Genesis

I've both run a company and been someone else's "key employee" in the past.

I also have had promises made to me in the context of being that "key man" that were maliciously not kept. I was young, stupid, didn't get it in writing and got screwed. I timed my departure to be of the most damage possible, but didn't take anything with me on the way out - they didn't have anything I'd have wanted anyway. To say I was angry would be the understatement of the year - but for my contribution the company I was working for at the time would have folded. I literally rescued a project that would have sunk them and filled the lungs with water.....

That event, which occurred relatively early in my employment life, was one of the driving forces behind my desire to be self-employed. I was able to turn that screwing into a motivational force to succeed, and while there were many ventures both for myself and others after that one, I never forgot the lessons I learned from it.....

I don't know what to think about this, to be honest, but here's my nickel analysis of the two press releases.....

To buy Barry's story you have to believe that he was offered 1% of gross sales plus a salary for his talents and equipment in a key role. You have to believe that an equipment manufacturer who needed something and has a friend with talent and tooling would negotiate such a deal, that such a transaction would be seen as reasonable by both sides, and that both would do it on a handshake. You also have to believe that Barry was then paid only the salary, and told to pound sand on the gross revenue split - repeatedly. After some amount of insult in this fashion he took the law into his own hands, set up his own company, and took some measure of recompense - but not the total he claimed he was owed in back compensation - in the form of lifting the raw material from Halcyon. Barry states that while he understands taking the material was legally wrong, this is why he did it and felt justified at the time in doing what he did. You must also probably believe that Barry believed (at the time he took the stuff) that when (not if) the theft was discovered he would be able to successfully "offset" it against what he was owed in some fashion and as such would avoid significant penalty by the law for this act - or, alternatively, that Barry would be willing to steal five average automobiles from a random new car lot. (I find the second entirely implausible myself!)

To buy Jerrod's story you have to believe that Barry was Halcyon's "Most Senior Manager", was paid a "healthy salary" (in relationship to his value to the company), and for reasons unexplained decided to intentionally damage Halcyon's vendor relationships, set up his own company and then steal $100k+ worth of raw materials and "trick" employees into doing work for his firm (while presumably on Halcyon's clock). You must believe that Barry thought that $100k worth of raw materials taken from a small company either could not be traced to him, or that it would not be discovered missing at all. You have to believe that someone of Barry's intelligence (which you must evaluate by what you know of either him or his products, as that's all you've got to go on) would believe he could "get away" with stealing the material (in whatever form "get away with" actually means to him.) Finally you have to believe that its unreasonable (or even unethical or worse) to file paperwork to set up your own company before formally resigning from your position.

I think this pretty much outlines the two positions that have been taken in the respective documents, without embellishing anything.

Now, something which may help you evaluate these two positions in your own mind.....

......There is a thing in the US called "The Statute of Frauds" (go look it up.) The short (non-lawyer) version of this is that any contract intended to be performed over a period of more than one year must be in writing to be enforceable. As such, a 1% "handshake agreement" - if such a deal was made - spanning several years cannot be enforced. This would mean that if such an agreement was made, even if it can be proven that it was made, Barry would likely have been told by a lawyer (if he went to see one in contemplation of suing to enforce that deal) that he had no prayer in hell of managing to win. (BTW, this is my "Businessman's understanding" of the SOF - I ain't a lawyer!)

There are likely only two people who know what really happened, and the explanations put forward are, of course, polar opposites.

However, this is what both parties have put on the table for us to judge by, as customers. Reality is that we are unable to evaluate this objectively as we do not have the facts - but as customers and individuals we are entitled to draw conclusions for ourselves - and act on those conclusions - from the material presented to us.

As with most polar opposite presentations, the truth could be anywhere along a line between those two presented positions....

__________________
"A venturesome minority will always be eager to get off on their own, and no obstacles should be placed in their path; let them take risks for Godsake, let them get lost, sunburnt, stranded, drowned, eaten by bears, buried alive under avalanches - that is the right and privilege of any free American."
http://www.denninger.net
http://www.diversunion.org/liability.htm - Fix the Diving Cert racket