darTZeel out of business?

[A-Line]

I wonder if the new budget series offered by DarTZeel will have much competition from the Chi-Fi clone market on AliExpress?

 

[facten]

I spoke to Jay this morning as he is someone I know , lives in my area, and his lovely wife does some work for our other business in internet market and advertising. We spoke briefly about this and although I know nothing about the truth of this story I did suggest that he contact DZ and Herve and ask him to address the situation on camera.
I also feel that this is the world today and accountability is something we all crave. If this is a story then we would hope to have all the facts to make up our own minds as to the reality.

In his video from yesterday Jay stated that he asked him to join him for a video but it was declined so I presume that is that. Regardless, as I've stated elsewhere it would seem that seeing disclosure of the purported legal outcome that Roy apparently based his commentary on would offer an unbiased, independent, factual picture of things.

 

[Rt66indierock]

In these days of click-bait, conspiracy theories and fake-news, it’s hardly surprising that I’ve been ascribed all kinds of motives and agendas in ‘outing’ the financial situation at Dartzeel. As usual, the truth is a lot simpler.

I’m a journalist: it’s my job!

This is information, not a rumour or speculation. It is the result of a legal process in the Swiss courts, the outcome of which is widely known, certainly throughout the European high-end: This is not repeating gossip, but reporting a matter of record known to multiple sources and yet, one that neither the manufacturer nor their agents were talking about.

Nor are the reasons behind it particularly hard to fathom. Global uncertainty over wars in the Ukraine and Middle-East have squeezed customer confidence and shrunk demand for high-end audio products. At the same time, the Swiss Franc is riding high, making Swiss products progressively more expensive in international markets – and foreign products cheaper in the Swiss domestic market. For a company producing a small number of really expensive units, that’s a perfect storm.

Why bring up the situation at Dartzeel now and in the way I did?

The judgement has been in place for weeks. Unless the company can meet its obligations, it will be liquidated. Although the brand name itself might continue unaffected, the company itself cannot, at least in its current form. This immediately calls into question continued access to original parts and metalwork essential to on-going servicing of existing products. It calls into question whether any ‘new’ Dartzeel will honour existing warranties. It calls into question whether current re-sellers will be willing or able to service and support existing products. None of this is good new for the resale value of demonstration, stock or pre-owned units. Residual values are likely to plummet.

Posting on WBF was a deliberate choice, giving the manufacturer and their agents a chance to come clean and clarify the on-going situation. We have seen how that worked out.

Silence or obfuscation on this subject serves only one group of people: those with Dartzeel equipment (new or used) that they want or need to sell. But in protecting their investment they are preying on purchasers ignorant of the real situation. This is not good for those customers. It is not good for the industry as a whole. But it is also not a conspiracy. It’s simply a bunch of individuals with shared interests, all opting to take the same stance. In an industry where there is no office of professional standards, it’s a depressing sight.

So perhaps the questions we should be asking are, what does this tell us about those re-sellers who chose to keep silent and, what does it tell us about the journalists and magazines that chose not to report it or the opportunists who chose to exploit and sensationalise it? For some reason, the phrase “lower than a snake’s belly” keeps coming to mind…

Roy, I said you don’t have the credibility to post about darTZeel’s financial condition. And I don’t respect you as a reviewer.

What you did was gottcha journalism at its worst. This is what you should have done.

An ethical person would have acquired a copy of the Swiss judgement, quoted relevant sections and posted the case citation. Real journalism you haven’t done this.

When I went after Bob Stuart and MQA I distributed very damaging financial information about Meridian Audio and MQA Ltd. I gave the source to anyone who would listen, Companies House with the comment I just organized it for you.

I’ve posted and said damaging things about Tidal Music. My sources were Companies House, Block Inc.’s quarterly financial statement presentations and a judge’s order dismissing a Block Inc. shareholder suit. Again, anybody can see the information for themselves.

When Audio research was having problems recently documents were cited and posted.

To summarize, you are just as bad a gatekeeper as any of the people in the industry / hobby you criticize.

 

[Elliot G.]

i know Roy for many years and I personally don’t see where there is any upside at all for him to be writing about this but rather only serious negative consequences if he is wrong .
He said he is doing his job and before people attack him they should wait to see what the whole story really is
Are journalists not supposed to be journalists?
If no one breaks a story then how are people ever going to know what’s going on? Wait till it’s too late react?

 

[Audiohertz2]

I wonder if the new budget series offered by DarTZeel will have much competition from the Chi-Fi clone market on AliExpress?

Biggest flattery ....

 

[ssfas]

Roy, I said you don’t have the credibility to post about darTZeel’s financial condition. And I don’t respect you as a reviewer.

What you did was gottcha journalism at its worst. This is what you should have done.

An ethical person would have acquired a copy of the Swiss judgement, quoted relevant sections and posted the case citation. Real journalism you haven’t done this.

When I went after Bob Stuart and MQA I distributed very damaging financial information about Meridian Audio and MQA Ltd. I gave the source to anyone who would listen, Companies House with the comment I just organized it for you.

I’ve posted and said damaging things about Tidal Music. My sources were Companies House, Block Inc.’s quarterly financial statement presentations and a judge’s order dismissing a Block Inc. shareholder suit. Again, anybody can see the information for themselves.

When Audio research was having problems recently documents were cited and posted.

To summarize, you are just as bad a gatekeeper as any of the people in the industry / hobby you criticize.

I do a lot of financial research and use various corporate and legal databases daily. MQA is easy because UK has relatively open filing requirements. What got me was for most of MQA's life Stuart was only the front, having sold out to a large Swiss investor whose main investment was in BAT, one of the world's largest producers of cigarettes. The intention with MQA was to form a cartel. They explained this in their annual report. I and a few others posted this online.

The Swiss system is much more private and federal. I had a quick look and couldn't find anything.

It seems Dartzeel is toast and the owner is desperately trying to spin it to salvage any brand value that remains. I don't see this as a loss to the world, probably reflective of the demand for extremely expensive audio products. Companies and brands come and go, usually ones feeding vastly more families than Darzteel.

What strikes me is that, if you exclude the $200,000 mono blocks, the rest of the products are at price points ($30-50k) that put them in what appears still to be a sustainable market with lots of brands happily operating. If indeed the company is failing, the extreme high end excuse doesn't seem to wash.

 

[Charles S]

It would certainly seem that a definitive official word from DarTZeel would immediately clear up and clarify this issue. The fact that they have not is a de facto implicit confirmation that they are in receivership. If I were in the market for one of their amps and bought one without knowledge of this issue, I would feel betrayed by the dealership or owner of the gear. A clear definitive word from DarTZeel that it is business as usual is all that is needed.

 

[Rt66indierock]

I do a lot of financial research and use various corporate and legal databases daily. MQA is easy because UK has relatively open filing requirements. What got me was for most of MQA's life Stuart was only the front, having sold out to a large Swiss investor whose main investment was in BAT, one of the world's largest producers of cigarettes. The intention with MQA was to form a cartel. They explained this in their annual report. I and a few others posted this online.

The Swiss system is much more private and federal. I had a quick look and couldn't find anything.

It seems Dartzeel is toast and the owner is desperately trying to spin it to salvage any brand value that remains. I don't see this as a loss to the world, probably reflective of the demand for extremely expensive audio products. Companies and brands come and go, usually ones feeding vastly more families than Darzteel.

What strikes me is that, if you exclude the $200,000 mono blocks, the rest of the products are at price points ($30-50k) that put them in what appears still to be a sustainable market with lots of brands happily operating. If indeed the company is failing, the extreme high end excuse doesn't seem to wash.

Do you speak German well enough to search the judgements database? I don't.

 

[ssfas]

Do you speak German well enough to search the judgements database? I don't.

You don't have to. Most European databases have an English option. If someone really wants to get hold of the filing under the Swiss Debt Enforcement and Bankruptcy Act, if there is one, you will find it here. It will cost you CHF17.

 

[Dierkx1]

It would certainly seem that a definitive official word from DarTZeel would immediately clear up and clarify this issue. The fact that they have not is a de facto implicit confirmation that they are in receivership. If I were in the market for one of their amps and bought one without knowledge of this issue, I would feel betrayed by the dealership or owner of the gear. A clear definitive word from DarTZeel that it is business as usual is all that is needed.

i know Roy for many years and I personally don’t see where there is any upside at all for him to be writing about this but rather only serious negative consequences if he is wrong .
He said he is doing his job and before people attack him they should wait to see what the whole story really is
Are journalists not supposed to be journalists?
If no one breaks a story then how are people ever going to know what’s going on? Wait till it’s too late react?

I'm not sure we know all "the facts." I certainly don't. I would suggest that Dartzeel may be in crisis management mode if @RoyGregory post caught them by surprise. It is then often the case that a company can miscommunicate to the marketplace and stakeholders - their dealers, distributors, customers, shareholders- by hastily putting out statements, responses and "clarifications." And, of course, social media runs with it. Schadenfreude, anyone?

