#FIGHT BACK!
29 messages in this thread
Dear Mr. Saperstein,
So what? Who cares what the "Trustees" are supposed to do for the creditors.
I don't and neither should you. Clearly, these "Trustees" are incompetant or
they would have effected a decesion before Christmas and for all the other
Amiga owners is to DEFINATELY rattle their cage, get them off the dime and get
the deal done, now! 6,000,000 Amiga owners (lovers) can make a lot of noise,
write a lot of letters, and trust me, a landslide of pressure is imposible to
ingore. Sir, with respect, you are dead wrong.
Jon Byk
"6,000,000 Amiga owners (lovers) can make a lot of noise, write a lot of
letters, and trust me, a landslide of pressure is imposible to ingore."
More like a landfill of unread letters and unanswered phone calls.
Your argument suffers from all manner of faults, not the least of which is
over generalization. Commodore may indeed have sold perhaps 5,000,000 or so
Amiga computers. Anyone's numbers are approximations at best.
To claim that somehow all these people represent a community of common
interest is really pushing it. And it's doubtful that someone who purchased an
Amiga as a game machine has the same interest as one who bought for use in
video production.
"Who cares what the "Trustees" are supposed to do for the creditors."
Well, the trustees for a start. It's simple enough and utterly lawful for
them to ignore the bleating of unhappy Amiga owners. That's what wastebaskets
are for.
By law, the trustees have their responsibilities set out for them. If you're
not a creditor of Commodore, you have nothing to say that they have to listen
to. Period.
Obviously you and everyone else has a perfect right to write them, Email
them, phone them, fax them or semaphore them.
And they have every right to simply ignore you – which is what I expect they
would do.
Jerry
Jerry,
..and the world may come to an end, or here in California, we may have a 7.5
earthquake in April, so I guess there is no use getting out of bed and going to
work! Come on, Jerry, you are on these boards a lot. You must have a real
interest in keeping Amiga alive.
Get off your duff and make an effort. Do something. Write a letter to the
Trustees and say you own an Amiga. You have an investment. You want to keep
on getting software up-grades. You want to live to see the A5000. It's a
great OS.
My Emplant on an old 2000 (PPS 040/28) is much faster the my friends new
PowerPc Mac 60mhz. He couldn't believe it!
You may be well served to wake up and take a positive approach to things. You
may be amazed at what you can accomplish, but you have to try!
FIGHTBACK!
Jon Byk
Jon:
For some reason you simply don't get it: the trustees have a legal obligation
to do what the law requires.
All the letters and phone calls in the world aren't – and shouldn't – change
their course.
Jerry
Jerry,
Just because you do not agree with me, doesn't mean that I simply don't get it.
Not only are you insulting, but you are single-minded to a fault. I don't know
what you do for a living or how successful you have been, but I have found that
determination, persistance and hard work generally pay off. You give up and
you expect everyone to do the same. Never give up, Jerry, and you might be
supprised at the results.
FIGHTBACK!
Jon Byk
There's no intention of being insulting on my part, Jon. You just may not
like the explanation for the trustees doing what they're doing or my belief
that a campaign such as you propose would lead to the filling of lots of
wastebaskets and lots of telephone hang-ups.
No one is stopping you from writing letters, making phone calls or anything
else you want to do. But if you've noticed, most of those who have chosen to
comment have basically said the same thing: the trustees aren't going to listen
because they have no reason or obligation to listen.
So do whatever turns you on.
Jerry
What is really frustrating is that a global British bank, can crash and
burn to the point where even the Bank of England could not put together a
rescue package, and the sucker is sold off in less than a fortnight.
Meanwhile a realtively minor Computer concern slowly winds down, and all
the kings horses and all the kings men, cannot sort it out in almost a
year.
Yeah, but banks have to pretend to be honest so the books were in order.
Irv & Medhi had a whole different strategy going when they convoluted the whole
mess of a corp. all over the world. A bank wouldn't be allowed to do that in
most countries. They'd have all kinds of auditors on thier backs.
At least that's my opinion, working for financial institutions for the majority
of the last 17 years.
Robb
Supposedly the Bank was less than forthright in its dealings. There are
reports in the press than the Bank now did know of the traders actions,
and that its New York branch was almost closed last year by US regulators
for the way it was handling its affairs.
Wonder if there are an Irv Gould or Mehdi Ali listed some place amongst
its boards of directors.
Actually I take some sort of perverse pride in knowing that in a few short
years the officers of my computer maker, could make a more convoluted
mess, than a world wide banking concern could in 200 years.
Yes, but . . .
The bank sold for one Pound – and the assumption of hundreds of millions of
dollars of possible losses. The bank was also very important to a lot of
*wealthy* entitites.
