| |
Main
Date: 02 Jan 2009 14:54:42
From: B. Lafferty
Subject: What Is Redman's Real Agenda?
|
From the USCF Issues Forum:
by redman on Fri Jan 02, 2009 7:44 am #122105
I was delighted to hear from Executive Director Hall that we have
received a bequest of $350,000. I had mixed feelings that it came from
my old friend, Phil LeCornu, since I was sorry to hear about his death.
I would be happy to contribute a tributary article about Phil to Chess
Life. Although no one can speak for Phil, since I knew him quite well, I
think that what I am about to propose fits well without what he
envisioned his bequest to be -- to an ongoing organization.
The Life Membership Asset Management Committee is elected each year by
the Delegates. The Committee then elects its officers. We function, in
short, as the savings account for the Federation. We control and invest
about $425,000 in liquid assets and the building and property of the
Federation. These assets are part of the Federation and could be taken
if there were ever a judgment against the USCF. To my mind, this is a
remote possibility. However, the LMA is a safeguard. In effect, we
operate as a firewall -- Operations can not simply use these assets
without the Delegate controls that are enacted through the LMA.
Having said that, I would hasten to assure members that since the Cherry
Hill meeting in August of 2007, the LMA and Operations have had cordial
relations of trust. Since Bill Hall's declaration of "a line in the
sand," Operations has faithfully and monthly contributed to building up
future reserves for the LMA. Chief Financial Office, Joe Nanna, also has
been a very significant part of this building of trust. Although the LMA
Management Asset Committee continues to worry about continuing operating
deficits, we do not worry about the ability of Bill and Joe to fix problems.
AND NOW THE PROPOSAL
The U.S. Chess Federation has recently received a significant bequest
from Phil LeCornu, $350,000. As Chair of the Life Asset Management
Committee (henceforth, LMA), I propose two plans.
Plan 1. The LeCornu bequest to USCF will pay 50% off the current loan on
the mortgage of the building (about $410,000 total or $205,000) and the
LMA will pay the other 50% (about $205,000). This plan will require the
approval of the USCF Executive Board and the LMA.
Plan 2. The LeCornu bequest to USCF will pay up to $150,000 towards the
current mortgage, the LMA will pay up to $150,000, and the Federation
will raise, through tax-deductible contributions to the U.S Chess Trust,
up to an additional $150,000. This plan will require the approval of the
USCF Executive Board, the LMA, and the U.S. Chess Trust, not to mention
sustained efforts from Operations. The reason that this proposal is more
costly is that it will require more expense for various campaigns and
rewards.
These proposals come to you from the Chair (Tim Redman) and Vice-Chair
(Leroy Dubeck) of the LMA Management Commitee, but not from the
Committee itself. They would have to be passed by vote of the entire LMA
Committee and the Executive Board and perhaps the U.S. Chess Trust.
At the same time, I believe that his course is the best for the
Federation, and it would meet with Phil LeCornu's conservative approach.
Cordially,
Tim Redman
Chair, Life Membership Asset Management Committee
by Brian Mottershead on Fri Jan 02, 2009 7:55 am #122109
redman wrote:
Plan 2. The LeCornu bequest to USCF will pay up to $150,000 towards the
current mortgage, the LMA will pay up to $150,000, and the Federation
will raise, through tax-deductible contributions to the U.S Chess Trust,
up to an additional $150,000. This plan will require the approval of the
USCF Executive Board, the LMA, and the U.S. Chess Trust, not to mention
sustained efforts from Operations. The reason that this proposal is more
costly is that it will require more expense for various campaigns and
rewards.
****************
What are these "various campaigns and rewards", and what are the
expenses? How much of contributions through US Chess Trust would come to
the USCF, and how much would go to fund-raising and administrative
costs? Incidentally, what is the US Chess Trust's previous record
concerning the percentage of revenue spent on program versus
administrative and fund-raising expenses?
