Chapter 11 Announced - Part 7 - Plan 5.0 - Voting/Confirmation

[skeptic]

10 minutes ago, johnsch322 said:

I read notice of depositions including the one from the BSA to the TCC and I agree with his assessment. Personally I am looking forward to the official vote count and I hope the offer was rejected. 

And that is your right.  But his post is simply poor taste at least, and certainly not reflective of what I would hope a lawyer would consider ethical.  I do not have an issue with his preferring rejection, or even concluding it has happened.  It is the post itself that I find nasty and in, as I said poor taste.  Oh well, I cannot do anything about it anyway.  

[Eagle1993]

2 hours ago, johnsch322 said:

From Tim Kosnoff Twitter

Kosnoff Law

@SexAbuseAttys

·

29m

Happy New Year Friends and Followers. I have great news to share. Judging by the flurry of deposition notices filed by BSA last night to depose most of the firms urging clients to Reject and seeking evidence of the impact of the “Kosnoff Communications” on the vote,THEY LOST BIG 3

1

5

Kosnoff Law

@SexAbuseAttys

·

29m

Now BSA wants to invalidate your REJECT votes

Based on some info I found, it sounds like lawyers likely have an idea where the vote is headed.  I'm not sure the BSA mass deposition requests mean the vote is headed to failing.  I expect both sides are preparing for both passing/failing votes.

Remember, BSA needs overwhelming support.  So, they will fight to try and get as many reject votes thrown out.

That said, if you listened to Kosnoff's deposition, it is clear there is a ton of focus on approval votes and coalition law firm's use of their own eBallot.  

Finally, there is still the investigation into the vetting of claims.

All of these will be used to try and go after the votes.  So, I'm not sure anything on the docket will indicate which way the vote count is going.

 

[johnsch322]

21 minutes ago, Eagle1993 said:

Based on some info I found, it sounds like lawyers likely have an idea where the vote is headed.  I'm not sure the BSA mass deposition requests mean the vote is headed to failing.  I expect both sides are preparing for both passing/failing votes.

Remember, BSA needs overwhelming support.  So, they will fight to try and get as many reject votes thrown out.

That said, if you listened to Kosnoff's deposition, it is clear there is a ton of focus on approval votes and coalition law firm's use of their own eBallot.  

Finally, there is still the investigation into the vetting of claims.

All of these will be used to try and go after the votes.  So, I'm not sure anything on the docket will indicate which way the vote count is going.

 

We should definitely know more in 3 days. 

[vol_scouter]

33 minutes ago, johnsch322 said:

We should definitely know more in 3 days. 

As the time that a vote total approaches, I encourage everyone to repeat the Scout Oath and Law several times to remind us how to treat one another. 

There are victims here who wish for the plan to fail.  If it does, they will be pleased and if not, they will be very unhappy.  Scouters wish for them to be compensated as they deserve some level of compensation.

Also, this list is for Scouters interested in bettering Scouting.  Many of us have been on these forums for many years.  Though they want victims to be compensated, many (most ?) feel that the present plan is a good compromise.  They will be very distressed if the plan fails and will be pleased if it passes.

Note that some long time forum members who are long time Scouters are also victims so that the groups are not monolithic.

Let us all be restrained in our responses in deference to those with differing views.  Let the values of Scouting shine through.

[Eagle1993]

1 hour ago, vol_scouter said:

Let us all be restrained in our responses in deference to those with differing views.  Let the values of Scouting shine through.

Very well said.  

[1980Scouter]

Has anyone heard anything from their LC expressing concern if the vote fails and the plan falls apart? 

I am sure SE talk amongst themselves and realize a failed plan would open up LC to lawsuits depending on state law windows.

How worried are LC's? The ones around me do not show it if they are.

[MattR]

25 minutes ago, 1980Scouter said:

Has anyone heard anything from their LC expressing concern if the vote fails and the plan falls apart? 

I am sure SE talk amongst themselves and realize a failed plan would open up LC to lawsuits depending on state law windows.

How worried are LC's? The ones around me do not show it if they are.

I assume they have as much access to that information as we do. So, they're likely scrambling about figuring out how to deal with losses from covid. I do know that my council has lost staff. Whether they were laid off or found better jobs, I don't know.

[vol_scouter]

9 hours ago, MattR said:

I assume they have as much access to that information as we do. So, they're likely scrambling about figuring out how to deal with losses from covid. I do know that my council has lost staff. Whether they were laid off or found better jobs, I don't know.

The local councils have meetings with the BSA National officials from time to time.  Those meetings are typically informational and might provide predictions or information a day or so before it hits these pages. 
 

Local councils often leave positions unfilled for several months to save money or to increase flexibility in uncertain times.  So your council could just have openings that they have not been able fill or some combination of conserving money and being flexible.  
 

I have heard nothing about the vote except there is hope that the plan is going to pass.  

[Eagle94-A1]

Last i heard, my LC thinks it is a done deal. They plan to sell the camps needed to meet their obligation,  and continue on.

[Eagle1993]

My guess is that most LCs are focused on rechartering units.  The bankruptcy is a concern, but right now it’s in a holding pattern and they have other more pressing issues to tend to.   

[skeptic]

17 minutes ago, Eagle1993 said:

My guess is that most LCs are focused on rechartering units.  The bankruptcy is a concern, but right now it’s in a holding pattern and they have other more pressing issues to tend to.   