Makes a big difference.
Jerry
If someone had offered $1 plus the full assumption of all of Commodore's debt,
they could have owned Commodore at any time (still could).
dale@iam.com http://www.iam.com
Intangible Assets Manufacturing
That's for sure. But obviously no one wanted it at that price.
Jerry
>> If someone had offered $1 plus the full assumption of all of
>> Commodore's debt, they could have owned Commodore at any time
>> (still could).
And then they'd be broke too… <g>
Jon,
And exactly what kind of "pressure" do you intend to put on the
trustees? And what would you suppose this pressure to do?
You (me and all the other) as an Amiga owner have exactly ZERO to say
about what happens with the remains of Commodore. We were customers, not
creditors.
Period.
Don
Don,
The "pressure" which may affect the Trustees is very simple human psych- ology.
These fellows don't know we exist. At least, we are not "top-of- mind". They
have been dealing with few potential buyers and the creditors lawyers. I
believe the negotiations and due dilligence has been going on since last April.
Apparently nothing has come to fruition nor is it about to come to a
conclusion. Think about it Don, a woman can get pregnant and have a baby in
less time than these folks have been fooling around!
Of course, you are right, we have nothing to say about the liquidation of
Commodore, but so what? Does that keep us from letting the Trustees know that
there are MILLIONS of AmigaUsers in the world, each of whom has a vital,
personal interest in the fate of what I believe is an extraordinary OS and
technology?
Don, if you were a Trustee and every morning you got thousands of letters
attesting to the foregoing, I don't think you could help being affected. Let's
take our heads out of our harddisks and FIGHTBACK!
Jon Byk
Jon,
You don't get it…they don't CARE if there are millions of Amiga
owners out there. That fact has nothing to do with the sale of the company's
assets.
The trustees don't care if the buyers intend on starting up an assembly
line or using the assets to make ping-pong balls. They only care about how
much money they can get selling those assets.
The *buyers* may (or may not…depends on their intentions) care about
those things…the number of potential customers for the buyer's new products
may influence how much they're willing to pay for the assets.
But the sellers could care less.
Do you think a TV salesman cares if you intend on watching kiddie
programs, porn films or network news? No, they care you want to buy the TV and
what you do with it once you own it is your business.
The trustees don't care what the buyers intend on doing with the
technology, they only care what price they can get for it. The millions of
owners are a possible concern for the buyers…not the sellers.
Don
I don't even think they care how much they get for the assets, only how much
they get paid in the process. Any nitwit knows perishable assets sell much
better live than dead. They've let the assets perish, thus they will get much
less for them, if they ever get to sell them. But their own coffers grow with
each passing day of litigation. Hey, they got their own families to think
about too B-) Omega? What's an Omega? Come to think of it, it's starting to
sound like Omega may be an appropriate name …
DJ
DJ,
Look at the current story of the German subsidary selling off a
trademark without authorization. It's that kind of crap…figuring out if it
was legal or not, figuring out who the German subsidary belonged to,etc. that
is causing most of the delays.
Don
I think that the real delays are caused by the fact that the assets are worth
so little. If someone could justify slapping $100 million down on the table,
they'd own everything and could sort out exactly what they bought later. The
problem is that the assets aren't worth enough to justify spending very much at
all, and the offers in the single-digits and teens are even contingent on
getting all of the little pieces of this and that and the other, as if it is
all worth barely anything at all and no risk should be taken.
dale@iam.com http://www.iam.com
Intangible Assets Manufacturing
Dale,
Ok…that's reasonable.
Don
Don,
I think the mistake you are making is assigning logic and intelligence to the
actions of the trustees. It seems to me that they, over the last ten months
have demonstrate the obverse.
This bankruptsy proceeding has not been an excercise of rationality in a
vacuum. I have to believe that these guys are airheads. The Bahamas (I've
been there) is a laid back place where people go for vacations. This has got
to be the biggest bankruptsy proceeding they've ever had.
Why not build a little fire under them and let them know that there are six
million people interested in getting a better, faster result than has been
demonstrated to date?
FIGHTBACK!
Jon Byk
Jon,
You have many strange ideas about what's going on.
Go write all the letters you wish…I'll not join you, nor will I
encourage anyone else to do so.
Don
So we write letters and say what? "Please Sir, can't we have more
Amigas?" (to the tune of a Dikens character asking for more porridge.)
I have no idea whether or not this is the biggest bankruptcy the Bahamas
have ever had. There are a fair number of companies doing business out of
there for the same reason C= did.
You seem to have the idea that everyone in the Bahamas is some sort of
beach bum airhead just whiling away their days in the sun.
