Well, first what’s confirmed out of the way, BlueLedge is a qualified vendor right on NCRA’s website. BlueLedge being a leading digital court reporting training outfit famously integrated into Veritext’s pipeline.
I’ll be honest. I told my source I didn’t know about it, but it doesn’t surprise me. The National Court Reporters Association can’t really discriminate against BlueLedge without risking another antitrust lawsuit. And to be honest, the course as advertised by BlueLedge meets CEU requirements.
This being a real reason I support moving a good deal of our overall funding to individuals and companies that can actually speak out against bad business practices — such as BlueLedge gaining a presence on college websites across America through Ed 2 Go — rather than basically be forced to work with them and advertise them. But what do I know? I’m just a guy that documented all this in years gone by.
Moving on, I got a long email from an anonymous source. In short, it alleges that Veritext has “just bought” Kentuckiana Court Reporting, which encompasses Kentuckiana, Churchill Reporting, Kentucky Court Reporters, Pike Court Reporting, TriStar Court Reporting, and Milestone Court Reporting. Veritext itself has not yet advertised this alleged acquisition. The email mentions that there may be a lot of internal turmoil, with digitals preparing to flee if they “lose benefits,” the case apparently being that Kentuckiana keeps digitals as regular employees and that Veritext tends not to.
The main theme: “Students should be warned that Veritext will be headhunting them, and what to expect from them and what their reputation is.”
To be even more frank, students, here’s what to expect from most corporations: When they need you, the relationship is good, even often weighted in some way in your favor. But they are always working on reworking that relationship to a point where they don’t really need you, and as that happens, you can expect rates to freeze/fall or work to be withheld in favor of giving it to others who will do it cheaper. And as corporate consolidation of the court reporting industry continues, we can expect that the pool of satisfied reporters will become smaller.
Of course, as with all things, the truth is nuanced and layered. But take this as a very direction-of-the-river-absent-other-information type of post. Good luck.
I’m in a local community Facebook group called Staten Island Neighbors. Fun group. Highly suggested to any of my readers from Staten Island.
I thought I’d raise to my community a more national issue that I’ve been raising consumer awareness on for years now because, sure as hell, it impacts us locally, specifically jobseekers.
If you want to skip the story bits, scroll down to the next bolded part.
I’ve been a stenographic court reporter for about 14 years now. There are many of us on Staten Island. We’re the people you see in court with those funny stenotype machines. It’s a good living. And there are much more reputable Staten Islanders that I bet would agree.
And when I went to school for what I’m doing, I was told a great many things about the outlook of the career. Lots of nuance to that discussion. But if you want to become a court reporter for the New York State Court Unified Court System, stenographic court reporting remains the way to do it.
Over the years I documented a private sector plot to fool lawyer and student consumers into accepting something called digital reporting, that is, the recording and transcribing of testimony. Digital’s been around for many decades in one form or another and hasn’t supplanted stenography because it’s less efficient. About half a decade ago, a shift started to happen, and long story short, large corporations in our field started spending A LOT of time and money on digital reporting. The end goal is pretty simple. They want to push us stenographers out of the market, put in lower paid digital reporters, and pocket the difference. And their money and influence even spread to our College of Staten Island.
Here’s the deal for anyone that clicked that Ed 2 Go link, these people are not trustworthy people. Ed 2 Go is known to have worked with fraudsters like Brian Kennedy. Veritext, one of the plot pushers, is owned by Leonard Green, a private equity group known for looting hospitals for poor people. BlueLedge digital court reporting training is either owned by or heavily affiliated with Veritext. There’s a whole rabbit hole that’s not appropriate for this post. But these are not people that we can trust with our futures or our kids’ futures.
I documented this stuff so well that when you Google Veritext fraud, my stuff comes up, and the multimillion dollar Veritext hasn’t sued because it would only cause the evidence against the company reach a courtroom.
