Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

Prev Next
Re: Updated: A Comprehensive (But Controversial) Wind Tunnel Wheel Shootout [Toby] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Toby wrote:
TiCass wrote:
Oh wow, Hambini delivers.
Updated post with Flo's letter.
https://www.hambini.com/blog/post/bicycle-wheel-aerodynamics-which-one-is-fastest/


That certainly doesn't looks good for you guys. It's a disappointing response regardless of Hambini questionable behavior.


The interesting thing is that that letter:

1) does not appear to demand the Flo results be taken down as originally claimed
2) contains no specific legal threat
3) instead requests HR discipline for use of company equipment and rude public behavior
4) their item 2 does not hold any legal water whatsoever
5) the first two instances of "see attached" have the A capitalized; the third does not
6) their item 3 does not have a period
7) their item 1 lacks a space between "3" and "hours"
8) is redacted as to the legal firm in question ("legal firm")

On that last point, I'm not a lawyer, but what expectation is there that a nastygram is private and revealing the "legal firm" in question would open the recipient to further action? Legal action is not private, so if "they" decided to follow through this would all be public anyway. Without the name of a company to follow up on this is no level of proof and doesn't even sound like any lawyer letter I've seen. It does, in fact, sound much more like Hambini's own writing style. If that's the case...

And what about the other supposed letter from another company? Why wouldn't he have shown both?

http://bikeblather.blogspot.com/
Quote Reply
Re: Updated: A Comprehensive (But Controversial) Wind Tunnel Wheel Shootout [TiCass] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
TiCass wrote:
If it's an internet stunt from Hambini, it's an insanely high risk stunt. He exposed himself, his career and his company to very real legal consequences. That would be a dumb thing to do.

Yes, yes it would. Have you ever seen a law office produce an external document with such sloppy formatting? I haven't.

Come to think of it, look at paragraph three. "I" feel it is only appropriate that "I"... have you ever seen a legal document written from a first-person singular perspective like that? I haven't. It's generally "the law offices of XYZ, on behalf of its client ABC, is writing to..." or similar.

Maybe British lawyers are super casual and informal and imprecise with language.

The point is, ladies and gentleman, that speed, for lack of a better word, is good. Speed is right, Speed works. Speed clarifies, cuts through, and captures the essence of the evolutionary spirit.
Quote Reply
Re: Updated: A Comprehensive (But Controversial) Wind Tunnel Wheel Shootout [Toby] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I'm no lawyer, but that doesn't appears to be a proper legal document. For what is worth, on Hambini's website, that document is called "letter from lawyers".
Quote Reply
Re: Updated: A Comprehensive (But Controversial) Wind Tunnel Wheel Shootout [TiCass] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
TiCass wrote:
I'm no lawyer, but that doesn't appears to be a proper legal document. For what is worth, on Hambini's website, that document is called "letter from lawyers".

I never called it a legal document. It is (supposedly) a lawyer letter, a "nastygram". Law offices are still typically very precise about formatting, grammar, and style (in the "style guide" sense of that word). This is an extremely sloppy document whoever produced it. I work for a bank; if something this sloppy went out to the public heads would roll.

But like I said, maybe British lawyers are relaxed and just type up documents really quickly and send them out without proofreading. Maybe.

It also missed a period at the end of the second-to-last paragraph. It also appears to have a double-space between "published" and "on" in the first paragraph. How many formatting, grammar, and style errors are normal per page in British lawyer letters? How many more do we think I can find if I keep looking? It's Veteran's Day here in the US; I have nothing but time.

The point is, ladies and gentleman, that speed, for lack of a better word, is good. Speed is right, Speed works. Speed clarifies, cuts through, and captures the essence of the evolutionary spirit.
Quote Reply
Re: Updated: A Comprehensive (But Controversial) Wind Tunnel Wheel Shootout [TiCass] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
TiCass wrote:
If it's an internet stunt from Hambini, it's an insanely high risk stunt. He exposed himself, his career and his company to very real legal consequences. That would be a dumb thing to do.

I doubt Flo would bother with a legal response. Hambini is doing more damage to his own name and brand than any other entity could do if they tried.
Quote Reply
Re: Updated: A Comprehensive (But Controversial) Wind Tunnel Wheel Shootout [trail] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
trail wrote:
TiCass wrote:
If it's an internet stunt from Hambini, it's an insanely high risk stunt. He exposed himself, his career and his company to very real legal consequences. That would be a dumb thing to do.


I doubt Flo would bother with a legal response. Hambini is doing more damage to his own name and brand than any other entity could do if they tried.