*******************
These proposals come to you from the Chair (Tim Redman) and Vice-Chair
(Leroy Dubeck) of the LMA Management Commitee, but not from the
Committee itself. They would have to be passed by vote of the entire LMA
Committee and the Executive Board and perhaps the U.S. Chess Trust.
****************************************
Or, on the USCF side, just the Delegates, presumably. And the US Chess
Trust is dispensable, since that is not the only 501(c)(3) option
available, is it? What is the US Chess Trust going to do to help with
this fund raising, other than serving as a conduit for the donations?
Another question: if it is a good thing to invest LMA funds in paying
off the mortgage, how come the LMA Committee has not done that already?
No "deal" with the Executive Board would have been required, since the
LMA Committee's charter is to direct the investment of LMA funds. How
did the arrival of the bequest suddenly make paying off the mortgage
with LMA funds more of a good thing than it was before?
In financial terms, isn't your "Plan 1" the same as spending $401K of
the assets of the corporation (bequest+part of the LMA) to pay off the
mortgage? Leaving aside questions of who politically controls the
assets, if the Executive Board wants to move $401K (a combination of the
bequests and the LMA) into paying off the mortgage and the Delegate's
are agreeable, why does there have to be a "deal" between "Operations"
(which other people call "the USCF") and the LMA?
Brian Mottershead
|
|
| |
Date: 02 Jan 2009 07:38:33
From: [email protected]
Subject: Re: What Is Redman's Real Agenda?
|
STAVING OFF BANKRUPCY
Will the USCF, in its infinite wisdom, uses the bequest wisely?
Phil LeCornu was a strong player. I believe that he hailed from
Detroit and then moved for a while to New York City where he hung out
with Evans, Fischer, Lombardy and other top players. I don't know
much more about him and look forward to Tim Redman's obituary.
Diagram 170 after 20...Ng6 is featured in NEW IDEAS IN CHESS by GM
Larry Evans. Here is the complete game.
White: Larry Evans
Black: Phil LeCornu
Nimzo-Indian Defense
US Open, Tampa 1952
1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.e3 0=960 5.Bd3 d5 6.Nf3 Nbd7 7.a3 Bd6 8.Qc2
c6 9.0=960 Re8 10.e4 dxe4 11.Nxe4 Nxe4 12.Bxe4 Nf8 13.Re1 Bd7 14.g3 Rc8
15.Bg5 f6 16.Bd2 Re7 17.Bc3 Be8 18.b4 Bf7 19.Kg2 a6 20.Rad1 Ng6
21.Ne5! Qe8 22.Nxf7 Qxf7 23.f4 Kh8 24.Rd2 Rce8 25.Kg1 Nf8 26.a4 Qh5
27.Qd3 Qh3 28.c5 Bb8 29.b5 axb5 30.axb5 cxb5 31.Bg2 Qh5 32.Qxb5 e5
33.fxe5 fxe5 34.Rde2 Ng6 35.d5 Rf8 36.d6 Ref7 37.Bxe5 Nxe5 38.Rxe5 Qg4
39.Re8 Qd4+ 40.Kh1 Black overstepped on time
They played again at the 6th Canadian Open Championship in 1966. Here
is that encounter.
