Bernard Zimmermann has published a long post on his POS Solutions blog tonight following my post earlier today. While most who read his post will see it for what it is, there is one point which goes to the heart of Mr Zimmermann and the company he created. He claims:
The last offer of any note for purchase of our respective businesses was from POS Solutions to buy Tower Systems, which we had a meeting to discuss.
This is a lie – there has been no such meeting. I made an unsolicited offer in writing to Zac Varga and Bernard Zimmermann – the owners of POS. After due consideration they rejected the offer as is their right.
My view is that POS Solutions is in trouble. This is a view I have formed based on steep discounting. I have seen quotes offering for under $5,000 what they usually charge over $20,000 for. Such discounting tells me they are in trouble. That and the number of newsagents who have switched.
To regular readers here – don’t worry. I am not about to let this valuable newsagent resource be hijacked by a fading competitor.
And are far as your views are concerned well you are wrong again. There is documented proof that such a meeting took place. The problem was that Tower systems was not that valuable.
Bernard you are a liar on this point and again demonstrating why newsagents are aggrieved at your actions.
I am not lying. The result is plain for all to see that not only was I not willing to pay what you asked for to sell Tower systems but apparently no one else was too.
As far as newsagents are concerned, with the recent development of our new version posbrowser lite, it probably makes little difference as we now they have a product at the same price structure as towers.
Bernard, you are a liar. You made no offer. There was no meeting. I have not asked for any amount. This post of yours demonstrates the lengths you will go to divert attention from the desperate situation in which you find yourself.
On POS Browser lite, this appears to be your way of explaining an 82% drop in the price of your software. Good luck to you. Newsagents who paid full price will be angry. Maybe you could provide a refund of the difference.
Whatever. Looking at notes the amount you were looking at was about a $1000 a site.
Bernard, there was no such meeting, offer from you or request from me. You are lying.
Through these comments and at your blog we are demonstrating how our two companies operate. Your comments are published unedited. My comments at your blog, fewer than yours here, are barred.
Your company is bleeding customers and therefore revenue. Fixing that will not be achieved by you publishing lies here.
No one is getting edited or not banned except viagra type salesmen and that guy that posts from Germany whose sole purpose seems to be hate Towers. If yours was so comments are published and unedited. I wonder why he is logging into us?
As far as your accusations of lying are concerned, I have documented proof for my claims. I am not lying. If the price was right, I would have bought Tower systems then. You could have been now doing what you wanted, playwriting in the US.
Bernard you have censored at least five comments from myself and others to your blog. Your censorship says plenty about your fears.
As for this latest comment here, I challenge you to a public debate where you can present your proof to newsagents. There is none because you are lying.
The only posts that have been censored are because of language. Having said that if you feel that some are not there that should be then please resubmit them.
Now I have not problem with some public examination. I have emails and diary notes. If you are reasonable now then the offer is still open.
Bernard, You have barred now six comments from me and others at your company’s blog – demonstrating your distaste for free speech.
There was no offer from you and I have no interest in any future offer from you.
Why not focus more attention on your customers – they need it from you more than me.
Mark
For the record it was company decisions not mine to disallow certain words used. When installing the blog software one high official woman here demanded the language block set close to max. When I reduced it, I was blasted and told to reset it. It was a corporate decision.
Having said that if six posts of yours were banned, it was for using foul language! So I wonder what you said that got those post banned? If so I don’t consider it a case of free speech. Having said that I do believe there should be some limits on free speech, in these sorts of environments if for no other reason then my blog would be full of Viagra salespeople.
Also I notice that your demands for public inspection of the documents that confirm what I say and you demanded has been forgotten. I wonder why?
Now finally you accuse me publicly of being a liar and publicly abuse our company. You quote misleading figures; attack the creditworthiness of the company and make other similar claims that are ridiculous. Then you ask me to stop defending myself. Stop talking about POS Solutions and I and I will stop talking about your company.
Bernard you are lying again. No foul language used, merely a statement that your post was untruthful now if you filter out posts because the word truth is included then that would be why you blocked free speech.
Mark
It seems in your reply that the main body of my previous reply has been ignored.
As far as my views on free speech, I think we are getting off topic but I do feel that there must often be limits, I mean you cannot cry falsely fire in a public place. I suppose it depends where the limit is drawn.
Anyway I just double checked your IP address and you are not banned from the board.
Having said that it is a company blog does have a strict policy regarding what many consider offensive language. I agree that it went a bit too far in what was banned. However having said that when I took out a few words off the list and used them, I got blasted by readers and then my business partner and his wife.
If your posts were banned as a result, I would say that you were lucky. A work around would be to reword the comments not to use those terms.
Or alternative let me know the dates of the comments and I will check exactly what happened.
Bernard I am not going to answer every point you write in these comments. Why would I? You demonstrate disregard for openness and transparency by banning comments critical of your company from your blog. This demonstrates your fear. The comments I and others posted were not offensive at all – just truthful in exposing you as the liar on the matter covered in your post. Mark
Before you stated to me that if since I did not answer every item, then it means your claim that what I did not answer is true because I did not challenge it. Now taking this logic you now admit that I am telling the truth!
On the third issue you now add that others have been banned for their comments – well I admit I banned the person who keeps commenting on how many bugs the tower’s software has and how lousy Tower support is! What makes your comment here dishonest is that it was you that requested his comments be banned? Now you condemned me for doing what you asked me to do! Maybe he posts on my site because he is not allowed to post on your site and he feels fustrated.
More lies from you Bernard. You ban any comments critical of your company. You are running from the reality that your business is failing because of poor software and poor service. Bernard, you are holding newsagents back.
