Chapter 11 Announced - Part 8 - TCC Term Sheet & Plan Confirmation

[ThenNow]

27 minutes ago, clbkbx said:

Does that make sense to others?

Yes.

[NJScout1980]

Signing out friends…wish you all the best!  Being censured for opinions based on credible evidence is ridiculous.   I have my opinions of the lawyers; now I will add the moderator.   Someone needs to call out the lawyers; and yeah my words were as kind as they come!   Scout law #6.   Add another point that doesn’t expire 😂 

[clbkbx]

19 minutes ago, NJScout1980 said:

Being censured for opinions based on credible evidence is ridiculous.

Sorry to hear that, @NJScout1980. I read and responded to your post. While we may disagree on some things, I don't recall anything not appropriate for this forum. For what it's worth... I hope you keep posting. 

Here's the article that was shared: https://www.forbes.com/sites/michaelkrauss/2022/03/08/bankruptcy-and-the-boy-scouts/

I urge everyone to brush up on their critical readings skills if they do read it.

Edited March 11, 2022 by clbkbx
Added link.

[johnsch322]

Somehow, I feel like the TCC has called the other party's bluff.  they got nowhere in getting additional money so in return for their endorsement of the plan they were able to get better youth protection and TDP.  Are they betting that more money will have to be put on the table to get the plan confirmed and thru the appeals process?

[clbkbx]

2 minutes ago, johnsch322 said:

they were able to get better youth protection  

I scream every time I see something about negotiating for "better" youth protection. [This has nothing to do with the points in your post, @johnsch322.] I may have mentioned this earlier but that (better youth protection) was the chat answer I received from Doug Kennedy of the TCC as the reason to vote for this plan. 

1. appropriate youth protection should have been implemented as soon as it was determined to not be sufficient. This is a BSA failure (and is presumably an on-going failure until a bankruptcy case is over).
2. that it is being negotiated as part of a bankruptcy stemming from too little youth protection is unbelievable. This is a BSA failure.
3. that the first plan was sent out with "lesser" and presumably not appropriate youth protection is unconscionable. This is a BSA, a TCC and a court failure. If it wasn't sufficient, it should not have been sent out.

The BSA is an entity that wants to survive and I can understand (but vehemently disagree with) their choices around money, settlements, debt, etc. But when that entity is youth-oriented and needs to negotiate with outside groups to make sure the youth are protected... disgusting. 

Quote

Are they betting that more money will have to be put on the table to get the plan confirmed and thru the appeals process?

That is a really interesting idea. We'll see!

[johnsch322]

8 minutes ago, clbkbx said:

That is a really interesting idea. We'll see!

And they also have veto in any additional settlements with third parties and I would expect that would include any new settlement with Hartford, Century and the LDS.

[ThenNow]

9 minutes ago, clbkbx said:

I scream every time I see something about negotiating for "better" youth protection. [This has nothing to do with the points in your post, @johnsch322.] I may have mentioned this earlier but that (better youth protection) was the chat answer I received from Doug Kennedy of the TCC as the reason to vote for this plan. 

1. appropriate youth protection should have been implemented as soon as it was determined to not be sufficient. This is a BSA failure (and is presumably an on-going failure until a bankruptcy case is over).
2. that it is being negotiated as part of a bankruptcy stemming from too little youth protection is unbelievable. This is a BSA failure.
3. that the first plan was sent out with "lesser" and presumably not appropriate youth protection is unconscionable. This is a BSA, a TCC and a court failure. If it wasn't sufficient, it should not have been sent out.

The BSA is an entity that wants to survive and I can understand (but vehemently disagree with) their choices around money, settlements, debt, etc. But when that entity is youth-oriented and needs to negotiate with outside groups to make sure the youth are protected... disgusting. 

Starting from the end, are you saying it's wrong, foolish or pointless to negotiate changes to help keep youth safe? I get the disgusting and don't disagree. Let's assume BSA is headed toward emergence to continue its youth-serving mission. For the sake of staying in a straight line, let's not argue whether it does or does not do that well. All mitigating arguments and objections to the outcome being realized aside, isn't it better to use the moment to leverage enhanced youth protection than see BSA emerge without those significant improvements? Are you exclusively saying that because they had to be forced to change is repressible or do you believe no one should negotiate with those perceived as unrepentant, unredeemable or other "uns" we can insert? Not poking, just hoping to better understand. For me, the trauma of not seeing these changes put in place to protect kids outweighs whether it was a huge BSA failing. All said and done, I'm glad for the outcome. 

