From: anim8rfsk <anim8rfsk@cox.net>
Subject: Re: Weinstein Company sold
Full headers:
Path: news.netfront.net!goblin1!goblin2!goblin.stu.neva.ru!peer03.am4!peer.am4.highwinds-media.com!peer02.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!post02.iad!fx41.iad.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: anim8rfsk <anim8rfsk@cox.net>
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies.current-films,rec.arts.tv
Subject: Re: Weinstein Company sold
References: <p7bkmi$b3c$1@dont-email.me> <anim8rfsk-3D3253.07351102032018@news.easynews.com> <p7bnv2$3lp$1@dont-email.me>
User-Agent: MT-NewsWatcher/3.5.3b3 (Intel Mac OS X)
Message-ID: <anim8rfsk-C960EA.08514002032018@news.easynews.com>
Lines: 69
X-Complaints-To: abuse@easynews.com
Organization: Easynews - www.easynews.com
X-Complaints-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly.
Date: Fri, 02 Mar 2018 08:51:41 -0700
X-Received-Bytes: 3311
X-Received-Body-CRC: 1297951903
Print Article
Forward Article
In article <p7bnv2$3lp$1@dont-email.me>, Obveeus<Obveeus@aol.com> 
wrote:

> On 3/2/2018 9:35 AM, anim8rfsk wrote:
> > In article <p7bkmi$b3c$1@dont-email.me>, Obveeus<Obveeus@aol.com>
> > wrote:
> > 
> >> The Weinstein company has a sale agreement in place for the company.
> >> The new ownership, led by Maria Contreras-Sweet (head of the Small
> >> Business Administration under Obama) will set aside $90Million for
> >> Weinstein's victims,
> > 
> > So, what, about $25 apiece?
> 
> I suspect this $90million set aside will bring more claims out of the 
> woodwork.

Oh, absolutely.

> >   keep the 150 or so employees employed,
> > 
> > Because none of them were complicit
> 
> I think the complicit employees already quit the company and filed 
> lawsuits claiming that they were victims.  I hope there is a way to 
> exclude them from any payouts.  As for complicit board members...yes, 
> they probably all need to be replaced, even if some of them did start 
> protesting in the later years.
> 
> >   and promises
> >> to create a new executive board that is mostly female.
> > 
> > Because that shouldn't send her straight to prison.
> > 
> > Oh, wait, yes, it should.
> 
> I have no idea why they think statements like that aren't proof of 
> sexual discrimination.

I know!  Can you imagine if they'd said "we ain't gonna have no stupid 
broads on the board"

  Maybe the board is filled with unpaid positions 
> so it doesn't count as a job?

LOL.  I'm unclear on what an 'executive board' does anyway.

> >    They also
> >> promise that people acting in bad faith will not be rewarded (hopefully
> >> meaning that board members forced out only after years of enabling
> >> Weinstein will not be rewarded and that personal assistants to Weinstein
> >> who helped lure/trap women won't be able to claim victim-hood themselves).
> > 
> > It's hard to imagine that company isn't rotten through and through.
> 
> Its also hard to imagine that it is much different than every other 
> personally owned company in Hollywood...or America for that matter.
> 
> > It's also hard to imagine that, as hands on as he was (hah!), it isn't
> > pointless without him, except maybe as a way to miss-manage (hah!!)
> > previous assets.
> 
> The catalog income will keep this company afloat once they get out from 
> under the cloud/ban of Weinstein.  After that, success will depend on 
> the ability of the new owners to hire talent and pick the right projects

-- 
Join your old RAT friends at
https://www.facebook.com/groups/1688985234647266/