• Welcome to the Chronicle Forums.
    Please complete your profile. The forums and the rest of www.chronofhorse.com has single sign-in, so your log in information for one will automatically work for the other. Disclaimer: The opinions expressed here are the views of the individual and do not necessarily reflect the views and opinions of The Chronicle of the Horse.

Announcement

Collapse

Forum rules and no-advertising policy

As a participant on this forum, it is your responsibility to know and follow our rules. Please read this message in its entirety.

Board Rules

1. You’re responsible for what you say.
As outlined in Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, The Chronicle of the Horse and its affiliates, as well Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd., the developers of vBulletin, are not legally responsible for statements made in the forums.

This is a public forum viewed by a wide spectrum of people, so please be mindful of what you say and who might be reading it—details of personal disputes are likely better handled privately. While posters are legally responsible for their statements, the moderators may in their discretion remove or edit posts that violate these rules. Users have the ability to modify or delete their own messages after posting, but administrators generally will not delete posts, threads or accounts upon request.

Outright inflammatory, vulgar, harassing, malicious or otherwise inappropriate statements and criminal charges unsubstantiated by a reputable news source or legal documentation will not be tolerated and will be dealt with at the discretion of the moderators.

Credible threats of suicide will be reported to the police along with identifying user information at our disposal, in addition to referring the user to suicide helpline resources such as 1-800-SUICIDE or 1-800-273-TALK.

2. Conversations in horse-related forums should be horse-related.
The forums are a wonderful source of information and support for members of the horse community. While it’s understandably tempting to share information or search for input on other topics upon which members might have a similar level of knowledge, members must maintain the focus on horses.

3. Keep conversations productive, on topic and civil.
Discussion and disagreement are inevitable and encouraged; personal insults, diatribes and sniping comments are unproductive and unacceptable. Whether a subject is light-hearted or serious, keep posts focused on the current topic and of general interest to other participants of that thread. Utilize the private message feature or personal email where appropriate to address side topics or personal issues not related to the topic at large.

4. No advertising in the discussion forums.
Posts in the discussion forums directly or indirectly advertising horses, jobs, items or services for sale or wanted will be removed at the discretion of the moderators. Use of the private messaging feature or email addresses obtained through users’ profiles for unsolicited advertising is not permitted.

Company representatives may participate in discussions and answer questions about their products or services, or suggest their products on recent threads if they fulfill the criteria of a query. False "testimonials" provided by company affiliates posing as general consumers are not appropriate, and self-promotion of sales, ad campaigns, etc. through the discussion forums is not allowed.

Paid advertising is available on our classifieds site and through the purchase of banner ads. The tightly monitored Giveaways forum permits free listings of genuinely free horses and items available or wanted (on a limited basis). Items offered for trade are not allowed.

Advertising Policy Specifics
When in doubt of whether something you want to post constitutes advertising, please contact a moderator privately in advance for further clarification. Refer to the following points for general guidelines:

Horses – Only general discussion about the buying, leasing, selling and pricing of horses is permitted. If the post contains, or links to, the type of specific information typically found in a sales or wanted ad, and it’s related to a horse for sale, regardless of who’s selling it, it doesn’t belong in the discussion forums.

Stallions – Board members may ask for suggestions on breeding stallion recommendations. Stallion owners may reply to such queries by suggesting their own stallions, only if their horse fits the specific criteria of the original poster. Excessive promotion of a stallion by its owner or related parties is not permitted and will be addressed at the discretion of the moderators.

Services – Members may use the forums to ask for general recommendations of trainers, barns, shippers, farriers, etc., and other members may answer those requests by suggesting themselves or their company, if their services fulfill the specific criteria of the original post. Members may not solicit other members for business if it is not in response to a direct, genuine query.

Products – While members may ask for general opinions and suggestions on equipment, trailers, trucks, etc., they may not list the specific attributes for which they are in the market, as such posts serve as wanted ads.

Event Announcements – Members may post one notification of an upcoming event that may be of interest to fellow members, if the original poster does not benefit financially from the event. Such threads may not be “bumped” excessively. Premium members may post their own notices in the Event Announcements forum.