White: Larry Evans
Black: Phil LeCornu
Caro-Kann Defense
1.e4 c6 2.Nc3 d5 3.Nf3 dxe4 4.Nxe4 Bg4 5.h3 Bxf3 6.Qxf3 e6 7.b3 Nd7
8.Bb2 Ngf6 9.c4 Nxe4 10.Qxe4 Qg5 11.0=960=960 0=960=960 12.f4 Qa5 13.Kb1 Nf=
6
14.Qe3 Qf5+ 15.Ka1 Bc5 16.d4 Bd6 17.g3 Qa5 18.Kb1 Rd7 19.Bd3 Kb8
20.Rhf1 Rhd8 21.g4 c5 22.Bc2 cxd4 23.Bxd4 Bc7 24.f5 e5 25.Bc3 Rxd1+
26.Rxd1 Rxd1+ 27.Bxd1 Qb6 28.c5 Qc6 29.Bxe5 Bxe5 30.Qxe5+ Kc8 31.Bc2
Qh1+ 32.Kb2 Qd5 33.Qc3 h6 34.b4 a6 35.Bb3 Qd7 36.Qc4 Kd8 37.Qxf7 Qxf7
38.Bxf7 Kc7 39.Kc2 Kc6 40.Bc4 a5 41.a3 axb4 42.axb4 Ne4 43.Bf1 Ng5
44.Bg2+ Kc7 45.Kd3 Nf7 46.Kd4 b6 47.h4 bxc5+ 48.bxc5 Kd7 49.Bd5 Nd8
50.Ke5 Black Resigns
B. Lafferty wrote:
> From the USCF Issues Forum:
>
> by redman on Fri Jan 02, 2009 7:44 am #122105
>
> I was delighted to hear from Executive Director Hall that we have
> received a bequest of $350,000. I had mixed feelings that it came from
> my old friend, Phil LeCornu, since I was sorry to hear about his death.
> I would be happy to contribute a tributary article about Phil to Chess
> Life. Although no one can speak for Phil, since I knew him quite well, I
> think that what I am about to propose fits well without what he
> envisioned his bequest to be -- to an ongoing organization.
>
> The Life Membership Asset Management Committee is elected each year by
> the Delegates. The Committee then elects its officers. We function, in
> short, as the savings account for the Federation. We control and invest
> about $425,000 in liquid assets and the building and property of the
> Federation. These assets are part of the Federation and could be taken
> if there were ever a judgment against the USCF. To my mind, this is a
> remote possibility. However, the LMA is a safeguard. In effect, we
> operate as a firewall -- Operations can not simply use these assets
> without the Delegate controls that are enacted through the LMA.
>
> Having said that, I would hasten to assure members that since the Cherry
> Hill meeting in August of 2007, the LMA and Operations have had cordial
> relations of trust. Since Bill Hall's declaration of "a line in the
> sand," Operations has faithfully and monthly contributed to building up
> future reserves for the LMA. Chief Financial Office, Joe Nanna, also has
> been a very significant part of this building of trust. Although the LMA
> Management Asset Committee continues to worry about continuing operating
> deficits, we do not worry about the ability of Bill and Joe to fix proble=
ms.
>
> AND NOW THE PROPOSAL
>
> The U.S. Chess Federation has recently received a significant bequest
> from Phil LeCornu, $350,000. As Chair of the Life Asset Management
> Committee (henceforth, LMA), I propose two plans.
>
> Plan 1. The LeCornu bequest to USCF will pay 50% off the current loan on
> the mortgage of the building (about $410,000 total or $205,000) and the
> LMA will pay the other 50% (about $205,000). This plan will require the
> approval of the USCF Executive Board and the LMA.
>
> Plan 2. The LeCornu bequest to USCF will pay up to $150,000 towards the
> current mortgage, the LMA will pay up to $150,000, and the Federation
> will raise, through tax-deductible contributions to the U.S Chess Trust,
> up to an additional $150,000. This plan will require the approval of the
> USCF Executive Board, the LMA, and the U.S. Chess Trust, not to mention
> sustained efforts from Operations. The reason that this proposal is more
> costly is that it will require more expense for various campaigns and
> rewards.
>
> These proposals come to you from the Chair (Tim Redman) and Vice-Chair
> (Leroy Dubeck) of the LMA Management Commitee, but not from the
> Committee itself. They would have to be passed by vote of the entire LMA
> Committee and the Executive Board and perhaps the U.S. Chess Trust.
>
> At the same time, I believe that his course is the best for the
> Federation, and it would meet with Phil LeCornu's conservative approach.
