Quinn
Well-Known Member
I'd like to point out that Donald Trump has declared bankruptcy no less than four times in the last 21 years. Would you argue he is not a successful businessman?
Propworx Closing its Doors
- Thread starter Linnear
- Start date
I'd like to point out that Donald Trump has declared bankruptcy no less than four times in the last 21 years. Would you argue he is not a successful businessman?
Linnear
Well-Known Member
Well put Quinn. MGM declared bankruptcy and they are still making films. GM and CHrysler declared bankruptcy and still make cars and people don't care.
Don's statement shows a total lack of business knowledge. A bankruptcy is a financial transaction. When a company like GM or Propworx makes sure that its customers are well taken care of, it only affects its creditors.
BTW, I have posted on this elsewhere, but last month the bankruptcy trustee gave Propworx a new lease on life by granting us the assets (basiclaly the IP) which allows us to continue business. More to come on that.
Alec
Don's statement shows a total lack of business knowledge. A bankruptcy is a financial transaction. When a company like GM or Propworx makes sure that its customers are well taken care of, it only affects its creditors.
BTW, I have posted on this elsewhere, but last month the bankruptcy trustee gave Propworx a new lease on life by granting us the assets (basiclaly the IP) which allows us to continue business. More to come on that.
Alec
Last edited:
That's quite a statement. To me, however, it only reinforces my previous comment. I'm afraid that if you remove all of Don's emotions and personal gibberish, he is right in certain things, and I am with him on the principle of honour and integrity, as I previously said.
Although Alec did not say he was proud of that failure, the nonchalant manner in which he mentioned it ...
Propworx was my fourth company and having sold Marketworks for $ 16 million, (I wish got most of that!), I can take a loss on my entrepreneurial record (Which now stands at 1 win, 1 loss and 2 ties)
... was, IMO, extremely poor form, that to me, also portrays over-confident arrogance. Sorry Alec, it's the way I see it. I equate that smiley to a raspberry to all the people you owed money to. To make it clear Alec, I don't know you from Adam. Since I have derived no satisfaction from dealing with you, there are certain things that stick out like a sore thumb to my unbiased eyes.
Bankruptcy is legal, all well and good, but saying, in public, in not so many words, "Customers are fine, so screw the creditors" is plain and simple wrong.
I've never head Donald Trump or GM consider their creditors with such a cavalier attitude.
General Motors, several of Donald Trump's companies, Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer, and Chrysler all filed Chapter 11 bankruptcy (reorganization) and came out of bankruptcy with detailed plans to pay back creditors.
Propworx filed Chapter 7 bankruptcy (liquidation). I don't think one can make the same comparison unless the Propworx creditors are going to be paid back.
James
Propworx filed Chapter 7 bankruptcy (liquidation). I don't think one can make the same comparison unless the Propworx creditors are going to be paid back.
James
I'm reasonably certain ... at least as far as GM is concerned, that this statement is just factually incorrect. I believe the company has paid back a portion of the approx. $50 billion in bailout money that was received to fund continued operations - money provided by the Bush and Obama administrations; (although I thought I read that the government did incur a loss on the bailout). And as far as the original creditors at the time of bankruptcy; the corporation had approx. $175 billion in debt and I think most of that was relieved under the bankruptcy proceedings.
Is not the purpose of these bankruptcy proceedings (for GM, Trump, MGM, etc.) to provide relief from large amounts of debt that the filer does not have the ability to pay? And are not creditor repayment plans, if any, designed to pay back just a small percentage (around 20%) of the original debt? Your comment makes it sound like all those large corporations underwent bankruptcy but then took some moral high ground that you imply Propworx is not taking by paying back creditors without creditors realizing tremendous losses. If you could provide some hard numbers to support your claim, that would be appreciated.
Gerald
Last edited:
Linnear
Well-Known Member
100% WRONG. You clearly don't understand business or the bankruptcy. Chapter 11 does not mean you pay back your creditors, that is totally ridiculous. The whole reason companies go through bankruptcy, whether Chapter 7 or Chapter 11 is because they cannot pay back creditors. In Chapter 11, creditors often get stock in lieu of payment of debt, and the current stock holders get ZERO.
Also, KingJames is a well known Don Hildebrand shill. His low post count is almost entirely adding to Don's attacks on me.
And I have never taken a cavalier attitude to paying back creditors. My point was simply we made sure our customers were being taken care of.
Alec
Last edited:
It is my opinion that you are indeed taking a cavalier attitude. It really is that simple - my opinion.
Being on the RPF has nothing to do with my opinion of your attitude :lol All I had to do to form it was look in the right places. Character traits emerge very rapidly. Will I delve deeper into this ? Absolutely not. Third parties (and not your Don's, who nobody takes seriously) have a mouth (or keyboard), and I most certainly am not going to 'speak' on their behalf.
I have formed an opinion, and I'm afraid there is little you can do about that.
Just as you are a very good businessman, I assure you that my character judgements are at par with your business skills.
You make your career and money doing business.
I made mine entirely on judging characters.