I don't know if Roy reached out to Dartzeel for comment prior to his WBF post. Journalists often do so prior to publication which gives the company an opportunity to respond in a thoughtful way. He is transparent on industry affiliations on his website, but a best practice might have been to disclose at the same time and the same forum where he posted. And I would like to believe he did not have any ill intentions. I'm not a journalist so I may have this all wrong.

 

[Lee]

In these days of click-bait, conspiracy theories and fake-news, it’s hardly surprising that I’ve been ascribed all kinds of motives and agendas in ‘outing’ the financial situation at Dartzeel. As usual, the truth is a lot simpler.

I’m a journalist: it’s my job!

This is information, not a rumour or speculation. It is the result of a legal process in the Swiss courts, the outcome of which is widely known, certainly throughout the European high-end: This is not repeating gossip, but reporting a matter of record known to multiple sources and yet, one that neither the manufacturer nor their agents were talking about.

Nor are the reasons behind it particularly hard to fathom. Global uncertainty over wars in the Ukraine and Middle-East have squeezed customer confidence and shrunk demand for high-end audio products. At the same time, the Swiss Franc is riding high, making Swiss products progressively more expensive in international markets – and foreign products cheaper in the Swiss domestic market. For a company producing a small number of really expensive units, that’s a perfect storm.

Why bring up the situation at Dartzeel now and in the way I did?

The judgement has been in place for weeks. Unless the company can meet its obligations, it will be liquidated. Although the brand name itself might continue unaffected, the company itself cannot, at least in its current form. This immediately calls into question continued access to original parts and metalwork essential to on-going servicing of existing products. It calls into question whether any ‘new’ Dartzeel will honour existing warranties. It calls into question whether current re-sellers will be willing or able to service and support existing products. None of this is good new for the resale value of demonstration, stock or pre-owned units. Residual values are likely to plummet.

Posting on WBF was a deliberate choice, giving the manufacturer and their agents a chance to come clean and clarify the on-going situation. We have seen how that worked out.

Silence or obfuscation on this subject serves only one group of people: those with Dartzeel equipment (new or used) that they want or need to sell. But in protecting their investment they are preying on purchasers ignorant of the real situation. This is not good for those customers. It is not good for the industry as a whole. But it is also not a conspiracy. It’s simply a bunch of individuals with shared interests, all opting to take the same stance. In an industry where there is no office of professional standards, it’s a depressing sight.

So perhaps the questions we should be asking are, what does this tell us about those re-sellers who chose to keep silent and, what does it tell us about the journalists and magazines that chose not to report it or the opportunists who chose to exploit and sensationalise it? For some reason, the phrase “lower than a snake’s belly” keeps coming to mind…

Roy,

Thank you for this information. A couple of questions:

Do you have a copy of the legal proceedings or some other independent document that verifies this?

Can you also verify if Herve is correct that he is able to do instalments on the amount owned and thus may be able to continue on in some form or fashion?

I really wish Dartzeel well as I think it’s a great brand. It would be better for the industry for them to continue on.

 

[Rt66indierock]

You don't have to. Most European databases have an English option. If someone really wants to get hold of the filing under the Swiss Debt Enforcement and Bankruptcy Act, if there is one, you will find it here. It will cost you CHF17.
View attachment 138102

Somebody must have spent 20 dollars to find out.

 

[ssfas]

I'm not sure we know all "the facts." I certainly don't. I would suggest that Dartzeel may be in crisis management mode if @RoyGregory post caught them by surprise. It is then often the case that a company can miscommunicate to the marketplace and stakeholders - their dealers, distributors, customers, shareholders- by hastily putting out statements, responses and "clarifications." And, of course, social media runs with it. Schadenfreude, anyone?

I don't know if Roy reached out to Dartzeel for comment prior to his WBF post. Journalists often do so prior to publication which gives them an opportunity to respond in a thoughtful way. He is transparent on industry affiliations on his website, but a best practice might have been to disclose at the same time and the same forum where he posted. And I would like to believe he did not have any ill intentions. I'm not a journalist so I may have this all wrong.

Having briefly reviewed Swiss bankruptcy law, the possibility is that there is an insolvent liquidation, but there may be a scheme or recapitalisation or creditor agreement. Unless someone has put up some money to buy the assets and finance a new business, I would be interested to see the way forward, if there is one. A reconstruction depends on there being a potentially viable business, but per their website the new business doesn't even have any products developed.

I could think of a million questions which would require full disclosure of any proceedings and plans. The obfuscation on the statement and website makes one wonder.