The law firm is under the commission of Ms Chong Ting Yan and appoints lawyer to issue you this letter about the matters of terminating the exclusive contract between Ms Chong and your company as per followings:
Elkie’s Legal Letter to Cube for Contract Termination- Translation Thread
Mistreatments are stated in the legal letter
#CLC
The law firm is under the commission of Ms Chong Ting Yan and appoints lawyer to issue you this letter about the matters of terminating the exclusive contract between Ms Chong and your company as per followings:
1. During the contract period, all Ms Chong’s entertainment incomes were collected by your company first. However, your company has never revealed the actual details of the incomes to Ms Chong.
This means Elkie was never paid for her role in The Rich Son 😱
1. From the day your company received this letter, the exclusive contract is terminated between your company and Ms Chong.
2. Within 15 days of your company receiving this
3. If you company refuse to follow as per letter’s content, my side will use all legal means to protect our rights.
More from For later read
Today's Twitter threads (a Twitter thread).
Inside: Planet Money on HP's myriad ripoffs; Strength in numbers; and more!
Archived at: https://t.co/esjoT3u5Gr
#Pluralistic
1/
On Feb 22, I'm delivering a keynote address for the NISO Plus conference, "The day of the comet: what trustbusting means for digital manipulation."
https://t.co/Z84xicXhGg
2/
Planet Money on HP's myriad ripoffs: Ink-stained wretches of the world, unite!
https://t.co/k5ASdVUrC2
3/
Strength in numbers: The crisis in accounting.
https://t.co/DjfAfHWpNN
4/
#15yrsago Bad Samaritan family won’t return found expensive camera https://t.co/Rn9E5R1gtV
#10yrsago What does Libyan revolution mean for https://t.co/Jz28qHVhrV? https://t.co/dN1e4MxU4r
5/
Inside: Planet Money on HP's myriad ripoffs; Strength in numbers; and more!
Archived at: https://t.co/esjoT3u5Gr
#Pluralistic
1/
On Feb 22, I'm delivering a keynote address for the NISO Plus conference, "The day of the comet: what trustbusting means for digital manipulation."
https://t.co/Z84xicXhGg
2/
Planet Money on HP's myriad ripoffs: Ink-stained wretches of the world, unite!
https://t.co/k5ASdVUrC2
3/
Back in November, I published an article for @EFF about @HP's latest printer-ink ripoff: after offering its customers a free-ink-for-life plan, it unilaterally switched them all to a $1/month-for-life plan.https://t.co/bsc73xPSuo
— Cory Doctorow #BLM (@doctorow) February 18, 2021
1/ pic.twitter.com/tagduPupA5
Strength in numbers: The crisis in accounting.
https://t.co/DjfAfHWpNN
4/
Accountancy is more likely to be mocked than celebrated (or condemned), but accountants, far more than poets, are the unacknowledged legislators of the world.
— Cory Doctorow #BLM (@doctorow) February 18, 2021
1/ pic.twitter.com/FaNQc66gQN
#15yrsago Bad Samaritan family won’t return found expensive camera https://t.co/Rn9E5R1gtV
#10yrsago What does Libyan revolution mean for https://t.co/Jz28qHVhrV? https://t.co/dN1e4MxU4r
5/
How I created content in 2020
A thread...
Back in Aug 2016, I started creating content to share my experiences as an entrepreneur.
Over 3 years I had put out 1,200+ hours of content - posting every week without
Little did I know that something I started almost 4 years back would give my life an entirely new direction.
At the end of 2019, my biggest platform was LinkedIn with ~700K followers.
In Jan 2020, I decided to build a team that would help me with the content.
I ran a month long recruitment drive to hire a team of interns.
It comprised 4 detailed rounds - starting with my loved 20 questions, then an assignment, then a WhatsApp video round and finally F2F.
Through 1,200+ applications, I finally selected 6 profiles, starting March.
I am a firm believer in @peterthiel's one task, one person philosophy
So the team was structured such that everyone was responsible for ONLY one task
1. Content ideas
2. Videography
3. Video editing
4. LinkedIn (+TikTok) distribution
5. FB+IG distribution
6. YouTube distribution
A thread...
Back in Aug 2016, I started creating content to share my experiences as an entrepreneur.
Over 3 years I had put out 1,200+ hours of content - posting every week without
August 2016.
— Ankur Warikoo (@warikoo) October 2, 2020
It has been 3 months since LinkedIn had launched its video feature.
And I had been waiting for it to be activated on my profile.
A thread...
Little did I know that something I started almost 4 years back would give my life an entirely new direction.
At the end of 2019, my biggest platform was LinkedIn with ~700K followers.
In Jan 2020, I decided to build a team that would help me with the content.
I ran a month long recruitment drive to hire a team of interns.
