Why Was Comair Not Sold?

[surplus1]

This is true for the most part, but the MEC was directly responsible for how the negotiations went and how they could have ended. They had multiple opportunities in the closing days to finish the deal but they boycotted the final bargaining session. At that bargaining session the checkbook was wide open for Seibs to personally close the deal. They only showed after Maggie (the arbitrator) dragged them into the room, then they left and never returned so the arbitrator ended the session early.

Are you a CMR pilot, or were you at the time? On the MEC or the negotiating committe? I have to ask as you portray yourself as quite the authority on these matters.

Perhaps you were a member of senior management?

What you stated above is 100% true. What they got after 89 days could have been had prior to the strike.

And just how do you know that?

And it wasn't a forced sale. The company was prepared to split off from Delta until they made an offer the board couldn't refuse. The company had huge cash reserves set aside specifically to walk if "mother" didn't want to play nice. None of the board expected what Delta offered and the deal went down in a matter of 2 days.

Again I have to ask: Just how do you know that to be a fact? Were you there and at a level that would know such things?

In the end, "mother" had enough and was prepared to just shut it down, that's when the ratification happened. The company was never the same after. I believe you are right, if the sale to Delta hadn't happened, the strike most likely would have never happened. All I know is that the culture we enjoyed prior to the sale and subsequent strike never happened again and as I've said before.. it stopped being "fun".

You say that "the culture" enjoyed before the sale and strike never happened again. So what destroyed the culture, was it the strike or was it the purchase by Delta?

You've made some very strong and pointed statements and I'm just curious as to whether you're speculating or if you're truly "in the know". Sometimes you refer to CMR as "they" and other times you say "we"; I'm confused.

 

[fugghedabowdit]

The one after him, Fred ?, said if we'd take paycuts we'd get the plane that Fred paraded around...we didn't.

We actually bought Fred's razzle-dazzle if I remember correctly...Randy's not so much.

 

[Bugsmasher Plus]

are you a cmr pilot, or were you at the time? On the mec or the negotiating committe? I have to ask as you portray yourself as quite the authority on these matters.

Perhaps you were a member of senior management?

And just how do you know that?

Again i have to ask: Just how do you know that to be a fact? Were you there and at a level that would know such things?

i was management and a direct report to one of those in the room. What came back to me was unfiltered and i know it to be fact.

you say that "the culture" enjoyed before the sale and strike never happened again. So what destroyed the culture, was it the strike or was it the purchase by delta?

everybody has an opinion on this and they are entitled to it. For me personally it was primarily the strike. After the sale to dal, comair still had the "family" feel to it. That was gone post strike and it just wasn't fun anymore. The "family" closeness was gone.

you've made some very strong and pointed statements and i'm just curious as to whether you're speculating or if you're truly "in the know".

the term "in the know" would place me in the room.. I wasn't in the room, but was in that part of the food chain where i had a reason and need to be informed by what was happening in the room.

sometimes you refer to cmr as "they" and other times you say "we"; i'm confused.

i'm sorry, never meant to confuse anybody. My years at comair were the best i've enjoyed in aviation, and it's tough for me to see what's happened there without a twinge of nostalgia.

...............

..................

 

[surplus1]

i was management and a direct report to one of those in the room. What came back to me was unfiltered and i know it to be fact.

That's interesting. I suspected you were in management because of what you wrote and how you wrote it. I guess I lucked out.

As you correctly point out we all have our "opinions" and you're certainly entitled to yours. Likewise, I am entitled to mine and we do not always agree. I will tell you specifically where I disagree below.

Notice I asked if you were in senior management. By that I mean - at the Vice Presidential level or higher. If that was the case you know a lot. If it was not the case, then you only know the "spin" that you got from your bosses. Sometimes that would be accurate and other times it would be no more than what they wanted you to believe. That is quite different from what you call "the facts".

