Full Version: NEW ADMINS!
I'm not really complaining but want to know why some Admins/Webmasters who have taken over GPTR programs are not paying earnings earned from the previous owners. Why are the existing members made to run after the previous owners to be able to get paid???? I believe all liabilities should be assumed when one takes over a website. Any opionions/experiences on this????
Well, in some cases, such as Nile Cash, there was an agreement for Kath to keep the debt. If this would never to happen, the site wouldn't exist and nobody would never know if they were getting paid or not.
That's just one problem.
However, I also look at it this way...
Say a site owner left, gave / sold the site to someone else. If the new admin would take over the debt, those who reached payout at the current time, would never be able to get paid because they would have to wait for the old owners responsiblity to be done.
Personally, I want the old owner to take a step forward and compensate for the problems THEY caused. If they owe me money, then it should come from the person who owes it and caused it.
That's just my two cents,
That's just one problem.
However, I also look at it this way...
Say a site owner left, gave / sold the site to someone else. If the new admin would take over the debt, those who reached payout at the current time, would never be able to get paid because they would have to wait for the old owners responsiblity to be done.
Personally, I want the old owner to take a step forward and compensate for the problems THEY caused. If they owe me money, then it should come from the person who owes it and caused it.
That's just my two cents,
Betty Bucks did something very nice about this. The old WM's debts were about 10,000. The WM is saying that new members will get paid first but with the spare cash earned, old members will be payed.
I think it depends on the argreement of the transfer.
I think in my ideal world one of two things would happen when a site is taken over
1 - the old owner would pay out all members so that they could sell a site with zero debts
or
2 - the new owner would take into consideration the amount of debt in a site when bidding for it and be prepared to take on that debt - that could only happen if the sites' were worth a lot more than they currently are though, I think. Say a program was worth $50,000 then with $1000 debt they would offer $49,000 and be prepared to pump that $1000 straight into the site as soon as they took over in the form of payments owed to members. Unfortunately the sites are worth around $200, have $20,000 of debt and are being bought for $250 with the new owner not prepared to take on the $20,000 of debt.
1 - the old owner would pay out all members so that they could sell a site with zero debts
or
2 - the new owner would take into consideration the amount of debt in a site when bidding for it and be prepared to take on that debt - that could only happen if the sites' were worth a lot more than they currently are though, I think. Say a program was worth $50,000 then with $1000 debt they would offer $49,000 and be prepared to pump that $1000 straight into the site as soon as they took over in the form of payments owed to members. Unfortunately the sites are worth around $200, have $20,000 of debt and are being bought for $250 with the new owner not prepared to take on the $20,000 of debt.
| QUOTE (rollerjam5 @ Dec 8 2003, 11:35 PM) |
| Betty Bucks did something very nice about this. The old WM's debts were about 10,000. The WM is saying that new members will get paid first but with the spare cash earned, old members will be payed. |
Triple the debt amount and add some. Then your closer to accurate figures.
| QUOTE (wagdoll @ Dec 9 2003, 07:37 AM) |
| I think in my ideal world one of two things would happen when a site is taken over 1 - the old owner would pay out all members so that they could sell a site with zero debts or 2 - the new owner would take into consideration the amount of debt in a site when bidding for it and be prepared to take on that debt - that could only happen if the sites' were worth a lot more than they currently are though, I think. Say a program was worth $50,000 then with $1000 debt they would offer $49,000 and be prepared to pump that $1000 straight into the site as soon as they took over in the form of payments owed to members. Unfortunately the sites are worth around $200, have $20,000 of debt and are being bought for $250 with the new owner not prepared to take on the $20,000 of debt. |
Yaa that Makes sense.. but then..if the site was worth 50,000.. I dont think the old owner would have sold it...just my two cents..
| QUOTE (wagdoll @ Dec 9 2003, 12:37 AM) |
| I think in my ideal world one of two things would happen when a site is taken over 1 - the old owner would pay out all members so that they could sell a site with zero debts or 2 - the new owner would take into consideration the amount of debt in a site when bidding for it and be prepared to take on that debt - that could only happen if the sites' were worth a lot more than they currently are though, I think. Say a program was worth $50,000 then with $1000 debt they would offer $49,000 and be prepared to pump that $1000 straight into the site as soon as they took over in the form of payments owed to members. Unfortunately the sites are worth around $200, have $20,000 of debt and are being bought for $250 with the new owner not prepared to take on the $20,000 of debt. |
That's what happens IN THE REAL WORLD.
Well, I mean when you are in bussiness with people who have any clue about what they are doing, not teenagers that think they can run a bussiness.
