Not sure if this has been posted..Mastro in the Chicago Tribune

[calvindog]

Originally Posted by turtleguy64

We are a country all about 2nd chances,no?Ya gotta have faith and the hope that people will in the end do the right thing.Witness the Michael Vick situation.

Problem with your comment is that Mike Vick accepted responsibility for his actions, plead guilty and did time for his crimes. Doug Allen still maintains he's the victim of a card-hating government hell-bent on destroying the cardboard dreams of many a men.

[Peter_Spaeth]

If Legendary really BOUGHT Mastro's assets for fair value, and it wasn't a shell game, why can't Mastro use THAT money to pay consignors?

[Sean_C]

I wonder what kind of salary Doug is making as the president of Mastro (or whatever that company is named now) to go along with his salary as president of Legendary.

[RichardSimon]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

If Legendary really BOUGHT Mastro's assets for fair value, and it wasn't a shell game, why can't Mastro use THAT money to pay consignors?

You are actually asking him to do the honorable thing? You should know better than that .

[daviddbreadman]

NM

[turtleguy64]

Just the negative reactions I expected.Understandable,perhaps justified, but I kind of doubt that Doug Allen was hoping for me to post a favorable thread based on his explanation of the demise of Mastro and the present quagmire.I am not one of the big honcho bidders on Mastro or Legendary.I am mainly a consignor. Why would he take the time for an indepth explanation with a little fish in the pond?I don't have the time to fully lay out for all of you every part of his conversation with me.Suffice to say ,there are many factors that contributed to the mess at the end for Mastronet and the banking industry played a big part with Silk,Ltmd ,the prime owner.Bottomline ,the only way for Legendary to get some street cred would be to get every consignor his $ from the ill fated Mastro Feb. auction.It is that simple.

[slidekellyslide]

Originally Posted by turtleguy64

the only way for Legendary to get some street cred would be to get every consignor his $ from the ill fated Mastro Feb. auction.It is that simple.

Have you not heard? They aren't even paying consignors for their April Legendary auction. How can that be? They've assumed none of Mastro's debt.

[Jim VB]

Originally Posted by turtleguy64

... I am not one of the big honcho bidders on Mastro or Legendary.I am mainly a consignor. Why would he take the time for an indepth explanation with a little fish in the pond?

As has been mentioned here many times before, he needs the consignors more than he needs the bidders. Those in the consignor pool have many other options. Those in the bidder pool are: a) addicted to cards and b) willing to go where ever the good lots are.

He took the time with you because he needs you more than he needs me (mainly a bidder).

The easiest way for him to keep you (and the other consignors) would be to pay up. For a variety of reasons, he can't. So he hopes for one of two outcomes from his discussion. Best case, you buy it completely and continue to wait for payment and continue to consign in the meantime. Next best case, maybe you're wary. Don't consign anything new, but sit silently and patiently while you wait for your money.

The worst case, for him, would be if you were loud, and public in your dissatisfaction with not getting your money. If you went to the media, the message boards, and/or the court system, you could make it tougher for him to get other consignments.

Some have taken that road. Some of them have been paid. You have chosen not to, so expect to wait some more.

[birdman42]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

If Legendary really BOUGHT Mastro's assets for fair value, and it wasn't a shell game, why can't Mastro use THAT money to pay consignors?

Peter,

I've wondered that myself. If Legendary bought all of Mastro's assets, that would include their accounts receivable. So nobody owes Mastro any money; it's all owed to Legendary. And Mastro either had the cash to pay out, and they should do so, or they don't have enough cash, and they're hoping some people go away that they can pay the ones left.

No dog in this fight.

Bill

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by birdman42

Peter,

I've wondered that myself. If Legendary bought all of Mastro's assets, that would include their accounts receivable. So nobody owes Mastro any money; it's all owed to Legendary. And Mastro either had the cash to pay out, and they should do so, or they don't have enough cash, and they're hoping some people go away that they can pay the ones left.

No dog in this fight.

Bill

Interesting point, but apparently Legendary did not acquire that receivable, as the suit against Dave Forman was filed by Ketap (new name for Mastro), not by Legendary.

[Boomer]

Turtleguy
I would love to hear Doug Allen's explanation of what happened at Mastro.
Thanks
Mike

[turtleguy64]

Mike,I'll try to put it for you in a nutshell as related to me by him and I sincerely hope I get it right.If I don't,then I owe someone an apology:company purchasing Mastronet ran into difficulties and had to cut loose of Mastronet as an asset,bank note came due (a very,very large one).Banks note had to be honored.Let me interject here-a very good friend with connections in Mastronet warned me not to consign anything else to them as these difficulties were coming to fruition.Next point,the Dave Forman refusal to pay the 400 thou on items he won from that Feb. auction really created pressure on Mastronet to pay it's consignors.Had he paid,every single consignor would have gotten their money and we are not even discussing any of this today.Okay,Mike,I am out of steam but that is the crux of my conversation with Doug.Believe what you will,to me it became a perfect storm and the economy being what it was in Feb. probably didn't help,especially with attempts to borrow to try and resolve all the $ problems.But that's my theory,not someone else's theory.

[Boomer]

Thank you

[turtleguy64]

Glad to help.David

[Sean_C]

The only consignors that should not have been paid should have been the ones who were unfortunately involved with the contended lots with Forman, or other non-paying bidders. End of story. Anything else is a pathetic attempt to excuse poor business practices.

You ship consignors items before getting paid for them? Then you are responsible for them. If you can't get the items back, you pay the consignors their $, and pursue your legal options against the person (has Forman been served yet, or has that dog and pony show continued?).

You borrow too much $ and have problems paying the bank back? Then you suck as an executive and should be replaced.

Your backers have $ problems? Then why the hell would you allow them to be involved in your new enterprise?

Originally Posted by turtleguy64

Mike,I'll try to put it for you in a nutshell as related to me by him and I sincerely hope I get it right.If I don't,then I owe someone an apology:company purchasing Mastronet ran into difficulties and had to cut loose of Mastronet as an asset,bank note came due (a very,very large one).Banks note had to be honored.Let me interject here-a very good friend with connections in Mastronet warned me not to consign anything else to them as these difficulties were coming to fruition.Next point,the Dave Forman refusal to pay the 400 thou on items he won from that Feb. auction really created pressure on Mastronet to pay it's consignors.Had he paid,every single consignor would have gotten their money and we are not even discussing any of this today.Okay,Mike,I am out of steam but that is the crux of my conversation with Doug.Believe what you will,to me it became a perfect storm and the economy being what it was in Feb. probably didn't help,especially with attempts to borrow to try and resolve all the $ problems.But that's my theory,not someone else's theory.

[Jim VB]

Originally Posted by Sean_C

...(has Forman been served yet, or has that dog and pony show continued?).

Good question!!! I don't know the answer, but think of it this way, once Forman has been served, the plaintiff is open to discovery motions and depositions. Do you think they really want that, or do they hope bad publicity would force payment?