Ex PESA n's R US: Internet Merchants Association formed by ex PeSA members

[BellisimaJ.]

From TRS:

la***********
10/12/06 05:39 AM (#101)








St********,
ge********
10/13/06 05:50 AM (#121)








Ok, how are you certain?

Mi*******






1bu********
10/13/06 06:02 AM (#122)








Read the articles, it specifically mentions "ebay sellers" to qualify






1bu
10/13/06 06:03 AM (#123)








Plus read the by-laws Mi******

http://www.gopesa.org/bylaws.htm

E-commerce Merchants Alliance

Organization Bylaws



Introduction



The registered name of the Association is the "E-commerce Merchants Alliance (“EMA”)" which currently operates under the name of “The Professional eBay Sellers Alliance” (referred to in this document as "PESA"). There are no other operations of EMA outside of the activities conducted by PESA.



PESA was established on August 23, 2003.



PESA has the following mission statement:



"The Professional eBay Sellers Alliance provides a service to high volume eBay sellers by helping to establish a favorable operating environment, by providing a forum for discussion on non-competitive issues, and by providing information to assist them in their business."






1bu**********
10/13/06 06:06 AM (#124)








Mi********

as we have spoken about many times the BOD has offered basically zero transparency, hence only a select few no the details of non profit status, have tax returns been filed etc. Not sure why the BOD has never been forthcoming with such info, but not being tranparent only leads to problems.






MEMCOM is Membership Committeeac**********
10/13/06 10:18 AM (#125)








Mi********

Since you are the MEMCOM chair, how does this affect 'organizational update' Pesa's membership guidelines or requirements?

jo********


MEMCOM is Membership Committee




emo***********
10/13/06 11:29 AM (#126)








Here's an idea:

How about along with the $99 dues, each member provide how many eBay transactions they had last year and the total of those sales (this info IS public knowledge and any robot could be gathering it at any time), and then some math whiz at Pesa could compile those two totals and then we would ACTUALLY know for sure how many annual transactions and sales Pesa actually represents.

I never understood why anyone is secretive about their annual sales, anyway.

Br********






ac**********
10/13/06 11:34 AM (#127)








I guess I should read what I write before I post it. Should have been:

Mi**********

Since you are the MEMCOM chair, how does this 'organizational update' affect Pesa's membership guidelines or requirements?

jo*******






ji********
10/13/06 11:38 AM (#128)








I have no specific knowledge of PeSA's non-profit status, but my strong feeling is that it is not a non-profit group nor should it be.

In searching the IRS database of non-profits I can find no other similar organization that is listed as a non-profit. Not shop.org or it's parent National Retail Association; not North American Equipment Dealers Association, not the National Trucking Association, or any other similar association that I have searched for.

My feeling is that a trade association of any type is not generally organized as a non-profit. If the association has a specific education foundation or a charitable foundation (eBay Foundation) then those separate entities are set up as non-profits.

With that said, I agree that members should be informed on the formal organizational structure of PeSA, its finances, etc., and I feel that it will be forthcoming.

Ji*******






1bu********
10/13/06 11:52 AM (#129)








"but my strong feeling is that it is not a non-profit group nor should it be."

Ji***** regardless of what your feeling is this is what we were all told PESA is, the posts from Jonathan state so, so have we been dooped?






ge********
10/13/06 12:00 PM (#130)








Hmmmmmmm, have we all been duped? That is the question of the day.

Which is why I am curious, have I been volunteering my time and energy to a private corp that now someone will own and gain from my sweat equity, your sweat equity and many other's sweat equity.

I also was under the belief this would be a NON PROFIT group where all proceeds would be used for the sole benefit of the growth of the group. NEVER ONCE did anyone say anything about a person or persons owning this group and benefitting from it's resources.

Jo******,

Instituting dues without the consent, knowledge or consultation of the MEMCOM is just rude. Allowing members to enter the group without passing through the MEMCOM is also RUDE. AND more importantly disempowers the entire volunteer MEMCOM. My group has been saying for a long time "why do we meet, why do we have discussions, why bother if the board is going to do what it wants".

IF the board is a BOD for a private corp, then it's only responsibility is to the stockholders (just like eBay) but if the group is a non profit for the benefit of it's members (as we were all told it would be) then the BOD has a responsibility to it's members and it's volunteers.

This BOD acts as if it is a private corp, but asks for volunteers like it is a NON PROFIT and then when mistakes are made, it uses the volunteers as a a scapegoat saying "hey, we are only volunteers, what do you expect".

Bottom line, I just need to know if I am donating my time and resources to a private corp owned by 1-2-3 people who will eventually profit from my hard work or am I volunteering my time and effort to a NON PROFIT for the benefit of us all.

One answer, I can move on and make my decisions.

SO, yes, it matters to MEMCOM.

Mi*******
__________________
What is your big concern about "heading" the committee? I would think that as long as you had real contributions, the important thing would be to make them. In fact, a lot more would probably be accomplished with someone who didn't have such an antagonistic relationship with the founder. I would just hate to see a situation of a committee hitting brick walls based on personalities.

L*********






1bu*********
10/12/06 05:51 AM (#102)








L*********

where did I say I was concerned? Please do not start rumors on something never stated by me.

Thanks
St********






1bu********
10/12/06 05:53 AM (#103)








L*********

If you are referring to my reply to Alexander's post, it was more to defend a personal attack made on me by Al********, it was not expressed as a concern for anything else other then Al****** making a personal attack on me. And who the hell care what Al******'s personal thoughts in this regard are anyway, just a totally idiotic and stupid post he made

St*******






la***********
10/12/06 05:55 AM (#104)








link to another thread on the PeSA board


1bu********
09/09/06 11:19 AM (#54)


"St****** has offered to rewrite the bylaws."

Correction, St****** has agreed to head a committee to re-write proposed by-laws to submit to board for review and approval.

St*******






1bu**********
10/12/06 05:58 AM (#105)








And your point L*******, I think that post was self explanatory, no? I never agreed to "re-write" the by-laws personally myself. I would agree to head a commitee and assist in re-writing them and of course submitting to BOD for approval. That it what was said nothing more nothing less, what are you reading into it that was not said or there? Why you even bringing this up?




sho*************
10/12/06 06:05 AM (#106)





"I still haven't seen any visions. Care to share?"

I have been a PeSA member since 2004 and have yet to see this either. This is a big part of why I question the dues. Everything seem to be a big secret. I think it will get even worse when money is involved.

Ra***********









co***********
10/12/06 06:35 AM (#107)








I don't think a ebay hosted discussion board is the place to release goals of intent. I believe we should expect a more clear direction of goals when this group makes the transition to a trade asoc. off of ebay

This is going to become a pay to play board and I do hope more structure is to come. I just suppose and hope PESA will remove itself from this ebay hosted board.

K*********







emo***********
10/12/06 07:12 AM (#108)








Good point K*******. But it would sure help if most of the members could even ACCESS the other board! Maybe some of those dues monies could go towards bringing that board into the 21st century so that it doesn't take many requests and a month or more to gain access.

Br********







ta**********
10/12/06 07:27 AM (#109)








What a silly thread.

First off, PESA isn't and wouldn't be a 501©(3). It is a 501©(6).

(flame on)

Second, how much fricking transparency do you really need for $99 bucks. Sheesh! I don't always agree with Joe and the BOD, but one thing is certain after three plus years now. These guys are not ripping people off and moving to Brazil with your $99 lousy bucks. They've put on summits, done a website, tried to organized relationships with vendors like BuySafe to get us special deals, set up a health insurance dealio, and so forth. These dudes are volunteers. If you're unhappy with the way things are being run -- we'll you're certainly getting your money's worth so far.

Third, it's $99. Come on now people. It's one thing to complain about attending a summit. That's money and your time, which is really valuable. But 99 clams? Are you kidding me? Do you live on potatoes and water? We're supposed to be top sellers here! If you can't find $99 of value just from lurking on this board, you are in the wrong business.

Fourth, even if everything is a big "secret" and there are all these conspiracies and everything . . . WHO CARES!!! I mean really. I could drink an entire bottle of Metamucil and I still wouldn't give a crap about all the political BS like how to properly moderate these boards, whether Randy Smythe is invited to join or not, or whether the PESA election polls were open 3 days or 4 days.

BOD: Don't listen to the naysayers. People either recognize the value of PESA and are willing to pony up $99 or not. Once you have our $99s, then you have a year to prove that the group is worth $240 (it is).

Back to lurking
(flame off)

An********







en********
10/12/06 09:20 AM (#110)








An*********

A thread on the change in Organizational Structure of PeSA is silly??

I don't believe the majority of posters in this thread are objecting to paying dues ($99, $240 whatever) or are accusing ANYONE within PeSA of "ripping people off".

I agree with you: most of us can get "$99 of value just from lurking on this board" however this message board is free - it doesn't cost anyone anything to operate. Therefore, I don't believe it is unreasonable that the membership would like to be informed as to how that money will be spent.

Quote: "Fourth, even if everything is a big "secret" and there are all these conspiracies and everything . . . WHO CARES!!!"

You may not care but many of us do. It was only a mere 9 months ago that PeSA almost lost it's independent status because of perhaps some "secret" closed-door dealings that we were not privy to. Due to many PeSA members that did "care", PeSA remained a thriving and independent organization.

I have been a member of PeSA for several years and have never considered myself a "naysayer". I always try and keep my post positive, constructive and non-political.

I appreciate that you have an opinion and would always encourage you to share it. Please give consideration for others to do the same.

Regards,

Da********

lo********
10/12/06 09:47 AM (#111)








I found $99 worth of value just in this discussion board alone after a few hours of reading through many of the threads.

There are still threads I have not completely read through yet.

-Ch*******






la*********
10/12/06 11:52 AM (#112)








Happy to pay $99.

I do agree better communication between the BOD and the general membership would help improve morale and everyones confidence with regards to how "professional" our professional alliance really is. I think many of us, after our experience with eBay and its horrible communication and complete disregard for its community, are gunshy about any organization not being transparent - especially when some of us have only met "online". It is easy for things to seem too impersonal (resulting in distrust) when an organization's primary means of communication is electronic.

With regards to dues and the NEED for dues to get more organized - it seems to be a "chicken or the egg" scenario. It is hard to have one without the other. I gather this is why the first round of dues is lower - in an attempt to garner good faith and show results before upping the ante.

My long-winded way of saying that I am happy to be a paying member and I am optimistic/hopeful regarding the future of PESA.






tra**********
10/12/06 06:20 PM (#113)








I think the chicken and the egg analogy is a good one. I, for one, think it is madness that volunteers float expenses on their own credit cards, spend a bunch of hours organizing events, and get a bunch of grief (and a bunch of thank yous) for their effort.

However, I would also like to see a plan for where we are headed. This does not mean *poof* we go from where we are to a finished state, but the communication of a plan would be nice.

Example:
- Assuming paid membership of # ppl, annual dues collected is $x
- Sponsors contribute $y
- $x + $y = $z operating budget, with obvious fluctuations
- these positions will draw $x in stipends
- general plans for balance of money include a, b, and c (hopefully, including professional help at events, financial disclosures, improved communication by BOD and committees, etc.)
- top 3 priorities and their status by committee are 1, 2, and 3
- interaction with ECTMA (by PeSA members, BOD, etc.) involves x, y, and z

If only 500 members remain, that's $120k in dues next year. I fully anticipate that we will get our $240 worth, but it'd sure be nice to know what the plans are to leverage that much money.

T**********






ba************
10/12/06 06:23 PM (#114)








This sure seems to me like a long thread over $8.25 per month (Roughly the same cost as my lunch each day).

I think it is safe to say that I get $8 per month in value out of the message board alone just in the tips tricks that people post that result in time savings.

All I ask is that they take my $99 and produce benefits for me. My exposure is $99 and for that, I don't care who holds it, makes decisions over how to spend it, or what city they decide to spend it in next time around.

All I am looking for is that the dues function to enhance the benefits for all dues paying members. If I don't feel like I have gotten my $100 bucks worth after a year, that will factor in to my decision to renew at X price point a year later.

Ba**********






ge************
10/12/06 07:45 PM (#115)








Does anyone know or remember the thread where publicly the BOD stated what type of corp PESA is or was? I seem to recall that was stated in a thread in the past 24 months. That would be very important to know at this juncture. Andrew's quote above about the type of corp may or may not be accurate as to what it "should" be. For all we know, PESA may not even be a "NON PROFIT" corp.

