CompuServe Thread

#FIGHT BACK!

12 messages in this thread
#187674From: Wayne SteeleMar 6, 1995 12:36 AM
Jerry: >> The process of liquidating Commodore is one of law. It has no other purpose than winding up the affairs of the corporation according to the law and realizing as much money from the sale of Commodore's assets as possible for the benefit of the creditors. I agree completely. However, don't you think the longer this goes on, the less money the creditors are likely to get? As we rapidly approach the one-year anniversary of Commodore's closure, it is clear that the potential to make money in the Amiga market has dwindled. Sooner or later, the bids on the table are gonna take a dive. It's simple economics, really. Each one of these "two week" delays costs the Amiga market dearly. We're losing users, developers, and – witness Amiga World – resources. CEI and AIL must be aware of this. At some point, they'll have to realize that the risk is increasing while the value is decreasing. Hence, I think their backers will force them to reduce their offers to compensate. Wayne
#187684From: J Saperstein/FontBankMar 6, 1995 3:30 AM
"However, don't you think the longer this goes on, the less money the creditors are likely to get?" Absolutely. And pointing out that the process is strictly for the benefit of the creditors doesn't mean that I think the trustees are doing a good job. Frankly I think their approach to the whole matter has been incredibly stupid. They should have made every effort to keep the Amiga production lines flowing and even contracted out the marketing to someone. But I suspect that what really happened is that the trustees thought it would be a relatively clean liquidation and woke up one morning realizing that they were in a swamp of unclear ownership of a maze of international corporations. Gould is a genius at avoiding taxes, even to the point of not spending any significant time anywhere – and that means any corporate structure he devised is going to be an almost indecipherable maze. The trustees are, however, legally liable to the court, the creditors and even the shareholders (but not to anyone who simply owns a Commodore built computer). Their professional licenses are on the line as well as their personal assets, so they have to be careful, as the law requires. I certainly would have done things differently – but I have the luxury of knowing absolutely nothing of what the trustees faced. As they say, ignorance is bliss. At this point I wouldn't be at all surprised to see the whole deal for the sale of the Commodore assets fall through. The former dealer network is virtually gone. The game market has simply moved on to other players and the video market is going increasingly toward the Macintosh, Windows and SGI. And as you correctly point out, one company after another has announced abandonment of their Amiga products. Amiga's former stronghold of video with NewTek is rapidly being gobbled up by PC and Mac players like Fast. I don't know what's happening with Scala's market. I was a firm believer that the Amiga could be successfully marketed as a niche machine, but I'm not so sure of that any more. Far too much time has elapsed and the Amiga name and technology simply don't have all that much staying power in the marketplace. Right now I'm looking to buy another one or two A4000's just to keep on hand. If I can keep my Toaster (and soon Flyer) setup running for another four or five years, I'll be happy. Jerry
#187709From: MARTIN SKOWRONSKIMar 6, 1995 9:09 AM
Jerry, <<The trustees are, however, legally liable to the court, the creditors and even the shareholders (but not to anyone who simply owns a Commodore built computer).>> I cannot speak for the courts or the creditors, but as a shareholder of C= stock; it is pretty obvious to me that the trustees wern't concerned in the least as to their responsibility to me and my fellow shareholders. <<The trustees are, however, legally liable to the court, the creditors and even the shareholders (but not to anyone who simply owns a Commodore built computer).>> Why is it easier to assume that the trustees are "stupid", rather than, they are operating by another agenda. For whatever treason <g>, the delays, IMHO, have been orchestrated and well planned. It seems to me that a motivated and resourcefull investigative reporter would not have to do too much digging to find the "genius" behind this fraudulant liquidation. Cheers, Marty ProActive Images Inc. "WE BECOME WHAT WE THINK ABOUT ALL DAY LONG" – RW EMERSON
#187737From: J Saperstein/FontBankMar 6, 1995 12:37 PM
"it is pretty obvious to me that the trustees wern't concerned in the least as to their responsibility to me and my fellow shareholders" Shareholders are the absolute last on the list and that's only if there is any cash left after liquidating the assets and making a distribution to the creditors. Shareholders do preserve some rights to sue for fraud. So maybe it's time for you to hire a lawyer. <G> "the delays, IMHO, have been orchestrated and well planned" And IMHO there isn't even the slightest shred of any evidence to support that opinion. <G> Jerry