>
> Cordially,
>
> Tim Redman
> Chair, Life Membership Asset Management Committee
>
>
>
> by Brian Mottershead on Fri Jan 02, 2009 7:55 am #122109
>
> redman wrote:
> Plan 2. The LeCornu bequest to USCF will pay up to $150,000 towards the
> current mortgage, the LMA will pay up to $150,000, and the Federation
> will raise, through tax-deductible contributions to the U.S Chess Trust,
> up to an additional $150,000. This plan will require the approval of the
> USCF Executive Board, the LMA, and the U.S. Chess Trust, not to mention
> sustained efforts from Operations. The reason that this proposal is more
> costly is that it will require more expense for various campaigns and
> rewards.
> ****************
>
>
> What are these "various campaigns and rewards", and what are the
> expenses? How much of contributions through US Chess Trust would come to
> the USCF, and how much would go to fund-raising and administrative
> costs? Incidentally, what is the US Chess Trust's previous record
> concerning the percentage of revenue spent on program versus
> administrative and fund-raising expenses?
> *******************
>
> These proposals come to you from the Chair (Tim Redman) and Vice-Chair
> (Leroy Dubeck) of the LMA Management Commitee, but not from the
> Committee itself. They would have to be passed by vote of the entire LMA
> Committee and the Executive Board and perhaps the U.S. Chess Trust.
> ****************************************
>
>
> Or, on the USCF side, just the Delegates, presumably. And the US Chess
> Trust is dispensable, since that is not the only 501(c)(3) option
> available, is it? What is the US Chess Trust going to do to help with
> this fund raising, other than serving as a conduit for the donations?
>
> Another question: if it is a good thing to invest LMA funds in paying
> off the mortgage, how come the LMA Committee has not done that already?
> No "deal" with the Executive Board would have been required, since the
> LMA Committee's charter is to direct the investment of LMA funds. How
> did the arrival of the bequest suddenly make paying off the mortgage
> with LMA funds more of a good thing than it was before?
>
> In financial terms, isn't your "Plan 1" the same as spending $401K of
> the assets of the corporation (bequest+part of the LMA) to pay off the
> mortgage? Leaving aside questions of who politically controls the
> assets, if the Executive Board wants to move $401K (a combination of the
> bequests and the LMA) into paying off the mortgage and the Delegate's
> are agreeable, why does there have to be a "deal" between "Operations"
> (which other people call "the USCF") and the LMA?
> Brian Mottershead
|
| |
Date: 02 Jan 2009 07:12:28
From: samsloan
Subject: Re: What Is Redman's Real Agenda?
|
Although I am not exactly on the best of terms with Tim Redman and I
am certainly not his spokesman, I am confident that I can answer this
question for him.
Tim Redman's "Real Agenda" is to do the job entrusted to him by the
USCF Delegates who created the LMA Committee and appointed Tim Redman
as Chairman of that committee.
The job he has been told to do by the delegates is to protect the Life
Member Assets form being misappropriated by the Crossville office.
Now, Tim Redman has a new job. His close friend Phil LeCornu has died
and left a bequest of $350,000 and Tim Redman wants to try to make
sure that the USCF Office does not waste this money on operations.
Brian, the fact that you have to ask questions like this indicates
that you may not be the most suitable candidate for election.
Sam Sloan
|
| | |
Date: 02 Jan 2009 10:25:41
From: samsloan
Subject: Re: What Is Redman's Real Agenda?
|
On Jan 2, 1:02=A0pm, "B. Lafferty" <[email protected] > wrote:
> samsloan wrote:
> > On Jan 2, 10:17 am, "B. Lafferty" <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> samsloan wrote:
> >>> Although I am not exactly on the best of terms with Tim Redman and I
> >>> am certainly not his spokesman, I am confident that I can answer this
> >>> question for him.
> >>> Tim Redman's "Real Agenda" is to do the job entrusted to him by the
> >>> USCF Delegates who created the LMA Committee and appointed Tim Redman
> >>> as Chairman of that committee.
> >>> The job he has been told to do by the delegates is to protect the Lif=
e
> >>> Member Assets form being misappropriated by the Crossville office.