Charities/Rescues – Announcements for charitable or fundraising events can only be made for 501(c)(3) tax-exempt organizations. Special exceptions may be made, at the moderators’ discretion and direction, for board-related events or fundraising activities in extraordinary circumstances.

Occasional posts regarding horses available for adoption through IRS-registered horse rescue or placement programs are permitted in the appropriate forums, but these threads may be limited at the discretion of the moderators. Individuals may not advertise or make announcements for horses in need of rescue, placement or adoption unless the horse is available through a recognized rescue or placement agency or government-run entity or the thread fits the criteria for and is located in the Giveaways forum.

5. Do not post copyrighted photographs unless you have purchased that photo and have permission to do so.

6. Respect other members.
As members are often passionate about their beliefs and intentions can easily be misinterpreted in this type of environment, try to explore or resolve the inevitable disagreements that arise in the course of threads calmly and rationally.

If you see a post that you feel violates the rules of the board, please click the “alert” button (exclamation point inside of a triangle) in the bottom left corner of the post, which will alert ONLY the moderators to the post in question. They will then take whatever action, or no action, as deemed appropriate for the situation at their discretion. Do not air grievances regarding other posters or the moderators in the discussion forums.

Please be advised that adding another user to your “Ignore” list via your User Control Panel can be a useful tactic, which blocks posts and private messages by members whose commentary you’d rather avoid reading.

7. We have the right to reproduce statements made in the forums.
The Chronicle of the Horse may copy, quote, link to or otherwise reproduce posts, or portions of posts, in print or online for advertising or editorial purposes, if attributed to their original authors, and by posting in this forum, you hereby grant to The Chronicle of the Horse a perpetual, non-exclusive license under copyright and other rights, to do so.

8. We reserve the right to enforce and amend the rules.
The moderators may delete, edit, move or close any post or thread at any time, or refrain from doing any of the foregoing, in their discretion, and may suspend or revoke a user’s membership privileges at any time to maintain adherence to the rules and the general spirit of the forum. These rules may be amended at any time to address the current needs of the board.

Please see our full Terms of Service and Privacy Policy for more information.

Thanks for being a part of the COTH forums!

(Revised 2/8/18)
See more
See less

Anyone considering a donation to a resuce or other nonprofit - FYI...

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #61
    The folks looking into things should also look *fully* into things before slagging off too.
    Sitting on your tuckus in front of a computer and looking at pay sites where you only want the "free intro" carrot dangling page is not researching jack-squat. It's taking a single snowflake and telling everyone else an avalanche just happened.
    The truth will not be found on the internet alone on the free pages of pay sites.
    However it *can* be found if one gets off one's tuckus and takes up the org on their invitation to come see how things are done in person and to ask whatever questions they might have. Of course that might mean attempting a somewhat civil attitude for a short time. And it also might require standing up and walking away from the computer screen. And it might even involve not being the star of your own little show online anymore if you don't find out what you think/hope you'll find out.
    It can also be found with in depth research. I've not had anything found illegal in the rescues I donate to...and I know if I'm sending funds in I want the place to first be fully on the up&up and secondly to not be bleeding heart wack-a-doos; that they run the rescue with their heads and not with their hearts and emotions.
    You jump in the saddle,
    Hold onto the bridle!
    Jump in the line!
    ...Belefonte

    Comment


    • #62
      Originally posted by MistyBlue View Post
      The folks looking into things should also look *fully* into things before slagging off too.
      That's right. The same can be said for rescues before they try and ruin someone's reputation in a public forum as well. Especially since they - being a an organization open to scrutiny due to the nature of their work - should be held to a higher standard.

      And yes, to point out the obvious - I have a very large problem with interactions I have had with some rescues recently. Especially some "off-line" interactions. Hence my irritation that a bunch of people jump on one person who has an issue in order to silence her.

      Rather than jumping on that emotional, knee jerk bandwagon, I'm suggesting the best way to resolve whatever THAT issue was would be to dispassionately discuss whatever that issue was with a clear and rational explanation from the rescue. Emphasis on RATIONAL - with the notion that being TRANSPARENT only can only help the organization's PR.