While this most likely is untrue, that would make it even less likely for
such a campaign to work. If they aren't worried about the creditors
filing suit for not expiditing the disposal of the assets in a timely
fashion for the best possible return, then I doubt they will leave those
vacation spots to read a letter about how much we want our computers back.
Plain truth is, we have no leverage. Just because a letter is mailed,
doesn't mean it gets read.
However, if makes you feel better, write a letter.
And if, perchance, your letter speeds the settlement of the case, and
brings about a return of the Amiga, I'll sing your praises till my dying
day.
I think an offer from one of these supposedly "well funded" companies that
was sufficiently large to make the creditors and the court sit up and take
notice, would probably have a larger effect.
Alex,
>>You seem to have the idea that everyone in the Bahamas is some sort of beach
bum airhead just whiling away their days in the sun.<<
I've never been to the Bahamas, but I have been to the French West Indies a few
times (going again in 24 days<G>) and if people in the Bahamas are anything
like people in the FWI…
Don't worry, what's your hurry, we'll get to it. Someday maybe. The mindset is
totally laid back no matter what you are doing.
It's great when you're on vacation. The first few days you're uptight then you
just go with the flow. And you can wait for hours for a meal to be served. Let
alone this C= mess.
I'm kinda thinking these Bahamians are running this C= thing that way, don't
worry, they'll get around to it.
Grumble, Robb
Jon,
If you really want to apply pressure, you'd best start with the creditors.
The trustees are there to get the highest dollar for the creditors.
None of these people are Forrest Gump. Do you really think that the
salability of the Amiga as a continuing concern is only apparent to the
people here on Compuserve?
Out of all the articles in newspapers and magazines, and surely the
documents files by Amiga International and CEI, some mention of
deterioration over time, of the value of the technology has been
mentioned.
The creditors and trustee may well feel that a higher return may be
realized by parting C= out, as opposed to selling the assets as a whole.
The name of the computer company escapes me at the moment, however they
patented the game cartridge and certain animation technology. The company
recently won a judgement against Nintendo for patent infringement to the
tune of over $100 million. The kicker is, that the company went broke
over 10 years ago, and is still in the hands of the trustees. In this
particular case, which is surely and isolated one, more money was to be
had by not selling the assets.
I doubt any such future windfall would be available from lawsuits over the
Amiga technology, however C= is not the first computer company to go
broke. (Nor is it likely to be the last.) Lawyers love precident, and
surely they have looked at past liquidations and are well aware of the
rate at which technolgy depreciates. Possibly they are better informed
than we.
Lastly there is money to be made in loosing money. A really good write
off is sometimes more valuable than getting back a few cents on the
dollar.
All of that doesn't help us, but then again they owe us nothing. We gave
our money, and got a computer. They loaned theirs, and were not repaid,
so they foreclosed and now C= is theirs. If they can make more money by
not selling C= and taking the write off, then that is what they owe to
their share holders to do. No matter how negatively it affects us.
Alex,
>None of these people are Forrest Gump.
Sometimes I wish Forrest Gump was running Commodore instead of Ali and Gould.
The Amiga would be a grand success! ;-}
Regards,
John Chang
John:
Uh hu! "PC's are like a box of chocolates… You never know what you're gonna
get."
Wayne
Alex,
The creditors are controlled by the laywers who sell their time by the hours.
Often, laywers are motivated by self interest (greed).
From what I've read on the BBS's, it seems to me that the trustees are and have
acted in an irrational manner to the detriment of all. Ergo, stir up the
trustees.
As far as creditors benefiting from a write-off, if they can, they will, and
they won't be able to until the assets are sold or the assets no long- er have
value – however, the creditors will be much better off getting cash. The more,
the better.
FIGHTBACK!
Jon Byk
Small creditors may be under the thumb of a lawer, however then big
creditors, have lawyers on staff, so the lawyer gets paid anyway.
Cash isn't always better either. Losses can accrue tax credits. (Isn't
business law wonderful?) There are plenty of times when the tacx credits
can be more valuable than the money that could be gained in the sale of
the assets. (Kinda like the old story where a person gets a pay raise,
only to find a smaller pay check, because they are in a higer tax
bracket.)
I read a lot of things on a lot of BBS's. However, I don't take such
postings as evdience of what is really going on.
Basically I see it this way. If I was one of the major creditors, who was
owed millions of dollars, and I thought I was going to loose a potential
million or two more, because some trustee was jerking the bidders around,
I do think I'd have my staff lawyer down there prodding those folks along,
so that I could salvage those few bucks that I could.
That is unless the write off was more valuable for my annual bottom line,
or that breaking it up and parting it out looked to be more rewarding.
Lastly, if C= wouldn't listen to our pleadings while they were in
business, what makes you think that some Bahamian trustee will?