Zane Smith, Esquire of Chicago is counsel for a group of Zidware customers. He successfully obtained a judgment on behalf of his clients. That lawsuit was not a "class action," which is a legal term of art, with a very specific meaning.

In any event, for USA pre-order customers, who dealt directly with DP, jurisdiction and other important issues regarding TBL will likely require consultation with overseas counsel. I imagine that the sales contract with Dutch Pinball designates the jurisdiction and law applicable to any dispute arising thereunder.

I'm pretty sure that you meant "lose" and not "loose." The latter word means what you're not with your money.

From the standpoint of the bloodthirsty lawyer, who preordered RAZA #4, I view this Pinsider's outline as accurate.  I would add a clarification, though. 

The primary obstacle to legal recourse on the part of preorder customers has always been a fear of incurring excessive, unrecouped legal fees and costs.  A "class action" is a specialized legal claim that has never been available in the USA preorder debacles, like Zidware and Skit-B.  Typically, class actions require thousands or tens of thousands of victims who share virtually identical grievances. 

A court must certify/approve the class.  One or more lead class members represents the entire class. Class actions are designed to streamline a large volume of "low value" cases to economize court resources, legal fees and costs.  

The available legal route for preorder customers, like the EAs here, is a "group action" as opposed to a "class action." A lawyer can often be found to work on a hybrid flat fee/contingency basis, which allows the victims to cap or circumscribe legal fees and litigation costs.  That is how the dozen or so Zidware victims were able to economically seek legal redress and obtain a favorable judgment at trial.  Their lawyer was willing to absorb some of the litigation risk precisely because his contingency fee, if successful, would be based on a twelvefold quantum and because the pleadings had already been filed, requiring the joinder of new plaintiffs merely via amendment.

Hiring an experienced litigator for a singular claim, on an hourly fee basis, with $15K or less at stake, is usually economically unfeasible. I was able to take on that task against Zidware under these extraordinary circumstances:

1) The debacle's timing was relatively early, prior to the Jpop rescue efforts of Pintasia, American Pinball and Deeproot, meaning that other creditors had not already depleted assets (if any had existed). The slate was clean; no other suits by customers (or vendors, as I recall) had been filed, at that time. Jpop had brought empty cabinets to an expo and refund requests were virtually all ignored (1 Pinsider received a refund after threatening legal action, post-expo). I began preparing for suit shortly thereafter;

2) Zidware and its officers were all based in Illinois;

3) As a trial attorney licensed in New Jersey and Washington, DC, I was able to prepare drafts of the complaint (i.e. the lawsuit's initial pleading) thereby averting the hourly legal fee. However, I needed a local attorney admitted to practice in Illinois;

4) I knew a talented civil litigator in Chicago willing to represent me and to allow me to keep fees to a minimum, based on my ability to assist.

Needless to say, for Early Achievers to replicate a "group action" here, a dozen or more would likely be needed to organize and retain Dutch counsel.  With $100K or so total at stake, a hybrid retainer might be feasible, for those inclined toward proactive efforts.  

Having endured the anxiety-producing Zidware rollercoaster debacle, my heart breaks for those who had hostage games.  The removal of game plaques is, in retrospect (and perhaps in the future), instructive.  I disagree with the notion that these TBL games were fungible goods.

If this dispute had been in the USA, an "intervenor action" could have been brought for injunctive relief, after ARA's suit but prior to any ARA adjudication. The legal argument could have been that these fully-paid games were designated to EAs (highlighting the plaques as evidence) and that EAs had the 1st right to purchase or otherwise acquire them. 

An equity court (or law division court) judge (or arbitrator) would have been called upon to craft an equitable remedy, somehow splitting the proverbial baby.  EAs may have been required to pay more; but, I imagine that a U.S. court would have fashioned some Solomonesque solution, making everyone at least marginally satisfied.  Minimally, a skilled attorney on behalf of EAs could have monkey-wrenched ARA's claim enough to have secured some concessions for EAs.

Whether Dutch law would have operated similarly or whether a future path exists, however dubious, regarding parts or other assets is up for debate.