But it seems to me, if PESA were a TRUE NON PROFIT, we would have had to file certain public docs yearly, especially when having received nearly $500k in revenue.

It would also make a HUGE difference in my mind as to what type of corp ECMTA is before I go and support it (finacially or otherwise)

Mi*********


Bolding mine - TR




li***********
10/13/06 03:01 AM (#116)







QUOTE:
gothamcityonline (156348 )
07/11/04 04:34 PM (#71 of 155)

"I have moved forward and filed the organization's incorporation papers and once accepted will file for 501©6 status of the organization. I'm not sure of the mission of the other board, but I would like this group to accomplish more than just being a forum for candid conversation."

internal link to thread removed






li
10/13/06 03:06 AM (#117)








PRESS RELEASE - Summit Las Vegas, Oct 22-24
noblespirit (16980 )
10/15/04 06:10 PM





About the PES Alliance

The Professional eBay Sellers Alliance (PES Alliance) is a 501© 6, non-profit, trade association founded in October 2003 to serve the ever-evolving needs of small businesses which make their living selling in various online marketplaces including eBay.com. The PES Alliance currently has over 600 members, who were admitted membership to the group based on quantitative or qualitative criteria originally established by the Board of Directors. The Alliance also revealed a philanthropic side, (defined by the Board as a core value of the group); by reaching out to the e-commerce community with their “Sellers Helping Sellers” campaign at the “eBay Live!” 2004 Community Conference in July. While attending the conference, the group also sponsored a fundraising event for the DOUA, (Disabled Online Users Association), which raised approximately $15,000 in one evening. Additional community events are being planned for the eBay Live! 2005 Community


internal link removed






1bu*********
10/13/06 03:24 AM (#118)








I do not see how that is possible at least at that point in time, the corporation articles were not field to over 1 year later after that press release.

https://www.sos.nh.gov/corporate/so...ings.asp?743048






ge*********
10/13/06 05:39 AM (#119)








Hmmmm,

That is strange. Look at the wording, what was stated is that the "incorporation" papers were filed, it does not confirm that the 501©6 status was filed for????????

I would be curious to know if those filings were ever completed and if we in fact have a NON PROFIT status??????

St******,
I think you are looking at the NEW organization that Jonathan owns, not PESA's filings.

Mi*********






1bu*********
10/13/06 05:43 AM (#120)








Mi********

No those are PESA's filings, that I a mcertain about

St*******





1bu*******
10/13/06 12:35 PM (#131)








hmm, very interesting thoughts Mi******. The BOD seems always to be silent and never answer questions like this, I guess this time is no different, they usually wait until the smokes clears and everything blows over and never provide answers. Ohh, isn't that called transparency?

St********






li*********
10/13/06 01:27 PM (#132)








Well Joe did craft an answer to a post in the Summit thread, maybe it wore him out. We'll have to wait until he rests to get another post out of him.

Same ole, same ole. They've adopted the eBay way. Throw them a bombshell, let them throw their fits, just wait them out until they go away and then we'll do whatever we want anyway.






ac**********
10/13/06 02:07 PM (#133)








Mi******, I hadn't thought about things that way.

Over the last two years indications from the BOD and the posted bylaws have been that Pesa is a NON profit corporation.

Jonathan's post in the gopesa election thread about the two corporations talks about his ownership in both organizations, ECMTA and PESA and about the direction he will take. This gives some indication they might be private, for profit corporations.

Everyone who has volunteered over the last two years have done so under the understanding that Pesa was to be incorporated as a nonprofit corporation. This belief was formed per the statements and posts by members of the BOD. I know I have not worked to build Pesa so someone's pockets could eventually get lined.

In 2004, I was on the BOD and the BOD understood that we were working to build a nonprofit corporation. The BOD's continual secrecy raises the possibility that we have all been mislead.

The BOD's reluctance to clarify the confusion by posting Pesa's current organizational structure is troubling. A simple post stating that Pesa is a nonprofit corporation would kill any and all conspiracy theories. Members would know what their work goes toward.

Refusing to post just adds fuel to the fire and confuses everyone.

Now, this thread has turned out to be about a much more serious issue than the value of Pesa membership being => $99.

I don't think this issue will go away if the BOD ignores it. I hope they don't think that. I hope the BOD values Pesa's membership enough to let them know the facts. Refusal to inform the membership gives an indication that the BOD really doesn't care about its members.

BOD, PLEASE HELP US ALL BY LETTING THE MEMBERS KNOW THE ACTUAL LEGAL STRUCTURE OF PESA. A simple post is all it takes.

Regards,
jo********






ce*********
10/13/06 02:37 PM (#134)








I frankly don't see how PESA would qualify for either 501©(3) (religious and charitable non-profits) or 501©(6) (professional trade associations) status.

According to the IRS, the following scenario does NOT pass the test of a 501©(6) non-profit:

"An organization composed of individuals, firms, associations, and corporations, each representing a different trade, business, occupation, or profession whose purpose is to exchange information on business prospects has no common business interest other than a mutual desire to increase their individual sales. The activities are not directed to the improvement of one or more lines of business, but rather to the promotion of the private interests of its members."

The above is quoting point #1 on page 12 of this document:

http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-tege/eotopick03.pdf

It seems to me that the above scenario describes PESA to a "T". We are a group of businesses who sell unrelated products. The only thing that ties us together is selling online.

Just to play devil's advocate -- If we were all set up together in a strip mall, would the IRS let us form a non-profit organization? Our common interest would be improving business at the strip mall. Same situation here in a "virtual" strip mall.

It seems to me that the above ruling practically eliminates the chance of PESA being or becoming a 501©(6). After reading this document, there shouldn't be much question here. PESA is not organized as a non-profit.

Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.

JH






1bu*******
10/13/06 02:53 PM (#135)








What surpises me is that all of you are suprised about this, the writing has been on the walls for mosths if not years this thing was going to be monetized, and done so in a way for personal gain IMO. I certainly hope I was wrong, but the answers have yet to be provided. If you look at post #2 of this thread Iasked teh following, which has yet to be answered.

Jonathan

this seems like all good news. Can you provide a little more detail though.

Is PESA still a non profit org?

Is ECMTA a non profit org?



St*******



ji**********
10/13/06 03:49 PM (#136)








JH:

I am reading the IRS rules on non-profits the same way you are. I just don't think that the IRS non-profit requirements matched what this group was trying to do.

Does this mean that we were all duped? I can only speak for myself, but I wasn't fooled. I never read anywhere that they had attained non-profit status, except for that very early post above.

It is easy enough to search the IRS site for non-profits, and I never see PeSA listed there, so I assume that they were either turned down, changed their mind about non-profit, or that it takes a long time to obtain this status.

While I would prefer PeSA was more open with their membership, I understand that a post on this board is seen by so many other eyes than just members, and posts are even carried to other chat boards.

I am sure that more information will be forthcoming, if they expect to transition to a dues paying membership. I have no reason to believe that PeSA has anything to hide.
We have board members and an executive director that I trust completely.

Ji*******






ce**********
10/13/06 04:00 PM (#137)








I have never seen any sort of "official" declaration that PESA is a non-profit either. I have not even seen an "unofficial" comment about non-profit status from any member of the BOD.

Personally, I don't think PESA needs to be a non-profit to accomplish great things. That said, obviously a lot of people feel they were led to believe otherwise (or at the very least assumed otherwise and were not corrected by those who had info on the actual status).

This type of thing can undermine trust in an organization.

There is nothing wrong with not pursuing non-profit status. That fact just needs to be clarified to the membership so everyone knows what is going on and why it is happening.

JH






ce***********
10/13/06 04:13 PM (#138)








One other thing-- just because PESA isn't a non-profit doesn't mean that it has to operate with the purpose of generating profits. In my eyes, it should be operated as close to "profit neutral" as possible while still having adequate funding to accomplish goals.

I also don't see $99 dues suddenly making Joe or any "insider" rich! I trust everything will be handled appropriately and members will see a positive return on that $99 investment.

JH






lo**********
10/13/06 04:13 PM (#139)








I have just one thought all of the sudden about this and it may turn into a discussion of its own.

Someone recently posted (jokingly I believe) that they would take 100 shares of PeSA at the IPO.

Just possibly if each member in this group were to each own one share of PeSA stock at an initial cost of $99.00, then based upon the revenue that by having capital might create, such stock value may rise or fall (Or I suppose it could be a fixed price possibly??)

I know this would blow the idea of a non-profit out the window, but may yield more members with a vested interest OR it just may create a big old mess of a bunch of arguments.

I have been in coin clubs that raised money through selling spaces at coin shows. I assume PeSA could do the same (think summits). Maybe they already do.

So the stock idea doesn't fly...eh? Just a thought.

Ch********






aa*********
10/13/06 04:32 PM (#140)








"or that it takes a long time to obtain this status."

That is indeed the case. I sit on the BOD of a non-profit and have been involved with several others. Achieving non-profit status is a very protracted, frustrating experience. The gov't doesn't just hand out non-profit status to anyone... even very deserving philanthropic groups are heavily scrutinized. Whether that has anything to do with PeSA's current status, I have no idea.

An*******
__________________

http://therossshow.com/showthread.php?p=...post125844

[BellisimaJ.]

From TRS:

com********
10/13/06 08:33 PM (#151)








Va******* wrote

"Why is the BOD not addressing any of these concerns? Why kind of financial structure will this organization have? Why is ECMTA linked to PESA? If sponsorships have been paid to/forPeSa in the past how were they declared and by whom? Would donations mitigate the complications here?

Even more curious."

Get used to it in this group. I have been a member since early 2004. They never have done well at this so to not expect them to start.

Do not expect minutes to meetings
Do not expect finance reports.
Do not expect the board to post about much of anything, be lucky if you know who they are.
Do not expect them to tell you anything about what goes on like the creation of a new group maybe or if we are an incorporated group or basically much of anything.

Just sit back, relax, let them use your numbers and do whatever they want to do. Now they have a little money of yours to spend (if you stay around) they can have more meetings with eBay you will know nothing about and more photo ops for them and they can say things on behalf of you that you may or may not agree with, many other things they do not want to tell you.

Just my vision of the group as one of the older members.

J******






sho**********
10/13/06 08:37 PM (#152)








"Just sit back, relax, let them use your numbers and do whatever they want to do. Now they have a little money of yours to spend (if you stay around) they can have more meetings with eBay you will know nothing about and more photo ops for them and they can say things on behalf of you that you may or may not agree with, many other things they do not want to tell you."

I agree with this statement 100%.

Ra*********






li*********
10/13/06 09:06 PM (#153)








"Just sit back, relax, let them use your numbers and do whatever they want to do. Now they have a little money of yours to spend (if you stay around) they can have more meetings with eBay you will know nothing about and more photo ops for them and they can say things on behalf of you that you may or may not agree with, many other things they do not want to tell you."

"I agree with this statement 100%."


Ditto. I was starting to think I was the only one with the conspiracy theories. I'm glad to know I'm not alone.






lar**********
10/13/06 10:09 PM (#154)








hmmm...

I think I understand many of the frustrations stated here. I am curious though on one aspect of this thread. There are a couple members that seem to have been in PeSA for quite a while posting quite a bit. But the input is limited to a rather small group.

Not only has the BOD not weighed in on the concerns, neither have many memebers, when looking at the ratio in relation to the membership total.

Does this thread represent the majority of PeSA members, or are folks simply not speaking up?

I have no qualms about paying $99 for the first year of membership.

I do have concerns regarding many of the issues brought up in this thread. Primarily, communication with members about what PeSA goals are, and...well, really, all of my concerns revolve around communication.

This has been an interesting thread to follow, as a new member. I found the post from the MEMCOM chairman particularly curious, and concerning.

I'm hoping that more of the long term members weigh in on these concerns.

Ha******






en***********
10/13/06 10:12 PM (#155)








Most likely every member of the BOD has read all 153 posts in this thread. Why an earth has no BOD member posted a response??? Come on guys!!






lan***********
10/13/06 11:53 PM (#156)








There must be a way in which GoPesa can be formed to allow for 'registration fees' without the need to class those fees as profits and create an IRS situation, surely there is enough brain power here to work that one out ?

Similarily, audited accounts can be shown etc etc, so we can see where our money has been spent, what is left etc.

Which brings me to my next question, what has happened so far, as sponsors have contributed $$$'s already, did they send the funds to GoPesa, and GoPesa spend them for venue hire etc, or were they billed directly by the venues, if the former, then there may already be an IRS issue ?

