| [Web] Amiga Inc. is in danger of insolvency and the Amiga brand again faces uncertainty. | ANN.lu |
|
| List of all comments to this article |
| Amiga Inc. is in danger of insolvency and the Amiga brand again faces uncertainty. : Comment 80 of 120 | ANN.lu |
| Posted by samface on 24-Sep-2003 09:28 GMT | In reply to Comment 63 (T_Bone):
From http://www.dictionary.com:
insolvency
\In*sol"ven*cy\, n.; pl. Insolvencies. (Law) (a) The condition of being insolvent; the state or condition of a person who is insolvent; the condition of one who is unable to pay his debts as they fall due, or in the usual course of trade and business; as, a merchant's insolvency. (b) Insufficiency to discharge all debts of the owner; as, the insolvency of an estate.
insolvency
n : lacking financial resources [ant: solvency]
-----
I'd say the last definition is the most simple and best applied to this case. What I wanted to point out is that this article implies that they would be in a situation where a liquidation of the company would be the only solution. This is simply not a fact and as Bill McEwan tried to explain at his deposition; they expect to be able to resolve this situation. The fact that this part has been left out in the article tells me that it is far from unbiased.
Furthermore, the plaintiffs did not file any complaints at the time of when the defendant asked to reschedule the deposition and both parties agreed to the new date. Why has this part been left out?
Also, Amiga Inc. made it perfectly clear to their employees from the start that the company is an investment company, meaning that they may run out of funds at times. When a company has no funds, it cannot pay anything or anyone. Everyone working for Amiga Inc. where perfectly aware of the risks involved. The court even agreed to Amiga Inc.'s plans to pay once the funds become available. You see, putting Amiga Inc. in a liquidation process will not benefit any of those who Amiga Inc. are in debt to because you cannot find a better guarantee for not getting your money back. Why is there no mention of this?
Since the court decided that Amiga Inc. may pay those debts whenever funds become available, the court obviously thinks that Amiga Inc. are still in a position of resolving the situation, otherwise they wouldn't be allowed to continue. Yet the article states that "the future of the legendary Amiga brand and intellectual property is once again uncertain". I couldn't disagree more. |
|
| List of all comments to this article (continued) |
|
- User Menu
-
- About ANN archives
- The ANN archives is powered by #AmigaZeux. It was updated daily (news last: 22-Oct-2004; comments last: 18-May-2005).
ANN.lu was created, previously owned and maintained by Christian Kemp, www.ckemp.com.
- Contribute
- Not possible at this time!
- Search ANN archives
- Advanced search
- Hosting
- ANN.lu was hosted by Dreamhost. Sign up through this link, mention "ckemp" as referrer and he will get a 10% commission on any account you purchase.
Please show your appreciation for any past, present and future work on ANN.lu by making a contribution via PayPal.
|
