CBS/Paramount sues to stop Axanar

[oswriter]

I am proceeding with a heavy helping of 'not really grasping this'. May I presume all charities are nonprofit? Are all nonprofit organizations also 'charities/charitable institutes'? If not do the, what are they - statutes? - do the above [I'll just call them in perfect ignorance] statutes also apply to a nonprofit that is not a charity or charitable institute? (And are the words charity & charitable institute as applied to business/organizations interchangeable? Synonymous?)

"Nonprofit organization" can mean a lot of things. 26 U.S.C. sec. 501(c) alone defines 29 different categories of tax-exempt nonprofit organizations. One of these categories--501(c)(3)--refers to any organization "operated exclusively for religious, charitable, scientific, testing for public safety, literary, or educational purposes." So "charities" are basically a subset of 501(c)(3) organizations. But so are colleges, churches, and scientific organizations. It's a big tent.

The reason that charities seek 501(c)(3) status is that all donations received are tax-deductible by the contributors. This is not true of exempt organizations in the other Section 501 categories. As a result, the IRS makes an organization jump through a lot of hoops just to get 501(c)(3) status. It's not something you can cavalierly claim as a matter of right.

 

[dmac]

If I have a different viewpoint of Peters' actions here, it's only because I've never seen a Con artist attempt to not end up with a large sum of cash after all is said and done.

 

[muCephi]

I am proceeding with a heavy helping of 'not really grasping this'. May I presume all charities are nonprofit? Are all nonprofit organizations also 'charities/charitable institutes'? If not do the, what are they - statutes? - do the above [I'll just call them in perfect ignorance] statutes also apply to a nonprofit that is not a charity or charitable institute? (And are the words charity & charitable institute as applied to business/organizations interchangeable? Synonymous?)

An important point is that nonprofits have to conform to certain public interest goals (as explained by oswriter above), as well as certain ways of operation. Mainly the latter has to do with the nonprofit leadership being essentially trustees of the donations to assure they are used for the public good declared by the organization. There has to be a board of directors, bylaws, statement of purposes (the 501c3 application contains this), conformance to various tax reporting mechanisms, etc. as a consequence of the trustee role.

If one compares how well known 501c3s operate, Axanar is none of that. This is what ticks off people so much when they hear Axanar say they are "operating as a nonprofit". There is a clear definition of what this means in terms of specific ways of operating, and Axanar is NOT doing those things. It is trying to redefine what "operating as a nonprofit" means to EVERYONE ELSE IN THE WORLD.

I can assure from y personal experience that mentioning to anyone on his FB page that he does not have 501(c)3 status sends LFIM into a rage. He butted into a thread I was posting in where I pointed out to someone who asked about the non-profit angle that there is no 501(c)3 there and told me if I wanted to "bitch" about Axanar I should go elsewhere. He threatened to ban me, but never did. He also wanted to argue about everything else and I told him there were only two things I would comment on: his lack of a film ("it takes time to make a film Mike!") despite all the money and his lack of 501(c)3 status since those were two indisputable facts. He also wanted to argue about Star Trek Continues having it and I basically told him to piss off.

He is arguing to the rockslide coming down the mountain that someone somewhere else on some other date was passed by when some sort of mountain event occurred, so you rocks better pass me by too. I am just amazed how much energy he wastes on strategies and tactics that are ineffectual.

 

[muCephi]

If I have a different viewpoint of Peters' actions here, it's only because I've never seen a Con artist attempt to not end up with a large sum of cash after all is said and done.

I have wanted to believe it wasn't so intentional. But over time things which are crystal clear to everyone in the world (like what it means to be operating as a nonprofit) have been argued by Alec way, way past the point where he must have learned the truth even if he didn't know originally, past any point where just stubbornness should have carried it. Something else is going on.

 

[dmac]

If this was someone going around the block for the first time mistakes, misconceptions, overconfidence and antisocial behavior would be explainable to a point. But this doesn't describe the founder of Axanar IMHO.
So.
Where is the Million dollars hidden?
Listen to Christian Gossett at the 16 & 31 minute mark.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[Rincewiend]

That million dollars was based on the KS/IGG right?
So how much did he raise through other means?

