In His Own Words
04-21-2010, 02:22 PM
#111
Registered
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 8,170
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
04-21-2010, 02:25 PM
#112
Gold Member
Gold Member
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Crown Point, IN
Posts: 71
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dohhhh. I told him not to post. But nooo. Damn BarChopper....haha!!
04-21-2010, 02:42 PM
#113
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Mooresville, NC
Posts: 94
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't think the power that be wanted me to post here, so I paid the $24.95.
Now that I can post. Here is my .02 worth. I love SOS. I am the biggest post whore in the place! I go there for the comrade (and the ClayMates
). It has nothing to do with bounced checks, pretend boats, or stupid vendettas. It's all about the people. I am sure the people here are great too! We are all boaters. That's why we are here. The rest of it is 
Now that I can post. Here is my .02 worth. I love SOS. I am the biggest post whore in the place! I go there for the comrade (and the ClayMates
). It has nothing to do with bounced checks, pretend boats, or stupid vendettas. It's all about the people. I am sure the people here are great too! We are all boaters. That's why we are here. The rest of it is
Charter Member
04-21-2010, 03:05 PM
#116
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Mooresville, NC
Posts: 94
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
04-21-2010, 03:55 PM
#118
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
04-21-2010, 05:49 PM
#119
Registered
The whole "Buy Out" part of the puzzle is interesitng isn't it? Hell I was just here for the read, but when that popped up. That put a whole new spin on things didn't it?
Disagree with owners views....tell him you want to buy him out for a $$ amount, I would presume, that is MUCH lower than the place is worth. WITH the caveat of " If you don't sell it we will tell people you didn't own "ALL" the boats you have claimed to own, and all the other things that we can try to blow out of proportion".
I would suspect the whole buy out thing wasn't supposed to leak out was it?? Becasue that would put you in a NOT SO HONEST light as well now wouldn't it?
Ah... glass houses gents.
You see you can try to explain your way out of that, but no matter what you do now... there was an offer, a refusal, and then the mud slinging.... it is wrong, dishonest, a beneath the standards of anyone with any morals.
so now I grab yet another bag of Popcorn, and watch what is the best reality drama going.
well done gents.....well done.
Disagree with owners views....tell him you want to buy him out for a $$ amount, I would presume, that is MUCH lower than the place is worth. WITH the caveat of " If you don't sell it we will tell people you didn't own "ALL" the boats you have claimed to own, and all the other things that we can try to blow out of proportion".
I would suspect the whole buy out thing wasn't supposed to leak out was it?? Becasue that would put you in a NOT SO HONEST light as well now wouldn't it?
Ah... glass houses gents.
You see you can try to explain your way out of that, but no matter what you do now... there was an offer, a refusal, and then the mud slinging.... it is wrong, dishonest, a beneath the standards of anyone with any morals.
so now I grab yet another bag of Popcorn, and watch what is the best reality drama going.
well done gents.....well done.
Suppose you are on the board of directors of SOS and have impeccable reputations and you become convinced that the person who has administrative control of your very public web site is a pathological liar who would stoop so low as to delay sending member-donated funds to a childrens charity for nearly 2 months, who only hands over a check after 2 months of pleading by board members when he can no longer avoid it during the meeting in KW (despite claims that "it's in the mail"), who then manages to bounce the check that he finally did provide, who when first confronted about it bouncing tried to play it off as bank fraud and then mail fraud citing a postal investigation because "they already cashed it," who then changed the tune about it already being made good, and who finally replaces it only after it's brought into public light while being confronted by the remaining board members to do so... Well those board members might think it reasonable to just buy this person out rather than further risk him tarnishing the reputation of the web site and themselves through any continued association.
Further consider from the board members perspective that this nasty charity check bouncing business exploded after they had already confronted this person about him dramatically inflating his offshore boating credentials on this very web site and on SOS, those claimed credentials being one of the main reason they went into business with him in the first place, and in response he offers nothing to alleviate their fears that he is in fact a pathological lier who totally fabricated his claims of owing and operating such boats as a 50' Sea Ray, 42' Apache, 41 Sea Ray, 3 41" Apache's, Top guns, ect... and they begin to wonder if their partner in SeriouslyOffShore has any Offshore Performance boat credentials at all! Well from the board's perspective the buyout offer may have been seen as the only viable option to quickly disassociate themselves from this person who they saw as a pathological liar, and their motive was simply to remove him from the scene before he perpertrated yet more lies upon the offshore community (i.e. US). When Chris didnt' accept the offer the board walked away from the web site because continuing to work with a person they saw a pathological liar was just not an option. They also felt obligated to warn others about Chris.