#187723From: Don Curtis/SYSOPMar 6, 1995 11:44 AM
Jerry, (and Wayne) The Amiga market has already proven it can't make money…that's why Commodore collapsed. IF it could make money…Commodore wouldn't have collapsed. Now yes, there were things that Commodore could have done to make things better…but the trustees job isn't to run the business (keep the production lines open)…because that had a better chance of losing money than the current loss of market value. Yes…we all can sit here and complain about the lack of advertising, the lack of evangelism, the non-cooperation with major software houses to bring software to the Amiga….but all of that costs money. That would all have been well and good back in the mid and late 80's. It'd be worthless now, 10 years later. Back then, Commodore was in just about as financially on the ropes as they were right before declaring bankruptcy. They didn't have the cash needed to really pull off what was needed for the long term survival of the Amiga. I said it many years ago in a Transactor article, they made a crucial mistake (in my opinion) years ago when they brought out the A500. That changed the focus of the market from mainstream to game machine and killed any chances for the long term survival of the Amiga. Yes, the A500 provided much needed cash in the short term…but in the long term, killed the goose (that laid the golden egg). Commodore never had the cash needed to do a proper job with the Amiga, and their methods of getting cash to do what they did…insured it's untimely death. Again…that's all my opinion…but it seems to be supported by the history of the Amiga. Don
#187739From: J Saperstein/FontBankMar 6, 1995 12:43 PM
Don: I see no basis for arguing anything you've said. It's all right on. My only point was that the trustees could have continued production and marketing assuming, as you point out, that it was profitable. None of us, of course, know what the actual financial condition of Commodore was and you may be quite correct in assuming that continued production would have reduced the estate available for liquidation to benefit the creditors. The trustees have the final responsibility and they definitely call all the shots, right or wrong. Jerry
#187834From: Wayne SteeleMar 6, 1995 11:31 PM
Don: >> Again…that's all my opinion…but it seems to be supported by the history of the Amiga. Looking back at my involvement in the Amiga market since 1986, I'd have to say I agree with you. For what it's worth, however, I do think the Amiga *could* have done better than it did in Commodore's hands. As for the ever-pending liquidation, I've had a drastic change of opinion during the past ten months. At first, I really believed the Amiga could be saved if the right company came along. Now, I think the whole thing is quickly becoming a pointless exercise. You don't know how hard it is for me to admit that. 🙁 Wayne
#187869From: Don Curtis/SYSOPMar 7, 1995 1:51 AM
Wayne, I agree, a well funded company could have done quite better with the Amiga technology. Don
#188335From: EducomMar 10, 1995 5:41 AM
Don, I certainly won't agree with you… We are still making money out of the Amiga, and we could still do for some time wouldn't it be the lack of hardware. We've always been disgusted by the commercial policy from C= France, which I guess was more or less edicted by West Chester. I won't discuss the pros or cons etc. of the Amiga against its previous or current competitors, but I'll say that it could have been a major thing (I'm talking $$$ here) in the computer industry. I put the blame on C='s headquarters, certainly not on the machine itself nor on its users… Hey, Dan, I don't want to start no controversy; we don't need that… We're all already in deep s*#t |-) Fred. Frederic Botton from Paris, France fbotton@cix.compulink.co.uk
#188440From: Don Curtis/SYSOPMar 11, 1995 12:20 AM
Frederic, Certainly…individuals in the Amiga market could, and still can make money. But that has nothing to do with the viability of the computer itself as a profitable entity for the manufacturer. The Amiga has always done well in several nitch markets, but those markets (while making money for the VARs) didn't make enough money to keep the parent organization in business. Yes, I certainly agree…Commodore could have done a significantly better job of marketing the machine….especially, back when it could have made a large difference. Don
#187805From: Wayne SteeleMar 6, 1995 8:51 PM
Jerry: >> At this point I wouldn't be at all surprised to see the whole deal for the sale of the Commodore assets fall through. I also see that possibility. While I certainly don't want to see the Amiga disappear forever, I must admit the continued delays have me worried. Wayne
#187890From: J Saperstein/FontBankMar 7, 1995 3:03 AM
If I can get three or four years out of my present Amigas (plus one or two more that I plan to acquire), I'll be happy. It's a lot less expensive than having to shell out the bucks for a video system based on another platform. Jerry