When you buy something you have to specify in the contract who is gonna cover debts.
For example, when you buy a house or a car usually buyer has to pay left bills (taxes, etc.)
But if you buy a bussiness you sometimes require previous owner to clear debts before you go on -just to have everything in order.
The problem with GPT programs is that debt is 1000 times the bussiness real value
I still do not understand why people buy programs with such a problem -and they do not launch a new one.
Personally, I think we should find out where the old WM of the prgramme lives then go round and kneecap them with an old rusty hand drill, only kidding.
If someone buys a business with the debts at a reduced price, then they should be responsible for the debts. If they pay the full asking price, then the resposibility should lie with the old owner, if the new owner is stupid enough to pay the full asking price with the debts, then its down to them.
If someone buys a business with the debts at a reduced price, then they should be responsible for the debts. If they pay the full asking price, then the resposibility should lie with the old owner, if the new owner is stupid enough to pay the full asking price with the debts, then its down to them.
Hi! Thank ya'll for your reply. Deeply appreciate. 
I do believe that new Admins/WMs should accept all responsibilites when taking over a site because it will reflect on them. I don't think "old" members will appreciate having the burden of running after the previous WMs just to get paid. And who knows where they can be reached??? Or if they are still willing to pay if ever you reached them??? I am not willing to stay in a program which doesn't want to assume responsibilities. It is however true that it depends on the agreements between the Admins/WMs but I personally believe that if the new Admins/WMs is smart enough he/she should see to it that before they take over a site that EVERYTHING IS PAID. Like in the real world where you see 'ALL BILLS PAID' being posted to let people know.
I do believe that new Admins/WMs should accept all responsibilites when taking over a site because it will reflect on them. I don't think "old" members will appreciate having the burden of running after the previous WMs just to get paid. And who knows where they can be reached??? Or if they are still willing to pay if ever you reached them??? I am not willing to stay in a program which doesn't want to assume responsibilities. It is however true that it depends on the agreements between the Admins/WMs but I personally believe that if the new Admins/WMs is smart enough he/she should see to it that before they take over a site that EVERYTHING IS PAID. Like in the real world where you see 'ALL BILLS PAID' being posted to let people know.
They are basically buying a mailing list, for their purposes.
I like the rusty hand drill idea, myself...
I like the rusty hand drill idea, myself...
| QUOTE (superbird79 @ Dec 9 2003, 09:10 PM) | ||
Triple the debt amount and add some. Then your closer to accurate figures. |
Wow! That means they got the debt down around 20k!
| QUOTE (rollerjam5 @ Dec 10 2003, 06:31 AM) | ||||
Wow! That means they got the debt down around 20k! |
i thought rollerjam said triple.. thatz 30k!!!
| QUOTE (romanov @ Dec 9 2003, 09:36 AM) |
| Personally, I think we should find out where the old WM of the prgramme lives then go round and kneecap them with an old rusty hand drill, only kidding. |
LMAO!
Thanks for the late night laugh!
(I agree wholeheartedly that the previous owner should be responsible, but the thing is... If they were going to be responsible about it, they'd still be running it or at least paying off their debts, right? Most times, that is the farthest thing from the truth, their sense of responsibility is non-existent.)
| QUOTE (superbird79 @ Dec 9 2003, 06:10 AM) | ||
Triple the debt amount and add some. Then your closer to accurate figures. |
Geez... $30,000...
I have never had that much money in my LIFE, much less that much debt... ouch...
| QUOTE (rollerjam5 @ Dec 8 2003, 06:35 PM) |
| Betty Bucks did something very nice about this. The old WM's debts were about 10,000. The WM is saying that new members will get paid first but with the spare cash earned, old members will be payed. |
new members paid first that is not fair and that is why i will not click on anymoe than one link a week to keep the account open. I want paid before the new person who just joined. Just because you just joined doesnt make you special and that you deserve payment first. Those who stuck with the site and supported it threw hard times should be paid first.
| QUOTE (deathstalker @ Dec 11 2003, 08:54 PM) | ||
new members paid first that is not fair and that is why i will not click on anymoe than one link a week to keep the account open. I want paid before the new person who just joined. Just because you just joined doesnt make you special and that you deserve payment first. Those who stuck with the site and supported it threw hard times should be paid first. |
That's not what I was saying, I meant new members that joined after the WM changed would be paid first but the old WM's debts from members would be paid with extra cash.
Let me clearify here..........
Members who have been waiting for payout PRIOR to our taking over are being paid first. When we took over we had redemption requests dated from Oct. 23 on. Any requests made prior to Oct. 23 had to be re-redeemed. Payments are being made in order received.
