I think it stinks that some are making judgement on BS not handing these ingrates 20% of his business, just because he was the unlucky one whose offer to purchase Empire was chosen over the other offer when the trustees SOLD it on the open market. He should've just started his own company right then, instead of having the monkey of those 2 options on his back. The real problem is that the elder Winter never bothered to think ahead to look after his family by figuring out what would happen to his company in the event of his early demise, and how his kids would be taken care of.
Imagine if BS had NOT made an offer to purchase Empire, and the sale had instead gone through to the Montreal bidder. Would that bidder have had to sign an 'options' clause to look after the previous owner's kids several years into the future? I think not!
Empire was for sale on the open market, and just because BS happened to have a close personal relationship with the deceased, he became beholden to the 2 options. Meanwhile, he had to borrow money to buy it, and had his OWN intelligence with which to run such a business, which had zero to do with the orphans or his deceased uncle. It seems Empire actually required some brains to run the biz successfully - it had lost 20% of its annual revenues when run by the trustees before selling, but yet they chose NOT to allow BS to run it when he had offered to do so. Later it was listed on the open market, when BS paid MORE than the competitor. BS wasn't given any breaks or 'deals' because of his personal relationship with the deceased, he bought it fair and square, in fact paying MORE than the competitor was willing to pay.
Why should BS have been penalized like that? Without BS's offer, the other firm would have been the buyer for less money, and without such stipulations. That seems unfair right off the bat.
BS and his partner turned the company around to double its revenues within a few short years, attracting another company to want to buy it. They got an offer too good to pass up, and so they sold it to them. And along with the sale, went the 'options' requirement for the orphans. The orphans were still young at the time, so there was no question they hadn't met the requirements of the options.. and for all BS knew at the time, the orphans had been adopted into a loving family, as I don't believe he had contact with them at that time.
It was okay for the trustees/executors to make a business decision to sell the company they had been entrusted to look after... but it wasn't okay for BS to do the same with the company he paid for? The trustees got off the hook from being responsible for the orphans' future windfall, but BS was supposed to keep that obligation forever, even when he sold the company and no longer had anything to do with it? All because he happened to know the dead guy?
Who says any of the kids would have worked there in the first place, nevermind having been able to stick it out for minimum 2 years as 'responsible fulltime employees'? And wasn't it 5% per each orphan
of the 'issued shares' - how many shares were 'issued', and what was the purchase price of the shares, and would the orphans have even have wanted to spend any money they had on making such a purchase by the time they met the requirements? At age 15 it seems KW started getting into trouble - and what would have been different if BS had not sold Empire? KW's and his brothers' issues don't seem to have anything to do with who owned Empire. BS selling or not selling, wasn't going to impact the family lives of the orphans, how they were being raised by their new family, their genes, or etc.
I got the impression that after selling Empire, BS remained on as an employee, but then was fired after 6 months. It was only then that BS made the decision to start up his own company, from scratch. He was good at it, and on it went to become what it became.
One way or another, at one time or another, by one party or another, Empire sold and no longer had anything to do with the orphans. The orphans presumably would have received the proceeds of the sale of Empire when the trustees sold it, the monies which BS paid for it, just as they would've received the proceeds from any other buyer, and that would've been it. But later, BS was said to have been like a 'bank' to the orphans, with KW's 'allowance' alone being up to $20,000/week at one point. He funded their businesses, bailed them out of trouble, tried to get them help when needed, bought them properties, funded their unsecured loans.
BS *was* being generous with them, even though not obligated to be, until the orphans got greedy and started thinking they were entitled to even more. Too bad for them that they didn't just continue to enjoy having a sugar daddy and become productive business owners, each in their individually chosen fields, with benefit of a great business mentor, instead of getting greedy, spending probably hundreds of thousands on legal fees dragging whoever they could through the courts, for years, trying to get more, and losing out on the generosity afforded them by one of Canada's wealthiest men. How many courts and judges will it take until they accept that their entitlement ended decades ago? Do they have any regrets in how they handled themselves? Did they already get their revenge?
[FONT="] “For me it isn’t about shekels, it’s about revenge!” [/FONT][FONT="] [/FONT]
[FONT="]
https://torontolife.com/from-the-archives/barry-sherman-bitter-pill-from-the-archives/[/FONT]
Goodman remembers being Sherman’s boss after his employer at the time, California-based ICN Pharmaceuticals, bought Empire from Sherman in the early 1970s. After about six months, he was ordered to fire Sherman and reluctantly did so.
“I fired him. He would tell me later that was the best thing that ever happened to him,” said Goodman. “He says, ‘Don’t worry about it, Morris, I was planning to quit anyhow.’ And he started Apotex (in 1974).
[FONT="]
https://www.thestar.com/business/20...r-barry-sherman-will-be-tough-to-replace.html[/FONT]
