John Ruschmeyer <jruschme_at_exit109.com> wrote:
>One thing to remember here is that your logic is based on the premise
>that the information still exists.
Yes, of course. I wouldn't begin a quest of begging until I was sure
the item existed. No Holy Grail searches for me. I think there are
several categories of "lost": 1) it's somewhere in the vaults but
we can't find it, 2) it's in the vaults but no I'm too busy to get it,
3) I can't get permission to get it out, 4) I've got it but I don't
want to give it to you, 5) I can't give it you, 6) We'd have to pay a
lawyer to say we can give it to you, etc. down through N) the company
says they don't have it but an engineer we found on the net managed
to save a copy.
I'm more concerned about saving what we can, and getting official
permission to do so, and being able to reproduce it in a more
accessible fashion than it exists now. I can't do anything about
things that don't exist.
Tony Duell wrote:
>Exactly. One problem that PERQ-fanatics have found is just who (out of
>PERQ Logic Systems, Accent Systems, ICL, Varityper, etc) own what?
And perhaps this can help the argument. If a company has completely
lost or disregarded an asset that we can point out that they rightfully
own, perhaps they'll be more friendly if we ask to take care of it
for them. Buy-outs and acquisitions tend to prune away less valuable
(but no less *interesting*) technologies. My Quest involves telling
Lockheed-Martin that they own the Terak. Wish me luck. :-)
Ward Donald Griffiths III <gram_at_cnct.com> wrote:
>"Inventory" tax means that for as long as you hold the merchandise,
>you will continue to be taxed every bloody year unless you bite the
>bullet and throw the stuff away.
In my understanding of accounting, this "tax" doesn't exist. I think
the previous writer doesn't understand why the bean counters want to
get rid of inventory. There are certainly exceptions that rile
the blood of small- and large-L libertarians, but in my experience
in US small business, you are only taxed once. A B.C. wants to
reduce inventory for other reasons - it's money tied up in junk
that's not selling, not gaining interest, and isn't growing in value.
When it comes time to dumpster it, it becomes a write-off loss and
its original cost is probably taken as a deduction of some kind,
which alone makes it valuable to the bottom line.
So, the original poster's notion is correct - the complications of
taxation tends to make companies dump old stuff. It's like property
tax - it forces people to find a way for the land to generate at
least that much cash, which discourages people from buying land and
simply preserving it as-is.
- John
Jefferson Computer Museum <
http://www.threedee.com/jcm>
Received on Fri May 08 1998 - 08:50:34 BST