I was not a member of Company management so I would NOT know what you were told or by whom. You acknowledge that you were not “at the table” but even if you were that would not give you 100% of the story. Why? Because senior management often knows things that never come across “at the table”, unless that is what they want at that moment. In all major negotiations the big deals are often not cut “at the table”. Those deals are made behind the scenes and thereafter finalized by the actual negotiators/lawyers. That is true on both sides of the equation.

There’s another side to the stories that come out of negotiations and that is the Union’s side. It is also subject to a certain level of “spin”, which is normal in these proceedings.

Unless one has direct and frequent contact with the highest management levels on both sides of the spectrum one does not have all of the facts. Very few people actually know everything about what went down and what didn’t. However, lots of people think they know – based on what they were told.

For example you said:

This is true for the most part, but the MEC was directly responsible for how the negotiations went and how they could have ended.

On its face that simply is not true. The MEC and the Company are jointly responsible for how the negotiations went and how they could have ended. It’s a two-way street. It takes at least two people to disagree my friend, not just one.

Then you said:

They had multiple opportunities in the closing days to finish the deal but they boycotted the final bargaining session. At that bargaining session the checkbook was wide open for Seibs to personally close the deal. They only showed after Maggie (the arbitrator) dragged them into the room, then they left and never returned so the arbitrator ended the session early.

Sorry but that is mostly Company spin. The Company had equally multiple opportunities to close the deal and chose not to. Don’t blame the Union for what is a joint responsibility. I’ll just say that if that is what was “reported” to you, you did not get a complete and factual report. By the way, its mediator not arbitrator.

I know that mediators are supposed to be impartial but humans are never what they’re supposed to be 100% of the time. A Mediator has only one true objective and that is to get an agreement. What’s in that agreement is not important to them. They often take sides if they think it will achieve the desired goal, i.e., to get an agreement.
It is therefore not always prudent to hang your hat on what they might say. They “spin” just as much as the next guy, maybe more.

Negotiations are always difficult and especially in the end game. Some facts you might want to consider are these:

Delta’s acquisition of the Company took place before the end game began. That fact changed the entire tone of the negotiations process and substantially delayed the outcome as well as the final results. It became immediately obvious to the Union side (at the table) that the Company’s chief negotiator (at the table) no longer had the power to make decisions without first consulting Atlanta. Whether or not Atlanta actually knew what it wanted or didn’t was anybody’s guess. Sometimes it took them days to make the most simple decision.

Then the Company’s chief negotiator went away and was replaced by a person who, from the union’s perspective, was not only incompatible and intransigent but more interested in making a name for himself than in reaching an agreement. I believe, just my opinion, that this change in the Company’s principal at the table had a major negative impact on the process. The process changed from a strong dispute to a virtual war and it was not the union’s negotiators that caused that.

At about the same time on the Union’s side the MEC Chairman retired and was replaced by a new MEC Chairman. My personal opinion is that the change in MEC leadership had very little, if any, negative impact on the outcome one way or the other. Others may have a different opinion. One thing it didn’t do was change the union’s positions on the issues.

However in fairness I will say that it is also my personal opinion that the top leadership in the National Union (D.C.) did have a decidedly negative impact on the negotiations as a whole. The MEC was basically fighting a war on two fronts. Publicly all was well in the Union but privately it was a horse of a very different color. Some of that was no secret. I know why those difficulties occurred but that’s a different subject for perhaps another time.

I have no idea how the management felt about the change in the Union’s MECC, but I do know how the union felt about the changes made in management (CMR to Delta) and the Company’s chief negotiator, as well as the resulting changes in the company’s positions and strategies. It was a whole new ball game..

Both of those events had a major effect on what happened subsequently, whether we like it or not. Some might think that effect was positive while others might think it was not. Or the opinions could be split. I suppose that depends on whose side you were on. You’ll have to make your own decision on that.

