perusing dockets

User avatar
stefan
Posts: 6224
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2009 9:08 pm
Location: College Station, TX
Contact:

Re: perusing dockets

Post by stefan »

On the PC website

>>
Pre-Arrival Wines
The term "Pre-Arrival" is applied to wines we have purchased (typically abroad) that have not arrived yet. Depending on the particular wine, the arrival time is typically 6+ months to over two years (in the case of Bordeaux Futures, for example).
>>

Jim, if PC offers something on pre-arrival that it has not already purchased, doesn't that constitute fraud? (I do not have evidence that PC has offered wine that it has not purchased or at least thinks that it owns. When they could not deliver wines of mine several years ago I think it was do to a sloppy inventory system that they fixed.)
User avatar
JimHow
Posts: 20105
Joined: Thu Nov 20, 2008 10:49 pm
Location: Lewiston, Maine, United States
Contact:

Re: perusing dockets

Post by JimHow »

Fraud is when you misrepresent a material fact with the intention of inducing conduct by another party, who is harmed thereby.
I guess it depends whether you are harmed as a result.
If a lawyer steals from a client trust fund account and the money gets returned without the client being harmed, the lawyer still gets disbarred.
I don't follow Wine Berserkers but I've still never heard a strong answer to my question:
How is what PC does substantially different from what Rare did?
User avatar
Blanquito
Posts: 5923
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2009 9:24 pm

Re: perusing dockets

Post by Blanquito »

JimHow wrote:I have a philosophy of never wishing bad on anyone, including PC. But it appears that they have repeatedly lied to people, and have engaged in fraud. If most of us did stuff like that in our professions -- lawyers, doctors, plumbers, carpenters -- we'd be out of business.
+1.

And just to avoid any unintentional implication, the dynamic I was referring to occurred exclusively on the old eBob and now on Berserkers. We've had some frank discussion about PC's business practices on BWE before, but never anything I felt was unreasonable and nothing compared to these other sites.
User avatar
JimHow
Posts: 20105
Joined: Thu Nov 20, 2008 10:49 pm
Location: Lewiston, Maine, United States
Contact:

Re: perusing dockets

Post by JimHow »

Yeah the couple times I took a look at that thread it seems to be an ugly little discussion going on.
User avatar
DavidG
Posts: 8280
Joined: Sat Nov 22, 2008 1:12 pm
Location: Maryland
Contact:

Re: perusing dockets

Post by DavidG »

JimHow wrote:I don't follow Wine Berserkers but I've still never heard a strong answer to my question:
How is what PC does substantially different from what Rare did?
A year ago I would have said (and did say) that the difference is that PC always delivers. Just sloooowly.

But it does seem clear that they are taking money for pre-arrival wines they haven't purchased. PC employees have said so. That is what Rare did. Perhaps there is, or was, a difference in degree. It looks like PC has gotten deeper into a hole, which is what happens to schemes like that. Hard to know exactly how deep a hole without access to their books but the indirect evidence that they are having trouble keeping up is a lot more convincing now than it was last year.

Was/is there intent to defraud? I don't know, they have had an awfully long run of success. Did the lure of fast pre-arrival cash become too strong? At what point did it shift from an innovative business practice to a risky one to "what Rare did?" I suppose if it's illegal it's illegal regardless of degree, but I can't imagine that use of current income to pay past debts is unusual. Many businesses do that.

Yet it does come back to selling wines they say they have purchased when in fact they haven't. They may have limited it, controlled it, and won a lot of bets doing it for many years. They even came through the Great Recession. But at its core that's dishonest. By Jim's definition above it becomes fraudulent when people are harmed. Last year I would have said there's no harm in waiting 5 years for a wine I'm not drinking for another 10 years. Unless you consider the mental anguish of impatience as harmful. Now we know that there are some who are not willing to wait who are also not getting their money back. That should satisfy the definition of harmful.

I hope PC comes through this ok and makes everyone whole. If they go bankrupt or are otherwise shut down, a lot of consumers will lose. But if they are in a death spiral, the sooner they get shut down the fewer people will have been drawn into the vortex.
User avatar
RDD
Posts: 853
Joined: Mon May 04, 2009 4:45 pm
Contact:

Re: perusing dockets

Post by RDD »

Blanquito wrote:
JimHow wrote:I have a philosophy of never wishing bad on anyone, including PC. But it appears that they have repeatedly lied to people, and have engaged in fraud. If most of us did stuff like that in our professions -- lawyers, doctors, plumbers, carpenters -- we'd be out of business.
+1.

