August 8, 2012 was a day I will never forget and leading up to it, we had sought prayers for strength. Our friends really came through but it caused many to wonder if there was some life-threatening illness or some other life-altering event. So, here's what happened;
I (as President of my corporation) had initiated a lawsuit against a former Landlord (of the business) and August 8 was the hearing. The judge ruled against my corporation, but allowed my corporation to be compensated, minus some deductions and held that my corporation was responsible for attorney fees and costs of the defendant. So, the defendant got my corporation's property (over $30k worth of equipment) at no cost to them.
I'm not writing this to complain about the finding, but to let people know some things you should be aware of before pursuing any litigation.
1. The law can be on your side and you still lose. According to my Attorney, the law was on our side yet the judge still ruled against us.
2. The judge you get can be clueless as to the applicable laws. In our case, one judge heard all the preliminary arguments and pre-trial motions, but retired at the end of July. So, the judge who heard the case was new to the case and didn't even know the definition of some of the legal terms our side used. This may be due to our judge coming from a family court background instead of civil litigation.
3. If you are going to go all the way to trial, you should be prepared to be called every name you can think of and you should expect the person doing the name-calling to do so with great conviction. Put on your thick skin or you will feel great pain.
4. The legal system is nothing but a game to most of those who live within that system (read; lawyers and judges). Most don't really care what you like/don't like, think/don't think of them and they'll smile and give a polite "nice to meet you" while plotting the moment they'll put the knife in your heart and twist it. At the end, the judge will likely thank both sides (no matter how disgustingly dishonest they are) for their "professionalism."
5. Even when you believe you are right, when everyone tells you that you're doing the right thing, seriously evaluate whether or not you want to go down this road. Even if you win, you may not recover everything you asked for and if you lose, it can be devastating.
In our case, the judge selected certain documents to rely on, but then didn't rely on everything in/not in the documents. He said he was not relying on testimony (after about eight hours of testimony and extensive pre-trial depositions).
As this chapter in my life closes, I pray for guidance and strength going forward. My hope for anyone reading this is that you never have the experience I did.
Monday, August 13, 2012
Monday, July 2, 2012
Healthcare Act And Other Political Crap
With the recent Supreme Court ruling, upholding the Affordable Healthcare Act, there are opinions everywhere and so I post mine here and welcome all to comment, if you have the guts.
So first, the ruling. It is offensive to me that Federal Government now has the power to require anyone to purchase a good or service. Some say; you have to buy car insurance. Even the President who was a Constitutional Law Professor used that argument on tv. Really idiots? You wanna have that argument? Okay, you don't have to buy car insurance if you don't operate your vehicle on a public road. Also, you are not required to carry insurance on yourself, only to cover losses someone else sustains for your cause. The Healthcare Mandate says the Federal Government can penalize (or tax) you for NOT participating in what they think you should have.
One of the things I find absurd is that the Supreme Court found that the Affordable Healthcare Act is only legal if the penalty for not buying health insurance is a tax. But then the Obama administration and supporters go on tv and insist it is a penalty. Hey idiots; if it is a penalty, the Court said you can't have it. Duh!!!!
So, now that the Federal Government can do it regarding this, what is to stop them from telling you EVERYTHING you must eat based on their health recommendations? And we know the government NEVER gets anything wrong. Dumb Masses!
Now, some people are talking of and actually are, displaying their American flags upside down. Others are condemning this and saying it is disrespectful. Some are even saying it is disrespectful to veterans. I'm a vet and I say this is much more respectful than the President was when he was campaigning. That's right, President Obama said President George W Bush was "unpatriotic" for allowing the national debt to increase by $4trillion in eight years. Well, Mr. Obama (and all you followers of his) what say you now that the national debt has increased more than $6trillion in less than four years under President Obama? Dumb Masses!
The United States of America was born out of people realizing they didn't like living under the government's thumb in Europe. Yet now we vote for MORE government control. We watch socialist nations fall into ruin and somehow think we can do it better.