Some (perhaps you?) have the opinion that the MEC wanted a strike and caused the strike. That’s not my opinion. Once the company decided that it didn’t care or even wanted a strike, there was nothing the negotiators or the MEC could have done to avoid it - short of just caving completely. That wasn’t going to happen.

I think I know that the MEC, while fully prepared to strike, did not want a strike. I have the opinion that Comair’s management also did not want a strike. But, Comair’s management wasn’t running the show any more. I believe that a strike would no have occurred if Delta Airlines had not taken control of the company and the process..

I believe that Delta management intentionally took the position of “who do they think they are? We’ll show them how things are going to be in the future. Now that we’re in charge they’ll back down in a heartbeat. Those pipsqueaks wouldn’t dare strike Delta.”

I don’t blame them completely for that. Remember, Delta management had never dealt with anyone at the bargaining table other than the Delta MEC. The Delta pilots have never struck their airline. They always cut a deal at the end, even if it’s not exactly in their favor. That being the case it was difficult for DAL management to believe that a bunch of “commuter pilots” would dare to strike almighty Delta. Not when thousands of Delta pilots had never had the cojones to do it. They were confident that ultimately CMR pilots would roll over.

In other words I’m saying that Delta management made a conscious decision to force the strike. They assumed that Comair pilots would either back down right before or shortly after and it would be all over in a couple of weeks at most and they would emerge as the clear winners. As it turned out they were wrong.

Out of a situation that might have cost them $50 millions over 5 years, they managed to create a debacle that cost them $700 millions in 90 days and nearly cost them a $2 billion dollar investment. They’ve hated Comair pilots ever since and still do. But, it was their fault.

 

[surplus1]

Continued

About the culture you said:

everybody has an opinion on this and they are entitled to it. For me personally it was primarily the strike. After the sale to dal, comair still had the "family" feel to it. That was gone post strike and it just wasn't fun anymore. The "family" closeness was gone.

Yes, we are each entitled to our opinions; I’m sure you know the saying – everybody has one. Well, I have one too.

Comair did have a culture of its own and that culture was especially strong within the pilot group. Yes, it was a “family” and while we had differences within as all families do, I think that very few people who were really a part of “the family” would ever have done anything to destroy it. Perhaps in the lower echelons but not at the very top of the food chain(s) on either side. That is why I believe that an agreement between management and the pilots could have been reached without a strike – IF the company had not changed hands.

My opinion is different from yours in the sense that I do not think the strike had a negative impact on the culture, at least not in the pilot group. I can’t really speak about the other groups and won’t try.

I think Comair died on the day it became a fact that Delta had acquired the company. Delta was never a part of “the family” and cared nothing about it. To them it was just business as usual and seen mostly as a threat not a friend. To us Comair was our Company and “they” were not family. They weren’t even in-laws.

There was no celebration once we knew that Delta would acquire Comair. Instead of a celebration there was a wake. Comair died on that day and the true family knew it. What they’re fighting over now is just the carcass of what once was a living thing.

I’m not trying to say that the strike had zero effect for it definitely did make a difference. For the pilots that difference came about for two reasons: 1) A lot of people left during and in the aftermath. 2) When it got going again a whole lot of new pilots came to the airline. In that respect the MEC dropped the ball. It did not make any real effort to assimilate the new people into our family and make them welcome. In a lot of cases much was done to alienate them because they “weren’t there” during the struggle. The failure to deal with the new folks in the right way and make them “one of us” has done much to divide the pilot group and seriously damaged its culture.

You said: earlier

What they got after 89 days could have been had prior to the strike.

I believe that is true but only if it is qualified. True if Delta had not acquired the company. Not true once Delta did.

And it wasn't a forced sale. The company was prepared to split off from Delta until they made an offer the board couldn't refuse. The company had huge cash reserves set aside specifically to walk if "mother" didn't want to play nice. None of the board expected what Delta offered and the deal went down in a matter of 2 days.

