Quote:
Originally Posted by Adraco
If someone buys a company and that company being sold can show and offer up that X% of income is ”guaranteed” or contracted revenue - of course the selling price will reflect this. This often means that the selling party will get close to the full value of those included contracts.
For the buying company, which now has paid dearly for those signed contracts - they now need to deliver the contracted services and at the end of the contracts (hopefully) make their money back plus a small interest/profit. They can’t just be ”good guys” and let people cancel their contracts left and right. They have prepaid for your income stream, now it is your turn to deliver cash to them.
Think better before signing contracts.
In other news, nothing but stellar reputation and the highest respect for both Brad @Mojohost and Ryan @Vacares. I have dealt with both and these two fine gentlemen should be your first point of contact whenever you need to discuss a new server or a transfer. Most likely that will be the first, last and only contact you need. Pure Respect to both of them!
|
Adraco you did a great job of briefly explaining the BTS mechanism in place for establishing take over valuations.
Nonetheless I still look at this situation no different that my own previous marriages.
Both parties to that agreement of marriage, as husband and wife, have vowed in the presence of a government official to remain married to the other person "till death us do part".
Imagine trying to force the other person to remain in the unhappy relationship, because that vow was made. Sometimes it is in everyone's interest to simply walk away.
In divorce the typical cost of the separation is often a division of assets and possibly alimony. Twice now, we each walked away gaining our freedom back and not losing any money, because both parties respected each other enough to not try to screw the other.
Regardless if Omar is a good guy or a bad one, the general consensus is likely that he is a bad guy because of the decisions or actions he makes on behalf of his employer TTS. I highly doubt that a thread like this has earned TTS more business. Instead it may have the opposite effect. Those currently having contracts with TTS, are carefully reviewing the contract language right now, and making notes on how and when to exit in case it is needed.
I offered the OP the opportunity to send over his current agreement to me, so that I can help access his options. He/she has chosen not to. Often there is an easy legal remedy to an exit, that even TTS is aware about but for their own benefit, would never disclose.
Omar I am not in your shoes, as I am responsible for my own actions, and do not depend on an employer to put food on the table for my family. If you agree with TTS poor approach to contracts, then stick by them. You deserve each other. In the event that you disagree, you should go up to bat for those clients that you represent, and ask your bosses, is it really worth holding a client hostage in a business relationship, when its clearly not working for them anymore.
Is the negative publicity really worth it?