I enjoyed playing TBL at Pinfest a few years ago. Naturally, my fingers remain crossed that EAs ultimately receive a remedy, even in the twilight of this saga. I apologize for this long post. . .hope I haven't contributed to the anxiety, which would be unDudelike, for sure. I do not mean to be an interloper here. Instead, having followed this thread, my intention is to add some clarity, particularly on the incorrect use of the class action terminology.

If 147 EAs, who have yet to receive a game, paid about $9K each, they have $1,323,000 at stake.  The preorder money at stake and the number of customers in the Zidware debacle (Magic Girl, RAZA and AiW in the aggregate) were similar.

Yet, only about a dozen Zidware preorder customers (the Zidware Dozen, hereafter ZDs) hired an attorney, forming the group around my initial suit. Apart from the fear of incurring legal expenses, the fear of accelerating insolvency is perhaps the second reason for aggrieved customers to default to laxity. 

Lawsuits in the USA are useful to force transparency where information is desired.  A good lawyer will obtain that information and advise clients of the best path to achieve the objective. In the words of Justice Brandeis, sunlight is the best disinfectant.  

The attorney can reach out to the adverse party in the spirit of cooperation, with the clout that he/she has the power to force the ultimate issue.  When insolvency is inevitable, the lawyer's job is to determine whether the clients have rights to assets and to ensure that they are first in line.  The lawyer can explain how, for example, the fraudulent transfer of asset law may apply.

The ZDs understood the benefit of counsel.  Mr68 created a private Facebook group to organize the ZDs who  joined the lawsuit.  Mr68 took the lead and continues the effort currently to conclude the victory.  

The tenacious ZDs, with Mr68's leadership, deserve the credit for the successful verdict.  Each of them was the exceptional 1 in 10 of total preorder customers who refused to allow the ship to steer them into the iceberg.  My case successfully resolved within a couple of weeks of the suit, which I filed years ago.  It was Mr68 and the other ZDs (at least one of whom is an EA here) who walked the walk.

The TBL and Zidware projects share some common elements.  Equally, many contrasts exist between the two.  The sensible approach, I submit, is to follow Mr68's template.  Discuss these issues on a private forum, like a Facebook group, in which only EAs and select persons are permitted to join.  Filter out the noise generated by those with adverse interests.  There is strength in numbers and in commonality of interest.

While I prefer the mechanical bowling feature, if a video bowling element were to be implemented, I would hope that it would mimic Namco's wonderful 2006 Rockin' Bowl-O-Rama.

Namco's Bowl-O-Rama was ahead of its time. The developers consulted with professional bowlers in creating a very realistic bowling experience. The player uses a track ball to both spin and control ball acceleration.

Splits can be made. Ball weight can be selected. The options add to the challenge. It's the best bowling simulator out there, all of these years later. Below is a brief video link demo.

Rockin' Bowl-O-Rama was rediscovered by enthusiasts in about 2012. Recognizing the game's high fun quotient and terrific aesthetics, resellers began buying nonworking project games for $500 or less at auctions. Today, functional examples fetch between $1,300 - $2,500, but typically closer to $1,700 for a clean one, with spinning ash trays, an intact base, and unmolested console graphics.

I was able to buy replacement spinning ashtrays directly from Namco. These are usually missing. They really add to the vintage Brunswick bowling alley vibe.

There's a nearly identical version game out there with a less substantial base and slightly different monitor, which may have been a home version. The commercial version's base is quite heavy, as would be expected.

Namco made its original foppy disc software proprietary. It was nearly impossible to repair. Like Sony's error in failing to license Betamax technology, allowing the inferior VHS format to claim the video market back in the day, I suspect that Bowl-O-Rama's fate was, in part, doomed for this reason. However, flash drive modifications became available, although these can be challenging to download.

But for Namco's technological misstep in this regard, these games would likely continue to earn revenue on location today. Instead, they have found their way into our gamerooms, which is also a strike, I suppose.

Be sure that the image is crisp and that the game is, needless to say, free of hacks. The vinyl-like graphic is durable so that element is usually well-preserved. The original track ball is black.

Many are equipped with dollar acceptors, which adds value. There's an upright cabinet version as well. But, much of the game's charm is its retro sensibility.

