Raven and Gabe Sapoltzy on WOL

[Guest TDinDC1112]

Look what they have provided though and you'll see they did everything the law required

I don't care either way, but I think using the "they did everything the law requires" statement is such a cop out. It's not the point that they did all they had to do. The point is that they need to do enough to prove it. The prosecution didn't prove that O.J. was guilty, hence according to the law he's innocent. Does that make it fact then just because the law says so? No. Don't accept that as the end all to the issue.

[Guest Goodear]

I don't care either way, but I think using the "they did everything the law requires" statement is such a cop out. It's not the point that they did all they had to do. The point is that they need to do enough to prove it.

 

But if they aren't filing things with anyone, what sense would iot make to provide or create them? Then you get to the point where they have documentation that doesn't mean anything and people picking up on that won't be happy either. I say again, how do you prove a man does not have anything to do with you?

 

The prosecution didn't prove that O.J. was guilty, hence according to the law he's innocent. Does that make it fact then just because the law says so? No. Don't accept that as the end all to the issue.

 

Its not the be all to end all, but its what they needed to do for the state. They then have their CEO sign a poorly worded document that holds him personally liable for the losses of another company if it is proven that Rob is around. What else they would provide that would mean anything is beyond me.

[The Ghost of bps21 0]

"Its not the be all to end all, but its what they needed to do for the state"

 

This goes right back to my feelings about the fans and how they should be responsible for holding them to higher standards.

 

It also leads to the ridiculous nature that RoH has with being completely dumfounded that there word isn't good enough for everyone.

[Guest Goodear]

But those higher standards don't mean anything if the paperwork doesn't go anywhere. They can create buckets of forms and have them notarized but since no one is going to check that information or even hold onto it, what does the paperwork actually mean? I could show youa ton of paperwork that says that I am the king of England... but if no recognized authority will accept it, what does it actually mean? Nothing.

 

Why don't the people making accusations of misconduct actually go out and do some work to see if he's there or not? Its not like they don't know where the guy lives or where the ROH operations are based. For people so very offended by the idea, why don't they get out of the office and actually do some reporting instead of relying on innuendo?

[Guest Dynamite Kido]

I'm not pro-anything on this anymore.

 

It certainly doesn't benefit me in anyway that these guys can't work RoH anymore...since I watch RoH...and now they won't be there.

 

So...I'm against TNA on that.

 

On the other end however, I'm finding it hard to just take what RoH says at face value at this point. Gabe is right, they did mishandle things those first few days. But they haven't really stopped mishandling things since then as regards to the RF situation. I understand that most of there fan base is uberloyal and they can get away with that...but the sheer idea that it completely confounds them that anyone could question them to the point of lashing out...is ridiculous. What buble world do they exist in where they can't get a read on what's going on outside?

 

In summation...TNA should give RoH back there wrestlers...and RoH should stop pretending that there shit doesn't stink just because they tell us it doesn't.

 

I believe RF is gone. The signing of the paper (which should have been more than enough for TNA to back of) settles that for me.

 

But Good Lord...If they aren't hiding something...they are the worst public relations people EVER.

Thank you BPS. You always seem to be the voice of reason around here. Great post as it sums up the way I feel about the whole situation too. It seems like discussing this situation is just like beating a dead horse.......

[Guest Doyo]

according to Joey Styles, they have not done everything required under the law:

 

 

"The paperwork was not filed with the appropriate authorities in Pennsylvania and was not even notarized. While it is true that Pennsylvania's Corporations Bureau does not require for profit corporations to file change

of ownership with them, the Pennsylvania Department of Revenue does and there is no record with that department of the change of ownership. In the case of the filing with the Corporations Bureau, while it's not required it would have only taken a few minutes to prepare the change, and it would have been in their best interest to do so in light of the horrible publicity Feinstein forced upon them. Why wouldn't Ring of Honor rush to cleanse themselves of Feinstein in any and every way possible?"

rest of his column here

[Michrome 0]

Yes, and according to many people that have checked with the DoR, he's wrong.

[Guest Dynamite Kido]

Yes, and according to many people that have checked with the DoR, he's wrong.

I plead ignorance on this one, but what was he wrong about Michrome?

[Guest OSIcon]

I've checked the site (the Pennsylvania Department of Revenue) pretty extensively myself and I haven't been able to find any for or special instructions for corporations who have had a change in management or ownership. From my understanding of the Department of Revenue (which I admit is pretty limited), the idea that the department would have a separate form for something like this didn't seem to make a whole lot of sense.

 

Of course, there are sections of the different tax filing forms that ask for the corporate officers to be listed. This would be one place where those changes would need to be listed. Of course, Joe Styles has no way of knowing whether ROH did that or not (nor would he be able to find that kind of confidential information out easily). There is a chance that ROH hasn't or has just recently sent in that tax information.