TLDR: The bottom line is that a lot of time and money is being spent on convincing Staten Islanders that digital court reporting is a good job when in reality it is lower paid and has fewer job opportunities than stenographic reporting. Tell your friends and familyif they’re considering a digital court reporting career.
Happy to answer questions in the comments. I’m a lifelong Staten Islander. The media and government are ignoring what has been documented despite the illegal actions of these corporations, so it is down to us to protect each other through information sharing. That’s what this website brings to the table. That’s what Staten Island Neighbors brings to the table. And to all those that believe in honest business, and believe businesses shouldn’t violate the law to get ahead, thanks for sharing.
Came across Reddit user elzpwetd’s post a couple of days ago. Wanted to get it some attention. More or less, the post talks about how AI already has a capacity to summarize documents very well. The idea is that the need for log notes and deposition digests done by humans would, in a perfect-AI world, disappear.
In a world where AI has been perfected, you don’t need anyone in the seat. It’s simply assistive technology to the professional lawyer. You could argue that you still need someone to set up the recording equipment, but in courts that’s often a one-and-done situation and in depositions we’re doing Zoom depos, so…
…I think [she] hits the nail on the head.
Of course, this opens up the stage to what I have said all along. AI sellers will claim the technology is perfect or ready for prime time well before it is. Case in point, in 2016, Microsoft said its AI was better than human transcribers. In 2020, AI scored as low as 25% in the racial disparities in automated speech recognition study. We’re now in 2024, and AI’s imperfections are obvious to anyone that spends enough time playing with it. On good-quality audio with standard English speakers, 100% is possible. I’ve seen it myself. It does well. Guess what? We do well under such conditions too. The conditions where humans struggle? AI becomes an unreliable nightmare that needs to be manually fixed by a human — a human that may not be able to decipher whatever garbled audio there is, which is just one good reason to have a human being taking simultaneous verbatim notes.
Still, not a problem in many cases, as our spitballers will point out. But there’s nobody tracking how many appeals bad audio has sabotaged in the United States. Ignorance is bliss and it allows court administrators to take action without knowing or caring about the potential pitfalls. Even if it’s as low as 1% of the appeals that get screwed, just looking at the federal level, I’m pretty sure we’re looking at 500 a year, which is a lot for a system where many believe it is better for 100 guilty people to go free than one innocent be convicted. And even when the stakes aren’t freedom, who wants their multimillion dollar pharmaceutical case to be blown up by an inadequate record?
Our spitballers are also habitually wrong. I’ve seen it said that our jobs only exist because we have a strong lobby. Nothing could be further from the truth. As I revealed two days ago, our “strong lobby” sabotages us whenever it thinks it can get away with it. We need look no further than the steady decline of officialships for recordings despite every indication that stenotype is a better solution for access to justice.
In a way, it would be a joy to see AI be perfected. The very people who have fought so hard for our replacement would watch their companies become relatively worthless. How long would Veritext’s court reporting revenue last with other companies selling subscriptions to unlimited transcription for less than the cost of a single deposition? Maybe that’s why all the big boxes are gouging the lawyers now while they can? Scared of the future?
I guess I was too, for a time. Maybe we’re not so different?
There are a great many people that genuinely believe what happens on the internet doesn’t matter. Governments of the world have known that’s not true for a long time. They’ve used the internet to influence the citizens of other countries to great impact. Just Google state-sponsored trolling.
This was, among many reasons, why I began this online op so many years ago. While some subsect of you laughed and said it wouldn’t amount to anything, others knew the truth and supported my work.
Now Veritext’s digital advertising is drawing people into the field in droves. The digital side of the equation is lying to them. Telling them there are digital scopists and all these new job titles they need to be certified for. There’s an esprit de corps in the digital camp that is entirely okay with being dishonest, lying fraudsters. They conveniently leave out again and again that stenography has more job opportunities and better income. They’re all in bed together, financially benefitting from each other’s actions. If consumers were more aggressive about reporting the fraud and deceit to the FTC, attorneys general, and education departments, we’d be seeing a very different outcome. They’d start looking into this the same way they looked into rapacious steno schools years back.
