winewood

[wymjym]

I read and thought about the hype within the winewood posting and just couldn't let it die.
In mid summer I went to the bluecooling site and was intrigued by what I read but questioned (in my mind) that the product could/would be built to aircraft+ specs.
In late October I revisited that site and it had changed a bit.
The other day, spurred on by the winewood posting, I once again revisited the bluecooling site. It had changed a LOT. Now it says, not open for business......before it did not say that, also you will notice that there is a discontinued product (how do you discontinue a "prototype"?
Kyle really gave a good response early on in the winewood novela. Then at the end of the posting winewood suggests that,
"Bluecooling was able to show me evidence that they had not sold a single unit to anyone, and I found out myself that they were not even registered in any state to do business."
Proof of a negative is pretty hard to validate my friend.
I agree with Joe....winewood sounds like a very invested bluecooling entity. I have been told that GEdwards works in the communications field. I don't know what that really means.
Now I can go on to do my work.
wj

[bigben2k]

I don't know who's running BlueCooling, but it looks like they picked up a bad rep even before opening!

I would expect that this would be run by some kid somewhere: it would explain the Paypal payment option. Then he must have tried to start a company, and encountered the usual obstacles: need a business plan, market survey, funding, registration, partners, etc...

He must have sold quite a few blocks if he had to register a company.

I dunno. Maybe Winewood is the kid (or an enterprising young man) or maybe he has nothing to do with it all... I don't see how Winewood's posts benefit that site in any way.

IMO, whoever is running this operation should start from scratch with a new name.

[Cova]

Normally I wouldn't keep a topic like this going, but I just finished reading an interesting article about Google published by Wired (which I happened to find from a link from [H], kinda ironic - wired article here: http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/1...ic=&topic_set= ) and it made me wonder. With the potential legal problems that Google's cache does cause it - just how much stuff does Google's cache have in it?

Well - they still have cached the old BlueCooling BTMS product listing page complete with PayPal links to buy all of the products with no mention that they are in any way incomplete or prototype units. In fact this quote rather makes it look like they are really trying to sell some product (and have sold a reasonable number and have had condensation complaints) Before Ordering, please refer to web chart provided to identify your CPU and matching BTMS. You can get the entire cached page here:
http://www.google.ca/search?q=cache:...hl=en&ie=UTF-8

Now I'm not sure about the rest of you guys, but I've sat down with [H]-Kyle and had a few beers and gotten to know the guy a bit (admittedly a couple years ago, but I don't think he's changed much). I'm not really sure why everyone around here is constantly [H]-bashing, and I try and stay out of it, enjoying the content of both sites most of the time, and disagreeing with a bit of info from each site on occasion. But whatever most of you think of him, Kyle is not really a bad person, and compared to a new startup company who's product looked like it shouldn't work even before I ever read a review about it I trust Kyle hands down in the case of lack of proof from both sides (remember, anyone with $30 to register a domain name can build a startup web-company). In this case though I believe there is some proof to be found, and it ends up proving Kyle right in the first place.

Edit: Automatically parse URL's and google-cache-style hyperlinks with URL's nested inside them don't get along. Should be fixed now.

[winewood]

Great questions guys.. please PM me for other questions: reasons at bottom of page.

BigBen2k and wymjym-
Let me share my thought process. Correct me where wrong .
Companies must register in any state the do business or operate out of. If Bluecooling was doing business as a DBA (doing business as) or incorporating, then the records will show that they were registered or have EVER been. You cant sell before registering under BCooling, so proving that they were never or aren't registered is quite easy and does prove alot. This is not even remotely the same thing as a $30 domain the web.

You are right that it would be very easy to prove that they did do business as the IRS and state tax offices would have to be the first to be contacted. A DBA is a legal entitiy status that says that no one else can use that name for business if it is registered. They must be registered to be legal if it is not a self named entity.

I want to be fair about this.. so I asked Kyle in plenty of time to back up that he could indeed show me proof that they did business. Kyle had every opportunity to argue the facts that I found and presented back to him. He didn't prove what he said he could when asked. What other opinion could anyone hold if they were being objective?

I think IF everyone asking questions right now was fair themsleves, they would notice that any proof a sale would be the easiest thing to prove. I wanted a reciept, or credit card statement, or ANY unit that was sold. Kyle said he could easily "prove it" and was very forthcoming with information until I asked him this one question. He didn't, and I belive he will not be to prove it in light of what I have found. He still won't respond to my inquirys. Why stop there if its "easy"?. IF we want to be objective.. no proof doesn't hold water to given proof. Even "paypal" proof. I don't feel that I am being biased or unfair considering the information given to ME by Kyle and George. Is this not the same information that anyone can look up themselves, or ask for like I did?