Looking at this another way, so what if GoPesa is a 'for profit' organisation, if members 'own' GoPesa, then that 'profit' is for the members surely, OK they may not get 'cash' back, but would certainly get 'benefit in kind' from the GoPesa 'road shows' where tickets could be at a much reduced rate for GoPesa members, standard rate for non Go Pesa members etc, thus increasing the bank balance to help fund the 'road shows'.

I appreciate US laws are somewhat different than UK laws, but there must be a way to resolve this IRS situation?

On a different note, I value my Pesa membership, and have trust and faith in the organisation, its sad to see all this 'negativety'.

Ed************8






cam**********
10/13/06 11:56 PM (#157)








I for one have not posted much because I am new and this whole topic is very new to me.
It is interesting to read and get a glimpse of the PESA history.
I agree the BOD need to get on board here and offer up some answers to questions and theories being discussed.

Da*********






emo********
10/14/06 03:48 AM (#158)








This Pesa group is starting to eerily remind me of eBay itself! I have said many times that eBay's greatest asset SHOULD be the "goodwill" of its buyers and sellers, and I contend that it actually has an incredibly small amount of goodwill, and also has a huge amount of "badwill", due to its lack of communication with the sellers, its antagonistic attitude, etc. It is amazing to me that so many sellers who derive their living from eBay at the very same time find so much to despise about eBay.

Is this not very similar to Pesa? We don't derive our living from Pesa, but many of us very much enjoy it, and and yet many of us are also really annoyed that there is so much about Pesa that is shrouded in mystery.

If the "owners" of Pesa (whoever they are!) want to eventually cash in on that ownership, they might do well to consider at least TRYING to build some more "goodwill" with its members. Or maybe they see how successful the owners of eBay have been with so little goodwill, and are simply trying to emulate THAT business model.

If that is their goal, they are doing an excellent job, in my opinion.

Br********






la**********
10/14/06 04:20 AM (#159)








An****** (not to hijack)

Regarding healthcare - I spoke to St***** this week - and apparently Jonathan had tried to contact him. I gave St*** Jonathan's information again (email).






cos********
10/14/06 04:56 AM (#160)








If PESA is unable to provide answers to many of the questions on this thread I will not be able to continue my commitment to the $100 per month payment on the group of 30 nor will I feel comfortable with joining PESA even at the tiny sum of $99.

When I joined the B***'s group of 30 I made the error of thinking that monies spent in that regard would also be made public. If they are I have not discovered where. It was my error for making that assumption. This has put far more doubts into my mind on all regards of $ spent with PESA. That is the first thing I would detail if I were in a position of power. Folks just want to know how their cash is spent. They trade their limited time for it

I believe a large number of sellers may splinter out of this group and I can find good discussions on other boards. This is not a easy decision for me to make but the doubts continue to be fueled here. At this point I have started to think the new PESA will be a like it or leave it organization. I had mentioned that I would take 100 shares of PESA at the IPO - this must be a private corp. that will not be offering stock purchase options to its members. Nothing built on a unstable foundation will stand for long. I understand efforts must be compensated but lets do it all in the open, otherwise this group is not what I thought it was. Time will tell - I hope. At least I will need to make a decision before the end of this month. I came to this group seeking growth and hope to rebuild my faith in it

Ki********


1bu*******
10/14/06 05:04 AM (#161)








Br*****

You are right, a lot of similarities between ebay management and PESA management. I have said this before myself when I have called for transparency on issues in the past. We would never get direct answers and always the "ole sweep under the rug" routine.

Remember 2 elections ago the big fiasco as to who had access to members passwords to votes? The BOD after much pressure finally admitted in a true PESA BOD fashion that a bunch of folks had access to see all members voting passwords, but spun it in a way to never disclose who exactly did.

They still never answered the following questions that were asked though. They remain swept till this day.

1. Who on the election committee has access to my password?

2. Who on the election committee has access to see how I voted?

3. Please provide a list of the PESA members that voted twice in the recent election or any prior election.


You notice also lately new by-laws have been called for by many members and the BOD ignores that issue as well. Is it possible new by-laws already exist none of us know about? Remember we just had an election and if this is a for profit company which I clearly think it is, then the owners will never let an elected board have total power in what goes on.

Remember the BOD never was forthcoming about the articles of incorporation. I posted a link to them as I had found them through an internet search. But that info was never shared with members, and then the BOD has the audacity to get pissed off when some members say there is a hidden agenda. I say if there is smoke there is usually fire.

Again just another example here of the lack of transparency and how the BOD keeps playing a lot of its members like a fiddle. The value in this group is its members, we elected the BOD and we should demand answers.

My guess is what they will do next is make some big announcement(s) like the spring summit agenda or some member benefits etc to tally the troops and get this issue to die down and again have it swept under the rug.






1bu********
10/14/06 05:06 AM (#162)








PS kinf of reminds me of the title of the thread I started last week "EBAY TELLING USA STORE SELLERS T0 "BEND OVER"

This thread would be more appropriately named

"PESA BOD TELLING MEMBERS T0 "BEND OVER"






got********
10/14/06 07:50 AM (#163)








I've tried to stay neutral and on the sidelines, but after this much time I am very troubled that there has been NO response to the original questions raised. That I find troubling. $99 isn't such a big deal, but the lack of communication IS, and without it, I fear the group will implode long before the end of the year.
This has always been a problem area, with conspiracy theories abounding, but as long as it was a volunteer organization, so what? Toss tens of thousands into the mix - potentially $100k+ - and now it does become a big deal.

On top of that, I have additional questions which I feel need to be addressed as well.

1. What will the money be used for?
2. Who controls it? Who provides oversight, what say do the members have?
3. What are the benefits? AARP has the largest membership out there, but they don't join for the lobbying, or the camraderie - they want their discounts, their benefits!
4. Why $99? Why was this level chosen?
It must have been obvious that many members will not pay this. It has been estimated here that 200 out of 1000+ will. So, that raises $20k. Now, if the decision was made to charge $49, isn't it logical that many more might have paid? If we had 400 members paying $49, (or 800 paying $25), we'd have the same amount of money raised, but with more resulting members. Who did the math and why this amount?
5. What is the focus of this group to be? What are it's goals? (This is already not clear, prior to fees being levied.)
With the increasingly multi-channel approach that members are taking, eBay is becoming less and less important to many of us. If, however, that is to be the primary focus, then how much value will this group continue to bring to those members? If on the other hand, the group focuses more off-eBay, what about those who's business is 100% there?

One follow-up - one of the major strengths that the group has is it's large membership and it's combined sales volume. If the group is suddenly 200-300 members, how valuable is it? We have fewer resources, less of a force to be reckoned with, lower sales volume - much easier to ignore. Heck, if you dropped AARP's membership by 80%, they'd be much less effective too!
Think of the potential effect on summits. Right now we can get top-level execs and major companies who want to attend. To what extent will this be the case if the membership level is only 20% of present? At some point, they're going to decide it may not be worth it.






rt**********
10/14/06 08:41 AM (#164)








Dues are a step in the right direction for PESA however dues paying members are going to expect more from the BOD compared to a free PESA. The price of the dues are a non issue but communication (or lack of) is a serious issue.

To keep things positive I am going to assume our questions will be answered when PESA is prepared to accept our dues . Please, there is no conspiracy here, it's not helping anyone by cultivating those thoughts.

Jonathan I anxiously await your announcement and will cheerfully forward my dues as soon as the basic questions above have been answered.

Ro******






gothamcityonline
10/14/06 08:51 AM (#165)








So let me try to answer some of the questions that were on this forum. I'm sorry I have not been able to answer some of these questions, but I do run a business during the day and I've been busy with some New York events at night.

Of course, if I was asked these questions at the Summit when I saw a number of people, I would have been glad to answer them. We, the Board, are not trying to hide anything. One of the reasons we are charging dues, is to have someone committed to PESA to work on communication. Its a tough position, but clearly needs to be filled.

There is no extra money lining anyone's pockets, expecially not any Board member. As a matter of fact, it has been documented that several Board members have funded PESA to get things done; we even had a number of volunteers float expenses, which is not how an organization should operate.

Now to official org stuff. PESA is incorporated and request non-profit status. But, because of some of the programs of PESA, it could not be a non-profit 501c6 org until we could ensure compliance. A couple issues raised was:

1. Would PESA be involved in any political activities such as lobbying, ie on the issue of regulating eBay sellers as auctioneers, or contacting lawmakers on internet taxation issues?

2. Would one member of PESA gain greater benefit from the org than another and would PESA as an organization be acting in favor on one member on any issues. Well, some of the programs we've been working on could hurt us there.

3. There were some reporting requirements, but an accountant would take care of that, so we weren't worried.

We would have been able to qualify due to the eBay marketplace common interest. PESA's mission was to work on improving the marketplace as a whole and not just individual businesses.

To date, we have not guaranteed the IRS that we wouldn't do those things which means we have not been granted non-profit status. Does that mean that PESA is setup to generate profits? Technically yes, but as we all know, PESA has been a money pit since it started. The dues were initiated because I would like the organization to have some resources to improve the way we do things. I am not happy with how the organization runs, or doesn't run. Our reporting needs to be better, our communication needs to be better, and we need to develop some benefits. Now, the reason it hasn't happened to date is because there is no money to do it. That is changing now.

ECMTA is a totally separate corp; there are no co-mingling of funds, any dues paid to PESA stay in PESA's bank account and gets used to support PESA. Also, any member that joins ECMTA does not get into PESA without the review of the Membership Committee. As was announced, PESA members get free access to ECMTA resources when it goes live. Since there are going to be other dues paying members in ECMTA, and PESA members are getting free access, in essence, PESA members are getting other people to carry the cost of their membership.

I hope that I have earned the trust and respect of PESA members to let me get this done. That means that I won't post as much as I may like, but you should know that its because I think there are tangible improvements I can make in PESA to address the concerns here; and I find that spending my time on those initiatives are more important than chatting. If you don't believe it, then you should not pay your dues and hope the org finds support elsewhere; if you think things will move forward, then its probably worth staying involved.

I will try to give members an update each week on initiatives. The Board is not ignoring posts, however, the days of Board members fighting with members in a discussion forum are over. This is going to be a professionally run organization, however, we need the resources to get there. I'd like to have the chance to do it.

Sincerely,

Jonathan



lo*******
10/14/06 08:55 AM (#166)








Item number 4 in post 163 is a really good one to mull over considering the higher the cost may yield a lower membership.

Ch*******






emo******
10/14/06 08:56 AM (#167)








Well, Jonathan certainly answered all the members' questions. Perhaps a moderator should lock this thread?

Br*********






1bu*******
10/14/06 09:03 AM (#168)








Br*****

Jonathan answered most of the questions yes, a ouple still remain.

Who are the stockholders of PESA?

What is the current corporation status of PESA, chapter S,C?

I have every expectation there should be dues, there should be reimbursement of expenses to BOD members, there should be paid staff. However I als owant to know if this is set up where there are stockholders who stand to profit down the road from either PESA or EMCTA?

St*****






co********
10/14/06 09:07 AM (#169)








Br***** I suppose that remark was a joke.

I think he said if you want to join us we will take care of all your concerns then.

Ki*******






go********
10/14/06 09:26 AM (#170)








I think that is a great idea Br****.

Jonathan and the rest of the Board have worked tirelessly on behalf of PeSA for the past three years that I have been associated with PeSA. I think the 200-300 members who have participated at the Summits over the past would agree. It seems the most outspoken are the ones who do not attend these events and get to see how hard that Board and the committees do work (for free...actually cost them money because of lost business time). Worse, they don't really get to see the value of this organization.

To have their integrity impugned as much as I have read in this thread is disgraceful. I think each of us should look in the mirror and question why we allow such an attitude on these Boards.

To those naysayers the answer is simple, drop out of PeSA and let us fail by ourself (or succeed.......)
__________________

[BellisimaJ.]

From TRS:

sho******
10/14/06 09:28 AM (#171)








"The Board is not ignoring posts, however, the days of Board members fighting with members in a discussion forum are over. This is going to be a professionally run organization, however, we need the resources to get there. I'd like to have the chance to do it."

Am I reading this correctly? Is Jonathan saying there will be less even transparency once dues are paid?

Ra*****






sho*******
10/14/06 09:29 AM (#172)








less even = even less






co*********
10/14/06 09:42 AM (#173)








B***** - are you intending to publish in open fashion how the monies for the PESA group of 30 have been spent up to this point ? Why has that not been done already ?

