Re-organisation of Jolla company

General
#246

It is a wrong claim. Fragmentation is so high that it does not even exist a referring HW platform for each smartphone vendors. Very small smartphone producer can claim to have such platform: fairphone, pinephone, murena, librem, someone else?

However, it does not exist because the revenues-market dynamics. The good news that offering a new way in doing business and collect revenues, the fragmentation will be reduced in time because it is a cost for everyone. For someones is a way to collect revenues. Hence: fragmentation costs + its benefits is still positive. Offer them a way to cut fragmentation costs and increase revenues, and they will embrace it as soon as they started to understand it.

More or less, the innovation lays here. Whatever, ASOP or CentOS.

#247

Companies are legal entities. Therefore they can own something, like humans.

Le società di capitali hanno «personalità giuridica»: sono cioè, per lo Stato, dei soggetti giuridici distinti dalle persone dei soci . È quindi la società, e non il singolo socio, ad essere titolare dei diritti e degli obblighi che nascono dallo svolgimento dell’attività.

You have been confused but this law trick which is not very recent to be honest.

One more tip:

  • the first company with shares has been invented in Genoa during the middle-age, centuries ago
  • the first insurance / escrow deposit (earliest commercial bank) was invented in Genoa almost in the same time
  • the first modern bank with common customers allowance was invented in Florence, a little later.

Never challenge a Genovese about business and trading! :rofl:

I am a Genovese and we do business and trading for living not for arguing with someone else like lawyers do! You lose, your client lose. A Gevose lose, s/he lose. A damn HUGE difference! :wink:

#248

Yes.

No.

Its not a trick and I am not confused. This is what I do for a day job - I am a lawyer specialising in contract and tort law. Are you?

5 Likes
#249

So … No, then (20 chars).

#250

Yes and yes (and 20 chars)

#251

I expect this is accurate and fits the facts much more than various other people pretending they understand the business. It’s painful for me to read and it must be worse for Steve_Everett. :wink:
Indeed, aside from the management buyout, I guessed this was what was going on a week or so after Jolla went into administration. The small invoice was a bit of a giveaway (€140k not €50k).

Rostelcom (or Putin’s inner circle) knew something Jolla could only guess at – that Aurora was going to be Russia’s governmental OS [perhaps including for military hardware].

I’d assume the sale was open to other buyers. And I’d be curious what the mandated share price is.

4 Likes
#252

For sure, it was not a matter of money. :wink:

#253

I do not understand something, maybe someone here can explain. If Rostelecom as debtor of Jolla was decoupled of the international payments system, could not even if they wanted to, to pay the debts. Moreover, how the new owners pay Rostelecom if payments to Russia are not possible? Is this not stealing?

2 Likes
#254

Anyway let’s remember Jolly cooperation quote by Solaire on Dark Souls game series haha
Anyway I am super happy that Jolla is secured again, the Finnish Court solved this Russian dilemma and ongoing issue that was preventing the company to be in business for time period.
I mean, take a french company that wants to be in business with Jolla… knowing that behind them was 30% of Russian stakes.
Finally it’s again all finnish, from what I’ve understand, and has this subsidiary Seaferix, that will concentrate in vehicles OEM software.
If you think about it, it’s the way BlackBerry went with IoT and vehicles, but they decided to leave mobile OS development… and yet, Jolla managed to profit 5million EUR! That’s a great success for a little enterprise! Congrats to Jolla!

1 Like
#255

Rostelecom was not a debtor of Jolla. Rostelecom was partly owner of Jolla, which was a debtor with respect to its own lawyers. I oversimplified saying Rostelecom was “a debtor”, meaning that being a shareholder of a debtor it’s not on the side which has to get money, but on the side that has to fork out (limited to its own company share).

1 Like
#256

But how do they get the buyout money? Or how could they have counter offer ? Would this process would have applied against an US company for example? Just asking, cause a russian company is owning me money and they cannot pay the debts. How is it working in this case? Very curious…

1 Like
#257

Rostelecom does not have anything to pay. They have already paid for acquiring Jolla shares years ago. That’s all they risk to lose.

1 Like
#258

You didn’t understood me…there was a buyout. The new owners bought the company, that means Rostelecom had to receive money for their shares. How did they got the money?

1 Like
#259

‘Boys’ has associations with male minors where it is mostly used for. It doesn’t sound very serious when used by adults. The combination of ‘jolly’ and ‘boys’ is even less serious. Besides it is not women friendly. Why not ‘JollySailors’?

5 Likes
#260

There was no buyout. Jolla assets were sold and money went to Jolla creditors. Possible excess remained in the ownership of Jolla.

#261

So stealing right? Who sold Jolla assests? The owners? How is it called if your property was “sold” without your consent? Cause they didn’t ask Rostelecom if they sell…or they ask but their request was denied. But if Jolla had debts, maybe the owners could have stepped in and pay the debts. You are always avoiding the question, how could they have done this? Did the new owners profit from the fact that the russians couldn’t pay the debts even if they wanted ?Again. is this not stealing?

3 Likes
#262

Anybody you know ever had debts they did not pay?
That’s what happens when you don’t pay debts.
Judges come in and mandate to sell your assets.

#263

You are avoiding the question again. How could they pay the debts if they are decoupled from the international payment system? Why you are always avoiding the question?

#264

Agree @Kea , this was not a good choice.

#265

That could actually save lives. I’m working on some automobile safety stuff (not Jolla, not mercedes) and I can tell you, a better interface would make a lot of cars safer :slight_smile:

2 Likes