KARAOKE SCENE MAGAZINE ONLINE! - Sound Choice Website updated Public Forums Karaoke Discussions Karaoke Scene's Karaoke Forums Home | Contact Us | Site Map  

Karaoke Forums

Karaoke Scene Karaoke Forums

Karaoke Scene

   
  * Login
  * Register

  * FAQ
  * Search

Custom Search

Social Networks


wordpress-hosting

Offsite Links


It is currently Tue Sep 26, 2017 4:35 am

All times are UTC - 8 hours





Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 102 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Thu Mar 23, 2017 2:11 am 
Offline
Super Extreme Poster
Super Extreme Poster
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2001 3:57 pm
Posts: 21651
Songs: 35
Images: 3
Location: Tacoma, WA
Been Liked: 1633 times
What I wonder is does SCE get and book the gigs themselves or rely on their 'affiliates' to book the gigs. I could see a 'possible' upside if they (SCE) are getting & booking gigs and passing it on to their affiliates and taking what might be considered a 'finders' fee per gig. But if the kj is still having to book the gigs themselves, I don't see any real advantage. The kj could simply book the gig and not have to pay anyone.

_________________
LIKE Lonman on Facebook - Lonman Productions Karaoke & my main site via my profile!
Image


Top
 Profile Personal album Singer's Showcase Profile 
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 23, 2017 5:56 am 
Offline
Super Duper Poster
Super Duper Poster

Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2011 8:22 am
Posts: 2812
Been Liked: 169 times
Lonman wrote:
What I wonder is does SCE get and book the gigs themselves or rely on their 'affiliates' to book the gigs. I could see a 'possible' upside if they (SCE) are getting & booking gigs and passing it on to their affiliates and taking what might be considered a 'finders' fee per gig. But if the kj is still having to book the gigs themselves, I don't see any real advantage. The kj could simply book the gig and not have to pay anyone.



8) If SCE is acting as a booking agent isn't the old standard fee 10%? I'm just wondering if it is more like the multi rigger that puts in his own equipment and then hires a college student to run the machine for $10.00 an hour? You are right about one thing Lonnie if the host has to book the gig why cut in SCE? Unless SCE can convince the venue that they won't be sued by PEP. I think the venue owner would be smart enough to know that this only is limited protection and not worth the extra cost. There can't be that many hosts that are licensed I went on their PEP rock site and punched L.A. and came up with one for the whole city in Torrance Calif. I notice when you go on this site their is no total number of license holders for the whole U.S.A. I suspect the reason is there are so few after all of these years of effort that it is an embarrassment. Just like you can't get a total number for the amount of GEM's that have actually been leased. Jim is good at saying they are winning, but it is all in his head, like Charlie Sheen.


Last edited by The Lone Ranger on Thu Mar 23, 2017 6:30 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile Singer's Showcase Profile 
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 23, 2017 6:18 am 
Offline
Super Poster
Super Poster

Joined: Wed Dec 16, 2015 4:07 pm
Posts: 565
Been Liked: 101 times
TIGER BLOOD KARAOKE!!!


Top
 Profile Singer's Showcase Profile 
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 23, 2017 7:10 am 
Offline
Super Duper Poster
Super Duper Poster
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2011 8:59 am
Posts: 2961
Location: Pineville, NC
Been Liked: 984 times
dvdgdry wrote:
Bars are not going to pay more for something that they are already getting.


Agreed, which is why I have pointed out that our approach delivers more value to the bar than the entertainment.

_________________
Since there has been some confusion:
1. I am a lawyer. I am not your lawyer. Statements I make here about legal issues are for informational purposes only.
2. I am an officer of Phoenix Entertainment Partners, but my opinions on matters not involving Phoenix's business are my own and may not reflect the opinions of the company.
3. If you have questions you'd like answered officially, you are welcome to email me at jim@phxep.com or send me a private message here.


Top
 Profile Singer's Showcase Profile 
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 23, 2017 7:23 am 
Offline
Super Duper Poster
Super Duper Poster
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2011 8:59 am
Posts: 2961
Location: Pineville, NC
Been Liked: 984 times
The Lone Ranger wrote:
There can't be that many hosts that are licensed I went on their PEP rock site and punched L.A. and came up with one for the whole city in Torrance Calif.