If these events did unfold as the board says, then the board's actions seem quite reasonable IMO, wouldn't you agree? I guess it comes down to whom do you believe. The word of the four board of directors or Chris Sunkin, a guy who bounced a check to a children's charity and offers little or no rebuttle to repeated claims that he outright lied to yourself and fellow members on this very web site about owning and operating numerous highly visable iconic Offshore Performance boats. Highly visable except when Chris Sunkin owns and operates them I guess (We are still waiting and welcome a explaination of how that can be Chris).
It is my understanding that Chris has the administrative keys to Seriouslyoffshore and the ability to bill advertisers to generate revenue to keep the site up and running. I am not telling anyone that they should not patronize
his web site, although in good conscience I cannot do so myself considering his, IMO, complete lack of integrity. But if other people feel ok about endorsing Chris Sunkin's by visiting his site then so be it. We all see things from a different perspective so enjoy your visits there. I am sure that Chris will have more tales of his vast experiences with Offshore boats to keep you well entertained.
04-21-2010, 05:58 PM
#120
Registered User
I have taken my time and carefully considered the most appropriate response to the recent events. Some people were disappointed that I didn’t immediately jump into an accusatory shouting match with people hurling accusations. Others assumed “it must all be true and he’s running from it”. People that know me know that I don’t do things without thinking them through and carefully considering the consequences. I’ll return to consequences in a bit.
There was in fact an effort made to secure ownership of Serious from me. It came on Friday, March 30th in the form of an e-mail. To begin with, it was by no definition a legitimate or proper offer to buy a business. It was in the form of an e-mail and the language was vague at best. It cited the cooperative interests of four parties of which I had no idea if truly associated with the proposal, let alone if the signor was legitimate in the first place.
The issue with how it was delivered were the least of my concerns. The e-mail began with a statement about how the action was being done on behalf of the Board members, yet all but four were excluded from this “offer”. As I began making calls I learned that everyone else was as surprised as me. The e-mail then addressed the fact that the group had been “inundated with information” regarding my past. I suppose this is the same information being whispered about with no direct accusation- as it’s baseless. No one seems willing to make a direct, libelous statements.
They then go on to address the situation with the check to the charity. As everyone has now heard, there was a mixup with a check delivered to a charity that was quickly and satisfactorily resolved for all parties involved. Interestingly enough, the “offer” letter was delivered while we were still attempting to learn about what happened with the check. I would assume this group didn’t assemble all this information, agree upon and form a four-way investment partnership and discuss, agree upon and present an offer in a day. In my estimation the check issue was a convenient excuse. And a made-to-order leverage point.
The next two paragraphs are interesting- the first declares that the four in question will not be continuing as participants on the site. The next tells me that without those four the site has zero value and the only parties that would value it was their group.
So far, all that’s been accomplished is attempts at potentially softening my confidence about the viability of the site and what I perceived as thinly veiled threats of personal business disclosures.
They follow this up with a pocket-change offer for the total interest of the site.
The “offer” then included a stipulation to provide contractual assurances of non-disclosure.
Lastly it gave me just two weekend days and one morning to consider, seek counsel- although not from their fellow Board members and deliver a decision. They also made it clear they has “other means” to publicly press their agenda if I didn’t comply.
In my opinion, a proper adversarial offer to purchase a business comes in the form of a written document, most commonly delivered through the buyer’s agent. Friendly offers usually start with a casual conversation between the two parties. Legitimate offers don’t come with veiled threats of disclosures of a multitude of unspecified wrongdoings. Or for absurd amounts.
