I don't see how Mr. Coster or anyone else can possible sell the rights to a machine that was patented many years ago as a cream separator. Perhaps someone should do a patent search on this before millions are spent.
Wouldn't Costner's disclosure of a "Potential" deal be considered insider information and therefore illegal? Was this information provided to other investors in the company? Baldwin & his partner surely weren't the only ones investing in Costner's company at the time. I think Baldwin was mad that he cashed out too soon. I'm rooting for you Kevin!
It is so great to see such a decision about money between celebrities put into the hands of a "down and out jury" from New Orleans. May the best liars win.
So we should all CRY crocodile tears for these greedy rich folks who took advantage of a situation.......to make money.
We, the public, stupidly support their profession of acting to the level that they are driven to make more money, more money and more money......never enough......but the grim reaper still visit them just like everyone else.....at which time rich or poor does not matter!!
Like Kevin Costner is such a saint - NOT! He makes babies and doesn't take care of them. How many children has he made now? He is no example for anyone to live by. And Mr. Baldwin is as dumb as a stone. Both of them are idiots. Why are we giving this story any time whatsoever?
This whole thing with actors investing in obscure centrifuges to clean oily water sounds pretty weird. How did they get into such a business? You would think the professionals ie. the oil companies would have stuff like this.
I believe the Baldwin brother got out too soon and has his regrets. You snooze you lose... it's the way it goes. I'm sure it sucks but YOU SOLD your shares. That was your decision. The only reason you're crying about it now is because YOU SOLD to soon and didn't get more money. Imagine that the bottom fell out, I bet he wouldn't sue to help with the losses.
This is essentially a large wet/dry Shop Vac and they are fighting over it. This does sound a bit shady, Costner making a deal without telling them and then wanting to buy their shares with the proceeds. Sounds like a leveraged buyout by withholding information.
>> RangerDan107: "I've got a box of these frozen deformed fish on the way to Rush Limbaugh right now. He said the spill was harmless. I want to see him eat these fish with their eyes hanging out of their sockets."
Actually, the Obama Administration said the spill was harmless TOO. They trumpeted the fact that the spill was never AS BAD as some made out from Day One. And they NEVER even bothered to change the laws on oil rig safety protocols after the spill. In fact, the Obama Administrator in charge of inspecting the rigs and granting permits has claimed repeatedly that things "worked out fine, the spill has been completely contained." So if you're going to mail rotting fish to Rush because of his statement, I hope in the spirit of balanced fairness that you're planning to send some fish to Washington TOO.
>> Hypnotoad72: "Amusingly, the oil company - the one who works with oil for a living, had no clue how to clean up after itself so it relied on some hollywood actors?!!"
Costner became interested in marine life/ocean safety while filming WATERWORLD ages ago. And to his credit, he put his money where his mouth is by helping to start up and fund this venture. And the technology was based on a very solid idea, it was just that no one had figured out a way to make it work. It took over 15 years of time and continued investment to finally get it to work. But (again) to Costner's credit, he stuck by the company and now they're reaping the rewards for having created something that works. So good on them.
>> Endrepubs: "The only way the dumbest Baldwin brother can make money these days is by suing."
Well, to be fair, he lawsuit wasn't bounced by a judge. Which means someone thought it was based on a legitimate question. Yes, like ANY investor, Baldwin can choose to keep his money with a company or pull it out -- taking EITHER a small profit or a loss. That's venture capitalism at work.
But the LEGAL question here is totally valid. Namely, DID Costner and his original core partners PURPOSEFULLY WITHHOLD information about upcoming sales...and the MILLIONS of dollars that would be flowing in...from other investors (like Baldwin), so they would sell short and leave the company -- thus meaning that Costner (and his core partners) would make even more money in the end. This is all about the timeline and IF information was PROPERLY given out. Yes, Baldwin decided to sell -- but he WOULDN'T have sold if he'd been told that big deals were ALREADY being signed behind the scenes.
Bottom line: Sure, investors always come and go. But it also wouldn't be ethical for Costner to DUPE people into selling short, by holding back valuable information that investors are LEGALLY entitled to.
The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. By using this Web site you agree to accept our Terms of Service. Click here to read the Rules of Engagement.
Reply to Comment The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. By using this Web site you agree to accept our Terms of Service. Click here to read the Rules of Engagement.
We, the public, stupidly support their profession of acting to the level that they are driven to make more money, more money and more money......never enough......but the grim reaper still visit them just like everyone else.....at which time rich or poor does not matter!!
Oh my, something else I agree with you on.
You are, by far, the biggest jerk, S. O .B I have ever encountered on the web.
>> RangerDan107: "I've got a box of these frozen deformed fish on the way to Rush Limbaugh right now. He said the spill was harmless. I want to see him eat these fish with their eyes hanging out of their sockets."
Actually, the Obama Administration said the spill was harmless TOO. They trumpeted the fact that the spill was never AS BAD as some made out from Day One. And they NEVER even bothered to change the laws on oil rig safety protocols after the spill. In fact, the Obama Administrator in charge of inspecting the rigs and granting permits has claimed repeatedly that things "worked out fine, the spill has been completely contained." So if you're going to mail rotting fish to Rush because of his statement, I hope in the spirit of balanced fairness that you're planning to send some fish to Washington TOO.
>> Hypnotoad72: "Amusingly, the oil company - the one who works with oil for a living, had no clue how to clean up after itself so it relied on some hollywood actors?!!"
Costner became interested in marine life/ocean safety while filming WATERWORLD ages ago. And to his credit, he put his money where his mouth is by helping to start up and fund this venture. And the technology was based on a very solid idea, it was just that no one had figured out a way to make it work. It took over 15 years of time and continued investment to finally get it to work. But (again) to Costner's credit, he stuck by the company and now they're reaping the rewards for having created something that works. So good on them.
>> Endrepubs: "The only way the dumbest Baldwin brother can make money these days is by suing."
Well, to be fair, he lawsuit wasn't bounced by a judge. Which means someone thought it was based on a legitimate question. Yes, like ANY investor, Baldwin can choose to keep his money with a company or pull it out -- taking EITHER a small profit or a loss. That's venture capitalism at work.
But the LEGAL question here is totally valid. Namely, DID Costner and his original core partners PURPOSEFULLY WITHHOLD information about upcoming sales...and the MILLIONS of dollars that would be flowing in...from other investors (like Baldwin), so they would sell short and leave the company -- thus meaning that Costner (and his core partners) would make even more money in the end. This is all about the timeline and IF information was PROPERLY given out. Yes, Baldwin decided to sell -- but he WOULDN'T have sold if he'd been told that big deals were ALREADY being signed behind the scenes.
Bottom line: Sure, investors always come and go. But it also wouldn't be ethical for Costner to DUPE people into selling short, by holding back valuable information that investors are LEGALLY entitled to.