Russ Boyd $50K HORSE entrant

[Myrtle]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I agree with your response & would add.....businesses are governed by the laws of the state/country within which they were formed.

In this case, we are talking about a system of law in a foreign country, so at best, without specific working knowledge of that system, we're all chasing our tails.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, this is true of course, and why I added the caveat "under U.S. law." I'm assuming this was based in an English Common law country with similar laws to those of the U.S regarding corporations and partnerships, but if not, then all bets are off.

Edit: But even if this is not the case, there are still other causes of action concievably available against Boyd, even if you sued him in the U.S., on theories of fraud, etc. (It would be possible to get American Jurisdiction over this through a long-arm statute).

[/ QUOTE ]

....missed your caveat. Thanks for the clarification.

[frommagio]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Show us the facts Jack. "Russ Boyd Sucks" is not a liability argument.

[/ QUOTE ]
I do apologize that I do not have the time right now to further expand upon the many ways that corporate shareholders or managers can be held liable for the debts of a corporation, however if you would like to learn more, a good starting place would be HERE


[/ QUOTE ]
Thanks for the condescending link. But I'm not asking your distinguished opinion about whether a corporate veil can be pierced due to fraud or other reasons. I'm asking you to support your assertion that "indeed, based on the facts of this case, it sounds like he would be liable, at least under U.S. law". I do apologize for asking you to take the time to back up your statement.

Just asking for facts. I think that if you had them, you would state them.

[ QUOTE ]
Note also that I did not say Dutch Boyd WAS Definitely liable, just that he COULD BE Liable, in response to your assertion that, "Anyone who has taken business 101 knows that he CAN'T be liable." (You made an absolute statement, and your absolute statement was incorrect).


[/ QUOTE ]
I can quote you correctly, why can't you quote me (or whoever you are thnking of) correctly? As far as I can tell, you manufactured this little gem out of thin air: "Anyone who has taken business 101 knows that he CAN'T be liable." Nobody has said that.

If you could argue against my actual position, then you surely would. Instead, you make up strawman crap and tear it down.

My position is simple: I'm interested in what happened here, I've spent several evenings googling around trying to learn everything that I could, and I'd like to know more. But you can't help - you can't deliver any info, and you can't distinguish your feelings from your facts.

[ QUOTE ]
You're right, I would need all the facts of the case, and clearly, I don't have that because everything is word of mouth, thirdhand or fourth-hand. I merely asserted, that there are several different bases upon which Boyd COULD be liable. That assertion is correct.


[/ QUOTE ]
Ahhh, a slight backing off from the indefensible position.
Can an apology be far away?

[ QUOTE ]

Edit: I'm also assuming here that Boyd's company was organized as a corporation, if it wasn't, than its even easier to go after Boyd as being personally liable, especially in light of the fact that appears to have committed fraud.


[/ QUOTE ]
Good assumption, since it appears to be uncontradicted. So now let's talk about "appearing to commit fraud." Hint: that's not the same as screwing up and going bankrupt.

Got any facts? I think we know the answer to that.

[ QUOTE ]
Edit: Also, in the U.S. at least, the only types of companies in which an owner is shielded from personal liability, are corporations, and some specific types of limited liability companies and limited liability partnerships. In all other regular businesses, the owners ARE personally liable for the debts of the business.

[/ QUOTE ]
True, but that really doesn't seem relevant - in view of the pretty much publicly undisputed information that he had a corporation. He's also a lawyer, but there's always the chance he screwed up completely and botched the articles of incorporation. But I wouldn't assume that; did I mention that I tend to prefer facts?

Another quirk of US law that you may be unaware of: running a failed business is not considered to be prima facie evidence of fraud. Neither is having bad business partners. Not all companies fail because they're Enron-style crooks. Sometimes they fail because - surprise - they're just poorly run companies.

Proof by assertion, condescension, faked quotes, strawman arguments - everything but facts. Let's just agree on the following:
- Dutch Boyd not being a model citizen.
- Your admission that facts would be preferable to assertions (oh, if only you had some).

I'd love to be shown that Russ Boyd comingled funds, siphoned off the profits to support his lifestyle, committed acts of fraud - any of the above. It would make it so easy to just condemn the guy completely.