The United States of America IS THE LAST BEST HOPE FOR THE WORLD! Some think that's arrogant to say. But I say; who does everyone turn to when they're in trouble? Who supplies the money, the humanitarian aid, the military aid? WE DO!
Many of the people who support expanding the Federal Government have never had to go to the mat with regulatory agencies. They've never risked their livelihood for anything. They've never felt the wrath of the Federal Government. I have literally had a State government middle manager look me in the eye and say; "you can fight this, but if you do, we will bring the full weight and authority of the government to bear." All you friends of big government, does that sound like old-style mob tactics?
I believe our country is in distress. We must return to our greatness. Otherwise it is just a matter of time before our children and grandchildren see their country overtaken. If you are truly concerned about THE WORLD you leave behind, you might want to pay more attention to THE COUNTRY you leave behind.
Monday, June 11, 2012
UWF Inc ?
I am really looking for some constructive feedback on this issue.
Our local university, University of West Florida, has set up a non-profit corporation. This is the brainchild of a new Vice President who apparently has done this at other universities. The story goes that colleges and universities are suffering financially, due to cutbacks in government funding. These corporations are being set up to allow the college to operate businesses in the private sector that will bring revenue into the university iteself. In the case of UWF there are two primary ventures causing angst among many people; one is the purchase of a nearby "country club" which is really just a golf course with a pro shop, bar and banquet facilities, the other is a piece of beach property that seems to have been entrusted to the university by the State of Florida (or some other government entity) for the purposes of preservation and archaeology.
The VP @ UWF says the naysayers will be staunch supporters about a year after things get going. I'd like to be one of the supporters if this is good and a right thing to do. However, I have the following issues with this;
1. Basic Business Principles. If the university cannot survive on the money it receives from tuition, fees and other charges, shouldn't the university be questioning its very business plan (if it has one)? If you or I set up a business and couldn't fund the operations with the revenue we receive, our business would have to close up. These educational institutions have been able to pay top dollar for faculty, the grounds are always meticulously manicured. They have added sports complexes, recreational facilities and all this has been subsidized by the taxpayers.
2. Effect on Private Sector. The university says acquiring the golf course will allow them to use the club as a training ground for their business students. They say it will allow them to offer "real world experience." My question is; are you fabricating the "real world experience?" This club doesn't employ a lot of people (likely less than 50). In the real world, those people will lose their jobs. In the real world, the majority of what this club offers is golf and the occasional wedding reception. Since the university's newly formed corporation isn't required to disclose records to the general public, the current revenue and profitability of the country club is unknown. Out here in the real world, it is hard to believe the golf course would even be interested in selling if it was doing significant revenue with a good profit margin.
The university is also planning a hotel and convention center. Currently there are numerous hotels within 3 miles of the university. Many of these are either new or newly renovated. These hotels derive a significant amount of business from the various sporting events and conferences held at the university. So again, out here in the real world, which the UWF VP wants the students to experience, these hotels will see their business decline in direct proportion to the amount of business taken on at a new UWF hotel.
One question nobody has asked is whether or not prices at the operations run by the university's corporation will undercut the competition unfairly.
3. Beach development? Yep. It seems that the beach property that was entrusted to the university is now going to be opened up for development. This from the same university that has opposed a bike path at the beach previously. And if the property was entrusted by the government, shouldn't the taxpayers have the final say on what gets done with that property?
4. Who is on the hook if there are any losses? So far, we're told that the money to purchase the golf course will come from a bank loan. However, I've never heard of a bank making a 100% loan to a business with no prior year tax returns or historical profit/loss information. Remember; the university can't currently make it on the money they're generating already. What if the additional purchases through the non-profit corporation don't pan out? Are there sufficient protections for the taxpayers?
5. Who actually gets paid? The UWF VP is the President of the newly formed corporation. How much money will the executives of this new corporation be paid? Will they have "golden parachute" plans in place? Will they benefit financially regardless of profits passed through to the university? Because this is a private corporation, we the taxpayers don't get the opportunity to scrutinize those details.