And just to avoid any unintentional implication, the dynamic I was referring to occurred exclusively on the old eBob and now on Berserkers. We've had some frank discussion about PC's business practices on BWE before, but never anything I felt was unreasonable and nothing compared to these other sites.
That is what I love about this sight.
We can have some major differences of a opinion in any topic.
But we remain pretty civil.
And when we get together it's all family, friends and fun.'
User avatar
stefan
Posts: 6224
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2009 9:08 pm
Location: College Station, TX
Contact:

Re: perusing dockets

Post by stefan »

"...they are taking money for pre-arrival wines they haven't purchased. PC employees have said so."

David, do you know this? At the very least PC should have sourced wines at a certain price and bought them when they have PA orders in. This is how other merchants operate.

From what Jim said, I deduce that even if PC has been lying about having bought PA wines, they are not guilty of fraud if they actually do deliver the wines; "no harm; no foul", I guess. Nevertheless, if PC has been lying, I do not want to do business with them.

BTW: If PC has been telling the truth about receiving PA wines this fall, they will reap a bonanza from so many people canceling or converting PA purchases because (1) they can sell the wines at higher prices, (2) they pocket 15% on PA purchases less than two years old, and (3) they get rid of current inventory, much of which probably wasn't moving. So if they are on the up and up, it is not at all surprising that they do not respond to all the negative discussion on the internet.
User avatar
Blanquito
Posts: 5923
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2009 9:24 pm

Re: perusing dockets

Post by Blanquito »

stefan wrote: BTW: If PC has been telling the truth about receiving PA wines this fall, they will reap a bonanza from so many people canceling or converting PA purchases because (1) they can sell the wines at higher prices, (2) they pocket 15% on PA purchases less than two years old, and (3) they get rid of current inventory, much of which probably wasn't moving. So if they are on the up and up, it is not at all surprising that they do not respond to all the negative discussion on the internet.
I've had similar thoughts, but I think the big risk now for PC is the long term damage to their reputation. I for one will not buy prearrivals there again. If possible, they could revert to their former model which emphasized specials on in stock wines (which I would buy), that might fix the damage to their current model, but it's hard to see them continuing successfully with a prearrival-heavy approach..
User avatar
DavidG
Posts: 8280
Joined: Sat Nov 22, 2008 1:12 pm
Location: Maryland
Contact:

Re: perusing dockets

Post by DavidG »

stefan wrote:"...they are taking money for pre-arrival wines they haven't purchased. PC employees have said so."

David, do you know this? At the very least PC should have sourced wines at a certain price and bought them when they have PA orders in. This is how other merchants operate.
They have not said it directly to me, but I have heard this from two different people who claim it was told directly to them by PC employees. Hearsay, I know. I happen to believe that it is true in at least some cases of pre-arrival orders, probably not all cases. But it is possible that the employee didn't know what they were talking about.
User avatar
DavidG
Posts: 8280
Joined: Sat Nov 22, 2008 1:12 pm
Location: Maryland
Contact:

Re: perusing dockets

Post by DavidG »

I ordered two pre-arrival bottles of 2001 Yquem a couple of weeks ago, just before the proverbial merde hit the ventilateur.

Last Wednesday I called to see what my options were, and was told Quelle chance! It is in! They will ship 2-day air on Monday.
An email follows an hour later: No it is not in.
I checked the web - my account says it is in.
Called back Wednesday, and after some 10 minutes of checking it appears that there is a glitch: their computer thinks it is in but it is not.
Odds I can get it by the end of the month?... Unlikely. We don't know when it will come in.
Well how about a refund?... No problem, same credit card you ordered with? We'll process it this week or next.

Credit showed up yesterday for 100% of the original order amount.

I have yet to be shorted a single bottle or a single cent by PC, and I hope they do make it through this, but my opinion remains unchanged: they are selling wines they say they have purchased that they have not yet purchased. That's a dangerous game and a dishonest one. It will be frustrating to see the offers with the too-good prices (2004 Winston Churchill recently OMG!), many of which I have successfully taken advantage of in the past. We'll see how long I last before I either succumb or unsubscribe from the emails once again.
User avatar
JimHow
Posts: 20105
Joined: Thu Nov 20, 2008 10:49 pm
Location: Lewiston, Maine, United States
Contact:

