S02.E06: Sweet Pete's

[formerlyfreedom]

An attempt to help Florida-based candy business Sweet Pete's, which is failing to make a profit.

Original airdate: April 1, 2014

[clod]

preview

[Abra Came]

Wow, that Dane was really something.  I think that Marcus was determined to get rid of that guy, and would have gladly paid a team of high-dollar lawyers a mint to make sure that Dane was cut out.  The episode ended kind of abruptly, though, we didn't get to see what changes Marcus made (other than dumping Dane).  Maybe they'll some follow-ups later so we can see how Sweet Pete & Marcus are doing now.

[LeftDownwind]

Seeing Marcus dismantle Dane at the end with the dilution plans may have been my most favorite reality TV moment ever.  He said something along the lines of "I'm putting in as much as it takes", which gave me goose bumps.  It was very satisfying to see Dane put in his place, but it was also a great moment because I was rooting so much for the candy makers, and it was nice to see someone powerful on their side.

I'm getting pretty addicted to this show.  It seems to come off as extremely "real" and Marcus seems like a very decent guy.

[Tara Ariano]

Here's what Sarah wrote about the episode!

[zillabreeze]

 

Seeing Marcus dismantle Dane at the end with the dilution plans may have been my most favorite reality TV moment ever.

It was certainly up in my top ten!  Dane was a serious douche.  He wasn't even smart enough to put on a front and roll up his sleeves to get out the big order.  ALSO???? If he had spent 5000 hours on IT (B.S.) Why was therir system so antiquated???  I was also quite taken aback to find out he had only put in 2K cash!  He not only owned the building, but was paying himself rent for it.

It was beyond obvious that he had been screwing over that hard working couple, and didn't even feel bad about it!  Bet there had been some cash skimming on his part, too.

They seemed like such a nice couple I was really rooting for their success. Loved the goofy hair sticking up guy and the way Marcus incorporated it into the new look.  Cute!!

[Lola16]

Dane reminded me of someone but I couldn't place if it was a character on TV or someone I know in real life.  What a selfish bastard. I did love how the camera would focus on that large bald spot on the back of his head.

So Dane's contribution was 2K$ in cash (guessing inventory or equipment) plus he did the initial IT and ordered a sign.  He also bought a house in an area with little foot traffic and rented it out to the business for $1400 a month.  He would also show up from time to time and eat candy and agitate the partners.   Did I miss anything?

I looked at Google Earth and the house is in a residential neighborhood.  It does have a nice parking lot next to it.  A couple blocks north is an abandoned warehouse.  A few blocks south is where some shops are.  According to Zillow it sold in 2011 for $13,500.  (Thirteen thousand five hundred dollars!)  Even with property & school taxes, 1 years rent covers the purchase price and everything after that is pure profit.

Dane ruined his own gravy train by being an out of control jackwad.

Seeing Marcus dismantle Dane at the end with the dilution plans may have been my most favorite reality TV moment ever. 

That was so delish!

[sskrill]

Gah, I hated Dane right from the get-go.  What a lazy piece of shit he was.  He spent all his time outplaying and manipulating Pete and his wife while contributing nothing to the business, yet when Marcus came in and outplayed him, he cried foul.  I got so tired of hearing his "5000 hours" routine - which I'm sure was far overstated.  But you know what, if Pete and Mrs Pete only got paid $10k for all the time they put in for an entire year then fine, give him $10k and his initial $2k and send him packing.

Pete didn't seem like a business guy but I could see the wife managing the books with no problem.

Now I need to scope out their website for some goodies.

(copied from my TWOP post cause I'm lazy)

[Lola16]

Dane speaks out.

http://www.bizjournals.com/jacksonville/news/2014/04/02/embattled-sweet-petes-investor-dane-baird-speaks.html

 

“I got a call from the producer, and I thought [the show] would be a solution,” Baird said. “I knew Allison and Pete were upset, so i thought it was a solution. I was just wrong.”
Lemonis said he plans to invest enough money in Sweet Pete’s to utterly dilute Baird’s stake in the business.
“If they wanted to replace me, they’d have to buy me out,” Baird said. "At this juncture, that’s not part of the discussion, so I’m still there.”