Ki*********






aac**********
10/14/06 09:44 AM (#174)








Thank you, Jonathan. There will always be naysayers, but I think these are exactly the kinds of things most of us were looking for. I agree that boards vs. member fights need to be a thing of the past, but some timely, simple communication could mitigate the vast majority of that.

Thanks...

An********






li***********
10/14/06 10:00 AM (#175)








Translation:
"We are not going to waste our time talking to you, sit down, shut up, drink the Kool-aid and wait for your orders. End of transmittal."






lau*******
10/14/06 10:13 AM (#176)








Translation:
"We are not going to waste our time talking to you, sit down, shut up, drink the Kool-aid and wait for your orders. End of transmittal."

So, li********

It sounds like your opinion is that the members consist of death-cult zombies who are incapable of independent thinking or logical review of the options laid before them.

Personally, I resent your comment. Whatever I ultimately agree or disagree with, does not alter the fact that I can weigh the various agendas (and there are more than 1) and reach my own conclusions on the extent of my potential risks vs. my perception of benefits.

If your personality is such that you consider yourself to be a "kool-aid" drinker, there are probably some outreach programs to help you work through that.

L******






su********
10/14/06 10:17 AM (#177)








Excuse me but there is not to be bashing of members and their opinions in any manner while this dicussion takes place.
We are not planning to lock this thread as long as it is civil. This is a valid discussion where members have questions. We don't lock or delete threads unless they meander down to the lowest denominator and become rude.

Su*********
(still Moderator)






rt********
10/14/06 10:20 AM (#178)








Thank you Jonathan for confirming my assumptions. We are all busy running our businesses and I applaud you for taking as much time as you do for PESA.

"One of the reasons we are charging dues, is to have someone committed to PESA to work on communication. Its a tough position, but clearly needs to be filled."

This reply should be sufficient for anyone to put up a mere $99. How far would any of us have taken our businesses running on a budget like PESA has had in the past? Special thanks to those members that have used personal funds to assure the rest of us could enjoy the benefits of PESA.

Ki******* those funds were needed to purchase/set-up the software that had to be purchased. I believe B****** has been very clear about how those funds are being used. I'm sure he would provide you with all the details if you missed something when this was first explained (or maybe you joined later).

Ro*********






li*********
10/14/06 10:23 AM (#179)








I hate Kool-Aid. I also don't follow orders well.

Sorry to offend you, didn't mean to.

I see a whole lot of sellers here willing to accept what crumbs are offered because they have so much hope and trust in this group. That post of Jonathan's was just a sip of Grape flavor. The many many questions asked in this thread and others through the years still have not been answered. In essence he gave us a morsel and told us that he wouldn't be answering anymore questions until after we ante up and then maybe he'd speak.

For the record; I like Jonathan and voted for him in each election.
Also for the record; I have no problem with paying the dues and plan on doing so.

What I have a problem with is the continual evasive techniques the board uses. I saw it back when the board split in two and wasn't real happy about it coming back together as one without the questions being answered, but then as now, everyone had high hopes that it would all eventually be explained and the group would grow as planned. Time goes on, the questions seemed to fade away. I really don't want to see that again.

Things need to be decided on, set in writing, published to the members and then, only then, should the members be required to pay dues.

Everyone wants a piece of pie in the sky. I need to know what flavor it is first.






cos*******
10/14/06 10:30 AM (#180)








Ro***** - I must have missed that. How much $ has been collected ? How much was the software ? What type of software was it ? Who is making the decisions ? Should't we be voting as a group of 30 to see how our $100 is spent every month ? I have no input ? I am a trusting person also. But I live here in the show me state of MO. If I had a better idea of all the circumstances I would have rather just thrown down my $100 to stay and see how this all plays out.

Ki********
__________________


tra********
10/14/06 10:32 AM (#181)








L****** -

I don't agree with li*****'s statement, but I also don't think the cynicism was aimed at the membership ... but I could be wrong, I guess.

I, for one, will pay the $99 if for no other reason than I have already received $99 in value from the group.

I don't know the BOD members personally, but I believe they are likely acting in the best interests of the membership. I also respect the fact that they all have business to run, too.

However -- and this is a big however -- there is a need in the coming months for the BOD to dramatically increase transparency / communication if they expect the membership to begin paying dues of $240 a year. Personally, I would feel comfortable giving them the benefit of the doubt all the way through the spring summit.

I think many people are setting a higher bar for PeSA due to the word "alliance" - it implies we are all in this together. I hope the dues allow BOD and committee members to avoid shelling out their own funds and to be somewhat compensated for their time, but I also hope/expect it to improve communication, organization, and planning for PeSA.

Just my $0.02, er ... $99.

T******






emo********
10/14/06 10:45 AM (#182)








Since it has been established that Pesa is NOT a non-profit organization, then who are the shareholders? I would like to know who they are and the percentages each holds. Or, if that is "classified information", tell me that (although I would imagine that "no reply" to this question is the same as saying it is classified information.

Here's hoping for a reply from any shareholder.

Br******






1bu********
10/14/06 10:52 AM (#183)








Br******* I posed the same here and more

1bu**** (91707 )
10/14/06 09:03 AM (#168 of 182)




Br******

Jonathan answered most of the questions yes, a ouple still remain.

Who are the stockholders of PESA?

What is the current corporation status of PESA, chapter S,C?

I have every expectation there should be dues, there should be reimbursement of expenses to BOD members, there should be paid staff. However I als owant to know if this is set up where there are stockholders who stand to profit down the road from either PESA or EMCTA?

St******






1bu*********
10/14/06 10:54 AM (#184)








Br******

in my mind we still need these questions answered, I would personally like to know if there are stockholders and to make a determination if they are trying to monetize this or EMCTA for personal gain.

It would appear to me they are in it for personal gain, not that there is anything wrong with that it just would be nice to know upfront instead of them constantly providing spin. We accuse ebay of providing spin all the time and yet we allow our own BOD to get away with it, sigh






lo********
10/14/06 11:19 AM (#185)








I think the last paragraph of Jonathans answer sums it good enough for me to go forward and plan on sending in my $99 dues:

I will try to give members an update each week on initiatives. The Board is not ignoring posts, however, the days of Board members fighting with members in a discussion forum are over. This is going to be a professionally run organization, however, we need the resources to get there. I'd like to have the chance to do it.


By giving the members weekly updates
By not avoiding posts
By not fighting with members
By running the organization professionally
By receiving the resources to get it done
...and by giving Jonathan the chance to do it.

I am in...let us move forward, onward and upward!

Ch********






1bu********
10/14/06 11:39 AM (#186)








Ch*******

glad to see you buy into things easily, I will wait further clarification on the following

Who are the stockholders of PESA?

Who are the stockholders of EMCTA?

What is the current corporation status of PESA, chapter S,C?

What is the current corporation status of EMCTA, chapter S,C?

I have every expectation there should be dues, there should be reimbursement of expenses to BOD members, there should be paid staff. However I also want to know if this is set up where there are stockholders who stand to profit down the road from either PESA or EMCTA?


As posted on another thread,

You have to understand the master plan, or what I perceive the master plan to be. There will not be a bunch of new people signing on to PESA. PESA still has qualifications and is for high volume sellers. Hence EMCTA comes in where anyone can sign up. Since all PESA members are entitled to EMCTA benefits as per Jonathan, the new members who sign on will be recruited for EMCTA.

Dues there are $19 a month

http://www.ecmta.org/ecmbenefits.cfm

So EMCTA is leveraging the fact that they could add immediate legitimacy to EMCTA by saying “we have 400 members, all high volume sellers, meaning us. So the plan is to monetize EMCTA for personal gain of the stockholders, my guess that is Jonathan and Joe with the other BOD members having minority stakes and a select few others were probably offered minority stakes as well.

So the stockholders who are trying to monetize this for personal gain are using PESA members as leverage to ultimately make the profit for personal gain from EMCTA, make sense?

From EMCTA web site: Who is the "group of small business owners"?

ECMTA is managed by a group of small business owners who excel in operational efficiency and logistics optimization. The group formed ECMTA to improve their relationships with vendors. By combining the resources of many small businesses, ECMTA can enjoy the premium service and price discounting from vendors that is otherwise only available to large businesses.






cam*******
10/14/06 12:14 PM (#187)








Jonathan said...I hope that I have earned the trust and respect of PESA members to let me get this done.

That is all I need to know.

I do not know you personally but I have FAITH in you.
I appreciate the work being done on my behalf to make PESA a better organization.

I am all in and will do my part to support the elected BOD and their decisions/plans for the future of this group.

Keep up the good work.

Da*******






emo*********
10/14/06 01:19 PM (#188)








Can a corporation exist WITHOUT shareholders? And are those allowed to be kept secret? I guess so!

Br*******






lo********
10/14/06 01:21 PM (#189)








Br****,
No and No, at least here in Kentucky anyway. Different states have different laws I am sure though.

Ch******






ti********
10/14/06 02:33 PM (#190)








I have a few other questions to add to those excellent questions already asked:

Will a BOD rep please clarify what exactly the relationship between PeSA and ECMTA is.

When does the BOD plan on completing PeSA's "non-profit" status?

Who is in charge of PeSA, and will the membership have any say in it PeSA moves forward?

Who owns PeSA?

Are there plans to merge PeSA and ECMTA?

Ta*******
__________________


ge*******
10/14/06 02:50 PM (#191)








Dear Jonathan,

Thank you very much for taking time out of your VERY busy schedule to answer these questions. I know it must be frustrating to have to answer to a group for what you do, especially when you do so much of it so well.

I totally agree (and told the board so) that dues should be in place and then I again suggested that a professional events company should be hired with that money to put on and run our summits. This professional events company could manage our website, produce a newsletter and arrange for benefits from venders and sponsors out of the profits of a summit tradeshow floor booths sales. This could relieve that logistical nightmare from the board all the while maximizing the PESA power for the benefit of the members.

Even though a substantial sum of revenue has been generated over the years (could be as much as $500k I am guessing) I do not think that any theft or misappropriation of funds has occurred within this organization at this time.

I know that I have personally invested cash, time and energy in this organization, but I have probably done 1/100th what Jonathan and Joe have donated.

Since you stated we could not be a NON PROFIT ORG until we complied with certain requirements, then is it the PESA board of directors official position to move towards fulfilling those requirements in order to establish NON PROFIT status?

IF so, then what is your path, plan and ETA to do so and how can we help?
Can or should the board establish a committee to manage that process?

Or, do you plan on modeling profitable organizations like Shop.org?

Both methods are acceptable, reasonable paths. You have certainly demonstrated the commitment and wisdom to take this group successfully down either path and I would not (could not ) ask for or find a better person to make the appropriate choice.

I, as a member and a staunch volunteer wish to know the official intention of this organization that I am a proud member of.

Mi******






bi********
10/14/06 09:42 PM (#192)








Who owns ECMTA?

Has it been, or will it be given personal information from members of PESA? Or, does it financially need to be a paid sponsor to get any of this information or the member spreadsheet?

Is it, ECMTA or will it be a Sponsor at future Pesa sessions or does it and its owners get a free ride?

These are serious questions that unanswered will kill this organization.

Lets don't confuse ownership and membership.

From day one, this information should have been laid out there.

Who owns PESA? What is it, 3 years, never been told yet.

Is it a secret?

No Bashing, valid questions.

Bi******






sp***********
10/14/06 10:03 PM (#193)








Mi*****:

I feel your pain though not as deeply. I have been a member for much shorter a time, I do not think the BOD is necessarily hiding things from us, as I do think they have not played out.

My personal answer would be, "wait and see." As a young'un, I can afford to do this. The direction in our committee has been outstanding. I am sorry to hear it has not been the same in your committee.

Through a few years of experience, you and many others have developed your own opinions. New members are listening. Thanks for your posts.

Best,
T****






en**********
10/14/06 11:09 PM (#194)








A little OT but am I correct when I believe the current BOD is: Joe C, Jonathan G, Adam H, Tom M, and David H?

Da*******






spo***********
10/14/06 11:16 PM (#195)








Da*****:

Yes, you are correct.

T*****



1bu*********
10/15/06 05:17 AM (#196)








"I do not think the BOD is necessarily hiding things from us,"

"My personal answer would be, "wait and see."

T**** not sure how you draw this conclusion when some of us have been asking for answers for 2-3 years now and they never have provided direct no spin zone answers.

In fact I think we should have Joe or Jonathan on the Bill O'Reilly show so Bill can ask the tough questions and nail them for answers. While we know they are busy and running businesses it is not hard to provide these simple answers.(at least some of BOD are busy - others look like they are having business problems based on monthly feedback numbers)

Who are the stockholders of PESA?

