Bankruptcy, everything but the legalese

[johnsch322]

8 minutes ago, Eagle1993 said:

While I side with the opinion that BSA LCs should provide more funding, to be fair, claimant attorneys that represent 80% of claimants have signed onto this deal. 

Have you seen anything that breaks down claimants and who their attorneys are?  To get to that figure those attorneys would have to represent 66,000 claimants.  Tim Kosnoff says he represents 16,000 and he is very vocal in his opposition.  That would mean that only 500 claimants are represented by other firms.

[CynicalScouter]

24 minutes ago, johnsch322 said:

That is exactly what the TCC wants to do.  They will show how much more is needed and a path to get there.  I am sure if XYZ council can find a way to get to the figure no one will care which path they take.  One important point to remember this is a BSA National bankruptcy and all other entities LC's CO's etc. are just trying to piggyback so they won't possibly suffer greater losses in the future.  

I will also say this: I know my council is absolutely furious to see that there are councils who are getting away with paying out tiny percentages of their assets while my council is on the higher end of the percentage spectrum.

I think a lot of this may be the TCC coming in COUNCIL BY COUNCIL and saying "Heart of Virginia, you are fine, Cascade Pacific, no way" etc.

[CynicalScouter]

17 minutes ago, johnsch322 said:

Have you seen anything that breaks down claimants and who their attorneys are?  To get to that figure those attorneys would have to represent 66,000 claimants.  Tim Kosnoff says he represents 16,000 and he is very vocal in his opposition. 

Here's the problem: AIS consists of three lawfirms. Two of those firms (AVA and Kosnoff) are NOT affiliated or part of the Coalition. The third is. Thus some of these claimants are getting claimed by BOTH camps.

[HelpfulTracks]

43 minutes ago, johnsch322 said:

The compensation plan is woefully inadequate.  Not even close to equitable and fair that BSA touted.  If you sold me a piece of land for $100,000 and I only paid you $1,000 and you took me to court and the judge allowed me to keep the land and you were out $99,000 what would you say?

First, my comment was regarding CynicalScouter hyperbole that BSA "simply refusing to compensate victims"

Second, it seem odd, even a bit grotesque, to compare compensation for sexual abuse to a free market transaction. 

And finally, that is exactly how bankruptcy court works. Claimants enter bankruptcy owing more than they can pay. In your example, the likely outcome would be the court settling that of something less than $99k would be how I would be compensated. Or if Ch7, the property would be liquidated and I would be paid based on standing. 

[johnsch322]

5 minutes ago, HelpfulTracks said:

And finally, that is exactly how bankruptcy court works. Claimants enter bankruptcy owing more than they can pay.

Funny though how other classes within the bankruptcy are not getting pennies on the dollar...only abuse claimants.

[fred8033]

55 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said:

Here's the problem: AIS consists of three lawfirms. Two of those firms (AVA and Kosnoff) are NOT affiliated or part of the Coalition. The third is. Thus some of these claimants are getting claimed by BOTH camps.

Isn't that the negligence of the claimants lawyers?  The victims should be pissed at their own lawyers too.  

So ...  Which lawyer met the victim?  Which lawyer invested time with the victim?  Which lawyer incurred cost working with that SPECIFIC victim?  (versus the overall case)

Edited October 11, 2021 by fred8033

[fred8033]

16 hours ago, CynicalScouter said:

The BSA Camp system was designed and developed for a time when BSA had 3-4 million scouts.

We are now 900,000 (at best) and BSA in its most cheerfully optimistic projections is saying 1 million by 2025 at the earliest.

It is intellectually dishonest to argue 900,000 as the long term membership numbers.   We just had a PANDEMIC.  I remember.  We had funerals this last year.  We buried our friends. 

2019 ... After 20 years of bad press and continual court battles and membership battles and recruiting challenges, etc, etc, etc, etc), 2019 was still 2 million members and 700,000+ volunteers.  It is very conceivable if BSA can get past this final ugly hurdle and get past THIS CURRENT PANDEMIC, the program will recover.  

It is conceivable if BSA can fix it's marketing too, that it can successfully market a program that gets kids off their video game consoles and back into nature.  ... It's a stretch, but we could see the program grow again as parents realize they want their kids outside being active and moving.

Edited October 11, 2021 by fred8033

[Eagle1993]

6 minutes ago, fred8033 said:

It is intellectually dishonest to argue 900,000 as the long term membership numbers.   We just had a PANDEMIC.  I remember.  We had funerals this last year.  We buried our friends. 

2019 ... After 20 years of bad press and continual court battles and membership battles and recruiting challenges, etc, etc, etc, etc), 2019 was still 2 million members and 700,000+ volunteers.  It is very conceivable if BSA can get past this final ugly hurdle and get past THIS CURRENT PANDEMIC, the program will recover.  

It is conceivable if BSA can fix it's marketing too, that it can successfully market a program that gets kids off their video game consoles and back into nature.