      Comment


      • #63
        Originally posted by Nojacketrequired View Post
        Unfortunately "the end" might be too late for someone's reputation that has been slagged all over the internet.

        NJR
        Amen!

        Comment


        • #64
          Originally posted by sketcher View Post
          That's right. The same can be said for rescues before they try and ruin someone's reputation in a public forum as well. Especially since they - being a an organization open to scrutiny due to the nature of their work - should be held to a higher standard.

          And yes, to point out the obvious - I have a very large problem with interactions I have had with some rescues recently. Especially some "off-line" interactions. Hence my irritation that a bunch of people jump on one person who has an issue in order to silence her.

          Rather than jumping on that emotional, knee jerk bandwagon, I'm suggesting the best way to resolve whatever THAT issue was would be to dispassionately discuss whatever that issue was with a clear and rational explanation from the rescue. Emphasis on RATIONAL - with the notion that being TRANSPARENT only can only help the organization's PR.
          This is sounding more like which came first the chicken or the egg, but when one person is consistently distorting facts and starting drama, there might be something amiss about that one person.
          I have no idea about the "off line" interactions, but the bottom line is if you don't agree with a program, a philosophy or how an organization operates, go find one that suits your needs.
          No organization is under any obligation to have to submit to harassment.

          Comment


          • #65
            Originally posted by Floridarider View Post
            This is sounding more like which came first the chicken or the egg, but when one person is consistently distorting facts and starting drama, there might be something amiss about that one person.
            I have no idea about the "off line" interactions, but the bottom line is if you don't agree with a program, a philosophy or how an organization operates, go find one that suits your needs.
            No organization is under any obligation to have to submit to harassment.
            Well, after having heard the sagas of CBER and the never ending soap of Crossed Sabers, I cannot blame people who have been burned but the likes of that to be skeptic/cynic about it.

            BTW, if you volunteer to stick your head in the noose when critic is offered it does not make you look particularly good.

            But that is really getting off the topic of the financial obligation a group asking for public support.
            One person's harrassment is another's vigilance. Yes, there are nuts you can never please but the majority of people are normal and work hard for their money. They support the cause but don't like to be taken advantage of.
            FWIW, the yes-men don't advance matters. The critical eye is much better for that, since there is always room for improvement.

            Comment


            • #66
              Originally posted by Alagirl View Post
              Well, after having heard the sagas of CBER and the never ending soap of Crossed Sabers, I cannot blame people who have been burned but the likes of that to be skeptic/cynic about it.

              BTW, if you volunteer to stick your head in the noose when critic is offered it does not make you look particularly good.

              But that is really getting off the topic of the financial obligation a group asking for public support.
              One person's harrassment is another's vigilance. Yes, there are nuts you can never please but the majority of people are normal and work hard for their money. They support the cause but don't like to be taken advantage of.
              FWIW, the yes-men don't advance matters. The critical eye is much better for that, since there is always room for improvement.
              Ah, but it's less than fair or honest to lump all groups together simply because one has a personal grudge against an organization. In general everyone has to follow their own road and practice due diligence; that is prudent, BUT turning facts around with the conscious effort to disparage anyone or any group doesn't " advance matters" either.
              The majority of organizations that have been around for an extended amount of time have been scrutinized, tested and still remain on board. While you may not agree with a particular aspect of their organization, it does not entitle anyone to throw barbs. I donate to a lot of rescues, both horse, dog and wild life; I research which ones fit my needs and if I see something out of line or egregious, I try to find out why ... but never with blatant statements and a gossip stream of preteen drama.
              Decide for yourself, but why do I think if you were the object of the constant harassment by any particular person or some little group of angry housewives, you just might feel differently?

              Comment


              • #67
                Originally posted by Floridarider View Post
                Ah, but it's less than fair or honest to lump all groups together simply because one has a personal grudge against an organization.
                I'm not sure where you are getting that from.


                Originally posted by Floridarider View Post
                In general everyone has to follow their own road and practice due diligence;
                Right. Part of the due diligence is to be able to speak freely on a public forum about one's experiences so that others may add that information to their quest due diligence. It is up to the reader to determine if a poster has a viable concern or is simply stirring the pot for the sake of causing drama.

