Recliner

"Tony Polson" <docnews2011@> wrote in message
news:3oe7849p8e116u371cvri6hp0araiaiabh@
> "Recliner" <nigelp@clara.co_dot_uk> wrote:
>
>> Yes, I think that's fairly normal, and it's something that Stobart
>> failed to do. Of course, by the time they acquired HRT, John Farrow
>> had set up his new UKRT, but I imagine that they could have induced
>> him to join them had they understood how heavily dependent the
>> railtours company was on him.
>
>
> If you imagine that, you're pretty naive. I will try to keep this
> explanation as simple as I can:
>
> JF sold HR to FM Rail. The agreement was that FM would pay him a
> significant amount of money for the goodwill of the business, while JF
> undertook to work for a certain time for HR under FM Rail ownership,
> in order to transfer his expertise to the buyer.
>
> JF delivered. FM Rail did not deliver; after a downpayment, JF didn't
> get paid the balance of the agreed purchase price of HR.

And JF also didn't deliver the rest of the knowledge transfer thad had
been agreed. He got paid little and delivered equally little (not
surprisingly).

>
> He then had the appalling experience of seeing the goodwill of HR, for
> which he had still not been paid, being sold on to Stobart for a song.
>
> Why on earth would he want to work for Stobart?
>
> He would have to be mad! I am surprised that you cannot see this.

Very simple: for money. I am surprised that you cannot see this. Unlike
me, you seem to have not to have actually been a customer of the various
companies involved, and to have a false sense of the worth of intangible
assets. Incidentally, Stobart did no wrongs to JF; the transactions were
more complex than that. To quote "Tony Polson", "you're pretty naive".