But the community we have is irreplaceable. If it works together, it cannot be beat, and that is why companies have again and again tried to soothe stenographers by telling them they are not being replaced. It is easy to believe the big lie when the big lie means business as usual. But the big lie will have you competing with digitals at about $30 an hour within the next ten years. That is why the big companies have co-opted associations like TEXDRA. That is why, when the bid to take the NCRA by the Plan B folks failed, they ran to Speech-to-Text Institute. And when we eviscerated STTI for its fraud, they ran to STAR and AAERT. These are indisputable, undisputed facts.
The comment.Special Note: How often does autocorrect duck you?
(I later upvoted most of these posts.)
I pasted all that in so that I could give you a big reveal: Discussions like this are happening every day now. Private conversations, emails, Reddit, Facebook, and more.
There’s something cool about my answer. I can honestly say the Speech-to-Text Institute was accused of fraud, sued, and shut down its website. I can honestly say Veritext had someone on the board. I can honestly say that Veritext’s parent company Leonard Green loots hospitals for poor people. I can honestly say these are the people we are dealing with, liars and lunatics obsessed not with quality or hard work but with sucking as much money out of everyone as possible to the benefit of comparatively no one.
And the community can honestly say all of that too. My work can be pointed to as proof that the digital folks are fraudsters. It is a record of the fraud made and expounded on again and again over many, many posts. And the companies are powerless to stop me. With all their money and all their power they’ve never had an answer because turning attention to my work will only grow my following and bring my unionization plan that much closer to reality. Checkmate.
So if I could have one ask, help me win this thing. Stop being scared of using the word fraud. “The digital side of court reporting routinely commits fraud to fool consumers into digital court reporting. It was documented by Stenonymous.” that’s all you have to remember. You don’t have to read my hundreds of blog posts. You don’t have to contribute. You don’t have to do anything more than counter the big lie with the big truth. And when you do, I assure you, we will go back to business as usual, except you won’t be competing with digital court reporters at $30 an hour within the next 10 years.
According to the article, Paul Gaynor is the lobbyist and spokesperson for the Coalition to Capture the Record, an organization I wrote about recently. The companies behind the Coalition do not want to identify themselves to Law360 right now, with Paul Gaynor being quoted, “we’re just rolling this out and we’re getting our ducks in a row…” “We’re not really interested in disclosing it right now. This isn’t some big secret.”
“It’s not a big secret that we’re keeping this secret.”
Mr. Gaynor, were we born yesterday?
Sue Terry, former President of the National Court Reporters Association and current chair of the NCRA Strong Committee is quoted as saying “legitimate organizations prioritize transparency and want to be accessible to the public.” “The absence of clear contact details, physical address, direct telephone numbers, coupled with the lack of publicly accessible ownership information would be giant red flags for me.”
National Court Reporters Association President Kristen Anderson is also quoted. “I am unsure how any reputable entity would venture to gather industry recognition, respect, and reputation by remaining anonymous.” “Since their [motto] is ‘collaborating to ensure equal access to justice’ on their website, how is that even done if you do not know who is sponsoring the platform for ‘collaborating’?” “Unmasking the arcane presentation of this coalition would serve the best interests of the public, the legal system, the bar, the judiciary, and legal advocacy organizations across the country.”
I don’t want to steal Mr. Lerner’s thunder. If you have any interest, you should go read the article. Sorry about the paywall. I will say that it uses California’s shortage, forecasted to be 20x worse than some other parts of the country, to make the case for “real” shortage. It’s kind of like sticking your head in an oven and claiming the whole room is too hot. It also ignores the elephant in the room that they were not using funds earmarked to obtain and retain court reporters while going to the media and crying shortage. It also ignores the fact that the better-paid private sector work is getting covered with far fewer problems. No money, big problems. Meanwhile we have these little shadow groups throwing money on digital all damn day.
I will say this too: There are two lines in the article that make me laugh.