With that I disagree completely. It was a forced sale. First of all Comair was not prepared to split off from Delta. Yes, they had some cash in the bank but not nearly enough to do that overnight. Secondly they didn’t want to; it was a very lucrative business. Comair’s top management trusted Delta’s management – as it turned out a huge mistake which they didn’t realize until they had already been shafted.

Also, do not overlook the fact that Delta already owned 20% or Comair’s stock – before the proffer. In fact it is not true that none of the Board expected what Delta offered. Why would the Board fall over at an offer of roughly $23 dollars when CMR stock was selling at over $30 - $34? It was a low ball offer and Delta’s offer was initially rejected. Delta then acted in a way that CMR’s CEO did not anticipate. They signed deals with 2 new “partners” and those deals had exactly the effect that they planned. They created fear in the market and CMR’s stock crashed to around $17 about a 40% decline in short order. That put the handwriting on the wall. If the Board didn’t sell for $23 +, within a very short time they’d be selling for $5. That would have cost the Mueller(s), Siebs and a few others literally tens of millions personally and there would have been nothing they could do to prevent Delta from buying control. Better to take something than to lose everything.

There are some battles you just can’t win and one of them is a determined effort by a large corporation to devour a relatively small corporation with or without its consent. They sold because they really had no choice and I wouldn’t call that anything but what it was: an unfriendly takeover. They didn’t do in on the open market but they did it just the same.

i'm sorry, never meant to confuse anybody. My years at comair were the best i've enjoyed in aviation, and it's tough for me to see what's happened there without a twinge of nostalgia.

Well, I couldn’t say that my years at Comair were the best I’ve enjoyed in aviation but they were certainly among the best. Some of the best people I’ve ever known I met and worked with there and despite our problems it was a lot of “fun”; we were building something together. Delta put an end to that.

Although the Delta takeover did cost me a ton of money directly by reducing the value of my stock, it did not cause my retirement. That would have happened anyway. As for nostalgia – I have a lot more than a twinge. Comair was “The Best Little Airline in America” at one time and had the potential to be much more. I wish it had been so but Delta destroyed that wish. They did not have to do that because they bought it … in my opinion they made a conscious and deliberate choice to do that.

Meanwhile, reality is that Delta Airlines has chosen to systematically destroy Comair – pretty much from day one of their reign. Well, they own it … so that’s the way the cookie crumbles.

I just wish the best for all Comair people and yep, I do miss “the family”.

 

[bvt1151]

We actually bought Fred's razzle-dazzle if I remember correctly...Randy's not so much.

Even though that LOA was ratified it was never put into effect. It was linked to the flight attendants' vote, which never passed and went to 1113C.

 

[tiffanytaylor]

Comair was not sold because Delta is going to release an announcement about merging Comair with mainline.[/QUOTE

I wish that was true.

 

[Bugsmasher Plus]

That's interesting. I suspected you were in management because of what you wrote and how you wrote it. I guess I lucked out.

As you correctly point out we all have our "opinions" and you're certainly entitled to yours. Likewise, I am entitled to mine and we do not always agree. I will tell you specifically where I disagree below.

Notice I asked if you were in senior management. By that I mean - at the Vice Presidential level or higher. If that was the case you know a lot. If it was not the case, then you only know the "spin" that you got from your bosses. Sometimes that would be accurate and other times it would be no more than what they wanted you to believe. That is quite different from what you call "the facts".

I was not a member of Company management so I would NOT know what you were told or by whom. You acknowledge that you were not “at the table” but even if you were that would not give you 100% of the story. Why? Because senior management often knows things that never come across “at the table”, unless that is what they want at that moment. In all major negotiations the big deals are often not cut “at the table”. Those deals are made behind the scenes and thereafter finalized by the actual negotiators/lawyers. That is true on both sides of the equation.

There’s another side to the stories that come out of negotiations and that is the Union’s side. It is also subject to a certain level of “spin”, which is normal in these proceedings.

