Wow, ya go away for a day and things get all wound up!  I have stated my position on the campaign letter previously and will not beat that one again but I felt the need to comment on the state of law suits especially here in CA. 

A few years ago, the small civil engineering firm I work was sued by the family of a young man terribly injured in a car accident.  His girl friend was driving her daddy's porsche and while playing with the radio ran off the edge of the road, over corrected and hit a tree.  She was killed and he was severely brain damaged.  His family sued porsche, the city, CalTrans (state transportation department) and my firm which designed the road.  There was no validity to the suit.  there was nothing wrong with the road or the car.  Porsche settled, the city settled and CalTrans settled, leaving us as the only ones left.  My boss was adamant about not settling because we had done nothing wrong.  But unfortunately because this was such a sad case, the lawyers recommended he settle because the jury would find the case very sympathetic and even if they only found my firm 10% at fault, because everyone else settled, we would be liable for the ENTIRE judgement.  rather than place the firm at risk and the livelihood of it's 20 employees, My boss finally settled.  It was the financially responsible thing to do even if morally reprehensible.

My point is I used to believe like you that if someone settled that there must be some truth to the allegations.  I now know that to be nieve. Joni Mitchell said it best in the song "Windfall"

In the land of litigation
The courts are like game shows
Take what's behind the curtain
The jury cries
I'm not going to be the jackpot
At the end of your perjured rainbow
Not if local justice has even one good eye

Sleddog,

You have a good one too.  Take care of yourself!!

Amyjo ~ it had nothing to do with negative comments against Olivia ~ it had to do with mis-quotes about what was thought the courts had said Olivia’s worth was.

And, you might be right about the truth being somewhere in the middle and that both sides were not totally innocent in whatever happened.  That’s usually the way it goes when there are two sides to a story! 

There will never be an explanation on the settlement by either party as it was sealed by the courts, period.

I know that in your initial blog you wanted to express that you felt the "solicitation letter" was tacky.  Some may agree and some will disagree ~ and that’s fine!  But, then you also brought up the lawsuit ~ and so it went!!!

Empower yourself and find out the all the facts ~ then you won’t feel so bombarded.

This is the end of my part with the back and forth  ~ as I am certainly not the one who can answer all your questions.

So for you and anyone else who has questions about this matter ~ go to the source ~ call and talk to Judy and find out what you want to know for yourself.

You seem to know it all.  Why don't you tell me what the difference is?   And how do you know what kind of people Amy or Judy really are?

  I think the truth is actually somewhere in the middle and both sides were not totally innocent in whatever happened.  There has never been an explanation on the settlement by either party.  Obviously, there never will be either.

  The point in my initial blog wasn't even about the lawsuit so I am not going to continue to sling mud back and forth regarding it.  

My opinion was that I thought it wasn't appropriate to ask former customers to help bail out a private company. We seemed to have gotten away from that.

However, everyone seems do be very defensive with this issue.  If there is a negative comment about Olivia posted you get bombarded. 

I do wish Judy and Olivia the best and hope they weather this storm.

Having 4 of the 5 claims against Judy allowed to proceed ~ does not prove what kind of a person Judy is or is not!

The claim that was dismissed was to have Olivia as a company dissolved.  Wrongful claims are allowed to proceed everyday in the court systems.  I hope you are never wrongfully sued ~ 'cause, you'll be in for a big surprise!

Here’s a quote from a previous Bay Area Reporter article (http://www.ebar.com/news/article.php?sec=news&article=1700) "Errett declined to elaborate on her departure. "Why or how I left is less relevant than this: I have the utmost respect for Olivia. The company has an incredible mission and I believe in it in my bones. I remain a part-owner of the company and I expect and hope the company will continue to thrive.""

That came from someone who later tried to have the company dissolved.  Is that from an open and honest person?

Errett is also quoted as saying "Olivia grew from $6 million in annual revenues to $20 million, and it projected revenues to reach $25 million by the close of 2007"

There’s a $5 million difference between this article and the one you linked to.  So which was it $25 or $30 million?

Why don’t you just call Judy and find out what you really want to know for yourself.

oh, don't be silly. "Court documents" does not equal "facts".  The numbers you mention were those presented by one party in the case, not both.  Our courts are designed to ascertain which documents contain facts.  And newspapers/reporters don't always tell the story.

I'm neither a sheep nor a fool, but I hope you cheer up and that your business improves. 

Yes ~ each has a right to their opinion ~ and each sees their opinion as right!

Amyjo ~ the link you provided to the Bay Area Reporter (which I read weeks ago) are not the actual court documents.