Have no idea how long they may last, but we have had two district level executives added this month.  They had all been riffed last year, and it was only the exec and assistant doing it all, with two office part timers and part time store.  They did keep the camp ranger.  One of the newbies has no Scouting experience other than a brother who was one; he was not.  The other is an Eagle.  Have not met them as yet, and waiting for bio's.  It was not too long back we had as many as six field exec's, and two years ago still 3.

 

 

 

Edited January 3, 2022 by skeptic

[ThenNow]

13 hours ago, vol_scouter said:

I have heard nothing about the vote except there is hope that the plan is going to pass.

In some ways, I’m not sure the tally we will see tomorrow will mean whatever it appears to mean. I put the odds at zero that it will be overwhelming in either direction. The numbers are just not there. There are two motivated factions, each with a devoted constituency they likely “turned out,” as they say. Given the assumption of a failed dispositive result, this is what I think.

We are in for something that could end up looking like a MAD warfare scenario. There will be an all out assault on claimant votes both accept and reject. Both sides will try to invalidate the other’s respective tally by all means available and at any cost. TCC, Kosnoff, AIG, Patterson (Zalkin/Pfau), et al., with be seeking to upend “accept” votes. Coalition and its allies will try to undermine the “rejects” (used advisedly). The Kosnoff/TCC letter, e-ballot, time-barred and $3500 off-ramp claims, attorney e-signatures, aggregator methods, Coalition efforts to dog clients into changing votes and 30’000+/- claims lacking basic identifiers - LC, CO, abuser, year(s), etc. - will all be “painted” targets awaiting guided missile lock.  I think it’s about to get ugly, not to mention the Purdue Kraken stirring beneath the dark waters. Well, what do I know, other than this is a terrible mess. Ack. Oh, yeah. Happy New Year.

Edited January 3, 2022 by ThenNow

[InquisitiveScouter]

20 minutes ago, ThenNow said:

In some ways, I’m not sure the tally we will see tomorrow will mean whatever it appears to mean. I put the odds at zero that it will be overwhelming in either direction. The numbers are just not there. There are two motivated factions, each with a devoted constituency they likely “turned out,” as they say. Given the assumption of a failed dispositive result, this is what I think.

We are in for something that could end up looking like a MAD warfare scenario. There will be an all out assault on claimant votes both accept and reject. Both sides will try to invalidate the other’s respective tally by all means available and at any cost. TCC, Kosnoff, AIG, Patterson (Zalkin/Pfau), et al., with be seeking to upend “accept” votes. Coalition and its allies with try to undermine the “rejects” (used advisedly). The Kosnoff/TCC letter, e-ballot, time-barred and $3500 off-ramp claims, attorney e-signatures, aggregator methods, Coalition efforts to dog clients into changing votes and 30’000+/- claims lacking basic identifiers - LC, CO, abuser, year(s), etc. - will all be “painted” targets awaiting guided missile lock.  I think it’s about to get ugly, not to mention the Purdue Kraken stirring beneath the dark waters. Well, what do I know, other than this is a terrible mess. Ack. Oh, yeah. Happy New Year.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SqC_m3yUDU

 

[fred8033]

January 3rd 2022 ... Welcome to year bankruptcy year four ...  I started discussing bankruptcy rumors in 2019 to handle CSA, GSA etc suits.  

If counted from when bankruptcy was filed, we'll be starting year three in February ... BSA filed Feb 2020.

 

 

[Eagle1993]

1 hour ago, ThenNow said:

We are in for something that could end up looking like a MAD warfare scenario. There will be an all out assault on claimant votes both accept and reject.

100% agree.  Kosnoff noted that BSA is deposing nearly every group that is against the plan.  From the Roman Catholic Church to the TCC and all law firms in between.  They are going to ask about their communication in terms of voting, how they kept track of votes, how they communicated with claimants who decided not to vote, etc.  

Now, the other groups are already lining up arguments against the coalition, eBallots, badgering clients, etc.

My guess is that the vote comes in the range of 70-85% accept.  Why?  Because that likely the worst case scenario for all involved and given BSA's luck, I expect that is what we will see.  What is this the worst case?  Because it is enough to pass a BSA only plan; however, not enough for the judge to likely accept non debtors.  BSA will believe they are close enough.  Anti plan advocates will believe that close doesn't count.  With no clear "winner" of the vote, we will be stuck in limbo for months. 

To me, the best case situation for the BSA is >95% accept.  The second best is a very low accept rate <<66%.  At least in this scenario, most could agree that we are either very close to a final plan or need to allow other groups (TCC) to take the lead. 

If a new plan takes shape, I do expect some LCs will need to kick in more.  I just saw Daniel Boone council had 20 lawsuits filed against it for CSA.  From prior discussions, each CSA lawsuit costs about $500K in legal fees ... so they are likely looking at $10M (roughly) in legal fees.  I took a look at the Daniel Boone's settlement ... they only offered $656K.  They have net unrestricted assets of $7.8M.  It seems like some councils are playing with fire.  Just the legal fees from 2 cases likely exceeds their settlement offer.  If this plan fails, I believe some councils may have wished they offered more.  Daniel Boone is one that I question right now.

c1f98e_d7d75080e9ef4391ae5b8bc408cb8211.pdf (filesusr.com)