LOL, OK. Anyone who wants to check the truthfulness of this statement can go to https://pep.rocks/licensees.php and put in Los Angeles, CA. Within a 25-mile radius of the city center, which doesn't even cover all of LA County, there are 20 licensees with a total of 25 licensed rigs. It's true that there's only one in Torrance, though. :roll:

The Lone Ranger wrote:
I notice when you go on this site their is no total number of license holders for the whole U.S.A.


This is correct. We also limit the amount of information that can be scraped from our database at any given time.

The Lone Ranger wrote:
I suspect the reason is there are so few after all of these years of effort that it is an embarrassment.


The reason why we limit access to that information is because no one needs to know that information. You're only "interested" if you can use it against us, and we have no interest in aiding you in that task. We also limit that information because we're trying to prevent our database from being hijacked by people who want to sell that information to marketers. You might have noticed that in the listing, we provide only the company name, the location, and the number and type of licenses. Any further information on the licensee requires a one-at-a-time popup. It's intentionally designed that way to make it easy for legitimate users to get information while making it difficult for list sellers to scrape information to sell.

The Lone Ranger wrote:
Just like you can't get a total number for the amount of GEM's that have actually been leased.


That would be zero, because we don't "lease" the GEM series.

_________________
Since there has been some confusion:
1. I am a lawyer. I am not your lawyer. Statements I make here about legal issues are for informational purposes only.
2. I am an officer of Phoenix Entertainment Partners, but my opinions on matters not involving Phoenix's business are my own and may not reflect the opinions of the company.
3. If you have questions you'd like answered officially, you are welcome to email me at jim@phxep.com or send me a private message here.


Top
 Profile Singer's Showcase Profile 
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 23, 2017 7:38 am 
Offline
Super Duper Poster
Super Duper Poster
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2011 8:59 am
Posts: 2961
Location: Pineville, NC
Been Liked: 984 times
Lonman wrote:
What I wonder is does SCE get and book the gigs themselves or rely on their 'affiliates' to book the gigs. I could see a 'possible' upside if they (SCE) are getting & booking gigs and passing it on to their affiliates and taking what might be considered a 'finders' fee per gig. But if the kj is still having to book the gigs themselves, I don't see any real advantage. The kj could simply book the gig and not have to pay anyone.


We book gigs ourselves and either staff them ourselves or contract them out to trusted, screened affiliates.

KJs are always free to book their own gigs. But if a KJ is tapping into our marketing and promotional apparatus, our engagement tools, or our music (specifically, GEM series and other music licensed to or owned by SCE) for those gigs, then there is a fee schedule for that. Our goal is to set up a team relationship, where we are working together with the KJ to get work at premium rates, in which we all benefit according to our contributions.

For example, we might book a gig, sell a PA to the venue, supply computing and music, and simply hire talent to come in and run the show. (That's what we did in our test run in Alaska last summer, except that the venues already had high-quality PAs.) The venue pays us, and we pay the talent a given rate.

If the talent also supplies computing and/or a PA, they get more money. If they also supply licensed music, they get even more money. If the talent books the gig but uses our other tools (like music, promotions, marketing, and engagement) then the arrangement is between them and venue and we simply take an appropriate cut for our contribution.

The point of all of this isn't to compete with legit KJs. It's to provide key services, equipment, and content according to what the talent needs to be successful. Most importantly of all, pirate operators CANNOT tap into this at all. Many times, they can't even effectively promote their shows, at least in the markets where we actively litigate, because they have to hide from Phoenix.

_________________
Since there has been some confusion:
1. I am a lawyer. I am not your lawyer. Statements I make here about legal issues are for informational purposes only.
2. I am an officer of Phoenix Entertainment Partners, but my opinions on matters not involving Phoenix's business are my own and may not reflect the opinions of the company.
3. If you have questions you'd like answered officially, you are welcome to email me at jim@phxep.com or send me a private message here.


Top
 Profile Singer's Showcase Profile 
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 23, 2017 7:43 am 
Offline
newbie
newbie
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 23, 2017 7:22 am
Posts: 9
Songs: 2
Been Liked: 1 time
Agreed :)


Top
 Profile Singer's Showcase Profile 
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 23, 2017 7:51 am 
Offline
Super Duper Poster
Super Duper Poster

Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2011 8:22 am
Posts: 2812
Been Liked: 169 times
JimHarrington wrote:
The Lone Ranger wrote:
There can't be that many hosts that are licensed I went on their PEP rock site and punched L.A. and came up with one for the whole city in Torrance Calif.


