I'm not sure where this "I know better" is coming from, since my position is, and has always been, that I DON'T KNOW. You seem to feel you know better, but haven't posted anything to support it as far as I can identify. The part about Mountain Girl delivering cash to Doug Irwin has been on the internet for years. I have yet to see any new information in this thread. Please correct me if I am wrong here.waldo041 wrote:i am not playing stupid mick, and am in no way calling you stupid, and am not trying to take offense to your "i know better".
Wrong again. I THINK Doug may have been treated unfairly, but I don't know. As I have said about three times, I have read everything I could find on the subject, and believe that all that I have read is more or less true. But if you think we are getting the whole story, I think you are mistaken. That is all. The "all for one and one for all" line is just laughable though, and obviously part of a lame attempt to mitigate the reputational damage that sicking their legal team on an ailing Doug Irwin did.but i seriously believe you feel doug was treated unfairly and refuse to hear what really went down,
Dude, I was just expressing my opinion here and discussing our different views of the issue. I sure as hell don't want to change anyone's thought process. And even if I did, I'm pretty sure I would want to change it to something other than mine. The "hypotheticals" were only meant to show that there are important issues relative to the ownership of the guitars that we know nothing about. There is nothing "hypothetical" about the lack of relevant facts here. In fact, I would say that the lack of facts is a fact in this case.and choose hypotheticals or your corporate knowledge as a tool to change my thought process.
Mr. Irwin's lawyers are good ones. You can't auction something effectively when someone else has a ROFR on that item. Doug was right to walk away if that was the offer. What you seem to want to show me, that you think the boys were all good and upstanding toward Mr. Irwin, and what you are showing me, lots of gamesmanship being played by the surviving members of the GD to wrest those guitars out of his hands, are at complete odds with each other from where I sit.The parties were close to an agreement in November, but Mr Irwin pulled out at the last minute over a clause which would give the band first refusal before he sold any of the guitars.
Mr Irwin's lawyers said that could scare off any potential bidders.
Of course Doug was after the cash, he was out of work, unable to work, and broke. He had no other choice but to sell the guitars. If the surviving members of the GD wanted the guitars so bad, they should have bought them from him. That's why I really don't care to hear any whining from them about the guitars being in the hands of private collectors, they had first shot at them and wouldn't pay up for them.Mr Irwin's attorney Douglas Long said the question of the guitars' value has been one of the big stumbling blocks to reaching a deal.
He said: "There is only one way to figure out what something is worth, and that is at public auction. You've got to give the world a chance to buy it."
i believe it was doug after the cash the whole time. and GDP was trying to protect the instruments. GDP would have never sold them at an auction because they felt they were part of them. and they would be displayed as the other are to this day!
Maybe they did, but if they did, it looks to me like they didn't try very hard.they knew what was going to happen to them, and while they didn't say, i am sure this means they "tried" to compensate doug for them!
Mama Mama many worlds I've come since I first left home.