Yes.. they have a bad rap before even opening their doors. It was their fault, BC should not have sent anything to [H] when they don't appear to be objective (non money motivated, IMO). And yes that first review unit appeared to be a piece of crap per what I saw from a tester that I no longer trust.

Corva,
I want to be first to say that Kyle is a cool guy for talking with me and appears to be a gentleman. You and I have the same opinion in that area. The only thing that I disagree with him is the second article, based on what I have proof that he knew at THAT time. I have issues with the WB roundup and events happening after July 23rd on until the WB roundup articles release.

As to what proof is to be found statement.. you lost me.. no idea as to what proof you recieved from Kyle that shows he didn't use the wrong setup or used bad testing procedures, or know about the presidents email that it was a prototype on the 2nd article.. please read my post carefully. It is my belief that even a couple of beers cant possible hide these issues . You can still see from his own words and BC that it was not designed to be used w/out a TEC and its still there.. on both sites companies webs, what am I missing? Is the BTMS a waterblock??? no.. Kyle states it himself in the first review. Why was it used? Did none of the questions I brought up raise a single doubt? Not all of them were based on correspondance, but on the stated from what is still posted. But I do thank you for reading the article and respect your opinion that you believe otherwise. The members have been very nice and as expected analytical.

Request for help: If this unit was sold, then SOMEONE would have to buy it. SOMEONE would speak about it on some forums somewhere. SOMEONE would have proof of purchase. If everthing is legit, then there should be at least 1 public mention of Bluecooling or BTMS before Kyles article SOMEWHERE on the internet, and this would support Kyles claim that this was a "for sale unit". Can anyone agree as to this? I have found zero information before Kyles post and continue to look.

My research hasn't stopped. IF this is the question in everyone's mind, then please help me out. Surely someone can make a point contrary to my postings with proof and extend the same effort. That, I believe is fair. After all, before I posted anything I had gone to the source. It is requested that others do the same. I make this challenge because they can tell you the same things they told me. Im not scared of cross examination and hope other people are examining for themselves the facts that they believe are plausable.

I am not an employee or president or even the delivery boy for any of these companies. If you think otherwise.. you are intitled to. I don't know what proof there is that I could show you otherwise besides the fact that they aren't a formed company yet (which is pretty convincing). If none of these "proved" topics that are using email to validate themselves dont ring true with you, please feel free to investigate the points that pull data from the still posted webs. I don't care if anyone calls me a liar as to who I am or my sources. Only ESP or conjecture is arguing with me. Look it up yourselves or just ignore the info you don't think checks out and look at what you can. I don't believe most data on the web, thats why I investigated this in the first place. Holding me in a different regard is not expected.

Please PM me if you would like to banter. I do not know if this topic is popular due to the professional image the Procooling staff is attempting to hold toward [H]. I admire their stance, and respect them for keeping "what one guy believes he has on email" in cautious regard. I have only been impressed by the responses and observations. So I wish to respectfully make no other comments on this thread, but choose to take it to the emails.

[bigben2k]

First off, I have to agree: we should watch our words when we talk about [H]. I think that the problem is that they are doing something half-a**ed where we'd do it right, before we'd do something like that but hey, that's our position, and anytime someone takes a position, there's bound to be someone out there that'll disagree. Such is the world.

2: I think that Kyle is probably a really cool guy to hang out with. If anything, he's getting some flack for not respecting some basic journalism ethics or processes. This is made clear when he challenges ProCooling to do better, rather than admitting that the block roundup article was limited (which is all we ever wanted him to do).

3: As far as I know (and someone correct me if I'm off), anyone can operate a business out of their own home, which is how I suspect BlueCooling got started. It is legal to operate a small business (without any kind of registration) as long as the revenue is less than a couple of thousand dollars. Once it exceeds that amount, the business must be reghistered, a tax number must be obtained, and proper IRS reporting is required (which also requires detailed accounting). This is where most people fail: it's just a huge step that most people would rather avoid, because it will usually require finding a partner or hiring some specialized help (accountant).

[Cova]

As for the business thing, if it is the same as in Canada (which I'm 90%+ sure that it is for the basic laws) then it is perfectly legal to start a "company" selling things out of your basement without any type of legal registration or anything else. However, this type of business has many drawbacks, in that the owner of the business is legally the same entity as the business itself - if the business gets goes bankrupt or gets sued, the owner is personally responsible for paying all debts out of his own pocket. This type of business does not require any type of financial investment to get started, though a $30 domain name would be a good start as far as helping potential customers find you.