But from where I sit (with no horse in the race), it doesn't really look like that's what happened. More likely a sharp young kid got in way over his head, had nowhere near the necessary tools to run a growing business, had a few things go wrong with partners, screwed up a few decisions while hoping for the best, made all the wrong moves talking to his customers once things were coming unglued, and picked the wrong deal in his last best chance to salvage something. He maybe even convinced himself that he could eventually assume those debts and pay them back, but maybe he's rationalized those thoughts away - who knows. There's no excuse for it; it's just a sad story all around.

And by the way, it was a horrible thing that MS Sunshine and all the others went through. We all feel very badly for those folks, and if I were one of them, I'd be super angry to this day. If I had lost one one hundredth of what Sunshine lost I'd still be hopping mad.

[Aytumious]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Clearly the moderators aren't going to actually respond to our punk-ass concerns since Granny is untouchable. Good thing, too - his posts are so informative!

[/ QUOTE ]


minion

[/ QUOTE ]

Minion of whom exactly? I'm not getting the whole minion thing unless they are subordinates to someone.

[MicroBob]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
wow, some of you guys are batshit crazy.

[/ QUOTE ]

i'd like to thank myself for tuning this thread into a giant [censored] storm

[/ QUOTE ]


sponger, I disagreed with your earlier post to MS-sunshine about this.

But this post is just typical sponger brilliance and I thank you for making me laugh yet again.

Is it too late to get on the Sponger for Mod bandwagon??

[flubsy]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
you are a pathetic minion.

also, i doubt you have ever, or will ever have $56k to your name, much less have it stolen from you.

st00pid railbird.

[/ QUOTE ]

Please die, seriously. I really wish you had a clue. Dutch Boyd is being staked for these tournies, much like the one he won and got very little out of except for a bracelet and some recognition. His bankroll is less than 100k? 100%. Leave poker and poker gossip to those who actually play the game.

[/ QUOTE ]

Exactly why would anyone stake him in a 50k tournament where the majority of the players are professionals with far more experience than him in most of the games played? You'd have to be dumb as a post. Sounds like bs to me. There's no way in the world he has enough edge for a staker to make money and most likely he's a long term loser in that tournament.

[/ QUOTE ]

He was staked...why is this so hard to believe? Why do you criticize the other poster's claim...when you have no *real* information as to the validity of it?

How is he inexperienced? His internet play alone likely rivals most non-internet players with a lifetime of experience.

Oh, and he was staked.

...oh yeah...and...he was staked. Like every pro tournament player out there...he is staked into every WSOP he plays this year.

[flubsy]

[ QUOTE ]
All,

This thread is fairly laughable.

Boyd is staked by Sheets and Bax.

Or so the rumor goes.

[/ QUOTE ]

hmmm...a post that appear to have some concrete information behind it...and noone responds.

curious kids here.

[HSB]

[ QUOTE ]
hey can someone summarize the last three pages of this thread, tia

[/ QUOTE ]

Russ Boyd Sucks

Granny Mae and MSSunshine are trolls

Everyone else is a minion

That's about it I think.

[Ted Metro]

Can we give some Romanian $5 to hack pokerspot and replace the front page with something about Dutch Boyd being a douche bag?

[GrannyMae]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Clearly the moderators aren't going to actually respond to our punk-ass concerns since Granny is untouchable. Good thing, too - his posts are so informative!

[/ QUOTE ]


minion

[/ QUOTE ]

Minion of whom exactly? I'm not getting the whole minion thing unless they are subordinates to someone.

[/ QUOTE ]


rofl

seems like you understand it perfectly.

[PITTM]

the fact that you say "you guys dont see eye to eye" is just such a silly copout i dont even know what to say. granny has ONLY trolled me. if there were significant points to argue that might be nice. but its seriously only trolling. how granny is not banned is so far beyond me. i just assume the moderators either
a) have their heads up their asses.
b) dont care about their forum at all.

i contacted them and they just flat out tell me that they dont care that grannymae is only a troll and has no other value whatsoever. if thats gonna be ignored, fine, but ill probably stay away from the zoo. i dont like when people are just mind bogglingly stupid to the point of thinking that saying the same flame over and over again is "making a point". i thought human beings had evolved to form rational thought, i guess this makes the zoo title appropriate.

rj