> >>> Now, Tim Redman has a new job. His close friend Phil LeCornu has died
> >>> and left a bequest of $350,000 and Tim Redman wants to try to make
> >>> sure that the USCF Office does not waste this money on operations.
> >>> Brian, the fact that you have to ask questions like this indicates
> >>> that you may not be the most suitable candidate for election.
> >>> Sam Sloan
> >> I'm glad to learn that you do not speak for Mr. Redman. The most cogen=
t
> >> question is why Mr. Redman proposes now to pay down the mortgage but d=
id
> >> not earlier with LMA funds.
>
> > The answer to that question is over on the other thread entitled
> > "Mortgage Proposal from LMA Chair".
>
> > However, David Quinn who, rumor has it, is also becoming a candidate,
> > has an interesting idea.
>
> > You may not be aware of this but Mr. Quinn has a PhD degree in
> > financial analysis and has held heavyweight jobs with financial
> > institutions such as Morgan Stanley.
>
> I'm very much aware of David's expertise and position.
>
> If the USCF were not at the brink of being driven under by Trolgar
> litigation costs (a conscious strategy by them, IMO, evidenced by this
> proposal from their friend Redman who also proposed "mediation" by
> Harold Winston), I would agree with you. If the issue is survival and
> the bequest will make survival real, then that has to come first. The
> real issue is litigation costs needlessly incurred due to two board
> members.
>
> > Basically, the USCF office building in Crossville is worthless because
> > the mortgage we must pay off is more than the building is worth. The
> > remaining mortgage is $410,000 and the building in today's real estate
> > market in an isolated out-of-the-way place with no other structures
> > around it is worth only $50,000 or at the most $100,000.
>
> Have you had an appraisal done of the Crossville building? =A0If you
> haven't, you're talking noting more than speculation.
No. No appraisal has been done on the building. During my year on the
board plus before and after my time on the board I have been demanding
that an appraisal be done on the building.
The answer always given by the Goichberg controlled board has been
that appraisals cost money and since we are not going to sell the
building why appraise it.
Obviously, I do not agree with this but that is what they said. They
did not disagree when, during the meeting in Stillwater, I said that
the building was not worth more than $50,000. In fact, Joel Channing,
who makes his living as a builder and a contractor, seemed to agree
with me.
It is true that both Winston and Redman have been asking the board to
settle their differences with the Polgar or Trollgar Group. Of course,
I disagree but you should not reject out-of-hand anything that Redman
writes. He has been USCF President twice, 1981-1984 and 2000-2001, so
he must know something about it, plus he is now Chairman of the LMA
Committee.
>
>
> > Quinn posted on the USCF Issues Forum that upon examining the mortgage
> > documents, depending on what type of mortgage it is, we might be able
> > just to walk away from the building and not owe anything nor be
> > indebted to the mortgage provider.
>
> If you walk away, meaning don't pay the mortgage, the mortgagor will
> foreclose and the property will probably be sold at auction. =A0Any
> deficiency will be due and owing by the mortgagee. =A0So forgive my
> French, but what the devil are you thinking? =A0On second thought,
> consider that a rhetorical question. :-)
That is not a rhetorical question. I asked the same question.
He wrote on the USCF Issues Forum and you can look it up that in some
mortgages especially on newly constructed buildings you can walk away
from it and not have to pay anything.
That is the reason why we have to look at the mortgage documents and
see what they say.
Sam Sloan
|
| | | |
Date: 02 Jan 2009 18:54:24
From: B. Lafferty
Subject: Re: What Is Redman's Real Agenda?
|
samsloan wrote:
> On Jan 2, 1:02 pm, "B. Lafferty" <[email protected]> wrote:
>> samsloan wrote:
>>> On Jan 2, 10:17 am, "B. Lafferty" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>> samsloan wrote:
>>>>> Although I am not exactly on the best of terms with Tim Redman and I
>>>>> am certainly not his spokesman, I am confident that I can answer this
>>>>> question for him.
