we dont always agree on things but I surely had the same sentiments with that add....
The add is so wrong on so many levels....
The double meaning, the ( unattraktive to me anyhow ) girl, the " tude" in her face....
not cool ...

Lets see here.

Dahon 2012 model line up seemed to suggest some new interesting lines, especially the little compact folding bikes. Since I am able to read and understand Chinese well, the design aspect of those bikes are quite different than Tern philosophy.

Tern 2012 model line up seemed to suggest a different direction, namely an emphasis on RIDE QUALITY plus fast fold, something that's just not that prevalent on the Dahon 2012 line up of bikes.

PLUS..

How the heck they are able to show off new line of bikes and design within such a short period of time from engineering, testing, and then production? This seemed to suggest that me that David Hon and Josh Hon already had their own vision of what Dahon future bike lines should be even before this mess began and had concept bikes in the works in the past.

Which means only one thing. Who gets more of the attention? I find it disturbing for some people here to suggest some offensive remarks toward the Dahon family members. Your opinions should be left at that. Opinions are not facts. Unless you are close members and or relatives of the Hon family, you should keep your opinion to yourselves.

Having said that, it is almost impossible to have 2 captains running the same company. A company only has 1 vision and 1 captain. The division between Dahon and Tern is a good thing. I prefer David Hon to be pursuing his vision and Josh Hon to be pursuing his vision, so they both can offer the VERY BEST products at the BEST VALUE possible. As a consumer, I will benefit from this. To the competitors, they will need to up to ante and move their rear to start competing against these 2 companies.

Rather than bad mouthing the captains of both companies, as a competitor of a folding bike, you should show innovation and motivation to win. Otherwise, you're going to be looked at as some guy who couldn't get a girl you want and then blame the other guys as jerks. Yeah, we know that song and dance before!

Wow!
Things are really unfolding now.
Very soon, this whole thing will be on National Inquirer for everyone to read.

+1. Tacky. Which is what the whole Dahon/Tern thing is in danger of becoming too. And that is very sad.

In the business world, a gentleman's word is simply not good enough these days. Even contractual word is still not good enough. Sorry, but if you're a nice guy with no business smarts, you will get burned.

I have worked in the corporate world for so long and seriously, it is not uncommon to see other companies and individuals making accusations about patent infringements, and insinuating innuendos just because there are people out there who like to play games, push boundaries and make accusations in the hopes of giving them leverage and the advantage. It's sad that the pawns they use to play these games are you guys, because you are their allies. Certainly, people who work in the industry and know more won't play the game. The internet is the best place to propagate false opinions, because people can just hide behind an IP address and not wrecked their reputation. I applaud some of the individuals here who would put their reputation on the line. At least, they don't need to hide behind a pseudo name.

So, do you have any comments about the mess Apple Inc. and Samsung and a bunch of other phone and internet companies are suing over each other have anything to do with family problems?

Which means, Apple Inc. people must have a ton of family problems since they love suing pretty much everybody who they think try copying their product these days. They even went after a friend of mine who runs a used Apple computer store that sells used computer for the poor with his business name that he had used for ages with a cease and deceased order. Yet with all the Apple fans out there who believe and use Apple products, you use an Apple product or shop at iTunes, you support their action! There are a lot of companies out there that do unsavory things and yet we have no problems supporting their cause with your business. It is all relative.
Forum members have the responsibility to provide true information and factual opinions. Unless you are dealing with this first hand, consider your information second or even third hand. How accurate is that? Do you know what happened to the news agency people when someone reported the death of Chinese leader Jiang Zemin and ofcourse, this information was false. At least, someone did have to eat crow later and resign. Sadly, people here hide behind an IP address. How courageous is that action?

Totally uninterested. Many lawsuits in this world, many sins, nobody's perfect. Things won't fall over in a heap in a hurry.

cheers
jur

You can be an as*****e, just dont expect people to treat you nicely.

Dahon is known for patenting stuff other better more clever people designed/invented but didnt have enough money to patent.

I dont care what "the corporate people do" I am customer and I care for what is right and wrong, who makes the products I use and how they are made, and I hope Tern comes out on top and puts Dahon out of business.


Like I said, you get what you give.Dahon had it coming.


Edit: This is not a computer forum, its a folding bike forum. But if you are interested in Apple vs Samsung I recommend 9to5mac.com

The ad is horrible - I don't think it will appeal much to the folding bike demographic. At all.

Not likely, why do you ask?

Dahon Taiwan? Dahon China? Both?

