Here is the video that shows the trip/delivery from China to Vancouver and the Owner/Buyer and his wife were on board for the whole delivery and there were no problems. You can watch him take delivery and seemed very happy.. ruclips.net/video/DcLLCCkyr3k/видео.html So if the owner that looks like he's in his 80's or older probably isn't able to operate a 120 ft yacht without a captain or isn't competent enough to remember numerous intense systems he was shown, then he may need to be shown a lot more than they did and he was offered that. The system that failed is not a Nordhavn system and should be warranted by the Manufacturer that sold it to him, not Nordhavn. Pretty simple. (If you buy a house and bring your own appliances for the builder to install, the appliances are warranted by the appliance manufacturer, not the builder.)
Mr. Conconi has enjoyed many of the vessels he has bought from Nordhavn - in fact, he has purchased 4 of them in the past. However, when Mr. Conconi advanced sufficient funds to complete the manufacture of his latest vessel with Nordhavn - the Aurora - and the vessel was not completed or finished, Nordhavn Facts found it necessary to highlight this situation. Mr. Conconi placed his trust in PAE (otherwise he would not have provided PAE with $16,000,000). However, PAE refused to complete the Aurora, leaving Mr. Conconi with major expenses as well as a partially completed boat and much that had to be redesigned and removed (without PAE's help or contribution). Mr. Conconi has enjoyed the other Nordhavn vessels that he has purchased - but not the process of purchasing his latest Nordhavn through PAE, as the company did not complete the vessel as promised. The truth, in Mr. Conconi's situation, was deflected at every turn by PAE. The company did not contribute or compensate for the work Mr. Conconi had to perform on his vessel. Nordhavn Facts is simply demonstrating and warning consumers of what could happen if a purchaser prepays significantly more than the cost to complete their vessel. Furthermore, what is even more troubling, is that PAE had a documented history of begging Mr. Conconi for additional money whenever PAE was unable to meet its financial obligations. For example, on March 27, 2013, PAE’s project manager, Trever Smith, wrote to Mr. Conconi on PAE’s behalf, explaining that “in order to have the N120 virtually turnkey as it leaves the yard we need to ask for some assistance.” Mr. Smith went on to explain that PAE immediately needed another $322,000.00, but that this was “finally the last time” PAE would “bug” Conconi with its “cash flow woes.” [Exhibit 436] nordhavnfacts.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/Exhibit-436.pdf A few short months later, PAE’s President, Dan Streech, followed up on June 21, 2013, with another request for additional money, this time asking Mr. Conconi for a $4 million loan to get Aurora “over the finish line…completed, released from the factory and delivered to Vancouver,” stating “you have been a perfect gentleman, partner and participant in the building of the boat and have done your part and much more…especially in that you have advanced early payments to PAE when we needed them. We are very very appreciative of all that you have done.” [Exhibit 267] nordhavnfacts.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/Exhibit-267.pdf But, of course, fast-forwarding to when Mr. Conconi started to insist that PAE honor its obligations to him, Dan Streech’s praise for Mr. Conconi as the “perfect gentlemen” and “partner” suddenly changed, going so far as to refer to Mr. Conconi, the man who saved PAE from financial ruin, as, among other names, a “crazy guy” that is “irrational” (deposition Transcript of Daniel Streech September 21, 2015, ) nordhavnfacts.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/crazy.mp4?_=1 In fact, you’ll hear Mr. Streech has a history of bad-mouthing most anyone who disagrees with him about Aurora’s condition. For example, Kelly Christian, an expert witness who actually inspected Aurora - was described by Streech as “Creepy.” (Deposition Transcript of Expert Witness Daniel Streech March 25, 2016) nordhavnfacts.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/creepy.mp4?_=1 And Brian Bergmark, an expert witness who testified about PAE’s financial and accounting issues, was referred to by Streech as “an idiot” who Streech wouldn’t hire to “balance [his] checkbook.” (Deposition Transcript of Expert Witness Daniel Streech March 25, 2016) nordhavnfacts.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/idiot.mp4?_=1 Mr. Conconi also learned that he and his wife were not the first to enter into a contract with PAE for the N-120 - that another couple were the first - and that Streech described this couple as “high maintenance . . . which was bound to erode the already too low margin” when explaining their defunct deal to the Conconis. [Exhibit 235] nordhavnfacts.