[asterisk-users] World Cheapest Predictive Dialer!

[Mark Hamilton]

400 class! I'm in! haha

-----Original Message-----
From: asterisk-users-bounces at lists.digium.com
[mailto:asterisk-users-bounces at lists.digium.com] On Behalf Of Steve Totaro
Sent: June 15, 2008 9:10 AM
To: Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion
Subject: Re: [asterisk-users] World Cheapest Predictive Dialer!

Your original quote that was conveniently snipped....

"I'm quite certain this is already obvious and will simply be interpreted
as a tautological affirmation of the obvious, but such co-mingling of
personal and business assets -- whether with an evidently fraudalent
purpose or not as such -- will generally not survive the "test of
reasonableness" that must be satisfied for corporate liability to not be
pierced.

In other words, if you simply pay for your house in this manner, and
then you declare bankruptcy or are sued by creditors or whatever, the
courts will scavenge this sort of thing up as evidence that your
corporate entity is a financial alter-ego to whatever degree, and
declare that your house is actually, de facto, a personal asset and can
be included in the asset classes potentially awarded by judgments to the
plaintiffs."

On Sat, Jun 14, 2008 at 10:33 AM, Alex Balashov
<abalashov at evaristesys.com> wrote:
> Steve Totaro wrote:
>
>> It is a legitimate real estate company renting you a place to live.
>> This asset protection tactic has been around for a very long time and
>> is legit.  Totally separate entities.
>
> Well, certainly, and some of the time this asset protection tactic works
> -- somewhat, but not exclusively covariantly with the degree to which
> the real estate company is truly legitimate (i.e. operates in that
> business), and not just an obvious asset shell.
>
> However, as with all shell games and formal gimmicks, they sometimes
> don't work.  If it can be shown that the other company's basis of
> existence lies materially in securing your assets and little more, the
> assets it is meant to protect can lose their shielding.
>
> If I own a big house and a nice yacht and various other accoutrements of
> high executive life and move them into an asset shell company and then
> bankrupt my primary company, or the company becomes liable for damages
> (due, in substance, to my actions) that cannot be collected without
> liquidating it, and the financial picture is bleak, people are getting
> laid off, foreclosures and garnishments and liens are being opened, and
> the court finds that I'm sitting on an enourmous pile of lavish personal
> assets owned by another company for the explicitly identifiable purpose
> of insulating them from the consequences of the aforementioned
> situation, there is the very real risk that they court will expose those
> assets to liquidation as well.  It can and does happen.
>
>
> --
> Alex Balashov
> Evariste Systems
> Web    : http://www.evaristesys.com/
> Tel    : (+1) (678) 954-0670
> Direct : (+1) (678) 954-0671
> Mobile : (+1) (706) 338-8599
>

Quite a different tone from your original reply at the top of the
thread, you must have done some homework before replying this time.
You also changed the original scenario quite a bit to try to improve
your side of the debate by adding yachts and "various other
accouterments (edited for spelling) of high executive life"

Here is some more reading for your pleasure
http://www.nevada123.com/learning-center/cat/18

Obviously, there are much more complex and virtually untouchable ways
to protect assets but I will not go into them until you are ready,
this is just a 100 class, the 400 class costs a bit and a Masters is
considerably higher since only the really wealthy need to utilize the
tactics (not a commercial plug).

Thanks,
Steve Totaro

_______________________________________________
-- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com --

asterisk-users mailing list
To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
   http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users