8TSSOP size standard in chaos now?

It's a free country so if I am willing to go to the mat in a friendly sense (meaning not in court) I find it unprofessional if a lawyer would refuse that. Often they ended up taking whole section changes from me verbatim. Usually after they found that I would not budge on that issue. I gave them little bits elsewhere to save face. Such as jurisdiction, as long as it isn't in a state where the legislature is crazy.

Then you can buy the island and the matching biz jet :-)

But one has to dress up :-)

Sometimes that even has to be done when it comes to design wishes. "Bummer! Isn't there some loophole around Kirchhoff's law?".

Sure! It's called a 'capacitor'. ;)

Cheers

Phil Hobbs

I gather that they caved?

Cheers

Phil Hobbs

I suspect it's not that at all-- by dealing direct they would be depriving another member of the brotherhood of of their rightful fee.

Of course it's probably actually justified as being unfair in that the other person has no law education and one can only advocate for one client at a time.

--sp

He may not have to. ;-)

Probably, but it isn't completely outrageous. It's quite friendly to outsiders with a little money, so it wouldn't surprise me.

In a way. They gave us enough cash to pay our lawyers, and a bunch of stock that of course was worthless. I got the rights to use a patent, also worthless.

It was sure an experience, meeting with arrogant VCs and their lawyers. The nanotech fad fizzled before they could take it public, so they sold off the company to an established outfit for what is was worth, which was moderate. All the common shareholders (friends, family, angels, all those suckers) got nothing.

Except when, like in my case, the other party will not play that game. Then the first guy's fees will evaporate as well because they won't be anything to negotiate. The lawyer could have made more money talking to me than by not talking to me. Happened earlier this year. I simply broke it off and told them it's either my liability terms or nothing.

Not necessarily. There is a growing trend in divorce cases to use the same counsel for both parties in an effort to reach a fair deal without an ugly battle.

Was the company in big debt? In bankruptcy common shareholders are last in line. Otherwise, if the company has assets, they belong to the shareholders.

Is that "mediation" or is this something new?

It's sort of mediation but where the person in the middle has bar cert and can legally handle all the official docs right there.

Minus some exorbitant lawyer fees there might not be any assets left.

The process is that VCs contact the founders and express huge enthusiasm and promise floods of cash. The founders then spend themselves into trouble, at which point the VCs stall a while to make things really desperate, and eventually save them but get first in line and own the company. If the company is eventually sold or goes public, the VCs get all the cash and everyone else gets hosed.

I get a call or email about once a week from someone who "has a buyer" for my company. Similar scam.

And salaries. And Loans. And.... And.... And.... Common shareholders rarely get anything. If there were that much in assets the company would be unlikely to be bankrupt.

Well, since Obama, there are no bankruptcy rules.

What are you talking about? If the company goes public *everyone* does well.

Scams are scams, not at all the same as VC.