Login

Ratjoy.com » Forums » EoS Litigations » Suing: Howard Roark and Galt Industrial Inc.

Suing: Howard Roark and Galt Industrial Inc.

Richard Ripberger RJ: Rip CO: Rip Post Rating: -6 + / - Total Posts: 153 Karma: 78 Joined: Mar 28, 2012	Posted on Apr 17, 2012 A public company is not "an account" it is a shared asset and while the majority shareholder will control its direction and operation he has a responsibility to the owners of the shares he does not own to squander away funds or through shady deals transfer assets that they own part of to his own private companies or a public one he owns a larger share of. Even if there are no "human" players harmed to defraud the NPC stockholders is harmful to the integrity of the stock market itself.
Jon Borowsky RJ: Velvet Blue Post Rating: -5 + / - Total Posts: 1 Karma: 10 Joined: Apr 3, 2012	Posted on Apr 17, 2012 In the U.S., at least, a CEO has a "duty of loyalty" to the corporation. One of the elements of this is that in a "self-dealing" transaction between the corporation and an entity owned or controlled by the CEO has to be able to show that the price is objectively fair, or else the transaction is void and the CEO is liable to the corporation. This is one of the very few ways it is practically possible for an officer or director to really get in a lot of trouble under Del. law. This is not mitigated by the fact that the CEO is a major or controlling shareholder ... if you want to get assets out of a corporation you control but don't completely own you either have to distribute them pro-rata to the SH's or you have to buy out the minority SH's first. I think it might just be between the SH's and the CEO though-- I'm not sure whether it would constitute fraud or anything else with criminal penalties attached.
Zack WenJian RJ: Zack CO: Zack Post Rating: -1 + / - Total Posts: 114 Karma: 503 Joined: Mar 31, 2012	Posted on Apr 17, 2012 You may have made right decision by liquidating the company but it is wrong to transfer all the money into your own account after that. It is called PUBLIC company for a reason. What you can do is giving all assets out as dividend, accounting to all shareholders regardless how minority they are. Anyway, most of them will go to you since you are the major shareholder. By transferring the money out to your own account alone, no matter what reason, it is illegal by law.
eric scott RJ: Erik Scott CO: Sappo Post Rating: 10 + / - Total Posts: 130 Karma: 29 Joined: Apr 5, 2012	Posted on Apr 17, 2012 I don't care what ya'll say... I laughed my arse off at Howard's post. Keep on keeping on
Matt Leitch RJ: Howard Roark Post Rating: 4 + / - Total Posts: 8 Karma: 12 Joined: Apr 4, 2012	Posted on Apr 18, 2012 From: THE LAW FIRM OF DEWEY, CHEATEM & HOWE Representing HOWARD S. ROARK & AFFILIATES To: THE RIGHT HONOURABLE JUDGE GREENHOG & THE SUPREME COURT OF ECONOSIA RE: THE SHAREHOLDERS OF GOON POWER INC. v. HOWARD S. ROARK On behalf of our client Howard S. Roark we wish to propose a settlement in the matter of GoonPower Inc. v. Howard S. Roark. Our client hereby agrees to a remedy for all human shareholders of record at the time he was made Chairman & CEO of GoonPower Inc. (2012-04-16 16:27:25). For any shares of GoonPower Inc. owned by human EOS players at the aforementioned time our client agrees to pay $4.00 per share. For example, total shares available in GoonPower Inc. at the time was 102,000,000 and ownership is estimated to be around 1% meaning total compensation would be between estimated at $4,080,000 (Outside Ownership 1% x Shares Avail 102M x $4.00/share). Upon acceptance of this offer we ask that all charges against our client be dropped immediately and this matter be closed. We believe the proposal put before the court is an equitable one as it seeks to remedy those parties who could have any legitimate claim of being directly harmed by the actions of our client. The proposed offer of $4.00/share is significantly above the market price of shares in GoonPower Inc. at the time in question. Futhermore, our client could not be reasonably expected to assume a duty of care to future shareholders as represented by this lawsuit or for that matter any ‘non-human’ shareholders including but not limited to ‘robot shareholders’ ‘phantom shareholders’ ‘zombie shareholders’ and the like – from which not