 

[wtriker1701]

Confusing moments for me, when RMB likes a FB comment that goes like this:

Rand Johnson
21 Std.
Dear Alec Peters,
aka Narcissistic Son of a BITCH and SCAM ARTIST!

You keep claiming CBS and Paramount are suing the fans in regard to Axanar, THIS IS BLATANTLY FALSE!

They are suing YOU and your cronies ONLY!

You keep claiming CBS and Paramount are destroying Fan Films, THIS IS BLATANTLY FALSE!

You are the one who Infringed on copyright and used CBS IP without license or permission.

You are the one who insisted on guidelines for fan film and got it. Which essentially restricted how fan film can be made because of you and your BIG MOUTH!

You are the only so called fan film producer to raise 1.5 million dollars and spent it on everything but the film you raised the money to make.

You claim you applied for 501 (C) non profit status and there is NO record of the filing anywhere in the state of California public records.

You claim the the story of Garth was your idea when records proved CBS first came with up the idea in their licensing of FASA games.

You claim Donor Store merchandise uses no Star Trek IP yet your selling models of the Klingon D-7, patches with various symbols such as the Andorian Logo and IDIC symbol and various other items that do INDEED infringe on Star Trek IP because CBS OWNS THE COPYRIGHTS to the ship, logo and symbols... DUMBASS!

You removed thousands of Donors names from the Donor Roster with the deletion of the Retro Active Donors List to which Donors used PayPal to donate to.

You are the only Fan Film Producer to spend Donor funds on Sushi, various restaurants, Car tires, car payments, car insurance, AAA membership, Comic Cons, Airline tickets, Gas, Salary for your personal gain to live a lavish lifestyle at the donors expense.

YOU are the ONLY fan film producer to be publicly called a SCAM ARTIST, GRIFTER, and a CON MAN.

These are FACTS Alec Peters. YOU AND YOU ALONE ARE THE ONLY FUCKING ASSHOLE TO SINGLE HANDILY DESTROY STAR TREK FAN FILM FOR REAL FANS

NICE GOING ASSHOLE! BIG WIN FOR AXANAR!

SINCERELY,

Rand Johnson

 

[RedForman]

Confusing moments for me, when RMB likes a FB comment that goes like this:

As he's demonstrated repeatedly, RMB has no backbone and/or can't properly think for himself (witness how easy Lord Alec is able to manipulate him). He's about two steps removed from Slow Lane.

 

[ThankYouGeneR]

That million dollars was based on the KS/IGG right?

I believe that is correct.

So how much did he raise through other means?

And that 'is' the Question isn't it? How much 'did' he raise through other means? Currently-- personally, I have no idea. Plus, and though it naturally follows to wonder and it has fleetingly crossed my now and then about things like money raised at conventions and maybe sometimes elsewhere... the thing is it is just now dawning on *me* the possible enormity of that question. And the answer.

There is this.

The GoFundMe was abortedAxanar has raised money on top of its crowdfunding proceeds that it has never disclosed. This include such sources as direct donations on their website, "retroactive" donations (actually Blu-ray/DVD sales of Prelude to Axanar) and merchandise sales. Estimates for these undisclosed funds total ~$200,000.

....and this.

I have actually wondered exactly that, @Noname Given. I have heard word that Peters only counts the crowdfunding proceeds from Kickstarter and Indiegogo as "donor money." All other undisclosed income is "his." I'm hoping to get this opinion of his confirmed, as it fits the revisions he's said to have made in the Axanar financials submitted to the court the second time.

And here's the thing, for me I mean, I feel like I'm back at that moment the first week in January. A donor trying to prove for myself that my belief in this defendant and this production was correct. Literally looking for information to prove this is all just a big mistake, because people make mistakes, the defendant was misspeaking. And trying to find information that would disprove the things I was reading other people saying... because I believed in this defendant. And I sure as heck wasn't going to believe otherwise just because some people were saying 'things'. (I still don't. I continue to think for myself) Even if they were saying lots of 'things'. That this could all be explained. I would find it.