“The exact degree of the shortage has been debated in the legal industry for years, with some stenographers arguing that legal service organizations exaggerate the shortage to drum up new digital court reporting business.” We haven’t been arguing. We documented and exposed this fraud. You refuse to write that because you or the folks above you discriminate against people with disabilities. That’s okay. Don’t worry. Society is on your side. It’ll be a funny thing if my field ever funds me enough to light Law360 on literary fire for failing to address a fraud being perpetrated against civil litigation lawyers that’s been public knowledge for *checks notes* almost 3 years. I’m sure your subs will go up when that becomes more widely known.
“The Speech to Text Institute, a former nonprofit that advocated for a similar position, disbanded after 2022.” In actuality, stenographers backing me helped me expose them for fraud, leading to Trey Perez’s eventual lawsuit against them and others, which the Speech-to-Text Institute has not “legally” answered to. In fact, the organization replied to the lawsuit after its “disbanding”, just not with a legal document known as an “answer.”
There has not been much movement on the lawsuit front. The most recent docket report shows no changes from the last time I viewed it. Available below.
All my creative language aside, appreciate the article very much. Hope to see more that I can share from Mr. Lerner and Law360. The stenographic community loves coverage. I don’t know if Law360 can turn that into subscription dollars, but it ought to try. After all, I bought a subscription to the New York Law Journal. I could easily see myself picking up one for Law360 next year.
P.S.
To my fans that participate in Protect Your Record Project group or activities, it’s my humble opinion that you can help protect the record by letting attorneys know the Veritext fraud is public knowledge. They can Google it. The whole world can Google it. And Veritext let the statute of limitations on defamation lapse so it will literally never be disputed in a court of law. A few of you have come to me and said they’re so upset with Veritext and the prices and yadda yadda. Capitalize on that.
The more lawyers that learn about this fraud, the more that might report it to the FTC. If enough do, the FTC might actually do something. It’s as simple as that. If nothing else, as word spreads, news media might be more amenable to publishing the truth instead of its groupthink garbage.
Perhaps donate to PYRP today instead of Stenonymous.
All I’m saying is… let’s make this a reality:
The court reporter shortage fraud has not received adequate media attention despite the lawsuit against the Speech-to-Text Institute and the continued obfuscation of groups supporting digital court reporting.
Addendum:
I later was told Law360 is a strict B2B provider and the cost is at least a few hundred dollars a month. So that impacts some of the comments I made on this page.
Some time ago I came up with a pretty good formula for figuring out a court reporter’s hourly rate. It excludes appearance fees, but depending on the job, appearance fees can be pretty damn minimal and simply by adding a small amount to the hourly rate, you’d be adjusting for the lost appearance income.
Page rate * pages per hour = hourly rate.
Hourly rate * 0.33 = writing time rate
Hourly rate * 0.67 = transcription rate
Perhaps divide your appearance fee by 4 and add it to the hourly. This is a little more fair than the 4-hour blocks many in the industry use today.
From my experience, believe it or not, you can get a New York City deposition reporter for somewhere around $4.00 a page. And a court reporter gets somewhere between 40 and 60 pages per hour.
That gives us a range for a non-realtime reporter of $160 to $240 an hour. Seems high, but for every hour on the machine it can take up to 2 hours of transcription, and court reporters that can do it much faster are either cutting corners, really experienced, or really, really good.
According to my sources, digital court reporters make around $30. Just so everyone knows, a fraud nonprofit called the Speech-to-Text Institute was used by the larger corporations of the court reporting field to systematically soak the market in misinformation, confusing jobseekers and consumers. The aim was to expand digital court reporting, increase the supply of “court reporters” to create a market glut, and make corporations like Veritext look good on paper so they could be sold to the next sucker.
30/240 = 12.5%
And let me be clear, $4.00 per page is not exactly a rich life in court reporting NYC. There are many that make more than that, which means digital is an even smaller percentage.
Did your deposition discovery costs decrease 90%?
My sources say lawyer bills are higher than ever.