guilty by reason of insanity is the only logical plea. We believe Howard S. Roark, acted within his rights as Chairman & CEO & Owner of GoonPower Inc. and in no way is this proposal to be taken as an admission of guilt to the charges facing our client. By making this proposal our client wishes to seek an amicable and efficient resolution to the issue at hand and has agreed to the proposal herein as an act of good faith. We respectfully caution the court against setting a dangerous precedent by proceeding with these charges against Howard S. Roark. The plaintiff David Wile (Noxiousdog) obtained ownership in GoonPower Inc. long after my client executed the business transactions that were within his authority as Chair, CEO and owner of the company. As such he has no legitimate foundation to launch any claim against our Howard S. Roark or any of his affiliates. By agreeing to hear this case the Court is potentially opening the door for more frivolous lawsuits of a similar nature by disgruntled speculative shareholders. We would also like to remind the court of our client’s long standing record of community service and charitable work for PAASMPBD (People Against Adam Sandler Movies Post Big Daddy). Our client wishes to continue being a member of EOS and hopes the Court will accept the aforementioned settlement. We thank the Court for its consideration and respectfully await its decision. Sincerely, Dewey, Cheatem & Howe LLB
david wile RJ: Noxiousdog CO: Noxiousdog Post Rating: 1 + / - Total Posts: 25 Karma: 51 Joined: Mar 26, 2012	Posted on Apr 18, 2012 (Last edited on Apr 18, 2012) From: THE LAW FIRM OF BICKERS & BICKERS Representing GOON POWER INC. To: THE RIGHT HONOURABLE JUDGE GREENHOG & THE SUPREME COURT OF ECONOSIA CC: HOWARD S. ROARK RE: NOXIOUSDOG v. HOWARD S. ROARK The facts of this case are not in dispute. 140M of Goon Power Inc. assets were trasferred to Galt Industries, Inc. These assets must be returned. Our system functions on the basis of property rights and rule of law. We must expect that when we enter into a an agreement to sell our private company to the public that a fiduciary responsibility will be maintained. There should be no distinction between robots and humans. These robots are the life blood of Econosia's system. They have elected the representation of The People's Beloved Big Bro. They purchase our goods. They manufacture our goods and as such they are entitled to the fruits of their labor. Perhaps most importantly, they fund our IPOs. These are not transactions made with humans. We are far to few in number, and far too untrustworthy, to grant other humans the capital for our endeavors. We need our robot citizens, and the Supreme Court of Econosia has a duty to protect them and their assets in turn. With regard to the settlement proposal, it is unsatisfactory. The assets that were removed from Goon Power Inc. are property of Goon Power Inc. Just as Howard Roark cannot take company funds for his personal amusement, neither groups of robot nor human shareholders can take company funds on a whim. If they wish for a disbursement, a shareholder vote can take place for a special dividend. Former shareholders are invited to bring a civil suit against Mr. Roark if it is in their interest. Special billing rates apply. We would also like to commend Mr. Roarks work for PAAMPBD, though we would like an exception for 50 First Dates even if it means surrendering our man card. Sincerely, Bickers & Bickers
Matt Leitch RJ: Howard Roark Post Rating: 3 + / - Total Posts: 8 Karma: 12 Joined: Apr 4, 2012	Posted on Apr 18, 2012 This is Howard Roark speaking. I offer this statement as a response to the charges that have been laid against me. For a moment I was Chair & CEO the only significant owner of GoonPower Inc. As Chair & CEO of the company my goal was to try to unlock the value of the company’s assets and realize that value for all existing shareholders (the vast majority of which were me). I was very successful in my goal. As much as some people (David Wile) might recoil at the notion - EOS is a game. It is not a perfect representation of real life & sometimes we need to suspend disbelief. The EOS stock market is a good example. In this case acting as Chair & CEO and majority owner I had to assess the value of my shares and determine if they were representative