• Please visit and share your knowledge at our sister communities:
  • If you have not, please join our official Homebrewing Facebook Group!

    Homebrewing Facebook Group

Pittsburgh

Homebrew Talk

Help Support Homebrew Talk:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
per BG newsletter yesterday, their 2019 motto: "more beer, for more people, in a more convenient way."

canning?






Please?
 
Yup...how do we work on getting HH into cans next?

tenor.gif
 

I think the argument is that they invested a % and based on TH growth the amount they offered seems pretty low. Imagine giving a kid $5 to start his lemonade stand and he says he’s going to give you $10 next week if things go well. Next thing you know he stole your car and ****** your mom (RIP) and you’re sitting there with preluderl’s dick in your hand.
 
I think the argument is that they invested a % and based on TH growth the amount they offered seems pretty low. Imagine giving a kid $5 to start his lemonade stand and he says he’s going to give you $10 next week if things go well. Next thing you know he stole your car and ****** your mom (RIP) and you’re sitting there with preluderl’s dick in your hand.

But did I get my $10? Cause then we’re good.

Children and lemonade is the perfect analogy though. He’s starting **** over a 5k “investment” (more likely a “loan” between peers/friends) and now he’s getting legal over it? In this industry? Shaun Hill...

tenor.gif
 
But did I get my $10? Cause then we’re good.

Children and lemonade is the perfect analogy though. He’s starting **** over a 5k “investment” (more likely a “loan” between peers/friends) and now he’s getting legal over it? In this industry? Shaun Hill...

tenor.gif
An agreement is an agreement tho. Imagine you went to a bar because they advertised half price beers & you get there an hour into it & they're like "nah man, not enough people bought chicken wings dude, prices are full price now" like you wouldn't runYelp!that. But with lawyers. And no chicken wings.
 
An agreement is an agreement tho. Imagine you went to a bar because they advertised half price beers & you get there an hour into it & they're like "nah man, not enough people bought chicken wings dude, prices are full price now" like you wouldn't runYelp!that. But with lawyers. And no chicken wings.

Counterpoint: Shaun Hill is a penis wrinkle
 
Head Hunter? Yes? This is like the 4th year we've been through this, I don't know the who why nor how but for ***** sake I have no idea why Head Hunter cans aren't the biggest priority to them.
They are waiting for Head Hunter growth in bottle to slow in chain accounts. When growth goes under 3-4% they'll bust out the Headhunter cans to increase growth again. I was hoping/asking for a 19.2 road pop to place next to the 14% Four Loko flavored like Swedish Fish but wasn't so disappointed because 2 Four Loko do the job for the same price.
 
They are waiting for Head Hunter growth in bottle to slow in chain accounts. When growth goes under 3-4% they'll bust out the Headhunter cans to increase growth again. I was hoping/asking for a 19.2 road pop to place next to the 14% Four Loko flavored like Swedish Fish but wasn't so disappointed because 2 Four Loko do the job for the same price.

I think you may have a problem
 
I bet their labels would be sick. I also hope, and I know I’m not alone here, that the cans themselves don’t smell bad.

Has anyone heard about this?

https://www.goodbeerhunting.com/sightlines/2019/1/8/tired-hands-hill-farmstead-lawsuit

870 barrels to 11,250 from 2013 to 2017

The way that I read this, and forgive me as I am just making my way through my first cup of coffee and I skimmed this pretty fast, but the 3 HF guys put up 5k each with the terms of getting 7500 back in 5 years (a 50% increase on initial investment). Then TH exceeded those projections, but still only offered 7500 back to each. That is at least the main part of it.
 
The way that I read this, and forgive me as I am just making my way through my first cup of coffee and I skimmed this pretty fast, but the 3 HF guys put up 5k each with the terms of getting at least 7500 back in 5 years (a 50% increase on initial investment). Then TH exceeded those projections, but still only offered 7500 back to each. That is at least the main part of it.

More or less but with a couple significant changes (one noted above).

I wasn't too impressed with the Complaint; honestly, it makes it difficult to really get a read on whether this is a reach. Accordingly to the allegations, Hill et al only understood Tired Hands was reserving the right to buy back at 150% investment after 5 years. Their understanding was that TH would distribute profits each year of profitability, though (sounds like that never happened). I can't tell whether the operating agreement actually requires that, though. Some of the artful pleading makes it seem like the operating agreement might be very TH-friendly and that they were not actually required to make profit distributions (each Plaintiff is (or at least was) 0.5% shareholder), despite alleged representations to the contrary.

It seems like one of the driving issues here might be taxes that the plaintiffs had to pay leading up to the 5 year mark, when I gather TH told them to hand over their ownership for $7500. The complaint at least alleges that company profits were allocated to shareholders such that taxes were paid on ownership interest while TH refused to make distributions to, at a minimum, cover the taxes that were paid.

So, what might seem piddly on the surface might be a lot more involved. I'd be pissed if I invested in a company, paid taxes on my ownership in the company while it took off in a big way, never received profit distributions in the company, and was told I had to sell my interest for 150% of investment after 5 years of rabid success.
 
More or less but with a couple significant changes (one noted above).

I wasn't too impressed with the Complaint; honestly, it makes it difficult to really get a read on whether this is a reach. Accordingly to the allegations, Hill et al only understood Tired Hands was reserving the right to buy back at 150% investment after 5 years. Their understanding was that TH would distribute profits each year of profitability, though (sounds like that never happened). I can't tell whether the operating agreement actually requires that, though. Some of the artful pleading makes it seem like the operating agreement might be very TH-friendly and that they were not actually required to make profit distributions (each Plaintiff is (or at least was) 0.5% shareholder), despite alleged representations to the contrary.

It seems like one of the driving issues here might be taxes that the plaintiffs had to pay leading up to the 5 year mark, when I gather TH told them to hand over their ownership for $7500. The complaint at least alleges that company profits were allocated to shareholders such that taxes were paid on ownership interest while TH refused to make distributions to, at a minimum, cover the taxes that were paid.

So, what might seem piddly on the surface might be a lot more involved. I'd be pissed if I invested in a company, paid taxes on my ownership in the company while it took off in a big way, never received profit distributions in the company, and was told I had to sell my interest for 150% of investment after 5 years of rabid success.

tenor.gif
 
More or less but with a couple significant changes (one noted above).

I wasn't too impressed with the Complaint; honestly, it makes it difficult to really get a read on whether this is a reach. Accordingly to the allegations, Hill et al only understood Tired Hands was reserving the right to buy back at 150% investment after 5 years. Their understanding was that TH would distribute profits each year of profitability, though (sounds like that never happened). I can't tell whether the operating agreement actually requires that, though. Some of the artful pleading makes it seem like the operating agreement might be very TH-friendly and that they were not actually required to make profit distributions (each Plaintiff is (or at least was) 0.5% shareholder), despite alleged representations to the contrary.

It seems like one of the driving issues here might be taxes that the plaintiffs had to pay leading up to the 5 year mark, when I gather TH told them to hand over their ownership for $7500. The complaint at least alleges that company profits were allocated to shareholders such that taxes were paid on ownership interest while TH refused to make distributions to, at a minimum, cover the taxes that were paid.

So, what might seem piddly on the surface might be a lot more involved. I'd be pissed if I invested in a company, paid taxes on my ownership in the company while it took off in a big way, never received profit distributions in the company, and was told I had to sell my interest for 150% of investment after 5 years of rabid success.

giphy.gif
 
Back
Top