                Originally posted by Floridarider View Post
                that is prudent, BUT turning facts around with the conscious effort to disparage anyone or any group doesn't " advance matters" either.
                I'm not sure where you are seeing that? Perhaps you have background or inside information that the rest of us don't have? What are the facts that are being turned around?

                Originally posted by Floridarider View Post
                The majority of organizations that have been around for an extended amount of time have been scrutinized, tested and still remain on board. While you may not agree with a particular aspect of their organization, it does not entitle anyone to throw barbs.
                Yes, a lot of politicians have been around a long time as well. Some of them are dedicated and aboveboard, even if occasionally they have to get down in the dirt to play the game and get something accomplished for the benefit of their constituents.

                But, some of them, over time, develop an amazing attitude of entitlement. They derive great personal benefit - both financial and egotistical - from their long term, strong, political connections and power.

                We don't stop questioning our politicians because they have been around a while and everyone believes they have been vetted. Why should any other organization which is supported by donations be exempt from the same sort of scrutinization - and be willingly to undergo that scrutinizitation?

                Originally posted by Floridarider View Post
                but never with blatant statements and a gossip stream of preteen drama. Decide for yourself, but why do I think if you were the object of the constant harassment by any particular person or some little group of angry housewives, you just might feel differently?
                Sorry. A lot of the drama comes from the rescues themselves and the followers of that rescue who take it upon themselves to come on boards like this to defend the perceived slights.

                I sometimes feel bad for some of these organizations. They need the energy and dedication of their followers but can also be damaged by them when some of them become overzealous and fanatical. It must be a catch-22 for them.

                Comment


                • #68
                  I'm not here to pretend, offend or defend. You obviously haven't followed the thread, and you haven't read some of the comments referenced from the past, so it might be difficult for you to follow what has transpired.

                  Anyone can turn any situation or conversation around in an unsavory way just by twisting and hinting with innuendos. I find it particulary sad that you might think it's just dliligence that a single person comes out into the public to try and damage an organization regardless of hidden agendas ( which were brought out here) yet you find fault with supporters and people just like me who have actually been to the organization, checked the accounting since it was done by an independent auditor, witnessed the miracles happening and seen the sacrifices made by a family,and still try to make it seem that we are " protesting too much."

                  Every and any organization has the right to defend themselves against harassment; sorry to hear that you don't agree, but hey that's what makes our country so great.

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    I agree with Sketcher's points...it's not a bad thing to question a rescue org and ask for clarification. There are some so-called rescues that just suck out loud and do find a fanatical (albeit below-average intelligence) following who rabidly defend them.
                    In this case the defenders aren't stating that all rescues need to left unquestioned. The issue is there's one poster who seems to have an unreasonable vendetta against AC4H. And has had one for some time. It seems to stem from a perceived idea that the rescue is making a large profit from the broker owned horses. In other threads it was explained ad nauseum how the program works, the owner of the rescue has invited the poster to call or visit personally for questions and clarification...the poster prefers to stay behind a computer screen spewing vitriol instead of getting first hand information instead of "I read on the internet on another BB" info.
                    The poster in question does indeed seem to hate this particular rescue...and then tries to sugarcoat that hatred by stating they often use the word rescue in quotes referring to other rescues (however only seems to do that with AC4H iin a search), makes thinly veiled insults and insinuations and refers to them elsewhere with the dollar sign instead of the number four...so that wasn;t exactly a typo either.
                    Considering the poster's past with another very questionable rescue that they dealt with personally...it's not hard to guess that they got burned once and just distrust everyone now. But it's also not hard to guess that they might not be a stellar and unobjective judge of character either considering past affiliations.