of the current value of the company. In my opinion they were not. In theory, I could have taken the company's cash and bought back shares thereby realizing shareholder value through the subsequent price accretion. Afterwards I could have liquidated my ownership stake in the company lived fat, rich, and happy for the rest of my life having never been plagued by the likes of David Wile. Same result and perfectly ‘legal’. As any Chair & CEO knows in EOS this was not an option for me at the time. So again with the goal of driving value for shareholders I proceeded to liquidate assets in the only way I could within the limitations of EOS. Effectively transferring asset value to the shareholders of GoonPower Inc. (ie. me). Unfortunately, I was not aware of ‘robot shareholders’ and am of the opinion that no Chair or CEO should be asked to act in their best interest – especially when they behave irrationally. I recognize it was not a perfect approach because the other shareholders of record at the time did not get their slice of the pie – Hence my settlement proposal above which I believe to be fair. David Wile and others like him bought shares in GoonPower Inc. after these transactions which were transparent to anyone who would have conducted simple due diligence. David Wile invested anyway – and the former owner of GoonPower Inc. (me again) rejoiced. Now David Wile feels that I was ‘unfair’ to him because I chose to make myself rich and not him. I took advantage of an opportunity and now David Wile feels entitled to benefit from it. If EOS is not representative of real life – Some of its players certainly are. We choose what kind of game this is & I implore you to see beauty of creativity and the virtue of competition. Sometimes we win and sometimes we loose – for me that is what makes it fun. Don’t allow players like David Wile to spoil that. Do not allow these charges to stand. “To each according to his ability” HR
Richard Ripberger RJ: Rip CO: Rip Post Rating: -3 + / - Total Posts: 153 Karma: 78 Joined: Mar 28, 2012	Posted on Apr 18, 2012 If it is ok to rip off the non-human stockholders then having non-human stock holders at all is nothing but a way to game the system. Until such a time that a person has to have someone human to buy or sell stock from and that an IPO can only sell shares that are actually bought by human players then this is nothing but gaming the stock market. I would suggest that if doing this is ok that stock should be disabled otherwise there is no point to actually properly manage a public company when you can make 10X the money in a fraction of time by simply IPOing companies as fast as you can and screwing over stockholders as much as you can and then leaving the NPC stockholders with the bag as you trash and steal what remains. In the end stealing from the system has an effect on everyone playing just like cheating your taxes effects everyone. Just because something is possible and not specifically against the rules doesn't mean it isn't unsportsmanlike and contrary to the interests of the game. Something that has been done a half dozen times now much to the fortune of those doing it.
david wile RJ: Noxiousdog CO: Noxiousdog Post Rating: 1 + / - Total Posts: 25 Karma: 51 Joined: Mar 26, 2012	Posted on Apr 18, 2012 Let me be clear. My personal impact in this is immaterial. The 140M can evaporate for all I care. I didn't have any wealth destroyed in this process. I made my GPOW purchases at prices from 4.65 to 13.31. It's currently trading at 12.79, but it will certainly be worth more tomorrow when the net worths are updated with valid sales numbers. You are correct, it is a game, and a game has rules. RJ clearly indicated that these transactions are against the rules. They are flagged on the B2B for a reason. As you mentioned, it's about precident. Since there is no significant hindrance to doing an IPO, I can do it over and over funneling cash to a private company, rinse, wash, repeat. But that's not exactly fair to other players, and it would destroy any credibility the stock market my have. So, unfair to me? Not personally. Unfair to the player base as a whole? Yes. That being said, I'm sure there's a reasonable penalty that can figured out, but whatever RJ decides is fine with me. I'm just playing along as this thread has been very entertaining.