Who are the stockholders of EMCTA?

What is the current corporation status of PESA, chapter S,C?

What is the current corporation status of PESA, chapter S,C?

Is EMCTA set up to be monetized and profit made for personal gain?






go********
10/15/06 05:19 AM (#197)








T****, a few short months ago, you had the idea that this group was relatively worthless. Now, you seem to have changed your mind. What caused the change, what use do you see it having now?






1bu********
10/15/06 06:29 AM (#198)








T********

Here is another example, according to "whois" the EMCTA site was registered nearly 1 year ago or Dec 2005. I had said all along it was apparent this was not just dreamed up last week and had to be in the works a long time.

Domain Name:ECMTA.ORG
Created On:06-Dec-2005 22:21:10 UTC


So why is it those BOD continues on a path of spin and lack of transparency. If they created EMCTA to monetize it for personal gain that is fine, but why not just disclose it and be honest?

What would bother me here is not that they are setting up a profit center for personal gain, it is that they are using PESA to do it. PESA IMO does not belong to a small group of people, PESA belongs to its members, 100% of its members. Without members PESA has no value or no assets. Yet on the EMCTA web site it makes reference PESA has joined forces with EMCTA.

Is EMCTA (if it is a profit center for personal gain) leveraging PESA and its members? If so why should they do this without our full knowledge and only alter full disclosure?

I for one want to know exactly who owns EMCTA, is it or is it not set up as a profitable corporation where its shareholders will benefit personally, and if so what gives them the authority to leverage this group PESA to their benefit?






ge********
10/15/06 06:38 AM (#199)








Dear T*****,

I am really shocked to hear your statements. Are you saying that the events committee made all the decisions for the last summitt?

City location?

Dates?

Length?

Hotel?

Speakers?

Wi thout interference from the bod?

Mi*******






la*********
10/15/06 06:46 AM (#200)








Mi********l,

I can't speak for T****** & Events, but I can speak for the Election Committee. We have never had any board interference in the process at all. The extensive guidelines are our own product, as are the processes involved. We were able to do everything we wanted to, and that was with no BOD input other than final acceptance.

L*********

[BellisimaJ.]

From TRS:

ge*******
10/14/06 02:50 PM (#191)








Dear Jonathan,
ge******
10/15/06 06:48 AM (#201)








Dear L*****,

That is a VERY refreshing post. I am EXTREMELY happy to hear that.

Mi********






mu*********
10/15/06 07:02 AM (#202)








This is just to confirm what L**** stated. We have never had any board interference at all. Never.

Al********






jayandmarie
10/15/06 08:14 AM (#203)








Here's how I see it:

1) Joe C registered / organized EMCTA a year ago in New Hampshire where he lives, and then nothing more got done. Jonathan & Co. took over sometime in 2006 to get things done right.

2) We will never see the organizational information we seek out of PeSA. PeSA is Joe C.'s baby and it is not going to happen. Joe C is perhaps a man of vision, but not a man of organization or of seeing-things-to-completion. This is the guy who puts 500+ photographs into his EBay Auctions. Can you imagine him ever getting the PeSA Organization done? This has not happened and will not happen.

3) Jonathan recognizes the monetization possibilities of ECMTA, and down-the-road, if it works as he envisions, there will be staff and payroll (and money to be made) at ECMTA. Money will never be made at PeSA, for a variety of reasons, including (1) the rules and involvement of eBay, and (2) Joe C's entrenched involvement. PeSA's a great idea, but it's not going to make Joe C. rich.

4) Jonathan needs PeSA's members to seed ECMTA. PeSA and this message board is his 'sandbox'. Here he will figure out what is wrong with his current ideas, how to re-write his less popular ideas so they will play to non-eBay ECMTA members and vendors. This seems like a very natural arrangement to me: if PeSA members are moving their businesses off-eBay then it stands to reason that PeSA must move 'off eBay' as well.

5) If ECMTA is successful then Jonathan will continue to distance himself and his objectives from Joe C and from PeSA. Joe C. will not be on the ECMTA BOD. Again, PeSA is Joe C's baby. I would assume at that point where ECMTA becomes viable that (1) PeSA loses relevance for most current PeSA members, and (2) Joe C. opens up the membership of PeSA to smaller sellers. Those of us (like JayAndMarie) who are strictly EBay and not ECMTA material may opt out of PeSA at that time if that happens. I came to PeSA to get away from the Power Seller board: if that board should simply gravitate here then I will not feel comfortable here.

6) I do not think our in-fighting and micro-analyzing bothers Jonathan at all. This is exactly what he needs to understand, because for ECMTA to be successful he must address all of these issues. He is probably waiting for us to uncover every problem and clean out every nook-and-cranny for him. You've met him - he's a perfectionist, he wants to do ECMTA right. He does not chime in here with many responses because he does not want to stop the flow of discourse back to him. He is probably waiting for 1busyman to run out of complaints. When we are all out of our gripes he will make notes of all of them and address them in the new organization.

7) Joe C does not have answers to the PeSA questions being asked of him, and so he does not answer. This is not a criticism, this is just an observation. It is not Jonathan's place to answer: PeSA is Joe C.'s. I suspect Jonathan can answer most of the questions with regards to ECMTA (not PeSA), but it is still too early - he wants us to drain our brains of ideas and criticisms and then do things 'right'.

8) Those of us who have been around Joe C. understand he believes himself to be a man of vision and a man of stature, a 'Noble Spirit' in fact. He's not going to sharpen his own pencil, much less organize his own PeSA, and prior BOD members, and possibly current ones as well, have said they will not do it for him under his PeSA leadership. (New members should remember that Joe C is the only BOD member not up for reelection or removal: he will always be one of the five BOD members).

9) Specific to this thread: please note that the original post was signed by 'The PeSA Board' but clearly written, not by Joe, but by Jonathan. If you've met the men, try reading it in Jonathan's voice, and then read it again in Joe's voice. It would appear to be Jonathan's baby. Having said that, with Jonathan the ONLY candidate for the Chairmanship of PeSA in the recent election (face it, nobody else here wants the job, or could DO the job, unless we were being paid for it. Right? RIGHT???), then it seems to me you almost have to go with Jonathan and the $99.

10) Long-standing animosity between Joe C and other prominent PeSAns have made several of the PeSA Committees ineffectual. Mi****** Ge********* doesn't work well with Joe C. - Mi*****, you should let someone else handle the MemCOM and see if things can get done. This is not a criticism of you, just an observation of a situation that unfortunately exists. Jo***** St****** doesn't work well with Joe C - Jo***** has left the Ethics Committee, which apparently has no leadership at this time. I do not work well with Joe C - I left the Moderation Committee and the current group is doing very well. To****** We***** did not work well with Joe C - he left the group completely and the Events Committee has continued his fine work.

Anyway, my 20c

JAY






1bu*******
10/15/06 08:26 AM (#204)








JAY

Thanks for sharing your views. I only wish that Jonathan would simply lay out all the cards on the table. I od not criticize him or his vision for EMCTA nor his desire to monetize it for profit if that is the case. I just do not think it is fair to keep members in the cark and string us a long for someone's personal gain or benefit.

St*******






cos***********
10/15/06 08:27 AM (#205)








Yes - Very Wise indeed

Ki*******






1bu********
10/15/06 08:34 AM (#206)








Jay

one point of clarification,

You said

1) Joe C registered / organized EMCTA a year ago in New Hampshire where he lives, and then nothing more got done. Jonathan & Co. took over sometime in 2006 to get things done right.

Joe C registered E-Commerce Merchants Alliance Inc. not EMCTA 1 year ago, and E-Commerce Merchants Alliance Inc. is PESA if you read the by-laws that exist now it says

The registered name of the Association is the "E-commerce Merchants Alliance (“EMA”)" which currently operates under the name of “The Professional eBay Sellers Alliance” (referred to in this document as "PESA"). There are no other operations of EMA outside of the activities conducted by PESA.


Now there is only 1 way to end all the speculation and internatl bickering tha texists now and always has rear its head, and tha tis for Jonathan and Joe to simply provide facts and details.

St********






emo*********
10/15/06 08:48 AM (#207)








Jay wrote, "He is probably waiting for 1bu***** to run out of complaints"

I will bet the Jewish Messiah arrives before that happens!

Br******






1bu*********
10/15/06 08:59 AM (#208)








Br********

I am simply the voice of reason. I have heard from many members , many many members that I post what they are thinking and afraid to post. Someone has to do it no?

St*********






emo**********
10/15/06 09:10 AM (#209)








St**** wrote, "Someone has to do it no?"

I agree completely. But the BOD might have a different answer!

Br*******






go**********
10/15/06 09:15 AM (#210)








It helps to have an opposing view. Even if I don't agree with everyting that the person says, I am still thankful that it's there.

In this case, my opinion is changing to the negative due to the lack of response. Originally, I thought $99 was a given. So what, it's not a whole lot. However, with more reflection (and fewer answers), it seems like it IS a lot, since the end product will likely be a shadow of it's former self.
Think about it. We'll have far fewer members, which means that we'll have much less drawing power and recognition.
If the $$$ is to help subsidize the summits, ??? $50 off a summit is useless, given the cost after paying for plane fare, hotels, etc. Moreover, with 260 members (the average guess now), who are we going to get to come?
As for influencing powers-to-be, we will have reduced our strength. (Not that this group ever had much influence anyways, and we never DID hear what happened at the recent meeting...)
As for the message board, what's to keep St******** from starting up the Professional Free Seller's Alliance (PFSA) open to all former and current PeSA members? Wanna guess which board would be more useful?
__________________
Thank you very much for taking time out of your VERY busy schedule to answer these questions. I know it must be frustrating to have to answer to a group for what you do, especially when you do so much of it so well.

I totally agree (and told the board so) that dues should be in place and then I again suggested that a professional events company should be hired with that money to put on and run our summits. This professional events company could manage our website, produce a newsletter and arrange for benefits from venders and sponsors out of the profits of a summit tradeshow floor booths sales. This could relieve that logistical nightmare from the board all the while maximizing the PESA power for the benefit of the members.

Even though a substantial sum of revenue has been generated over the years (could be as much as $500k I am guessing) I do not think that any theft or misappropriation of funds has occurred within this organization at this time.

I know that I have personally invested cash, time and energy in this organization, but I have probably done 1/100th what Jonathan and Joe have donated.

Since you stated we could not be a NON PROFIT ORG until we complied with certain requirements, then is it the PESA board of directors official position to move towards fulfilling those requirements in order to establish NON PROFIT status?

IF so, then what is your path, plan and ETA to do so and how can we help?
Can or should the board establish a committee to manage that process?

Or, do you plan on modeling profitable organizations like Shop.org?

Both methods are acceptable, reasonable paths. You have certainly demonstrated the commitment and wisdom to take this group successfully down either path and I would not (could not ) ask for or find a better person to make the appropriate choice.

I, as a member and a staunch volunteer wish to know the official intention of this organization that I am a proud member of.

Mi******






bi********
10/14/06 09:42 PM (#192)








Who owns ECMTA?

Has it been, or will it be given personal information from members of PESA? Or, does it financially need to be a paid sponsor to get any of this information or the member spreadsheet?

Is it, ECMTA or will it be a Sponsor at future Pesa sessions or does it and its owners get a free ride?

These are serious questions that unanswered will kill this organization.

Lets don't confuse ownership and membership.

From day one, this information should have been laid out there.

Who owns PESA? What is it, 3 years, never been told yet.

Is it a secret?

No Bashing, valid questions.

Bi******






sp***********
10/14/06 10:03 PM (#193)








Mi*****:

I feel your pain though not as deeply. I have been a member for much shorter a time, I do not think the BOD is necessarily hiding things from us, as I do think they have not played out.

My personal answer would be, "wait and see." As a young'un, I can afford to do this. The direction in our committee has been outstanding. I am sorry to hear it has not been the same in your committee.

Through a few years of experience, you and many others have developed your own opinions. New members are listening. Thanks for your posts.

Best,
T****






en**********
10/14/06 11:09 PM (#194)








A little OT but am I correct when I believe the current BOD is: Joe C, Jonathan G, Adam H, Tom M, and David H?

Da*******






spo***********
10/14/06 11:16 PM (#195)








Da*****:

Yes, you are correct.

T*****



1bu*********
10/15/06 05:17 AM (#196)








"I do not think the BOD is necessarily hiding things from us,"

"My personal answer would be, "wait and see."

