Post #711198 by Fate on Sat, Mar 15, 2014 10:22 AM

On 2014-03-13 17:15, Atomic Tiki Punk wrote:

In this case the owner has the money to buy and setup a 2000 gallon tank, otherwise
he would not be doing it in the first place, As a contingency the raised funds may still be needed
if he (The owner) changes his plans again.

I for one don't believe in awarding greed, so not a penny should go to this guy for any reason
it is a little something I like to call ethics.

How do you know the owner "HAS" the money? Have you spoken to him?

How is this "greed"?? So a guy buys an old closed restaurant (and everything in it) Said restaurant has a bunch of fish that have to be removed before any real renovation can happen (Do any of you understand how much money is being lost when a building is just sitting NOT bringing in money?)
Upon putting out the word that the fish need to be removed - a bunch of people and press get riled up over one particular fish (which, considering all the other animals there, I find a bit odd), to the point of raising money for Rufus to have a new home. Eventually there develops a plan as to where the fish may go (rumor has it a certain new restaurant home dragged their feet quite a bit, complicating the issue). Further discussion among all brings up that moving Rufus to a new location involves a lot of risk to him. (dont sit here and tell me that moving a fish 10 feet is the SAME as moving it 10 miles).

So, the owner notices Rufus has a lot of value to many, also learns that moving said fish would be risky, and decides that perhaps he can accommodate the fish in his original home, which, will lower the risk of the move issue, and possibly attract customers that care about said fish.
HOW is that greedy?
Seriously - however flaky you want to see him as for changing his mind - how is that greedy?

There is considerable cost involved in accommodating this fish. Why do you assume the owner just has that money (over 10K) just sitting around burning a hole in his pocket? If he saw everyone raising money to move Rufus - why wouldn't he reasonably assume that perhaps if he keeps Rufus there and builds a new bigger tank - that people would NOT want to support that too?
How is that greedy?
Why do you assume he just easily comes up with a last minute 13K for a new fish tank, never mind what is involved with holding Rufus somewhere while the building gets renovated. Have you seen that building? It needs work to say the least.
I still find it odd (and a bit misguided and hypocritical that you people are so adamant that the money only goes to the RISKIER move for Rufus, and zero will go to having a new home WHERE HE CURRENTLY RESIDES - some of you going so far as to hope all ventures at that property fail miserably because he decided to keep a fish he first wanted out (such a considerate "ethical" bunch you are). I find it completely reasonable that the new owner (if he did- Im not speaking for him) thought that you people would be willing to financially support a new home for Rufus WHEREVER it would be since you were all so quick to raise money for a new home.

how is that greedy?