Shard Gaming (AKA DaddyCheese) Rage Quits?

  • The FTB Forum is now read-only, and is here as an archive. To participate in our community discussions, please join our Discord! https://ftb.team/discord

DIMentia

New Member
Jul 29, 2019
15
0
0
If you had an account on Shard Gaming (formerly known as DaddyCheese) you likely received a cryptic email from an accountancy firm today, 20131012 at about 20:00 (UT) or thereabout.

It read something like this...
"Due to recent unexpected trading circumstances Shard Hosting Solutions
LTD has ceased trading with immediate effect.  We urge all clients
to take a backup of their data immediately as we cannot guarantee how
long services will operate for before being disconnected by our
upstream suppliers.

If you feel you are a creditor and owed money by the company please
contact:
PHILIP LAWRENCE
[email protected]

Baverstocks Limited Dickens House, 3-7 Guithavon St, Witham CM8 1BJ"
Baverstocks is an accountancy firm which appears to specialize in tax compliance not a hosting company.
Exactly why an accountancy firm is handling this is a matter of conjecture.
We contacted ColoCrossing and we've been assured that they did not disconnect Shard Gaming.
The disconnect notice came just minutes before access died rendering the notice futile... There was insufficient time to offload backups if you had any. If ColoCrossing didn't pull the plug, then the email makes an assertion that might be seen as reflecting poorly upon the reputation of ColoCrossing. It seems unlikely that an accountancy firm would make such an assertion without some reason for it, but at this point exactly who pulled the plug and why remains a mystery. It is possible that ColoCrossing might have done so and there might be a communication failure, or Baverstocks was simply told that this was the case and has simply repeated in good faith, a misrepresentation of the matter.

At about 3PM (GMT - 5) Shard Gaming has in close order, shut or privated their Facebook account, their Twitter, and have locked their thread on Minecraftforums.net. Their history has been expunged on Archive.org and their parent company Shardhost.com has also fallen from the face of the earth with the exception that the Whois is still available for this domain.

Since they are making such an effort to vanish, I think it might be wise to post that information here before that too disappears.
...just in case there are other folks out there trying to find out who just danced off stage with their money.

Registration information for Shardhost.com
Domain Name: SHARDHOST.COM
Creation Date: 2012-05-11 22:39:00Z
Registrar Registration Expiration Date: 2014-05-11 21:39:34Z
Registrar: ENOM, INC.
Reseller: NAMECHEAP.COM
Registrant Name: SARAH WHITE
Registrant Organization: SHARD HOSTING SOLUTIONS LTD
Registrant Street: HORNIGALS
Registrant Street: LITTLE TEY ROAD
Registrant City: FEERING
Registrant State/Province: ESSEX
Registrant Postal Code: CO59RS
Registrant Country: GB
Admin Name: SARAH WHITE
Admin Organization: SHARD HOSTING SOLUTIONS LTD
Admin Street: HORNIGALS
Admin Street: LITTLE TEY ROAD
Admin City: FEERING
Admin State/Province: ESSEX
Admin Postal Code: CO59RS
Admin Country: GB
Admin Phone: +44.08458623345
Admin Phone Ext:
Admin Fax: +1.5555555555
Admin Fax Ext:
Admin Email: [email protected]
Tech Name: SARAH WHITE
Tech Organization: SHARD HOSTING SOLUTIONS LTD
Tech Street: HORNIGALS
Tech Street: LITTLE TEY ROAD
Tech City: FEERING
Tech State/Province: ESSEX
Tech Postal Code: CO59RS
Tech Country: GB
Tech Phone: +44.08458623345
Tech Phone Ext:
Tech Fax: +1.5555555555
Tech Fax Ext:
Tech Email: [email protected]
Name Server: DNS1.REGISTRAR-SERVERS.COM
Name Server: DNS2.REGISTRAR-SERVERS.COM
Name Server: DNS3.REGISTRAR-SERVERS.COM
Name Server: DNS4.REGISTRAR-SERVERS.COM
Name Server: DNS5.REGISTRAR-SERVERS.COM

Their collocation host claims that in spite of Shard's assertion, that they did not terminate or suspend their account.
ColoCrossing is reluctant to speak to this matter, as the email sent by Shard Gaming lays the matter at their feet which appears to be a misrepresentation. It would appear that someone is being less than truthful here. We have not yet determined who, or to what extent.

We've contacted ColoCrossing to see if they can just get us download access to our files. It will take significantly longer than the about 15 minutes we were given to grab our current backup.

So far, we have received sympathy and tentatively optimistic semi-assurances from ColoCrossing that the files should still be intact and sitting on their services. They have not responded yet to our email requesting download access.

