Bankruptcy, everything but the legalese

[HelpfulTracks]

41 minutes ago, johnsch322 said:

Nor was this a problem that survivors created.

No it is not. But the current scouts are absolutely part of the equation in terms of how the final settlements are made.

For me that is absolutely part of the equation. 

[johnsch322]

6 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said:

I consider the current scouts secondary indirect victims of BSA’s. bad choices. The judge has said she is considering their interest in seeing scouting survive. But victims don’t just disappear because the organization does good works elsewhere.

I would like to add that for anyone who cares about current scouters satisfying victims is in their best interest.  If the vote doesn't pass and this all goes to the toggle plan their will be many LC's going bankrupt.  That will hurt current scouters more than meaningful money being put into the settlement by LC's.

[johnsch322]

2 minutes ago, HelpfulTracks said:

No it is not. But the current scouts are absolutely part of the equation in terms of how the final settlements are made.

For me that is absolutely part of the equation. 

Not sure which LC you belong to but would it be in the best interest of your current scouters if your LC had to declare bankruptcy?

[ThenNow]

Just now, HelpfulTracks said:

No it is not. But the current scouts are absolutely part of the equation in terms of how the final settlements are made.

For me that is absolutely part of the equation. 

Let us come and talk to them and their parents about our Scouting “experience” and see how they react. I’ve been told that we, together, comprise the victim class in this case. Maybe we should meet. I wonder how that would go. For those who “know” me in the virtual sense, I value the valuable and despise the despicable of my years in Scouting. I wish no one harm and certainly not that which befell me and my fellows.

[CynicalScouter]

Just now, HelpfulTracks said:

For me that is absolutely part of the equation. 

And what is the exchange rate? 

How many Cub Scout campouts absolve BSA from its civil liability for a Tier 1 child sexual abuse, hmmm?

BSA cannot and should not use today’s children as human shields for its corporate negligence in how it handled child sexual abuse.

 

[Eagle1993]

18 minutes ago, vol_scouter said:

To the moderators:

It seems to me that the views on this thread are so vastly divergent and, for many, the emotions are some what raw so that this will devolve into arguments.  It seems to me that fair is largely determined by one's starting point.

This appears, at least to me, similar to the debates over adding girls, gay scouts and gay youth.  I generally agree that for the most part, few if any will be swayed either way by the back and forth.  Hopefully it can be done in a scoutlike manner so at minimum you have the benefit of learning where each side is coming from.

This is a tough debate.  There is simply not enough money to go around.  BSA even if liquidated including all of its LCs could not come close to what is really needed to pay victims.  In addition, many of us want BSA to survive and we know BSA was not in great shape before bankruptcy ... so how much funding can truly be provided while still allowing BSA & LCs enough to function & survive is not an easy answer.

 I hope everyone who has an opinion feels open  sharing it.  I would ask to be careful to not attack fellow forum members and allow them to respond or not respond based on their personal choice.

If there is a specific comment that appears to not be scoutlike, please report it by clicking the three dots.

[vol_scouter]

10 minutes ago, 1980Scouter said:

The LC's have A LOT more they could give up(most,not all). I feel all cash and investments except for 6 months operating capital should go to the fund.  And maybe 50% of current camps too. That will still leave an alive BSA. They will have to work harder in the future to stay afloat.

I think that the current BSA is fair and should be adopted.

[HelpfulTracks]

45 minutes ago, Muttsy said:

I don’t much care what happens to BSA. It is 100% responsible for its predicament. 

I disagree. BSA's mistakes, in-action, and deliberate actions, absolutely have responsibility in this predicament, but are the actual abuser not responsible for some of the predicament?

[CynicalScouter]

By the way and I know this first hand for my council: there are TONS of donors ready to come in and fund after the BSA and/or LCs come out. Trust me: the $500 million that the LCs have to put up will be back in place inside of 3-5 years.

Cry me a river.

I wish I could sit in on the TCC tonight but will just wait for the video tomorrow.

[johnsch322]

5 minutes ago, HelpfulTracks said:

I disagree. BSA's mistakes, in-action, and deliberate actions, absolutely have responsibility in this predicament, but are the actual abuser not responsible for some of the predicament?

The abusers definitely are.  But unfortunately most of them are dead or unidentifiable.  

[CynicalScouter]

4 minutes ago, HelpfulTracks said:

are the actual abuser not responsible for some of the predicament?

BSA decided to go into bankruptcy.

BSA decided to try to cut a deal to get 3rd parties covered by their bankruptcy (LCs and COs).

They own this mess.

[johnsch322]

8 minutes ago, vol_scouter said:

I think that the current BSA is fair and should be adopted.

I am going out on a limb and presuming you mean the current settlement offer.  I will go further and assume you are not a claimant/victim.  

[CynicalScouter]

Just now, johnsch322 said:

I will go further and assume you are not a claimant/victim

Good bets. I will never fathom people who defend the BSA (and LCs) at all costs, no matter what.

[HelpfulTracks]

10 minutes ago, johnsch322 said:

I would like to add that for anyone who cares about current scouters satisfying victims is in their best interest.  If the vote doesn't pass and this all goes to the toggle plan their will be many LC's going bankrupt.  That will hurt current scouters more than meaningful money being put into the settlement by LC's.

I do not disagree. Which is why when the concept of what is fair was brought up, I asked what that is. 

Based on SOME of the responses, the settlement that reaches the level of "fair" either includes BSA going away, or it requires a level of financial restitution that is not achievable because that level of assets does not exist. 

Some have made recommendations that seem achievable. And I would assume the lawyers that represent the victims have negotiated (and are negotiating) to get to that place.

7 minutes ago, johnsch322 said:

Not sure which LC you belong to but would it be in the best interest of your current scouters if your LC had to declare bankruptcy?

I am not sure what the reasoning behind the question is, so I cannot expound other than to say I don't know.

[vol_scouter]

2 minutes ago, johnsch322 said:

I am going out on a limb and presuming you mean the current settlement offer.  I will go further and assume you are not a claimant/victim.  

You assume correctly.  My reason is to point out the futility in this exercise.  Our initial point of view colors the way in which we view it.  Victims want more - I get it and do not think that they are not deserving but those of us who are not victims wish to see a vibrant BSA.