You know that Tern is a brand of Dahon Taiwan, right?

I don't think you really get my point with the Apple vs Samsung analogy. It is currently well known for Apple to issue cease and decease order into any business it deems threatened to its legal and intellectual properties; which includes mom & dad shops. We have other big corporate entities that do this outside of the computer industry. Food, water, etc you name. Seemed to me like you've lived in a cave for all this years.

Suffice to say, anyone can pay a license to use patented technology to be incorporated into their own designs. Why do you think some people or company file patents and concepts but MAKE absolutely no widgets?!?

I hear the same song and dance with people that blame big companies for ceasing innovations due to existing patents. Let's not forget that Dahon and Apple at one point in time were young companies which faced similar issues against the bigger corporations of the past. It's all relative. Today, they are leaders of their own markets. There are no excuses for their success!

Because you quoted as saying that this current mess is created by Hon's family. Perhaps you can explain to me what mess they had created? Disruption of distribution supplies, dishonoring and cheating on Dahon's dealers and causing loss and suffering to most Dahon dealers due to this legal battle. Perhaps you have solid good first hand knowledge that I and some of the dealers do not?

Thanks,

ok let me try ..... Tern is a not a subsidiary a brand or anything like that.
Its a complete new company, which has no ties to any other company.
The owners of Tern ( Florence and Josh Hon ) happen to own Dahon Global since years. Dahon GLobal was in charge of all Taiwanes built bikes in the past, Dahon GLobal was in charge of worldwide sales of all Dahon bikes( except USA).
They did all the marketing, the shows etc etc etc ... Dahon China was merely building bikes........
All marketing driven changes were coming from Taiwan ...( color, model spec, accessories, etc etc )
Some but not all technical developments came from Taiwan. Some of the major ones have patents ( either by Josh or Dahon Global, which he always owned ) These patents are publich knowledge and are easily found. The Vector and Ios line of bikes for example are completely developed by Dahon Global and have patents on it. ( Not in every country as far as I know, but nether the less )
Dahon China also has patents on hinges and on other things, at the beginning all tech bits were developed by Dr David Hon, later more and more came from Josh and his Team.
Mr David Hon ( Dahon China ) is a super gifted Rocket Scientiest ( no kidding here ) He has singlehandidly make a folding bike which revolutionized the bike world. He has my deepest admiration. He has brilliant ideas and will succeed in the bike biz. I have no doubts that we will see a lot of new and fresh Dahon bikes coming down the pipeline.
( Even if their marketing sucks )

Tern has stepped back and two steps forward with their bike design. Its not the lightest bike, its not the smallest fold, its not this and that .... what it is : is a bike which is solid, all parts are great and fresh, everything is replaceable and serviceable, all of them ride like a dream, not just for short hops, but for much longer distances. Its a bike designed by people who have listened to their dealers, and maybe more important to their customers, and by people who are riding every day. A few bikes in the line up are basically designed around the wishes from people like you, yes here on bikeforum ( and the Dahon ( Global) forum of course)

There are vast differences between the two companies, and their respectibve bikes. Surely there will be one or two models which will be close, but in all reality there are different customers for each of the two brands. I am looking forward of getting the first Terns in and sell them side by side with my beloved Dahons.

and now quit that legal stabs and in particular personal rumors which in both cases most of us have absolutely no idea about.
Its below us here on bikeforums to spread such bs...and keep dragging it on and on ....
Lets rather get exited about all the new folding bikes which will hit the streets...

Peace
Thor

+1

-HANK RYAN-
Norman, Oklahoma USA

And as you succinctly phrased it, that's the heart of Dahon North America's lawsuit against Tern right there: the competing Tern brand bikes were developed while the Tern principles were corporate officers of Dahon North America and had fiduciary duties to their investors.

Dahon shows the Curl, but doesn't market it. They enter it into a "new products" competition, but still don't market it. Josh Hon announces on the Dahon web board that the Curl was never intended to be a production bike and was just "a design exercise". Then the Curl shows up in China as a production bike.

Josh Hon controlled the product line and marketing of the bikes, and the Curl patent was in Dr. David Hon's name. At last I get it.

I wouldn't expect existing cyclists/folding bike users to be particularly attracted by that 'add' (sic). As Dahon clearly stated in the advertising campaign's debut, it was designed to reach the Blue Ocean.

I am off riding my bike ....

should I take my
Curve SL or the 20 ani edition HElios SL ?

Smaller wheels = more fun ...

;-)

But that is a broad accusation and is not that simple.

