The Shark Tank - Page 35 - Business, Finances and Investing Forum

Two Plus Two Forums Other Topics Business, Finance, and Investing

The Shark Tank

Post Reply Subscribe

...

Page 35 of 125

First

15 25 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 45 55 85

Last

Page 35 of 125

First

15 25 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 45 55 85

Last

11-07-2012 , 02:24 AM

#851

TheAsianPlayboy

old hand

Join Date: Oct 2012 Posts: 1,315

Could I go on the show, try and get as much cash as possible. Then just let the company die and then make a new company? lol

Quote

11-07-2012 , 02:45 AM

#852

Oski

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 13,261

Quote:

Originally Posted by LT22

Wat....obv the show doesn't do charity work

The show makes its money off the show.

If there is some type of deal like you are claiming, I would have seen it during the due diligence phase.

Quote

11-07-2012 , 02:46 AM

#853

Oski

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 13,261

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheAsianPlayboy

Could I go on the show, try and get as much cash as possible. Then just let the company die and then make a new company? lol

No. You will have fiduciary duties to your new partners or investors.

Quote

11-07-2012 , 03:04 AM

#854

Oski

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 13,261

Quote:

Originally Posted by ker17

The company I work for invested in a company that will be on the tank later this season who basically said the Shark Tank has the back end right to 5% if your business absolutely blows up, but that they don't really take anything. It sounded and still sounds pretty fishy to me, but Oski is reinforcing that.

The only thing that came from the network is that their representatives make sure you finalize the deal with the Shark Tank investor prior to the airing of you segment. They waited to get word that the deal was finished and then they put the segment on the calendar for airing.

Quote

11-07-2012 , 03:31 AM

#855

PFUNK

banned

Join Date: Jul 2008 Posts: 1,283

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oski

I've never seen the show, but I am the lawyer for Cousin's Maine Lobster. I finalized the deal with Barbara's attorneys. Aside from that transaction, there was no deal between Cousin's and the show, network or any other party. On the other hand, I was not hired until after they taped in August, so I could be wrong (even though I saw nothing indicating such a deal for being on the show).

Mind if I ask what type your law work or position might best be described as?

Quote

11-07-2012 , 03:37 AM

#856

Oski

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 13,261

Quote:

Originally Posted by PFUNK

Mind if I ask what type your law work or position might best be described as?

I am a sole practitioner, so I do at lot of different things, but mostly in litigation. Many of my cases involve business disputes. I also have a few business clients that I service in house - like Cousins.

Quote

11-07-2012 , 09:09 AM

#857

IcyHotMonkey

veteran

Join Date: Mar 2005 Posts: 2,771

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oski

The show makes its money off the show.

If there is some type of deal like you are claiming, I would have seen it during the due diligence phase.

Earlier ITT I quoted the contract to get on the show, clearly gives the Shark Tank the right to exercise 5% equity or 2% sales.

Quote

11-07-2012 , 09:15 AM

#858

LT22

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 12,842

Quote:

Originally Posted by IcyHotMonkey

Earlier ITT I quoted the contract to get on the show, clearly gives the Shark Tank the right to exercise 5% equity or 2% sales.

Correct. It's an option for the Shark Tank Entities for 2 years. I believe it's contingent on a shark actually making a deal.

I suggest you read the application your clients signed to appear on the show.

Quote

11-07-2012 , 10:22 AM

#859

Oski

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 13,261

Quote:

Originally Posted by LT22

I suggest you read my first post on the matter which explains I was hired after they filmed the show and in which I explain that if there was such a deal in place, neither my client nor Barbara mentioned it or presented it to me.

Quote

11-07-2012 , 10:40 AM

#860

Oski

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 13,261

I checked with my client and there is an option as stated in this thread: 2.5% of annual sales or 5% when company is sold.

Quote

11-07-2012 , 11:57 AM

#861

jalexand42

Hypothetical Ubermonkey

Join Date: Oct 2005 Posts: 5,390

From what I've read, they only intend on exercising that option if a company comes on and turns into the next facebook. They aren't exercising for a company that's just doing a few million in sales, which is pretty cool.

Quote

11-07-2012 , 12:22 PM

#862

LT22

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 12,842

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oski

I read your previous post. I wasn't saying you were incompetent. I was saying your clients/Barbara were incompetent b/c they failed to mention it.

Quote

11-07-2012 , 12:25 PM

#863

LT22

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 12,842

Quote:

Originally Posted by jalexand42

To me, that's a dumb way to handle it. "hey we won't stick our hands in the cookie jar unless you get rich."

