Premier Cru Master Complaint Thread (MERGED)

Victor_Hong · February 4, 2016, 1:28am

Indeed, given apparent access to and control of data about the physical inventory,
financial condition, wholesale purchases and sales, retail sales and deliveries, etc.,
the key IT manager would inherently have been a very conflicted agent, at best, for
the bankruptcy trustee, even before consideration of unpaid wages and material
pre-filing wine conveyances.

Terry_H_a_r_r_i_s · February 4, 2016, 3:27am

Thanks, again, Ryan.

I suspect in very short order Mr. Nishi will be returning that $25,000 worth of wine he walked away with, as it likely will be very important to him, personally, to try to be helpful to unwinding this mess.

But, I think all or most of us here appreciate the actions and efforts of the U.S. Trustee’s Office here. Was this Margaret H. McGee filing the objection?

R_Smith1 · February 4, 2016, 3:53am

My pleasure Terry! You are correct about Margaret McGee being the one to file the objection. Both she and the judge are doing an excellent job handling this case.

Craig_G · February 4, 2016, 4:09am

He was shot, though. Right?

George_Chadwick · February 4, 2016, 4:13am

Worry thee not.

Al_Osterheld · February 4, 2016, 4:40am

I also want to add thanks to Ryan for adding updates for those of us who don’t have access.

-Al

M.Kaplan · February 4, 2016, 4:42am

Right. By the coward Robert Ford. Or one of his (Bill’s, not the coward Robert Ford’s) ex-wives. Or Antonio Galloni. I forget which.

Craig_G · February 4, 2016, 5:36am

They let him have it with both Barolos.

Pat_Martin · February 4, 2016, 6:38am

Tsk, tsk. Both Baroli.

Peter_Chiu · February 4, 2016, 12:38pm

Add me to the list who would like to say … l

Tom_G_l_a_s_g_o_w · February 4, 2016, 12:48pm

This was mentioned in the dialogue of post 5817, that the wine would need to be returned by way of the trustee suing to have it returned.

Don_Brazelton · February 4, 2016, 1:22pm

List of Open Orders. The PC website contained a list of one’s open orders. I am unable to access it now. Any suggestions on retrieving that list?

ClarkstonMark · February 4, 2016, 1:45pm

2 things … I wonder if Nishi was owed $25k, or some number more or less. I also wonder if the $25k of wine has been sold by Nishi. I am sure we will soon find out.

Victor_Hong · February 4, 2016, 1:51pm

Sole source: your own e-mails from PC, of confirmed purchases and delayed deliveries.
Assemble as a spreadsheet, PDF those e-mails as support, and save back-ups.

R_Smith1 · February 4, 2016, 3:16pm

Hi Don, there was discussion at the 2/1 hearing about bringing the PC website back online. The site would be used to provide information to the creditors. Until then, I would agree with Victor’s advice.

ybarselah · February 4, 2016, 6:17pm

I’m not an expert, but I would imagine it very difficult to find records that never existed in the first place.

At least none of the employees were aware of such shenanigans.

Don_Cornwell · February 5, 2016, 4:23am

jfloren:

For creditors, having access to the creator of the PC database at $100 per hour is well worth it. Hiring forensic experts who are pure as the driven snow to try to recreate everything would cost dramatically more money and that would come directly out of our pockets. The lawyers running this are not stupid and they would neither trust Nishi implicitly nor allow him to manipulate the original data. The assets here are limited and we have to keep our eye on the ball.

Re Don Cornwell’s post above, as I noted a couple weeks ago (assume he did not read), I too purchased the 2002 Drouhin Musigny from PC, apparently right around the same time he did, but in my case they delivered that wine. So whatever Brian Nishi, as the PC employee assigned to handle Don’s complaints, may have told Don, the notion that PC never had that wine is simply not factual. What this says about Brian Nishi, I have no idea.

Joe:

I did read your post but I didn’t respond to it. Forgive me, but I thought it was rather obvious that if you received wine a year or more after they cancelled my order, that says nothing about whether PC owned the wine, or had contractual commitments to supply the wine, when they first sold it. They didn’t own the wine and it took some pretty unbelievable threats of litigation to get Brian Nishi to concede that point. It’s been pointed out multiple times that PC sold wines they didn’t own and then tried to source the wine later. It’s also been pointed out that, in some cases, they even accepted losses in buying wines to fill the orders. So how does the fact that you ordered the the same wine I did in late 2003/early 2004 and received the wine in 2008 or 2009 show that PC owned the wine or had contractual commitments for it back in 2003/2004? It clearly doesn’t. Moreover, If PC had owned the wine or had the contractual commitments for it, it clearly wouldn’t have taken four or five years to deliver the wine to you.