                    To question a rescue and ask for more detailed info isn't a bad thing. To hound one or two particular rescues without bothering to do any more research than what's found online is ridiculous and vindictive. Especially after being invited to see things first hand and refusing to do so. Does that seem unbiased to anyone? And calling those who have done extensive research into the rescue in question (because I also do not believe much of what I hear online whether it's good or bad...I also had the family attorney check before purchasing from there. Actual unbiased research and they checked out fine and legal) mindless goons is just childish IMO.
                    And FWIW...anyone with any financial sense at all can see that their income stated is a pittance...it's not a 4 horse backyard rescue. The numbers add up fine with bupkis left over for pocket lining...with propr research the allegations this person is making just do not add up *at all.*
                    And I'm not a blind following goon...I distrust pretty much everyone from the get go. I allso don't believe the sun rises and sets on this particular rescue...but I do see them doing what they can in ways that work for quantity and using their funds wisely to help the largest number possible. Is it perfect? hardly...nobody is perfect. Do I agree with *everything* they do 100%? Nope. Do I think they do a hella lot more right than wrong? Yep, because I checked it out first. REALLY checked them out. I wouldn't hesitate to recommend them to others at this point...experienced others most likely as opposed to newbie horse folks. But anyone buying from an auction, dealer, broker or rescue should have some experience...that's an obvious given in cases like this. And we can't control the world's inexperienced folks anymore than we can control pettiness online.
                    You jump in the saddle,
                    Hold onto the bridle!
                    Jump in the line!
                    ...Belefonte

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      I can not believe this thread is still going on, and not about the actual topic but some imagined agenda.
                      I, like many others here, discuss a variety of topics that I have a personal interest in- horse slaughter, horse 'rescues', and sometimes I get suckered into looking at Finger Lakes and CANTER TBs. Discussing those topics, even if you do so EVERY TIME they come up on the forum and with a spin others don't like, does not constitute harassment.

                      I think many of you are seeing what is not there.
                      To point:
                      Originally posted by MistyBlue View Post
                      with propr research the allegations this person is making just do not add up *at all.*
                      What allegations did I make? Seriously, quote 'em for me would ya' cause I am not seeing anything I wrote that comes close to an allegation. It's of further interest since what my concerns are about the numbers this rescue pulls in are probably NOT what any of you are thinking, AT ALL.

                      As to 'proper research', why is looking at their 990s not enough? And if that is not enough 'proper research', then, isn't that precisely what this thread was discussing in the first place, that sometimes getting the information one needs to make an informed decision they personally are comfortable with is hard if not impossible to do?

                      Finally, as for going to visit? In light of the way everyone reacts to questions and points made? Yeah, I don't think so. 'Inviting', these people are not.
                      Last edited by Angela Freda; May. 13, 2010, 06:14 PM.
                      Yo/Yousolong April 23rd, 1985- April 15th, 2014

                      http://notesfromadogwalker.com/2012/...m-a-sanctuary/

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Originally posted by Floridarider View Post
                        supporters and people just like me who have actually been to the organization, checked the accounting since it was done by an independent auditor, ...
                        You have personally seen that audit? Is that what you are saying?
                        I'm sure many would be interested to hear what it included and what about it gave you comfort.
                        Yo/Yousolong April 23rd, 1985- April 15th, 2014

                        http://notesfromadogwalker.com/2012/...m-a-sanctuary/

                        Comment

                        • Original Poster

                          #72
                          No offense but you're really off base here.

                          There is no need to question that poster about the financial statements. You are able to view them yourself - merely by asking to see their audited financial statements.

                          I doubt there is a conspiracy between the auditor and the nonprofit.

                          Having been through many an internal and external audit, I can tell you that they are a big PITA for a nonprofit. Because auditors - audit. And you better have your ducks in a row.



                          Originally posted by Angela Freda View Post
                          You have personally seen that audit? Is that what you are saying?
                          I'm sure many would be interested to hear what it entailed and what about it gave you comfort.
                          Brothers and sisters, I bid you beware
                          Of giving your heart to a dog to tear.
                          -Rudyard Kipling

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            What allegations did I make? Seriously, quote 'em for me would ya' cause I am not seeing anything I wrote that comes close to an allegation. It's of further interest since what my concerns are about the numbers this rescue pulls in are probably NOT what any of you are thinking, AT ALL.
                            Thank you to the AC#H goons, and others for making me rethink things.I've looked at things differently and now have some new ideas about the situation.
                            Many more questions to come, once I've had a chance to look into them.