As I mentioned earlier, I began phoning Board members. All were able to provide valuable input on the situation. After those discussions I quickly determined that there would be no response to the overture. I came to find that the group of four still had some sort of back-door access to the private moderator’s discussion room, despite having their permissions immediately revoked. We learned about this later- one of the four even bragged to a Board member about it. Nonetheless, on Sunday evening the representative for the group withdrew the “offer”, citing that the site was now valueless due to the Board being informed and now in an adversarial mood toward the group wishing to purchase it.
I made a pledge to all of the Founding members when we started that the site would never leave our control. It wouldn’t go to a third party and it certainly would never go to a group of insiders that intentionally excluded the rest.
Immediately they began to make good upon their threat. The issue with the check was between myself and one other Board member. By the first of the week, threads began appearing on OSO floating the notion of some sort of impropriety. As is often the case, each and every tidbit was sparingly released to drive drama and anticipation. The poll was a nice touch too. Clearly the individual enlisted the help of proxies with their own agendas to push this issue publicly. As you all saw in the check thread, everyone had a grand old time with this until I posted my comments and some documentation. The mood immediately changed. All the rational people went “honest mistake” and moved on. Some chose to continue their rants. Now we have a completely different thread trying once again to convince the world what a bad person I am. The same people, the same agenda. I made an observation this afternoon that the entire sum of people truly concerned about this wouldn’t constitute a crowd in my modest living room. The majority of the rest are here for the amusement value.
Over the last week I’ve been dealing pretty much exclusively with this issue. Dealing with Board members being pestered and in some cases harassed. And dealing with the exploration of my options. The hardest part of this has been having to stand by and watch the discomfort of those that have stood by me during this. As I said in the beginning I don’t do anything by reaction. And sometimes it takes time, consideration and the input of others. Unfortunately we had a board member too close to one of the other parties to remain with us. Another was experiencing other life issues and stepped back as a result. And a few just simply got tired of being hassled. That’s unfortunate.
Over the last week I have been in contact with law enforcement officials and my attorneys. Both are willing to proceed with action against the four and their group of proxies. But I’ve spent today soul-searching on the right thing to do. After the offer died, three of the four went silent. While I disagree with their action, I respect that they went away. And I believe that they may not have entirely understood what was going on. Regardless of what’s happened, law enforcement and lawyers visiting workplaces with subpoenas for e-mails and such are damaging. And contingency-driven lawyers want large sums of money for their efforts. All I want is this nonsense to stop. I don’t want a nickle from anyone. And I don’t want to see people hurt from this, regardless of what’s transpired this week.
I’m not naming names. There is no reason. I would suggest you do the same. I don’t believe they want what’s happening to be going on and after being dragged through the mud a few times lately I completely understand why. Revenge is for sad, bitter people.
To the rest of the crap people have been floating around, as I said before, bring me someone I owe money to. Bring me someone who I’ve wronged. After 10 years on OSO and now Serious there has to be someone. As a few of you may have noticed, one of the rumored issues was brought up on OSO. The individual in question- the guy that supposedly got ripped off- told the person inquiring that his story was a total fabrication. The thread was instantly deleted. I wonder why? The truth would likely ruin all the fun.
There was in fact an effort made to secure ownership of Serious from me. It came on Friday, March 30th in the form of an e-mail. To begin with, it was by no definition a legitimate or proper offer to buy a business. It was in the form of an e-mail and the language was vague at best. It cited the cooperative interests of four parties of which I had no idea if truly associated with the proposal, let alone if the signor was legitimate in the first place.
The issue with how it was delivered were the least of my concerns. The e-mail began with a statement about how the action was being done on behalf of the Board members, yet all but four were excluded from this “offer”. As I began making calls I learned that everyone else was as surprised as me. The e-mail then addressed the fact that the group had been “inundated with information” regarding my past. I suppose this is the same information being whispered about with no direct accusation- as it’s baseless. No one seems willing to make a direct, libelous statements.
They then go on to address the situation with the check to the charity. As everyone has now heard, there was a mixup with a check delivered to a charity that was quickly and satisfactorily resolved for all parties involved. Interestingly enough, the “offer” letter was delivered while we were still attempting to learn about what happened with the check. I would assume this group didn’t assemble all this information, agree upon and form a four-way investment partnership and discuss, agree upon and present an offer in a day. In my estimation the check issue was a convenient excuse. And a made-to-order leverage point.