LOL, OK. Anyone who wants to check the truthfulness of this statement can go to https://pep.rocks/licensees.php and put in Los Angeles, CA. Within a 25-mile radius of the city center, which doesn't even cover all of LA County, there are 20 licensees with a total of 25 licensed rigs. It's true that there's only one in Torrance, though. :roll:

The Lone Ranger wrote:
I notice when you go on this site their is no total number of license holders for the whole U.S.A.


This is correct. We also limit the amount of information that can be scraped from our database at any given time.

The Lone Ranger wrote:
I suspect the reason is there are so few after all of these years of effort that it is an embarrassment.


The reason why we limit access to that information is because no one needs to know that information. You're only "interested" if you can use it against us, and we have no interest in aiding you in that task. We also limit that information because we're trying to prevent our database from being hijacked by people who want to sell that information to marketers. You might have noticed that in the listing, we provide only the company name, the location, and the number and type of licenses. Any further information on the licensee requires a one-at-a-time popup. It's intentionally designed that way to make it easy for legitimate users to get information while making it difficult for list sellers to scrape information to sell.

The Lone Ranger wrote:
Just like you can't get a total number for the amount of GEM's that have actually been leased.


That would be zero, because we don't "lease" the GEM series.


8) 25 licensed rigs in all of L.A. do you know how many hosts are in L.A. county at least a few thousand LOL LOL LOL LOL

I don't call that winning Jim, it's pretty sad really after all this time. After all like you point out APS was 5 years ago. You limit information because you don't want the hosts on this site to know what losers you really are. This makes it easy for you to hide the real facts. Years ago you had one certified host for all of Texas I hope things have gotten better for you. If you now have 2 that means you have increased your certified hosts by 100% big deal. All of this is intentionally designed to mislead hosts and make them believe you are winning, when actually your companies are small and financially on the ropes. :bawling: :bawling: :bawling:

Vertical Integration: This means sticking it up anyone you can convince as far as it will go, ringing every dollar you can out of every transaction.

Industry Disruptor: This means over turning the status quo in order to gain maximum advantage for yourself. Hosts that are already doing well would be fools to support anyone that is dedicated to upsetting the current apple cart, if it is working for them.

Defragmentation: This means pulling together all of the loose ends of the karaoke service industry, get them all in line and paying you.

Like I said before this is all Hubris, nothing more Jim.


Top
 Profile Singer's Showcase Profile 
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 23, 2017 8:05 am 
Offline
Super Duper Poster
Super Duper Poster
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2011 8:59 am
Posts: 2961
Location: Pineville, NC
Been Liked: 984 times
The Lone Ranger wrote:
8) 25 licensed rigs in all of L.A. do you know how many hosts are in L.A. county at least a few thousand LOL LOL LOL LOL


So, when you said that there was only one, you were lying.

Kind of you to admit it. But no one should ever listen to what you have to say, because you have proven that you can't be trusted.

_________________
Since there has been some confusion:
1. I am a lawyer. I am not your lawyer. Statements I make here about legal issues are for informational purposes only.
2. I am an officer of Phoenix Entertainment Partners, but my opinions on matters not involving Phoenix's business are my own and may not reflect the opinions of the company.
3. If you have questions you'd like answered officially, you are welcome to email me at jim@phxep.com or send me a private message here.


Top
 Profile Singer's Showcase Profile 
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 23, 2017 8:13 am 
Offline
Super Duper Poster
Super Duper Poster

Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2011 8:22 am
Posts: 2812
Been Liked: 169 times
JimHarrington wrote:
Our goal is to set up a team relationship, where we are working together with the KJ to get work at premium rates, in which we all benefit according to our contributions.



The point of all of this isn't to compete with legit KJs. It's to provide key services, equipment, and content according to what the talent needs to be successful. Most importantly of all, pirate operators CANNOT tap into this at all. Many times, they can't even effectively promote their shows, at least in the markets where we actively litigate, because they have to hide from Phoenix.


8) Of course you are the captain of the team, right Jim? You call the plays and everyone is working for the team SCE. Since you are contributing more you will get the bigger slice, right? The host will instead of working his own land will become a share cropper host for you. You supply the land aka venue, the seeds and tools, and you all share in the crop. Of course before there is even a harvest the host pays for his license, so you win no matter what. Oh and if anyone wants to quit the team you make it where they will suffer the financial consequences of that choice, right?