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/Exhibit-235.pdf Dan Streech, Trevor Smith and Jim Leishman also testified that Mike Tellaria - a PAE employee who was aboard Aurora for the trip from Hong Kong to Vancouver - demonstrated the vessel’s systems to Mr. Conconi during that trip in compliance with PAE’s “demonstration of the systems” obligation under the Agreement. However, when Mr. Tellaria was deposited under oath, he testified as follows: Q Did you demonstrate any of the N120 systems to Mr. Conconi? A No. Q Do you know if anyone else was demonstrating systems to Mr. Conconi during the voyage? A No. Q Did you see anybody do any demonstration whatsoever of any system of the N120 during the voyage? A No. In the end, PAE failed to get every dollar it asked for. In fact, during the trial, PAE had to lower its claim because it admittedly miscalculated its final invoice by over $40,000, which was later reduced by another $100,000 by the court of appeals. Also, PAE claimed at the trial, through Dan Streech, that despite agreeing to deliver Aurora fully fueled, he simply “forgot” to fuel the vessel. Ultimately, PAE lost the appeal, and the judgment was reduced by over $100,000. In addition, Mr. Conconi was promised that a team of PAE employees would be waiting at the dock to complete Aurora and permit Mr. Conconi to accept delivery. In reality, the entire delivery team left Aurora for the airport on arrival, and another team never came. The morning of arrival, Aurora developed a serious leak that involved a defective system eroding through the vessel’s sea chests. With the assistance of tape and pumps, the Aurora was sailed to Seattle to make emergency repairs. During this time, PAE promised to finish Aurora to its completed state. However, 4 months later, after Mr. Conconi insisted on her return from the Seattle docks, no remaining work had been performed and the Aurora was still in the same condition she was in when taken for emergency repairs. Dan Streech inspected Aurora on her departure from Delta Marine in Seattle for the first time, four months after Aurora arrived in Canada. It appeared that PAE simply planned a DUMP & RUN, falsely insisting Mr. Conconi had accepted delivery of Aurora and any defects were limited to the manufacturer’s individual warranties. All inspections were performed in the year that followed delivery and illustrated the same inspected condition as at purported delivery. The reality and performance speaks for itself. Mr. Conconi finished the Aurora without any assistance from PAE. PAE would like to focus on debt collection and avoid any conversation as to whether they completed the Aurora. Mr. Conconi has no difficulty honoring and paying debts. Instead, this situation is entirely over whether the vessel was completed in accordance with the contract. PAE went so far as to state Aurora was perfect and all of Mr. Conconi’s claims and inspections were fake. In reality, this case was not about a debt owed to PAE. Instead, it was about whether PAE finished and completed the Aurora in accordance with the Purchase Agreement. Nordhavn Facts has concluded the Aurora was in an incomplete state and was simply abandoned in Vancouver. The fact is, PAE did not investigate further into the situation regarding the Aurora and failed to complete their obligations because they lacked the financial ability to complete the work. Furthermore, various pieces of documentation, such as third-party inspections by Steve D'Antonio and Barr Leonard, illustrate what was incomplete and later done by the purchaser after the vessel was abandoned. The contract was specific and clear. The remaining 1.8 million was not owed by Mr. Conconi until all systems were demonstrated to a reasonable satisfaction level. As highlighted on the Nordhavn Facts website, various elements of the boat, such as the broken woodwork, for example, were never even attempted to be repaired by PAE. Many mistruths were stated by PAE, such as the company denying the expert reports and photos. At the end of the day, no decision was made regarding the incomplete status of Aurora. The fact remains - PAE abandoned the vessel and refused to complete her construction. There are always two sides in a story. Like anyone else, Mr. Conconi would like his side of the story to be heard and help prevent other customers from having similar experiences.
I've always thought of Nordhavn as a solid company, whether this guy was being to demanding, or not, he did spend 15 million, and Nordhavn missed their mark by not making this guy feel like he bought the best product, backed by a solid warranty. Referring someone as " incompetent ", after spending 15 million, is NOT good company leadership.