[califred]

Dane was such a jerk.  He spends 2 grand and his "time" and thinks he should get 150k.    I hope Marcus liquidates him right out of there asap.

[Latro]

Dain was kind of annoying, but I'm not seeing it as worthwhile for Marcus and the other owners to completely dilute him out.

The fact is that the owners went willingly into a partnership agreement with this guy and presumably were happy with the deal at the time.  And, during the time that they willingly stayed in the partnership, the company built up brand equity in the name and intellectual property in the recipes.

When Marcus offered the owners a chance to just walk away and start fresh, they didn't want to do that because they would lose their recipes.  It was agreed at the table that diluting Dain was the best option available.

During the final discussion with him at the end, I think we're seeing a touch of producer editing shenanigans.  The implication is that Marcus is going to loan the owners enough money to completely dilute Dain out of the business.  But, that isn't what Marcus actually said.  What he said was that he would put in whatever the business needed.  My takeaway was that he would probably dilute Dain down to about 5% or so and that while Dain wasn't ecstatic about that, was happy enough to accept it.

Marcus has to walk a fine line here, because he wants Dain out of the picture but he also doesn't want to get embroiled in a lawsuit that's going to cost a bunch of time, money and owner focus.  He can certainly afford lawyers, but Dain might have a realistic chance of prevailing in a suit.  Not really worth it.

Plus, I'm not really certain how this personal loan to the owners is going to work.  Marcus loans them the $750k he wants to invest and they pay that capital into the company.  They now own (say) 95% of Sweet Pete's, Dain owns 5% and Marcus owns 0% but has a loan for $750k.  How are the owners going to pay that loan back?  Is Marcus going to forgive it in return for 50% equity?  You can see how an argument could be made that the loan is a sham designed to bring in a new partner without unanimous consent of all partners.  Hence the legal hairiness that might ensue. 

All of the machinations just seem like a waste of time.  Why tell Dain at the beginning that he was going to get $2000+5% and 0% equity?  Obviously he isn't going to accept literally _nothing_ for his 50% of the company.  Marcus could have saved a lot of time by basically offering to let him keep 5% and continue receiving rent for the term of the lease and Dain would have likely accepted it.  The alternative would have been for the owners to quit and for him to have 50% of nothing.  

The only reasons I can see for Marcus to go through all the drama was either a) he thought it would make good TV or b) he didn't realize the importance that the owners placed on the recipes and thought that he could just dissolve the company and start fresh with no problems.

I'm also curious as to how the deal is structured when Marcus decides to roll out the concept nationally.  Will the equity holders of Sweet Pete's participate in that?  I would imagine that Marcus will use the paid in capital section of the partnership agreement to continue to dilute them as he invests money for a national roll out.  

Its certainly a love-fest right now between Marcus and the owners, but I wonder how they will feel in a few years when they own very little of the cash flow machine that this thing could become?  (For what its worth, I think that they *should* feel pretty good about it, but my experience tells me that they may not.)

Also, here in Houston, we have a place like this.  I went on a tour with my son and some of his friends.  Same kind of deal, see the factory and then spend money in the shop.  The set up at the place here in town isn't nearly as good - the "tour" is viewed through a window and is extremely boring for kids (and adults).  No hands on, just watching through a window while a single worker takes chocolates off a conveyor belt.  I left thinking that there was a real opportunity for someone to do this right.  Looks like Marcus found one.

[Lola16]

There's a local article that goes into more detail about the financial plans:

http://jacksonville.com/news/metro/2014-04-01/story/jacksonville-candy-store-sweet-petes-gets-new-partner-future

 

Allison Behringer said that Lemonis is attempting to buy Baird out. Then Lemonis and the Behringers would each own 50 percent of the company. Lemonis would invest $750,000 in the company, she said.