The other type of business would be to incorporate. This makes the business a separate legal entity - this requires a second set of books for the company (first set is still the owners), the books need to be checked annually by a certified accountant (this may differ between Canada and the US), the business must be registered, and basically all the other complicated stuff everyone is thinking about is generally required. Many people do start home businesses like this because they are no longer financially responsible should something bad happen to the company. Initial investment is still nothing (though if you want the business to be registered under a name instead of a number you have to pay to do a name search first) but there is an annual cost in accounting fee's.

[zoson]

All I have to say is click the cached google link. It proves that winewood is full of crap. And that Kyle wasn't lying about it all.
-Zoson

[bigben2k]

I don't know... It proves that there was a page that allows someone to go through a purchasing process, however, going through the actual site, I came across this:

"PC Cooling Store Opening Soon!

We are currently not open for business. However feel free to browse our upcoming products"

That tells me that they had to shut down because of some regulation, or tax issue. Who knows, maybe their banker pulled the plug on them, and they're looking for a new backer.

I suspect that if they sold any blocks, it must have been in a very small quantity. (which makes Winewood and Kyle right).

[wymjym]

[i]
That tells me that they had to shut down because of some regulation, or tax issue. Who knows, maybe their banker pulled the plug on them, and they're looking for a new backer.

I suspect that if they sold any blocks, it must have been in a very small quantity. (which makes Winewood and Kyle right). [/b]

BB,
what it tells me is that someone (winewood) is practicing to become a spin doctor. If he/she continues to improve then at some point there will be a position available for them within a political office. Until that time you just must ask yourself........why would anyone with any type of a life go to the extremes that winewood has gone to in order to twist some facts around????
Also!!!!the paypal thing only proves that bluecooling did not receive payment through paypal under the blue cooling name, nothing more.....that bluecooling is not registered in CA or Texas only proves that they are not registered....not that they were not (or were not trying to) do(ing) business.
Last point (I hope) Kyle maintained that some blocks were sold and winewood maintained that all blocks were prototypes and that there was no proof of sale. So assumptions are drawn from that...if something is sold and not titled as a prototype, is it a prototype or an early release retail unit? If there is no 'proof' (btw---how does someone know that there is no proof) of a sale does that mean there was no sale, or just no proof of a sale?
As I said when I started this thread...I read and thought and just couldn't stay silent. At first glance you can read it and believe what you like but after you sit back and remove your personal feelings...... there are certain points that just don't ring true.
I feel that when/if bluecooling gets their stuff going it will be easier/cheaper to change names in order to overcome the negative pr that does currently exist.
but this is only my opinion and it is worth exactly what you paid for it.
wj

[MadDogMe]

All I have to say is click the cached google link. It proves that winewood is full of crap. And that Kyle wasn't lying about it all.

Does it?, I've seen sites set up ready to go, does'nt mean you can/could actualy place the order...

Until someone steps forward and says they did buy from the site all you are doing is slandering winewood for something he never stated, seems he's the only one trying to find out if a sale did take place, he's saying the evidence so far points to no sale taking place, even if it was a cash in hand sale there would still be an end user out there somewhere, and if the units are as crap as he points out they'd be looking for help on the net would'nt they?. where are these buyers?, why would winewood be looking for them if he did'nt want them found?...

[Blackeagle]

A interesting read.

I also just finished reading both that page in the cache and all pages of the Bluecooling site as it now is.

One thing I noticed is that when you link into the Bluecooling site today and hit any page but the front one you would see nothing to make you relize that this site is not open for sales.

Couldn't this very well have been the case at the time of that Google screen shot? I think that is VERY possible. It might be a good idea for that company to note the fact they are not open to sales at this time on each page of their site to avoid confusion.

I think that I agree with both Bigben & Maddog. After reading of the currant site and the cache page I can see that as BigBen said, both Kyle of [H] and George of Bluecooling can each be telling the truth.

If Kyle received a offer to reveiw a new product with a link to view the product at a new site, wouldn't it well be the link would take him to the page with infor and pix of that product? Would he feel any need to check the front page for disclaimers? Thus if the contacting individual did not clearly state in his e-mails that the site wasn't yet ready to open Kyle would be sure to think they were open from his reading the sites info. As would anyone hitting the site now on any page except the first. Thus Kyle now rightly feels he "knows the truth". I can't blame him for that, I wouldn't have checked the front page for disclaimers myself.

