Home
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Members
Current visitors
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Home
Forums
The Competition
FedEx Discussions
Stupid arguments about the Ground business model
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="oldrps" data-source="post: 4735855" data-attributes="member: 36765"><p><em>When you ask another party to invest their own money in a venture where all of the other competitors in that space invested all of the required funds themselves that person does not deserve being lied to. Your beloved RPS/FXG marketed this con as a so called "partnership" A partnership when one party is untruthful with the other is no partnership.</em></p><ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">What difference does it make regarding the competition, you knew that going in. Did you not do any homework before you signed the agreement with RPS? </li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">I don't have a copy of the operating agreement from when I was there, but I don't remember "partnership" being in the agreement.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Why do you think I love RPS/FXG. If I loved them, seems like I wouldn't have left.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">How was the agreement a con? Please cite some examples for everyone so they can understand.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">What did RPS/Ground do that was untruthful and not spelled out in the agreement? Please cite some examples for everyone so they can understand.</li> </ul><p><em>"As for this so called "business opportunity" it keeps trying to promote. Goodwill and proprietary rights key components of a true business venture..... WERE NOT VOLUNTARILY GRANTED! It required the hammer of law to get them to grudgingly give it up."</em></p><ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">How much money did you lose by not having goodwill and proprietary rights?</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">How much money did you gain when you got them?</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">What proprietary rights did you gain in the newer contracts?</li> </ul><p><em>"The only difference between then and now is that the individual has to put up more money. Money that has no more standing no more defensible regardless of the increase in capital requirements now then it was then And the only difference between then and now is that despite the conveyance of limited goodwill and proprietary rights there is not one single action a contractor can undertake that is NOT subject to FXG oversight and control."</em></p><ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Did you ever have your own business before you contracted with RPS? </li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul"><em>Money that has no more standing no more defensible</em>... What are you trying to say with the 2nd sentence? Lot of big words, but does not make any sense. I <em>think</em> you mean the business owner has to invest more money in capital than you did when you started. I would think they have to put up more money as they have more routes now which requires more vehicles. They should gross a lot more money than you did with one vehicle. </li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">How many businesses startup with no money and has guaranteed income as soon as you start it? </li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">I can't answer what they have done for the past 20 years, but when I was there, you better believe there was oversight, we were the customer and paid your business for a service that was agreed upon. Do you think a customer isn't going to make sure they get what they paid for and verify that it was completed.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Control is a little bit more difficult to define as you may see something is control, but could be a part of servicing an area. <ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">You can say that I have to service every package everyday as control, but it is part of the agreement. </li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">You can't leave until all of the packages are loaded could be considered control, but how can you service all of the packages if you leave before they are all loaded. </li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">You have to return by 6:30 pm so all of the pickup packages have to be unloaded for the outbound trailers to leave on time, but that is part of servicing all the packages. </li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">There are also legal requirements that may appear to be control. They made me pull the Haz-Mat slips out my Haz-Mat envelope as I delivered the packages. That is a DOT requirement, not control. You will need to give examples on how they controlled you that were beyond the agreement. </li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">For example, to make your statement make more since, you could say you had an over controlling manager that went beyond what they were supposed to do. They made me run my stops in a specific order everyday. Said I had to start at 8:30am and leave by 6:00pm. </li> </ul></li> </ul><p><em>"No matter how large or small the scale you the contractor operate at, in the end all you did was buy yourself a job."</em></p><ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">I think you described any person that starts up their own business. The only difference is you can lose money with a business, not with a job.</li> </ul><p>Please start giving examples of how they did you wrong instead of being vague of what happened. Cite some examples of what they did that was wrong. Just throwing out that statement without backing it up with some facts solidifies your argument. It will help people understand what really happened.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="oldrps, post: 4735855, member: 36765"] [I]When you ask another party to invest their own money in a venture where all of the other competitors in that space invested all of the required funds themselves that person does not deserve being lied to. Your beloved RPS/FXG marketed this con as a so called "partnership" A partnership when one party is untruthful with the other is no partnership.[/I] [LIST] [*]What difference does it make regarding the competition, you knew that going in. Did you not do any homework before you signed the agreement with RPS? [*]I don't have a copy of the operating agreement from when I was there, but I don't remember "partnership" being in the agreement. [*]Why do you think I love RPS/FXG. If I loved them, seems like I wouldn't have left. [*]How was the agreement a con? Please cite some examples for everyone so they can understand. [*]What did RPS/Ground do that was untruthful and not spelled out in the agreement? Please cite some examples for everyone so they can understand. [/LIST] [I]"As for this so called "business opportunity" it keeps trying to promote. Goodwill and proprietary rights key components of a true business venture..... WERE NOT VOLUNTARILY GRANTED! It required the hammer of law to get them to grudgingly give it up."[/I] [LIST] [*]How much money did you lose by not having goodwill and proprietary rights? [*]How much money did you gain when you got them? [*]What proprietary rights did you gain in the newer contracts? [/LIST] [I]"The only difference between then and now is that the individual has to put up more money. Money that has no more standing no more defensible regardless of the increase in capital requirements now then it was then And the only difference between then and now is that despite the conveyance of limited goodwill and proprietary rights there is not one single action a contractor can undertake that is NOT subject to FXG oversight and control."[/I] [LIST] [*]Did you ever have your own business before you contracted with RPS? [*][I]Money that has no more standing no more defensible[/I]... What are you trying to say with the 2nd sentence? Lot of big words, but does not make any sense. I [I]think[/I] you mean the business owner has to invest more money in capital than you did when you started. I would think they have to put up more money as they have more routes now which requires more vehicles. They should gross a lot more money than you did with one vehicle. [*]How many businesses startup with no money and has guaranteed income as soon as you start it? [*]I can't answer what they have done for the past 20 years, but when I was there, you better believe there was oversight, we were the customer and paid your business for a service that was agreed upon. Do you think a customer isn't going to make sure they get what they paid for and verify that it was completed. [*]Control is a little bit more difficult to define as you may see something is control, but could be a part of servicing an area. [LIST] [*]You can say that I have to service every package everyday as control, but it is part of the agreement. [*]You can't leave until all of the packages are loaded could be considered control, but how can you service all of the packages if you leave before they are all loaded. [*]You have to return by 6:30 pm so all of the pickup packages have to be unloaded for the outbound trailers to leave on time, but that is part of servicing all the packages. [*]There are also legal requirements that may appear to be control. They made me pull the Haz-Mat slips out my Haz-Mat envelope as I delivered the packages. That is a DOT requirement, not control. You will need to give examples on how they controlled you that were beyond the agreement. [*]For example, to make your statement make more since, you could say you had an over controlling manager that went beyond what they were supposed to do. They made me run my stops in a specific order everyday. Said I had to start at 8:30am and leave by 6:00pm. [/LIST] [/LIST] [I]"No matter how large or small the scale you the contractor operate at, in the end all you did was buy yourself a job."[/I] [LIST] [*]I think you described any person that starts up their own business. The only difference is you can lose money with a business, not with a job. [/LIST] Please start giving examples of how they did you wrong instead of being vague of what happened. Cite some examples of what they did that was wrong. Just throwing out that statement without backing it up with some facts solidifies your argument. It will help people understand what really happened. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Home
Forums
The Competition
FedEx Discussions
Stupid arguments about the Ground business model
Top