Eagle1993
-
Content Count
2826 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
104
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Articles
Store
Posts posted by Eagle1993
-
-
10 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said:
Very, very interesting item that was in another thread but I think belongs here (as well).
https://www.scouter.com/topic/32604-respondeat-superior/?do=findComment&comment=525220
FWIW, we just got an invite for a council townhall about a number of topics including bankruptcy. May 19 date set, prequestions are allowed.
-
1
-
-
So ... just a quick reset ... I'm sure others can add/modify. Just attempting to see where this case stands.
- BSA has created a 2nd settlement offer that has 2 parts. One with a higher payout that would include LC & COs and settle their lawsuits and and 2nd that would only protect National (with a lower offer).
- BSA negotiated a settlement with Hartford Insurance for $650M. I believe this is only included if the total package passes (as it includes a settlement for all LCs).
- I don't believe I have seen a formal objection from the TCC to the 2nd offer ... but I'm sure it is coming.
- The FCR and Collation of Abused have formally objected to the 2nd offer.
- Multiple other law firms objected.
- TCC is requesting an estimation of damages for all claimants (they est $102B). Multiple insurance companies, the BSA, LDS and Methodist Church have filed objections. I believe the May 19 hearing will discuss this.
- BSA released a schedule/timeline assuming the 2nd settlement offer (either part) is accepted that shows them exiting bankruptcy sometime in August.
- It appears there is some sort of mediation going on this week in New York.
- Court had demanded a mediation in Miami that appears to have solved very little.
- TCC is looking to sue JP Morgan over the Philmont & Summit loans ... but not sure the status of that.
Any other updates? I know I'm missing a lot, but hard to keep track. I thought it would be good to summarize what will happen May 19th and the status of the various issues in court.
-
3
-
38 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said:
I'll be adding as I recollect/find more, but to start.
California: AB 218 of 2019 passed UNANIMOUSLY in the Assembly (69-0) and the Senate (33-0)
Georgia: HB 17 of 2015 passed UNANIMOUSLY in the House (162-0) and the Senate (54-0)
Minnesota: HF 681 of 2013 passed 123-3 in the House and 57-0 in the Senate.
All voted democratic in the last election. When it comes up to vote, its tough to vote against. The difference is that more Republican leaning states are preventing this from coming to vote and more Democratic leaning states are getting these bills to vote. It really doesn't matter ... other than I think the momentum for new states to adapt lookback windows (and thus putting more LCs at risk) will slow as the number remaining states without these lookback windows are in more heavy Republican states.
Also note that Georgia's law only allowed civil cases lookback against the perpetrators ... not institutions. The clear issue in bankruptcy for BSA (and LCs in future) is the civil lookback windows against institutions. I think there is bipartisan support for removal of criminal and civil SOLs against individuals ... there is a lack of bipartisan support for lookback windows against institutions. That is the big $ one that I think many are questioning.
-
19 minutes ago, ThenNow said:
Can you help me understand your “However” qualifier? Personally, I’m not seeking “revenge,” don’t know of many guys that would characterize their involvement in the case as such, and the SoL law in the state of my primary abuse has not undergone substantial change or reform. From my understanding, 50,000+/- victim/survivor claimants are in that last category.
Revenge is probably too tough of a word. I think it is more of .. at a certain point, regardless of how bad the organization was, there should be some time limits in laws for civil charges. I think the prior laws were too tight ... you need to give more time than just a few years after someone turns 18. Going forward, I think there should be a limit that at around 40, you lose the ability to sue institutions in civil court, but can sue criminally indefinitely. I also have no issue suing individuals civil indefinitely (those directly involved in the abuse or coverup).
19 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said:I mean, come on. You can say "We take YPT seriously" and "We have the greatest YPT program ever." but you wait until 2019 to get to 99% compliance? I'm not looking for 100% because there will always be some lag time in reporting/someone missing their YPT renewal date, etc. But, like, high 90s?
I can't argue with this and they should have mandated training. That said, GSUSA doesn't require training. None of the youth sports I volunteered for required training. So its tough to say BSA is an outlier, in fact, the 80% is better than most other organizations I have seen. Hopefully others also take heed.
11 hours ago, CynicalScouter said:So like I said, this is not just nonpartisan, this is just about the most BIpartisan thing you can imagine.
I was looking at state level revival laws. Of the top 10 Republican states (from last election), only 2 had civil revival laws (WV & Ark). Only 2 of the top 10 Democratic states don't have civil revival laws (Maryland & Washington). Maryland's effort failed primarily due to Republicans in 2019... I see a partisan divide, but perhaps that is simply correlation.
-
1
-
-
32 minutes ago, ThenNow said:
Take the $1500 opt out now and buy those 250+ Carmel Mochas? What would you tell your son?
I’ll step into this thicket a bit. I think there is an argument that there should be a statue of limitations for civil cases. Otherwise, what company would be able to exist today that existed in the past. Most Germany companies should probably go bankrupt over their involvement in WWII. Many American companies should go bankrupt over lawsuits from their crimes 50+ years ago. If we go back and look at actions that occurred by every organization with no time limits, I wonder if any organization but recent ones could survive. At some point, society moves on, admits the sins of the past but doesn’t destroy every institution that existed.
I see a frequent question about ... what if it was my son. Of course, I would want the institution shut down. However, that doesn’t mean the law should match my desire of unabated revenge.
I don’t blame anyone seeking compensation, regardless of the time passed. I would do the exact same as those in this thread. At the same time, I think these look back laws were not made to ensure safety today. They appear to be a gift from Democratic politicians to their trial lawyer donors. The biggest impact is that they simply jack up insurance costs to the point only wealthy families will be able to join scouting or many other youth activities.
This is probably coming off more rough than I intend. I really do think BSA senior leaders hid this, especially before 1990. I’ve completely accepted the fact that based on law, BSA needs to pay. I also know there are no winners here... those abused will get some funds but I’m sure they would trade that in to undo the abuse. Scouts today will have less options.... but perhaps that was going to happen anyway.
Im still hoping for a settlement soon.
-
1
-
-
This merger is just the start.
There are 112 Girl Scout Councils in the USA ... and their youth membership is at ~1.8 million. I expect they lost numbers due to Covid, but likely much more than the <800,000 left in the BSA.
16 territories and 7 councils per territory gets you to the 112 number. I wouldn't be surprised if we are headed that way. So we may see 100+ councils disappear in the next 2-5 years.
-
Don't forget that PSZJ Law also has offices in NYC. This may be a sign, hopefully, that they are hashing out details for a settlement.
BSA knows that they cannot exit bankruptcy successfully without TCC approval.
TCC knows that BSA can burn up another hundred million + of cash on legal fees ... which will never go to the claimants. They also likely know National BSA's true financial situation ... more than any of us on this forum. They likely know that insurance companies, LCs and perhaps COs are the bigger targets.
So, perhaps, the BSA and TCC and sit down and work out a deal. BSA wants out. TCC likely has a list of demands. Negotiate a settlement where both side is not 100% happy but can move on.
-
2
-
-
3 minutes ago, gpurlee said:
Some board members considered the project a potential white elephant whose cost could outweigh its usefulness, according to two people familiar with the matter. Rising spending soon became a concern for some.
The more I look at BSA financials and this case, I expect National doesn't have much money.
Summit was a financial disaster. That has been documented in Scouter.com in multiple threads. I really expect if they sold Summit, it wouldn't not pay off the debt assigned to it. Who would spend hundreds of millions of dollars on a large campground in West Virginia? BSA had major payments due in 2020 and 2022 that they haven't made. We all question how they would ever make those payments. I expect JP Morgan adjusted the payment schedule as they know the property would likely only fetch 10s of millions vs the hundreds that is owed. BSA should walk from that property ... it is a white elephant that will continue to suck funds from BSA.
I have scouts that went there, and they had a great time. That said, BSA cannot afford it now or ever so why pretend. I expect we can find solutions for National Jambos going forward. We did for decades before we had Summit.
I think they should turn over Arrow WV to the Settlement Trust and let JP Morgan and the TCC fight it out.
-
3
-
-
24 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said:
Tough to predict. Who knows what the legal fees will be over the next several months. Probably pretty close, but then in Sept they start getting cash from new registrations. I also wonder if they can dip into their endowment. That could carry them through 2022 I expect.
-
21 minutes ago, Eagle1993 said:
Just reviewed monthly filings from BSA on their cash over the last year.
End of Month - Unrestricted Cash
Apr-20 $116,140
May-20 $117,303
Jun-20 $112,281
Jul-20 $101,059
Aug-20 $82,249
Sep-20 $68,863
Oct-20 $67,630
Nov-20 $65,534
Dec-20 $61,690
Jan-21 $52,467
Feb-21 $66,228
Mar-21 $40,724
Apr-21 $49,852
There are a lot of details in the monthly reports. Basically, you can guess the big cash inflows are Sept/Oct (registrations), Jan - March (Charters + High Adventure Bases). There are some big outflow months as well (insurance payments).
June - September is essentially a cash burn for BSA. Last year was a $44M burn. Last year they spent less on bankruptcy lawyers than they are now. Plus not sure how HA base changes will impact burn.
Looks like we will almost be out of Cash by September.... but I think they can limp until the end of the year ... BSA won't last 2022 in bankruptcy.
-
Just reviewed monthly filings from BSA on their cash over the last year.
End of Month - Unrestricted Cash
Apr-20 $116,140
May-20 $117,303
Jun-20 $112,281
Jul-20 $101,059
Aug-20 $82,249
Sep-20 $68,863
Oct-20 $67,630
Nov-20 $65,534
Dec-20 $61,690
Jan-21 $52,467
Feb-21 $66,228
Mar-21 $40,724
Apr-21 $49,852
-
BSA likely doesn’t want to show Summit as it will prove what we all know. It was and is a giant pit where they threw and continue to throw money into and is likely worth less than the debt owed. Give it to the TCC along with the debt assigned to it. BSA would be better off.
-
4
-
-
7 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said:
I was told, point blank, that the 2021 and 2022 increases were merely "discussed" and not "approved" by the National Board.
Of course, several councils posted the truth in 2020: the fee increases are coming in 2021 and 2022.
The 2020 fees are too high. Way too high for Cub Scouts.
-
1 minute ago, Eagle1993 said:
Hello new Lion Scout. Here are your fees..
$25 - New Scout
$25 - current year registration
$75 - Next year registration
$25 - Council fee
$50 - Pack fee
$13 - Shirt
$10 - Lion kit
$223 ... you can make the check out to....
Forgot Scout’s Life. $235
-
1
-
-
Hello new Lion Scout. Here are your fees..
$25 - New Scout
$25 - current year registration
$75 - Next year registration
$25 - Council fee
$50 - Pack fee
$13 - Shirt
$10 - Lion kit
$223 ... you can make the check out to....
-
1 hour ago, mrjohns2 said:
The Girl Scouts did this. Especially half way through the year. That makes a lot of sense for the BSA to do the same, say, just about now. Make it free to join, and hope when recharter rolls around, they pay.
We did the opposite. I have to charge $25 new scout signup fee + registration fees. We dropped our Pack fee for now.
-
1
-
-
14 minutes ago, PACAN said:
Yes. 2021 March KPI report that the summary page numbers were shared with me. March 2020 to March 2021 comparison. I'm guessing the 2021 numbers are post rechartering.
Cubs Scouts BSA V/SS Explorers Total
2021 348738 369716 13832 16787 749073
2020 641939 417360 25399 58311 1143009
Ugly numbers, especially if you look at 2019.
Scouts BSA ... not too bad considering. Long term concern if Cubs don't increase.
Explorer posts ... my guess a bunch shut down as I'm sure PO and Fire Departments would not look at working with youth groups during Covid. It will probably take until 2022 for this to start recovery. No idea what % would return.
Cubs ... very little recruiting in 2020, AOL cross overs and drop outs as Cub Scouting via zoom is ok but not great. To me, units that survived should see a bounce this fall. The bigger concern is loss of units ... it takes a lot of effort to restart a dead Pack.
Venturing/SS ... I think Venturing is dying and I would be surprised if there is a bump in that number. I think our district lost our only Venturing crew. SS I expect will bounce back up if they were part of the drop.
-
5 minutes ago, Eagle1970 said:
While realizing the goal is to maximize recovery, it looks to me that the lion's share of potential is with the insurers. Nowhere have I seen that the BSA has the asset value to offer a reasonable settlement without them. If the BSA has the potential contribution of $1B and the insurers have the potential of $15B, I know where my efforts would be directed.
If the TCC can prove the JP Morgan loans are actually unsecured debt and the HA bases are non restricted assets, that is a several hundred million dollar win. I don't expect TCC or lawyers representing claimants to let these go without a fight. (I watched groups fight for four years over ~$50M). The back & forth is expected ... the bankruptcy court will need to rule, followed by appeals process.
I do think BSA (and JP Morgan) should defend their position. I'm not a lawyer, so I have no idea which side is correct. What I don't understand is how they can try and proceed with a plan without these major decisions decided (at least by the bankruptcy court).
-
1 hour ago, PACAN said:
Ventures/Sea Scouts are fading away on their own regardless of what National does or doesn't do. V/SS have less than 14K and E less than 17K youth.
More disturbing is that the numbers show that there are more Scouts BSA than Cubs.
Mergers might work some but as long as Exec Bds have to approve them, no one is likely to want to merge with a failing (cash poor) council. An ever growing number of councils have less than 1000 youth.
Some parents are hesitant to join as they hear about the bankruptcy and may be waiting it out to see what happens.
I think Venturing may fade away but Sea Scouts will remain fairly stable in or outside BSA. I see almost no value to them staying in BSA. When I talk with our local Ship, the leader spent an hour complaining about the BSA and that it provides nothing. I guess I question why stay in the BSA at that point ... create a stand alone organization without the burden of BSA overhead. On the BSA side, if they are not going to invest or do anything with Sea Scouts ... then why keep them? It is definitely concerning based on the comments above that leaders in BSA don't even know they exist. At that point, it is simply a $50M liability waiting in the wings...
Again, I'm 100% pro Sea Scouts and think its a great program. I hope my son joins when he is old enough. The leaders I talked to are great. I just question if the marriage with BSA is the right fit going forward.
FWIW, this debate is meaningless as BSA is headed in the opposite direction. I didn't realize it, but they expanded into STEM Scout Labs.
-
1
-
-
5 hours ago, yknot said:
Okayyyy... but there is more than dollars at stake here. A lot more. We have a vanishing percentage of Americans involved in scouting. These folks are our friends, members, advocates and ambassadors. I wouldn't cut anyone loose who is in the scouting fold right now. Whatever thousands they are costing it is a drop in the bucket compared to the billions being discussed in this bankruptcy. I feel like we need to focus on the relevant stuff here.
I think the money is not the reason, but spinning off non core programs still makes sense. My personal experience... several years ago my organization had a lot of variety of products with low volumes. Even the low volume products made money, but they distracted our sales and R&D teams from our core products. We ended the non core products, focused our efforts on the core ones and are growing.
I don’t expect this will happen, BSA is more likely to fade under a slow moving bureaucracy than take the aggressive actions needed. They are making good choices to reduce number of layers, I just think more aggressive actions are needed.
- Reduce offerings to core (eliminate Lions, Tigers and only keep Cub Scouts and Scouts BSA)- Further reduce spending at any layer about Council
- Merge councils, reduce leadership spending... focus spend on programs and DEs
- Offer more options for training
- Eliminate units that are poor performing and avoid new units until there is clear capacity and leadership to ramp up
-
1
-
-
11 minutes ago, yknot said:
If it's a tiny portion of the program how is it even relevant in the middle of this massive mess. Spinning off these programs is hardly going to make a dent in any issues the BSA is facing right now.
My bet is there are meetings, discussions, legal and insurance aspects, IT, etc. Heck, they spent time trying to merge with Venturjng and debating age limits... so they are spending time on the program. It causes lack of focus... same with Learning for Life, Explorers and I would argue STEM. Many worthy and great ideas... but we need to get back to basics and have the entire BSA professional and volunteer Corp focused on providing the best 2nd grade through 18 YO scouting program.
Again, I love many of these programs, but BSA is in serious trouble and needs to focus.
-
3 hours ago, mrjohns2 said:
I wish they would just spin off / stop Explorers, Sea Scouts, and Venturers. The carrying cost can’t be zero.
Agreed. I think these programs should continue, just not under BSA. When in crisis, it’s good to relook at the mission and refocus. Merge councils, let the best take over weak ones. Same with units. With focus, you clarify the mission and improve performance of the organization.
-
1 hour ago, MattR said:
I wish there was more focus on quality rather than quantity. The number of quality programs is probably a better indicator of the future then the number of current youth.
When you see quantities drop like this, it is hard to argue we have a lot of quality units.
-
2
-
-
Some Wisconsin numbers (not a big LDS state)...
2018
- 63,283 Youth
- 830 Packs
- 652 Troops
- 128 Crews
- 18,576 Adults
- 9,567 Learning for Life/Explorers
2020
- 33,457 Youth
- 641 Packs
- 658 Troops
- 79 Crews
- 12,560 adults
- 2,178 Learning of Life/Explorers
The loss of Packs is concerning as is the ratio of Packs to Troops.
Venturing is dying. There is no pipeline that feeds the program. I also think that adding girls to Troops likely cut off some of the interest.
I hope the 2020 numbers are post recharter. If these are pre recharter ... UGH! We better have a great recruiting this fall.
-
1
Chapter 11 announced - Part 3 - BSA's Toggle Plan
in Issues & Politics
Posted
There were various threads leading up to bankruptcy. It has been a long road.
If BSA didn't enter in bankruptcy in Feb 2020, they would have spent most of their money on lawyers defending the first round of several hundred lawsuits. After losing a few of those cases, they would have wiped away the rest of their cash/value. Most claimants would have received nothing.
I think BSA did want to create a settlement fund to ensure a broad group of abused could get some compensation (vs only the first few who won lawsuits). I also agree that they wanted this to be behind them as well. They didn't predict Covid nor 84,000 claims ... that pretty much destroyed any plans they had. I don't think they had bad intent. I really do think they though bankruptcy would be the best answer.
In the meantime, most of us operate our units with little impact (at this point) from bankruptcy ... other than possibly the fee increases. If Covid wasn't hitting, I expect they year would have been fairly normal. I do expect the future may get a bit rough for operating BSA units.