The whole point of all of this is to compete with all KJs, legal as well as illegal. You need the venues the legal hosts now work at, and you need the pirates to swell your ranks since they are the marginal players, who will agree to your contracts. Even small time multi riggers will have problems, Chris has avoided all of this by joining you, others who haven't will be in direct competition with you. Since their operations are larger than the simple one rig owner operator, they will get more investigation from PEP, won't they. If you take gigs away from legal hosts, you will use the old market forces free capitalism argument. That they were outdated and not cost effective, the same devise used by Walmart and later Amazon to get rid of small brick mom and pop stores, and later Larger Department Stores.


Last edited by The Lone Ranger on Thu Mar 23, 2017 11:40 am, edited 2 times in total.

Top
 Profile Singer's Showcase Profile 
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 23, 2017 8:18 am 
Offline
Super Duper Poster
Super Duper Poster

Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2011 8:22 am
Posts: 2812
Been Liked: 169 times
JimHarrington wrote:
The Lone Ranger wrote:
8) 25 licensed rigs in all of L.A. do you know how many hosts are in L.A. county at least a few thousand LOL LOL LOL LOL


So, when you said that there was only one, you were lying.

Kind of you to admit it. But no one should ever listen to what you have to say, because you have proven that you can't be trusted.



8) What I said is because of the way you hide information on your site, only one license showed up Torrance. Your hiding of information only serves to fuel the distrust you have already built up. If anyone should not be believed it is you and PEP/SCE/CB and whatever other companies your represent. You have lied about APS, you have mislead as to the actual effectiveness of your legal process all of these years, you have not fulfilled one of your promises to renew production of new product. Should I continue. If anyone deserves the pants on fire award it is you Jimbo.

P.S. To clear this up further when I punched in L.A. Torrance is what came up. I guess this was the closest site to L.A., it is hard to tell the way information is cloaked. The way it appeared to me is for L.A. only Torrance had a license site. There's around 6 million people in L.A. alone, so that wouldn't seem like much. For all of L.A. county 25 licenses would just be a drop in the hosting bucket.


Last edited by The Lone Ranger on Thu Mar 23, 2017 9:09 am, edited 2 times in total.

Top
 Profile Singer's Showcase Profile 
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 23, 2017 8:19 am 
Offline
Super Poster
Super Poster

Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2011 8:35 am
Posts: 752
Images: 1
Been Liked: 73 times
FOUL: You BOTH said there is only one in Torrance, which it alone is the size of many medium-population cities. He allowed the expansion to include ALL of LA, of which Torrance might be 5% or so. Extending the label "liar" to him is inappropriate and blatantly incorrect...


Top
 Profile Personal album Singer's Showcase Profile 
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 23, 2017 8:30 am 
Offline
Super Plus Poster
Super Plus Poster

Joined: Fri Jun 18, 2010 11:16 pm
Posts: 1919
Location: HIgh River, AB
Been Liked: 254 times
The Lone Ranger wrote:
JimHarrington wrote:

The whole point of all of this is to compete with all KJs, legal as well as illegal. You need the venues the legal hosts now work at, and you need the pirates to swell your ranks since they are the marginal players, who will agree to your contracts. Even small time multi riggers will have problems, Chris has avoided all of this by joining you, others who haven't will be in direct competition with you. Since their operations are larger the the simple one rig owner operator, they will get more investigation from PEP, won't they. If you take gigs away from legal hosts, you will use the old market forces free capitalism argument. That they were outdated and not cost effective, the same devise used by Walmart and later Amazon to get rid of small brick mom and pop stores, and later Larger Department Stores.


Seriously?? I think you're giving them WAY too much credit if you think they are actually going to make that much of an impact like Walrmart and their ilk did.

By you're own rantings, they don't have the resources for that kind of expansion.

Chris doesn't need this program and he will be just fine doing whatever he is doing on his own. Nothing wrong with that I don't think SCE will be 'going after' people like Chris in the first place.

Now for me only, this might be something I'd be interested in, depending on how much of a percentage they wanted.

I am an excellent HOST, I know how to entertain an audience and keep them engaged. However, I am a TERRIBLE business man. I have never been able to find the gigs that I needed to sustain a viable karaoke business, and everything I tried in terms of marketing to get people to come out in the first place was a MISERABLE failure.

