With the reported closure of Apez, rumours started circulating to the effect that CasperVend, which had produced a means of helping content creators utilising the Apez iVend system to migrate to Casper’s own systems, were in fact Apez rebranded.
Such were the scale of these rumours, that Casper Warden, head of CasperVend, issued a strongly-worded and entirely open rebuttal to the claims – and full marks to him for doing so. While there are still issues surrounding Apez itself none of them have anything to do with CasperVend, which has provided an extraordinary opportunity to ease the pain of existing Apez customers – and has done so with the minimum of additional headaches.
So, kudos again to Casper.
In the meantime, Apez have sold their land holdings in Second Life, with the monies raised being put towards honouring outstanding withdrawal requests – which is also good news.
However, as of today, Weds. 8th December 2010, account balances that have not had a withdrawal ticket posted against them have apparently been voided. It is unclear as to how many accounts are affected, but again, given that Apez was not operating as a bank, nor – I understand – were monies deposited via in-world ATMS or pending withdrawal by merchants intended to be used in support of other aspects of the Apez business, it still seems extraordinary that they are now apparently baulking at honouring all outstanding accounts by introducing an entirely arbitrary deadline by which account withdrawal tickets must be submitted.
If it remains the case that Apex are unable to honour all account holders with a full repayment of funds deposited (less the obvious commission, in the case of deposits via vendor sales). then it is hard to see how any potential purchaser will benefit in taking on the Apez brand.
Inara Pey: Living in a Modemworld 
You say that Casper is helping 🙂 But they’ve just made a shedload of money from Apez users — and now Apez is going to continue …
http://apez.biz/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&t=3095
… so, I think there’s some explaining to do. Will Casper refund people who bought their system, thinking Apez was going to cease …
There’s still the mystery of who is related to who and why.
LikeLike
Caspervend have made their position clear; Sure, they’ve gained customers in the process – that is some respects is the nature of the beast; it’s called “doing business” and happens all the time in the real world.
However, my understanding from the documentation I received as an Apez customer (as opposed to hearing rumour & speculation) is that the basic migration pack furnished to Apez customers was FREE OF CHARGE – so where is the profiteering you imply? Sure, the commission rate rose by 1%, but I’d hardly say that in itself going to see the money flooding in to the CasperVend coffers “by the shedload”.
Only if customers opted to move up to the “commission free” systems offered by CasperVend, would they have to pay out anything extra. and agin, the key here is opted to – not “coerced”, not “mislead”, not “blindly encouraged”. Frankly, had people opted not to wait and simply jumped to, say, HippoVend, would you be pointing the finger there as well and muttering charges of profiteering because people would have had to purchase these alternative systems?
At the time that CasperVend swung into action, the future of Apez was utterly uncertain; sure, it was somewhat opportunistic to move in on an existing customer-base – and Casper Warden himself has been honest and upfront about that in his own statement. Was it premature? Possibly. But again, as I said above, that is the nature of business, and if we’re all going to come into SL and call ourselves “business people” and “entrepreneurs”, then we’re going to have to learn to take the rough with the smooth. But again – it’s not as if anyone was coerced into forking-out thousands of L$ to make the switch.
Hindsight is also a wonderful thing. It is now possible to look back over the last few weeks and give the CasperVend offer a long, hard look given all that has happened since with regards to Apez; but to point the finger of blame at CasperVend? I hardly think that is justified.
Let’s be clear here, no-one knew what in heaven’s name was going on at Apez; Cenji was remaining tight-lipped; at the start of November major users of Apez were experiencing problems receiving payments for goods sold, and so on. The rumour-mill was in overdrive concerning the imminent “collapse” of Apez, and so forth. As it stands the offer from CasperVend didn’t come about until after Cenji made an announcement that Apez was effectively closing its doors. As such, and unless anyone can produce evidence otherwise, then I’ll continue to dismiss claims of collusion between CasperVend and Apez as little more than spiteful speculation.
Turning to the idea the Apez brand is “continuing”; with respect, I suggest you go back and re-read the announcement – which I’d actually linked to in my article – again. All the announcement actually states is that there are negotiations in progress. Nothing is by any means certain until the deal is done – if the deal is done.
The fact remains that the reputation of Apez as a brand is shot shot to pieces. In failing, it has raised questions as to exactly how what should have been “ring fenced” funds belonging to customers have been utilised to bring about such a cashflow crisis. It has become the centrepiece of highly negative, and somewhat spiteful rumour-mongering that has impacted those who have tried to assist in matter (vis-a-vis CasperVend). Ergo, one has to ask, where does a company such as Egoisme benefit in buying out what amounts to a soiled brand? Why should they risk the kind of finger-pointing and rumour-spreading that has dogged other attempts to see “the business” move forward?
Let’s face it, Egoisme are hardly acting out of any sense of altruism towards Apez customers – just as CasperVend weren’t. They’ll be looking at any such acquisition in cold, hard business terms – and as such, there is absolutely no guarantee that the Apez business will continue “as is” as you imply . Egoisme have not committed to maintaining the brand in its current format, they have not committed to serving the Apez customer base without any form of restructuring, review of commission levels or anything else. So to call this a “done deal” is currently somewhat premature.
I agree with you that there are many questions to be answered about the entire Apez situation – most notably around how what should have been “safe” funds were utilised within the business such that Apez could no longer honour withdrawal requests; to state there was a “run on the bank” simply is not good enough. However, to simply point the finger solely at CasperVend, given all that has gone on, and is still going on, here and make unsubstantiated claims of profiteering is, I would suggest, somewhat misplaced.
LikeLike