Re: perusing dockets

Post by JimHow »

they are selling wines they say they have purchased that they have not yet purchased.
Again, I haven't been reading Wine Berzerker, but that's not a new revelation, is it?
I mean, that's been an assumption for a long time now, no?
Is there some new information about that on the other site?
User avatar
Blanquito
Posts: 5923
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2009 9:24 pm

Re: perusing dockets

Post by Blanquito »

Seems like PC has heard the message and started giving (small time at least) customers their money back now. There were a number of experiences related on Berserkers where everyday wine buyers were getting static about refunds, but all the news of late has been like Daivd's: money returned, no hassles, no delays.
User avatar
Blanquito
Posts: 5923
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2009 9:24 pm

Re: perusing dockets

Post by Blanquito »

JimHow wrote:
they are selling wines they say they have purchased that they have not yet purchased.
Again, I haven't been reading Wine Berzerker, but that's not a new revelation, is it?
I mean, that's been an assumption for a long time now, no?
Is there some new information about that on the other site?
I haven't seen a smoking gun, just people reporting they were told this on the phone (AKA hearsay). However, as the lawsuits and other hard evidence has piled up, it has become harder and harder to deny that PC has probably been doing this.
Last edited by Blanquito on Wed Sep 23, 2015 5:46 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
DavidG
Posts: 8280
Joined: Sat Nov 22, 2008 1:12 pm
Location: Maryland
Contact:

Re: perusing dockets

Post by DavidG »

What Patrick said.
User avatar
Michael-P
Posts: 783
Joined: Sun Feb 01, 2009 5:49 am
Contact:

Re: perusing dockets

Post by Michael-P »

I sure hope they make it through this since I've gotten a lot of great wines from them over the years at good prices. One of my mainstays.

I am surprised if this is their business model, successful for decades, why they are having problems now.

Michael-P
User avatar
jckba
Posts: 1808
Joined: Wed Apr 24, 2013 9:18 pm
Location: Sparkill, NY
Contact:

Re: perusing dockets

Post by jckba »

http://www.winespectator.com/webfeature/show/id/52184

A nice Wine spectator feature summarizing the current lawsuits alleging Berkeley's Premier Cru promised great prices for wines it didn't have
Last edited by jckba on Wed Oct 07, 2015 6:31 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
JimHow
Posts: 20105
Joined: Thu Nov 20, 2008 10:49 pm
Location: Lewiston, Maine, United States
Contact:

Re: perusing dockets

Post by JimHow »

Thanks for the effort jckba, I can't seem to access it.
User avatar
jckba
Posts: 1808
Joined: Wed Apr 24, 2013 9:18 pm
Location: Sparkill, NY
Contact:

Re: perusing dockets

Post by jckba »

Whoops I accidentally typoed the link when copying and pasting it and have since corrected it ;)
User avatar
JimHow
Posts: 20105
Joined: Thu Nov 20, 2008 10:49 pm
Location: Lewiston, Maine, United States
Contact:

Re: perusing dockets

Post by JimHow »

Thanks jckba. Sounds like more BS to me.
If the stuff is in a warehouse in Beaune, why hasn't it been shipped???
And where exactly is the stuff that hasn't arrived?
I mean, where exactly are those Ponsots?
Where exactly are those wines that are the subject of those lawsuits?
Good grief. How is this guy not in prison?
User avatar
Blanquito
Posts: 5923
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2009 9:24 pm

Re: perusing dockets

Post by Blanquito »

The circumstantial evidence is quite damming at this point, but it remains to be seen if PCs well of (presumably) new clientele dries up or if people will keep rolling the dice to get "unbelievable" prices.

If the delivery times hadn't gotten so bad/long, going from consistently 2-3 years at the longest to 3-5+ years, I would probably still take a flier on an offer or two, but it seems clear that something slipped and their old successful approach stopped working (hence ever longer waits).
User avatar
DavidG
Posts: 8280
Joined: Sat Nov 22, 2008 1:12 pm
Location: Maryland
Contact:

Re: perusing dockets

Post by DavidG »

Ponsot's remarks seemed odd. I think he's right that they don't have the wines when they offer them. But I bet he does not know the history of or control every bottle he's ever sold. Same with Bordeaux. You wont see Ponsot or most of the other rarities in-stock at PC because when they do get them in, they're all owed to people who've been waiting for years.

I gave up on PC a couple of years ago because I got sick of the long waits, then dipped my toe back in for some 2001 Yquem at a great price. Well, all the stories about increasingly long delays and lawsuits prompted me to bail out. I have to say they were very professional and refunded every cent of my pre-arrival purchase within a week of my request.