It's clear this boat was rushed to the end, for whatever reason and it should not have been. Please take the time to read Steve D'Antonios report. What's interesting is that this is the 4th boat Mr Conconi purchased from PAE. Obviously he was happy before, and not so now. The inspection report is pretty awful on a new boat. I think Quality Control on this build was lacking and as Dan once stated to me, the bigger they are, the more complicated they are. And he's right. But the bottom line is PAE did not deliver their normally very high standard product. Such a shame. Normally a great product. And PAE have a HUGE list of happy customers. That lawyer is pretty objectionable as well!
Nordhavn Yachts made a big mistake here in my view. Old saying as to the customer is always right exists for a reason. The cost of just fulfilling their promise to Conconi and completing the vessel would have been far less expensive than all the business they are going to lose over this...
Well this video certainly confirms I won't be buying a boat from Nordhavn Yachts. You don't call your customer.....who has bought multiple vessels in the past from you.....incompetent.
You can look at that inspection report...the boat appears to have many serious flaws. I like their boats but I think they got over their head on this one.
Been seeing many stories like this. Came across one of these on Ripoff report, another customer was upset about PAE's poor work on his boat. Seems as tho this companies reputation is getting worse and worse......be interesting to see if they can "turn it around"....no pun intended.
WOW Talk about gross mismanagement of a build. Clearly this boat builder was way outside it's limits of what it can and can't do but is to blind to understand scalability of a build.
![Quando Rondo - Grow Up [Official Music Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/8zFnCg3BO4Q/mqdefault.jpg)
Here is the video that shows the trip/delivery from China to Vancouver and the Owner/Buyer and his wife were on board for the whole delivery and there were no problems. You can watch him take delivery and seemed very happy..
ruclips.net/video/DcLLCCkyr3k/видео.html
So if the owner that looks like he's in his 80's or older probably isn't able to operate a 120 ft yacht without a captain or isn't competent enough to remember numerous intense systems he was shown, then he may need to be shown a lot more than they did and he was offered that. The system that failed is not a Nordhavn system and should be warranted by the Manufacturer that sold it to him, not Nordhavn. Pretty simple. (If you buy a house and bring your own appliances for the builder to install, the appliances are warranted by the appliance manufacturer, not the builder.)
Mr. Conconi has enjoyed many of the vessels he has bought from Nordhavn - in fact, he has purchased 4 of them in the past. However, when Mr. Conconi advanced sufficient funds to complete the manufacture of his latest vessel with Nordhavn - the Aurora - and the vessel was not completed or finished, Nordhavn Facts found it necessary to highlight this situation. Mr. Conconi placed his trust in PAE (otherwise he would not have provided PAE with $16,000,000). However, PAE refused to complete the Aurora, leaving Mr. Conconi with major expenses as well as a partially completed boat and much that had to be redesigned and removed (without PAE's help or contribution).
Mr. Conconi has enjoyed the other Nordhavn vessels that he has purchased - but not the process of purchasing his latest Nordhavn through PAE, as the company did not complete the vessel as promised. The truth, in Mr. Conconi's situation, was deflected at every turn by PAE. The company did not contribute or compensate for the work Mr. Conconi had to perform on his vessel. Nordhavn Facts is simply demonstrating and warning consumers of what could happen if a purchaser prepays significantly more than the cost to complete their vessel.