T**** not sure how you draw this conclusion when some of us have been asking for answers for 2-3 years now and they never have provided direct no spin zone answers.

In fact I think we should have Joe or Jonathan on the Bill O'Reilly show so Bill can ask the tough questions and nail them for answers. While we know they are busy and running businesses it is not hard to provide these simple answers.(at least some of BOD are busy - others look like they are having business problems based on monthly feedback numbers)

Who are the stockholders of PESA?

Who are the stockholders of EMCTA?

What is the current corporation status of PESA, chapter S,C?

What is the current corporation status of PESA, chapter S,C?

Is EMCTA set up to be monetized and profit made for personal gain?






go********
10/15/06 05:19 AM (#197)








T****, a few short months ago, you had the idea that this group was relatively worthless. Now, you seem to have changed your mind. What caused the change, what use do you see it having now?






1bu********
10/15/06 06:29 AM (#198)








T********

Here is another example, according to "whois" the EMCTA site was registered nearly 1 year ago or Dec 2005. I had said all along it was apparent this was not just dreamed up last week and had to be in the works a long time.

Domain Name:ECMTA.ORG
Created On:06-Dec-2005 22:21:10 UTC


So why is it those BOD continues on a path of spin and lack of transparency. If they created EMCTA to monetize it for personal gain that is fine, but why not just disclose it and be honest?

What would bother me here is not that they are setting up a profit center for personal gain, it is that they are using PESA to do it. PESA IMO does not belong to a small group of people, PESA belongs to its members, 100% of its members. Without members PESA has no value or no assets. Yet on the EMCTA web site it makes reference PESA has joined forces with EMCTA.

Is EMCTA (if it is a profit center for personal gain) leveraging PESA and its members? If so why should they do this without our full knowledge and only alter full disclosure?

I for one want to know exactly who owns EMCTA, is it or is it not set up as a profitable corporation where its shareholders will benefit personally, and if so what gives them the authority to leverage this group PESA to their benefit?






ge********
10/15/06 06:38 AM (#199)








Dear T*****,

I am really shocked to hear your statements. Are you saying that the events committee made all the decisions for the last summitt?

City location?

Dates?

Length?

Hotel?

Speakers?

Wi thout interference from the bod?

Mi*******






la*********
10/15/06 06:46 AM (#200)








Mi********l,

I can't speak for T****** & Events, but I can speak for the Election Committee. We have never had any board interference in the process at all. The extensive guidelines are our own product, as are the processes involved. We were able to do everything we wanted to, and that was with no BOD input other than final acceptance.

L*********

http://therossshow.com/showthread.php?p=...post125901

[cranky_hippie]

What a fuster cluck. 

Comments like these stand out:

Same ole, same ole. They've adopted the eBay way. Throw them a bombshell, let them throw their fits, just wait them out until they go away and then we'll do whatever we want anyway.

However anytime tough questions were asked in the past in this regard either the BOD would remain silent and eventually things would settle down and it would be swept under the rug, or some of the BOD were getting extremely defensive and accusing members including myself of making up “conspiracy theory allegations” when all along many members, especially those who volunteered time were getting duped. Looks like again they will simply be silent in hopes quite a few members buck up $99 and take a wait and see attitude.

I guess that says that having a sizable business doesn't stop you from guzzling the 

[BellisimaJ.]

From TRS:

1bu*******
10/15/06 09:16 AM (#211)








"But the BOD might have a different answer!"

answers is not something the BOD is know for

St******






emo**********
10/15/06 09:24 AM (#212)








"As for the message board, what's to keep St***** from starting up the Professional Free Seller's Alliance (PFSA) open to all former and current PeSA members? Wanna guess which board would be more useful?"

Put me down as a member!

Br********






ge***********
10/15/06 09:27 AM (#213)








Ok,

Let me see if I get what you are saying correctly Jay.

Joe C is perhaps a man of vision, but not a man of organization or of seeing-things-to-completion.

Money will never be made at PeSA, for a variety of reasons, (2) Joe C's entrenched involvement.

Joe C does not have answers to the PeSA questions being asked of him, and so he does not answer.

He's not going to sharpen his own pencil, much less organize his own PeSA, and prior BOD members, and possibly current ones as well, have said they will not do it for him under his PeSA leadership.

Long-standing animosity between Joe C and other prominent PeSAns have made several of the PeSA Committees ineffectual.

So if Joe is in fact the one common person in all of these areas, then isn’t the noble thing to do is for Joe C. to step down and allow Jonathan to take charge of and change PESA to Professional ECOMMERCE sellers association, capitalize on the notoriety we already have and still encompass the “only eBay” sellers continuing on as a MEMBER OWNED corporation which re-invests it’s profits for the good and betterment of all members?

If Joe steps down, the committees are now effective, the board is no longer hog tied by Joe’s vision and circumvention of the rules and PESA can grow to a new level of professionalism on many platforms.

We know Joe is a brilliant man, accomplished and successful. I have lots of respect for him for what he has accomplished. Another possible solution would be to have Joe up for election, let the members decide if they think he is in fact qualified to be a board member for life.

You know what they say, let something go, if it comes back to you, it was yours, if not, it never was.

As you stated : if PeSA members are moving their businesses off-eBay then it stands to reason that PeSA must move 'off eBay' as well.

I sure hope Joe does not suspend me for posting MY conclusions of your post. This is not out of disrespect for Joe, but out of respect for the living breathing group known as PESA that has such a REAL chance to become something great, but seems to be limited by it’s founder. Jay’s post confirms what has been running through my mind for years.


By the way, if the group feels that me stepping down would benefit the group, I would do so in a heart beat. The board, including Joe as late as the SF summit confirmed they wished me to remain as chairperson of MEMCOM. IF their opinions have changed or if the group wishes to vote, I have absolutely NO problem abiding by the group or boards wishes. This group and it’s success is much bigger and more important than me, my ego or my pride. I would never ask for nor expect to have a life long appointment. I am proud of the numbers, policy and participation I have had in this group, but each day is a new opportunity for this group and I would not want to hold my position, limit the group, based on my past accomplishments. I retain my position in my mind because of what I have done for the group lately. Maybe I am confused? IT is the groups responsibility and the boards to monitor my position and my effectiveness. IF any of that is lacking to share it with me or remove me and put someone in that is more effective. I have no problems with that reality.


Mi********






1bu**********
10/15/06 09:35 AM (#214)








"As for the message board, what's to keep St****** from starting up the Professional Free Seller's Alliance (PFSA) open to all former and current PeSA members? Wanna guess which board would be more useful?"

First all let me state it was never my intentions nor is it now to fracture this group. I would much rather see it united and move forward, but I have my views on how it should move forward. I think Jonathan has done an outstanding job in this area, with one thing lacking, mainly that of transparency.

Besides it appears the BOD with recent announcements and a history of a lack of transparency have done an outstanding job of fracturing the group on its own.

Should the group not exist because of recent events I am certain someone would be starting a forum as Bi***** mentions above, because again the real value in PESA is peer to peer networking and PESA is nothing without us, its members.

St*******






jayandmarie
10/15/06 09:36 AM (#215)








Mi*****, I left ModCOM when Joe C was moderating posts behind our back. If Joe C is letting PeSA members in behind your back then I am surprised you have not left yet.

I would assume Jonathan agrees with most of what you said, and sees EMCTA as a solution.

QUOTE: You know what they say, let something go, if it comes back to you, it was yours, if not, it never was.

Yes, very true, my friend.

JAY






1bu*********
10/15/06 09:37 AM (#216)








"So if Joe is in fact the one common person in all of these areas, then isn’t the noble thing to do is for Joe C. to step down and allow Jonathan to take charge of and change PESA to Professional ECOMMERCE sellers association, capitalize on the notoriety we already have and still encompass the “only eBay” sellers continuing on as a MEMBER OWNED corporation which re-invests it’s profits for the good and betterment of all members?"

Interesting thought Mi*******. I cannot see any negatives from this, let me give it some more thought. I think it will also improve our images in ebays eyes day 1.

St*******






emo
10/15/06 10:07 AM (#217)








"So if Joe is in fact the one common person in all of these areas, then isn’t the noble thing to do is for Joe C. to step down?"

By this logic, should Meg not also "step down"?

Br******






got********
10/15/06 10:10 AM (#218)








St*******, the point of the line was to say that the message board is not a big reason to pony up membership fees. If 75% of the members did not, then someone could simply start a new, free, board and probably attract most of the active members from here.

I completely agree about not fracturing the group, but I fear that this is what is about to happen. This is what my questions have been directed towards. A fractured group will have far less value than what we have now, yet the membership fee is almost certain to do this (see the low guesses on remaining members if you doubt this).






joefriday2
10/15/06 10:15 AM (#219)








Mi*****, Here is what the events committee worked with during the last Summit, per your questions:

City location? The events committee did not pick the city. The board had decided on the city before the events committee even started working on the summit. With that being said I could never get an answer to determine which board member(s) voted for which particular city. It would be nice to have a voting record so that when the elections come around we can see how our board members have served us.

Dates? The events committee did not pick the dates. The only dates this particular hotel was available were the dates that the summit was held. The board wanted this hotel and that dictated the dates.

Length? The events committee did pick the length based upon the box we were in. (This involved the availability of this particular hotel and the Jewish holidays)

Hotel? The events committee did not pick the hotel. We provided the board 4 choices and they picked the hotel. The events committee did all negotiations with the hotel.

Speakers? The events committee picked all speakers and put the summit content together without interference from the board.

Ben






joefriday2
10/15/06 10:21 AM (#220)








I need to go on record to re-state that I do not want Joe to step down and I don't want the group fractured.

We made a deal with Joe that he would be here as long as he wants to be here. We will uphold our end of the deal.

I also expect Joe to uphold his end of the deal and get the PESA bylaws fixed.

We have a pending committee standing by, and ready to go to work, as soon as Joe and the board sanction the new bylaw committee.

Ben
__________________


com*********
10/15/06 11:11 AM (#221)








"I completely agree about not fracturing the group, but I fear that this is what is about to happen. This is what my questions have been directed towards. A fractured group will have far less value than what we have now, yet the membership fee is almost certain to do this"

It is not the membership fee doing it at all. Consider how the group is run as being the problem (Fire) and consider the membership fee making people wake up to that problem (Gas).

Ji*******






su********
10/15/06 11:16 AM (#222)








Would someone remind us that there are several board members and not only one. I'd like to hear from each of them before we go wildly making speculations about the goings on of this organization.

Thank you.

Su******
(personally, not as moderator).






spo**********
10/15/06 11:23 AM (#223)








Ben pretty much spelled out the EVCOM participation in the Fall Summit, but I think that it was in more of a cooperative spirit with the BOD. Once we knew it was to be downtown, I pushed for the hotel.

Bi******* you said: "T*****, a few short months ago, you had the idea that this group was relatively worthless."

A few short months ago I wasn't a member and didn't know what PeSA is. I have worked very hard in my short tenure in this group, and wouldn't do so if I did not think it is incredibly valuable.

T******






1bu*********
10/15/06 12:43 PM (#224)








Su******* said

" I'd like to hear from each of them before we go wildly making speculations about the goings on of this organization."

Su******* there is not one time in ourhistory that has happened, you should know that. It will not happen now either.






1bu
10/15/06 12:44 PM (#225)








T**** said "I have worked very hard in my short tenure in this group, and wouldn't do so if I did not think it is incredibly valuable."

Would you have done it if you knew you were being duped?

St**********



spo*********
10/15/06 01:19 PM (#226)








I have already invested my dues. Yes, I would. I don't feel duped. St*******, you have to take this with a grain of salt because I don't have the history that you and many posters to this board have. I bought into a business organization.

I made two contacts in PeSA that I would not have made without it, that have made me more money than a century worth of dues at $240.

I do agree that the prior questions should be answered, and legitimate by-laws established. I don't want to see PeSA harmed by installation of dues. I would like to see it become an effective lobby. I would also like to see some funds in the PeSA account. I don't think $99 is going to make anyone rich.

Just ramblings of a new member. Through your post, St****, and many others, I am learning the reasons for frustration with our organization. Most are quite valid. I am willing to continue participating, and see how it plays out.

T******






1bu********
10/15/06 01:23 PM (#227)








T**********

this is not about money. I think you will see the vast majority who have complaints are not complaining about dues, in fact I think you will find most who are complaining are ones who have lobbied for dues long ago.