Baird said nothing has been finalized and that attorneys are still going back and forth.

“Either he’s going to be out,” Allison Behringer said, “or we’re leaving with Marcus to start a new company.

Dane and the Behringers went into partnership in 2010 it looks like.  So over 3 years, 2K$ in investment and some IT work plus sourcing a place to house the business.  Dane is a local real estate agent so he probably saved himself commission as well as getting paid rent every month.  He has made out very well for his little investment.  The Behringers might have thought Dane would be an equal partner in the store but as we've seen, Dane likes to eat and stand around.  Perhaps if he was less of a dickhead and pitched in a little labor (he said he could wrap the caramels), there would be a lot less resentment.

I am wondering why the Behringers needed a partner in the first place.  They had the expertise and experience.  It seems they also should have the money.  There was a family candy store business that got so successful, it was franchised.  They wound up selling majority share of it because they didn't feel that was their expertise - managing franchises.  Wonder if they really suck at business?

http://www.bizjournals.com/jacksonville/stories/2010/07/19/daily30.html

 

Behringer’s mother, Phyllis Lockwood opened her first Peterbrooke store in San Marco in 1983 and the company flourished, evolving into a chain. Behinger and his younger sister Brooke, who are the namesakes of the company, and Behringer’s wife Allison all worked for the company. But soon after Peterbrooke became large enough to start franchising, Berhinger said the family realized that operating a franchise business wasn’t their expertise. They sold a portion of the business in October 2009 to Kelly Harris, who also operates the Times Grill group of restaurants.

There are now 25 Peterbrooke locations in three states, and while the family still owns a 40 percent share in the company, Phyllis has since retired and Brooke acquired the Atlantic Beach Peterbrooke location.

[attica]

And, during the time that they willingly stayed in the partnership, the company built up brand equity in the name and intellectual property in the recipes.

 

"Willingly" may not be quite right. Allison told Marcus they would have bought Dane out previously (she didn't say how long ago or how many times they tried), but he wouldn't sell.

[Lola16]

"Willingly" may not be quite right. Allison told Marcus they would have bought Dane out previously (she didn't say how long ago or how many times they tried), but he wouldn't sell.

Dane did an interview last year that reaches Alanis Morissette levels of irony:

 

3.  What advice would you give someone trying to start a new business?

It is hard, hard work so make sure you are passionate about what you are embarking on.  Have your finances in order before you take the dive. Most businesses don't hit profitability or cash flow for a couple years. If you have partners, get everything in writing. Everyone looks and hears things differently. The written word has a way of keeping everyone on the same page.

http://unfsbdc.blogspot.com/2013/04/an-interview-with-dane-baird-sweet.html

[Latro]

"Willingly" may not be quite right. Allison told Marcus they would have bought Dane out previously (she didn't say how long ago or how many times they tried), but he wouldn't sell.

"Willingly" in the sense that they could have left any time that they liked.  Buying out a partner is only one of their options.  To me its strange that they would have been willing to keep doing all of the work for no compensation, no investment, and only half the equity.  When it was obvious that they were in a hole, they just kept digging.

[Lola16]

"Willingly" in the sense that they could have left any time that they liked.  Buying out a partner is only one of their options.  To me its strange that they would have been willing to keep doing all of the work for no compensation, no investment, and only half the equity.  When it was obvious that they were in a hole, they just kept digging.

It was based on Pete's name and former candy maker status so I could see them not wanting to walk away and let Dane replace them with 2 other people.

Since they owned a successful shop before and sold it, I would think they would be savvy enough to hire a lawyer to look over the contract.  As well, I would think that they would not have been so broke that they needed a 2K investment as a 50/50 partner.  There's something they aren't telling us.