 

There could be something I am missing as I only spent a little time searching the large website. However, I would far from take Joey Styles' word as gospel on this subject. Afterall, it was his site (and it very well could have been him personally) who originally reported that the ownership documents were invalid because they were notierized nor were they sent to the State Department. Of course, since then, both of those things have been proven to not be needed.

[teke184 0]

I've checked the site (the Pennsylvania Department of Revenue) pretty extensively myself and I haven't been able to find any for or special instructions for corporations who have had a change in management or ownership. From my understanding of the Department of Revenue (which I admit is pretty limited), the idea that the department would have a separate form for something like this didn't seem to make a whole lot of sense.

 

Of course, there are sections of the different tax filing forms that ask for the corporate officers to be listed. This would be one place where those changes would need to be listed. Of course, Joe Styles has no way of knowing whether ROH did that or not (nor would he be able to find that kind of confidential information out easily). There is a chance that ROH hasn't or has just recently sent in that tax information.

 

There could be something I am missing as I only spent a little time searching the large website. However, I would far from take Joey Styles' word as gospel on this subject. Afterall, it was his site (and it very well could have been him personally) who originally reported that the ownership documents were invalid because they were notierized nor were they sent to the State Department. Of course, since then, both of those things have been proven to not be needed.

I *DO* work for a state department of Revenue, although not Pennsylvania, and organizations registered for most tax are supposed to notify the agency of any change in ownership once they submit their next tax form.

 

Sales is a tax I know specifically requires the new owner of a business to be specified, although I'm sure that Corporate Income requires it as well.

 

 

In ROH's case, they theoretically wouldn't have to submit the change in ownership until they filed their March sales tax, which would have been due around the fifth of the month and would be getting processed now. Granted, many states are pretty slow in processing anything associated with taxes besides the money they deposit.

[Guest OSIcon]

I *DO* work for a state department of Revenue, although not Pennsylvania, and organizations registered for most tax are supposed to notify the agency of any change in ownership once they submit their next tax form.

 

Sales is a tax I know specifically requires the new owner of a business to be specified, although I'm sure that Corporate Income requires it as well.

 

 

In ROH's case, they theoretically wouldn't have to submit the change in ownership until they filed their March sales tax, which would have been due around the fifth of the month and would be getting processed now. Granted, many states are pretty slow in processing anything associated with taxes besides the money they deposit.

 

That makes sense. Thanks for the information.

 

I fiigured there most likely wouldn't be a separate form and it would just be taken care of during a regular tax filing.

 

In that case, I really don't see how Joey Styles would know that they didn't file that information with the Dept. of Revenue yet.

[The Ghost of bps21 0]

I found this interesting from today's observer update:

 

The net is split pretty much right down the middle on this situation:

 

--In the latest poll regarding the ROH/TNA situation, here were the results

1) Believe that Rob Feinstein is still with ROH and TNA is only protecting its business interests 36.3%

2) Believe that Rob Feinstein is not with ROH, but TNA doesn't know that and is only protecting its business interests 28.0%

3) Believe that TNA doesn't want its talent working ROH shows and is simply using the Feinstein controversy as a convenient p.r. way of handling it 35.7%

[Michrome 0]

One interesting thing I heard from a friend of Cary Silken is that Rob is gone, and hasn't profited a thing since it happened, but that they are still finalizing the closure of the deal (IE: Money to Rob to leave). If that's the case, then they won't file anything until the deal is actually finished.

[The Ghost of bps21 0]

At this point I believe that he's gone. They were putting a lot at risk by signing anything with TNA.

 

If I had to vote in that poll...I'd vote somewhere between 2 and 3.

 

I believe he's gone...but A: TNA doesn't know for sure and B: Even if they did, they still don't want those guys working for RoH.

 

A makes B very convenient for them.

 

So I guess I'm actually closer to voting #3.

[Guest TDinDC1112]

One interesting thing I heard from a friend of Cary Silken is that Rob is gone, and hasn't profited a thing since it happened, but that they are still finalizing the closure of the deal (IE: Money to Rob to leave). If that's the case, then they won't file anything until the deal is actually finished.

That makes sense in that it explains how they just transferred it over to Doug. A major concern of everyone is that there is no way RF would have built this little empire, and just given it away for free. Everyone said Doug had no $$$ to give him for it. If they're still finalizing the buyout, that would make sense. That is the type of information that will get people off their backs.

[Vyce 0]

"Its not the be all to end all, but its what they needed to do for the state"

 

This goes right back to my feelings about the fans and how they should be responsible for holding them to higher standards.