There is not much else I can (or care to) say on the matter.
If Kingjames is a sock puppet account for Don, report it to mods and he will be banned just for creating SP accounts.
TerryMcIntosh
Well-Known Member
You're correct in the larger analysis of the situation regarding Chapter 13 reorganization. What's not commonly understood is that Chapter 13 has a big Chapter 7 component built in to it where secured creditors are paid back under a plan determined by the trustee, and most, if not all, unsecured debt is discharged (IE: simply disappears) just like a Chapter 7 bankruptcy.
Examples of secured debt under a Chapter 13, using the GM example, would be the government's bailout loan, or loans secured by real property that are owned by the company. Examples of unsecured debt under a Chapter 13 bankruptcy would be a supplier to GM of parts with which to build cars where the parts had already been delivered to GM, or unsecured lines of credit that are the equivalent of a signature loan (you wouldn't want to be American Express, for example, under a Chapter 13 filing). In the case of unsecured creditors 'getting the shaft' under a Chapter 13, it's true, but they do get to take a tax deduction on the discharged amount, so it's not a complete loss for the unsecured creditors.
If a business has assets that can be liquidated, and has a reasonable expectation of revenue, then a Chapter 13 filing is typically what a trustee would want to see filed, as it's best for the business, especially for a publicly traded firm. If a business has very few assets and very little reasonable expectation of revenue, then a Chapter 7 filing is what the trustee will want to see filed. Remember, the instant you file a bankruptcy petition, whether you're an individual person, private couple, or any of the flavors of business organization, you lose control of your affairs and they're transferred to the trustee of the court to administer. That means your life is no longer yours, and your finances and assets are owned by the trustee and not you, so slamming a debtor for anything that happens once a bankruptcy has been filed is not a fair attack, because they aren't making the decisions at all until the matter is resolved.
Alec is right in that it's simply the way that business works in much of the world, including America, and without such a mechanism then our country would not have survived for as long as it has and you'd find a very different way of life than what we enjoy. That all said, perhaps discussion of political matters by any of us might be best suited for the Off-Topic Forum in the future?
Examples of secured debt under a Chapter 13, using the GM example, would be the government's bailout loan, or loans secured by real property that are owned by the company. Examples of unsecured debt under a Chapter 13 bankruptcy would be a supplier to GM of parts with which to build cars where the parts had already been delivered to GM, or unsecured lines of credit that are the equivalent of a signature loan (you wouldn't want to be American Express, for example, under a Chapter 13 filing). In the case of unsecured creditors 'getting the shaft' under a Chapter 13, it's true, but they do get to take a tax deduction on the discharged amount, so it's not a complete loss for the unsecured creditors.
If a business has assets that can be liquidated, and has a reasonable expectation of revenue, then a Chapter 13 filing is typically what a trustee would want to see filed, as it's best for the business, especially for a publicly traded firm. If a business has very few assets and very little reasonable expectation of revenue, then a Chapter 7 filing is what the trustee will want to see filed. Remember, the instant you file a bankruptcy petition, whether you're an individual person, private couple, or any of the flavors of business organization, you lose control of your affairs and they're transferred to the trustee of the court to administer. That means your life is no longer yours, and your finances and assets are owned by the trustee and not you, so slamming a debtor for anything that happens once a bankruptcy has been filed is not a fair attack, because they aren't making the decisions at all until the matter is resolved.
Alec is right in that it's simply the way that business works in much of the world, including America, and without such a mechanism then our country would not have survived for as long as it has and you'd find a very different way of life than what we enjoy. That all said, perhaps discussion of political matters by any of us might be best suited for the Off-Topic Forum in the future?
Last edited:
Sorry if I said there was a plan for those companies to pay back all of the creditor's money. I don't have hard numbers but you agree some money did get paid back. So how much money are the creditors of Propworx being paying paid back? Are you implying Propworx is going to pay its creditors? That is good news.
You are correct. I pay my bills and I have been successful doing it the old fashioned way. Just because you have the ability to use these "bankruptcy tools" does not mean you have to use them.
Also, I have never met Don nor have I corresponded with him. It is too bad to see that anybody who disagrees with you is labeled an attacker. Please stop with the name calling. It is not the way professionals conduct business.
Great idea!
James
Chapter 13 is for individuals. Chapter 11 is generally used for corporations although individuals can use it. I think you mean Chapter 11.
James
TerryMcIntosh
Well-Known Member
I stand corrected and blame my lack of caffeine for the error in the 8am hour. =)
James:
I think from reading your most recent comments that you feel there was an option of whether or not the company should file for bankruptcy; and further, an option about whether creditors would be repaid or not (decided by the company executives). I myself do not know any of the financial particulars associated with Propworx ... but, in general, if a companies liabilities vastly exceed its assets and there are no funds available to finance ongoing operations - then what route other than bankruptcy is there? Also, I don't think it's a conscious decision on the part of the company whether it should "partially repay the creditors" or "not repay the creditors at all" (filing Chapter 7 versus Chapter 11). I believe its just a matter of mathematics based on the value of the assets that still exist at the time of filing. Even if the executives had the most honorable intentions and desired their creditors be repaid ... if there are absolutely no assets available to pay anything; then unfortunately the creditors would lose out. I believe Terry made the very insightful remark that it is the decision of the trustee as to how the bankruptcy affairs are handled ... and not the debtor (=Propworx), so it is unfair to find fault with the debtor about creditor repayment decisions made by the trustee.