BSA is betting against this.  I'm not sure if it is in the current plan, but previously BSA agreed to big penalties if they grow much beyond their current business model (which shows <1M scouts until 2025).  BSA had agreed to pay $50 per scout they register above certain thresholds.  In addition, they agreed to pay $150 per scout who registers at a high adventure base above certain thresholds.  These payments would be made to the trust settlement.  Now, they can get out of those payments by immediately paying off the large loan they are giving the trust.

[CynicalScouter]

56 minutes ago, johnsch322 said:

Funny though how other classes within the bankruptcy are not getting pennies on the dollar...only abuse claimants.

Yep.

Look at the disclosure statement: ALL other classes of voting creditors are getting 75%+

https://casedocs.omniagentsolutions.com/cmsvol2/pub_47373/da60d7ce-df85-45e9-9737-4dd1a5d50014_6445.pdf

All other voting classes (Class 3A, 3B, 4A, 4B, 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9) are much better

Class 3A, 3B, 4A, 4b, and 5 = 100% recovery
Class 6 (GENERAL Unsecured claims) 75-95%
Class 7 Non-Abuse Litigation Claims = TBD - these are the wrongful death and personal injury claims against BSA
Class 8 (Direct Abuse Claims) = 10-21% of $7 billion which, as noted, is an ABSURDLY low estimated value
Class 9 (Indirect Abuse Claims) = 10-21% of $7 billion which, as noted, is an ABSURDLY low estimated value

[fred8033]

2 minutes ago, Eagle1993 said:

BSA is betting against this.  I'm not sure if it is in the current plan, but previously BSA agreed to big penalties if they grow much beyond their current business model (which shows <1M scouts until 2025).  BSA had agreed to pay $50 per scout they register above certain thresholds.  In addition, they agreed to pay $150 per scout who registers at a high adventure base above certain thresholds.  These payments would be made to the trust settlement.  Now, they can get out of those payments by immediately paying off the large loan they are giving the trust.

Thank you.  Wow.  I did not make that connection.  I still agree with my thoughts.  I just did not think that future kids will be paying for this settlement.  Wow.  I really did not make that connection.  I'm used to bankruptcy cases and income projects etc.  I can see if more business comes that a bankruptcy agreement would adjust for that to avoid hiding probable future earnings.  ... I just did not make the connection that the trust explicitly was funded by future kids signing up.  ... Legally it sounds normal, but it just sounds wrong that a non-profit with a good cause would be penalized for doing more good will.

Thanks again.  I had not understood that point.

[CynicalScouter]

12 minutes ago, fred8033 said:

2019 was still 2 million members and 700,000+ volunteers.

And LDS left in 2020's numbers.

And BSA has even said it doesn't expect to get to 1,000,000 until 2025 at the earliest. That's not conjecture: that's what they reported to the court as part of their 5 year projections.

It's never coming back to the point where you need all these camps, built for a time when you had triple if not quadruple the number of scouts.

The camps are getting sold because BSA and the LCs need to pay and because frankly not all of them are needed anymore.

5 minutes ago, Eagle1993 said:

BSA is betting against this.  I'm not sure if it is in the current plan, but previously BSA agreed to big penalties if they grow much beyond their current business model (which shows <1M scouts until 2025).  BSA had agreed to pay $50 per scout they register above certain thresholds.  In addition, they agreed to pay $150 per scout who registers at a high adventure base above certain thresholds.  These payments would be made to the trust settlement.  Now, they can get out of those payments by immediately paying off the large loan they are giving the trust.

Exactly. Even BSA is saying they won't get back to 1,000,000 until 2025 at the earliest.

[HelpfulTracks]

34 minutes ago, johnsch322 said:

I know this topic covers camps but I think that the insurance issue is far larger.  If this proposal is voted down I think local scouters should be very upset with BSA National for including and negotiating with insurance company's.  As a victim could you imagine having a party (BSA) negotiating for pennies on the dollar for your settlement with no input from yourself?  

 

30 minutes ago, johnsch322 said:

Funny though how other classes within the bankruptcy are not getting pennies on the dollar...only abuse claimants.

Since the thread has gone down this path and off topic of the OP, I will continue on.

I am not a lawyer, and I have not seen what is being offered to whom, but my guess would be there are differences in the claims standing. 

I don't think there are any judgement claims included in the 82K and they are not secured creditors. So unless some type of agreement was made to give the victims a special claims status, much of the determination is part of law. The secured creditors will have first/best claims. 

And, I don't imagine there are any lump sum payouts to secured creditors, more like an alteration of terms of the debt; longer time to pay, lower rates, delay or remove of balloon payments, possibly some debt forgiveness. 

Which brings me to this question about valuation. 

I saw a chart in another post that was listing levels of claims, 1-6 if I remember correctly. It had a valuation for each level and all 82K claims where put against it to come up with a figure. 