At this stage I'm a spectator when it comes to PC. Hard to resist some of those prices, but I'm not going there any more.
User avatar
JimHow
Posts: 20105
Joined: Thu Nov 20, 2008 10:49 pm
Location: Lewiston, Maine, United States
Contact:

Re: perusing dockets

Post by JimHow »

So Lawrence Wai-Man Hui has a lawsuit for $981,000, for 1591 bottles of wine.
That's an average of $616.91 per bottle.
So where exactly are each of these bottles?
There must be a finite place on Planet Earth where each and every one of these bottles is located.
Where ARE they?
And for that kind of money, why cannot PC simply prioritize the shipment of those wines?
Why must somebody sue them?
The only possible answer that I can think of is:
PC never had any ownership interest in or right to those wines.
I'm assuming the lawyers involved must know the answer to that question:
Where ARE THEY????
Now, if PC collected a million dollars from Wai-Man Hui and never had an interest in these wines, how is this not Fraud, with a capital "F"???
I'm sure I must be missing something here because if it were fraud I'm assuming the authorities would have moved in by now.
This PC case is completely bizarre to me.
User avatar
Blanquito
Posts: 5923
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2009 9:24 pm

Re: perusing dockets

Post by Blanquito »

JimHow wrote:So Lawrence Wai-Man Hui has a lawsuit for $981,000, for 1591 bottles of wine.
That's an average of $616.91 per bottle.
So where exactly are each of these bottles?
There must be a finite place on Planet Earth where each and every one of these bottles is located.
Where ARE they?
And for that kind of money, why cannot PC simply prioritize the shipment of those wines?
Why must somebody sue them?
The only possible answer that I can think of is:
PC never had any ownership interest in or right to those wines.
I'm assuming the lawyers involved must know the answer to that question:
Where ARE THEY????
Now, if PC collected a million dollars from Wai-Man Hui and never had an interest in these wines, how is this not Fraud, with a capital "F"???
I'm sure I must be missing something here because if it were fraud I'm assuming the authorities would have moved in by now.
This PC case is completely bizarre to me.
PC claims they have contracts for actual wines with negociants, big distributors, "aggregators", folks looking to raise cash... I was told by James at PC, who worked there for years in customer service and was my most reliable contact there, that stuff falls through when these 3rd parties fail to deliver the promised wine within the promised timeframe. He even went so far as to say that they were no longer going to work with a particular "supplier" of Bordeaux going forward because it hadn't come through enough of late...

This could all be terrible bullshit, but if true, could there be people out there-- wine hunters-- looking to find certain wines on the grey market or sitting on auctions in return for getting paid something now? Otherwise, why the delays? Why would a big negociant -- who plausibly dumps some wine to raise cash -- not be able to send PC the wine right away? Sure, PC might have to wait for a container to fill up, but that can't take years.

Also, if such wine hunters or cash-starved negociants exist, why would PC have cornered the market for them? Why wouldn't other big stores with their own direct import setup be able to capitalize on these deals? Or is PC in a league of its own in terms of size, market share, etc?
User avatar
JimHow
Posts: 20105
Joined: Thu Nov 20, 2008 10:49 pm
Location: Lewiston, Maine, United States
Contact:

Re: perusing dockets

Post by JimHow »

Again, I'm just a country lawyer from Maine, but these concepts involved in the PC "model" are just completely alien to me.
How can somebody have put down $981,000 for 1500 bottles of French wines and not have received their wines?
And there's no straight answer as to where those wines are.
That is insanity-plus to me.
How can that possibly be? I repeat: How is this dude not in jail?
User avatar
JimHow
Posts: 20105
Joined: Thu Nov 20, 2008 10:49 pm
Location: Lewiston, Maine, United States
Contact:

Re: perusing dockets

Post by JimHow »

This passage in the WS story is the real killer to me:

“We have a lot of old-time customers who are OK with delays,” said Fox, when asked about Hui's unfilled orders. “They know they have to wait. [Mr. Hui] is new. Some things came in, but not in the quantity he’s looking for. A lot of this has to do with him not being in this country and being very insecure about the whole thing.”

Say what?
This guy paid you one MILLION dollars, and HE's somehow the one who just doesn't quite get it because he is "new" and "has not been in this country" and is "insecure."