Unless one has direct and frequent contact with the highest management levels on both sides of the spectrum one does not have all of the facts. Very few people actually know everything about what went down and what didn’t. However, lots of people think they know – based on what they were told.

For example you said:



On its face that simply is not true. The MEC and the Company are jointly responsible for how the negotiations went and how they could have ended. It’s a two-way street. It takes at least two people to disagree my friend, not just one.

Then you said:



Sorry but that is mostly Company spin. The Company had equally multiple opportunities to close the deal and chose not to. Don’t blame the Union for what is a joint responsibility. I’ll just say that if that is what was “reported” to you, you did not get a complete and factual report. By the way, its mediator not arbitrator.

I know that mediators are supposed to be impartial but humans are never what they’re supposed to be 100% of the time. A Mediator has only one true objective and that is to get an agreement. What’s in that agreement is not important to them. They often take sides if they think it will achieve the desired goal, i.e., to get an agreement.
It is therefore not always prudent to hang your hat on what they might say. They “spin” just as much as the next guy, maybe more.

Negotiations are always difficult and especially in the end game. Some facts you might want to consider are these:

Delta’s acquisition of the Company took place before the end game began. That fact changed the entire tone of the negotiations process and substantially delayed the outcome as well as the final results. It became immediately obvious to the Union side (at the table) that the Company’s chief negotiator (at the table) no longer had the power to make decisions without first consulting Atlanta. Whether or not Atlanta actually knew what it wanted or didn’t was anybody’s guess. Sometimes it took them days to make the most simple decision.

Then the Company’s chief negotiator went away and was replaced by a person who, from the union’s perspective, was not only incompatible and intransigent but more interested in making a name for himself than in reaching an agreement. I believe, just my opinion, that this change in the Company’s principal at the table had a major negative impact on the process. The process changed from a strong dispute to a virtual war and it was not the union’s negotiators that caused that.

At about the same time on the Union’s side the MEC Chairman retired and was replaced by a new MEC Chairman. My personal opinion is that the change in MEC leadership had very little, if any, negative impact on the outcome one way or the other. Others may have a different opinion. One thing it didn’t do was change the union’s positions on the issues.

However in fairness I will say that it is also my personal opinion that the top leadership in the National Union (D.C.) did have a decidedly negative impact on the negotiations as a whole. The MEC was basically fighting a war on two fronts. Publicly all was well in the Union but privately it was a horse of a very different color. Some of that was no secret. I know why those difficulties occurred but that’s a different subject for perhaps another time.

I have no idea how the management felt about the change in the Union’s MECC, but I do know how the union felt about the changes made in management (CMR to Delta) and the Company’s chief negotiator, as well as the resulting changes in the company’s positions and strategies. It was a whole new ball game..

Both of those events had a major effect on what happened subsequently, whether we like it or not. Some might think that effect was positive while others might think it was not. Or the opinions could be split. I suppose that depends on whose side you were on. You’ll have to make your own decision on that.

Some (perhaps you?) have the opinion that the MEC wanted a strike and caused the strike. That’s not my opinion. Once the company decided that it didn’t care or even wanted a strike, there was nothing the negotiators or the MEC could have done to avoid it - short of just caving completely. That wasn’t going to happen.

I think I know that the MEC, while fully prepared to strike, did not want a strike. I have the opinion that Comair’s management also did not want a strike. But, Comair’s management wasn’t running the show any more. I believe that a strike would no have occurred if Delta Airlines had not taken control of the company and the process..

I believe that Delta management intentionally took the position of “who do they think they are? We’ll show them how things are going to be in the future. Now that we’re in charge they’ll back down in a heartbeat. Those pipsqueaks wouldn’t dare strike Delta.”