By that first week I was steeped in backtracking everything I could find where the defendant was speaking for himself; no rumors for me, only him and him alone. Everything from the production site, everything in the previous FAQs, everything in the official blogs, everything in his own thread here, then everything in the official podcast, in one-on-one interviews. Everywhere I could look, for myself, see him talking. And the new FAQ for the production was put online, by the production itself, which contradicted what I 'knew' he'd said before... because *I* had read and heard him say it. He was contradicting himself, telling me (donors) this is the new thing, it never was that thing. And the enormity of this looked like this franchise I love was going to be impacted and fan film people were going to be collateral damage. The sadness I felt as my belief could no longer be supported was.......

<shake it off> Anyway, back to how much money did he raise through other means. I feel like I did that first week in January when seeing, *for myself* my belief had been misguided. I sort of feel like I'm in free-fall, like my feet have been swept out from under me. Because I 'think', maybe it's that *I* fear, that if it's ever fully learned, this is going to be an obscene amount. That was fleeced from people in my fandom. From people like me, people who believe. Using our love of my beloved Star Trek as the lure.

The thing is, even after all I've discovered for myself, all I'm still finding in my effort to learn how how we got here, I am aware that I am still searching for facts/something/anything that will allow me to believe that not 'all' of it was untrue. Even now 'knowing that he lied straight faced' I'm also still searching for 'a reason to believe.' Weird, huh?

How much money 'was' raised by other means? Is that money on the books? Is it accounted for? If not, why not? And where 'is' that money?

 

[ThankYouGeneR]

I have wanted to believe it wasn't so intentional. But over time things which are crystal clear to everyone in the world (like what it means to be operating as a nonprofit) have been argued by Alec way, way past the point where he must have learned the truth even if he didn't know originally, past any point where just stubbornness should have carried it. Something else is going on.

Yeah. I know. Me too. I am...... sad.

 

[muCephi]

That million dollars was based on the KS/IGG right?
So how much did he raise through other means?

So I have tried to make a really simple top level outline which could be modified with various comments, and it suggests to me that there could be as much as a million dollars unaccounted for as far as info released to the public. I am not saying money isn't in some safe harbor, just that it isn't explained.

Here is what I posted a bit upthread:
----------------------------------------
money that should have been around for 2016 expenses:

400k (what Alec said the investor group kicked in to take over the studio asset; the studio buildout cost is subtracted below in the 641k for Axanar)
150k - what alec says he has put into the project this year
731k (1.5 million C/P say was raised from crowdfunding (and merchandising?)-(128k+641k costs in 2015, per the Axanar annual report))
------
1381k

burn rate to keep the place open through 2016:
180k/year rent
50k/year guesstimate utilities, phones
120k/year guestimate salaries and perks
-------
350k

Difference:
about 1 million $
--------------------------------------

Now, various folks discount that the 400k or the 150k were actual external money rather than recycled Axanar money, or doubt these things ever happened.

And I don't know whether the studios' estimate of 1.5 million income includes the latest indiegogo takes, or estimated cash donation takes (some folks suggest it might be another couple hundred k in 2016).

But the point for me is that this is the high level lay of the land that Axanar asserts - yes they bought a studio but they sold it and put the money back into production; yes they paid salary and expenses, but they put these funds back as cash going into the production.

Whatever weasel directions the actual cashflow may have followed, you have to start somewhere if you are going to understand it. You can't let them keep changing the history upon which the analysis is made. And this is what they have represented at the highest level. Start there, require THEM to explain why it is wrong, and analyze their numbers as deviations from the baseline they claimed.

"Where's the million" comes from identifying the body of donated/merchandised money which needs to be unweaseled. Let them have their claimed expenses as stated in the 2015 report, messy as those may be. Working forward, how could they possibly be out of money part way through 2016?

Where did the million go? Sure, some of it may just have been PR misrepresentation (aka lies), both about cash intakes, and numbers in the 2015 report. Some might be misanalysis at a very high level in the above outline (e.g. some major expense not represented). Some of it may be just shifting cash around rather than an actual income. Some of it may be further money put into the studio infrastructure. Some of it may be expenses paid during 2016 not allowed in the (generous) allowances figured in above. Etc, etc.

