State of the Union

[adp98]

So the guys who made the initial investment and had the idea are going for it. As a result, they need more capital. Capital comes in and in return they get a position in the company. You are an expendable piece. You are a worker. These guys are the guys who create the money by infusing capital. You were lucky enough to get a piece by easily replaced. How is this a problem. The solution is create the entity or bring the capital. That's how it works. Everyone wants something for free. It's their money and therefore they determine how much risk and reward. Your risj is your time and in return they can you a small piece of equity. More than fair and that's supposed to be the American Dream not a "problem". You are lucky.

This post was edited on 1/23 9:41 AM by adp98

 

[nardibynature123]

Honestly, I am surprised that they are being nice enough to give you a piece.

 

[SnottieDrippen]

Once again ADP I am not complaining about my personal situation, I am in a wonderful position, I'm not complaining about money, I'm complaining about the big picture - the direction of the company.

I am critiquing the methods with which big money operates. And from my observations, a lot of the problems that American business has is a result of these ways of thinking. If all you're getting from my statements is that I'm asking for more, you are either not comprehending my statements or defending their viewpoint through ignorance just because they are the kinds of people who's interests you protect,

What they don't get is that just because they bring the money it does not mean that they have any idea what they are talking about, I'm glad they invested, but it would be in their best interests to let the people with the most experience provide direction, and then for them to use their relationships and resources to make things work. Instead they barge in with no clue and simple straight forward thinking that I feel will be our downfall. All they see is a quick dollar, while I and my peers see this as our one big shot to do something special. I really don"t think I'm being unfair here.

 

[SnottieDrippen]

Also, I outlined why I am not replaceable and why they are incapable of providing direction,

In my opinion, we won't even go public if we continue down this path. Our financials are a mess, we don't have scalability with our current model, and people are burning out faster than we can replace them with workers of even 50% the capability. It's flat out bad business, Maybe it's sour grapes for me and we have particularly bad leadership - like I said, this is my first time seeing the "behind the scenes" of big money. But I wouldn't be surprised if this is the accepted standard for coma lines in these types of situations - just artificially inflate the value of the company as much as possible and then cash out on time. The interest in building a sustainable, valuable product is not a part of their vision: it's only about $$$$

 

[adp98]

So the guys who accumulated the money in the business world, the same guys the founders of your company sought, should listen to the 25 year old kid with experience. That's rich. If these guys are wrong, it's their money that goes down the tubes with it. So yes, they will be calling the shots and probably have a better sense of the big picture of where the company is going and what it will take to get there.

This post was edited on 1/23 6:00 PM by adp98

 

[selmore1]

I think kind of the point he's trying to make is that rich money stays rich and poor money stays poor besides very few cases that eventually make it out. Yes, these guys are putting up all the money and hoarding all the profits but for the betterment of the country that may not be the best model. I'm not promoting socialism here and giving hand outs, but treating employees with a little more worth and providing a better wage. Instead of making their $20mm bank account $50mm, they turn those $80k salaries into $125k salaries and make $45mm. Yes, it's their money and will still be outstandingly rich but the country would be better as a whole and they could make even more money if people had more disposable income to spend on the service they're providing.

 

[tjc3844]

If the world were shangri-la, that might work. But, what are you going to do when the guy down the line comes and says to you that if you would give up just 10k of your 100k salary, 5 people could get a 2k raise and everyone would be better off. Don't you see where these kinds of ideas never end and, in the long run, everyone actually suffers. The world in general and the working world in particular is a pretty tough place. You get paid what the market will bear. If you want more, you have to depend on yourself and not some redistribute all the money and we'll all be better off scheme. That's the cold hard facts.

 

[whitecat]

Before he did jail time, didn't Ivan Boesky tell the Harvard Business School
that greed was a virtue? It is amazing that how many Washington and Wall Street
people have virtue.

 

[SnottieDrippen]

Fair enough ADP. I don't think a 40 year old who inherited a power plant and hasn't had to work within an accounting system once in their life has any more insight into our company's capabilities than someone like me with 5 years experience in a similar or the exact system and an actual comprehension of how our projects go from step 1 to step 200.

Big ideas are fine, but they are bullshit. You should know this more than anyone. It's empty words just like Obama uses - the private sector equivalent of "hope" and "change". I think we need to return to practicality, and grow the business in a scalable, efficient way. From what I can tell, your only argument seems to be that because they have more money, they are automatically correct.

I think the flaws I am pointing out are well thought out and justifiable. I don't want to give away any more details on here, but if you want I'd be willing to discuss this in private. Perhaps you have insights that I simply don't understand. You know the Tokyo email.

 

[SnottieDrippen]

I don't want to go down this slippery slope either but there's little doubt that people spending their money on nothing but the essentials is not helpful for businesses. If all the money is in the hands of a small percentage - well, one family only needs so many bounce houses in their backyard.

 

[Ninetynine5.0]

http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000221/?ref_=tt_trv_quBudd Foxx: Why do you need to wreck this company?


http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000140/?ref_=tt_trv_qu
Gordon Gekko: Because it's WRECKABLE, ALL RIGHT!?

I took another look at it and I changed my mind.

 

[nardibynature123]

I would still like to hear more about how the US came up with social security for the soldiers who fought in WW2 and they came up with it in the 1930's.

 

[adp98]

Originally posted by SnottieDrippen:
Fair enough ADP. I don't think a 40 year old who inherited a power plant and hasn't had to work within an accounting system once in their life has any more insight into our company's capabilities than someone like me with 5 years experience in a similar or the exact system and an actual comprehension of how our projects go from step 1 to step 200.

Big ideas are fine, but they are bullshit. You should know this more than anyone. It's empty words just like Obama uses - the private sector equivalent of "hope" and "change". I think we need to return to practicality, and grow the business in a scalable, efficient way. From what I can tell, your only argument seems to be that because they have more money, they are automatically correct.

I think the flaws I am pointing out are well thought out and justifiable. I don't want to give away any more details on here, but if you want I'd be willing to discuss this in private. Perhaps you have insights that I simply don't understand. You know the Tokyo email.

Snottie, if Tommy Boy is running your company then it's doomed anyway and you don't need to worry about how you guys split up the money. Usually investors are brought in that have an expertise in the sector. If not, your founders probably made a mistake picking their investors.

 

[SnottieDrippen]

I think it's a lot of just flat out human error. These big name people are just humans like the rest of us but are expected to have a magic wand - they the start sincerely believing that they really do have all encompassing miracle initiatives. All I want is some practicality.

I'm hoping for the sake of our country that what's happening at my place of work isn't the norm. Whatever I guess - it's already been a fun ride and we'll see what happens.

 

[tjc3844]

The guys who have come in to set up the IPO have an entirely different skill set than the people who work for your company. If they're good, they know how to present your company in such a way as to create the circumstances that will entice investors and the public into buying the stock. It shouldn't be their job to tell you how to do your job.