I purchased RemoteSpace from the same team. When RemoteSpace shut down in July, I was offered refund or migration to BrowserAct. Since Aug 5 I sent multiple emails/DMs; no refund or concrete follow-up—only repeated requests for my purchase platform and, later, silence.

The public Q&A says “refunds were processed” and “users were notified,” but my records show otherwise. Even after acknowledging their delay (“I was on vacation and forgot to delegate”), they provided only partial credits—far below the promised Tier-3 equivalence—and shifted responsibility to Dealify.

I appreciate the apology, but the pattern of delays, inconsistent explanations, and unclear compensation raises doubts about long-term reliability. If BrowserAct later shuts down after leaving AppSumo, buyers may face the same unresponsiveness seen with RemoteSpace.

This is for transparency so others can decide with context.

Pros: Promising concept, capable. Cons: Communication gaps, unfulfilled refund commitments, inconsistent support.

Prior Q&A: https://appsumo.com/s/16fdd8q/

Discrepancies and unresolved issues:

1. Refund processing. The Q&A says refunds were processed. My Aug 5+ requests were never executed—only replies requesting my platform; no refund or concrete resolution followed. Saying “refunds were processed through partners” conflicts with the thread.

2. Responsibility shift to Dealify. The 7/31 notice promised refund or migration, not a third-party dependency. After that promise, the team cannot disclaim responsibility. “Not on AppSumo” is irrelevant; purchase was via Dealify (their channel).

3. Response delay/inconsistency. Between Aug 5 and Oct 21 no substantial action occurred despite follow-ups. The first prompt response came only after I posted on AppSumo—indicating earlier non-response was not technical but willingness. The later admission (“vacation, no hand-off”) contradicts earlier claims of continuous support via delegation.

4. Tier compensation inconsistency. DMs promised “Tier-3 equivalent” migration. Yet only three codes (30,000 credits/month) were provided—below the public Tier-3 level (90,000/month) listed on AppSumo/product pages. That definition was later called “irrelevant,” further eroding trust.

5. Minimizing accountability. The team repeatedly blamed Dealify/AppSumo, avoided a written apology until pressed, and overlooked contradictions—raising concerns about protection after any delisting.

Summary: The gap between public statements and actual handling suggests a real risk that—once outside AppSumo’s protection—BrowserAct users may face similar unresponsiveness as with RemoteSpace. This is not an attack; it documents a verified timeline to encourage transparent, fair handling.

[ADDENDUM: Corrections and Supporting Facts]
I can’t reply under their comment, so I post corrections here.

(1) I did not “refuse both refund and compensation.” I redeemed the three codes (+10,000 credits/month each = 30,000/month). To close amicably, I pointed to your “make-whole” path to reach equivalence—either +6 additional codes, a manual top-up of +60,000/month, or direct Tier-3 assignment. That is not refusal; it is a request for functional parity.

(2) “Extortion / 3× credits” is false. Tier-3 = 90,000 credits/month is your public AppSumo definition. I receive 30,000/month, so the shortfall is 60,000/month (= 6 codes). Public numbers: T3 90,000; T4 130,000; T5 220,000. If migration tiers differ from AppSumo tiers, please publish the alternate table (site+AppSumo) in advance. As of now, the only published tier conditions are on AppSumo.

(3) “Public written apology / hinting negative reviews.” A brief apology was requested only as a small element of a good-faith settlement, tied to my commitment to update this Q&A positively once resolved. Not a threat. From the start I said I would mark it “resolved in good faith” if we settled.

(4) “Repeated messages via Discord/email/SNS.” I followed up via Discord/email because there were no replies for an extended period. As for “SNS,” I am unaware what service you mean—please specify.

(5) “Excessive ultimatum.” There was none. Because I had been ignored up to today, I asked—**for the first time**—for a reply within two business days. From 7/31 until yesterday I never set a deadline.

Finally, I chose to trust BrowserAct again and purchased Tier-5 on AppSumo after receiving this written commitment (excerpt):

On Wed, Oct 22, 2025 at 13:00:46, henk wrote:
“We confirm Browseract’s commitment to operate our software and related services for twelve (12) months from the Effective Date of this notice. If Browseract ceases operation or materially discontinues the service within this period, we will grant each eligible user credits for our new product(s) equal to the value of the user’s LTD entitlement as of the discontinuation date.”

I hope we do not face the same outcome twice and that this commitment is honored.