Comments on: Dennis Yu vs. Jeremy Shoemaker – the saga continues

By: michael webster

michael webster — Tue, 24 Nov 2009 09:45:02 +0000

@Alex; The video is pointing out that there are ringtones advertised as free on Schoemaker's site which actually have a cost of $3/month.

By: Alex

Alex — Mon, 23 Nov 2009 22:53:24 +0000

@Lookhere: What are you trying to say with that video. Explain please.

By: Lookhere

Lookhere — Sun, 22 Nov 2009 23:59:19 +0000

Concerning Jeremy,

Just look at this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y4LRFXkxlzM

By: Paul (Founder, WorkAtHomeTruth)

Paul (Founder, WorkAtHomeTruth) — Sun, 22 Nov 2009 23:39:34 +0000

DatingCare.com has made an interesting post here.

Seems to be a lot of potentially contradictory statements being made, depending on what the actual facts are.

By: michael webster

michael webster — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 14:21:19 +0000

I would love to hear what Frind is going to say to Schoemaker at the Affiliate West Summit about the meaning of "ROI"!

By: Paul (Founder, WorkAtHomeTruth)

Paul (Founder, WorkAtHomeTruth) — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 08:08:01 +0000

@michael webster: Yep, you're right about "ROI was in ideas and introductions".

I just saw that in the post I did above yours.

By: Paul (Founder, WorkAtHomeTruth)

Paul (Founder, WorkAtHomeTruth) — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 04:40:50 +0000

@michael webster:
Thanks for explaining that, Michael. The wording sounded strange to me.

I had thought it was Frind who had provided Yu with contacts, but I'll doublecheck my facts on that.

By: michael webster

michael webster — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 03:55:24 +0000

@Paul;
Frind's blog made very no sense, from a corporate law point of view.
He invested in corporation A, run by Yu.
He claims that corporation A "folded", whatever that means, and his "investment" was transferred to Blitzlocal without his knowledge or consent.
If he was a shareholder of A, it is possible that Blitzlocal bought the shares of A, but he would have had notice.
If he lent money to A, it is possible that Blitzlocal assumed the debt, but would have had notice.
The nonsense about reading an operating agreement is even more peculiar: what operating agreement, between what parties, and why would you read that to determine if you had invested in Blitzlocal?

The only part I buy is that Frind saw no money out his investment, but Yu gave him great ideas and contacts. Oddly, according to Schoemaker, Frind referred to this as a "great ROI" which Schoemaker relied upon thinking Frind was talking about money.

By: Paul (Founder, WorkAtHomeTruth)

Paul (Founder, WorkAtHomeTruth) — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 02:22:01 +0000

@michael webster:

OK. I was hoping maybe this meant something to you from Markus Frind's blog:

"The company went under, and somehow my shares transfered to blizlocal, although no one elses did. I’ve never talked to anyone on the board of directors at blitzlocal or seen any business plan or spoken with any employees, although “supposidly” i’m on the board. After reading shoemoneys post i went and looked at the operating agreement. Since I didn’t do anything required in the operating agreement I don’t see how I even could be an investor."

Nitin's site was just interesting to me because he was willing to think for himself, although in his third disclaimer he stated: "I read at various posts, that Dennis screwed his employees as well. I do not condone this activity of Dennis" but didn't post any facts to back those allegations up.

By: michael webster

michael webster — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 01:36:36 +0000

@Paul, read those two stories, but I didn't think much more light was shone on this odd blow up. But, I do like Mr. Frind's observation that Affiliate West will be interesting given that he, Yu and Schoemaker are on the same panel!