                            Here are some numbers to mull over:
                            Financial data from the 1023:
                            11/03-12/03, total expenses [which would include broker payment]= $16k
                            1/04-12/04 " " = $$206,800
                            1/05-12/05 " " =$299,600
                            And from actual 990s:
                            '05 990, 'Program Expenses' p 3 Pt. III, $129,888
                            '06 990, 'Supplies', p 2, pt II, $128,412
                            '07 990, 'Other Expenses', p 2, pt II, $235,216
                            Now are these, in total or part, the funds paid to Brian? You see how he's making a nice buck off them if that is the case? And further, you see how the 990 needs to be more detailed so that information is clearer so that those who care can make an informed decision on whether to pay Brian a big fat salary, or not?
                            Finally, as for going to visit? In light of the way everyone reacts to questions and points made? Yeah, I don't think so. 'Inviting', these people are not.
                            The way everyone reacts? What does anyone besides the owner of the rescue have to do with this? So the owner of AC4H has to play nicey-nice to you after the many many times you've insinuated illegal things against them on public BBs just to get you to come get your own proof? Do you think they're going to attack you or something? This isn't a TV drama, I'd highly doubt they're going to to do bodily harm. They might not offer you the best chair and a cup of Earl Grey considering your attitude towards them, but I'd bet you'd be safe. And you'd get the answers you're looking for.
                            Thinking they have it in for you makes about as much sense as asking other people who've use due diligence to then hand over their information to you because you're not willing to get it yourself. Ask for the audit instead of making up stuff you think will be on there. It's the mature adult thing to do.

                            And to answer another question about the impersonation...ask ye olde troll soduswoods that was on here a while back. Another ac4h thread you gleefully jumped into with both feet insinuating that the rescue was out screwing people over to place horses...despite the horse in question having been a broker sold one.
                            You jump in the saddle,
                            Hold onto the bridle!
                            Jump in the line!
                            ...Belefonte

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Wasn't that the one where Freda was acting out because a friend of hers fell off a horse she bought from the broker? And blamed AC4H because the broker horses are listed on her website to help them go to better homes? I remember her accusations. Link please? - and Freda - google is our friend.
                              Airborne? Oh. Yes, he can take a joke. Once. After that, the joke's on you.

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Quote:
                                What allegations did I make? Seriously, quote 'em for me would ya' cause I am not seeing anything I wrote that comes close to an allegation. It's of further interest since what my concerns are about the numbers this rescue pulls in are probably NOT what any of you are thinking, AT ALL.

                                Quote:
                                Thank you to the AC#H goons, and others for making me rethink things.I've looked at things differently and now have some new ideas about the situation.
                                Many more questions to come, once I've had a chance to look into them.

                                Here are some numbers to mull over:
                                Financial data from the 1023:
                                11/03-12/03, total expenses [which would include broker payment]= $16k
                                1/04-12/04 " " = $$206,800
                                1/05-12/05 " " =$299,600
                                And from actual 990s:
                                '05 990, 'Program Expenses' p 3 Pt. III, $129,888
                                '06 990, 'Supplies', p 2, pt II, $128,412
                                '07 990, 'Other Expenses', p 2, pt II, $235,216
                                Now are these, in total or part, the funds paid to Brian? You see how he's making a nice buck off them if that is the case? And further, you see how the 990 needs to be more detailed so that information is clearer so that those who care can make an informed decision on whether to pay Brian a big fat salary, or not?

                                Quote:
                                Finally, as for going to visit? In light of the way everyone reacts to questions and points made? Yeah, I don't think so. 'Inviting', these people are not.
                                The way everyone reacts? What does anyone besides the owner of the rescue have to do with this? So the owner of AC4H has to play nicey-nice to you after the many many times you've insinuated illegal things against them on public BBs just to get you to come get your own proof? Do you think they're going to attack you or something? This isn't a TV drama, I'd highly doubt they're going to to do bodily harm. They might not offer you the best chair and a cup of Earl Grey considering your attitude towards them, but I'd bet you'd be safe. And you'd get the answers you're looking for.
                                Thinking they have it in for you makes about as much sense as asking other people who've use due diligence to then hand over their information to you because you're not willing to get it yourself. Ask for the audit instead of making up stuff you think will be on there. It's the mature adult thing to do.

