🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1294@ncrcce.StPaul.NCR.COM> pasek@c10sd3.StPaul.NCR.COM (M. A. Pasek) writes:
>In article <1551@cfa253.cfa250.harvard.edu> cliff@cfa250.harvard.edu (Cliff Stoll) writes:
>>From article <1043@sas.UUCP>, by cole@sas.UUCP (Tom Cole):
>>> I currently have several Jasmine DirectDrive 45 (not 40) drives, purchased
>>> last summer.  One has taken a nose dive, and I have had zero luck in reaching
>>> Jasmine technical support to get help or a return authorization.
>>> 
>>> [woes about being unable to reach Jasmine deleted]
>>
>>I can't help with your 45 MB drive, but I just bought a Jasmine 80 MB drive, 
>>which showed up promptly and works peachy.
>>
>>But what's the scoop about Jasmine?  Who's suing them?  Why?

Jasmine has been having large-scale shipping delays, since their
line of credit with Quantum is extremely small.

Jasmine sued Rodime, their supplier of drive mechanisms from August of
1988 up to a few weeks ago, for supplying them with "defective drives."
They mentioned a "conspiracy," and claimed they had a "smoking gun" to
prove their case irrefutably. A couple of former employees were also
mentioned in the suit. The suit was for $25 million, but Jasmine admits
that they still owe Rodime in the millions for the "bad drives" they've
been getting. You can't blame Quantum for not really trusting Jasmine.

Also of note: Jasmine's tech support staff has dwindled to one person.
Customer service is handling all tech support questions. They've been
swamped ever since the lawsuit was filed a few weeks ago, and things
just keep getting worse.

--- Alex
UUCP: {att,backbones}!ucbvax!qal.berkeley.edu!lauac
INTERNET: lauac%qal.berkeley.edu@ucbvax.berkeley.edu
FIDONET: Alex.Lau@bmug.fidonet.org (1:161/444)