The lucrative business of bankruptcy

Wry Catcher

Diamond Member
Aug 3, 2009
51,322
6,469
1,860
San Francisco Bay Area
The following story ran Oct. 21, 1991, on Day Two of the nine-day "America: What went wrong?" series published in the Philadelphia Inquirer:

It was May 22, 1990, Rosalind Webb's last day of work after more than 30 years at the Bonwit Teller store in Center City.

The store was one of 14 Bonwit branches that were closing after Bonwit's parent company filed for bankruptcy protection.

That morning, Rosalind Webb did what she customarily did - she boarded the No. 48 bus at Allegheny Avenue and 29th Street in North Philadelphia and rode 25 minutes to her job in the shipping department of the store.

Somewhere aloft, Wilhelm Mallory, Steven Hochberg and Peter Dealy did what they customarily do, too.

Mallory flew from San Diego to New York, and billed a client $250 an hour for his travel. His associate, Dealy, flew from Los Angeles to Las Vegas, and billed $300 an hour. Hochberg flew from New York to Atlanta and charged $150 an hour for his time in the air.

What kind of work warrants such fees for sitting in an airplane? The same kind that charges $225 an hour for Richard Schmid to pack and unpack boxes.

Mallory, Dealy, Hochberg, Schmid - they are all in a business that reorganizes companies and puts people like Rosalind Webb out of work.

The bankruptcy business.


Read the rest of the story at:

The lucrative business of bankruptcy
 
The reason why bankruptcies are lucrative is simple. Most people don't like them, most people don't understand them, so most people avoid them. Because most people avoid bankruptcies, the price for bankrupt assets is low. So for people willing to make the time and effort, investing in bankruptcies and workouts is often a low risk way of earning a decent return.
 
When someone retains an attorney, they understand that they are paying for expenditures of time, even if that time is in the air. The attorney is in the air for the client's benefit. Or, they could be on the ground working on some other client's case getting paid for that time.
 
  • Thread starter
  • Banned
  • #4
When someone retains an attorney, they understand that they are paying for expenditures of time, even if that time is in the air. The attorney is in the air for the client's benefit. Or, they could be on the ground working on some other client's case getting paid for that time.

The 'client'? The client may be a corporate raider; for sure it is not the employees. I know you hold dear and near the 'conservative' ideology, but someday, maybe, you might read this entire series of ariticles and actually begin to question those beliefs you hold. Keep in mind this is one of nine articles which will challenge you. Are you up to the challenge?
 
When someone retains an attorney, they understand that they are paying for expenditures of time, even if that time is in the air. The attorney is in the air for the client's benefit. Or, they could be on the ground working on some other client's case getting paid for that time.

The 'client'? The client may be a corporate raider; for sure it is not the employees. I know you hold dear and near the 'conservative' ideology, but someday, maybe, you might read this entire series of ariticles and actually begin to question those beliefs you hold. Keep in mind this is one of nine articles which will challenge you. Are you up to the challenge?

No one's mind has ever been changed on the internet.
 
  • Thread starter
  • Banned
  • #6
When someone retains an attorney, they understand that they are paying for expenditures of time, even if that time is in the air. The attorney is in the air for the client's benefit. Or, they could be on the ground working on some other client's case getting paid for that time.

The 'client'? The client may be a corporate raider; for sure it is not the employees. I know you hold dear and near the 'conservative' ideology, but someday, maybe, you might read this entire series of ariticles and actually begin to question those beliefs you hold. Keep in mind this is one of nine articles which will challenge you. Are you up to the challenge?

No one's mind has ever been changed on the internet.

Is that true? Do you have evidence? Maybe a link to support your opinion?
 
  • Thread starter
  • Banned
  • #7
Apparently Paulie posted an opinion which cannot be backed up by facts. Funny how that seems to be the tour de force of the conservative element.
 

Forum List

Back
Top