George_Chadwick · February 5, 2016, 4:51am

Don Cornwell:

jfloren:

For creditors, having access to the creator of the PC database at $100 per hour is well worth it. Hiring forensic experts who are pure as the driven snow to try to recreate everything would cost dramatically more money and that would come directly out of our pockets. The lawyers running this are not stupid and they would neither trust Nishi implicitly nor allow him to manipulate the original data. The assets here are limited and we have to keep our eye on the ball.

Re Don Cornwell’s post above, as I noted a couple weeks ago (assume he did not read), I too purchased the 2002 Drouhin Musigny from PC, apparently right around the same time he did, but in my case they delivered that wine. So whatever Brian Nishi, as the PC employee assigned to handle Don’s complaints, may have told Don, the notion that PC never had that wine is simply not factual. What this says about Brian Nishi, I have no idea.

Joe:

I did read your post but I didn’t respond to it. Forgive me, but I thought it was rather obvious that if you received wine a year or more after I did that says nothing about whether PC owned the wine, or had contractual commitments to supply the wine, when they first sold it. They didn’t own the wine and it took some pretty unbelievable threats of litigation to get Brian Nishi to concede that point. It’s been pointed out multiple times that PC sold wines they didn’t own and then tried to source the wine later. It’s also been pointed out that, in some cases, they even accepted losses in buying wines to fill the orders. So how does the fact that you ordered the the same wine I did in late 2003/early 2004 and received the wine in 2008 or 2009 show that PC owned the wine or had contractual commitments for it back in 2003/2004? It clearly doesn’t. Moreover, If PC had owned the wine or had the contractual commitments for it, it clearly wouldn’t have taken four or five years to deliver the wine to you.

Don, a trivial note (I’m good at those): You’ve been deservedly acknowledged with gratitude many times, but I might be the first to say, I like the way you write. Plain and simple, and leaving the other person with the chance to dispute your plain statements of fact. Which usually are indisputable. A relief to read for the clarity and logic and lack of bias or obfuscation.

Mike_Miller · February 5, 2016, 6:01am

Well, we absolutely know that the Judge doesn’t drink red Burgundy!!!

Peter_Chiu · February 5, 2016, 1:41pm

George Chadwick:

Don Cornwell:

jfloren:

For creditors, having access to the creator of the PC database at $100 per hour is well worth it. Hiring forensic experts who are pure as the driven snow to try to recreate everything would cost dramatically more money and that would come directly out of our pockets. The lawyers running this are not stupid and they would neither trust Nishi implicitly nor allow him to manipulate the original data. The assets here are limited and we have to keep our eye on the ball.

Re Don Cornwell’s post above, as I noted a couple weeks ago (assume he did not read), I too purchased the 2002 Drouhin Musigny from PC, apparently right around the same time he did, but in my case they delivered that wine. So whatever Brian Nishi, as the PC employee assigned to handle Don’s complaints, may have told Don, the notion that PC never had that wine is simply not factual. What this says about Brian Nishi, I have no idea.

Joe:

I did read your post but I didn’t respond to it. Forgive me, but I thought it was rather obvious that if you received wine a year or more after I did that says nothing about whether PC owned the wine, or had contractual commitments to supply the wine, when they first sold it. They didn’t own the wine and it took some pretty unbelievable threats of litigation to get Brian Nishi to concede that point. It’s been pointed out multiple times that PC sold wines they didn’t own and then tried to source the wine later. It’s also been pointed out that, in some cases, they even accepted losses in buying wines to fill the orders. So how does the fact that you ordered the the same wine I did in late 2003/early 2004 and received the wine in 2008 or 2009 show that PC owned the wine or had contractual commitments for it back in 2003/2004? It clearly doesn’t. Moreover, If PC had owned the wine or had the contractual commitments for it, it clearly wouldn’t have taken four or five years to deliver the wine to you.

Don, a trivial note (I’m good at those): You’ve been deservedly acknowledged with gratitude many times, but I might be the first to say, I like the way you write. Plain and simple, and leaving the other person with the chance to dispute your plain statements of fact. Which usually are indisputable. A relief to read for the clarity and logic and lack of bias or obfuscation.

1 …very well said.