                                And to answer another question about the impersonation...ask ye olde troll soduswoods that was on here a while back. Another ac4h thread you gleefully jumped into with both feet insinuating that the rescue was out screwing people over to place horses...despite the horse in question having been a broker sold one.
                                Looks like proof that the innocent act has just been blown out of the water. It appears this person already had the financial numbers right along.

                                *rollseyes*

                                I think "obsession" fits this well.

                                Comment


                                • #76
                                  Originally posted by AnotherRound View Post
                                  Wasn't that the one where Freda was acting out because a friend of hers fell off a horse she bought from the broker? And blamed AC4H because the broker horses are listed on her website to help them go to better homes? I remember her accusations. Link please? - and Freda - google is our friend.
                                  That is the one, and still Freda denies that she doesn't harass AC4H.

                                  Comment


                                  • #77
                                    [QUOTE=JoZee;4862847]Looks like proof that the innocent act has just been blown out of the water. It appears this person already had the financial numbers right along.

                                    *rollseyes*

                                    I think "obsession" fits this well. :

                                    So here's the proof of the obsessive, nasty, unprofessional behavior that you asked for in another post. Now can you really tell me that someone who supports this rescue is out of line and too defensive? I don't think so.

                                    Comment


                                    • #78
                                      Unfortunately it's a misplaced obsession...the poster thinks that because the broker makes a profit on the horses then either it's
                                      a) the rescue is paying the broker the profits he makes
                                      2) the rescue is also profitting off of the broker's sales

                                      However if they just asked for the audits themselves instead of just glossing over the internet for the 990, they'd see where and what the income is spent on. And it's not what they're hoping the answer is...

                                      Of *course* the broker makes a profit. All brokers do, or else they aren't in business long. And of *course* the broker still has trucks going to feed lots and slaughter...if a broker provides for slaughter houses then that's part of their job.
                                      The broker sells through the auctions..some sell and some don't. Some sell to other meat buyers, some don't. Some he ships for meat himself, some he doesn't. And some are advertised on the broker pages of the rescue's site...NOT being sold by the rescue and the broker is NOT getting paid by the rescue. The rescue is simply hoping to help some of the horses find a wider buying audience, so they might have a better chance of finding a private home. Or even be purchased by a dealer or sales barn or flipper.

                                      To become rabid about something they're so poorly informed on...a story they're making up as they go along because it fits their preconceived notions...is a tad odd.

                                      Just being mad because brokers and dealers do business in ways they don't appove of is no reason to try to insult a rescue org that advertises some of their horses in case they can help find it a decent second chance. Brokers, dealers, sales barns and flippers have been around forever and it's a normal accepted equine business. Yes, some deal with feed lots and slaughter. If there's an issue with that aspect...take that on as a cause. I don't personally like it either, but it's not illegal. But thinking to insult and insinuate illegal doings of a rescue just trying to help some horses is going to change how a broker does business...or is going to stop any horse from ever going through auction or slaughter...or is going to ensure every horse out there only ever goes to the bestest most specialist home...or is going to force a broker to sell to private homes at meat prices...that's a tad too much of an immature Disney outlook on life in general.

                                      heck, as soon as I get my ring finished I plan on buying a few annnually from brokers, dealers and feed lots and working on them to flip. It's what I did for a long time and will probably do it again. I won't adopt them out, I probably won't have a FRR with the sales contracts either. And I might even make a little profit here and there. Oh the horrors.

                                      We all do what we can. For some of us that means just getting wide spread advertising out to help the ones we can despite it helping the broker make a profit too. To others it means flipping horses by taking them out of a potentially risky position, putting the work into them and reselling them...even without an adoption contract, first right clause or whatever because the horse still got it's second chance and those people flipping can help a LOT more and help higher numbers even if some future homes aren't the end all/be all. And for some it means whining endlessly and ineffectively online whilst never investing our own personal time, income or even getting off of our butts from the computer chair...and still think we're "making changes" happen.
                                      You jump in the saddle,
                                      Hold onto the bridle!
                                      Jump in the line!
                                      ...Belefonte

                                      Comment


                                      • #79
                                        Originally posted by MistyBlue View Post
                                        Unfortunately it's a misplaced obsession...the poster thinks that because the broker makes a profit on the horses then either it's
                                        a) the rescue is paying the broker the profits he makes
                                        2) the rescue is also profitting off of the broker's sales

                                        However if they just asked for the audits themselves instead of just glossing over the internet for the 990, they'd see where and what the income is spent on. And it's not what they're hoping the answer is...

