Not buying that at all. It makes no sense. Look at the facts:
Someone pops up and doesn't mention DHC at all but offers "their" figures with a photo saved as "Comp.jpg" which was imbedded in an html e-mail but not called "COMP.jpg" and was actually part of a much larger .png file (see my first post for the full .png).
To extract the photo the OP posted from that larger.png and to have it display in reasonable resolution (as the OP managed) is impossible. The original photo of the MOCs that was embedded in the larger .png was not of sufficient resolution when blown up to 600 pixels wide to display as it did in the OP's post. As such, I suggest the image displayed here (COMP.jpg) is taken directly from the original photo or a duplicate of the original photo. That means it was DHC or a disgruntled employee.
If it was an ex-employee then what's the motivation? Two possible answers: 1) a scam and they've come here to rip someone off for £2k, or 2) to get DHC and Darren in the **** and stir this up.
Let's look at 1), first. If they were going to do that then why make it obvious to anyone who ever dealt with DHC and was a comic fan and a SW fan that this is a scam? The photo used, the reference to Belfast in the username? So, if it is a scam they're more stupid than stupid itself. That would leave option 2): trying to stir things up and get Darren more grief. Don't buy that either. To know the story here you had to be a DHC customer, a SW comic fan, a vintage SW MOC collector and have a reasonable memory for photos of MOCs pictured some 7 months earlier. That is quite a small subset. And why now? Why not when people were still
really hacked off with DHC. And to still have access to a DHC e-mail address months later? If it had been a scam you wouldn't use the DHC e-mail address, you'd want no trail at all and if it was to stir **** why not use the "
[email protected]" e-mail address? Further, if it is to **** stir then you'd display it in the listing, not on your registrant details that only Edd can see. And why not sign off the initial post "Darren", also? Make it a bit more obvious for anyone suspicious?
Final point: Regardless of whether this was an ex-employee running a scam or stirring it up then why delete the original post as soon as it was outed? No. This is not an ex-employee or anyone else. Enough of the games.
Oh and nice of you to offer an apology for any disgruntled ex-customers whilst you're here, mate. Says it all really.