...it's also possible some 3rd party could be trolling him with this rotten bait. Then again, if that's the case, it's pretty dumb for him to make those accusations and post this without any due diligence as to the authenticity.

http://bikeblather.blogspot.com/
Quote Reply
Re: Updated: A Comprehensive (But Controversial) Wind Tunnel Wheel Shootout [trail] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I didn't pick a dog in that controversy and I would avoid speaking in definitive terms. It's frankly not quite clear if the letter is legitimate or not. It's a weak argument to dismiss it because of formatting issues.

For anyone outside of this thread who haven't seen Flo responses... they look like a jackass company. So yeah, they should bother!

If Hambini manufactured a fake lawyers letter and publish it on his company website to make Flo looks bad, that's certainly not something I would left legally unanswered.
Quote Reply
Re: Updated: A Comprehensive (But Controversial) Wind Tunnel Wheel Shootout [Tom A.] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Tom A. wrote:
trail wrote:
TiCass wrote:
If it's an internet stunt from Hambini, it's an insanely high risk stunt. He exposed himself, his career and his company to very real legal consequences. That would be a dumb thing to do.


I doubt Flo would bother with a legal response. Hambini is doing more damage to his own name and brand than any other entity could do if they tried.


...it's also possible some 3rd party could be trolling him with this rotten bait. Then again, if that's the case, it's pretty dumb for him to make those accusations and post this without any due diligence as to the authenticity.

That would also mean he got taken in by a worse fake than some phishing I've seen.

That third paragraph? There's no verb. There is, however, a period at the end. Is it intended to be a sentence?

It gets worse the more you look at it. There needs to be third-party-verifiable proof of this for me to take seriously anything Hambini says.

The point is, ladies and gentleman, that speed, for lack of a better word, is good. Speed is right, Speed works. Speed clarifies, cuts through, and captures the essence of the evolutionary spirit.
Quote Reply
Re: Updated: A Comprehensive (But Controversial) Wind Tunnel Wheel Shootout [Toby] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I work for a bank as well, I’ve seen a few legal letters regarding lease agreements, things to do with compliance and auditing, security and risk.

Let me say that every single one is very “tight” both in terms of intent and grammar/spelling.

...you really should know exactly what your getting when someone sends a legal letter, even myself as a layman.

It also strikes me as extremely weird that a law firm would target the HR department of a company, as first point of contact.

Maurice
Quote Reply
Re: Updated: A Comprehensive (But Controversial) Wind Tunnel Wheel Shootout [mauricemaher] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
mauricemaher wrote:
I work for a bank as well, I’ve seen a few legal letters regarding lease agreements, things to do with compliance and auditing, security and risk.

Let me say that every single one is very “tight” both in terms of intent and grammar/spelling.

...you really should know exactly what your getting when someone sends a legal letter, even myself as a layman.

It also strikes me as extremely weird that a law firm would target the HR department of a company, as first point of contact.

Maurice

Yep.

"This correspondence is with regards the comments and data..."

That should be "This correspondence is with (or better, in) regards to the comments and data..." or maybe "This correspondence regards the comments and data...". As it stands, that phrasing is broken. The whole letter sounds as if it were written by a person for whom English is not a first language.

The point is, ladies and gentleman, that speed, for lack of a better word, is good. Speed is right, Speed works. Speed clarifies, cuts through, and captures the essence of the evolutionary spirit.
Quote Reply
Re: Updated: A Comprehensive (But Controversial) Wind Tunnel Wheel Shootout [TiCass] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
TiCass wrote:
I didn't pick a dog in that controversy and I would avoid speaking in definitive terms. It's frankly not quite clear if the letter is legitimate or not. It's a weak argument to dismiss it because of formatting issues.

I've seen enough from this thread, the weight weenie thread, and the prior bottom bracket kerfluffle. Flo also has a long body of work and in the industry are universally viewed as really great guys.

I'm comfortable picking a dog. Even if it's someone trolling Hambini.
Quote Reply
Re: Updated: A Comprehensive (But Controversial) Wind Tunnel Wheel Shootout [Tom A.] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I very much doubt that letter is from a lawyer, the construct is poor and the basis makes little sense. The respondent would be the protagonist, any legal letter would go to Hambini. I think someone has tried to troll Hambini, not especially well. It would be interesting to know if he’s gone back to the law firm named on the letter.

I’ve got no Flo products or relationship with the firm but this would seem pretty out of character from the interaction the guys have online. Admittedly a fairly superficial view though.
Quote Reply
Re: Updated: A Comprehensive (But Controversial) Wind Tunnel Wheel Shootout [Stueys] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I agree with this. I think the guy has been duped.

Could be wrong but this is what it looks like to me. It certainly didn't come from a legit lawyer though. Looks like a prank
Quote Reply
Re: Updated: A Comprehensive (But Controversial) Wind Tunnel Wheel Shootout [mauricemaher] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I’m not saying this is from a lawyer but all of you are giving the industry far too much credit!!!