[PaleRider]

1 hour ago, ThenNow said:

Agreed. If we recall the way it went down, without any involvement of the TCC and triumphantly announced to the world as the second coming, it was clearly a (the?) major BSA gaffe that set the trajectory.  I believe that is when I went into my, "smells like desperation" and not "teen spirit" routine. 

I know this may sound silly to some but is what it is, who are the non debtors

[T2Eagle]

5 minutes ago, PaleRider said:

I know this may sound silly to some but is what it is, who are the non debtors

The Local Councils and Chartering Organizations, who are not the debtor(s) declaring bankruptcy, but under the plan will be given the same protection from future law suits as if they had gone through bankruptcy.

[PaleRider]

1 minute ago, T2Eagle said:

The Local Councils and Chartering Organizations, who are not the debtor(s) declaring bankruptcy, but under the plan will be given the same protection from future law suits as if they had gone through bankruptcy.

Thank you for explaining that.

[skeptic]

2 hours ago, clbkbx said:

Sorry to hear that, @NJScout1980. I read and responded to your post. While we may disagree on some things, I don't recall anything not appropriate for this forum. For what it's worth... I hope you keep posting. 

Here's the article that was shared: https://www.forbes.com/sites/michaelkrauss/2022/03/08/bankruptcy-and-the-boy-scouts/

I urge everyone to brush up on their critical readings skills if they do read it.

Not sure if this post suggests this article, which is spot on by the way from my perspective, is reason for censue.  If so, I too would say not right, but in stronger verbiage.  Almost from the beginning some, shall we say questionable legal persons, those for whom I was smacked for my descriptions, have played fast and  loose with this.  The real victims, or now survivors, have been summarily used as pawns to instigate a "big payday" for grifters and those certain oily legal gurus, while the real victims/survivors have been left in the mud.  Again, just my view.  

[clbkbx]

58 minutes ago, ThenNow said:

isn't it better to use the moment to leverage enhanced youth protection than see BSA emerge without those significant improvements?

Yes, I completely agree that it is better.

I've been trying to think of a good analogy to describe what seems like bizarro world to me. The best I've come up with USA gymnastics. From the same month they filed for bankruptcy: "We have the majority of the Deborah Daniels report recommendations either implemented or in progress, and we are committed putting all of the recommendations in place. " https://usagym.org/pages/post.html?PostID=23015 also see https://usagym.org/pages/aboutus/pages/recommendations.html.

So a youth-oriented group recognized a problem associated with youth protection, enabled independent recommendations and started implementing them.

The BSA sent out a plan with insufficient* youth protection to survivors of childhood sexual abuse and asked them to vote yes (and if it they did, it would be implemented at a later date). The asterisk is because I'm not an expert on what should be implemented but presumably the TCC didn't agree with what was included in the first plan that was sent out. 

So, yes, much better to have it but I cannot believe this is what it takes to have it. 

[clbkbx]

1 minute ago, skeptic said:

Not sure if this post suggests this article, which is spot on by the way from my perspective, is reason for censue.

Hi @skeptic... there was more in the original post (that I don't recall) but that was the shared link. I still had it open and thought others might want to read it.

We disagree on whether the article is spot on.

[ThenNow]

15 minutes ago, clbkbx said:

We disagree on whether the article is spot on.

At some point an organization (and I won't hold my breath that it will be a governmental agency) will need to do autopsies of these cases. Since the analysis is not being done during the process, for various stated reasons some of which I don't not comprehend, they just slide on through like snail snot. I used that because they are slow, but slick. How can this continue to happen relatively unchecked without both full disclosure of aggregator funding and advertising methods, and frontend vetting and validation of e-signatures? From what I see as a moral and objective standpoint, all expediency excuses aside, how is this the "right" way to do something. Any dilution of the claimant pool by nefarious means damages survivors all over again. Okay. No one ping-pong me for veering of topic, bitte.

[skeptic]

31 minutes ago, clbkbx said:

Hi @skeptic... there was more in the original post (that I don't recall) but that was the shared link. I still had it open and thought others might want to read it.

We disagree on whether the article is spot on.

Well, "spot on" may be a stretch.  But it does show the realities of this and how it became the mess it is.  Most of the problem, in my view, can be laid in the laps of the messed up legal system that has little rhyme or reason much of the times, and is too often the "the land of predator grifters" with often thin credentials.  JMHO of course.