15 Jan
2013
15 Jan
'13
1:12 p.m.
That is not how I took what Mike said, and he has a very valid point.
Also we have seen no evidence that Tri-Valley stole anything, or that they are
'shady'. In reading through the *one* side of the story we have, it would appear
that they were either sold the 'scrap', or else contracted to remove it. I have
also noticed that Sellam references many documents that are missing, so even in his side
of the story there are considerable holes.
Something that worries me is what went into the dumpster that they apparently had on
site.
One also has to wonder how badly Sellam had pissed off the landlords prior to this point.
Reading through the email and documents last night I was reminded of a conversation
I'd had earlier in the night with my seven year old. As regrettable as it is, the
choices he made had consequences.
Zane
On Jan 15, 2013, at 10:21 AM, Bryan Pope <bryan.pope at comcast.net> wrote:
Wow. So if a burglar came into your house and stole
all of your stuff, then it would be better for him the sell it instead melting it down
for scrap. As least somebody can use it and the thief makes a small profit!
Obviously I should not worry about the infinitely tiny detail that the stuff was stolen.
I feel sooo much better now!
Cheers,
Bryan
On 1/15/2013 12:29 PM, Michael Kerpan wrote:
The way that shady "recycling" outfits
like this work is that they try
to move stuff as quickly as possible and if they can't sell it almost
immediately they WILL melt it down. While the fact that they're making
even a token attempt to sell stuff whole means that they know the
stuff is valuable, you can be pretty sure that if they can't sell the
working systems on their first attempt, they WILL get scrapped. Thus,
by encouraging people not to but this stuff, you are, in effect,
condemning it to a firey death...
Mike