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

TrainFan73 said:
Well, since we are posting random dudes on the internet’s thoughts…

Full disclosure, I have not watched this yet.
Click to expand...

gist: he was in contact with cam througout the building process of the plant because he wanted to visit the plant once it was running but now cam is fired and than refers to the article posted here earlie from businessden. he says he contacted new ceo Matt to see if he still can visit the plant which should be difficult because vmp(lease) is obviously not owned by the same people as vmp(lant)
 
Last edited:
I just want to go on record as stating I do not care about Very Meaty Pizza’s pressing plant and I do not think VMP will be going the way of BandBox soon (though they use the same pyramid scheme to keep their cash flow going).

What I do find hilarious is corporate shenanigans. You can use all the HBS buzzwords, but at the end of the day most boards and C-Suite denizens act like 6 year olds sitting in a sandbox, hurling cat turds at each other.
 
Indymisanthrope said:
How can it be any kind of debate whatsoever? Their logo is ON THE FUCKING BUILDING
Click to expand...
seems to me VMP was happy to have their name attached to it despite not legally fully owning it. VMP opening their own plant was good PR when the pandemic delays were a thing, but after 3 years of delays and people complaining about their 2 year long preorders, VMP probably wanted out.
 
MikeH said:
seems to me VMP was happy to have their name attached to it despite not legally fully owning it. VMP opening their own plant was good PR when the pandemic delays were a thing, but after 3 years of delays and people complaining about their 2 year long preorders, VMP probably wanted out.
Click to expand...
Just saying that claiming in court that you had no idea how ownership was being portrayed publicly is such a bonkers position to stake out. Not *only* are there various bits of PR floating around out there, the PHYSICAL BUILDING HAS THEIR NAME ON IT. It's a breathtakingly bad faith argument, tantamount to saying "I'm either lying or stupid, or both."
 
Indymisanthrope said:
Just saying that claiming in court that you had no idea how ownership was being portrayed publicly is such a bonkers position to stake out. Not *only* are there various bits of PR floating around out there, the PHYSICAL BUILDING HAS THEIR NAME ON IT. It's a breathtakingly bad faith argument, tantamount to saying "I'm either lying or stupid, or both."
Click to expand...
i think we just don't know enough about the case yet tbh...IIRC the complaint just said that Cam and co were exaggerating how much VMP was involved. Were they doing that to try to get more outside funding and lying about how much of a stake Vinyl Me Please had? The optics off first glance definitely don't look great for VMP's board itself...
 
MikeH said:
i think we just don't know enough about the case yet tbh...IIRC the complaint just said that Cam and co were exaggerating how much VMP was involved. Were they doing that to try to get more outside funding and lying about how much of a stake Vinyl Me Please had? The optics off first glance definitely don't look great for VMP's board itself...
Click to expand...
I’m with lawyer guy from Hoffman, the fact that none of the documents referred to are included seems problematic. But I’m no lawyer.
 
the other part of the complaint that seems wild to me, is that Gary Salstrom was hired with VMP money as a VMP employee. but what exactly did VMP think that Gary Salstrom, a dude whose entire job history has been working at pressing plants, was going to do for VMP? The plant has been in the works for 3 years and he was on their books...and then the complaint seems to say that they were paying him but he didn't do any work for VMP...and it took them 3 years to figure that out? so either the CFO was doing a bit of creative accounting to keep that secret, or VMP's board just didn't pay attention to anything financial for 3 years.
 
MikeH said:
so either the CFO was doing a bit of creative accounting to keep that secret, or VMP's board just didn't pay attention to anything financial for 3 years.
Click to expand...



Q55Bg2zipOT_JNWipScC_gioC3Qe2bI5ZGmEBgfGF_8.png
 
MikeH said:
the other part of the complaint that seems wild to me, is that Gary Salstrom was hired with VMP money as a VMP employee. but what exactly did VMP think that Gary Salstrom, a dude whose entire job history has been working at pressing plants, was going to do for VMP? The plant has been in the works for 3 years and he was on their books...and then the complaint seems to say that they were paying him but he didn't do any work for VMP...and it took them 3 years to figure that out? so either the CFO was doing a bit of creative accounting to keep that secret, or VMP's board just didn't pay attention to anything financial for 3 years.
Click to expand...

My guess is that anything presented to the board would have been general, and without specific breakdowns of line items. For example:

Q1: we spent $X on payroll

As opposed to breaking down everyone that made up part of that payroll number.

The key is that the people the board fired are the same people presenting reports to the board.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top