Shard Gaming was actively soliciting business just last week.
If they had solvency issues, they knew or should have known they had issues at the time they took our year subscription.
They represented their network as being their own hardware, where it appears that it was just leased boxs.
They have made significant misrepresentation of their facilities and their condition and it appears that they have simply buggered off with everyone's cash.

We have also filed a complaint with Paypal. Since our account is less than two weeks old, we expect that Paypal may be able to help. As there appears to be evidence of deception here, we suggest that others also file. At the very least there should be some sort of investigation.

I would recommend based upon the nature of these events that none EVER use this service again, under whatever name they may resurface. There simply isn't a word for this level of failure. At least not a word I'm willing to post here.
 

DIMentia

New Member
Jul 29, 2019
15
0
0
what does this mean for us on the ftb forums

Shard Gaming (formerly DaddyCheese) was a GSP catering to, among others, both vanilla. Bukkit, and Forge/FTB server hosting as well as VDS systems suitable for large, heavily modded games... like FTB..
If their own claims are to be believed they hosted something just short of 4000 servers.
What it means to people on FTB forums is that a fair number of game servers, including FTB/Forge are gone this evening due to their behavior.

Shard Gaming has poked it's head in to shill here on these forums. It has been attacked and defended on these forums..
It is appropriate to let people know that they have just closed their doors in the most unprofessional way possible.
The next time they decide to change their name and take another run at our wallets, the sound of chirping crickets should be the only thing they hear.

This is what a forum is for, yes?
To inform those searching for the answer to a question... a question like, "Is shard gaming a good host?"
 

Vauthil

New Member
Jul 29, 2019
1,491
-14
1
Relocated to Server Admin Area, as that's where such discussion/dissemination of this information is most relevant.
 

SeraphInsane

New Member
Jul 29, 2019
1
0
0
While their main page is down right now, I just managed to take a full copy of my server through the TCAdmin service which is up and running. So it should be possible for everyone to at least get their data back for a while yet. Money is a bigger issue I guess :-/
 

stym

New Member
Jul 29, 2019
2
0
0
Thank you for sharing the information. This is indeed the most lame and unprofessional way to go out of business I've ever seen from an IT company. Wow...
I too am in a situation where my server was pre-paid till March 11th. It might be a little too late for me to file a Paypal claim though, so I ended up emailing the accountacy firm, no response this far.
God bless Dropbox backups.
 

stym

New Member
Jul 29, 2019
2
0
0
Here's the response from Baverstocks, basically sending a big f-u signal to whomever was hoping for refunds:
To Whom It May Concern


Shard Hosting Solutions Limited

Thank you for your recent email. We were asked to undertake a review of the financial affairs if the company and following the review it was evident that the company did not have sufficient cash resources to continue trading. Our advice therefore was for the company to cease trading as soon as possible.

Application for Refunds

Any person allegedly due a refund for prepaid services is effectively an unsecured creditor of the company. There are insufficient funds to meet the liabilities due to unsecured creditors and therefore no refunds will be possible.

There being no assets or funds available it is unlikely that the company will enter into a formal insolvency procedure.

Further action for recovery of alleged refunds will therefore prove futile.

Server Requirements and Back Up.

The director has asked us to issue the following statement:-

“Under the terms of service you are responsible for your own data and backups. It was hoped that you would have had longer to take any additional backups you may require; however, upstream providers made a decision to withdraw their services as soon as the announcement was made that the company had ceased trading. European services should be reachable for backup collection; you should take a copy of the data immediately as the length of time that these will be available is uncertain”.

We cannot offer any further information at this present time.

Yours faithfully


Baverstocks
 

TheDJParadox

New Member
Jul 29, 2019
117
0
0
To be honest, the only viable option for getting some kind of money back is a PayPal charge-back. And that's if you're lucky. They've definately not chosen the best way to close down a company, disappearance off of the internet was a bit of a d-bag move.
 

DIMentia

New Member
Jul 29, 2019
15
0
0
Relocated to Server Admin Area, as that's where such discussion/dissemination of this information is most relevant.
Many thanks.

Update:

It appears as though ColoCrossing is not without blame in this mess.
Shard, for all of its own guilt, may actually be telling the truth about ColoCrossing pulling the plug.
The European portion of Shard's services remained up and allowed folks to clear out their files.
It doesn't make sense that Shard would pull the plug on its US services only.

While ColoCrossing has vigorously denied involvement, our dealings with them over the past couple of days leads me to the conclusion that internal company communications are painfully lacking.
Either that or they are simply making dishonest denials.

When all of this transpired, and we contacted ColoCrossing's chat support, we were asked to email them at their sales email addy... this is what they have been telling everyone.
We were possibly the first to do this and we have sent a couple of followup requests since.
We haven't heard anything back from them in email.
They haven't made any statement to us or to anyone so far as I'm aware about allowing former Shard accounts to recover their files directly.

What we have heard from them has been in the form of phone and chat conversations.