Secured debt is pretty straight forward to calculate.

How is victim debt being calculated? Pennies on the dollar of what?

Because some of the numbers I saw would be impossible to achieve if every asset was liquidated for BSA, the local councils and the insurance companies combined. 

Which begs the question pennies on the dollar for whom?

From the councils perspective, each council is probably looking at a different level of risk if the lawsuits come back at them alone. 

Because of the 82K I would think that:

• Some are outside the SOL (depending on the state)
• Some lack enough evidence to go to trial
• Some will make it to trial and fail
• Some will make it to trail and win small amounts
• Some will make it to trial and win large amounts

[fred8033]

3 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said:

And LDS left in 2020's numbers.

And BSA has even said it doesn't expect to get to 1,000,000 until 2025 at the earliest. That's not conjecture: that's what they reported to the court as part of their 5 year projections.

It's never coming back to the point where you need all these camps, built for a time when you had triple if not quadruple the number of scouts.

The camps are getting sold because BSA and the LCs need to pay and because frankly not all of them are needed anymore.

Exactly. Even BSA is saying they won't get back to 1,000,000 until 2025 at the earliest.

Good point LDS left. So Utah probably doesn't need as many camps. ... The question is whether the LCs in Utah have signed up for the agreement as I bet their SOLs won't re-open.

That probably explains what I'm seeing in my state.  Camps were less busy, but not way, way, way less.  Camp usage by LDS in my state was far less than 10% of the campers.  Far less.  I'm betting it was between 2% and 5% at best.  So it does not affect our state much.  So, our council still needs the local camps and potentially could see a recovery in the coming future.  

[CynicalScouter]

1 minute ago, fred8033 said:

I just did not make the connection that the trust explicitly was funded by future kids signing up.  ... Legally it sounds normal, but it just sounds wrong that a non-profit with a good cause would be penalized for doing more good will.

Yeah, BSA is really, really clear: it isn't coming back to 2 million and they'd be shocked if it reached 1 million.

Quote

Such annual principal payments shall be equal to the sum of
the following calculation: (a) $4,500,000; plus (b) $3.50 multiplied by the aggregate number of
Youth Members as of December 31 of the preceding year up to the forecasted number of Youth
Members for such year as set forth in the Debtors’ five-year business plan; plus (c) $50
multiplied by the aggregate number of High Adventure Base Participants during the preceding
calendar year; plus (d) $50 multiplied by the aggregate number of Youth Members in excess of
the forecasted number of Youth Members for such year, excluding the portion of the excess that
is comprised of members under the ScoutReach program, as set forth in the Debtors’ five-year
business plan; plus (e) $150 multiplied by the aggregate number of High Adventure Base
Participants, excluding those attending events with a registration fee of less than $300 (e.g., for
non-typical High Adventure Base activities), in excess of the forecasted number of High
Adventure Base Participants for such year as set forth in the Debtors’ five-year business plan.
The forecasted numbers of Youth Members and High Adventure Base Participants referenced in
clauses (b), (d) and (e) of the foregoing sentence are included in the Financial Projections
attached to the Disclosure Statement. The forecast for years after 2025 shall be deemed to be the
forecast for calendar year 2025. The BSA Settlement Trust Note may be prepaid at any time
without penalty.

 

[johnsch322]

2 minutes ago, HelpfulTracks said:

 

Since the thread has gone down this path and off topic of the OP, I will continue on.

I am not a lawyer, and I have not seen what is being offered to whom, but my guess would be there are differences in the claims standing. 

I don't think there are any judgement claims included in the 82K and they are not secured creditors. So unless some type of agreement was made to give the victims a special claims status, much of the determination is part of law. The secured creditors will have first/best claims. 

And, I don't imagine there are any lump sum payouts to secured creditors, more like an alteration of terms of the debt; longer time to pay, lower rates, delay or remove of balloon payments, possibly some debt forgiveness. 

Which brings me to this question about valuation. 

I saw a chart in another post that was listing levels of claims, 1-6 if I remember correctly. It had a valuation for each level and all 82K claims where put against it to come up with a figure. 

Secured debt is pretty straight forward to calculate.

How is victim debt being calculated? Pennies on the dollar of what?

Because some of the numbers I saw would be impossible to achieve if every asset was liquidated for BSA, the local councils and the insurance companies combined. 

Which begs the question pennies on the dollar for whom?

From the councils perspective, each council is probably looking at a different level of risk if the lawsuits come back at them alone. 

Because of the 82K I would think that:

• Some are outside the SOL (depending on the state)
• Some lack enough evidence to go to trial
• Some will make it to trial and fail
• Some will make it to trail and win small amounts
• Some will make it to trial and win large amounts

Pennies on the dollar being offered by BSA, LC’s Participating CO’s and insurance companies to abuse victims. And yes that includes me. If it included you or your child what would be your reaction?