And I hope my speculation is wrong T*****, but silence tells a lot as well

St********






ge*********
10/15/06 02:45 PM (#228)








Ben,

Thanks for notifying us of the Boards involvement in the last summitt. I am shocked at your recount of the record, as I remember a poll was taken as to where the members wanted the summitt held and I thought the members chose Atlanta? Whatever, water under the bridge.

I suspect other committees are experiencing the same things as you and I have. I am however proud and relieved to hear that the board has left the elections committee alone to govern elections as they should. I have always hoped they could do the same with the rest of the committees.

I totally agree, this is not about money, but the direction of the group and the lack of accountability thus far with the money that has been received (could be as much as $500k)and what has been accomplished, or not accomplished over more than 3 years. I wish to get on with the business of PESA. I am tired of hearing about benefits, I don't personally care about "benefits".

There are two benefits I seek from PESA:

ONE: I want a safe and propering organization that I can feel comfortable that will survive to provide a venue (summitts) where myself as a small internet seller can speak with analysts, reporters, venues and venders as that is the most beneficial thing an organization like this can do for me.

TWO - The message board is the second most valuable thing for me. The other fluff, shipping discounts, health ins etc is all stuff I can get from my local chamber of commerce.

If this group can remain in the hands of the members (without private interests) myself and many others I suspect will not only pay the $99 and the $240, but continue to donate thousands of dollars in time and resources to make it grow. One great way to jump start the PESA bank account would be to sell stock in the corp for $1-2-300 per share. That way, you have a wide and diverse group of owners and no hidden agendas.

IF this group is a privately held corporation, run by it's founder and thus held captive to his vision and ideas, then I suspect the fracture that others have talked about will occur.

I sincerely hope that Joe C. can and will realize this group has grown beyond his wisdom and in fact be noble and step down in light of the problems that have been outlined in this thread.

Should that occur, imagine a world where Jonathan can simply direct active committee's to execute on his plan, well funded by dues, well respected by many venues, well sought after by venders and supported in every way by it's dedicated and loyal members whose business is growing widely as a result.

Joe C. would be able to sit back and bask in the glory of what has occurred all because of his thoughts that one day on a beach in the NE.

Continue on the path where Jonathan appears to be distancing himself from PESA and re-arranging his alliances with a new organization while canabolizing PESA members for it's growth. Then the decision will be made to lower the membership standards and as Jay said, sellers of size "will no longer feel comfortable" here. PESA will be a flash in the pan. All the volunteers will disappear and neither organization will prosper like PESA could.

The power of PESA is in it's members. Anything that jeopardizes the membership fracturing is putting all of PESA at risk.

This is fair warning, anyone who chooses to email me about this privately from now on, I will post your emails on this thread. If you have something to say, for or against, please step up and state your opinion here.

Mi*********






1bu**********
10/15/06 02:49 PM (#229)








" If you have something to say, for or against, please step up and state your opinion here"

Mi*****

you are not referring to me are you? I will try to be more open and honest and post my thoughts here for now one without fear of reprisal


St*******






1bu******
10/15/06 03:23 PM (#230)








Mi********

I have given some more thoughts to your posts # 213 and # 228. While you and others may be surprised to hear this, I must say that asking Joe to step down or trying to remove him at this not time is not appropriate.

Some of you know who have been around for a while this group was fractured at one time in the past we were able to get back together and unite stronger then ever. At that time it is my understanding an agreement was reached between Joe the founder of PESA and the current BOD as well as some other influential members. Part of that agreement was that Joe would be a lifetime board member (barring any gross misconduct).

I believe we should honor our end of that agreement.

However also part of that agreement was PESA belonged to its members and did not belong to any one individual or small group of individuals. I also feel strongly that end of the agreement must be honored as well. To date that end of the agreement has not been kept, but I believe the original members who were here during that time should stand up and ensure that the original agreement is upheld.

With that said EMCTA in my opinion is a totally separate entity. If it is set up to be a profit center and is owned by a small group of individuals or one individual that is fine. PESA owners (its members) should not be associated with any group EMCTA that is not a fully owned subsidiary of PESA without our knowledge. Especially if the affiliation is with a for profit company and we do not have a contract signed with this company providing PESA funding.


Many of these issues exist because we have incomplete and sloppy by-laws. I am calling for a new committee immediately be put in place to create new by-laws. With this I also call for an expansion of the board from its current 4 elected members to 10-12 elected members.

St******
__________________


go********
10/15/06 03:37 PM (#231)








This may not be about dues, but it is definitely the catalyst which is causing an imminent problem. Everyone here thinks that the group will be smaller as a result, many thinking that it will be MUCH smaller.
So, to take Mi******'s criteria, let me ask some things.


ONE: I want a safe and propering organization that I can feel comfortable that will survive to provide a venue (summitts).
- How valuable will the summit be, what level contacts can we bring if the membership is 25% of present?

TWO - The message board is the second most valuable thing for me.
- How valuable will that be with 3/4 of the members gone? Especially if one of them starts a separate board for everyone (which I consider highly likely)?

I'm not complaining about the dues, but I AM wondering if anyone considered the impact that they would bring. If the group is considerably smaller, how much value\impact will it have??






joefriday2
10/15/06 03:46 PM (#232)








Bi******,

This isn't just about a message board. PESA grew out of a message board in a magical way into a trade association.

There are hundreds of boards that have tried to do what PESA has accomplished. None have made it. The reason is that it takes more than a message board.

PESA is a viable (yet incomplete) trade association. All that needs to happen is for the work that has begun to be finished.

There are a number of members that have stepped up to the plate to help make this happen. We're 60% there. The last 40% has been problematic.

Ben






spo************
10/15/06 03:56 PM (#233)








Bi******:

I think the several hundred that attend the events and value the board will remain. The question should be, "How many sponsors and speakers will wish to speak with a group of 300 (or whatever) total membership?"

After reading all of your comments ("your" meaning all of this threads comments by long-standing members), dues aren't the driving factor, rather transparency.

St******:

I agree with your points. By-laws need to be written with a strong committee structure, Expanding the BOD isn't a bad idea. We'll see what happens.

It is interesting that a prior thread started asking for voluntary dues. 3 responded in the affirmative and kicked in $100, one a director.

T*********






emo**********
10/15/06 04:24 PM (#234)








T*******

Forget the dues! They are incidental to what is wrong here. It is bad enough that a non-profit no-dues organization remains shrouded in mystery. It is insane to think a for-profit dues organization can operate in the same way. I will pay $99 to participate in this group and its discussions, but I won't feel like a member of it if I can't even find out who owns it!

Br******






tig**********
10/15/06 04:29 PM (#235)








Mi********,

Due to this statement in the bylaws "The Board of Directors may make separate bylaws governing the conduct of elections including provisions for expanding the size of the Board", whatever problems there may have been in the election committee don't seem worth fighting about. I recommend that you take it with a grain of salt.

From the creation filing document it appears that the corporation is comprised of five individuals. On dissolution the assets will be distributed to unspecified individuals who have contributed capital. Now, I'm not a lawyer and I don't know where the nonprofit status stands, but a non-profit does not have shareholders, and so by law the members have the right to vote for directors. So this subject could be a bit touchy, and I personally have just said all that I intend to about it.

While I am in complete agreement with those calling for information, I think the Board of Directors is between a rock and a hard place here. On the one hand PESA is legally nothing more than forum for sellers and a focal point for distributing technical knowledge and advice. On the other hand PESA is now soliciting dues for -I believe this is all that's been stated - for the purpose of improving communication and becoming more professional. If they collect dues to transform the organization into a trade association, or to provide tangible benefits then it seems to me that they'd be obligated to follow through, and these directions are not necessarily what they've envisioned.

I would like to a straightforward, detailed description of what the plan is though. As a member I'd like to be able to evaluate where this organization is going to be in six months, or if it's likely to endure. I think that volunteer members of a non-profit organization have that right, and that it is a minimum obligation of PESA to provide it. I'd also like to make my own evaluations about PESA as well; I'm sure there are a number of people in PESA who, as I do, have some years experience related to trade show management, trade association management and related professional experience and would like to bring that to bear.

--B***********






got*************
10/15/06 04:31 PM (#236)








T********, I don't think I agree with you. While they may not be a factor for most of us posting here, for many more, they are. If nothing else, if they were not to exist, then we wouldn't be facing a large potential loss of membership.
I can't say if it's transparency or whatnot, but I do know that very little (if anything) has been said about what members will get in return for the dues. Further, what is the focus going to be? EBay? ECommerce? The former will not have much value for someone like myself and probably soon yourself. OTOH, the latter will not have much value for someone like Jay.

As for your statement "How many sponsors and speakers will wish to speak with a group of 300 (or whatever) total membership?", I will respond EXACTLY. While the people who attend may not change, will our drawing power be less (almost certainly), and how much so? Will the attendees be the same top-level ones, or will they be farther down the food chain? This concerns me greatly. This is the crux of what I'm getting at.






spo*********
10/15/06 04:45 PM (#237)








Br******:

I agree with you (quoting myself): "dues aren't the driving factor, rather transparency."

Br*******:

I agree with you, too, again quoting myself, "How many sponsors and speakers will wish to speak with a group of 300 (or whatever) total membership?"

It concerns me as well.

T*******






spo*********
10/15/06 04:46 PM (#238)








Meant Bi***** on the second comment.






1bu***********
10/15/06 04:55 PM (#239)








T*******

you said "How many sponsors and speakers will wish to speak with a group of 300 (or whatever) total membership?"



We have yet to draw 300 individual sellers to any event, how many sponsors came in the past?






se************
10/15/06 05:00 PM (#240)








St******* has a point there. While I have not been to a Summit I would venture a guess that those that have would be more likely to stay on through PESA. My reasoning for this is that they have seen first hand the benefits that PESA brings to them. That being said, sponsors probably assume we come back here and talk all about it so it reaches a wider audience. But lets also remember we are not just members of PESA but also Powersellers (mostly) so we could be bringing it back to them still as far as sponsors are concerned.

Mi********
__________________

http://therossshow.com/showthread.php?p=...post125934

[BellisimaJ.]

From TRS:

You must remember that PESA grew out of an eBay bulletin board that was used by high volume sellers. No one had any idea that PESA would grow into a trade organization.

Anyone believe this?

Response to above post:

Anyone believe this?

Nope. Not the way I remember it.
Reply With Quote

Response to above post:

Nope. Not the way I remember it.

That guy is not very perceptive. It's kinda apparent all through his posts. He's like their OC.
__________________

[BellisimaJ.]

From TRS:

got***********
10/15/06 05:10 PM (#241)








Yes, we may not have drawn 300 people to one event. However, we have had a large pool to draw them from. No one is ever going to get everyone to attend - given the geography and the times, it's just not going to work for everyone, and not everyone will want to come even if they could.
Just because someone doesn't attend doesn't mean that they are not reached with the message that the speaker brings.

T********'s original statement is still valid. Will PeSA with 300 members be taken as seriously as PeSA with 1000+ members? Let's not forget total sales volume as well. Sure, we might get some suit from eBay\Google\Amazon, but would we get the Bill Cobbs? And with 300 total members, will we even get 70% of the attendance that we had before?






tig*********
10/15/06 05:21 PM (#242)








I don't think that summit attendence is necessarily tied that closely to the total membership. I suspect that for those who do attend, membership is ancilliary to attending the Summits.

In fact, that's why I tend to doubt that the dues are an attempt to monetize the membership. The Board of Directors would see more profit with less resistance by subcontracting the Summits with perhaps a registration fee, rather than going to the membership directly.

B*****






1bu*******
10/15/06 05:36 PM (#243)








" Will PeSA with 300 members be taken as seriously as PeSA with 1000+ members"

If done properly yes, first off we do no thave 1000+ members, where you getting that from? We are lucky to have 500 active individual selling members. Most os the active members I would guess have no problems with paying dues. The problems lie in transparency and ownership of PESA.

St*******






spo**********
10/15/06 05:38 PM (#244)








Relia-Bid
Channel Advisor
Overstock
MarketWorks
Infopia
Andale
Prosper
Internet Business Skills
Monsoon
BidPay

and I missing several from the Summit. Sellathon and Terapeak were there. I cannot recall if they were sponsors. Brian from Mystorerewards was a speaker.

Fedex sponsored the PeSA Lounge at Live. BuySafe and several others helped sponsor our poker tournament. Many sponsors contributed to the bags.

I agree with Bi*****. A larger pool to draw from would be beneficial and give us bigger clout. By the way, these sponsors should be thanked by all in attendance.

St******, you misread my point as I was saying our total group will be that size (I guessed 430). I imagine we would draw a larger proportion of membership, but our membership would be significantly smaller.