We are not paying new members first and then paying members who have been waiting since Oct. the leftovers. The members who have been waiting since Oct. are being paid first, period.
I hope that clears up any and all misinformation floating around
Members who have been waiting for payout PRIOR to our taking over are being paid first. When we took over we had redemption requests dated from Oct. 23 on. Any requests made prior to Oct. 23 had to be re-redeemed. Payments are being made in order received.
We are not paying new members first and then paying members who have been waiting since Oct. the leftovers. The members who have been waiting since Oct. are being paid first, period.
I hope that clears up any and all misinformation floating around
| QUOTE (devotedlady @ Dec 9 2003, 07:12 AM) |
| I'm not really complaining but want to know why some Admins/Webmasters who have taken over GPTR programs are not paying earnings earned from the previous owners. Why are the existing members made to run after the previous owners to be able to get paid???? I believe all liabilities should be assumed when one takes over a website. Any opionions/experiences on this???? |
Never got paid by the old owner at Nile cash. I also just unsubscribe from nile cash. Put in a redemption cashout request over a month ago. Sure their short of funds, and their trying. But I am in this to get paid not to sit waiting beyond thirty days or more.
I have a new policy, this happens to any other sites I will treat it like a data backup loss and unsubscribe. Far less frustrating.
I think if the site only changes hands and doesn't re-launch it is up to the new admin to pay. Other wise the privacy terms have been breached by passing on or selling our info. I have a very bad taste in my mouth about Nile cash and ECF.
| QUOTE (mcf @ Dec 28 2003, 10:02 PM) |
| I think if the site only changes hands and doesn't re-launch it is up to the new admin to pay. Other wise the privacy terms have been breached by passing on or selling our info. I have a very bad taste in my mouth about Nile cash and ECF. |
dont even think about bringing up ecf debt.
i already clarified that members will get paid.
Don't worry. I believe you.
Actually I've gotten very blase over the payment thing after my fiasco Taisia's. Can't take this stuff so seriously. Them, I took seriously as it was hundreds of dollars. Anything else is $5 here, $5 there.. not worth the aggravation.
Actually I've gotten very blase over the payment thing after my fiasco Taisia's. Can't take this stuff so seriously. Them, I took seriously as it was hundreds of dollars. Anything else is $5 here, $5 there.. not worth the aggravation.
| QUOTE (romanov @ Dec 10 2003, 12:36 AM) |
| Personally, I think we should find out where the old WM of the prgramme lives then go round and kneecap them with an old rusty hand drill, only kidding. If someone buys a business with the debts at a reduced price, then they should be responsible for the debts. If they pay the full asking price, then the resposibility should lie with the old owner, if the new owner is stupid enough to pay the full asking price with the debts, then its down to them. |
I completely agree with that. Why in the world buy a program that is in debt (and then start nagging and complaining about it).
For the members: they don't get paid anyway, so let the program in debt just vanish, the outcome is the same. Ok not exactly, they click and work and get never kept promises instead just losing their money. Losing money is something we have to live with now and then, but it's the nagging, whining, never kept promises, changing terms and all that, that gets me so frustrated sometimes...
Old admins should pay...no doubt about it.........
OK.....Some say new admins should pay...IF that was the case, these programs would die....NO one in there right minds would take over an old debt and pay out members, when they have recieved NO advertising dollars....so in short, the programs would dissappear anyway, and then we would all be left wondering....Like Noeys......
I know it is maddening, but what can we do.....we can all stop joining these too good to be true programs
OK.....Some say new admins should pay...IF that was the case, these programs would die....NO one in there right minds would take over an old debt and pay out members, when they have recieved NO advertising dollars....so in short, the programs would dissappear anyway, and then we would all be left wondering....Like Noeys......
I know it is maddening, but what can we do.....we can all stop joining these too good to be true programs
What I just don't get is why would anyone want to buy a dying site? Why don't they buy a new one? Seems to me they must not be paying very much at all to buy the last legs sites. I have heard where people have paid hundreds and some thousands for site clearly in debt. What does it cost to start a brand new site?
If I were to buy an old site I'd have a legal contract drawn up that bound each party and mail it to the old owner for signing. Then when they tried to renig on the deal they would be liable in court. In most states this word of mouth hodge podge trading isn't seen as a legal transaction.