First the article says of Olivia’s value … "estimated up to $30 million" ... then it says … "an estimated projected $25 million, based on booked tours, according to court documents and Errett."

I have read the actual court documents and these "estimated millions" are what Errett told the courts in her lawsuit against Olivia, that she, Amy Errett and a(n) "potential investor(s)" estimated Olivia’s value to be. 

No where in the legal documents do the Courts ever estimate Olivia’s value or even give an opinion!

The real court documents are public record and anyone can read them.

The article also stated that "Errett called Dlugacz a "fuc king idiot" and a "megalomaniac""

Neither of which is true!

Amyjo ~ call and talk with Judy ~ you’ll see for yourself what an open, honest and intelligent woman she truly is!  Then let us know what you think!!!

And, if your business is providing me personally with a service, and I wish to make sure that service continues ~ maybe then we’ll talk about a check!

Brewmax,

You have the right to your opinion as do I.  You did not like my wording of "tacky" that I used to describe the letter.  However, you referred to the letter as being "bold"  So, my opinion is of "bad taste" and yours is "dangerous"  Interesting??

I do not want to see Olivia go out of Business or any Businesses for that matter. 

 I just think that we should be entitled to more information (like financial reports and net worth of the company) before being asked to contribute to save the company from financial distress.  According to court documents the company was worth 6.8 million in 2002 when Amy took over as CEO.  When she was ousted in 2007 the company was worth close to 25 million dollars.   I am not pro Amy or pro Judy .   I am just stating the facts according to court documents.  Read for yourself....here is the link. 

www.ebar.com/news/article.php?sec=news&article=3732

By the way, my business is struggling right now too......can you send me a check?

Hi Amyjo -

Can you contact me directly at 800.631.6277, extension 630? I would like to coordinate a time for you to speak directly to Judy Dlugacz, our President and Founder. She would really like to speak to you regarding your post.

If you take a moment to speak to Judy, I am sure you will feel very differently about our Charter Membership program.

Thank you,

Jeri Umble, Sr. Director, Customer Care

amyjo,

While I certainly respect your right to feel the way you do, I want to point out that it is often more fiscally responsible for businesses to settle lawsuits out of court (regardless of their degree of merit) than to expend larger sums to fight them, since fighting lawsuits often costs far more in time and legal expenses than settling out of court these days. 

Then too, I suspect trips are actually cancelled because they aren't generating enough passengers (perhaps you haven't noticed or had one you've booked get cancelled), Other cost-cutting measures are employed, including staff reductions and projects being sidelined, etc. 

Businesses raise capital often and in many different ways.  I'm sure the people who disagree with you and have actually contributed to Olivia's capital campaign feel they are "getting something out of it" even if what they are getting is not all that material.

This community has a history of supporting in times of need.  When a local gay owned restaurant burned to the ground and the owners needed funds to rebuild, we didn't say "oh, they shouldn't have lined their pockets; rather, they should have bought more insurance".  We helped them re-open.  When a business or friend we love falters, whether for mistakes they've made or for other reasons, we help when we are able because we care and "that's just what we do".

Speculation is one thing but your response epitomizes "tacky" in my book.  I haven't seen the company financials, and don't know the details;  I really don't need to know them though in order to wish Olivia (and Judy) well and continued success in a trying time.  Whether you view the letter as tacky or you plan to contribute or not, taking pot shots and copping a holier-than-thou attitude is worse.

I think the recent solicitation letter was tacky.  The economy does suck right now and all businesses are struggling.  I have taken many Olivia vacations and do not mind paying more to be with other lesbians and to be able to be "out" and ourselves on these trips.  However, by asking your customers to give money to cover future trips is just plain wrong.  I am a business owner and would never ask or expect my customers to help bail me out. (with nothing in return except a charter membership that means nothing) The pretense is to keep the lesbian community going strong.    Whatever!!  I think the owner should dig into her own pockets and bank accounts instead of expecting the customers of Olivia to do so.  Olivia is not the only gay travel company that is out there.  However, Olivia is the only gay travel company begging former customers to just give them some money.  Why do you think that is?  Maybe some wrong doing on executives parts, mismanagement, greed, lawsuit settlement that obviously had merit or they wouldn't have settled.  These are merely speculations on my part, but I will not just hand over my hard earned money due to an obvious issue that has been swept under the rug. It is not due to people not taking vacations.  The trips are always booked and there is generally always a waitlist.  So, why all of a sudden is there no money???

Instead of giving Olivia money so the executives can continue to pad there bank accounts, why doesn't everybody that pland on giving pool there money and charter a boat or resort and at least get something out of it.