This show also was not their first foray into reality TV.  Sweet Pete's had a behind the scenes series last year according to this article:

http://www.bizjournals.com/jacksonville/blog/2013/05/jacksonville-store-gets-reality-tv-show.html

Maybe that show went into their financial difficulties?

[Abra Came]

Whoa, now that's interesting!  The show also features "sometimes unpredictable, yet good-natured partners, staff and customers." Dane was part of the cast, too!  I'm off to see if I can track down any episodes online--this should be interesting, given what we were shown on "The Profit."

[sskrill]

Didn't Marcus mention something about Pete leaving the family business on bad terms?  So when they say "family" owns 40% maybe that does not include him.  Or maybe he pissed mom off and ended up leaving with whatever personal assets he had.

I thought I remembered one of them saying they had $10k when they started Sweet Pete's with Dane.  So if they invested $10k and Dane only invested $2k Dane's share of ownership should be much less than Pete's but it sounded like they were 50/50.

[Lola16]

Didn't Marcus mention something about Pete leaving the family business on bad terms?  So when they say "family" owns 40% maybe that does not include him.  Or maybe he pissed mom off and ended up leaving with whatever personal assets he had.

I thought I remembered one of them saying they had $10k when they started Sweet Pete's with Dane.  So if they invested $10k and Dane only invested $2k Dane's share of ownership should be much less than Pete's but it sounded like they were 50/50.

I didn't hear about 'bad terms'.  It's possible that for some reason he didn't get any money from the sale of 60% of the business and is not getting any from the remaining 40%.  Something is up because he should have been able to either open a shop on his own or get a better investment deal.

[sskrill]

I just went back and watched the preview.  It does say he left the family business "after a dispute".  Then just after that Pete says "We put the last $10k we had in this business."

Sounds like he got cut out of the family business.  Maybe he was living the good life thinking he would take over half at some point so he never really saved anything.

[Irina Palm]

I loved it when it looked pretty bad for the "good guys" and Marcus comes to the rescue with the dilution information.  I could just smell Dane's poop filled shorts.  He had no idea that anyone else could be that smart, I guess.

 

He is such a lazy, crooked loser.

 

I cannot imagine anyone thinking that Marcus is stupid.  When he informed Dane that he was prepared to "loan" as much money as it would take to get him out, the blood drained from Dane's face.

Edited June 1, 2014 by Irina Palm

[Abra Came]

Looks like Pete & Co are moving out of Dane's building this fall.  This is apparently not the storefront that Marcus discovered on the show, but an even larger location:

http://www.sweetpetescandy.com/pages/about-us

[Lola16]

Looks like Pete & Co are moving out of Dane's building this fall.  This is apparently not the storefront that Marcus discovered on the show, but an even larger location:

http://www.sweetpetescandy.com/pages/about-us

 

This new 22,000 square foot facility will offer the ultimate candy experience. In addition to offering confectionaries and gifts, this new location will also host an event center, education center, party rooms and daily factory tours, as well as a full service restaurant cooking up delicious burgers, salads and more.

Wow.  That's a huge space and a huge undertaking.  Hopefully Pete and his wife are up to it.  Neither seemed like they had a good head for business.

[DanA]

The way Dane was shoving down carmels I'm surprised they didn't have a net loss for the day.   I think they should just change the name and alter the recipe's slightly and get Dane out of the picture, he's not worth the headache.  He was trying to get a payoff from Marcus which was just ridiculous.  When Marcus kept asking him how much $ did he put in, and he kept replying with hours, you knew the number was going to small.  2K is nothing, Dane was basically dragging it out by making 1400/month guaranteed rent, nice payoff for him and can always sell the house as his own equity, no wonder he just wanted it to drag on that way because he didn't have to do any work.

[Lola16]

Just got an email from Sweet Pete's that said they are opening a new downtown Jacksonville location.  I tried to click though the image to their website but it's not coded to redirect, it only opens up the image.  The website isn't optimized either.  I kinda expect a little more ecommerce marketing savvy from Marcus.