If SCE was able to actually find gigs for me and I was able to tap into a marketing scheme that allowed me to reach my target audience, I would totally be willing to pay them for that, again depending on how much it was.

There is a very simple solution for those of you who don't think that this is a good idea.. Don't do it.. Problem solved.


cheers
-James


Top
 Profile Singer's Showcase Profile 
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 23, 2017 8:51 am 
Offline
Super Duper Poster
Super Duper Poster

Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2011 8:22 am
Posts: 2812
Been Liked: 169 times
jclaydon wrote:

Seriously?? I think you're giving them WAY too much credit if you think they are actually going to make that much of an impact like Walrmart and their ilk did.

By you're own rantings, they don't have the resources for that kind of expansion.




cheers
-James



8) If you read all of my rantings, you will see the word hubris, while they might not have the means to succeed in this scheme, Jim is confident that he can convince enough venues and hosts to keep Kurt and Company afloat, after all he is the General Manager in charge of Marketing and Planning. The companies other two parts production and PEP are not bringing in enough revenue, that is why this latest gambit is being trotted out. To see if enough hosts and venues can be persuaded. After all they have to create the illusion they are doing something, and are not just dead in the water. They have to demonstrate that they are still viable, even if they are a zombie company aka a dead man walking. Oh by the way not much credit was given to Walmart or Amazon when they started, that perception has changed quite a bit over the years, hasn't it?

Cheers!


Top
 Profile Singer's Showcase Profile 
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 23, 2017 9:20 am 
Offline
Super Duper Poster
Super Duper Poster

Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2011 8:22 am
Posts: 2812
Been Liked: 169 times
JimHarrington wrote:

That would be zero, because we don't "lease" the GEM series.



8) Really Jim it's not a lease? I remember more than once others have described it as a lease, since you don't outright sell GEM to a host, you retain ownership. That after all of the money has been paid a nominal fee is required. Or maybe it is zero since you don't have any stock left, finally? If it isn't a lease why haven't you corrected others who think it is?


Top
 Profile Singer's Showcase Profile 
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 23, 2017 10:32 am 
Offline
Super Duper Poster
Super Duper Poster
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2011 8:59 am
Posts: 2961
Location: Pineville, NC
Been Liked: 984 times
The Lone Ranger wrote:
JimHarrington wrote:

That would be zero, because we don't "lease" the GEM series.



8) Really Jim it's not a lease? I remember more than once others have described it as a lease, since you don't outright sell GEM to a host, you retain ownership. That after all of the money has been paid a nominal fee is required. Or maybe it is zero since you don't have any stock left, finally? If it isn't a lease why haven't you corrected others who think it is?


I have repeatedly corrected the terminology used, whether that term has been "lease," "rent," "sell," or otherwise.

The GEM series licensing program is NOT a lease. A "lease" is a contract for the rental of property for a specified period of time, at the end of which either party may elect to discontinue the rental, and the property is returned to the lessor or otherwise disposed of.

The GEM series licensing program is not a lease because at the end of the initial term, ONLY the licensee can choose whether or not to continue the license. If the licensee wants to keep the discs for three more years, the licensee only needs to pay us the $100 fee for doing so. If the licensee does so, we cannot reclaim the discs.

Because we have no control over the length of time that the license is in force, the proper term for the arrangement is a possessory license--the right to keep and use the property.

_________________
Since there has been some confusion:
1. I am a lawyer. I am not your lawyer. Statements I make here about legal issues are for informational purposes only.
2. I am an officer of Phoenix Entertainment Partners, but my opinions on matters not involving Phoenix's business are my own and may not reflect the opinions of the company.
3. If you have questions you'd like answered officially, you are welcome to email me at jim@phxep.com or send me a private message here.


Top
 Profile Singer's Showcase Profile 
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 23, 2017 10:39 am 
Offline
Super Duper Poster
Super Duper Poster
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2011 8:59 am
Posts: 2961
Location: Pineville, NC
Been Liked: 984 times
doowhatchulike wrote:
FOUL: You BOTH said there is only one in Torrance, which it alone is the size of many medium-population cities. He allowed the expansion to include ALL of LA, of which Torrance might be 5% or so. Extending the label "liar" to him is inappropriate and blatantly incorrect...


I think that if you look carefully at what he wrote, even giving the benefit of the doubt, his statement was objectively false. He claimed that in looking for licensees in LA, he only found one in Torrance--thus implying that the one in Torrance was the only one in all of LA.