Anna Banana RJ: Sue MacLean CO: Sue MacLean Post Rating: 1 + / - Total Posts: 19 Karma: 21 Joined: Mar 31, 2012	Posted on Apr 18, 2012 This is awesome. :D
Matt Leitch RJ: Howard Roark Post Rating: 2 + / - Total Posts: 8 Karma: 12 Joined: Apr 4, 2012	Posted on Apr 18, 2012 David, Unfortunately, I think you are right. The disappointing part is that I have yet to find the "Rules of EOS" or anything on this site that states that what I did was wrong. It was a complete surprise to me the next day when you filed a 'grievance.' I have no doubt I will be crucified for breaking some unwritten 'rules of fair play' or violating some little turd's romantic notion of good sportsmanship. Remember you started this thread so unfortunately - you are the little turd crying "no fair". If I have violated the trust of 'robot shareholders' and the sanctity of the EOS stock market I am very sorry - If the market acts irrationally the players need to have the ability to rationalize it or vice versa - otherwise it becomes a simple mathematical equation and where is the fun in that. The only parties that have a legitimate grievance are the human players that owned shares at the time & I have offered to compensate them with an offer that is more than fair. You or any other existing shareholder of GoonPower Inc. are not entitled to a mouse's fart of recompense but because you feel I played outside the rules you have created a 'lawsuit'. Is that in the rules of EOS? Is the game now going to be played out on this forum? If my actions were stretching the rules of EOS where does filing a 'lawsuit' against a player rank in the rulebook? I joined EOS because I found the game entertaining for the competition - finding new ways to compete - risk and reward. While I am glad you are entertained by this thread I would prefer to get back to playing the game. RJ - Your call on this - If this kind of thing is allowed you can wipe me out totally. I am not nearly smart enough to outwit robot shareholders or inventive enough to duel the EOS legal system. HR
david wile RJ: Noxiousdog CO: Noxiousdog Post Rating: 7 + / - Total Posts: 25 Karma: 51 Joined: Mar 26, 2012	Posted on Apr 18, 2012 I understand where you're coming from, and I am serious that I have no issue with the penalty evaporating. I would also hope that it's serious enough to prevent someone doing it again, but not severe enough to cripple you or drive you away. In fact, considering the direction this has taken, if I were RJ, I'd do some EoS form of probation. I also think you're right about no flashing lights or against the rules. However, there was a big banner across the b2b about being under investigation. once you made the first transaction at 2:31pm. That's how I noticed the issues; not because I was rooting around in the books. There are a couple of threads discussing the generic idea of investigations. In addition I -believe- there was system/world news to that regard as well. As for crying foul, I do take responsibility, but I inquired what to do about the transactions when I noticed them, a third party asked RJ, and was told to post a thread here. I didn't come up with this idea on my own, though I did choose to follow through. I figured had I not done so, this would have just taken place another time with two other participants.
Zack WenJian RJ: Zack CO: Zack Post Rating: -1 + / - Total Posts: 114 Karma: 503 Joined: Mar 31, 2012	Posted on Apr 18, 2012 i personally feel that this is not a case of dispute and cannot be settle out of court... transferring money from one company to another of your own company, we all know is against the rule of the game. A commercial crime. Even if it is private company without involvement of third party like David, it is still against the rule. If this is let off lightly, everyone will be creating new account and transferring all the money to their main account. no offense to anyone =/
Benjamin Cohen RJ: Benjamin Baruch Cohen IV CO: Barun Cohen Post Rating: -1 + / - Total Posts: 18 Karma: 57 Joined: Mar 30, 2012	Posted on Apr 19, 2012 To be honest, there is no ToS or any other list of game rules. There are no rules. So those who claim that whatever Howard did was against the rules better get busy finding me a set of rules Ratan put out or stop bringing that in. Basically, if Howard is found guilty depends on the whims of Ratan. There are no game rules and everything is fair game - until we have a SEC we'll have stock fraud and hedging, until we have any other form of game rules we'll have this happening. Right now Ratan decides on a case by case basis if someone did anything wrong. Which is highly relative at best on it's own account because without rules how am I to know that that what I do is wrong? If people get so strung up about this, capitalism in it's greatest and most evil form, they should get Ratan to write up a set of rules - effectively causing him to put boundries on the free market of EOS and thus changing this from a pure capitalism simulator to an economy simulator that chooses 'fair play' over pure, hard, economic simulation.
Zack WenJian RJ: Zack CO: Zack Post Rating: 0 + / - Total Posts: 114 Karma: 503 Joined: Mar 31, 2012	Posted on Apr 19, 2012 no rules? so i just create massive accounts and buy 1 electric at $5million from my main account? seems legit.

You need to register or login to post a reply.

© 2012 Ratjoy.com Server Time: April 28, 2024, 8:28 PM