The next two paragraphs are interesting- the first declares that the four in question will not be continuing as participants on the site. The next tells me that without those four the site has zero value and the only parties that would value it was their group.
So far, all that’s been accomplished is attempts at potentially softening my confidence about the viability of the site and what I perceived as thinly veiled threats of personal business disclosures.
They follow this up with a pocket-change offer for the total interest of the site.
The “offer” then included a stipulation to provide contractual assurances of non-disclosure.
Lastly it gave me just two weekend days and one morning to consider, seek counsel- although not from their fellow Board members and deliver a decision. They also made it clear they has “other means” to publicly press their agenda if I didn’t comply.
In my opinion, a proper adversarial offer to purchase a business comes in the form of a written document, most commonly delivered through the buyer’s agent. Friendly offers usually start with a casual conversation between the two parties. Legitimate offers don’t come with veiled threats of disclosures of a multitude of unspecified wrongdoings. Or for absurd amounts.
As I mentioned earlier, I began phoning Board members. All were able to provide valuable input on the situation. After those discussions I quickly determined that there would be no response to the overture. I came to find that the group of four still had some sort of back-door access to the private moderator’s discussion room, despite having their permissions immediately revoked. We learned about this later- one of the four even bragged to a Board member about it. Nonetheless, on Sunday evening the representative for the group withdrew the “offer”, citing that the site was now valueless due to the Board being informed and now in an adversarial mood toward the group wishing to purchase it.
I made a pledge to all of the Founding members when we started that the site would never leave our control. It wouldn’t go to a third party and it certainly would never go to a group of insiders that intentionally excluded the rest.
Immediately they began to make good upon their threat. The issue with the check was between myself and one other Board member. By the first of the week, threads began appearing on OSO floating the notion of some sort of impropriety. As is often the case, each and every tidbit was sparingly released to drive drama and anticipation. The poll was a nice touch too. Clearly the individual enlisted the help of proxies with their own agendas to push this issue publicly. As you all saw in the check thread, everyone had a grand old time with this until I posted my comments and some documentation. The mood immediately changed. All the rational people went “honest mistake” and moved on. Some chose to continue their rants. Now we have a completely different thread trying once again to convince the world what a bad person I am. The same people, the same agenda. I made an observation this afternoon that the entire sum of people truly concerned about this wouldn’t constitute a crowd in my modest living room. The majority of the rest are here for the amusement value.
Over the last week I’ve been dealing pretty much exclusively with this issue. Dealing with Board members being pestered and in some cases harassed. And dealing with the exploration of my options. The hardest part of this has been having to stand by and watch the discomfort of those that have stood by me during this. As I said in the beginning I don’t do anything by reaction. And sometimes it takes time, consideration and the input of others. Unfortunately we had a board member too close to one of the other parties to remain with us. Another was experiencing other life issues and stepped back as a result. And a few just simply got tired of being hassled. That’s unfortunate.
Over the last week I have been in contact with law enforcement officials and my attorneys. Both are willing to proceed with action against the four and their group of proxies. But I’ve spent today soul-searching on the right thing to do. After the offer died, three of the four went silent. While I disagree with their action, I respect that they went away. And I believe that they may not have entirely understood what was going on. Regardless of what’s happened, law enforcement and lawyers visiting workplaces with subpoenas for e-mails and such are damaging. And contingency-driven lawyers want large sums of money for their efforts. All I want is this nonsense to stop. I don’t want a nickle from anyone. And I don’t want to see people hurt from this, regardless of what’s transpired this week.
I’m not naming names. There is no reason. I would suggest you do the same. I don’t believe they want what’s happening to be going on and after being dragged through the mud a few times lately I completely understand why. Revenge is for sad, bitter people.
To the rest of the crap people have been floating around, as I said before, bring me someone I owe money to. Bring me someone who I’ve wronged. After 10 years on OSO and now Serious there has to be someone. As a few of you may have noticed, one of the rumored issues was brought up on OSO. The individual in question- the guy that supposedly got ripped off- told the person inquiring that his story was a total fabrication. The thread was instantly deleted. I wonder why? The truth would likely ruin all the fun.
