On the last semester of the year 2005 our group started a research to locate worldwide companies that provided in-transit visibility solutions. More than 100 companies were contacted worldwide specifying the required technical and support needs.
A vast majority replied stating that their solution did not comply with the given technical requirements. NaviTag replied affirmatively, and also established that their solution exceeded the technical capabilities and professional support required.
This reply came in November from a person who identified himself as R. Scott Silva, President and CEO of NaviTag Technologies, Inc. He presented a product that was by his saying-, commercially adopted by large clients in the US such as: Hewlett Packard, Hasbro, Bose, Department of Defense, among others.
R. Scott Silva was made aware from the beginning (by the many conversations as well as the documents sent to him) that in order to commercialize the product in our markets the device must meet the technical specifications he claimed it surpassed. For this purpose, the product had to go trough a thoroughly certification process by the Costa Rican government that takes approximately 25 days. Previously identified field tests had to be passed. Once the technical capabilities were certified, then commercialization could begin.
To run the tests and get certified, NaviTag's representative asked us for a disbursement of $45.000,00, to give us the product to be analyzed. This amount could later be applied to either follow up orders, or the exclusive distributor agreement fee, since we also were holding conversations in order to become the Distributor for the Central America region.
On December 7th, the field test price was paid in part via wire transfer (expecting to obtain the certification), and a few days later, on December 13th R. Scott Silva arrived in Costa Rica with 2 units serialized (#001, #005). Such units were expected to have: full duplex iridium communication, GPS precise positioning as a ESRI Digital Map scaling of 1:50.000; however, the units did not meet the technical specifications claimed; and therefore, the trial or tests did not take place.
On this trip, he excused himself telling us that the device needed some tweaking but that it would be ready for the certification trial process within a couple of weeks. At that moment he also demanded that he had to be paid for the remaining difference for the certification and evaluation program, to bring the product in a fully functional way.
He also encouraged us to start operations with the new company that was going to represent NaviTag in Central America and we proceed to do so, by recording a company (Trazabilidad y Logistica Global NTT S.A.) -duly incorporated in the Mercantile Section of the Public Registry of Costa Rica-.
To keep our compromise we rented and remodeled offices within the conditions R. Scott Silva told us we would need. We contracted the professionals he suggested, and created a group of engineers to deploy the solution in Central America, with an intended sales effort towards identifying the potential clients and their specific needs.
By mid January we were worried about the lack of communication with Mr. Silva, and the considerable delay to perform the government trial (by this moment paid in advance in full). He disregarded most of our e-mails and phone calls, until we finally left messages addressing him our discomfort and preoccupation.
It took us several weeks to track him down, and when we did, we made him aware our growing concern and irritation regarding the almost non-existing communication. We confronted him about our serious doubts regarding NaviTag's capacity to deliver and support a product, specially taking into consideration that we were only in the initial stage of the business relationship. We believe our message to him was straightforward: [Communications with NaviTag are impossible, and that is unacceptable. We are concerned about representing a company that doesn't even answer phone calls and have no support for a global product]
We flew to Massachusetts on February 19th, (2 of TLG partners) to met R. Scott Silva, who never showed us to NaviTag's offices, he took us to Stratis Business Center in Hingham MA, Suite 200 where he claimed that NaviTag's main offices were located. Navitag.com/contact/directions.htm
Later on, we found that suite 200 is a place where anybody can reserve meeting rooms and the service is provided by a company called REGUS.
(link deleted - see below)
(I want to seize the opportunity and state that this company doesn't have any client attention or support for their product, as they don't even have a person to answer phone calls, it is just a re-routing system of calls to R. Scott Silva cellular phone.)
While on such offices, in Hingham MA, R. Scott Silva urged us to close the distributor agreement which we negotiated to cover the whole Central America area, for a 3 year period as he insisted to us that the product was ready to go.
We then agreed to move forward but only after signing a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU), in which NaviTag was bounded to run the Costa Rican government certification trial and be approved no later than May (considering the approximately 25 day length of the trial). This individual gave us a Gant Chart, showing us that NaviTag development team was on time to deliver the product.
We insisted to meet the development team as well as the staff of the company; however, he told us that he couldn't take us to their product development facilities because it was President's Day, and schools where on vacations for the whole week. So he took us to a Marriot Hotel, 30 minutes away from Boston and introduced us with two other individuals who he identified as NaviTag's engineers.