If I were to buy an old site I'd have a legal contract drawn up that bound each party and mail it to the old owner for signing. Then when they tried to renig on the deal they would be liable in court. In most states this word of mouth hodge podge trading isn't seen as a legal transaction.
| QUOTE (lady_knight @ Dec 29 2003, 08:41 AM) |
| What I just don't get is why would anyone want to buy a dying site? Why don't they buy a new one? Seems to me they must not be paying very much at all to buy the last legs sites. I have heard where people have paid hundreds and some thousands for site clearly in debt. What does it cost to start a brand new site? If I were to buy an old site I'd have a legal contract drawn up that bound each party and mail it to the old owner for signing. Then when they tried to renig on the deal they would be liable in court. In most states this word of mouth hodge podge trading isn't seen as a legal transaction. |
i'd like to add that you dont necessarily need a legal contract between the old owner and the new owners.
an email is taken into consideration also if the old owners say that they will pay the old members.
| QUOTE (ILostMyTrueLove @ Dec 29 2003, 07:38 PM) | ||
i'd like to add that you dont necessarily need a legal contract between the old owner and the new owners. an email is taken into consideration also if the old owners say that they will pay the old members. |
yes that is true because you can save it to disk or print it into a hard copy presentable in legal disputes.
Also I would think that archived messenger messages may also be legal but unsure on those.
| QUOTE (moonieb @ Dec 29 2003, 07:07 AM) |
| ....NO one in there right minds would take over an old debt and pay out members, when they have recieved NO advertising dollars.... |
That just cracked me up! You have soooooo hit the nail on the head.How much does it cost? Less that $200
| QUOTE (wagdoll @ Dec 8 2003, 05:37 PM) |
| I think in my ideal world one of two things would happen when a site is taken over 1 - the old owner would pay out all members so that they could sell a site with zero debts or 2 - the new owner would take into consideration the amount of debt in a site when bidding for it and be prepared to take on that debt - that could only happen if the sites' were worth a lot more than they currently are though, I think.? Say a program was worth $50,000 then with $1000 debt they would offer $49,000 and be prepared to pump that $1000 straight into the site as soon as they took over in the form of payments owed to members.? Unfortunately the sites are worth around $200, have $20,000 of debt and are being bought for $250 with the new owner not prepared to take on the $20,000 of debt. |
In the ideal world there would not be so many incompetent people alllowed to open a business to dump in someones lap when the going gets rough-oops did I say that? sorry..bad day
| QUOTE (rollerjam5 @ Dec 9 2003, 07:35 AM) |
| Betty Bucks did something very nice about this. The old WM's debts were about 10,000. The WM is saying that new members will get paid first but with the spare cash earned, old members will be payed. |
You should read betty's buck info. The so called old dept from the old webmaster is a joke. In the info part when they took control back in Oct they said the dept from the old wm was 10000. Go to the amin click page and see what it say's now over 13000 so why is it growing if the old wm had 10000. They are adding the new debt to the old one. And blaming it on the old wm. I'm a newer member start after the take over and I've be waiting for over a month for payout that I dont think will ever come.
| QUOTE (pepwolf @ Dec 29 2003, 08:06 PM) | ||
You should read betty's buck info. The so called old dept from the old webmaster is a joke. In the info part when they took control back in Oct they said the dept from the old wm was 10000. Go to the amin click page and see what it say's now over 13000 so why is it growing if the old wm had 10000. They are adding the new debt to the old one. And blaming it on the old wm. I'm a newer member start after the take over and I've be waiting for over a month for payout that I dont think will ever come. |
its the same site, all the debt goes to the site, the debt increases as they send mails, how is this fault of the new owners?
| QUOTE (moonieb @ Dec 30 2003, 12:07 AM) |
| Old admins should pay...no doubt about it......... OK.....Some say new admins should pay...IF that was the case, these programs would die....NO one in there right minds would take over an old debt and pay out members, when they have recieved NO advertising dollars....so in short, the programs would dissappear anyway, and then we would all be left wondering....Like Noeys...... I know it is maddening, but what can we do.....we can all stop joining these too good to be true programs |
Thank goodness someone said this!
I am looking at buying a site, and every single site for sale that I have seen has debt. Even if nobody is at payout, and the webmaster has always paid people who reach payout, the sites have to have debt unless there's no minimum payout.
Non-POs might be surprised to learn that a site of 3,000 members that has paid all redemptions so far can still have a debt of $15,000 or more.
I am preparing to take on one large site with a debt... I really hope people will SUPPORT me when I take this baby on, because a lot of people reading this are members with substantial earnings and I doubt any of you would prefer the owner just abandoned it.
| QUOTE (Salteh @ Dec 29 2003, 09:35 PM) | ||
Thank goodness someone said this! I am looking at buying a site, and every single site for sale that I have seen has debt. Even if nobody is at payout, and the webmaster has always paid people who reach payout, the sites have to have debt unless there's no minimum payout. Non-POs might be surprised to learn that a site of 3,000 members that has paid all redemptions so far can still have a debt of $15,000 or more. I am preparing to take on one large site with a debt... I really hope people will SUPPORT me when I take this baby on, because a lot of people reading this are members with substantial earnings and I doubt any of you would prefer the owner just abandoned it. |
huh?!?!