During my phone conversation with a person identified to me as the facilities manager at about 3:30 PM (GMT -5) it was suggested to me that if I purchased service from ColoCrossing, they could just transfer our files to the new system.
For reasons which become apparent further down, I will have to reserve a certain amount of doubt as to whether this representation was accurate.

From there, things take a step into the Twilight Zone.

We run a single small FTB server... We don't need a massive commercial box or worse, a cage full of boxes suitable for running a small country.

What was suggested to us next, was not only bizarre on its surface but turns out not to be true in any particular.
We were told that Hudson Valley Host was owned and controlled by the same interests that own ColoCrossing, and that we could buy service from them instead, and ColoCrossing would still transfer our files.
This turned out to be incorrect on just about every point.

I don't know if someone was just completely wrong, or if some of the people at ColoCrossing are trolling the folks trying to get help recovering their backups.

Okay, so we needed a new host anyway... So, we contacted HVH and explained the entire drama including CC's suggestion that they could transfer our files from Shard's dead system to HVH and give us access to our files again in this way.
The service we had on Shard was a KVM VDS with 2GB RAM, 30 GB SSD, and 2 E3 Cores.
HVH didn't have service that was exactly the same but they did have something close.
They offered us an OpenVZ unmanaged VPS, 2GB RAM (allegedly guaranteed), 80 GB RAID/10, and 2 cores... Not exactly the same but fairly close.

We got Debian set up and Java, and asked them to follow through with the file transfer that we had been told would be arranged by CC... and they looked at us like we had just grown a second head.

I think I need to point out here that HVH didn't initiate all of this. We were directed to buy service from HVH by CC as a means to recover our files.
HVH apparently had no idea what was going on and someone at CC was apparently taking the piss having us do this.
Apparently the representation made by CC that HVH was some sort of retail arm of CC for smaller hosting customers was also seriously in error.
Why we were told this is open to conjecture.

Okay... so. At this point we have pretty much resigned ourselves that we have lost our last day's backup, but we did still need a new host so we decided to try to just make the best of this and move forward.
We loaded our files up and... the server couldn't start because there was insufficient RAM.
Our own server has two GB allocated. The files run fine.
My desktop running the files in a VirtualBox VM with 2 GB, runs fine.
The service we had on Shard, they ran very well.
We played around with the Java invocation until we determined that HVH's "guaranteed" 2 GB RAM was actually about 1.6 GB.

Okay... we get it. The problem here is that different virtualization models treat the memory required to run the OS itself, inconsistently.
The strange thing here is that KVM VDS providers generally treat RAM as "Here is your box and it has 2 GB... and your OS sits on part of that."
OpenVZ tends to provide the OS as a shared resource. and then provides something similar to KVM by way of actually available difference in memory, but without the assurance that the server will have exclusive access to that amount of memory.
HVH appears to be claiming that their OpenVZ solution will guarantee a fixed amount of available memory, yet in practice, this amount of memory does not appear to be similar to other providers definitions of the same amount of memory, even allowing for the OS.
In addition, just running a newly genned world using our files, performance was mediocre.
It wasn't horrible, but it was inferior to running the game on my test box VM... a VirtualBox VM with 2GB of RAM, RAID 6, and 1 core of an AMD 9750. So, something is definitely not excellent there.

On Minecraft ProHosting, for all their failings, their system worked very damned well with our files on a 2GB account. The failing there was that they were allowing neighbors sharing the same resource pool to repeatedly flood the SSD.
On our Shard KVM system, they also ran very well. Really damned well.
On Hudson Valley Host, they won't run and the problem is that their definition of a 2GB RAM allocation is somehow enough smaller, that it doesn't run badly... it just won't run.

So we have been steered WAY off course now.
We still have not had our last backup archive made available to us by ColoCrossing in spite of having jumped through hoops of fire and taken out service with a provider that we have never heard of based on a claim by a CC employee that we would regain access to our files again by doing so.

Having found our brand new day old service at HVH completely incapable of running our files, we requested they sort us a refund based upon it being unsuitable for the purpose for which it had been sold to us.
They have declined to do so.

We are now a few hundreds of dollars out for service that vanishes before our eyes.
While some ColoCrossing employees appear quite genuinely sympathetic and earnest in their expressed desire to help or at least be conciliatory, others appear to by toying with those asking for help.

At this point, I really don't know what to make of all of this and our email requests of CC remain unanswered.

...and a further note on Hudson Valley Host.
Following closely upon this writing, they have offered to upgrade our RAM to 3 GB without requesting an additional fee.
I think that perhaps, in spite of the circumstances and the stressful and weird conditions in which we have been introduced to them that this might be the most professional and reasonable response we have received from anyone involved in this drama. It is certainly the only response that has been in the least bit favorable to us.
We'll see if that makes our server viable on their network.
 
Last edited: