Posted on 08/10/2017 8:19:21 AM PDT by garyb
In a footnote on page 1 and again on page 8 of its third quarter earnings release The Walt Disney Company makes note of a $177 million charge affecting its earnings.
That charge comes from ABC News settling a defamation lawsuit over its reporting of so-called pink slime. Beef Products Inc. (BPI) sued ABC News and correspondent Jim Avila for $1.9 billion dollars over what it claimed were “false and misleading and defamatory” statements about its product known as Lean Finely Textured Beef.
After 5 years of pre-trial, the case went before a South Dakota judge in early June. It was settled a few weeks later. And now we know how much ABC paid at least $177 million, but likely more, which will be covered by insurance. From the earnings report:
Items affecting comparability during the quarter and nine month period ended July 1, 2017 related to a charge, net of committed insurance recoveries, incurred in connection with the settlement of litigation ($177 million).
CNN talked with an lawyer for BPI who says the settlement is the largest amount paid by a media company in a defamation case. “Based on all the research we’ve done, that alone would make it the largest. As I said at the time, we got an extraordinarily favorable settlement,” said attorney Dan Webb.
Did a reinsurance pool take a hit?
Calling Berkshire Hathaway....Bershir.....
That is not enough punishment for that kind of reporting. All of the rest need to face the music for what they’ve done too. It has to happen.
I was hoping for at least an order of magnitude larger settlement. In any case ABC remains as an absolute antonym for “credibility.”
Disney
Quarterly report.
Page 8
Footnote 4
<>Items affecting comparability during the quarter and nine month period ended July 1, 2017 related to a charge, net of
committed insurance recoveries, incurred in connection with the settlement of litigation ($177 million).
https://ditm-twdc-us.storage.googleapis.com/q3-fy17-earnings.pdf
Great. Now everyone who buys insurance with pay for this idiot.
Should have been billions...................
Will BPI be filing a detailed quarter report showing a gain or recovery from litigation?
Case summary:
http://www.businessinsider.com/pink-slime-case-settlement-2017-6
The $1.7-billion was not the end of it.
The risk of a $5.7-billion hit was looming on the horizon.
ABC -— Welcome to South Dakota.
Good. Disney’s E&O insurance costs should skyrocket.
5.56mm
I remember watching this report and thinking at the time that the fools had no idea what meat processing always looks like...
ABC—nothing but seditious liars. Always Bull Crap (ABC).
The REAL story is the PINK SLIME. They use it in Prison a lot.
I genuinely don't understand why. This company is able to separate the little bits of lean meat that are present in the fat and cartilage that has been trimmed from larger cuts of meat. Why is that such a bad thing? It looks edible to me.
I hate not being able to separate the good bits of meat out of the fat and gristle when I cut up deer (as in the neck).
Also, how is this more disgusting than just grinding everything into sausage?
I agree with you completely.
"Pink slime" doesn't bother me. It's meat, just finely ground. I am old enough that I remember the old story was that McDonald's hamburgers were actually made out of earthworms. I was about 12 years old or so at the time and my first thought was "Do you mean that I've been wasting earthworms by using them for fishing?" I mean, I really loved McDonald's hamburgers when I was a kid; my parents allowed the five of us boys to have two McDonald's hamburgers each on our birthday. So my attitude was "Maybe more things should be made out of earthworms".
I love pink slime, but I don’t want to see it made!
When I was a kid, there were a couple of rumors that mcdonald’s hamburgers were made out of cats and kangaroos.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.