[RadioActiveRich]

"This isn't a partnership. It's a HOSTAGE SITUATION!" LOL! That is my all time favorite line from any episode so far. I love the way Pete's wife softens him and the way Pete acts with the kids. What a great couple. And the way Pete asks Marcus, "Can we look inside!?" when he showed them the trailer. So humble. A lot different than Dane standing there scarfing down chocolates. NOTE TO DANE: You didn't buy stock in Xerox dude. These are people. You got your rent and you leached off what you could. Now just do the right thing and let these people live their lives. You are the LAST person who should be talking about "fair".

Edited November 30, 2014 by RadioActiveRich

[nobodyyoucare]

Whoa, now that's interesting!  The show also features "sometimes unpredictable, yet good-natured partners, staff and customers." Dane was part of the cast, too!  I'm off to see if I can track down any episodes online--this should be interesting, given what we were shown on "The Profit."

 

I found the videos online. http://ytchannelembed.com/videos/watch/dJkCGHcGhwk#.VNoaT_nF_To Sweet Pete's does have a online site in which you can order stuff and they how to make candy videos. The videos were hosted on a site that also has the Sweet pete show, It was apparently11 episodes that aired on local tv in Jacksonville Florida. Dane was the Politician of Candy,

 

As for the getting out issue the recipes were important to Pete because of how much would be needed to done to rework them so Dane couldn't sue him. As for why they went with Dane it sounded like they had little if any choice because setting up a shop can cost easily 50,000 or more and if you don't have that money then no go. Then you got rent, inventory you have to buy etc. Dane offered them a building and some setup would in their situation sounded like the best thing especially if  he was to contribute and work as a partner. 

[Amarsir]

You can actually watch all 4 episodes, plus some bonuses, on their YouTube channel here:

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCq-L_SNayTDy-rOLZPtY3cw

 

Although I don't know why you'd want to. It's an amateurish take on candid reality shows and I couldn't make it through the 5 minutes of scale-gate. But it was pretty clear that Dane does not play well with others even then.

[nobodyyoucare]

You can actually watch all 4 episodes, plus some bonuses, on their YouTube channel here:

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCq-L_SNayTDy-rOLZPtY3cw

 

Although I don't know why you'd want to. It's an amateurish take on candid reality shows and I couldn't make it through the 5 minutes of scale-gate. But it was pretty clear that Dane does not play well with others even then.

Don't know if I will watch it but Dane clearly took to heart the book the Four hour work week. Put in four hours doing nothing and think you are entitled to all the rewards of the business, Thinking about possibly ordering some Sweet Pete candy when I got extra money. They got some sour stuff and perhaps this place has some very sour stuff. Mass produced stuff   has no comparison to hand made candy in terms of taste. http://www.sweetpetescandy.com/collections/specials/products/the-profit-deal i could always use a free shirt!

[caligirl50]

I thought it odd that Marcus said to the camera, "Dane didn't do anything to help grow the business when he had the chance" - I'm mixing up how he said it BUT why he didn't say it to his face?  Marcus ended up buying Dane out for $50,000.  I just don't understand why.  Marcus was diluting Dane's shares with the new $ he was putting into the company. Why not wait it out?  Was Dane going to get more than that if he hadn't paid him off?  Just curious.

 

I think Dane is scum and loved when Marcus told him off...even though he was nice about it.  Nicer than I would have been.

Edited February 11, 2015 by caligirl50

[clod]

I  would guess there would be a lot of technicalities in buying shares (to get control), that could have been a problem. 

 

like having the existing shareholders agree on a price..   or not having a quorum to conduct the legal business.

[nobodyyoucare]

Diluting Dane's shares was likely the cheapest and quickest as well as least messiest option to get him out of the way. Since this wouldn't be a publicly traded company there would be no buying of shares unless he agreed to do so. 

