Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Billthedrill
What she does do is to take up the reins herself, shedding her mantle at Taggart to become the high-powered builder in which role she seems far more comfortable.

I hate the deal she is willing to accept to get the line built. The endeavor is spun off so Taggart can distance itself, and she is expected to raise her own capital and assume all risk of failure. No problem so far. But....she has to sign that if it's a success she'll transfer ownership back to TT and get no more than reimbursement of her costs. She is expected to assume all the risks in return for no upside if she succeeds. I've turned down contracts like that. She shouldn't have let Jim get away with that, no matter how bad she wanted the line built.

98 posted on 02/28/2009 6:48:38 PM PST by Still Thinking (Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies ]


To: Still Thinking
She is expected to assume all the risks in return for no upside if she succeeds.

Kind of the flip-side of people buying houses they couldn't afford with no money down: they get to keep the profits if the value of the home goes up, yet get bailed out if the value goes down.

113 posted on 03/01/2009 2:20:08 AM PST by Explorer89 (Could you direct me to the Coachella Valley, and the carrot festival, therein?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 98 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson