Bankruptcy, everything but the legalese

[CynicalScouter 1434]

36 minutes ago, Gilwell_1919 said:

Are we talking about the AIS Coalition?

There is no "AIS Coalition".

There is AIS, a grouping of 3 particular lawfirms representing approximately 15,000 claimants OF WHICH some of those 15,000 are members of the Coalition of Abused Scouts for Justice. https://casedocs.omniagentsolutions.com/cmsvol2/pub_47373/47fa66fb-180b-411f-80c4-59e56cd1d63d_5923.pdf

Quote

6. AIS, per se, has not agreed to act on behalf of any entity or person in these Chapter 11 cases. AIS has not entered an appearance in these cases. Rather, the Law Firms act as co-counsel for the claimants who have engaged them.

9. The Law Firms represent 15,103 Abuse Victims. Of that group, 3,054 are also members of the Coalition of Abused Scouts for Justice (the “Coalition”).

There is the Coalition of Abused Scouts for Justice which represents around 60,000-65,000 claimants INCLUDING SOME that are members of AIS.

https://casedocs.omniagentsolutions.com/cmsvol2/pub_47373/853761_1429.pdf

Quote

1. On or around July 18, 2020, certain state court counsel (the “State Court Counsel”)2 formed the Coalition and retained Brown Rudnick LLP and Blank Rome LLP (together, the “Initial Coalition Counsel”) to represent their clients’ collective claims and interests with respect to the Debtors and the Bankruptcy Cases. The State Court Counsel decided to retain separate bankruptcy counsel for their clients under the auspices of the Coalition. It is their clients that comprise the members of the Coalition.

There was a falling out and two of the three AIS firms LEFT the Coalition; the third (Eisenberg) remains.

Quote

Footnote 2 The State Court Counsel who formed the Coalition are: (i) Eisenberg, Rothweiler, Winkler, Eisenberg & Jeck, P.C., (ii) Kosnoff Law PLLC, (iii) AVA Law Group, Inc., (iv) Andrews & Thornton, (v) ASK LLP, and (vi) Slater Slater Schulman LLP (the “Initial State Court Counsel”).

Footnote  3 As noted above, Initial State Court Counsel included (i) Kosnoff Law PLLC, and (ii) AVA Law Group, Inc. These two firms and their principals have resigned from the Coalition. All of their clients remain Coalition Members, whose interests are represented by Eisenberg, Rothweiler, Winkler, Eisenberg & Jeck, P.C. in accordance with the clients’ engagement letters.

If you read what Kosnoff has written, both in his filings with the court and on Twitter, the abbreviated version is he feels a) the Coalition is in it for profit and Wall Street backed loans (?) and b) that the Coalition is ready to sell out any and all claimants to get a) accomplished where as he (alone) is the sole voice speaking honestly for victims. Everyone else are sellouts.

Edited September 1, 2021 by CynicalScouter

[MattR 2659]

44 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said:

Can't have program without money. Money makes the world go 'round.

I didn't say no money, I said it shouldn't be the focus. Every decision seems to be based on increasing membership rather than improving, say, the aims. Why have lions and tigers if kids get burned out before they get to the best part of the program? Seems clear to me it's about membership/money.

I'd like to know what BSA's total value is compared to its yearly budget (including all councils). What other non profits measure assets in billions and spend so little per target member?

[CynicalScouter 1434]

1 minute ago, MattR said:

I'd like to know what BSA's total value is compared to its yearly budget (including all councils).

We don't know annual budgets for all LCs easy (have to pull 200+ IRS 990 Forms), but we can tell all assets of the LCs.

https://casedocs.omniagentsolutions.com/cmsvol2/pub_47373/213bd53f-b44f-45c9-97fc-246bcb7ca06b_4108.pdf

 

 

[CynicalScouter 1434]

 

24 minutes ago, MattR said:

I'd like to know what BSA's total value is compared to its yearly budget (including all councils). What other non profits measure assets in billions and spend so little per target member?

Using the data from the above and current membership numbers. Let's use the BSA's latest annual which had youth at 1,199,425. Let's also use 762,000 which was the number that BSA filed with the court at one point earlier this year.

	Operating Fund Total Net Assets	Capital Fund Total Net Assets	Endowment Fund Total Net Assets	Total Net Assets
	$76,091,174	$1,425,277,988	$1,795,028,509	$3,296,397,671
762,000	$99.86	$1,870.44	$2,355.68	$4,325.98
1,199,425	$63.44	$1,188.30	$1,496.57	$2,748.31

 

[MattR 2659]

7 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said:

We don't know annual budgets for all LCs easy (have to pull 200+ IRS 990 Forms), but we can tell all assets of the LCs.

https://casedocs.omniagentsolutions.com/cmsvol2/pub_47373/213bd53f-b44f-45c9-97fc-246bcb7ca06b_4108.pdf

 

 

I knew you'd have this available. Thanks!

Anyway, $3.3B / 750k scouts is $4400/scout. What other youth organization has anything close to that? What was the plan for all that money? How was it helping achieve the aims of scouting?

I'm sure its spent on something, but my impression is the plan, somewhere along the line, morphed from help units into grow the endowment.

 

[CynicalScouter 1434]

47 minutes ago, MattR said:

I'd like to know what BSA's total value is compared to its yearly budget (including all councils). What other non profits measure assets in billions and spend so little per target member?

One more, and I'm only picking on them because they are big

Circle Ten's budget for 2019 (latest data I've got from the IRS).

https://apps.irs.gov/pub/epostcard/cor/750800615_201912_990_2021040217863611.pdf

And estimated 57,000 scouts https://circleten.org/posts/1430

In 2018, Total Expenses = 15,254,062, or $267 per scout.

In 2019, Total Expenses = 14,154,166 or $248 per scout.

This is consisted with what I've heard in FOS pitches over the years "Scouting costs Council $200 per scout".

Ok, but what about the evil, evil salaries?

In 2018, 6,849,994 (or 45% of budget)

In 2019, 6,910,304 (or 49% of budget)

Quote

The Better Business Bureau's standards recommend that at least 65 percent of the nonprofit's total expenses should be for program expenses, including salaries.

But, how does this compare to other major not for profits? Not the best, not the worst. See attached from

https://onlinegrad.syracuse.edu/blog/big-non-profit-budgets-spending/

 

[CynicalScouter 1434]

11 minutes ago, MattR said:

Anyway, $3.3B / 750k scouts is $4400/scout. What other youth organization has anything close to that? What was the plan for all that money?

BUT a lot of that is locked up in real estate/capital fund.

Only 7% ($246 million) is in the operating fund's assets.

40% ($1.2 billion) is locked up in land.

49% ($1.6 billion) is locked up in endowments.

So, it isn't like BSA is swimming in cash ala Scrooge McDuck.

No one wants to tap into the principle of the endowments. And trying to sell those camps? No way. It took the bankruptcy for some councils to sit down and really decided whether they needed those camps or not.

 

Edited September 1, 2021 by CynicalScouter

[fred8033 1593]

3 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said:

....

Ok, but what about the evil, evil salaries?

In 2018, 6,849,994 (or 45% of budget)

In 2019, 6,910,304 (or 49% of budget)

The Better Business Bureau's standards recommend that at least 65 percent of the nonprofit's total expenses should be for program expenses, including salaries.

So ... "program expenses" ... I'm not sure we're comparing apples to apples.  What is a program expense and what is not?  of the 49% salaries, what is program expense versus overhead.  

It's easier to compare when it's a fundraising corp that hands over the cash to a program arm.  

[Gilwell_1919 42]

10 minutes ago, johnsch322 said:

I couldn't disagree more.  I believe he cares more about survivors than he does in the institution known as the BSA.  He will leave the salvaging of BSA to those who believe it can be salvaged.

Just talking out loud here....

I see it as indiscriminate lack care for collateral damage (i.e., the current scouts). How can we salvage anything with what's left if Total Warfare Tim K. is "salting the earth"? I think 99.9999% of the good folks in this forum agree that BSA needs to do the right thing by compensating the victims from its trail of carnage... and, most of us also agree that BSA is not scouting. However, if it is burned to the ground and people are dancing around the ashes afterwards claiming total victory... how do we think 12-year old Johnny is going to feel when he realizes what has happened? Sure, there may be other organizations that fills the void... but I believe the killing of BSA, if that happens, will hit these kids harder than most people think. Ultimately, my concern is always to protect kids... they are innocent and don't deserve to get caught in the middle of adults fighting. If BSA goes away, how do you break that to a 15-year old Life Scout that was a few merit badges shy of Eagle Scout? "sorry buddy, the BSA did some pretty bad stuff way before you were born and so it had to go away. I know you've dedicated half your life to scouting and to becoming an Eagle Scout... but that's no longer in the cards". Of course, this is all conjecture... but hopefully you get my point. As an adult, with a fully developed pre-frontal cortex, I know BSA is not the same thing as scouting. But to a kid who has "Boy Scouts of America" on his shirt... I think it's gonna be hard helping him cope with an aftermath that doesn't allow him to continue his journey towards Eagle Scout. 

Whatever will happen is anyone's guess at this point... but... Tim K. can win without salting the earth in the process. 

[Gilwell_1919 42]

1 hour ago, CynicalScouter said:

There is no "AIS Coalition".

There is AIS, a grouping of 3 particular lawfirms representing approximately 15,000 claimants OF WHICH some of those 15,000 are members of the Coalition of Abused Scouts for Justice. https://casedocs.omniagentsolutions.com/cmsvol2/pub_47373/47fa66fb-180b-411f-80c4-59e56cd1d63d_5923.pdf

There is the Coalition of Abused Scouts for Justice which represents around 60,000-65,000 claimants INCLUDING SOME that are members of AIS.

https://casedocs.omniagentsolutions.com/cmsvol2/pub_47373/853761_1429.pdf

There was a falling out and two of the three AIS firms LEFT the Coalition; the third (Eisenberg) remains.

If you read what Kosnoff has written, both in his filings with the court and on Twitter, the abbreviated version is he feels a) the Coalition is in it for profit and Wall Street backed loans (?) and b) that the Coalition is ready to sell out any and all claimants to get a) accomplished where as he (alone) is the sole voice speaking honestly for victims. Everyone else are sellouts.

Ok... I see. I'll eat the humble pie publicly. I thought the reference to the coalition was AIS, since it was a "coalition" of law firms. Hat-tip to @CynicalScouter for the clarification. 

[Gilwell_1919 42]

1 hour ago, CynicalScouter said:

Then re-read what he said or re-listen to what he said. He's been remarkably clear about this. He is NOT looking to kill SCOUTING. He's looking to kill BSA.

 

But... what about the current scouts in BSA? What's going to happen to the ones that love it because of local leadership and the friends in their units (and other units in their areas)? If you kill BSA, most of these innocent kids that love the program become collateral damage. I'd rather Tim K. and the others take their pound of flesh... and then let BSA reinvent itself. (crossing finger that they would have the inclination after losing their tails). 

[CynicalScouter 1434]

13 minutes ago, Gilwell_1919 said:

I see it as indiscriminate lack care for collateral damage (i.e., the current scouts).

Again, and I do hate to repeat myself, but I will.

The role and function of an attorney is to maximize the amount/value their client receives as compensation.

It is NOT the role and function of Kosnoff, or Stang, or ANY attorney for ANYONE other than BSA to care one whit about BSA and the "current scouts".

13 minutes ago, Gilwell_1919 said:

how do we think 12-year old Johnny is going to feel when he realizes what has happened?

I'll tell you what an attorney acting ethically would feel: "I feel bad for Johnny. I feel worse for my client who was [insert listing of sexual assault that took place] as part of a BSA program where the BSA, COs, and LCs were negligent. Maybe Johnny should ask BSA leadership why it failed both Johnny AND my client."

13 minutes ago, Gilwell_1919 said:

If BSA goes away, how do you break that to a 15-year old Life Scout that was a few merit badges shy of Eagle Scout? "sorry buddy, the BSA did some pretty bad stuff way before you were born and so it had to go away. I know you've dedicated half your life to scouting and to becoming an Eagle Scout... but that's no longer in the cards".

You do what we told my troop's Star and Life Scouts last spring: Get your Eagles quick and do NOT assume BSA survives past July.

But again, while you are talking to that 15-year old, why not have a conversation with the 51-year-old who, when he was 15, was sexually abused and had it swept under the rug by his local council? Why is he not worthy of your sympathy and concern?

Again, there are two sets of victims here: the sexually abused scouts of days gone by and the current scouts who will miss out on opportunities today. BOTH can blame BSA for operating in a manner that led to this point.

You know who is NOT to blame? The lawyers for the victims of child rape who are meeting their ethical duties to obtain the best possible settlement for their client(s).

You keep wanting to blame everyone BUT BSA.

Edited September 1, 2021 by CynicalScouter

[CynicalScouter 1434]

5 minutes ago, Gilwell_1919 said:

If you kill BSA, most of these innocent kids that love the program become collateral damage.

Then the entity to blame is BSA for operating its program in such a manner that, through its negligence, allowed THOUSANDS of children to be raped.

Trying to burden shift here to say that the lawyers (who I'll now say for the 5th time because it clearly isn't getting through to you) are ethically obligated to focus on THEIR CLIENTS should instead not do their jobs is nonsensical.

Edited September 1, 2021 by CynicalScouter

[johnsch322 524]

29 minutes ago, Gilwell_1919 said:

Just talking out loud here....

I see it as indiscriminate lack care for collateral damage (i.e., the current scouts). How can we salvage anything with what's left if Total Warfare Tim K. is "salting the earth"? I think 99.9999% of the good folks in this forum agree that BSA needs to do the right thing by compensating the victims from its trail of carnage... and, most of us also agree that BSA is not scouting. However, if it is burned to the ground and people are dancing around the ashes afterwards claiming total victory... how do we think 12-year old Johnny is going to feel when he realizes what has happened? Sure, there may be other organizations that fills the void... but I believe the killing of BSA, if that happens, will hit these kids harder than most people think. Ultimately, my concern is always to protect kids... they are innocent and don't deserve to get caught in the middle of adults fighting. If BSA goes away, how do you break that to a 15-year old Life Scout that was a few merit badges shy of Eagle Scout? "sorry buddy, the BSA did some pretty bad stuff way before you were born and so it had to go away. I know you've dedicated half your life to scouting and to becoming an Eagle Scout... but that's no longer in the cards". Of course, this is all conjecture... but hopefully you get my point. As an adult, with a fully developed pre-frontal cortex, I know BSA is not the same thing as scouting. But to a kid who has "Boy Scouts of America" on his shirt... I think it's gonna be hard helping him cope with an aftermath that doesn't allow him to continue his journey towards Eagle Scout. 

Whatever will happen is anyone's guess at this point... but... Tim K. can win without salting the earth in the process. 

That is a lot of hyperbole.  I haven't seen any burning to the ground or salting the earth before the courts.  You may see me dance though if I receive a fair and equitable settlement.  Protecting kids or the lack of protection is why BSA is in the mess that it finds itself in.  If some how BSA went into Chapter 7 you personally believe in the Scouting life and then I think you should say to 12 year old Johnny or the 15 year old life Scout that the dissolution of the BSA is not the end of the world and pales in comparison what happened to 13 year old John. You can always try to resurrect Scouting and it doesn't have to have the name BSA.  I hope you get my point because if BSA does go Chapter 7 (and I personally don't think it will) those boys will need you.

Edited September 1, 2021 by johnsch322

[David CO 1783]

15 minutes ago, Gilwell_1919 said:

how do we think 12-year old Johnny is going to feel when he realizes what has happened?  

He is probably going to feel pretty much the same way that little Tommy felt when BSA acquired Lone Scouts of America.  BSA never gave a single thought to how hundreds of thousands of children felt as it was ruthlessly stomping out its competition in its quest to gain a monopoly on scouting.