Sure, its a very high level overview. But there won't be clarity until the discussion moves on from just theorizing about bits of the cashflow, to tracing the cashflows from donation to final current status through all the uses, in a comprehensible high level statement.

 

[ThankYouGeneR]

Sure, its a very high level overview. But there won't be clarity until the discussion moves on from just theorizing about bits of the cashflow, to tracing the cashflows from donation to final current status through all the uses, in a comprehensible high level statement.

How do we do this?

How do we, or maybe just how can I do this: "But there won't be clarity until the discussion moves on from just theorizing about bits of the cashflow, to tracing the cashflows from donation to final current status through all the uses, in a comprehensible high level statement."

 

[muCephi]

How do we do this?

I saw that you posted this analysis on facebook, and their reaction was immediately to dismiss it by saying "oh well its obvious that the 400k and the 150k was a lie", therefore nothing more to reflect upon.

1. I guess I would pick brains here and perhaps make a tighter outline, and try to draw donor attention to it. In this regard:

Carlos, how much analysis of the raw 2016 budget data might you have made already? I am imagining you may have been looking at what might have been released, was there much? Do you have a take on how much money is in a cloud unaccounted for? Do you have any info in particular about the cashflows wrt/ the studio in 2016 from your sources? Your statement on this whole 2016 cashflow would end up being the definitive one I believe.


2. Axanar is trying to preempt all questions with another reboot of their financials through this 'review panel'. Maybe it exists, maybe not, but some of its ability to disseminate any brain fuzz revisionism from it could be countered by putting up questions which are very targeted to the most questionable financial issues and challenging the panel to explain.

An example: how can the salaries and expenses which Alec and others drew in 2015 and early 2016 "never have used donor money", if the reimbursement mechanism (money put into the project by Alec) didn't begin until about 2Q 2016 per his claims?

Perhaps building a list of questions that force the reboot to not escape through its desired wormhole could help. Otoh, maybe making the questions gives them warning of stupid claims they might otherwise make, and lets them say "if we give some sort of "answer" to these questions, we win.". So maybe the questions just get circulated a bit at a time.

I noticed you raised such a question a few days ago and got a good discussion going. If a half dozen of those happen, maybe it builds exacting attention around key points and makes it harder for Axanar to just do a swap out of the history.

 

[urbandefault]

So I have tried to make a really simple top level outline which could be modified with various comments, and it suggests to me that there could be as much as a million dollars unaccounted for as far as info released to the public. I am not saying money isn't in some safe harbor, just that it isn't explained.

Here is what I posted a bit upthread:
----------------------------------------
money that should have been around for 2016 expenses:

400k (what Alec said the investor group kicked in to take over the studio asset; the studio buildout cost is subtracted below in the 641k for Axanar)
150k - what alec says he has put into the project this year
731k (1.5 million C/P say was raised from crowdfunding (and merchandising?)-(128k+641k costs in 2015, per the Axanar annual report))
------
1381k

burn rate to keep the place open through 2016:
180k/year rent
50k/year guesstimate utilities, phones
120k/year guestimate salaries and perks
-------
350k

Difference:
about 1 million $
--------------------------------------

Now, various folks discount that the 400k or the 150k were actual external money rather than recycled Axanar money, or doubt these things ever happened.

And I don't know whether the studios' estimate of 1.5 million income includes the latest indiegogo takes, or estimated cash donation takes (some folks suggest it might be another couple hundred k in 2016).

But the point for me is that this is the high level lay of the land that Axanar asserts - yes they bought a studio but they sold it and put the money back into production; yes they paid salary and expenses, but they put them back as cash going into the production.

Whatever weasel directions the actual cashflow may have followed, you have to start somewhere if you are going to understand it. You can't let them keep changing the history upon which the analysis is made. And this is what they have represented at the highest level. Start there, require THEM to explain why it is wrong, and analyze their numbers as deviations from the baseline they claimed.