                                        Of *course* the broker makes a profit. All brokers do, or else they aren't in business long. And of *course* the broker still has trucks going to feed lots and slaughter...if a broker provides for slaughter houses then that's part of their job.
                                        The broker sells through the auctions..some sell and some don't. Some sell to other meat buyers, some don't. Some he ships for meat himself, some he doesn't. And some are advertised on the broker pages of the rescue's site...NOT being sold by the rescue and the broker is NOT getting paid by the rescue. The rescue is simply hoping to help some of the horses find a wider buying audience, so they might have a better chance of finding a private home. Or even be purchased by a dealer or sales barn or flipper.

                                        To become rabid about something they're so poorly informed on...a story they're making up as they go along because it fits their preconceived notions...is a tad odd.

                                        Just being mad because brokers and dealers do business in ways they don't appove of is no reason to try to insult a rescue org that advertises some of their horses in case they can help find it a decent second chance. Brokers, dealers, sales barns and flippers have been around forever and it's a normal accepted equine business. Yes, some deal with feed lots and slaughter. If there's an issue with that aspect...take that on as a cause. I don't personally like it either, but it's not illegal. But thinking to insult and insinuate illegal doings of a rescue just trying to help some horses is going to change how a broker does business...or is going to stop any horse from ever going through auction or slaughter...or is going to ensure every horse out there only ever goes to the bestest most specialist home...or is going to force a broker to sell to private homes at meat prices...that's a tad too much of an immature Disney outlook on life in general.

                                        heck, as soon as I get my ring finished I plan on buying a few annnually from brokers, dealers and feed lots and working on them to flip. It's what I did for a long time and will probably do it again. I won't adopt them out, I probably won't have a FRR with the sales contracts either. And I might even make a little profit here and there. Oh the horrors.

                                        We all do what we can. For some of us that means just getting wide spread advertising out to help the ones we can despite it helping the broker make a profit too. To others it means flipping horses by taking them out of a potentially risky position, putting the work into them and reselling them...even without an adoption contract, first right clause or whatever because the horse still got it's second chance and those people flipping can help a LOT more and help higher numbers even if some future homes aren't the end all/be all. And for some it means whining endlessly and ineffectively online whilst never investing our own personal time, income or even getting off of our butts from the computer chair...and still think we're "making changes" happen.
                                        Well, as 'not for profit' an organization is still allowed to be in the black below the line. Just the people running it aren't supposed to be.

                                        A broker deals. That's what he/she does. What and with whom he deals is not of any importance. And the profit he/she makes is between the broker and the IRS. Just because it's horses does not mean squat (or on the flip side, there are other people dealing in horses, they just don't call themselves broker, but 'dealer' and they usually make a tidy sum)

                                        And if you are a private person, hey, more power to you.(but how can you consider buying a horse to flip it?! Don't you kow you are supposed to luv it and keep it and feed it till it croaks of unnatural causes...)

                                        (yanking the mouse out of my bratty kid's crabby paws didn't help it's functionality either)

                                        But Floridarider: Considering that most of your posts in this thread are about Angela Fred's obsession, I think you need to check your own.It's getting old, considering this thread is not about one particular organization, but the general implication these rules have for small groups and for people considering to keep them afloat.

                                        Comment


                                        • #80
                                          And if you are a private person, hey, more power to you.(but how can you consider buying a horse to flip it?! Don't you kow you are supposed to luv it and keep it and feed it till it croaks of unnatural causes...)
                                          LOL...the two I have now are fed until they croak most likely. And probably from unnatural causes...like death by turkey vulture.
                                          Oddly enough one was a possible flip...but the little bugger is growing on me. Like a fungus, but growing all the same.
                                          You jump in the saddle,
                                          Hold onto the bridle!
                                          Jump in the line!
                                          ...Belefonte

                                          Comment

                                          Working...
                                          X