Vinyl Me Please (store, exclusives, swaps, etc)

MikeH said:
updated court docs for the VMPlant case are interesting....

trellis.law

Complaint - Amended - Amended Complaint with Jury Demand August 30, 2024

Complaint - Amended - Amended Complaint with Jury Demand August 30, 2024. Read court documents, court records online and search Trellis.law comprehensive legal database for any state court documents.
trellis.law trellis.law
Click to expand...
Well that explains a lot of the holes from the initial filing. Some real cloak and dagger shit over there.

And hey, as we’ve always suspected VMP is actively trying to sell.
 
Hemotep said:
Which is confusing because that would imply that it was VMPs plant, but at the same time they're trying to insist that it was never their plant. The whole thing is still very muddy with what sounds like contradictory claims at different parts. Mainly it doesn't sound like the board really knew if it was going to be their plant or not.
Click to expand...
The ends of the margin were cut off to me, but because of the tie up in equity, the plant was also in deck with the company being sold.

Basically, the dude negotiating the buy was in the three and was trying to get the plant paid for in the deal.
 
In summary, the fired execs had VMP staff sign ndas to keep all plant activity secret from the board. They then spent a bunch of money on the plant and hired Gary. RTI and QRP were like fuck you. The board didn’t like the idea because they saw the manufacturing issue resolving itself but at that point, the execs had sunk 11 months of time and effort in the project. They also didn’t like the way it was brought to the board (they evidently voted for the resolution at the meeting it was presented) and they thought Cam voting was fishy. In addition to at least 2 million being sunk in the project before and after board approval, the execs forced the plant to be in a possible deal for acquisition and that deal fell through. However they are in talks with that entity again.
 
MyWifeHatesTrain said:
In summary, the fired execs had VMP staff sign ndas to keep all plant activity secret from the board. They then spent a bunch of money on the plant and hired Gary. RTI and QRP were like fuck you. The board didn’t like the idea because they saw the manufacturing issue resolving itself but at that point, the execs had sunk 11 months of time and effort in the project. They also didn’t like the way it was brought to the board (they evidently voted for the resolution at the meeting it was presented) and they though Cam voting was fishy. In addition to at least 2 million being sunk in the project before and after board approval, the execs forced the plant to be in a possible deal for acquisition and that deal fell through. However they are in talks with that entity again.
Click to expand...
And @onlythedetails only ever wanted a margarita machine for the office!
 
MyWifeHatesTrain said:
In summary, the fired execs had VMP staff sign ndas to keep all plant activity secret from the board. They then spent a bunch of money on the plant and hired Gary. RTI and QRP were like fuck you. The board didn’t like the idea because they saw the manufacturing issue resolving itself but at that point, the execs had sunk 11 months of time and effort in the project. They also didn’t like the way it was brought to the board (they evidently voted for the resolution at the meeting it was presented) and they thought Cam voting was fishy. In addition to at least 2 million being sunk in the project before and after board approval, the execs forced the plant to be in a possible deal for acquisition and that deal fell through. However they are in talks with that entity again.
Click to expand...
I don’t understand how exactly the money and hire were hidden but based on most entities only really looking at p&ls annually in a way that would suss it out, can see how it is feasible.

Sinking that much money in and the urgent nature attributed to the negotiations that fell through makes me think the money on the plant was the straw that broke the camels back as opposed to the whole of why they are currently struggling.
 
MikeH said:
updated court docs for the VMPlant case are interesting....

trellis.law

Complaint - Amended - Amended Complaint with Jury Demand August 30, 2024

Complaint - Amended - Amended Complaint with Jury Demand August 30, 2024. Read court documents, court records online and search Trellis.law comprehensive legal database for any state court documents.
trellis.law trellis.law
Click to expand...
Keep in mind that this is just the Plaintiff's version of the events and of course, the narrative will be tilted towards their version of the facts. I would caution to not take this as definitive.
 
Holdsworthian said:
Keep in mind that this is just the Plaintiff's version of the events and of course, the narrative will be tilted towards their version of the facts. I would caution to not take this as definitive.
Click to expand...
Sure. There are just tons of details in here that were not part of the original complaint.

Cam and co have filed a countersuit saying they were layed off to avoid paying them severence.
 
Hemotep said:
I could buy that, but...

"We were laid off."

Bro, y'all were fired and sued.
Click to expand...
i didn't read enough of the countersuit but this is what i saw about it:

In the days before their firing, Schaefer and Block spoke with VMP co-founder Matt Fiedler about their conflicting ideas for the company’s future, according to Schaefer and Block. There were no allegations of financial impropriety or mismanagement then, they say.Instead, all sides talked about a path forward, including either a new role for Schaefer and Block or an exit strategy, which would include severance. Block was to get $169,000, Schaeffer $125,000, and one year of health insurance, according to Schaefer and Block. Then, on March 21, the two execs were abruptly fired, ensuring they would not receive benefits.“This abrupt and factually false change in position was led by Keith Stoltz, who had boasted of his bad faith treatment of employees at other companies that he owns,” according to a countersuit that Schaefer and Block filed on June 28 in Denver District Court.



Schaefer and Block say that VMP’s lawsuit against them “is being pushed and paid for” by Stoltz, who has “filed meritless lawsuits against former employees of other companies that he owns to ‘teach them a lesson’ and punish them when they did not follow his directives.”“This lawsuit was filed as a way to avoid paying severance amounts due under their employment contracts and to attempt to force (Schaefer and Block) — through expensive litigation — to forfeit their ownership interests in the company,” the countersuit claims.
 
MikeH said:
Sure. There are just tons of details in here that were not part of the original complaint.

Cam and co have filed a countersuit saying they were layed off to avoid paying them severence.
Click to expand...
Exactly. I don't know how many people here litigate for a living but my point is that I wouldn't believe everything that is contained in any pleading. To quote my favorite TV show, "The Truth is Out There", but we just don't really know that the real truth is and may never know. This will be settled long before any trial is a reality.
 
MikeH said:
i didn't read enough of the countersuit but this is what i saw about it:

In the days before their firing, Schaefer and Block spoke with VMP co-founder Matt Fiedler about their conflicting ideas for the company’s future, according to Schaefer and Block. There were no allegations of financial impropriety or mismanagement then, they say.Instead, all sides talked about a path forward, including either a new role for Schaefer and Block or an exit strategy, which would include severance. Block was to get $169,000, Schaeffer $125,000, and one year of health insurance, according to Schaefer and Block. Then, on March 21, the two execs were abruptly fired, ensuring they would not receive benefits.“This abrupt and factually false change in position was led by Keith Stoltz, who had boasted of his bad faith treatment of employees at other companies that he owns,” according to a countersuit that Schaefer and Block filed on June 28 in Denver District Court.



Schaefer and Block say that VMP’s lawsuit against them “is being pushed and paid for” by Stoltz, who has “filed meritless lawsuits against former employees of other companies that he owns to ‘teach them a lesson’ and punish them when they did not follow his directives.”“This lawsuit was filed as a way to avoid paying severance amounts due under their employment contracts and to attempt to force (Schaefer and Block) — through expensive litigation — to forfeit their ownership interests in the company,” the countersuit claims.
Click to expand...
Like I said, I could totally buy this version too. I was mainly making a joke about the use of the term laid off to describe what happened to them. That implies something much different than what it says here too. Being laid off specifically means that someone is let go without cause because of lack of available work.
 
Hemotep said:
Like I said, I could totally buy this version too. I was mainly making a joke about the use of the term laid off to describe what happened to them. That implies something much different than what it says here too. Being laid off specifically means that someone is let go without cause because of lack of available work.
Click to expand...
oh yea--that was my incorrect usage of words hah. lots of lay offs in my industry at the moment so that phrase was on my mind 🫠
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top