The problem with that, of course, is that our licensee directory works on proximity. A search centered on Torrance, with the default 25-mile radius, will identify not ONE licensee, but FIFTEEN licensees with a total of EIGHTEEN licenses. Even if you set it at the minimum 10-mile radius, you will still get FOUR licensees.

Would we prefer to have more licensees in LA? Sure. (And, by the way, we probably do, because not every licensee is in our directory.) But the import of his statement, which was intended to mock us by claiming that only one KJ in all of LA County is licensed, is a false implication--or, in everyday language, a lie.

_________________
Since there has been some confusion:
1. I am a lawyer. I am not your lawyer. Statements I make here about legal issues are for informational purposes only.
2. I am an officer of Phoenix Entertainment Partners, but my opinions on matters not involving Phoenix's business are my own and may not reflect the opinions of the company.
3. If you have questions you'd like answered officially, you are welcome to email me at jim@phxep.com or send me a private message here.


Top
 Profile Singer's Showcase Profile 
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 23, 2017 11:22 am 
Offline
Super Duper Poster
Super Duper Poster

Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2011 8:22 am
Posts: 2812
Been Liked: 169 times
8) Even if you have 18 or 25 Jim it is still a very very small number, hardly cornering the market. I'm not saying that it might not get bigger at least I'm sure that is what you are telling all the venues you are trying to seduce.


Top
 Profile Singer's Showcase Profile 
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 23, 2017 11:24 am 
Offline
Super Duper Poster
Super Duper Poster

Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2011 8:22 am
Posts: 2812
Been Liked: 169 times
JimHarrington wrote:
doowhatchulike wrote:
FOUL: You BOTH said there is only one in Torrance, which it alone is the size of many medium-population cities. He allowed the expansion to include ALL of LA, of which Torrance might be 5% or so. Extending the label "liar" to him is inappropriate and blatantly incorrect...


I think that if you look carefully at what he wrote, even giving the benefit of the doubt, his statement was objectively false. He claimed that in looking for licensees in LA, he only found one in Torrance--thus implying that the one in Torrance was the only one in all of LA.

The problem with that, of course, is that our licensee directory works on proximity. A search centered on Torrance, with the default 25-mile radius, will identify not ONE licensee, but FIFTEEN licensees with a total of EIGHTEEN licenses. Even if you set it at the minimum 10-mile radius, you will still get FOUR licensees.

Would we prefer to have more licensees in LA? Sure. (And, by the way, we probably do, because not every licensee is in our directory.) But the import of his statement, which was intended to mock us by claiming that only one KJ in all of LA County is licensed, is a false implication--or, in everyday language, a lie.



8) Jim you are not reading what I wrote. I said I went to your website and punched L.A. all that came up was Torrance. Wouldn't most people think that is it?


Top
 Profile Singer's Showcase Profile 
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 23, 2017 11:29 am 
Offline
Super Duper Poster
Super Duper Poster

Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2011 8:22 am
Posts: 2812
Been Liked: 169 times
JimHarrington wrote:

I have repeatedly corrected the terminology used, whether that term has been "lease," "rent," "sell," or otherwise.

The GEM series licensing program is NOT a lease. A "lease" is a contract for the rental of property for a specified period of time, at the end of which either party may elect to discontinue the rental, and the property is returned to the lessor or otherwise disposed of.

The GEM series licensing program is not a lease because at the end of the initial term, ONLY the licensee can choose whether or not to continue the license. If the licensee wants to keep the discs for three more years, the licensee only needs to pay us the $100 fee for doing so. If the licensee does so, we cannot reclaim the discs.

Because we have no control over the length of time that the license is in force, the proper term for the arrangement is a possessory license--the right to keep and use the property.



8) What we are doing is splitting legal hairs. The bottom line is the purchaser will never own the product out right. You will retain the right to the product. If for some reason you have to call in the product the license possessor will have to return the product, right? That is the way you are restructuring your whole business, hosts can use your product but never really own it. Seems more trouble than it is worth.

P.S. Oh by the way Jim you can call it a possessor license if that's what makes you happy. If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck it is a duck aka lease.


Top
 Profile Singer's Showcase Profile 
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 102 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

All times are UTC - 8 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 106 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group

Privacy Policy | Anti-Spam Policy | Acceptable Use Policy Copyright © Karaoke Scene Magazine
design & hosting by Cross Web Tech