It does seem from your remarks that you have a much harsher view of Propworx's conduct than is appropriate - where it has been stated that the largest creditor was owed in the hundreds of thousands of dollars - and that you find much more honor in a company like GM's situation - where tens of billions if not over a hundred billion dollars in creditor debt was not paid back and many thousands of employees lost their jobs.
Gerald
I think from reading your most recent comments that you feel there was an option of whether or not the company should file for bankruptcy; and further, an option about whether creditors would be repaid or not (decided by the company executives). I myself do not know any of the financial particulars associated with Propworx ... but, in general, if a companies liabilities vastly exceed its assets and there are no funds available to finance ongoing operations - then what route other than bankruptcy is there? Also, I don't think it's a conscious decision on the part of the company whether it should "partially repay the creditors" or "not repay the creditors at all" (filing Chapter 7 versus Chapter 11). I believe its just a matter of mathematics based on the value of the assets that still exist at the time of filing. Even if the executives had the most honorable intentions and desired their creditors be repaid ... if there are absolutely no assets available to pay anything; then unfortunately the creditors would lose out. I believe Terry made the very insightful remark that it is the decision of the trustee as to how the bankruptcy affairs are handled ... and not the debtor (=Propworx), so it is unfair to find fault with the debtor about creditor repayment decisions made by the trustee.
It does seem from your remarks that you have a much harsher view of Propworx's conduct than is appropriate - where it has been stated that the largest creditor was owed in the hundreds of thousands of dollars - and that you find much more honor in a company like GM's situation - where tens of billions if not over a hundred billion dollars in creditor debt was not paid back and many thousands of employees lost their jobs.
Gerald
Last edited:
You are correct. But it is easier to pay back hundreds of thousands of dollars rather than millions or billions of dollars. Is there a law that says no money can be paid back to a creditor after a bankruptcy? Like I said before, I would pay all my bills even if somebody says I don't have to. That's me. And I am made out to be the bad guy. Go figure.
Is there assets beyond the IP? There are many items from an MGM IP that are being sold by Propworx on ebay. Waiting to hear more.
One last thing. I have no sympathy for General Motors. They are a poorly run company burdened by unions.
James
I do find that sentiment very honorable. (It truly may not be achievable for everyone in all cases though - through no intentional fault of the their own.)
Gerald
Indeed.
Yet, what are considered to be unintentional faults, and how many are applicable to the Propworx case (Mismanagement ? Lack of foresight ? Circumstances totally beyond one's control ?)
We have read public thanks to customers for the great past, and the sharing of current and future plans. All well and good.
What were the circumstances that eventually led to bankruptcy in the first place ? Where did those $400,000 go ?
It is abnormal to assume that when a company owner in these circumstances addresses an audience out of his own free will, it is there only to say what one wishes to hear, and particularly in a case like this, that such questions will not be asked.
Last edited:
What is the ultimate objective in asking all of these questions, especially of an executive of a privately held business - as opposed to a publicly traded corporation? And why ask them in a public forum? It just seems to me that this line of discussion is merely another thinly veiled attempt to embarrass or ridicule Alec. By folks who have consistently found fault with him in the past. We do know that Alec has indicated he preferred that Propworx deal exclusively with major studios directly for specialized auctions focusing on a single production such as Iron Man or Stargate or Star Trek -- as opposed to auctioning material from thousands of individual consignors which is the traditional auction house model -- perhaps that business strategy was a limiting factor. Although I can see how that strategy had the best intentions of the collector in mind; since memorabilia coming directly from the production studio would not carry any authenticity issues with it. Everything sold would be unquestionably authentic. I find that an honorable goal as well. Many forum members have already expressed a desire not to see continued mean spirited attacks -- so why should further questioning along this subject line be considered anything but ill intentioned?
Gerald
Last edited:
Essentially, Propworx did not produce a product.
Propworx did not buy raw materials from suppliers, build a product, then sell it. I can better understand misjudging the market and not be able to sell the product and filing bankruptcy. Propworx received items that were ready to be sold on a consignment basis and presumably took a commission after the item sold. I do believe the majority of the items sold.
Example, if Propworx received a widget from MGM, placed it on ebay and sold it for $100, Propworx would take their commission (let's say 20%) and give MGM $80. Somehow the money owed MGM total several hundred thousand dollars. Some are curious as to what happened. What safeguards are in place to prevent this in the future?
If Propworx going to start selling replica props received from suppliers on consignment or credit, could this happen again? If this was Profiles in History instead of Propworx would there be the same sympathy?
No ridicule of embarrassment is intended. Just questions.
James
Last edited:
Similar threads