Pretty much and almost ALL Americans (public and private)can get sued by their former employers if this is how you put it. We get knowledge and experience from on-the-job training. Employers provide that at their own expense as an investment. You gained by it and you help the company grow. When you leave in good terms, you are not expected to repay back the investments they made on you. But you can use this experience and expertise (all of us do) working for the competing firm and benefit from raising wages or better working conditions. This is the norm. Some companies are nice enough to ask for permission to hire these former employees just as a courtesy. Most don't. In return, companies provide benefits to ensure employees stay loyal.

Dahon benefited from the sales of the Mu and IOS. And we know who holds the patents. A company all of us work for also benefited from your expertise. And we know who holds that expertise. What Dahon implied is that, they provided the venues to develop these expertise and they want to be properly compensated.

This is simply saying that, you work for a company, they provide on the job training which is required to perform your job, then provide more upgraded job training to keep pace with the required job. You then left to either work for a competing firm or form your own company, because you developed better ways to do things, but only you know. That's unique knowledge. Your former boss doesn't like this and then comes after you for ALL THE EXPENSES he or she spent on you to be repaid in full, because that unique knowledge that you developed on the job or during your off-time wasn't meant only for your only benefit. If that's the case, I'm not surprised if the American legal system isn't more clogged with more frivolous lawsuits on this, since millions of Americans switch jobs on a regular basis. I simply don't know.

So you see how complex this lawsuit can become?

I see some of the same red herring arguments that Thor advanced weeks ago.

Employees? No, they were corporate officers. If you actually know about business, you know there are different standards of behavior and in fact actual laws governing and restricting the actions of corporate officers.

Leave to work for someone else? No, as you have described, they developed a competing company and real, in-the-metal competing products while they continued to work for their previous company.

Dahon is a business entity, just like Apple, IBM, Samsung etc... Business 101 says that whoever leads or works for that business entity funded by investors is an employee. You want to do this to limit your liabilities with the firm in the case of bankruptcy or lawsuits from other firms, clients etc. So Josh Hon as well as Florence Hon were once employees of Dahon , but sit at the top of the food chain so to speak.

Which means if Dahon goes out of business tomorrow, all directors, corporate officers will have no jobs or duties to attend to. If they are not employees of Dahon, they will continue to work. But work for whom and work for what?!?

The argument you are saying is that, Josh Hon and Florence Hon developed bicycles, technology and a competing firm while serving as officers is a no no. It is a no no while being officers SELLING bikes under the table while serving as officers. This is called conflict of interest. But this is again not new. Any employees of any hi-tech company or firm will have to sign a NDA as well as a non-competing act before joining the company promising not to compete when the person is being employed. I was not aware that Josh Hon was selling Tern bikes while he was with Dahon. Do you?
Secondly, I was not aware that Josh Hon used all patented technologies from Dahon itself to develop Tern bikes. I thought he owned those. Do you?
So which leaves David Hon with what? Nothing to dispute.

Any employee can develop competing services and or products during their tenure with the old firm. What Thor said earlier and what I said on my last post is that, the old firm CAN NOT stop me or anyone to establish a new business and provide a service I developed during my employment with the old firm. Almost all Americans and everyone in the world do this. It is called apprenticing.. Bike mechanics do this. Hair dressers do this as well as line cooks or chefs do this. Then, they quit and form their own businesses. If you insist Dahon is correct, then all the bike mechanics, hair dressers and cooks that work in my town are as equally guilty as Josh Hon.

Fine.. I suppose you must have a perfect city to live in where no one apprentices any job and somehow, every hair dresser, bike mechanics and cooks who graduated from school or read a book somehow became experts without on the job experience.

Wow, that's great. Which country do you live in?

Wow... a lot of conjecture and unfounded accusations flying around here. (tcs)
I suggest holding on to your armchair and wait till a response is filed and then it is brought to court.
Nobody here really knows what the discussions and circumstances were leading up to this separation. Tern obviously feels they have a solid legal ground to stand on to launch an entirely new business venture... thats quite a risk not to have their ducks in a row.
Seems some of the parties involved are holding their cards close to the chest... if I were a gambling man, I'd be worried.

But of course I'm again assuming things.
Go ride your bike and get off the keyboard!!

Josh Hon's declaration to the court is available here https://freepdfhosting.com/45c41a5f07.pdf

If I understand it correctly he claims 1) he was not an officer, 2) California court has no justification in this case.

It is interesting to see the gap between the PR thrown at us and the details unfold in the court fillings.