The secret is that charges that court reporters don’t share in are added to the bill while page rates are kept artificially low to keep you thinking you’re getting a great deal.
Do what you will with that information. Might I humbly suggest that if they’re going to use a digital court reporter, you demand that the bill be something like 20% of what it usually is.
Or let them milk you, and by extension, your clients. That’s cool too.
Just let it happen. Trust me.
With stenographer jobs being systematically eliminated via fraud and deceit rather than by actual technological advancement, there’s really no reason for us not to expose what the companies are doing. After all, if they’re successful enough in reducing stenographic court reporter numbers, courts won’t be able to fill spots, and my job will likely be eliminated someday too, and with the disabilities I live with, I’m unsure about being able to do better than what I’ve got. Call me biased, sure. But your whole system of law is based off of two biased sides presenting their evidence, so if bias is a reason to disregard truth, you can just throw out the whole justice system today if you want to paint biased people as untrustworthy.
Just writing that for a fan of mine.
Side note, corporations that make millions of dollars let a respected 14-year member of our field publish openly about their fraud for almost 3 years now. They’re banking on you doing nothing. I suppose I am too.
It occurs to me it might be best to come out and say that in terms of rates lawyers have a financial interest in prolonging this digital v steno thing. More suppliers in the market, more competition. This is juxtaposed against what the corporate schemers want, continued corporate consolidation of the field under people that can jack up prices a la tacit parallelism.
Lots of pressure for you to switch to digital. Now you know why. Do with it what you will.
I know my methods are unorthodox. But we are in an asymmetrical situation where the powers that be have centralized power (money). We too have power, but it is decentralized and easier for us to be ignored or misrepresented. Surprise, that’s exactly what happens, and often.
I’d ask for funding from the community again. It centralizes our power. And now anyone with eyes or a screen reader can see the impact that has.
I stand by what I said yesterday.
You will triumph.
You are special.
And if there is a way to heal a hurt soul, we should.
To the powers that be,
Your obsession with short-term gains will never stand up to the enduring principles we espouse. We love each other the way you love your money.
It’s not what I really wanted. But I suppose I was naive. How often in life do we really get what we want?
I can’t help but feel you were a victim of the STTI Bloc’s fraud. Big money said jump and it made sense to jump. Perhaps I would’ve done the same in another time, place, and set of circumstances.
I made a promise to myself I’d bury an axe to build a bridge.
I could not do this before. But the time has come.
I wish you success and good fortune.
/ / / / /
The largest alternative publication in the court reporting market…
Stenonymous.com remains a platform for your words and voices.
So as I sat there over the years documenting things posted online and representations made by the larger corporations in my field, I was creating a record of what was happening that I could testify about it if it ever became an issue.
So here we are. Statute of limitations in New York defamation law has pretty much lapsed. Meaning that a 14-year “veteran” of the court reporting field came out publicly in his own name and said the largest corporation in court reporting was committing a fraud, and the corporations I wrote about let it happen despite it arguably being defamation per se if it wasn’t true. I presume because they bank on the intense stigma and assumed lack of credibility of someone with admitted illnesses/disabilities like mine.
Engaging in a scheme constituting a systematic course of conduct. Okay. What’s more systematic than a bunch of corporations getting together under a nonprofit to spread misinformation about the field? What about the representations made to attorneys that stenographers can’t be found when in fact corporations involved in the STTI Bloc were not really looking for stenographers? Effectively tricking consumers and jobseekers for years. A trick so effective it continues to this day.
“To defraud more than one person.” Well, there are a lot of consumers of Veritext and other fraudster services. Maybe if we asked a few if they were told stenographers could not be provided, we’d have that part down.
To obtain property from more than one person blah blah blah. Money is property. By taking people’s money, telling them the service they want is unavailable, and providing a subpar service for similar prices — it’s pretty much taking property by false or fraudulent pretenses. Maybe they’d take their business somewhere else if they knew the truth of “we want to cut our expenses and keep yours high.” That’s if it’s even true that digital is cheaper and not just an assumption by the finance gurus.