A "successful" site usually still has debt.
I am about to take over a site with more than 5000 members.
It is currently paying members, but cannot keep going like it is forever. It has debt like all the others up for sale.
I hope people will not scream blue murder. I plan to ACCEPT responsibility for the debt. I am sure many will be highly annoyed at the inevitable payment delays.
I hope the members will understand and support me.
I am not yet at liberty to discuss which site it is.
(edited for clarity)
I am about to take over a site with more than 5000 members.
It is currently paying members, but cannot keep going like it is forever. It has debt like all the others up for sale.
I hope people will not scream blue murder. I plan to ACCEPT responsibility for the debt. I am sure many will be highly annoyed at the inevitable payment delays.
I hope the members will understand and support me.
I am not yet at liberty to discuss which site it is.
(edited for clarity)
I just want to say good luck with your new site when you get it.
and anybody that is owed money should give the new webmaster a chance when its a done deal.
and anybody that is owed money should give the new webmaster a chance when its a done deal.
Thanks
I'm going to need my wetsuit when I jump into this one!
I'm going to need my wetsuit when I jump into this one!
| QUOTE (Salteh @ Dec 30 2003, 05:49 PM) |
| Thanks I'm going to need my wetsuit when I jump into this one! |
LMAO, better bring your hip waders too, the S**t gets deep around here every once in a while.
Wetsuit - check
Gum boots - check
Now all I need is a bulletproof vest and a heart of steel.
Isn't it bizarre, I am more concerned about the backlash from members than I am of actually running the site. That's what I get for hanging around here!
Gum boots - check
Now all I need is a bulletproof vest and a heart of steel.
Isn't it bizarre, I am more concerned about the backlash from members than I am of actually running the site. That's what I get for hanging around here!
| QUOTE (Salteh @ Dec 30 2003, 06:08 PM) |
| Wetsuit - check Gum boots - check Now all I need is a bulletproof vest and a heart of steel. Isn't it bizarre, I am more concerned about the backlash from members than I am of actually running the site. That's what I get for hanging around here! |
Easy to deal with unneccesary back lash, "thank you for your input" then delete the mail
Golden rules for transfering ownership.
1. Old owner pays as many members as possible with funds left.
2. New owner assumes old debt.
3. Announce changes if any to the site tos within first week of ownership.
4. NEVER sell to ET!
Waiting for old owners to pay is a laugh. These tyoe of deals even if made by new owners with good intent just cause members to lose any chance of being paid by old owner. Like with Nile, its not going to happen. One person been paid and no word from old owner. Kath did a neat run and left everyone with earnings not payable by new owners. If you want a site already runing, honor members debts if you wish to keep them as members.
1. Old owner pays as many members as possible with funds left.
2. New owner assumes old debt.
3. Announce changes if any to the site tos within first week of ownership.
4. NEVER sell to ET!
Waiting for old owners to pay is a laugh. These tyoe of deals even if made by new owners with good intent just cause members to lose any chance of being paid by old owner. Like with Nile, its not going to happen. One person been paid and no word from old owner. Kath did a neat run and left everyone with earnings not payable by new owners. If you want a site already runing, honor members debts if you wish to keep them as members.
I've used up all my "nice" concerning dre and TOS.
I like the kneecap idea. It's especially appropriate since she lives in Vegas. If the "casino owners" ran it, I might have a chance in Hades of getting paid.
I'm still working on my member's TOS that owners would have to agree to.
Darla
Nothing personal against Vegas, just made me laugh when I found out.
I like the kneecap idea. It's especially appropriate since she lives in Vegas. If the "casino owners" ran it, I might have a chance in Hades of getting paid.
I'm still working on my member's TOS that owners would have to agree to.
Darla
Nothing personal against Vegas, just made me laugh when I found out.
Well I live in Sydney, so please no kneecapping for me? 
Everyone hates changes to TOS, I just hope people understand that they will be necessary. I plan to have a whole bunch of non-debt-making giveaways to try and soften the blow... perhaps my life will be in less danger if I do that in return? hehehe
X Sal
Everyone hates changes to TOS, I just hope people understand that they will be necessary. I plan to have a whole bunch of non-debt-making giveaways to try and soften the blow... perhaps my life will be in less danger if I do that in return? hehehe
X Sal
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.