Pacifica continues to drift, de facto purposeless as ever.
Surprise. Shocker.
Interim Executive Director Livingston having secured a bridge loan and a transition to competent financial oversight, the organization simply drifts, as ever, as it has for decades as its listenership has faded, faded further, and then faded some more.
The Strategic Planning Committee has done nothing other than to meet and do nothing.
What’s the rush? What’s the problem?
It can wait.
No worries.
Herewith, a sampler of relevant audio.
Try not to laugh. Try not to fall asleep. Try not to laugh while falling asleep.
—Indigopirate
Before nodding off, I did appreciate the attention paid to the affiliates. The affiliates have been neglected apart being a source of two seats on the PNB. Anything to improve working with the affiliates is welcome.
ReplyDelete"Interim Executive Director Livingston having secured a bridge loan and a transition to competent financial oversight,"
ReplyDeleteLivingston did not get a bridge loan. Livingston only signed a three year loan that Pacifica did not qualify for and cannot pay back. It's not a bridge to anything, as the meeting this post is about indicates. As for "competent financial oversight," I can only say I have seen no financial oversight - competent or otherwise. The financial operations are in complete disarray, imo.
Kim
Uhm… you’ve described a bridge loan. Or a balloon loan. Pretty much the same difference if you’re at all familiar with finance.
DeleteUsage varies a bit depending on context.
Feel free to choose your preferred term.
If you feel this will prove to be a bridge loan to nowhere, I’d probably agree with you.
That’s because we’re talking about Pacifica, here. Which is to say Hopeless.. and worse than hopeless… and probably worse than that, whatever exactly ‘that’ is…
As for financial oversight, there had for some time been what is known, formally or semi-formally, as a loss of all financial controls. There was no actual knowledge of the financial state of affairs. Zero. Zip. None.
Not a clue. Nor the inkling of the whiff of a clue.
Nothing pretending to be something.
Cluelessness. In other words, Pacifica.
That’s known as a complete loss of control. The first thing you have to do, as a rule, is to get people in to attempt to get a handle on the current state of financial affairs and to put in place simultaneously the ability to track them going forward.
That, so far as I can tell as a mere member of the ignorant public, has been done and will continue.
If you want to argue that Pacifica is nonetheless demonstrably incapable of controlling its financial affairs, its programming, or its clueless committees and nominal directorship either now or likely going ‘forward’ (whatever ‘forward’ means to these folks) I’d probably agree with you.
I’m not here to defend Livingston, only to argue for accurate definitions and understandings of such things.
Livingston has made abundantly clear on innumerable occasions that if Pacifica doesn’t take advantage of the time which has been bought it will still either go down in shit or up in flames, or possibly both (choose one, or both, your preference).
To date, Pacifica shows no sign of changing in any useful or necessary way.
Is this a surprise?
~ ‘indigotheineffableinevitablepiratefromtheninthdimension’
Chris,
ReplyDeleteWhat was never revealed, except once in a comment by Alex Steinberg, was that WBAI had renewed its lease at 120 Wall Street. I do not know what amount was paid to Silverstein.
But WBAI, as personified by Michel Cohen, believes it is above American law.
Thank you.
Ed Manfredonia
@Ed
DeleteWith respect:
Might it be more accurate to argue that WBAI/Pacifica is beneath the notice of the law as it is beneath the notice of the public… and, of course, beneath contempt.
;)
~ ‘indigo’
Hi Indigo -
ReplyDeleteJust for clarity, here are two easily found definitions for "bridge loan" and "balloon loan."
Bridge loan: "a sum of money lent by a bank to cover an interval between two transactions, typically the buying of one house and the selling of another."
"Balloon Loan: "A balloon loan is a type of loan that does not fully amortize over its term. Since it is not fully amortized, a balloon payment is required at the end of the term to repay the remaining principal balance of the loan."
My interpretation is that Pacifica did not get a bridge loan, other than the "bridge to nowhere" type. There's been talk of "refinancing" the FJC loan but since imo FJC was a liar's loan to begin with, I don't see that as viable, which won't stop those that make up this kind of bullshit to keep saying it.
"As for financial oversight, there had for some time been what is known, formally or semi-formally, as a loss of all financial controls. There was no actual knowledge of the financial state of affairs. "
I'm not sure what time frame you're referring to. If it's the period after the CFO left, I'd say that is true.
But as for, "The first thing you have to do, as a rule, is to get people in to attempt to get a handle on the current state of financial affairs and to put in place simultaneously the ability to track them going forward. That, so far as I can tell as a mere member of the ignorant public, has been done and will continue."
While that's true, I haven't actually seen any results yet of what Livingston/NETA have done. NETA is trying to get up to speed but after, what, at least two-three months? ...as far as I can see, they're still, um, struggling. All public pronouncements from Livingston and the head of NETA, Anita, who spoke at the NFC and maybe the PNB also, were gross underestimations of what is needed relative to what their plans were. It's unknown how many are employed and doing what.
Last week, I asked Livingston about the status of the 990, due to the IRS August 15 and the FY2017 audit, due June 30, 2018 to the state of CA. The answers I got were meaningless gibberish and I still don't know what, if anything, was filed. At the August 6 Audit meeting, the auditor said he was still trying to get a trial balance from NETA in order to try and put together the 990 for a timely filing. I reminded Livingston of the IRS and state of CA codes that these documents, if they were, in fact, filed, need to be made public on pacifica.org. To date, they are still not. When the NFC gets around to meeting again in a couple of weeks, we might learn a little more. Unless, of course, they cancel from what seems like sheer inertia from all concerned.
All I can say is I think you're a lot more optimistic on this front than I am. But I always enjoy your comments!
Kim
Inertia is the key word here. Now that Tom is headed for the exit, not much will happen until the new person takes the helm.
DeleteAt the risk of sounding like the corporate/organizational bullshit which one hears from low-level consultants like Livingston, I think we’re on similar pages here.
DeleteAs for the minor question of terminology, I would understand ‘bridge’ in this context as meaning a loan intended to bridge from present dire circumstances to a reorganization sufficient to survive.
Do I think they can manage that?
No.
I see no transformation or rebirth here, given these people, and this organization, and its dedication to failure.
They might ‘survive’ in some fashion, in pieces or whatever, but at best they’ll continue in a zombie state for the foreseeable future and there’s a fair chance they’ll simply cease to exist.
A blessing, really.
These are people who can’t manage a simple meeting and thoughtlessly create impossible ‘structures’ of ‘management’ that can’t possibly do anything but fail.
The only question, and it’s a minor, academic question to my mind, is as to the details of that failure.
I see Pacifica as in effect dedicated only to myriad delusional mostly individually variant and often conflicting political agendas and utterly unwilling to cooperate, follow any lead, or in any way function.
These are political failure artists.
It’s the only art they know or care about.
These are in my judgement fools, knaves, and… what’s the formal term… oh yes, assholes.
People avoid them.
For that matter they largely avoid themselves.
So… we disagree a bit, but I don’t see it as so very great a difference.
Not as I see it, anyway.
If you want to make war, though, that’s fine, I have no problem with war.
~ ‘indigo’
ps: There’s a meeting scheduled for this evening, perhaps we’ll learn something? Who knows? Personally, I find it difficult to predict the paths of madness and delusion.