T******






tra**********
10/15/06 05:39 PM (#245)








Yikes.

This thread is certainly airing a few pieces of dirty laundry for new members (like me) to see. In truth, it is disheartening to read.

We've had lots of posts discussing the benefit/drawback of changing the "e" in PeSA to eCommerce vs. eBay ... perhaps the real discussion should be whether the "A" should be changed from Alliance to something more appropriate ... perhaps animosity? anger? anarchy?

T******






spo**********
10/15/06 05:41 PM (#246)








Ti***:

Me, too.

T*******






1bu
10/15/06 05:41 PM (#247)








I should add if PESA is a due based organization owned by its members an operates as a non profit trade association, it will actually bring more value to sponsors. Currently 1000 names on this thread is menaingless, because most are not active or serious members, and lots are duplications of multiple users, non selling members etc.

If we had 300-400 paying dues members it would lend credability for others to join who may see us as a more serious organization. Bottom line is dues are needed, the amount needed is stil TBD but $99 is a good starting point. How did the yarrive ta $240 is beyond me unless someone is looking to monetize this for profit.


Lastly if PESA is not owned by its members and is a fee based for profit organinaztion, it will never work. PESA will not even exist in 12 months from now. I say fee based rather then dues based because a for profit company it is a fee, a non profit it is dues.

St******






cel*************
10/15/06 05:50 PM (#248)








"How did the yarrive ta $240 is beyond me"

$20 x 12 months = $240

I'm guessing that's how it happened.

JH






ge*********
10/15/06 05:50 PM (#249)








St*******,

I am not asking for the board or the membership to remove Joe C.. I am very clear on the agreements that have been made over the years. 1.) for PESA to be a members driven and owned trade association 2.) for Joe C. to be on the board for life.

What I am suggesting is that if Joe C. seems to be the common denominator in preventing number one from happening, then if he is truly noble, he should step down.

Some of you are questioning the dues. Instead of thinking about it as "how many members will we have if" I would think about it this way.

If proper by-laws were in place. If committees were allowed to operate without direct interference of the bod. IF members were fully aware of the basic financial goings on of PESA. IF all we had to do was monitor a professional company's actions on our behalf in regards to planning and scheduling bi-annual summitts where a trade show floor funded that company's fees. Then I think that the vast majority of our membership would not even hesitate to pay $99 or $240 to be a member of PESA.

So, is it really the dues that is the problem?

If this group had regular summitts with 40 venders/venues exhibiting on a show floor, 3 days of classes, roundtables, speakers, seminars, food and fun plus a discussion board located at gopesa.org where we could have discussion threads of any sort, about any venue without fear of retribution. I cannnot see why anyone of the 1000 members would not attend.

The needs of both ebay sellers and ebay + sellers would be met. Membership and attendance would both be more secure than ever.

So, what is it that is holding this group back? I refer you to Jay's post as a possible answer. He has been around just as long as me, he has been as involved if not more so than I. Jay is wise. Does what he says make sense?

Or do you still have questions about the $99?

Mi********






spo**********
10/15/06 05:53 PM (#250)








St******:

So the bottom-line for the BOD is to address exactly what they are doing, where the organization is headed, where the money is being spent, what type of organization we are, who are shareholders, write by-laws, form a committee structure, provide financial information?

I think those are all valid points, and should be the BOD's main priority. Man, would that clear the air. We could make a huge leap forward.

I am willing to help anywhere if asked.

To*******

http://therossshow.com/showthread.php?p=...post125938

[BellisimaJ.]

fROM TRS:

1bu********
10/15/06 05:53 PM (#251)








JH

I know how to do math LOL, but as a non profit member owned trade association we only need a break even operating budget, so hence how was the $240 arrived at? and why the carrot dangled $99 if sign o nearly? I can answer that one and it is becuase someone figured at $99 not many questions would be asked, guess they were wrong here.






inf********
10/15/06 05:55 PM (#252)








You know, not to beat an apparantly dead horse, but it would have been an excellent time to discuss this AT THE PESA SUMMIT!

What a wonderful opportunity to, oh I don't know, have a PESA meeting? Maybe update the membership on the Boards doings on PESA's behalf?

So, here's what I'm seeing with the BOD of this group:

1. They refuse to disclose the financial structure of the group, and refuse to disclose financials.

2. They fly to Salt Lake and meet with eBay, supposedly on our behalf, yet they will not disclose the details of the meeting (and by the way, in my book, that is acting in your own interests, not on my behalf).

3. They announce a new organization or two on our behalf, but don't fill us in on it.

4. We recenly have a PESA summit, where there is no PESA meeting, no elections, no guidance or update whatsoever.

5. They ask for dues, which in most organizations is a great idea that I would support, but see point #1.

There are some great people in PESA - how hard is it to lead us?

Chalk me up for a vote of no confidence in the Board.

-Ke********






sp***********
10/15/06 05:56 PM (#253)








Mi******* is thinking bigger than me, and I like it

T*****






tra*********
10/15/06 05:57 PM (#254)








Since I was not around "in the old days", can someone explain why Joe has been granted BOD for life? I recognize he started this group, but that does not seem to be the reason people are implying Joe C. has this privilege.

Just curious.

Thanks.

Ti*******






tra*********
10/15/06 05:58 PM (#255)








Hmmm ... Ke****** makes some good points, IMO.

Ti*****




lau********
10/15/06 05:58 PM (#256)








4. We recenly have a PESA summit, where there is no PESA meeting, no elections, no guidance or update whatsoever.

Ke*****,

We just had an election. The fact is that it was the third election in 6 months, representing a 50% turnover in the BOD.

L****






1bu**********
10/15/06 05:58 PM (#257)








Mi********

If Joe wants to step down that would be entirely up to him. I understand your concerns and Jay concerns and can udnerstand why you have concerns in this regard.

However I do think proper written by-laws and an expanded BOD would serve to handle your concerns equally as well.

St********






1bu*******
10/15/06 05:59 PM (#258)








50% turnover L****, who was the 1/2 inasmuch as there are 5 BOD?






lau********
10/15/06 06:00 PM (#259)








who was the 1/2 inasmuch as there are 5 BOD?

St*******,

As a permanent member, I don't normally consider Joe. But we can call it 40% to be accurate.

L****






ge*******
10/15/06 06:01 PM (#260)








Oh, and btw.

Maybe members are leaving because their business is no longer centered on eBay. Maybe they don't feel that a ebay organization (PESA) fits their new business model, so they are opting for other solutions?

Maybe it is not the dues at all, maybe it is the market that is changing and the sellers are moving on to those markets and those associations.

IF PESA (& eBay) do not address their internal problems, then the sellers who support both PESA/eBay will be forced to move on.

Here is one plan:
Joe C. resigns or doesn't.
Appropriate and encompassing by-laws are enacted.
Committees are allowed to operate without board interference.
The name is changed from PESA to PESA (ebay to ecommerce)
Non Profit status is sought, or if not, then the stock is sold one share at a time to the members.
Dues are collected.
PESA moves to the gopesa.org message board.
Membership drives are started to attract sellers who are not on eBay.
A professional events committee is hired to plan and run or summitts.
We all live happily ever after.

Is it really the dues?

Mi*******
__________________


1bu*******
10/15/06 06:02 PM (#261)








Ke*** said

2. They fly to Salt Lake and meet with eBay, supposedly on our behalf, yet they will not disclose the details of the meeting (and by the way, in my book, that is acting in your own interests, not on my behalf).

Ke****

my guess is some had personal agendas and others did not. Care to guess who did?


Tim, read the by laws here, explains Joe C lifetime seat. of course we do not know if new by-laws have be written and approved overiding these current ones, but these current by-laws are very sloppy, if does not even allow for Joe's removal for misconduct which is wrong.

http://www.gopesa.org/bylaws.htm






1bu*******
10/15/06 06:04 PM (#262)








L***** said

"As a permanent member, I don't normally consider Joe."

I think a lot of folks feel the same way L****






tig********
10/15/06 06:06 PM (#263)








In the interest of accuracy:

In the event of a tie, Joe has a second vote.

Tam*********






lau*******
10/15/06 06:07 PM (#264)








I think a lot of folks feel the same way L*****

St*****,

Let me put it in better context. As a permanent member of the board, I don't consider Joes seat as an election concern. The EC has 4 seats to hold elections for, but yes, there are obviously 5 total.

L*****






1bu*******
10/15/06 06:07 PM (#265)








Mi********

we are not an exclusive ebay group and never have been, from the onset we discussed the fact that one day we would probably need to branch out to other venues and we did not want to restrict ourselves to eba yexclusively, you were here then so you should remember. Hence we incorporated as "E-commerce Merchants Alliance (“EMA”)" which currently operates under the name of “The Professional eBay Sellers Alliance” . We can certainly change the name we operate under at anytime and tha tis why we incorporated under "E-commerce Merchants Alliance"

St*****






lau********
10/15/06 06:08 PM (#266)








In the event of a tie, Joe has a second vote.

Tam******,

In the event of a tie what?

L*******






ge**********
10/15/06 06:09 PM (#267)








I was not privy to the discussions where the deal was made.

But, the deal was that Joe would publicly ask those who left and started another message board to come back, those who left would come back, this group would be a non profit organization for the benefit of the members and Joe C. would get a permanent seat on the board. David Hardin, Jay Sinese and John Stack were all who negotiated this deal. I (believe it or not) tried to stay out of it.

Would John, David or Jay care to elaborate? OR If someone were ambitious, you could probably search this message board and read all about it. It happened in Sept and Oct of 2004 or 2003? I cannot remember.

Mi********


Bolding Mine - TR




1bu******
10/15/06 06:10 PM (#268)








L****

al lboard members do not have to be present for a vote, so if one is out that leaves 4, so Joe gets 2 votes in a tie. Hence another huge reason why we need 10-12 board members






ge********
10/15/06 06:11 PM (#269)








St******,

I am aware. I am also aware that the "plan" was to at the right time change from ebay to ecommerce.

Is now the right time?

Mi**********






lau********
10/15/06 06:14 PM (#270)








St********,

Of course, any time you have a tie vote there has to be a mechanism to resolve it. That wouldn't matter if it were 4 directors or 100.

L********

[bargainbloodhound]

from the onset we discussed the fact that one day we would probably need to branch out to other venues and we did not want to restrict ourselves to eba yexclusively, you were here then so you should remember. Hence we incorporated as "E-commerce Merchants Alliance (“EMA”)" which currently operates under the name of “The Professional eBay Sellers Alliance” . We can certainly change the name we operate under at anytime and tha tis why we incorporated under "E-commerce Merchants Alliance"

The onset was 2003.  They didn't incorporate as EMA until October 2005.  This quote kind of confirms  that the reason nobody can find a record of an incorporation under their previous official names (Professional Ebay Sellers Alliance (PeSA) and The eBay Elite) is because there was no incorporation prior to 10/05...and yet they were advertising themselves as a nonprofit, accepting donations as a nonprofit when legally they (probably) weren't a nonprofit beause PeSA (probably) wasn't a legal entity until the incorporaton as a nonprofit corporation in 10/05 (and that's leaving aside the other question of whether the group ever filed for status as a tax exempt nonprofit with the IRS).

Further proof that there probably wasn't an incorporation prior to the EMA filing last year  is provided by this quote from a PeSA member from October 2005, shortly before the EMA incorporation...apparently the group didn't even have a separate PeSA PayPal account or bank account when the first summit took place:

xxxxx
10/08/05

Use Shelly as an excuse all you want. It doesn't change the fact and the TRUTH that P has not produced a Financial statement in two years.

P, as the Financial Controller, should have NEVER placed the burden of processing Pesa's funds in Shelly's business PayPal account. It was P and Joe's lack of planning which caused this necessity. The necessity occurred during the NY Summit in May of 2004. Pesa ( the eBay Elite) started nine months earlier. Planning for the NY summit started around February. Shelly, who was not presently on the Board, suggested numerous times that JC should get an Elite PayPal account. JC did nothing.

So, iT is not fair or proper for you to use Shelly as an excuse for P's lack of work or JC's lack of planning. Had Shelly not agreed to use her PayPal account, the NY Summit may have never happened. Even if it did, I wonder what excuse would be used for no Financial report.

Shelly did not hesitate to give those funds to JC in a timely manner for JC to deposit in his personal account. Does the financial report contain a detailed listing details of JC's personal PayPal account? Wouldn't that be considered commingling of funds on JC's behalf?

http://community.tuliptools.com/index.ph...ml#msg3198