It comprised 4 detailed rounds - starting with my loved 20 questions, then an assignment, then a WhatsApp video round and finally F2F.
Through 1,200+ applications, I finally selected 6 profiles, starting March.
I am a firm believer in @peterthiel's one task, one person philosophy
So the team was structured such that everyone was responsible for ONLY one task
1. Content ideas
2. Videography
3. Video editing
4. LinkedIn (+TikTok) distribution
5. FB+IG distribution
6. YouTube distribution
the whole point of Dunks was you could go cop them at VIM whenever you wanted for $65. this shit is like having to enter a raffle to buy milk.
like seriously why not make a ton more of them if they're gonna be so sought-after? they land at outlets? so? nike still makes money off that.
the only reason to keep making them so limited is that they KNOW all that matters is the profit on the flip and if they were readily available FEWER people would want them, not more
the whole system is super broken, but it's just gonna go the way it goes, because at this point it all caters to the secondary market. the only reason Nike can sell Jordan 1s for $200 is because the people buying them can flip them for $500
adjusted for inflation, a $65 AJ1 in 1985 is like $160—and modern-day AJ1s are made from cheaper materials in factories staffed by cheaper workers. they don't HAVE to be $200 retail. but the secondary market nuked the whole concept of what sneakers are "worth"
\U0001f91e ONLINE RAFFLE is available from @bodega for the upcoming "UNLV" Nike Dunk Low Retro. Open until 5 PM ET on 2/16.
— Kicks Deals (@KicksDeals) February 15, 2021
\u27a1\ufe0f\u27a1\ufe0f https://t.co/JxJlyPuJVo pic.twitter.com/zenWOCDg4L
like seriously why not make a ton more of them if they're gonna be so sought-after? they land at outlets? so? nike still makes money off that.
the only reason to keep making them so limited is that they KNOW all that matters is the profit on the flip and if they were readily available FEWER people would want them, not more
the whole system is super broken, but it's just gonna go the way it goes, because at this point it all caters to the secondary market. the only reason Nike can sell Jordan 1s for $200 is because the people buying them can flip them for $500
adjusted for inflation, a $65 AJ1 in 1985 is like $160—and modern-day AJ1s are made from cheaper materials in factories staffed by cheaper workers. they don't HAVE to be $200 retail. but the secondary market nuked the whole concept of what sneakers are "worth"
There is some valuable analysis in this report, but on the defense front this report is deeply flawed. There are other sections of value in report but, candidly, I don't think it helps us think through critical question of Taiwan defense issues in clear & well-grounded way. 1/
Normally as it might seem churlish to be so critical, but @cfr is so high-profile & the co-authors so distinguished I think it’s key to be clear. If not, people - including in Beijing - could get the wrong idea & this report could do real harm if influential on defense issues. 2/
BLUF: The defense discussion in this report does not engage at the depth needed to add to this critical debate. Accordingly conclusions in report are ill-founded - & in key parts harmful/misleading, esp that US shldnt be prepared defend Taiwan directly (alongside own efforts). 3/
The root of the problem is that report doesn't engage w the real debate on TWN defense issues or, frankly, the facts as knowable in public. Perhaps the most direct proof of this: The citations. There is nothing in the citations to @DeptofDefense China Military Power Report...4/
Nor to vast majority of leading informed sources on this like Ochmanek, the @RANDCorporation Scorecard, @CNAS, etc. This is esp salient b/c co-authors by their own admission have v little insight into contemporary military issues. & both last served in govt in Bush 43. 5/
This is an excellent report, and I'm glad to have joined the study group. The central focus on avoiding war is understandable--a US-China war would be catastrophic and should be avoided. But protecting Taiwan's security and prosperity requires doing more. 1/x https://t.co/P0Sg4LJcpV
— Bonnie Glaser / \u845b\u4f86\u5100 (@BonnieGlaser) February 12, 2021
Normally as it might seem churlish to be so critical, but @cfr is so high-profile & the co-authors so distinguished I think it’s key to be clear. If not, people - including in Beijing - could get the wrong idea & this report could do real harm if influential on defense issues. 2/
BLUF: The defense discussion in this report does not engage at the depth needed to add to this critical debate. Accordingly conclusions in report are ill-founded - & in key parts harmful/misleading, esp that US shldnt be prepared defend Taiwan directly (alongside own efforts). 3/
The root of the problem is that report doesn't engage w the real debate on TWN defense issues or, frankly, the facts as knowable in public. Perhaps the most direct proof of this: The citations. There is nothing in the citations to @DeptofDefense China Military Power Report...4/
Nor to vast majority of leading informed sources on this like Ochmanek, the @RANDCorporation Scorecard, @CNAS, etc. This is esp salient b/c co-authors by their own admission have v little insight into contemporary military issues. & both last served in govt in Bush 43. 5/