Furthermore, what is even more troubling, is that PAE had a documented history of begging Mr. Conconi for additional money whenever PAE was unable to meet its financial obligations. For example, on March 27, 2013, PAE’s project manager, Trever Smith, wrote to Mr. Conconi on PAE’s behalf, explaining that “in order to have the N120 virtually turnkey as it leaves the yard we need to ask for some assistance.” Mr. Smith went on to explain that PAE immediately needed another $322,000.00, but that this was “finally the last time” PAE would “bug” Conconi with its “cash flow woes.” [Exhibit 436]
nordhavnfacts.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/Exhibit-436.pdf
A few short months later, PAE’s President, Dan Streech, followed up on June 21, 2013, with another request for additional money, this time asking Mr. Conconi for a $4 million loan to get Aurora “over the finish line…completed, released from the factory and delivered to Vancouver,” stating “you have been a perfect gentleman, partner and participant in the building of the boat and have done your part and much more…especially in that you have advanced early payments to PAE when we needed them. We are very very appreciative of all that you have done.” [Exhibit 267]
nordhavnfacts.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/Exhibit-267.pdf
But, of course, fast-forwarding to when Mr. Conconi started to insist that PAE honor its obligations to him, Dan Streech’s praise for Mr. Conconi as the “perfect gentlemen” and “partner” suddenly changed, going so far as to refer to Mr. Conconi, the man who saved PAE from financial ruin, as, among other names, a “crazy guy” that is “irrational” (deposition Transcript of Daniel Streech September 21, 2015, )
nordhavnfacts.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/crazy.mp4?_=1
In fact, you’ll hear Mr. Streech has a history of bad-mouthing most anyone who disagrees with him about Aurora’s condition. For example, Kelly Christian, an expert witness who actually inspected Aurora - was described by Streech as “Creepy.” (Deposition Transcript of Expert Witness Daniel Streech March 25, 2016)
nordhavnfacts.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/creepy.mp4?_=1
And Brian Bergmark, an expert witness who testified about PAE’s financial and accounting issues, was referred to by Streech as “an idiot” who Streech wouldn’t hire to “balance [his] checkbook.” (Deposition Transcript of Expert Witness Daniel Streech March 25, 2016)
nordhavnfacts.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/idiot.mp4?_=1
Mr. Conconi also learned that he and his wife were not the first to enter into a contract with PAE for the N-120 - that another couple were the first - and that Streech described this couple as “high maintenance . . . which was bound to erode the already too low margin” when explaining their defunct deal to the Conconis. [Exhibit 235]
nordhavnfacts.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/Exhibit-235.pdf
Dan Streech, Trevor Smith and Jim Leishman also testified that Mike Tellaria - a PAE employee who was aboard Aurora for the trip from Hong Kong to Vancouver - demonstrated the vessel’s systems to Mr. Conconi during that trip in compliance with PAE’s “demonstration of the systems” obligation under the Agreement.
However, when Mr. Tellaria was deposited under oath, he testified as follows:
Q Did you demonstrate any of the N120 systems to Mr. Conconi?
A No.
Q Do you know if anyone else was demonstrating systems to Mr. Conconi during the voyage?
A No.
Q Did you see anybody do any demonstration whatsoever of any system of the N120 during the voyage?
A No.
In the end, PAE failed to get every dollar it asked for. In fact, during the trial, PAE had to lower its claim because it admittedly miscalculated its final invoice by over $40,000, which was later reduced by another $100,000 by the court of appeals. Also, PAE claimed at the trial, through Dan Streech, that despite agreeing to deliver Aurora fully fueled, he simply “forgot” to fuel the vessel. Ultimately, PAE lost the appeal, and the judgment was reduced by over $100,000.
In addition, Mr. Conconi was promised that a team of PAE employees would be waiting at the dock to complete Aurora and permit Mr. Conconi to accept delivery. In reality, the entire delivery team left Aurora for the airport on arrival, and another team never came.
The morning of arrival, Aurora developed a serious leak that involved a defective system eroding through the vessel’s sea chests. With the assistance of tape and pumps, the Aurora was sailed to Seattle to make emergency repairs. During this time, PAE promised to finish Aurora to its completed state. However, 4 months later, after Mr. Conconi insisted on her return from the Seattle docks, no remaining work had been performed and the Aurora was still in the same condition she was in when taken for emergency repairs.
Dan Streech inspected Aurora on her departure from Delta Marine in Seattle for the first time, four months after Aurora arrived in Canada. It appeared that PAE simply planned a DUMP & RUN, falsely insisting Mr. Conconi had accepted delivery of Aurora and any defects were limited to the manufacturer’s individual warranties.
All inspections were performed in the year that followed delivery and illustrated the same inspected condition as at purported delivery. The reality and performance speaks for itself. Mr. Conconi finished the Aurora without any assistance from PAE.
