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

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 🫠
 
MikeH said:
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 🫠
Click to expand...
Oh, haha, sorry. I thought they had said that and it was a funny spin.

I remember my old boss from when I worked in tech telling me that he always offered to be the first one laid off when they were happening because he was in management and it would get him a nice severance plus make his former employees think he did it for them. Really it paid for his boat and his kids college tuition. He almost always had job offers as an in demand engineer at the VP level, so would take a week vacation and then go back to work somewhere else.

Those were the days. I've never been so lucky to get offered a good severance package.
 
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...
It read like the three execs lead the discussions with the outside investor and tried to tie the pressing plant into the Deal, which makes sense since they obviously had trouble getting outside money for their plant.
Overall the three seemed to have funneled a whole lot of vmp money and time into the plant that they owned and negotiated a deal between the plant and vmp for themselves
 
Hemotep said:
Oh, haha, sorry. I thought they had said that and it was a funny spin.

I remember my old boss from when I worked in tech telling me that he always offered to be the first one laid off when they were happening because he was in management and it would get him a nice severance plus make his former employees think he did it for them. Really it paid for his boat and his kids college tuition. He almost always had job offers as an in demand engineer at the VP level, so would take a week vacation and then go back to work somewhere else.

Those were the days. I've never been so lucky to get offered a good severance package.
Click to expand...
no i'm just a dumb dumb!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top