ZX Vega +


So the latest is that RCL (David Levy) has made some long posts where he blames the usual suspects for their predicament. He also blames Indiegogo for pulling the trigger when they supposedly told IGG that they would show them the Vega+ in London rather than send it to the US as IGG wanted. He then went on to say that if this ends in court cases, he is going to drag in Andrews and Smith as defendants seeing since in his mind, it's their fault.

Also, one of the demands by IGG was for a contact at Sky. RCL had claimed Sky were holding things up by pulling their games from the Vega+. Anyway, as part of a BBC story(or register). Sky were approached and they said they were in no way holding up the Vega+.
 
It won't matter. IGG has literally zero legal methods to extract cash from RCL. If the money is gone then it's gone and there's nothing anyone can do at this stage except for shout loudly on facebook about it, I'm afraid.

What's really interesting is that this is the only campaign which has gone tits up and IGG has waded in on. The only one. Thousands of crowd funded ventures fail across all the sites that provide the service and the backers are generally just left out of pocket. I'm wondering why RCL's campaign is different.

Oh, and there's also the shareholder's meeting on monday. I'm expecting RCL to be a no-show for that one.
 
It won't matter. IGG has literally zero legal methods to extract cash from RCL. If the money is gone then it's gone and there's nothing anyone can do at this stage except for shout loudly on facebook about it, I'm afraid.

What's really interesting is that this is the only campaign which has gone tits up and IGG has waded in on. The only one. Thousands of crowd funded ventures fail across all the sites that provide the service and the backers are generally just left out of pocket. I'm wondering why RCL's campaign is different.

Oh, and there's also the shareholder's meeting on monday. I'm expecting RCL to be a no-show for that one.

It wasn't that long ago that IGG announced it would begin using a debt collector on campaigns that don't deliver like this. So this is their litmus test for their new process

But yes, the real thing to watch is the shareholder meeting and particularly which way SRL's rep votes
 
Also, this was a ZX branded, and had Sir Clive on the board. That meant a certain (fairly broad at least in the UK) sector of the media was on board from the get-go, so had professional writers following this story, especially as it started to get more interesting/confusing to follow.

I'm slightly disappointed that IGG still haven't got actual debt collectors involved in this. I think if they're ever going to get any money out of this they'll need to get baliffs involved, and for that I think they need a court judgement against them. I was hoping to hear they'd started that process, although perhaps IGG themselves haven't actively tried to get money out of them, so in a way this is the first step of that process.
 
It's questionable how much actual personal interest SC has in the device tbh - I was at the launch party of the original Vega, and SC was supposed to be there (that was the main reason I went, aside from a private meeting with the directors) but was a no-show due to health reasons. Very disappointed. Since then there's been very little showing of any publicity surrounding the great man and his part in all this.
 
Oh yeah, I'm not saying he lent anything beyond his name (and maybe the ZX trademark, I dunno) to the project, but I suspect that was enough to get British journos interested.
 
Last edited:
Indiegogo reaches a new low:

Indiegogo tweet messages about Arrow Certification for projects, and various backers tweet replies about the certification being removed from the Vega+ campaign. Indiegogo are caught lying when they reply saying that the Vega+ campaign never had certification. Several backers upload screenshots showing the Arrow certification logo was there, and Indiegogo block the users and delete the tweet. An almost identical tweet is then posted, and once again removed when proof is uploaded by various backers.

Source: http://retro-computers.co.uk/daily-blog/
 
Indiegogo reaches a new low:

Indiegogo tweet messages about Arrow Certification for projects, and various backers tweet replies about the certification being removed from the Vega+ campaign. Indiegogo are caught lying when they reply saying that the Vega+ campaign never had certification. Several backers upload screenshots showing the Arrow certification logo was there, and Indiegogo block the users and delete the tweet. An almost identical tweet is then posted, and once again removed when proof is uploaded by various backers.

Source: http://retro-computers.co.uk/daily-blog/

Wow, that's bad.

I have a feeling things might come to a head if this ends up failing
So many people warned it looked to good to be true and even erticles mentioned the same. So what did IGG do, they allowed them to extend the campaign by a week so they could get more money
If that fails or doesn't deliver what they said, it might be the final straw
 
It's literally the same hardware as the GPD Pocket, so it's feasible. Not sure about getting it into that sized case though.
 
RCL claims to have sent out units to those who opted for a unit with a severely reduced number of games. And some people have received it like the guy below. Mind you, they have a shareholder meeting on thursday to decide on removing the directors

 
Last edited:
Indeed. These are almost certainly prototypes used to prove to Sinclair Research Ltd that they are being unfairly targeted by their opponents.

I mean, just look at that image. if that's not a prototype, I might eat a hat. Made of something edible....
 
Well the meeting to vote out the directors of RCL has failed. Sinclair research who own 25% of RCL, abstained from voting. That meant they didn't have the majority 75% vote needed to kick the RCL directors out. Here is a Statement from Paul Andrews about it

"
For Immediate Release - 2nd August 2018 - From Paul Andrews and Chris Smith

Paul Andrews and Chris Smith as joint 50% shareholders of Retro Computers Ltd, called for a shareholders meeting with the aim of removing the current directors of the company, David Levy (also a 25% shareholder in the company), Suzanne Martin, and Janko Mrsic-Flogel, and the replacement of them with an independent new director.

This shareholder vote was initially called with the backing of a Sinclair Research Ltd officer, as evidenced by a chain of emails. A separate representative for Sinclair Research Ltd attended the first shareholder meeting, and suggested that a two week adjournment be allowed for Retro Computers Ltd directors to produce financial and other information requested by Sinclair Research Ltd, allowing a fair and balanced decision to be made. It transpired Retro Computers Ltd failed to provide Sinclair Research Ltd with any information within that two week period.

At the second shareholders meeting David Levy used his power as chairman to rapidly close the shareholders meeting, and instead call for a vote by poll. He also used his powers to extend the time for that meeting to the maximum 30 days allowed under by law, setting it for 2nd August 2018.

In response to the BBC article of the 1st August 2018 regarding the SKY withdrawal of licenses from Retro Computers Ltd, Paul Andrews reached out to what is believed to be the power of attorney of the Sinclair Research Ltd majority vote to ask their intentions, but no response was received.

Paul Andrews and Chris Smith were informed today prior to the commencement of the meeting that Sinclair Research Ltd would be abstaining from the vote, and they would not be attending the meeting.

Without Sinclair Research Ltd in attendance or a proxy vote, the majority vote of 75% required to pass the two resolutions cannot be reached. This leaves the current directors in place.

However Sinclair Research Ltd, did in the notice to fellow shareholders and the current directors of the company make this comment

“It should be noted for the record that SRL have serious concerns regarding the solvency of the company and the ability to continue to trade and fulfil all of its obligations. The directors should consider the position and seek the appropriate advice as there is a real concern that the company is trading whilst insolvent.”

Both Paul Andrews and Chris Smith share these concerns.

As the outcome has been determined by default, Paul Andrews and Chris Smith did not attend the meeting, but wish backers to know they will continue working in good faith on their behalf.
"
 
What is puzzling for me is that Janko Mrsic-Flogel is also one of the Gemini Directors... and that one seems to have worked out...?
 
Back
Top