Unbelievable. What a fucking scam!
User avatar
AKR
Posts: 5234
Joined: Thu Mar 19, 2015 4:33 am
Contact:

Re: perusing dockets

Post by AKR »

What is awesome is that John Fox talks about 'hiring a man in Beaune' when (if one reads the court filings) he's actually hired Cain & Daniels, who is proposing 'settlements' to his futures clientele. So at the same time they desperately try to sell more futures ... they have hired an agent who is telling patient futures customers that that they won't get their wine, nor all their money back, and they better take what they can, before terms get worse. No one has revealed what offers they have received, but given that the TSAI case has either been resolved / settled (something was filed with the court end of summer) things are coming to a head there. There is a trial date for the MA suit scheduled for I think Feb, last I checked.
User avatar
Blanquito
Posts: 5923
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2009 9:24 pm

Re: perusing dockets

Post by Blanquito »

I'm so glad I cashed out. Even if PC limps along for years and I would have received all of my prearrivals (a highly dubious proposition), waiting for the other shoe to drop had gotten so old. I took a small haircut to trade for in stock stuff, but it was worth ever cent I "lost".

Thanks for those who encouraged this course.
User avatar
DavidG
Posts: 8280
Joined: Sat Nov 22, 2008 1:12 pm
Location: Maryland
Contact:

Re: perusing dockets

Post by DavidG »

I'm glad I cashed out too. I was convinced to bail when people started posting hard facts about lawsuits and tax liens. The innuendo alone was plentiful but not sufficient for me to pull the trigger.

Arv, why would PC hire a debt consolidator in Beaune to negotiate with mostly stateside clients? Seems odd. Or is Cain & Daniels in the US, and Fox's statement about someone in Beaune just another diversion?
User avatar
JimHow
Posts: 20105
Joined: Thu Nov 20, 2008 10:49 pm
Location: Lewiston, Maine, United States
Contact:

Re: perusing dockets

Post by JimHow »

There are tax liens David?
User avatar
AKR
Posts: 5234
Joined: Thu Mar 19, 2015 4:33 am
Contact:

Re: perusing dockets

Post by AKR »

C&D is like a reverse debt collector.

Their job is to deal with people who are owed money (often via judgments) that a) they cannot contact the obligor any more and b) if they want to get something, they better be ready to parlay.

One can google them.

Businesses who plan to make good on their obligations -- on time and in full -- would have no need to hire such firms.

It's like seeing a foreign country hire Cleary, Gottleib to 'discuss things' with their bond holders.

========

Perhaps they have hired someone in Beaune. But it seems inconsistent with their actions disclosed in US courts. If their problems were merely logistical then that could have been resolved easily enough without need for costly court cases. In fact if one reads through (I think) HUI it seems like they jerked him around for some time with the 'your wines are being palletized for delivery to your locker' story. So if there is a whole magical warehouse chock full of DRC and 6L of Le Pin in Beaune why hasn't that been brought up in any of their responses to complaints?
User avatar
JimHow
Posts: 20105
Joined: Thu Nov 20, 2008 10:49 pm
Location: Lewiston, Maine, United States
Contact:

Re: perusing dockets

Post by JimHow »

Just read up on those tax liens and writs of execution. The end certainly seems near, but who knows?
User avatar
Blanquito
Posts: 5923
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2009 9:24 pm

Re: perusing dockets

Post by Blanquito »

Maybe PC will become a zombie retailer, shambling along long after its effectively dead. It does seem like they think they can pull through this though, otherwise why give people their money back or let them take in stock stuff (as widely reported on wine berserkers)?
User avatar
AKR
Posts: 5234
Joined: Thu Mar 19, 2015 4:33 am
Contact:

Re: perusing dockets

Post by AKR »

Perhaps there are people who still get the emails, and respond to them, so the x% that is assuaged by getting refunds or in stock is smaller than the continuing revenue they take in from more 'pre arrival' sales. So they keep them pacified while they continue to sell to Chinese millionaires/billionaires.