 

It also leads to the ridiculous nature that RoH has with being completely dumfounded that there word isn't good enough for everyone.

 

THANK YOU.

 

NOTHING has pissed me off more on this board than all of the ROH fanboys angry because some of us are daring to question the company after week after week of RIDICULOUSLY AWFUL public relations from them, since this whole RF mess started.

 

If Feinstein is really gone, and they're just waiting to pay him off before they file the paperwork.....then someone should have the good sense to really get that message out there. Leak it secretly to Meltz or something. Because the reason I don't believe he's gone yet is because they're being so goddamn flippant with the info they give out that I can't take them at their word.

 

They provide actual documentation he's gone - that's SIGNED this time - and perhaps I'll think aboug giving them my business again.

[Guest OSIcon]

They provide actual documentation he's gone - that's SIGNED this time - and perhaps I'll think aboug giving them my business again.

 

THe documents sent to 1wrestling WERE signed....

[Vyce 0]

They provide actual documentation he's gone - that's SIGNED this time - and perhaps I'll think aboug giving them my business again.

 

THe documents sent to 1wrestling WERE signed....

You're correct - I had meant to say notarized. You replied before I could edit my post.

[Guest TDinDC1112]

They provide actual documentation he's gone - that's SIGNED this time - and perhaps I'll think aboug giving them my business again.

 

THe documents sent to 1wrestling WERE signed....

You're correct - I had meant to say notarized. You replied before I could edit my post.

But remember - PA law doesn't require notarization, so it's ok!

[Michrome 0]

The hilarious thing is acting as if notarization proves anything. If they would lie about this, why not lie about notarization? This is just a red herring, just like changing the RFV name. If they do it, it still doesn't prove a thing.

[Guest Goodear]

From the Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction FAQ

 

FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS ABOUT NOTARIZATION

 

What is a Notary Public?

 

A Notary Public is a person appointed by state government to witness, as an impartial agent, the signing of important documents. An "impartial agent" means that the notary is not a party to the transaction and has no financial or beneficial interest in the transaction.

 

Why are documents notarized?

 

Notarization is intended to deter fraud. The impartial witness (Notary) ensures that the signer of a document is who they say they are and that the person signed the document willingly.

 

How does a Notary identify a signer?

 

Generally, the Notary will ask to see a current identifying document that has a photograph, physical description and a signature. A driver's license, military ID or passport is usually acceptable.

 

What is involved in having the Conduct and Competency form notarized?

 

The notary public will witness your signature on the form, complete the notary information at the bottom of the form and then affix their seal to the document. A relatively small fee may be charged for this service.

 

Does notarization mean that the information on a document is true?

 

No. Notarization does not prove that information or statements on a document are true or accurate. The signer is responsible for the content of the documents. The notary certifies the identity of the signer.

[Guest Dynamite Kido]

Does notarization mean that the information on a document is true?

 

No. Notarization does not prove that information or statements on a document are true or accurate. The signer is responsible for the content of the documents. The notary certifies the identity of the signer.

Sad thing is I have a friend who is a notary, and I was thinking this was the case.....I just wasn't sure.

[Guest MikeSC]

Does notarization mean that the information on a document is true?

 

No. Notarization does not prove that information or statements on a document are true or accurate. The signer is responsible for the content of the documents. The notary certifies the identity of the signer.

Sad thing is I have a friend who is a notary, and I was thinking this was the case.....I just wasn't sure.

Nah. Notaries simply state that the parties signed the paper.

 

In the end, I do believe that Rob is done with the company. If they say "We're still working on the buy-out", people will gripe that they lied about him being gone from the company --- so they have to stick with the story which is closer to the truth.

-=Mike

[Guest TDinDC1112]

Thought some of you might be interested in this. Between The Ropes is a weekly wrestling radio show out of Florida on Wednesday nights. As far as wrestling shows go, this is one of the major ones. They spoke about this for about 3 or 4 minutes starting at about the 24 minute mark. I think their views/opinions are pretty consistent with what I hear from the more general smark (as no marks even have a clue about something like this as they don't even know about TNA or ROH). Besides the totally into it crowd (us who are on message boards, journalists, Meltzer, etc.), I think a lot of people are still having major doubts over ROH and view it as, if they don't sign, then they're lieing.

 

http://www.betweentheropes.com/stream.php?filename=0414.wma

[Vyce 0]

The hilarious thing is acting as if notarization proves anything. If they would lie about this, why not lie about notarization? This is just a red herring, just like changing the RFV name. If they do it, it still doesn't prove a thing.

As I argued back when it was first revealed that the documents weren't notarized, it's not necessarily a matter of "notaries don't really proof anything" as it is ROH going the EXTRA mile to show that all the "t's" are crossed and "i's" are dotted.