I don’t blame them completely for that. Remember, Delta management had never dealt with anyone at the bargaining table other than the Delta MEC. The Delta pilots have never struck their airline. They always cut a deal at the end, even if it’s not exactly in their favor. That being the case it was difficult for DAL management to believe that a bunch of “commuter pilots” would dare to strike almighty Delta. Not when thousands of Delta pilots had never had the cojones to do it. They were confident that ultimately CMR pilots would roll over.

In other words I’m saying that Delta management made a conscious decision to force the strike. They assumed that Comair pilots would either back down right before or shortly after and it would be all over in a couple of weeks at most and they would emerge as the clear winners. As it turned out they were wrong.

Out of a situation that might have cost them $50 millions over 5 years, they managed to create a debacle that cost them $700 millions in 90 days and nearly cost them a $2 billion dollar investment. They’ve hated Comair pilots ever since and still do. But, it was their fault.

As much as I would love to go point for point with you, it really makes no difference anymore. There is nothing I'm going to write that will convince you otherwise. That's OK.

I was one of only a handful of people there on the management side and probably the only one that's ever written anything public about what I personally experienced. I know what I write to be absolute fact, I wasn't one of the bystanders, I was inside the team for years as it unfolded. Not a single conversation I was involved in was spin (as much as you would like to think otherwise).

As difficult as it is for you to accept, what I write really happened and that's the way it went down and it's why the once great company is going to fade away. Please don't try to convince me that I'm wrong when you weren't there with us.

 

[Bugsmasher Plus]

About the culture you said:



Yes, we are each entitled to our opinions; I’m sure you know the saying – everybody has one. Well, I have one too.

Comair did have a culture of its own and that culture was especially strong within the pilot group. Yes, it was a “family” and while we had differences within as all families do, I think that very few people who were really a part of “the family” would ever have done anything to destroy it. Perhaps in the lower echelons but not at the very top of the food chain(s) on either side. That is why I believe that an agreement between management and the pilots could have been reached without a strike – IF the company had not changed hands.

My opinion is different from yours in the sense that I do not think the strike had a negative impact on the culture, at least not in the pilot group. I can’t really speak about the other groups and won’t try.

I think Comair died on the day it became a fact that Delta had acquired the company. Delta was never a part of “the family” and cared nothing about it. To them it was just business as usual and seen mostly as a threat not a friend. To us Comair was our Company and “they” were not family. They weren’t even in-laws.

There was no celebration once we knew that Delta would acquire Comair. Instead of a celebration there was a wake. Comair died on that day and the true family knew it. What they’re fighting over now is just the carcass of what once was a living thing.

I’m not trying to say that the strike had zero effect for it definitely did make a difference. For the pilots that difference came about for two reasons: 1) A lot of people left during and in the aftermath. 2) When it got going again a whole lot of new pilots came to the airline. In that respect the MEC dropped the ball. It did not make any real effort to assimilate the new people into our family and make them welcome. In a lot of cases much was done to alienate them because they “weren’t there” during the struggle. The failure to deal with the new folks in the right way and make them “one of us” has done much to divide the pilot group and seriously damaged its culture.

You said: earlier

I believe that is true but only if it is qualified. True if Delta had not acquired the company. Not true once Delta did.



With that I disagree completely. It was a forced sale. First of all Comair was not prepared to split off from Delta. Yes, they had some cash in the bank but not nearly enough to do that overnight. Secondly they didn’t want to; it was a very lucrative business. Comair’s top management trusted Delta’s management – as it turned out a huge mistake which they didn’t realize until they had already been shafted.

Also, do not overlook the fact that Delta already owned 20% or Comair’s stock – before the proffer. In fact it is not true that none of the Board expected what Delta offered. Why would the Board fall over at an offer of roughly $23 dollars when CMR stock was selling at over $30 - $34? It was a low ball offer and Delta’s offer was initially rejected. Delta then acted in a way that CMR’s CEO did not anticipate. They signed deals with 2 new “partners” and those deals had exactly the effect that they planned. They created fear in the market and CMR’s stock crashed to around $17 about a 40% decline in short order. That put the handwriting on the wall. If the Board didn’t sell for $23 +, within a very short time they’d be selling for $5. That would have cost the Mueller(s), Siebs and a few others literally tens of millions personally and there would have been nothing they could do to prevent Delta from buying control. Better to take something than to lose everything.