20191128_202953 (resized).jpg

His Pinside identity is: herbertbsharp (of Ballston Spa, NY).

Incidentally, the game also features a slow-motion reverse angle replay mode, which is fun to activate after making tough spares. Also, trick shot challenges and other nontraditional bowling games are included.

I suppose. But, if I was to buy a Bowl-O-Rama today, I would either wait for a functional, original example in the $1K - $2K range or else settle for two parts games and create one good one. The monitor is robust and should not require replacement in a home environment unless it has a history of overuse.

The game is heavier than it appears. Thus, the shipping cost will be commensurate with a traditional arcade or pinball machine.

Edit: Looks like replacement monitors (and other components) are available. https://www.namcoparts.com/ECommerce/category/namco-parts/video-games/rockin-bowl-o-rama

No risk in having it topple over, with its weighted base.

The drink holders and wide-base are convenient, designed to invite multiple players to encircle the monitor. Nobody smokes in my house. Nevertheless, it's fun spinning the ashtrays.

I had my game shipped to me in New Jersey from a Las Vegas storage unit several years ago. I imagine that casinos had a few of them.

I have a friend who operates an arcade. He's convinced that Bowl-O-Rama would earn considerable revenue in the right locations today.

Below is the bowling poker game screen. The visuals are well done. The music selection is comprised of hits from the fifties. To change a song, the player engages a button on the console, causing an intentionally scratchy transition between tracks.

The trick shot mode is challenging even for an experienced player. The designers incorporated humor into the gameplay by rewarding good shots with comical accolades and failed shots with tongue-in-cheek ridicule.

You just know that the designers were cracking up during the game's development. This is another reason that Bowl-O-Rama seems to fit well with TBL.

20191129_221023 (resized).jpg

I'm not sure. As previously mentioned, a somewhat less substantial version was made (perhaps "home version"), with a pared down base, and other cost-saving changes, including the removal of the stainless trim under the monitor.

I suspect that the gameplay is the same; but, I'm not certain, having never played that model. I will check the literature I have with my game for clues.

Here's the $1,500 Bowl-O-Rama currently on eBay. As you can see, its base is somewhat less substantial than the others depicted in this thread. Also, the stainless steel panel under the monitor is absent. The speakers are probably smaller.

The monitor appears to be the same. I suspect that the gameplay is identical. I see the "stainless steel version" somewhat less frequently for sale. . .not sure if a price difference exists between the two versions.

The game was evidently manufactured in 2005 and 2006. It's possible that cost-cuts were implemented later in production (or the reverse may be true).

Edit: The Indiana eBay auction describes the game as the 2005 "home version," which supports my theory that the heavier model, with the stainless trim, was likely targeted to the commercial market.

20191129_234534 (resized).jpg

Actually, I think that the height of the base's lip on the commercial version is noticeably higher, apart from the variation in the pole's appearance. The paint finish on the base is also different.

I conclude that the "stainless steel version" was specifically made for commercial locations whereas the other version was marketed to residential customers.

By the way, my game was made in June 2006.

If you're like me, you will soon be on the hunt for other Bowl-O-Rama kitsch.

Good luck!

20191130_011910 (resized).jpg

20191130_012219 (resized).jpg

My game is running on the original disc. Because of the game's proprietary design, it does take special know-how to install the flash drive replacement; but, it can be accomplished.

Pinball/Arcade guru, Ray Brackins, of Wide Area Repair in PA, has successfully installed these USB flash drives, like the $75 one on eBay, as have others.

It's unfortunate that you didn't have access to someone capable of installing the USB. Indeed, retailers seek out $200 nonfunctional games, like yours, download the program and resell the game for as much as $3K (retail price being $2,500 - $3,000). That's why a functioning game, with good cosmetics, is a smart purchase in the $1K - $2K range, in my view.

Meanwhile, here's a Bowl-O-Rama postcard I have on display in my gameroom. With my second kid off to college in the fall, and the third in the wings, a TBL is not within my budget anytime soon. I will have to get my bowling fix by standing on a rug playing Bowl-O-Rama.
20191130_125125 (resized).jpg

20191130_125027 (resized).jpg

Done, good idea.