As a lawyer, I have many read letters and court-filed documents with typos, poor grammar and punctuation etc. You would be shocked at some of the garbage I read...
Last edited by: DFW_Tri: Nov 12, 18 13:35
Quote Reply
Re: Updated: A Comprehensive (But Controversial) Wind Tunnel Wheel Shootout [DFW_Tri] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
DFW_Tri wrote:
I’m not saying this is from a lawyer but all of you are giving the industry far too much credit!!!

As a lawyer, I have many read letters and court-filed documents with typos, poor grammar and punctuation etc.

Ok,

Just a “building guy” having said that, I just signed several snow removal contracts which had very specific punctuation and direct language....one was 7 pages.

Very much a layman on legal matters...so I’m probably out regarding further comments/speculation.

Cheers,
Maurice
Quote Reply
Re: Updated: A Comprehensive (But Controversial) Wind Tunnel Wheel Shootout [DFW_Tri] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
As a lawyer too, I agree 100%. The idea that this can't be from a lawyer due to poor and sloppy drafting is really poor logic (though it may not be from a lawyer due to other reasons). I read correspondence from lawyers literally everyday ranging from perfect to embarrassing.

Also, the argument that "in my experience X always has A, B and C, characteristics; Y does not have have A, B, and C characteristics; therefore Y cannot be X" is some really, really, bad logic since all it takes is for one person, or two lawyers in this case, to say that X often lacks A, B, or C to completely destroy the entire basis of the argument.

The criticism that they sent it to the wrong person, the employer, is very short sighted. If the goal is to put a stop to the commenting then creating a threat to his job is probably much more effective than a threat of litigation that would probably never materialize, would be expensive, and any judgment may or may not be collectible even if won. His employer is the perfect recipient to accomplish the goal, if the goal is to actually effect a change of behavior.

There are a lot of questions in this drama, but the analysis of those questions to reach possible answers leaves much to be desired.
Quote Reply
Re: Updated: A Comprehensive (But Controversial) Wind Tunnel Wheel Shootout [wjc] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Thank you for your insights. It doesn't seem to me like an outrageous proposition that a bank lawyer as higher standards than a small wheels company lawyer.

More problematic, if the letter is fake, someone (Hambini or a third party) is impersonating Flo's lawyer. Leaving that unanswered would be the most suspicious thing since the beginning of that controversy.
Quote Reply
Re: Updated: A Comprehensive (But Controversial) Wind Tunnel Wheel Shootout [TiCass] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
TiCass wrote:
I'm no lawyer, but that doesn't appears to be a proper legal document. For what is worth, on Hambini's website, that document is called "letter from lawyers".

I was going to pretty much say the exact same thing. That letter is 99.999% BOGUS. Maybe the date on it is 4/1?
Quote Reply
Re: Updated: A Comprehensive (But Controversial) Wind Tunnel Wheel Shootout [wjc] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
wjc wrote:
As a lawyer too, I agree 100%. The idea that this can't be from a lawyer due to poor and sloppy drafting is really poor logic (though it may not be from a lawyer due to other reasons). I read correspondence from lawyers literally everyday ranging from perfect to embarrassing.

Also, the argument that "in my experience X always has A, B and C, characteristics; Y does not have have A, B, and C characteristics; therefore Y cannot be X" is some really, really, bad logic since all it takes is for one person, or two lawyers in this case, to say that X often lacks A, B, or C to completely destroy the entire basis of the argument.

The criticism that they sent it to the wrong person, the employer, is very short sighted. If the goal is to put a stop to the commenting then creating a threat to his job is probably much more effective than a threat of litigation that would probably never materialize, would be expensive, and any judgment may or may not be collectible even if won. His employer is the perfect recipient to accomplish the goal, if the goal is to actually effect a change of behavior.

There are a lot of questions in this drama, but the analysis of those questions to reach possible answers leaves much to be desired.

Thanks, we get you want to peacock your intelligence through your intellectual critique.

Further facts at hand:
1. Everything was redacted except Flo Cycling, which seems a bit convenient.
2. The name of the client sponsor is incorrect (J. What kind of idiot barrister pierces the corporate veil and lists the principal behind an LLC as a client?
3. The letter does not correctly reference the legal entity that is actually d/b/a as Flo Cycling.
4. Uses public, not corporate notice address.
5. What kind of attorney sends a demand letter with a demand for termination of employment? That is simply petty and a hallmark of a letter intended to incite outrage at the supposed author.
6. Not sent on legal letterhead.
7. No postmark, exhibits, proof of delivery, etc.