[Amarsir]

I agree it could be the cheapest, but not at all the cleanest.  What Marcus described is exactly what happened to Eduardo Saverin at Facebook.  The result was one of the most high-profile lawsuits in recent history and pretty strong public sentiment on Saverin's side, plus a major out-of-court settlement.  (Not that the movie didn't help him out a lot.)  Even if Dean was a lazy do-nothing, he was a legitimate partner and Marcus using a finance trick to push him out would not play well.

 

So considering that Marcus obviously thinks Sweet Pete's can be a multi-million dollar business, paying $50k to cleanly break with the old partner is a smart idea.

Edited February 11, 2015 by Amarsir

[nobodyyoucare]

He didn't have his shares reduced that way. 

 

http://www.cnn.com/2012/05/29/tech/social-media/facebook-saverin-zuckerberg/ settlement wasn't disclosed. 

 

http://www.forbes.com/sites/briansolomon/2012/05/18/eduardo-saverins-net-worth-publicly-revealed-more-than-2-billion-in-facebook-alone/

[aaronl]

Late to the discussion. I just caught the episode and I was curious as to how the situation with Baird turned out.

 

Dain was kind of annoying, but I'm not seeing it as worthwhile for Marcus and the other owners to completely dilute him out.

 

You really can't "completely dilute" another shareholder. He would continue to own a stake and, under the anti-dilution clause in the corporate bylaws, would have the opportunity to match any investment in order to maintain his stake. If he did not match the investment of the other shareholders, though, his stake would shrink.

 

The best way to dilute him would be to put a very large sum of money into the business at the earliest possible date, as the anti-dilution provision likely turns on the market value of the business at the time of the investment. With a series of investments it would be necessary to get a matching series of valuations, each of which is subject to dispute, and the unwanted shareholder would benefit from any increase in the value of the business between investments -- I wonder if that played a role in the decision to buy and renovate a building, as opposed to entering into a lease, as the investment in the new building ways apparently massive.

 

My takeaway was that he would probably dilute Dain down to about 5% or so and that while Dain wasn't ecstatic about that, was happy enough to accept it.

 

My takeaway was that his goal was to try to establish a very low value for the business as a money-losing proposition, make a large investment via his loan to Behringers, and then to argue that the remaining interest held by Baird was minimal. It would not be too difficult to get an appraiser who would argue that there was little to no value to the business to any third party buyer -- at the point where Lemonis stepped in the business lived or died with Pete's commitment, which would deter buyers, and it was a consistent money-loser with a terrible location. But at the same time, it would be difficult to convince a jury that Lemonis was willing to invest that heavily in a worthless business, and the cost of litigation would be substantial.

 

During 'negotiations', Baird guaranteed himself a "no" by opening at $150,000, and Lemonis guaranteed himself a "no" by countering at $2,000 plus 5% interest. At the end of the day, given the likely cost of appraisers and attorney fees, as well as the reasonable value of the business, its name and its trade secrets (the recipes), it was not unreasonable to buy Baird out for $50,000. Without the power to dilute him, he could have held onto the 50% even as the business appreciated based upon other people's work and investment -- that's the essence of being a shareholder. It was the potential for dilution (and the cost of litigation) that gave the co-owners the leverage to get him out.

You are correct that the story behind the story is that the owners entered into a bad bargain with Baird, and even if it seems greedy to do so, Baird had the right to hold them to the bargain. In my opinion, any business of this sort should include a very clear buy-out provision, and the co-owners should also have a very clear articulation of their respective duties. In fairness to Baird, he took a chance on a business that might have turned out to be unable to return his $2,000 or cover its rent, and it appears that without his willingness to do so the business may not have even been able to open -- as they say, the greater the risk, the greater the reward.
 

Marcus has to walk a fine line here, because he wants Dain out of the picture but he also doesn't want to get embroiled in a lawsuit that's going to cost a bunch of time, money and owner focus.  He can certainly afford lawyers, but Dain might have a realistic chance of prevailing in a suit.  Not really worth it.