What good would it do me to ban such comments? They could post their comments in any number of other places. So please give me a date for your so-called banned posts and I will check on your complaint.
Next far from failing our new software posbrowser lite which is specially designed for a small shop and budget is really kicking goals.
Our service levels were measured by an outside organisation Microsoft for our certification recently and we got a very high score.
Finally we are *not* holding newsagents back. We are not stopping them from going to windows. If they wanted too most could go to either our windows package or yours or a few others. They choose to stay with DOS. In the final analysis they are holding themselves back but they are my clients and we definitely look after them.
Bernard, It says something that you so keenly use my company’s website to promote your business. I understand you are trying to stop more migrating to us. You are entitled to your views as am I to mine. I an thankful that more than 1m400 newsagents currently vote Tower Systems as better than POS. Your 700 (or less) newsagent customers shows you as a fading influence in the channel. Your customers numbers more than any survey tells you how you are dong with support and quality.
I will say again, your comments here out you as a liar on the every specific point I have written about – your claim you offered to buy my company. It is only Tower Systems which has put an offer, in writing, to you and your fellow Director.
mark Fletcher
Bernard, It says something that you so keenly use my company’s website to promote your business. I understand you are trying to stop more migrating to us. You are entitled to your views as am I to mine. I an thankful that more than 1,400 newsagents currently vote Tower Systems as better than POS. Your 700 (or less) newsagent customers shows you as a fading influence in the channel. Your customers numbers more than any survey tells you how you are doing with support and quality.
I will say again, your comments here out you as a liar on the every specific point I have written about – your claim you offered to buy my company. It is only Tower Systems which has put an offer, in writing, to you and your fellow Director.
mark Fletcher
You are entitled to views but not to publicly calling me a liar.
I stated the following that we had a meeting with both of us to discuss my purchase of Tower Systems. The main reason it did not advance was because I felt you were asking too much otherwise I would bought Tower Systems. Further I stated that I am still interested although not as much then as now. Now I have a new software package posbrowser lite, which is targeted at the same market as a typical tower user with a single shop and a small budget at a similar price structure to yours. So I don’t need retailer anymore. When you asked me for some public examination to confirm all of this, I agreed to show the emails and my diary notes. Suddenly you refused to discuss this issue further.
Then you came up with a new item that I had barred five (later it went to six) and other people comments on my blog. I pointed there is some moderation but no-one is barred that is on-topic (stops spammers with Viagra products – I have one that is keen) and uses reasonable language. I also
asked for a date so I can see though the history files of the blogging software what happened. You presented no dates. I have also double-checked
your IP address and you are not banned from the board. I also pointed out that you asked that I ban someone comments on my board which I did. So now you condemned me in part for doing what you asked me to do! I then speculated that surely this unhappy tower user posts on my blog because he
is frustrated possibly because he is not allowed to post on your site. You should be able to figure out who he is from his problems. We know his retail prices are wrong in the cash register and his sales history file are continuously in a mess so your support staff keep deleting his history file leaving him with no sales history.
Now you quote the number of sites of mine and yours again. I repeat my previous offer of some public or private examination of your claims by an
independent person; I bet there will be no acceptance of this by you either.
Well if I am lying why do I accept these offers of a public examination? If you are telling the truth why do you not accept these offers? Surely an
opportunity to prove your claims is in your interest not mine if you are being honest?
You are entitled to views but not to publicly calling me a liar.
I stated the following that we had a meeting with both of us to discuss my purchase of Tower Systems. The main reason it did not advance was because I felt you were asking too much otherwise I would bought Tower Systems. Further I stated that I am still interested although not as much then as now. Now I have a new software package posbrowser lite, which is targeted at the same market as a typical tower user with a single shop and a small budget at a similar price structure to yours. So I don’t need retailer anymore. When you asked me for some public examination to confirm all of this, I agreed to show the emails and my diary notes. Suddenly you refused to discuss this issue further.
Then you came up with a new item that I had barred five (later it went to six) and other people comments on my blog. I pointed there is some moderation but no-one is barred that is on-topic (stops spammers with Viagra products – I have one that is keen) and uses reasonable language. I also
asked for a date so I can see though the history files of the blogging software what happened. You presented no dates. I have also double-checked
your IP address and you are not banned from the board. I also pointed out that you asked that I ban someone comments on my board which I did. So now you condemned me in part for doing what you asked me to do! I then speculated that surely this unhappy tower user posts on my blog because he
is frustrated possibly because he is not allowed to post on your site. You should be able to figure out who he is from his problems. We know his retail prices are wrong in the cash register and his sales history file are continuously in a mess so your support staff keep deleting his history file leaving him with no sales history.
Now you quote the number of sites of mine and yours again. I repeat my previous offer of some public or private examination of your claims by an
independent person; I bet there will be no acceptance of this by you either.
Well if I am lying why do I accept these offers of a public examination? If you are telling the truth why do you not accept these offers? Surely an
opportunity to prove your claims is in your interest not mine if you are being honest?
Bernard,
I have said here that you have lied in your assertion that you offered to purchase my company and that we met to discuss this. No such offer was made and no such meeting took place.
People reading these comments will either believe you or me. There is no middle ground on this. One of us must be lying. It is you, there is no doubt about that.
The rest of your comments and your other comments at this place seek to divert attention from my claim that you have lied. The best way for you to address this is to acknowledge that the meeting did not take place and that you withdraw the comment. Alternatively, take action against me for claiming you have lied in an effort to get newsagents to consider your software again.
Mark