"Where's the million" comes from identifying the body of donated/merchandised money which needs to be unweaseled. Let them have their claimed expenses as stated in the 2015 report, messy as those may be. Working forward, how could they possibly be out of money part way through 2016?

Where did the million go? Sure, some of it may just have been PR misrepresentation (aka lies), both about cash intakes, and numbers in the 2015 report. Some might be misanalysis at a very high level in the above outline (e.g. some major expense not represented). Some of it may be just shifting cash around rather than an actual income. Some of it may be further money put into the studio infrastructure. Some of it may be expenses paid during 2016 not allowed in the (generous) allowances figured in above. Etc, etc.

Sure, its a very high level overview. But there won't be clarity until the discussion moves on from just theorizing about bits of the cashflow, to tracing the cashflows from donation to final current status through all the uses, in a comprehensible high level statement.

Didn't AP state somewhere that he had to pay the entire lease up front? Was that 2 or 3 years? Does the $180k in your accounting take that into consideration?

There's been so much information in the last year that I can't keep it all straight. :/

Regardless, there's a lot of money unaccounted for.

 

[ThankYouGeneR]

How do we do this?

I saw that you posted this analysis on facebook, and their reaction was immediately to dismiss it by saying "oh well its obvious that the 400k and the 150k was a lie", therefore nothing more to reflect upon..

Me? Well, no, I'm not on FB. Haven't been for half a dozen years.

(I'll go back now and finish reading your post. )

EDIT: Ah. Got it. Maybe you're thinking of my post here? In this thread? In that post I did say that for the figures I was using right then I was not including the 400K & 150K.

 

[muCephi]

Didn't AP state somewhere that he had to pay the entire lease up front? Was that 2 or 3 years? Does the $180k in your accounting take that into consideration?

There's been so much information in the last year that I can't keep it all straight. :/

Regardless, there's a lot of money unaccounted for.

I understood he had to pay something like 14 months up front. I would have imagined that would have been in the 2015 Axanar report as a 2015 operating expense, but I will have to look it up on Axamonitor to know.

In any case, if they tried to claim "Aha, your analysis misses the 180k rent we also had to pay", then I'd just say, ok, chalk up 180k to an innacuracy in the 2015 report. Any other accountings you'd care to correct by admitting you lied to donors?

 

[urbandefault]

I understood he had to pay something like 14 months up front. I would have imagined that would have been in the 2015 Axanar report as a 2015 operating expense, but I will have to look it up on Axamonitor to know.

In any case, if they tried to claim "Aha, your analysis misses the 180k rent we also had to pay", then I'd just say, ok, chalk up 180k to an innacuracy in the 2015 report. Any other accountings you'd care to correct by admitting you lied to donors?

Very good, thanks.

 

[muCephi]

Me? I'm not on FB. Haven't been for half a dozen years.

(I'll go back now and finish reading your post. )

Sorry, my own brain fuzz! Only one coffee so far today. I meant Mr. wtriker1701 posted other financial questions there as well as this outline.

 

[muCephi]

Very good, thanks.

This is an example of why I think questioners need to take some initiative on the financials and drive a stake as a point of reference for analyzing info as it comes out. Axanar has an official story on the money. Changes to it, every one of them, have to be looked at as deltas they are trying to reverse-engineer into their official story. This is an example of how the analysis method shows its teeth.

Axanar can't be allowed to just keep rebooting their history.

They above all others should understand this, being the keeper of the flame for the nonrebooted, most authentic to the original universe, and all...

 

[muCephi]

Didn't AP state somewhere that he had to pay the entire lease up front? Was that 2 or 3 years? Does the $180k in your accounting take that into consideration?

There's been so much information in the last year that I can't keep it all straight. :/

Regardless, there's a lot of money unaccounted for.

per Axamonitor, in its analysis of the 2015 Annual Report,

47-49 Studio 246,456.66 This amount includes facility fees, studio build-out and rent. However, the total projected infrastructure cost is expected to exceed $400,000,18) Since those costs do not appear to be encompassed by this spending report, they will presumably be covered by proceeds from the subsequent Indiegogo campaign.