Only $25,000 profit?
			Forum

Posted by: OTS ® 06/23/2005, 08:38:45 Author Profile Edit Alert Moderators

If 300 people bought tickets at $100 ($30,000) 300 at $50 ($15,000) and 300 at $35 ($10,500), which were the originally advertised prices for this “fundraiser” [or is it “fun-raiser”), and 1,000 bought tickets at $10 ($10,000) that would be an attendance of 1,900.  Perhaps another six hundred students got in for free, as there were seats available.  That brings the attendance to 2,500 (out of about 4,500 seats) and a gross of about $65,500.  If the guru gave a check for $25,000, WHAT HAPPENED TO THE OTHER $40,500?  ALL PROFITS were to go to the U.N. Food drive.  Don’t tell me that it cost Forty Thousand Dollars to put on the speech.  What, the union electricians and hall people and the hall and the podium rental cost Forty Thousand Dollars?  I doubt it.  Anyone?  What, you’re telling me that his private plane costs for his travel to Miami and the cost of his and his entourage flying in and staying on South Beach and eating at the fancy restaurants came out of this fundraiser as costs?  What?  Doesn’t he donate anything?  Everything is reimbursed back to him?  I mean The Foundation?  Can anyone explain this?

Previous

Recommend View All Current page

Next

Replies to this message

My thoughts entirely - and what about the sponsors? --- JHB ( Thu, Jun 23, 2005, 09:42:26 ) ( 170 bytes ) +2 Can the prem rawat explain? shouldn (no text) --- la-ex ( Thu, Jun 23, 2005, 10:06:26 ) ( 0 bytes ) Can the prem rawat foundation explain? Shouldn't they? --- la-ex ( Thu, Jun 23, 2005, 10:08:51 ) ( 289 bytes ) +2 Why exactly $25,000 --- NikW ( Thu, Jun 23, 2005, 11:23:46 ) ( 820 bytes ) +1 Re: Why exactly $25,000 --- kwts ( Thu, Jun 23, 2005, 14:45:19 ) ( 1414 bytes ) Maharaji has taken a leaf out of his brother's book --- Sir Dave ( Fri, Jun 24, 2005, 03:04:42 ) ( 1024 bytes ) +2 Great comparison, Sir Dave --- Babaluji ( Fri, Jun 24, 2005, 14:12:29 ) ( 412 bytes ) The Bob Geldof comparison is hilarious Sir Dave - LOL (no text) --- Steve ( Fri, Jun 24, 2005, 15:09:18 ) ( 0 bytes ) OTS, Rawat has all these "expenses" and they aren't cheap --- Joe ( Thu, Jun 23, 2005, 11:59:17 ) ( 929 bytes ) +1 Fear of the IRS may have -inspired- his alleged donation. (no text) --- bill ( Mon, Jun 27, 2005, 00:53:24 ) ( 0 bytes ) Re: Only $25,000 profit? --- PatD ( Thu, Jun 23, 2005, 18:46:45 ) ( 1228 bytes ) Re: Only $25,000 profit? --- Sir Dave ( Thu, Jun 23, 2005, 19:33:37 ) ( 204 bytes ) +1 Re: Not done in U.S. --- OTS ( Fri, Jun 24, 2005, 08:23:42 ) ( 1930 bytes ) +2 You bet it's galling, but there's a light --- Babaluji ( Fri, Jun 24, 2005, 12:04:13 ) ( 1424 bytes ) +1 rawat is privately pissed, publicly nonchalant.... --- la-ex ( Fri, Jun 24, 2005, 13:21:09 ) ( 4464 bytes ) +2 *********BEST OF NOMINATION*******Thns (no text) --- OTS ( Fri, Jun 24, 2005, 14:27:38 ) ( 0 bytes ) +1 Yeah, I noticed it was a ***BEST***, too. --- Babaluji ( Fri, Jun 24, 2005, 15:59:54 ) ( 118 bytes ) +1 Ok, it's a ***BEST*** --- Babaluji ( Fri, Jun 24, 2005, 22:37:04 ) ( 135 bytes ) link Re: rawat is privately pissed, freaked, and fearful...... --- bill ( Sun, Jun 26, 2005, 07:33:04 ) ( 462 bytes ) Re: Not done in U.S. --- PatD ( Fri, Jun 24, 2005, 20:06:33 ) ( 1038 bytes ) Re: Only $25,000 profit? --- sulla ( Fri, Jun 24, 2005, 17:17:58 ) ( 2379 bytes ) +1 BINGO: Ted Levitt is an old, old Rawat cult member --- Joe ( Fri, Jun 24, 2005, 18:17:55 ) ( 984 bytes ) +4 Also, Ted, how is your prostate?.... --- Joe ( Fri, Jun 24, 2005, 18:19:59 ) ( 88 bytes ) Well, ain't that the SMOKING GUN? --- Babaluji ( Fri, Jun 24, 2005, 21:12:55 ) ( 648 bytes ) img Re: BINGO: Ted Levitt is an old, old Rawat cult member --- sulla ( Fri, Jun 24, 2005, 21:14:07 ) ( 86 bytes ) +1 Good detective work you guys! --- Bunny ( Sat, Jun 25, 2005, 04:04:41 ) ( 339 bytes ) Typo Correction. --- Joe ( Sat, Jun 25, 2005, 19:55:59 ) ( 328 bytes ) +1 For cripes sake, Joe! --- Babaluji ( Sat, Jun 25, 2005, 21:43:04 ) ( 42 bytes )