The e-mail content shown by Kyle to Winewood is one interesting thorn in this whole thing. Did the buyer in that e-mail knowingly buy a proto type? A early pre-production model? Could he have failed to note that to Kyle as he was pissed off at Bluecooling and wanted to have Kyle grind his axe for him (I seem to recall seeing that service offered at [H].) Kyle's refusal to disclose this persons name without that persons agreement (which that guy would have reason to withhold) is in fact the very honorable thing for Kyle to do.

George no doubt feels he's the victom of sharp practice due his clear disclaimer on the front door of the site. Yet he may fail to relize how easy it is to get a VERY differant impression if the person hitting the site doesn't hit that first page, but instead links into the site elsewhere. And my reading of the site seems to indicate to me that Bluecooling has realeased or maybe even, sold at special discount rates (buy now is stated still today on some of the inner pages, in spite of the front page disclaimer), a few pre-production units for people and sites to try out and evaluate. This is not at all unusual. And George may not even relieze one of these people now has a axe he's looking to have sharpened, and a back to plant it in.

NOw comes Winewoods arrival intent on "finding the truth".
And he to is telling the full truth as best he can, after doing all he can to find a buyer, he can't. Thus it looks to him that Kyle lied to him. Kyle's tendency toward short and rude responses when someone questions him beyond what he feels like putting up with didn't, I'm sure help here. "Do what you have to bro." is I think how he phrased it in one respnse to Winewood. Short and blunt (if you thought rude to strong) responses like that do not win you friends, they can however make you enemys quickly.

This is all conjecture of course, but is one possible way in which all the partys involved can in fact be telling the truth.

I was quick to have doubts about Kyle due to having watched his words & actions (mass bannings) over the Intell CPU reveiw. So after reading Winewoods first post regarding these matters I was perhaps quick to judge. I can now see a way this could have all come to pass which would show that Kyle is telling the truth, with the info he had/has. Yet what I said in my response to Winewood in that other thread still stands in this much, I feel he should be commended not damned for his efforts from what I have seen. His carefully worded e-mails he posted, that drew some to think he must be connected to the Bluecooling company, can also be read as one trying very hard to act in a manner not to be taken as confrontational while still seeking answers. And if Winewood read much of the exchange on both this site and [H] during the water block blowup, and the even worse exchange with those who dared to question [H]'s CPU reveiw on both the [H] and Extreme systems site, can anyone here blame him for his care? ? ? Not [H]ardly. Kyle shoots from the hip at times, both through words and bannings, and that is a nice way of phrasing things. (I'd be surprised if Kyle doesn't wish he could have a chance to live those few days over differantly in hind sight. Both times. Damage to the [H] in both of them, and it was needless.)

If any blocks were sold, without the buyer being told they were proto types thay had to be very, very few indeed. If not then as MadDog said where are all these irate buyers? Some would have surely paid by check or credit cards leaving them with proofs in hand. But all I've seen is that one e-mail Kyle offered. But that is no longer enough for me to continue to feel that Kyle is being dishonest in this matter as I said above. Nor is it enough to sway me to be sure that Bluecooling is being dishonest in their dealings.

In the end this could all have been caused by a miss communication that grew out of control. But hard to see how we'll find out for sure, Winewood has tried hard to do so from what I can see. Sorry to see his efforts have caused some to doubt him for those very efforts.

[Cova]

Ok, I didn't post that last google-cache link to prove that BlueCooling was open for business (which it doesn't do), but to prove that they did have a vareity of products based on the BTMS available (soon?) for sale. I'm too lazy to look it up exactly right now, but this is in contrast with one of winewoods posts where he said that such product never existed.

If you want to try and prove that they were/weren't open for business, then this google-cache link may be of more interest:
http://www.google.ca/search?q=cache:...hl=en&ie=UTF-8
Which shows their front-page as it existed before the large disclaimer was put there.

I'm afraid I have no proof beyond my own memory that that was the state of the front-page at the at the same time that the previous product-page I linked existed. IMHO the current disclaimer was put there as a result of the [H]-review.

Edit: Again - automatically parse URL's and google-cache-style nested URLs don't get along, should be fixed now

[bigben2k]

"Our new product lineup is here just as our doors are about to open to the public. "

Maybe they sold a few prototypes, as this individual (or company) was able to do, while maintaining a low enough level of income, to avoid being registered.

We need to hear from someone who actually bought something there.