 

I completely agree that Marcus would not want to become embroiled in a lawsuit, but by structuring the deal the way he did he didn't have to worry about imminent litigation -- he could dilute Baird's shares while effectively excluding him from the business (particularly if decisions were to be made by majority vote) while pushing any litigation off to the future. With 50-50 ownership, even an unmatched dollar of investment would have shifted the balance of ownership. But yes, at the end of the day Baird would be able to hang onto his shares, dispute any low valuation being asserted to dilute his ownership interest, and complicate future investment. A lawsuit would easily cost each side tens of thousands of dollars, with that potential giving both sides an investment to reach a mutually acceptable agreement.

 

I don't think would be particularly difficult for Lemonis to protect himself in making loans to the Behringers while protecting himself -- he could have them pledge their stock as security. They would be committed to him by virtue of the large debt, he would be able to pursue their stake if they defaulted, and they would have a controlling interest. There's no reason he could not contract for the loan to be converted into an equity interest if and when Baird agreed to a buy-out.

 

Its certainly a love-fest right now between Marcus and the owners, but I wonder how they will feel in a few years when they own very little of the cash flow machine that this thing could become?  (For what its worth, I think that they *should* feel pretty good about it, but my experience tells me that they may not.)

 

There's always going to be a chance that, down the road, the Behringers will resent Lemonis for owning 50%. But there are some big differences between Lemonis and Dane. Lemonis is not going to ask them to work for nothing. As long as he sees potential for the business, Lemonis is going to invest the capital necessary to make it work. Lemonis has other businesses and business connections that can help him secure stable markets for the company's products. Lemonis has the experience and capital, if he chooses to do so, to expand the enterprise regionally or nationally. If the company is worth $millions (apart from its building) a few years down the road, that's an enormous return -- and one that would not have happened without Lemonis.

[Christina]

I watched an update show from last year and on Sweet Pete's, it said that he bought Dain out for $50k.

[caligirl50]

Has anyone ever tasted the candy?  I have.  Meh.

[clod]

of course I don't know the details of the company paperwork,   but it seems that if one partner could keep the other partner from taking a salary or doing anything,.......

 

then couldn't one partner prevent the company from accepting more investment money  (Marcus's money) ?   that might explain the buyout. 

 

or it was just faster/easier to buy him out.

Edited May 26, 2015 by clod

[nobodyyoucare]

I watched an update show from last year and on Sweet Pete's, it said that he bought Dain out for $50k.

50k to dilute Dain's shares to nothing. So essentially he was bought out.

[ClareWalks]

I ordered the Valentine's basket from Sweet Pete's, it arrived today and is GORGEOUS. I will report back once I have started eating the goodies. But after seeing the heinous bitches at the Marshmallow Company That Shall Not Be Named, I had to order from Pete :)

[ClareWalks]

Update: I have sampled most of the sweets, and most of it is absolutely amazing. The sea salt caramels, caramel popcorn, and taffy in particular are phenomenal. The chocolate covered Oreos are also very delicious. The only thing I wasn't a huge fan of are the chocolate covered potato chips, but that's mostly because I'm not a huge fan of them in general. I like that they aren't super-thickly covered with chocolate, it's just a thin layer so it isn't overwhelming. The Valentine's basket also comes with a chocolate peanut bar, strawberry shortbread candies, and a lollipop, none of which I have tried yet. But the basket itself is a beautiful red basket with handles that is very cute.

[Ariel Stockman]

Nice try Latro, no doubt one of Douche Bag Dain's butt buddies. You cannot defend or excuse this bastards selfish, passive aggressive, vindictive attitudes and actions toward Sweet Pete and his wife. Just so you know,  Dain Baird is a cancer on humanity and a useless waste of space and oxygen. He is loathed in the community and not a good person. He is empty,  evil, soulless, arrogant,  petty. I see the guy occasionally at lunch or dinner and it's all I can do to not punch his lights .