PAE would like to focus on debt collection and avoid any conversation as to whether they completed the Aurora. Mr. Conconi has no difficulty honoring and paying debts. Instead, this situation is entirely over whether the vessel was completed in accordance with the contract.
PAE went so far as to state Aurora was perfect and all of Mr. Conconi’s claims and inspections were fake. In reality, this case was not about a debt owed to PAE. Instead, it was about whether PAE finished and completed the Aurora in accordance with the Purchase Agreement.
Nordhavn Facts has concluded the Aurora was in an incomplete state and was simply abandoned in Vancouver. The fact is, PAE did not investigate further into the situation regarding the Aurora and failed to complete their obligations because they lacked the financial ability to complete the work. Furthermore, various pieces of documentation, such as third-party inspections by Steve D'Antonio and Barr Leonard, illustrate what was incomplete and later done by the purchaser after the vessel was abandoned.
The contract was specific and clear. The remaining 1.8 million was not owed by Mr. Conconi until all systems were demonstrated to a reasonable satisfaction level. As highlighted on the Nordhavn Facts website, various elements of the boat, such as the broken woodwork, for example, were never even attempted to be repaired by PAE.
Many mistruths were stated by PAE, such as the company denying the expert reports and photos. At the end of the day, no decision was made regarding the incomplete status of Aurora. The fact remains - PAE abandoned the vessel and refused to complete her construction.
There are always two sides in a story. Like anyone else, Mr. Conconi would like his side of the story to be heard and help prevent other customers from having similar experiences.
I've always thought of Nordhavn as a solid company, whether this guy was being to demanding, or not, he did spend 15 million, and Nordhavn missed their mark by not making this guy feel like he bought the best product, backed by a solid warranty. Referring someone as " incompetent ", after spending 15 million, is NOT good company leadership.
Wow now I'm thinking this over this winter we were going to start looking at Nordhaven 63. I'm not do sure about that now.
It's clear this boat was rushed to the end, for whatever reason and it should not have been. Please take the time to read Steve D'Antonios report. What's interesting is that this is the 4th boat Mr Conconi purchased from PAE. Obviously he was happy before, and not so now. The inspection report is pretty awful on a new boat. I think Quality Control on this build was lacking and as Dan once stated to me, the bigger they are, the more complicated they are. And he's right. But the bottom line is PAE did not deliver their normally very high standard product. Such a shame. Normally a great product. And PAE have a HUGE list of happy customers. That lawyer is pretty objectionable as well!
Been in love with Nordhavn a while. This changes many of my dreams. Maybe it’s a good thing I can’t afford these toys. Oh well!
Nordhavn Yachts made a big mistake here in my view. Old saying as to the customer is always right exists for a reason. The cost of just fulfilling their promise to Conconi and completing the vessel would have been far less expensive than all the business they are going to lose over this...
Not good, I see a name change in the future.if they even have one. Something happened with SeaRanger years back
If I paid that much for a yacht... I would expect it to be perfect!
Well this video certainly confirms I won't be buying a boat from Nordhavn Yachts. You don't call your customer.....who has bought multiple vessels in the past from you.....incompetent.
You can look at that inspection report...the boat appears to have many serious flaws. I like their boats but I think they got over their head on this one.
oh, oh...and i as an a ship-owner thought always, nordhaven is a save haven...a bullitproof masterpiece, and 15 millionen is number, wow....
It appears that there are a lot of customers not satisfied by PAE. This dispute sounds like it ended poorly.
Been seeing many stories like this. Came across one of these on Ripoff report, another customer was upset about PAE's poor work on his boat. Seems as tho this companies reputation is getting worse and worse......be interesting to see if they can "turn it around"....no pun intended.
Link to that report?
WOW
Talk about gross mismanagement of a build. Clearly this boat builder was way outside it's limits of what it can and can't do but is to blind to understand scalability of a build.
Next time Buy American!
Nordhavn needs to do the right thing.
Hopefully, the buyer finds a better company to work with next time.
Nordhavn has bad reviews all over the internet.
not good at all the handling of this
Hope they do right for Bob! Stand with Bob!