I can't believe you guys are being fooled by a Word print and Paint job.
Quote Reply
Re: Updated: A Comprehensive (But Controversial) Wind Tunnel Wheel Shootout [aravilare] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
aravilare wrote:
wjc wrote:
As a lawyer too, I agree 100%. The idea that this can't be from a lawyer due to poor and sloppy drafting is really poor logic (though it may not be from a lawyer due to other reasons). I read correspondence from lawyers literally everyday ranging from perfect to embarrassing.

Also, the argument that "in my experience X always has A, B and C, characteristics; Y does not have have A, B, and C characteristics; therefore Y cannot be X" is some really, really, bad logic since all it takes is for one person, or two lawyers in this case, to say that X often lacks A, B, or C to completely destroy the entire basis of the argument.

The criticism that they sent it to the wrong person, the employer, is very short sighted. If the goal is to put a stop to the commenting then creating a threat to his job is probably much more effective than a threat of litigation that would probably never materialize, would be expensive, and any judgment may or may not be collectible even if won. His employer is the perfect recipient to accomplish the goal, if the goal is to actually effect a change of behavior.

There are a lot of questions in this drama, but the analysis of those questions to reach possible answers leaves much to be desired.


Thanks, we get you want to peacock your intelligence through your intellectual critique.

Further facts at hand:
1. Everything was redacted except Flo Cycling, which seems a bit convenient.
2. The name of the client sponsor is incorrect (J. What kind of idiot barrister pierces the corporate veil and lists the principal behind an LLC as a client?
3. The letter does not correctly reference the legal entity that is actually d/b/a as Flo Cycling.
4. Uses public, not corporate notice address.
5. What kind of attorney sends a demand letter with a demand for termination of employment? That is simply petty and a hallmark of a letter intended to incite outrage at the supposed author.
6. Not sent on legal letterhead.
7. No postmark, exhibits, proof of delivery, etc.

I can't believe you guys are being fooled by a Word print and Paint job.

For more fun:

1) salutation of "Dear Sir or Madam" when the HR person in question's name should be publicly available
2) without a comma after the salutation
3) capitalized "Aerodynamic" inappropriately in the first paragraph
4) their item 1 is a run-on sentence that should have been avoided by a sixth-grader

The point is, ladies and gentleman, that speed, for lack of a better word, is good. Speed is right, Speed works. Speed clarifies, cuts through, and captures the essence of the evolutionary spirit.
Quote Reply
Re: Updated: A Comprehensive (But Controversial) Wind Tunnel Wheel Shootout [TiCass] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
TiCass wrote:
If it's an internet stunt from Hambini, it's an insanely high risk stunt. He exposed himself, his career and his company to very real legal consequences. That would be a dumb thing to do.

There won't be legal consequences. No one will be able to prove or disprove anything. That goes for the testing and data as well as the letter.

My read on how the "internet world" works is that any publicity is good publicity. Hambini may have pissed a lot of people off, but he has become much more widely known and has also gathered fans. This isn't like politics where you need more people in your plus column than minus in order to get elected. But based on the responses in the WW thread, he might be batting over .500 there as well. What's more important: Is he better known and have more fans than he did two months ago? Absolutely.
Quote Reply
Re: Updated: A Comprehensive (But Controversial) Wind Tunnel Wheel Shootout [rruff] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Impersonating a Flo's lawyer goes way beyond trolling people on the Internet and getting followers.
Quote Reply
Re: Updated: A Comprehensive (But Controversial) Wind Tunnel Wheel Shootout [rruff] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I found a Sachin Hambini a month or so ago on Linkedin. He was listed as "S. (Sachin) Hambini. Technical Authority - Propulsion Systems and Aerodynamic Integration at Airbus", which comports with the use of the Airbus wind tunnel.

The profile no longer exists or is hidden from search so I wouldn't be surprised if he got a little more professional scrutiny than he desired.
Quote Reply
Re: Updated: A Comprehensive (But Controversial) Wind Tunnel Wheel Shootout [aravilare] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Or he got a lovely meeting with the Head of HR department because of some letter...
It's easy to speculate.
Quote Reply
Re: Updated: A Comprehensive (But Controversial) Wind Tunnel Wheel Shootout [Canadian] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Canadian wrote:
TiCass wrote:
Oh wow, Hambini delivers.
Updated post with Flo's letter.
https://www.hambini.com/blog/post/bicycle-wheel-aerodynamics-which-one-is-fastest/


That certainly doesn't looks good for you guys. It's a disappointing response regardless of Hambini questionable behavior.


Except for the fact that we never sent that letter. Neither did anyone representing us.

Looks like Hambini got 'dropped by his coach mid-season' (SurfingLamb).
...Sorry to see that you guys are getting caught up in some douche-bag's attention stunt.
Quote Reply

Prev Next