It was obvious that they had no idea of who we where, why we where there, and what they were supposed to deliver. One of the guys handed us a business card identifying him as Russell Moore, Senior Vice-President of Product Development, but the other individual said he ran out of cards. This awkward meeting left us with a sense of suspicion.
Hence, next day (20th of February), R. Scott Silva was confronted and asked if NaviTag had any commercial activities, and requested some evidence. This Individual assured us that they had among their current clients', organizations such as HP, Bose, Dell, Hasbro, and Department of Defense.
When also petitioned for client contacts and references to verify their satisfaction degree with NaviTag, he did not provide any.in addition, -by his saying-, he told us that NaviTag sales have deployed more than eight thousand units among their clientele.
Taking into consideration all the inconveniences and excuses made by him, we requested to sign on behalf of NaviTag the before mentioned MOU; agreement that clearly specified the relevance and urgency to certify the device to the Costa Rican government. R. Scott Silva agreed to sign the MOU if we signed at the same time the Distributor Agreement, because he new that once we signed such distribution agreement, we were bound to wire-transfer NaviTag up to USD $100.000,00 as part of the agreement fee.By March we transferred the rest of the funds, and since then, his availability was again none.
On the first week of April, after a lot of work on our part, we were able to contact him via conference call. We expressed him our disappointment and the urgency to run the certification trial; and again, he reassured us that everything was on schedule for the estimated delivery date.
As we somehow expected, he failed to deliver the product on time; and from that last communication he vanished again until mid May, when he answered one of our many communications. We showed him the results of our exploration for commercial prospects interested in the solution. We told him know that we already had arranged meetings with top level executives of international companies, such as: Dole, Dos Pinos, Chiquita, Del Monte, Coffee Exporters, Fruit Exporters, Plants and Ferns Exporters, in land Carriage organizations and Vessel companies, among others, that have been contacted by us to offer them an intermodal in-transit visibility solution.in other words, unlike NaviTag, we worked very hard in order to be able to comply with the sales demanded to us by the distributor agreement.
He came on May 21, and brought another device (serial number #010 and recalled device serial number #001) which we expected to use it to run the trials with the government and have it approved. However, it was another non-compliant device. It was then when we got really worried since it was made clear that he had no intention to run the agreed and paid certification testing program, but that he may be trying to get a feeling of who our contacts were.
He even tried to collect USD $10.000,00 as an advance payment from each prospected client in order to demonstrate them how the device worked, request that we declined. Such decline was made by our clients, and they also requested R. Scott Silva a lists of clients to verify with them the benefits of the product, but he failed to provide the list to them and to us again.
Once he found out that our clients were reluctant to disburse money in advance, and that we decided not to be to what we considered know-, abused anymore, he disappeared. It is our feeling that this individual used us to gain access to the Central America market using our contact information, and our financial resources, to finish a noncompliance designed, and faulty product as far from the advertised features he told us it had.
During his last trip to Costa Rica, he left to Ecuador for a couple of days since (according to him) he was trying to establish a similar relationship with a local company and then came back to attend the last meeting we scheduled. Since we have our resources, we are identifying that company in Ecuador to find out their experience with NaviTag.
Amazingly, part of his strategy was to coordinate a meeting with the U.S. Commercial Service of the American Embassy in Costa Rica, (we thought it was customary since he claimed that the U.S. Department of Defense was one of their clients). He even indicated, that he performed due diligence on us through the U.S. Embassy who told them the good commercial reputation that we have.
Recently, and out of our frustration, we contacted the same Department of the American Embassy and they told us that they have no idea about this person, neither the company, and suggested that we should notify them of the case, and to contact an Attorney in Massachusetts, which we already did.
We hold this individual responsible for the financial losses we have had, not only for the $100.000,00 transferred to NaviTag's bank account, but for a similar (if not higher) amount we invested to set-up an operation that was unable to start because of his questionable and unprofessional approach, and the lack of a product to commercialize.
We have had a serious reputation set back, that so far we have not been able to determine. Most of our clients have lost trust, and have the impression that we were trying to use them to easy-fund our company, which was regarded by them as unprofessional and irresponsible.
In an effort to clear our reputation we issued an apology letter (brief but thoroughly) explaining them the extent of our ordeal and trying to recover the credibility that we lost because of NaviTag and R. Scott Silva.
Randall
San Jose
Costa Rica
0 comments