Penal Law 20.25 in New York provides for the criminal liability of people that commit criminal acts on behalf of corporations. So theoretically, if the persons that ordered this stuff were identified, they could go to jail for up to a year.
So yeah… look, I get that an A misdemeanor is not the crime of the century. But isn’t it at least a little interesting and newsworthy that the shortage that many court reporters and journalists have written about at length is actually a crime being committed?
I’m speaking up because, as I’ve documented before, when the women of this profession speak up, they’re sometimes threatened with a defamation lawsuit. Because anyone can sue anyone for any reason, this scares them into silence. I have pro se experiences, so I could probably defend myself in a bogus lawsuit. But you know what? There are still brave people speaking out like the Protect Your Record Project and Jackie Mentecky. So even if you buy wholeheartedly that I’m an idiot, invalid, or just untrustworthy, I’m not alone in my general message. You have to really look away from the evidence in order to not see it.
And this was all done in a strategic way by me. If the corporations respond to my antics, they give us more information, and information is what helped this come to light in the first place. Information is good.
If the corporations do not respond, they are silenced while I am free to build support and fundraise, as well as rewrite the narrative. This is what I’ve done for a few years now, and it’s working, albeit slower than anyone would’ve liked.
If the corporations respond with a bogus lawsuit, I get more information than I ever would’ve been able to through the discovery process and blow this up Streisand Effect style. They’ll also burn a whole lot of money on something I have an affirmative defense to. I got a buddy whose court case on a trip and fall has dragged out over 6 years. My blog would take hundreds of hours to sort through. We’d be in court forever. Game, set, match. The broken system can be used to our advantage.
And every day that goes by, the strength of a bogus lawsuit gets weaker. There are a number of things in case law that point to the inadmissibility of a case that the plaintiff sits on.
And that’s pretty much it.
The more people that echo my claims and point to my work, the less ignorable it is, and the more people we reach.
P.S.
For one of the first times ever, I took down a blog post. The one I took down shall not be named.
But I pose a question to you, readers.
If you wrote something that hurt someone that you never intended to hurt, what would you do?
Does it matter what their relationship to you is? What if it was a stranger?
These are the kinds of choices my writing has brought me. Things I decide in silence and isolation. Things I rarely share.
I can’t help but wonder what the world would think if it could experience these moments in time with me.
Perhaps that’s why I write at all. Captured moments in time that others can experience with me.
An art that court reporters know well.
But is it dying or evolving?
It brings back memories of a night I got punched in the mouth.
If I could de-escalate that, certainly there are a great many things I can convince people of.
I would like to convince you that you will triumph.
That you are special.
And that if there is a way to heal a hurt soul, we should.
First interesting thing to note, the website doubles down on the shortage narrative of the Speech-to-Text Institute Bloc, the group of corporations I identified as having joined in a fraud.
The Coalition to Capture the Record doubles down on the court reporter shortage fraud despite a president of the largest court reporting association in the country admitting Ducker was debunked and a committee of the National Court Reporters Association more or less describing it as defunct.
There’s also an implication that it’ll bring down the cost of litigation. This long-running lie was called into question by a 2009 study.
So once again, it’s that same behavior we saw Speech-to-Text Institute engaging in. “The shortage is the shortage and we can’t beat it so we must go digital.” This is being done despite the overwhelming evidence that localized shortages can be beat. For example, in New York City, a localized Bronx shortage was recently plugged in our courts. Turns out when we actually try to fill these spots, we’re successful, and the political machinery that stops us from filling spots is the problem.
There’s also a pull from STAR’s playbook, the organization a lot of the fraudsters ran to in order to legitimize their positions again (they also went AAERT). They call for unity.
If digital court reporters and stenographers are equal, why aren’t they paid the same? I know that bothers my audience. But let’s ask that question out loud and often, because eventually digital court reporters will start asking for more — and then this whole song and dance becomes moot, because it’s about replacing our workforce with a workforce that’s easier to abuse and control. It has never, ever been about shortage.