In the end, I find it ironic that so often it is academia bad-mouthing the big corporate giants as greedy, yet here is academia going into the private sector to generate money they so desperately need. Maybe profit isn't the demon so many people believe it to be.
This situation appears to be a perfect opportunity to educate the general public. Instead of telling us skeptics to just believe, how about giving us an objective education on this venture.
Tell me what you think.
Our local university, University of West Florida, has set up a non-profit corporation. This is the brainchild of a new Vice President who apparently has done this at other universities. The story goes that colleges and universities are suffering financially, due to cutbacks in government funding. These corporations are being set up to allow the college to operate businesses in the private sector that will bring revenue into the university iteself. In the case of UWF there are two primary ventures causing angst among many people; one is the purchase of a nearby "country club" which is really just a golf course with a pro shop, bar and banquet facilities, the other is a piece of beach property that seems to have been entrusted to the university by the State of Florida (or some other government entity) for the purposes of preservation and archaeology.
The VP @ UWF says the naysayers will be staunch supporters about a year after things get going. I'd like to be one of the supporters if this is good and a right thing to do. However, I have the following issues with this;
1. Basic Business Principles. If the university cannot survive on the money it receives from tuition, fees and other charges, shouldn't the university be questioning its very business plan (if it has one)? If you or I set up a business and couldn't fund the operations with the revenue we receive, our business would have to close up. These educational institutions have been able to pay top dollar for faculty, the grounds are always meticulously manicured. They have added sports complexes, recreational facilities and all this has been subsidized by the taxpayers.
2. Effect on Private Sector. The university says acquiring the golf course will allow them to use the club as a training ground for their business students. They say it will allow them to offer "real world experience." My question is; are you fabricating the "real world experience?" This club doesn't employ a lot of people (likely less than 50). In the real world, those people will lose their jobs. In the real world, the majority of what this club offers is golf and the occasional wedding reception. Since the university's newly formed corporation isn't required to disclose records to the general public, the current revenue and profitability of the country club is unknown. Out here in the real world, it is hard to believe the golf course would even be interested in selling if it was doing significant revenue with a good profit margin.
The university is also planning a hotel and convention center. Currently there are numerous hotels within 3 miles of the university. Many of these are either new or newly renovated. These hotels derive a significant amount of business from the various sporting events and conferences held at the university. So again, out here in the real world, which the UWF VP wants the students to experience, these hotels will see their business decline in direct proportion to the amount of business taken on at a new UWF hotel.
One question nobody has asked is whether or not prices at the operations run by the university's corporation will undercut the competition unfairly.
3. Beach development? Yep. It seems that the beach property that was entrusted to the university is now going to be opened up for development. This from the same university that has opposed a bike path at the beach previously. And if the property was entrusted by the government, shouldn't the taxpayers have the final say on what gets done with that property?
4. Who is on the hook if there are any losses? So far, we're told that the money to purchase the golf course will come from a bank loan. However, I've never heard of a bank making a 100% loan to a business with no prior year tax returns or historical profit/loss information. Remember; the university can't currently make it on the money they're generating already. What if the additional purchases through the non-profit corporation don't pan out? Are there sufficient protections for the taxpayers?
5. Who actually gets paid? The UWF VP is the President of the newly formed corporation. How much money will the executives of this new corporation be paid? Will they have "golden parachute" plans in place? Will they benefit financially regardless of profits passed through to the university? Because this is a private corporation, we the taxpayers don't get the opportunity to scrutinize those details.
In the end, I find it ironic that so often it is academia bad-mouthing the big corporate giants as greedy, yet here is academia going into the private sector to generate money they so desperately need. Maybe profit isn't the demon so many people believe it to be.
This situation appears to be a perfect opportunity to educate the general public. Instead of telling us skeptics to just believe, how about giving us an objective education on this venture.
Tell me what you think.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
