RE:And another thing!....quakes99 wrote: <sound of gloves ripping off> I'm sick and tired of the continuous whining in the never-ending chorus of high whiney voices crying "it's not fair!... it's not fair!... he got more than me... it's not fair!". You sound like a bunch of 4 year olds at a birthday party fighting over who got the biggest piece of cake! And others on the board are like the parents trying to find a way to stop the squabbling by trying to re-cut the cake or cut one kid's piece smaller to add to the other kid's piece... only to hear the chorus grow even louder... "It's not fair! Now it's REALLY not fair!"
Whatever happened to becoming adults and facing the truth that we all know... Life is Not Fair?
Sometimes adults have to make hard choices now that don't seem fair, in order to work together to increase the chances of a more fair and equitable outcome way down the road. Kids can't see that because they live in the moment. You have the gift of your years of wisdom to help you get past that and see the potential for that fairness gap to be bridged later on, if all goes well... there is always risk. (a.k.a. pirates :-0)
Couples do that all the time... hence the term "marriage of convenience". Your 2 single people who own houses that need renovating, and could be worth a lot more but the real estate market is at the lowest point in a decade. Best thing to do is borrow some money and fix them up to sell later on when the market has improved and houses are selling for twice what they are today... plus all the great renovations and upgrades you've added will allow you to cost recover all your work along the way!
But you go to the bank trying to get a renovation loan as single individuals and they look at your low value houses in the current market, and your single income, and say... sorry... too much risk. :-(
So you decide to partner up and get married or common-law equivalent. One of you has a house worth $200K and the other $300K, so you get the deeds altered so that both of your names are on each property. Now you have combined assets worth $500K, and combined net income double what you had as individuals. You put all your cash into a joint account that will be used to finance your partnership, as many married couples do.
You go back into the bank and the loans officer smiles, sees you as a "merged" couple with a single set of assets worth $500K and a higher net income with some cash in the bank. The risk level is lower, you get some renovation loans, and a better interest rate because you have more asset value to back up the loan.
You work together.. fix up both houses... adding value from the loans and watching the market until the time comes when you decide to sell one or both houses and pump the proceeds into your joint account. If you're lucky you may be able to sell just one house for $500K in the booming market and live in the other one, renting out the basement suite to generate some income to finance further renovations. Or maybe someone comes along who wants both houses... and you sell them together for $1M. You take the money, pay off the loans, go on a cruise, buy a boat and an RV and enjoy your windfall, nicely tucked up in your $350k condo that you bought with the proceeds.
Obviously, dealing with corporations subject to hostile takeovers and large numbers of shareholders is not going to be the same thing... but the principles are still there just the same. Even though the partners did not enter the marriage on even terms, they did both do very well in the end game and made far more money than they would have sitting in their individual homes that they could not renovate or add value to as the market was rising.
That's called "synergy" when the sum of the individual parts yields more value than either one as an individual part. 1+1=3 is the common concept.
That's what I think this merger is trying to do.
Whether or not I support that concept has yet to be decided.
Still waiting on more information coming in closer to the voting date.
ARRRR...and watch out for Pirates!! :-0
This has got to be the biggest load of BS that I have read in some time. Basically you are saying that despite our deposit being given to DML at an unfair ratio, we need to grow up and just take it in the back door, similar to working on a marriage?
At one time I valued your input quakes but those days are long gone. I havent read most of the drivel you constantly churn out on potential scenarios for some time now, and from that you have transcended into a hopeless apologist for FCU and the poor decision that management has made......followed everytime by an empty "DYODD".
In this marriage with DML, we need a prenuptual agreement, due to the disproportionate amount of holdings, as we are the 20 year old blonde daughter from a wealthy family, marrying a washed up broke old man(not you personally, just painting a picture).