There are some battles you just can’t win and one of them is a determined effort by a large corporation to devour a relatively small corporation with or without its consent. They sold because they really had no choice and I wouldn’t call that anything but what it was: an unfriendly takeover. They didn’t do in on the open market but they did it just the same.



Well, I couldn’t say that my years at Comair were the best I’ve enjoyed in aviation but they were certainly among the best. Some of the best people I’ve ever known I met and worked with there and despite our problems it was a lot of “fun”; we were building something together. Delta put an end to that.

Although the Delta takeover did cost me a ton of money directly by reducing the value of my stock, it did not cause my retirement. That would have happened anyway. As for nostalgia – I have a lot more than a twinge. Comair was “The Best Little Airline in America” at one time and had the potential to be much more. I wish it had been so but Delta destroyed that wish. They did not have to do that because they bought it … in my opinion they made a conscious and deliberate choice to do that.

Meanwhile, reality is that Delta Airlines has chosen to systematically destroy Comair – pretty much from day one of their reign. Well, they own it … so that’s the way the cookie crumbles.

I just wish the best for all Comair people and yep, I do miss “the family”.

On the sale, you realize that the negotiations were not about selling the company, right? The negotiations were about a renewal of the Delta contract as a connection carrier. Up until that point Comair had a sweetheart deal that was very profitable for the company. The $300 + million in cash reserves were there specifically to support the company if they broke off from Delta. It was F.U. money to Delta. It was anticipated that if they went independent again a high percentage of airplanes would have been parked, the stock price would have tanked and going into the weekend they were completely prepared to do that. You also must remember that the stock had just split, dropping the priced down to the high teens if I remember correctly, so the sales price in the low twenties kept the carrier in tact, make everybody a crapload of money and didn't park any airplanes or lose any jobs. It was not a forced sale, the company wasn't for sale and it was not part of the original negotiations. It was simply an offer they couldn't refuse.

I've been at this aviation thing for a long time now and I've yet to experience the same type of entreprenarial spirit we had there. It was truly a blast during that time. Enough for now.

Oh, and I respect your opinions... I was viewing out the window from within, rather than in the window from outside as most others did. It's a little different perspective. Enough for now.

 

[surplus1]

As much as I would love to go point for point with you, it really makes no difference anymore. There is nothing I'm going to write that will convince you otherwise. That's OK.

You're right, it doesn't make any difference anymore. What's done is done. Also, I'm truly not trying to convince you of anything. We just have a different perspective and I'm OK with that as well.

I was one of only a handful of people there on the management side and probably the only one that's ever written anything public about what I personally experienced. I know what I write to be absolute fact, I wasn't one of the bystanders, I was inside the team for years as it unfolded. Not a single conversation I was involved in was spin (as much as you would like to think otherwise).

As difficult as it is for you to accept, what I write really happened and that's the way it went down and it's why the once great company is going to fade away. Please don't try to convince me that I'm wrong when you weren't there with us.

Well, if you were one of the handful as you say then we know each other quite well. It might be fun to meet again. Sometimes I'd love to be able to write more. However, this is a public forum and not the place to exchange names or air laundry. Some things that are private should so remain. I have no point to make beyond what I've already said that I feel should be made in this venue. Perhaps one day we'll bump into each other again; it's a small world. Then I'll buy you a brew and we can exchange notes over a cold one.

We may see some things differently but I'm not trying to prove you wrong and me right. You say you were there and you know; I accept that. All I can say is, I was there too. Isn't it strange how absolute facts can mean different things to different people? "Beauty is in the eye of the beholder."