I do not think the stakes now are mere commercial failure anymore for this enterprise. It looks more like a Ron Wallace situation from the outside looking in.
User avatar
Blanquito
Posts: 5923
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2009 9:24 pm

Re: perusing dockets

Post by Blanquito »

What's a Ron Wallace situation?
User avatar
DavidG
Posts: 8280
Joined: Sat Nov 22, 2008 1:12 pm
Location: Maryland
Contact:

Re: perusing dockets

Post by DavidG »

Ron Wallace = Rare, LLC (in Colorado, not Rare Wine Co in Calfornia). In 2007, Wallace plead guilty to mail and wire fraud for running a Bordeaux futures scam to the tune of $11 million.
User avatar
DavidG
Posts: 8280
Joined: Sat Nov 22, 2008 1:12 pm
Location: Maryland
Contact:

Re: perusing dockets

Post by DavidG »

Things are not looking good according to this post by Justin Bonner over on WB:
I know this subject has been discussed ad nauseam but I feel it's necessary to share my experience. So I've had numerous bottles on order since 2011 including 2009 Pontet Canet (5cs on an order placed through a friend), 07 Guigal La La's and other BDX futures and Rhone wines. So I've been told for two years now that my bottles would be shipped the next shipping window only to be told after the season ends that they'd ship the following shipping season. This went on for more than two years so I finally demanded answers about 4-5mos back.

Whitney (my sales rep) finally admitted about 3-4mos ago that they would likely not be receiving any more 09 Pontet Canet and agree to reimburse me somewhere near market. I was told that a check would be mailed in 7-10 business days. Fast forward three weeks and I still had not received a check so I called them back to see what's up. I was told that a check that large ($12k) would take a little time being it was so large. Really? $12k shouldn't be all that much for an entity such as Premier Cru. I was told it would take another week or two.

Fast forward another three weeks and still nothing. I call them back and after numerous calls, I finally reach Whitney. He went on to tell me that they would cut the check soon. I demanded that it be resolved while I waited on the phone. He put me on hold for about ten minutes and came back and said he had a check in hand but couldn't mail it until the following week. The reason? The check would bounce and he needed to get the go ahead to actually mail it. He assured me it was cut, made out to me and would mail it the following Monday. He also promised to take a picture of the check and email me. Needless to say....the email never came.

So I continue to call for a few weeks and finally get Whitney back on the phone. He explains that since the order was placed through someone else, legal would have to agree to release the check to me even though my friend already confirmed twice via email that he granted authorization to do so.

Now....it's been many weeks and many calls, emails, voicemails later.....Whitney refuses to respond to my communications and John (owner) also refused to take my calls. I was told last week, by another sales rep, that I should ask for the payment to be made in smaller amounts as cash flow is extremely tight and only small refund requests are being fulfilled.

At this point, I'll be forced to contact the State Attorney General to act on my behalf. I would've taken a credit to use towards other bottles but they only have about a dozen bottles in stock that exceed the $200 threshold. No money, no inventory, no communication. And THIS is an entity that we're entrusting with likely millions of dollars in futures? I fear the ponzi scheme is coming to an abrupt end. Good luck everyone.
User avatar
JimHow
Posts: 20105
Joined: Thu Nov 20, 2008 10:49 pm
Location: Lewiston, Maine, United States
Contact:

Re: perusing dockets

Post by JimHow »

This is not theft how again?
Why has law enforcement not moved in long ago?
User avatar
DavidG
Posts: 8280
Joined: Sat Nov 22, 2008 1:12 pm
Location: Maryland
Contact:

Re: perusing dockets

Post by DavidG »

I didn't steal your money, Mr. How, I'm just holding your money. You say you want it back now? Well, you must not be familiar with the way it works here in PC-land. Are you from a foreign country? Or have you been listening to those over-optimistic delivery estimates that our employees bandy about? Clearly this is their fault. Or your fault. Or both of your faults.
User avatar
AKR
Posts: 5234
Joined: Thu Mar 19, 2015 4:33 am
Contact:

Re: perusing dockets

Post by AKR »

This Bonner guy has a very strange sense of what Ms. Kamala Harris can do for him.

I suspect that the criminal law side of the govt will eventually get involved here, but by then it will be too late, and much damage will be done.

And given that CA is releasing criminals due to inmate capacity issues, it seems like there isn't going to be much appetite to lock up a non violent offender.

I could see the end game 5 years from now being a plea bargain with probation of some kind, and promises of restitution that are never met, while the conspirators hang on to their retirement accounts and qualified annuities.
User avatar
DavidG
Posts: 8280
Joined: Sat Nov 22, 2008 1:12 pm
Location: Maryland
Contact:

Re: perusing dockets

Post by DavidG »

Looks like Fox has put PC up for sale in order to address cash-flow problems:

To address this, Fox and a partner have put the store at 1011 University Ave. up for sale. Gordon Commercial is offering the property, made up of three parcels and three buildings, on the market for $7.5 million.

Not sure that $7.5MM would come close to covering all the outstanding pre-arrival orders.
Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 7 guests