>>>>> Tim Redman's "Real Agenda" is to do the job entrusted to him by the
>>>>> USCF Delegates who created the LMA Committee and appointed Tim Redman
>>>>> as Chairman of that committee.
>>>>> The job he has been told to do by the delegates is to protect the Life
>>>>> Member Assets form being misappropriated by the Crossville office.
>>>>> Now, Tim Redman has a new job. His close friend Phil LeCornu has died
>>>>> and left a bequest of $350,000 and Tim Redman wants to try to make
>>>>> sure that the USCF Office does not waste this money on operations.
>>>>> Brian, the fact that you have to ask questions like this indicates
>>>>> that you may not be the most suitable candidate for election.
>>>>> Sam Sloan
>>>> I'm glad to learn that you do not speak for Mr. Redman. The most cogent
>>>> question is why Mr. Redman proposes now to pay down the mortgage but did
>>>> not earlier with LMA funds.
>>> The answer to that question is over on the other thread entitled
>>> "Mortgage Proposal from LMA Chair".
>>> However, David Quinn who, rumor has it, is also becoming a candidate,
>>> has an interesting idea.
>>> You may not be aware of this but Mr. Quinn has a PhD degree in
>>> financial analysis and has held heavyweight jobs with financial
>>> institutions such as Morgan Stanley.
>> I'm very much aware of David's expertise and position.
>>
>> If the USCF were not at the brink of being driven under by Trolgar
>> litigation costs (a conscious strategy by them, IMO, evidenced by this
>> proposal from their friend Redman who also proposed "mediation" by
>> Harold Winston), I would agree with you. If the issue is survival and
>> the bequest will make survival real, then that has to come first. The
>> real issue is litigation costs needlessly incurred due to two board
>> members.
>>
>>> Basically, the USCF office building in Crossville is worthless because
>>> the mortgage we must pay off is more than the building is worth. The
>>> remaining mortgage is $410,000 and the building in today's real estate
>>> market in an isolated out-of-the-way place with no other structures
>>> around it is worth only $50,000 or at the most $100,000.
>> Have you had an appraisal done of the Crossville building? If you
>> haven't, you're talking noting more than speculation.
>
> No. No appraisal has been done on the building. During my year on the
> board plus before and after my time on the board I have been demanding
> that an appraisal be done on the building.
>
> The answer always given by the Goichberg controlled board has been
> that appraisals cost money and since we are not going to sell the
> building why appraise it.
>
> Obviously, I do not agree with this but that is what they said. They
> did not disagree when, during the meeting in Stillwater, I said that
> the building was not worth more than $50,000. In fact, Joel Channing,
> who makes his living as a builder and a contractor, seemed to agree
> with me.
>
> It is true that both Winston and Redman have been asking the board to
> settle their differences with the Polgar or Trollgar Group. Of course,
> I disagree but you should not reject out-of-hand anything that Redman
> writes. He has been USCF President twice, 1981-1984 and 2000-2001, so
> he must know something about it, plus he is now Chairman of the LMA
> Committee.
>
>>
>>> Quinn posted on the USCF Issues Forum that upon examining the mortgage
>>> documents, depending on what type of mortgage it is, we might be able
>>> just to walk away from the building and not owe anything nor be
>>> indebted to the mortgage provider.
>> If you walk away, meaning don't pay the mortgage, the mortgagor will
>> foreclose and the property will probably be sold at auction. Any
>> deficiency will be due and owing by the mortgagee. So forgive my
>> French, but what the devil are you thinking? On second thought,
>> consider that a rhetorical question. :-)
>
> That is not a rhetorical question. I asked the same question.
>
> He wrote on the USCF Issues Forum and you can look it up that in some
> mortgages especially on newly constructed buildings you can walk away
> from it and not have to pay anything.
>
> That is the reason why we have to look at the mortgage documents and
> see what they say.