It should either be they take all the options (dumb) or they take none of the options. From a reasoning standpoint, what reason can they use to justify taking a percentage of a company that strikes it big?

Quote

11-07-2012 , 12:38 PM

#864

-Insert Witty SN-

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 17,921

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oski

barbara irl, please rate 1-10

Quote

11-07-2012 , 12:38 PM

#865

stinkypete

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jul 2004 Posts: 15,783

Quote:

Originally Posted by LT22

From a reasoning standpoint, what reason can they use to justify taking a percentage of a company that strikes it big?

because they can.

and they don`t want a reputation for raping struggling companies.

Quote

11-07-2012 , 03:54 PM

#866

WiltOnTilt

veteran

Join Date: Aug 2004 Posts: 2,893

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oski

I wonder if this is a new procedure for this season, since I'm pretty sure there have been several deals that have been aired that failed in the due diligence?

Quote

11-07-2012 , 04:40 PM

#867

Oski

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 13,261

Quote:

Originally Posted by -Insert Witty SN-

barbara irl, please rate 1-10

Never seen her. I only dealt with her lawyers.

Quote

11-07-2012 , 04:42 PM

#868

Oski

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 13,261

Quote:

Originally Posted by LT22

It's a total freeroll, anyway. I'll bet most of these companies don't go very far. Even those that have a chance paying 2.5% GROSS is hard to fight off.

Quote

11-07-2012 , 04:52 PM

#869

Oski

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 13,261

Quote:

Originally Posted by WiltOnTilt

I wonder if this is a new procedure for this season, since I'm pretty sure there have been several deals that have been aired that failed in the due diligence?

I have no idea; I've never seen the show.

Quote

11-07-2012 , 05:08 PM

#870

jalexand42

Hypothetical Ubermonkey

Join Date: Oct 2005 Posts: 5,390

Quote:

Originally Posted by WiltOnTilt

I wonder if this is a new procedure for this season, since I'm pretty sure there have been several deals that have been aired that failed in the due diligence?

Meh I'm guessing he's wrong. I think Lori posted on Reddit that the 8% deal she did for plate topper fell through because the guy was a huge tool during due diligence after the show.

Well, or he could be correct in that maybe they either want it done one way or another (executed or cancelled) before it airs.

Quote

11-07-2012 , 07:21 PM

#871

Oski

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 13,261

Quote:

Originally Posted by jalexand42

The latter is correct; although they were leaning on us to complete the deal.

Quote

11-07-2012 , 10:09 PM

#872

jalexand42

Hypothetical Ubermonkey

Join Date: Oct 2005 Posts: 5,390

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oski

The latter is correct; although they were leaning on us to complete the deal.

Cool, thanks. Appreciate you posting.

Quote

11-07-2012 , 10:10 PM

#873

IcyHotMonkey

veteran

Join Date: Mar 2005 Posts: 2,771

Quote:

Originally Posted by LT22

From a reasoning standpoint, what reason can they use to justify taking a percentage of a company that strikes it big?

Why wouldn't the Shark Tank take 5% of a small company?

Barely hurts the company. And if the company strikes it rich, the Shark Tank exposure is definitely 'justification'. Its a bit greedy.

Quote

11-07-2012 , 10:22 PM

#874

LT22

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 12,842

Quote:

Originally Posted by IcyHotMonkey

Why wouldn't the Shark Tank take 5% of a small company?

Barely hurts the company. And if the company strikes it rich, the Shark Tank exposure is definitely 'justification'. Its a bit greedy.

I guess I'm not even 100% sure what you're trying to say, but my main point was any time a company says, "We'll look at taking your profits on a case-by-case basis" I'm not a happy camper.

Obv they don't want to be seen as greedy pigs if an entrepreneur is making their living via their small business. However, at what point do they cross that threshold of "OK, you guys got rich we deserve a share, so we're taking our option." They're still being greedy pigs if it's a small time operation or if it's a multi million dollar operation. Never been a big fan of gray areas.

Quote

11-07-2012 , 10:32 PM

#875

nutsfl0pper

old hand

Join Date: May 2012 Posts: 1,298

Your main point is you're not a happy camper that one party sometimes doesn't take their mutually agreed upon share just out if charity? Good thing your opinion is irrelevant i'nnit?

Quote

Page 35 of 125

First

15 25 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 45 55 85

Last

Post Reply Subscribe

...

Page 35 of 125

First

15 25 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 45 55 85

Last