 

It probably sounds silly to you, but given the overall shitty way they've handled this whole situation, it doesn't inspire much confidence in me that they couldn't even bother to do something like simple like notarize the paperwork. It would have taken them, what? An extra couple minutes to get it done? I don't care if it wasn't required by law. They've seemed perfectly happy to do the absolute bare minimum to show that Rob is gone and then expect all of us to, by God, take them for their word that everything's peachy keen.

[Guest OSIcon]

As I argued back when it was first revealed that the documents weren't notarized, it's not necessarily a matter of "notaries don't really proof anything" as it is ROH going the EXTRA mile to show that all the "t's" are crossed and "i's" are dotted.

 

It probably sounds silly to you, but given the overall shitty way they've handled this whole situation, it doesn't inspire much confidence in me that they couldn't even bother to do something like simple like notarize the paperwork. It would have taken them, what? An extra couple minutes to get it done? I don't care if it wasn't required by law. They've seemed perfectly happy to do the absolute bare minimum to show that Rob is gone and then expect all of us to, by God, take them for their word that everything's peachy keen.

 

That makes NO SENSE though. What is the point of doing something that doesn't proove anything? Great, they got it noterized. They did something that means nothing. It would be like Gabe saying he is going to run a marathon to prove that Feinstein is gone. He did something extra but it means ABSOLUTELY NOTHING and is kind of ridiculous. I don't get at all what the purpose is of doing something that means nothing just for the sake of doing it and therefore pleasing those that are ill-informed to how things work. The documents don't gain anything from being handed to a notary, so what would eb the significance of doing it?

 

One thing that has really interested me in this whole ordeal is how much reporters/columnists and fans alike have muddied this situation so much with innaccurate and ill-informed reporting. I could write a 20 page term paper analysing that. When you REALLY get down to it and examine the situation, you see that ROH's poor handling of the situation is really confined to poor statements on their wesbite and some shakey comments from Gabe. Every other "poorly handled" instance is a result of either innaccurate and ill-informed opinions/reporting spread by websites and people who don't know (but think they know) what they are talking about on message boards. Your line about them doing the "bare minimum" is proof of that. Doing everything that the law requires and having the CEO take PERSONAL liability in the situation is FAR from bare minimum. In fact, it is about all you can ask without asking them to do meaningless tasks that proofs nothing (like going to a notary).

[Guest TDinDC1112]

When you REALLY get down to it and examine the situation, you see that ROH's poor handling of the situation is really confined to poor statements on their wesbite and some shakey comments from Gabe.

are those to be overlooked for some reason?

[Guest OSIcon]

are those to be overlooked for some reason?

 

Not at all. I never said they should. ROH did handle the situation wrong in many ways (their statements and Gabe's susbsequent comments mostly). My point was that a lot of the other "poor handling" doesn't even exist and just came about by ill-informed people spreading false facts. ROH didn't handle the situation perfectly at all (then again, I don't expect perfection). I never denied that. I only question how poorly they really did handle it when you take all the false "facts" and claims from others out of the equation.

 

Hell, Joey Styles is STILL doing it with is inference that ROH hasn't updated their tax info. with the Department of Revenue when the forms with that information would have just been processed (or possibly not processed completely yet). People have jumped on ROH after reading that saying, "Look, they are lying," when the truth is that they very well could have filed that information already.

[Guest TDinDC1112]

ROH didn't handle the situation perfectly at all (then again, I don't expect perfection). I never denied that. I only question how poorly they really did handle it when you take all the false "facts" and claims from others out of the equation.

ROH handled things very poorly. They have not done themselves any favors. Even with the way Gabe handled that caller on Meltzer. Telling him goobye like that when he was bringing up some reasonable points is not something they'd teach in public relations/crisis management class. I'm not saying this makes them in the wrong or anything, but they have provided fuel to the "RF is still around" fire.

[Guest Dynamite Kido]

ROH didn't handle the situation perfectly at all (then again, I don't expect perfection).  I never denied that.  I only question how poorly they really did handle it when you take all the false "facts" and claims from others out of the equation.

ROH handled things very poorly. They have not done themselves any favors. Even with the way Gabe handled that caller on Meltzer. Telling him goobye like that when he was bringing up some reasonable points is not something they'd teach in public relations/crisis management class. I'm not saying this makes them in the wrong or anything, but they have provided fuel to the "RF is still around" fire.

I agree that ROH has handled this situation poorly. But one thing that nobody think about is that unlike the WWE they don't have a PR department to do all that stuff for them. So this is the first time ANYONE in the professional side of ROH has had to do anything like this.........