>
> Sam Sloan
You do indeed have to look at the mortgage document. It is what it is
what it is.
|
| | |
Date: 02 Jan 2009 08:14:58
From: samsloan
Subject: Re: What Is Redman's Real Agenda?
|
On Jan 2, 10:17=A0am, "B. Lafferty" <[email protected] > wrote:
> samsloan wrote:
> > Although I am not exactly on the best of terms with Tim Redman and I
> > am certainly not his spokesman, I am confident that I can answer this
> > question for him.
>
> > Tim Redman's "Real Agenda" is to do the job entrusted to him by the
> > USCF Delegates who created the LMA Committee and appointed Tim Redman
> > as Chairman of that committee.
>
> > The job he has been told to do by the delegates is to protect the Life
> > Member Assets form being misappropriated by the Crossville office.
>
> > Now, Tim Redman has a new job. His close friend Phil LeCornu has died
> > and left a bequest of $350,000 and Tim Redman wants to try to make
> > sure that the USCF Office does not waste this money on operations.
>
> > Brian, the fact that you have to ask questions like this indicates
> > that you may not be the most suitable candidate for election.
>
> > Sam Sloan
>
> I'm glad to learn that you do not speak for Mr. Redman. The most cogent
> question is why Mr. Redman proposes now to pay down the mortgage but did
> not earlier with LMA funds.
The answer to that question is over on the other thread entitled
"Mortgage Proposal from LMA Chair".
However, David Quinn who, rumor has it, is also becoming a candidate,
has an interesting idea.
You may not be aware of this but Mr. Quinn has a PhD degree in
financial analysis and has held heavyweight jobs with financial
institutions such as Morgan Stanley.
Basically, the USCF office building in Crossville is worthless because
the mortgage we must pay off is more than the building is worth. The
remaining mortgage is $410,000 and the building in today's real estate
market in an isolated out-of-the-way place with no other structures
around it is worth only $50,000 or at the most $100,000.
Quinn posted on the USCF Issues Forum that upon examining the mortgage
documents, depending on what type of mortgage it is, we might be able
just to walk away from the building and not owe anything nor be
indebted to the mortgage provider.
So, before we do anything more on this issue, we need to get a hold of
the mortgage documents and see what they say.
Sam Sloan
|
| | | |
Date: 02 Jan 2009 18:02:06
From: B. Lafferty
Subject: Re: What Is Redman's Real Agenda?
|
samsloan wrote:
> On Jan 2, 10:17 am, "B. Lafferty" <[email protected]> wrote:
>> samsloan wrote:
>>> Although I am not exactly on the best of terms with Tim Redman and I
>>> am certainly not his spokesman, I am confident that I can answer this
>>> question for him.
>>> Tim Redman's "Real Agenda" is to do the job entrusted to him by the
>>> USCF Delegates who created the LMA Committee and appointed Tim Redman
>>> as Chairman of that committee.
>>> The job he has been told to do by the delegates is to protect the Life
>>> Member Assets form being misappropriated by the Crossville office.
>>> Now, Tim Redman has a new job. His close friend Phil LeCornu has died
>>> and left a bequest of $350,000 and Tim Redman wants to try to make
>>> sure that the USCF Office does not waste this money on operations.
>>> Brian, the fact that you have to ask questions like this indicates
>>> that you may not be the most suitable candidate for election.
>>> Sam Sloan
>> I'm glad to learn that you do not speak for Mr. Redman. The most cogent
>> question is why Mr. Redman proposes now to pay down the mortgage but did
>> not earlier with LMA funds.
>
> The answer to that question is over on the other thread entitled
> "Mortgage Proposal from LMA Chair".
>
> However, David Quinn who, rumor has it, is also becoming a candidate,
> has an interesting idea.
>
> You may not be aware of this but Mr. Quinn has a PhD degree in
> financial analysis and has held heavyweight jobs with financial
> institutions such as Morgan Stanley.
I'm very much aware of David's expertise and position.