Ever.
This next gem led me to conclude that this is not a serious organization, but a potential propaganda front.
Why does the Coalition to Capture the Record care about whether digital court reporters will replace stenographers?
Think about it. If your mission is access to justice, what does anything else matter? All this stuff about shortage and “we won’t replace you”, and all that nonsense, it’s not a message you would write to people interested in access. It’s a message you would write to stenographers you are trying to placate so that they don’t take a stand against their own elimination. A narrative to disarm and demoralize. “Give up, there is nothing you can do, join us.”
I believe in access to justice. I signed up for more information. And with time and evidence, my views may change.
But does anyone see what I’m seeing?
P.S.
I’m going to write about something on my mind. You’re not expected to read it.
The Max Azzarello thing happened outside my courthouse. Luckily for me, I wasn’t there, but I did see a brief video clip.
He’s been described as this gentle soul, intelligent guy that went downhill after his mother, who he had a close relationship with, died.
I wondered how many people might say the same about me, if I passed away. Admittedly, my relationship with my mother was not close, but we loved each other deeply. But how many of you would come out of the woodwork to call me a conspiracy theorist in my death? And despite not a peep while I’m alive and well to defend myself and my beliefs.
Of course, I’m never going to hurt myself. It’s not going to happen. Maybe that’ll be the deciding factor. And should anything suspicious occur, I hope my loved ones don’t accept a false narrative.
There’s also the fact that what I write about was real and what he wrote about was a distorted version of the truth. Yes, big money interests are using their wealth and power to influence markets, governments, and consumers. Yes, the government has serious problems because it’s woefully ill equipped to deal with lawbreaking businesses in the quantity and on the scale that they exist today.
But I can’t help but empathize. I know how it feels to scream into the void and hear nothing back.
If someone finds this corner of the internet and you’re in a dark place…
…I’ve been there too.
Hurting yourself isn’t the way. Certainly not self-immolation. The future will be brighter with you in it.
A better tomorrow needs builders. If your story ends here, how can the world change for the better?
Going to try to appeal to the big money crowd today.
You’re wasting your time and energy on trying to do away with us. I’ll concede that you could win on that front. Money means power. But it would be a Pyrrhic victory.
Look no further than famous digital court recording company, VIQ Solutions.
VIQ Solutions loves digital court recording.
“Yeah, so what, Chris?”
It’s a money pit.
VIQ Solutions posts a September 2023 quarterly loss of $4 million.
It misses its targets by incredible amounts.
VIQ Solutions earnings per share missed expectations by 135%
As I see it, if there are any investors that don’t directly benefit from the private equity model of buying, holding, and selling companies, they’re going to get burned by digital pretty bad. It’s basically going to become a jobs program propped up by your money. I guess it could be worth it if you edge us out and get to raise prices on courts and attorneys in typical oligopoly fashion. It’s worked so far on the American public, and lawyers and insurance companies seem happy to let it be done to them too.
Of course, this also means that, in my view, whoever Leonard Green sells Veritext to is a sucker with a lot of money. I don’t know what checkboxes people look at to decide whether they will spend the money. But I’m going to assume that with the horribly fractured and sometimes fabricated information in, around, and about this field, it would be easy to trick people with a lot of money or the handlers they trust with investing the money using those checkboxes. If it looks good on paper, who cares about everything else, right?
But the real world doesn’t care about your papers. You have an example right in front of you of what digital court recording can do to your wallet. Do the logical thing, walk away, and leave all the big box holding companies of today to flail. It’ll let the real winners come up, and you can buy into those a lot cheaper.
At this point in history, the money being poured on digital is all that’s propping it up. Take that away, and surprise, you realize you’re jacked up on hopium while riding hype trains. Don’t worry, we’ve all been there.
If you’re looking for a place to park millions of dollars, how about that Stenonymous guy? I hear his writing has shifted real-world industries. Seems like the kind of person that would work tirelessly to make sure you saw a return on your money, if only he had a suitable salary and staff.
