
Something has been lost in translation, there is no concerted campaign by me, I did say the above and I stick by it, but it isn't like I set time aside to attack the Sondors campaign, I am a passionate person with a genuine interest as to how this turns out I have no commercial interest whatsoever
Something has been lost in translation, there is no concerted campaign by me, I did say the above and I stick by it, but it isn't like I set time aside to attack the Sondors campaign, I am a passionate person with a genuine interest as to how this turns out I have no commercial interest whatsoever
Last edited:
Credible Hulk
Active Member
I don't recall seeing or reading any evidence of this in Sondors updates, just wondering where you found this information? After all, it's pretty hard to ship anything when it hasn't been built yet. Unless you meant that Ivars is shipping the two prototypes back to the US for another demo day?
pxpaulx
Well-Known Member
Pretty sure the campaign also said first deliveries would be in May didn't it? Pretty sure I'm going to get my radrover before a sondors is delivered.
Credible Hulk
Active Member
Yeah, that campaign says a lot of things, doesn't it? Like that manufacturing would start in March. Still waiting for most of those things to come true, like the tooth fairy. Pretty sure I'm going to get fitted for a casket before a sondors is delivered.
But seriously folks, I took a look at the RadRover, plenty of people seem to like it. Two things: 1. I'd like something to ride before the snow falls (and this is Canada). 2. I've had enough of the IGG roller coaster, and have no plans to give them any more of my money.
I'm going to buy a local secondhand ebike for now, and wait to see what happens with the Sondors. If it gets here, great! If it works, I'll be thankful. But I'm prepared to write off my cash as a loss if all else fails and I can't get a refund.
FTC Complaint
Active Member
Sondors is really an illustration of greed;
--The press in the crowd funding space who were looking for a viral campaign and thus readership and advertising. to include yahoo, la times, business insider, cnet
--The folks buying this bike who think they are getting a bargain
--Sondors - Who is trying to steal as much as he can
--Agency 2.0 - At 10% of gross, plus notoriety
--Indiegogo - At 5% of gross, plus notoriety
--Paypal - At 3% of gross
All parties are motivated by greed. The after-effect of greed will be paid for in the end product,if it is delivered. You cannot fight greed even we all know how this kind of story will play out.
--The press in the crowd funding space who were looking for a viral campaign and thus readership and advertising. to include yahoo, la times, business insider, cnet
--The folks buying this bike who think they are getting a bargain
--Sondors - Who is trying to steal as much as he can
--Agency 2.0 - At 10% of gross, plus notoriety
--Indiegogo - At 5% of gross, plus notoriety
--Paypal - At 3% of gross
All parties are motivated by greed. The after-effect of greed will be paid for in the end product,if it is delivered. You cannot fight greed even we all know how this kind of story will play out.
Last edited:
pxpaulx
Well-Known Member
If sondors gets people the bikes, he will come out the hero of the campaign at this point, and largely because the naysayers (such as yourself...I claim no stake except to hope people get what they paid for...). 2.0 are getting a black eye on their business to go after a half million bucks, they might get something out of it, but their business is done in the crowd funding segment. Indiegogo I'm sure is paying sondors delivers to save face for their business - don't want their 2nd biggest campaign crashing and burning.
Call it greed. Call it capitalism. Whatever you want everyone wants their piece of the pie on this one. Just hope the buyers get what they have paid for.
vincent713
Active Member
I've shipped similar package before and it usually cost $60 - $80 nationwide. I had a feeling when I initially saw Sondor's shipping price, it was over priced to compensate for the lower bike price.
PowerMe
Well-Known Member
So all these business ventures are just greedy and should cease to exist because a whole lot of people decided to jump in the Sonders campaign pool and companies want and expect their piece of the contracted % of the intake?
- PayPal
- IGG
- Agency 2.0
And I suppose if Sonders only sold 200 bikes all would be fine because it wouldn't be considered so greedy afterall?
There's an element of something else going on here, far beyond the normal CF issues. It's like the only thing that would be acceptable at all for some people is if free eBikes were handed out en masse, because really, anything else would be so greedy & unfair!
- PayPal
- IGG
- Agency 2.0
And I suppose if Sonders only sold 200 bikes all would be fine because it wouldn't be considered so greedy afterall?
There's an element of something else going on here, far beyond the normal CF issues. It's like the only thing that would be acceptable at all for some people is if free eBikes were handed out en masse, because really, anything else would be so greedy & unfair!
Similar threads
- Deleted member 4210
- Off-Topic Non-Ebike Discussion