If the USCF were not at the brink of being driven under by Trolgar
litigation costs (a conscious strategy by them, IMO, evidenced by this
proposal from their friend Redman who also proposed "mediation" by
Harold Winston), I would agree with you. If the issue is survival and
the bequest will make survival real, then that has to come first. The
real issue is litigation costs needlessly incurred due to two board
members.
>
> Basically, the USCF office building in Crossville is worthless because
> the mortgage we must pay off is more than the building is worth. The
> remaining mortgage is $410,000 and the building in today's real estate
> market in an isolated out-of-the-way place with no other structures
> around it is worth only $50,000 or at the most $100,000.
Have you had an appraisal done of the Crossville building? If you
haven't, you're talking noting more than speculation.
>
> Quinn posted on the USCF Issues Forum that upon examining the mortgage
> documents, depending on what type of mortgage it is, we might be able
> just to walk away from the building and not owe anything nor be
> indebted to the mortgage provider.
If you walk away, meaning don't pay the mortgage, the mortgagor will
foreclose and the property will probably be sold at auction. Any
deficiency will be due and owing by the mortgagee. So forgive my
French, but what the devil are you thinking? On second thought,
consider that a rhetorical question. :-)
>
> So, before we do anything more on this issue, we need to get a hold of
> the mortgage documents and see what they say.
>
> Sam Sloan
|
| | | |
Date: 02 Jan 2009 08:31:01
From: Mike Murray
Subject: Re: What Is Redman's Real Agenda?
|
On Fri, 2 Jan 2009 08:14:58 -0800 (PST), samsloan
<[email protected] > wrote:
>Basically, the USCF office building in Crossville is worthless because
>the mortgage we must pay off is more than the building is worth. The
>remaining mortgage is $410,000 and the building in today's real estate
>market in an isolated out-of-the-way place with no other structures
>around it is worth only $50,000 or at the most $100,000.
>Quinn posted on the USCF Issues Forum that upon examining the mortgage
>documents, depending on what type of mortgage it is, we might be able
>just to walk away from the building and not owe anything nor be
>indebted to the mortgage provider.
Something I never understood is why, when small and mid-size cities
all over the country had vacant or under-utilized commercial real
estate available, we demanded a NEW building. From what I've read,
the Crossville building has no architectural features unique to our
requirements -- in fact, we probably have no unique architectural
requirements. But we still paid an architect when stock plans might
have made sense.
Buying an older but sound building somewhere in the rust belt or even
snagging a long-term lease at bargain rates didn't seem to be fully
explored. As I remember, the main "competition" was a huge white
elephant structure, which seemed somewhat a straw horse (excuse the
mixed metaphors) to me.
It was like the decision was made, and from then on, discussion was
held to be invalid because it was "water under the bridge".
I hope my memory is faulty about this period in USCF planning.
|
| | |
Date: 02 Jan 2009 15:17:30
From: B. Lafferty
Subject: Re: What Is Redman's Real Agenda?
|
samsloan wrote:
> Although I am not exactly on the best of terms with Tim Redman and I
> am certainly not his spokesman, I am confident that I can answer this
> question for him.
>
> Tim Redman's "Real Agenda" is to do the job entrusted to him by the
> USCF Delegates who created the LMA Committee and appointed Tim Redman
> as Chairman of that committee.
>
> The job he has been told to do by the delegates is to protect the Life
> Member Assets form being misappropriated by the Crossville office.
>
> Now, Tim Redman has a new job. His close friend Phil LeCornu has died
> and left a bequest of $350,000 and Tim Redman wants to try to make
> sure that the USCF Office does not waste this money on operations.
>
> Brian, the fact that you have to ask questions like this indicates
> that you may not be the most suitable candidate for election.
>
> Sam Sloan
I'm glad to learn that you do not speak for Mr. Redman. The most cogent
question is why Mr. Redman proposes now to pay down the mortgage but did
not earlier with LMA funds.
|
|
