 |
|
| Science Forum Index » Engineering - Joining (Welding) Forum » FS Dayton MIG welder 225A... |
|
Page 4 of 5 Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 Next |
|
| Author |
Message |
| Winston... |
 Posted: Tue Oct 27, 2009 5:08 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
SteveB wrote:
[quote]"Winston" <Winston at (no spam) bigbrother.net> wrote > SteveB wrote:
"Winston" <Winston at (no spam) bigbrother.net> wrote
Turning down the collar would make a perfectly acceptable trade-in
hinky, yes? I don't get it.
--Winston
You really don't know what we're talking about, do you?
We shall see. (I was just asking a question, Steve.)
You are obviously not talking about lease bottles with their name in the
cast collar.
Why do you say that? I thought I was.
Because bottles with names cast in the collars are owned by the company, and
not able to be just exchanged freely as you claim, rather exchanged under
the terms of the rental/lease agreement.
[/quote]
I never questioned that point, for bottles who's lessors
still exist and have legal ownership. I still think that
returning the lessors property is the best course.
Let's agree to disagree about bottles that lost their
lessors during times of economic downturn. If no one has
legal, legitimate ownership, can we safely assume that the
lessee assumes legal title?
Does 'Sparks Welding' assume legal title to 'Burns Welding'
outstanding lease stock after 'Burns' goes out of business,
sans any contractual agreement between them?
I hardly think that 'Sparks' has any standing at all, here.
But that's why I ask.
--Winston |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| RAM³... |
| Posted: Tue Oct 27, 2009 5:30 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Winston <Winston at (no spam) bigbrother.net> wrote in
news:hc7uhb0nom at (no spam) news2.newsguy.com:
[quote]If no one has
legal, legitimate ownership, can we safely assume that the
lessee assumes legal title?
[/quote]
A moot point: unless the lessor simply abandons everything - including
buildings, equipment, etc. - and shuts down operations without ANY
outstanding bills then SOMEBODY took ownership of the business including
ALL assets.
This includes any bottles "on lease" at the time of the closure.
Therefore SOMEBODY actually OWNS the "on lease" bottles even though that
SOMEBODY may not have any business presence within 3,000 miles. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Winston... |
| Posted: Tue Oct 27, 2009 5:48 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
RAM³ wrote:
[quote]Winston <Winston at (no spam) bigbrother.net> wrote in
news:hc7uhb0nom at (no spam) news2.newsguy.com:
If no one has
legal, legitimate ownership, can we safely assume that the
lessee assumes legal title?
A moot point: unless the lessor simply abandons everything - including
buildings, equipment, etc. - and shuts down operations without ANY
outstanding bills then SOMEBODY took ownership of the business including
ALL assets.
This includes any bottles "on lease" at the time of the closure.
Therefore SOMEBODY actually OWNS the "on lease" bottles even though that
SOMEBODY may not have any business presence within 3,000 miles.
[/quote]
So, 'Burns Welding' of Barstow, CA goes out of business.
The receiver is a Real Estate Investment Trust based in Manhattan.
Fred brings his 'Burns' leased bottle into 'Sparks' for a swap.
Sans any legal agreement between 'Burns', 'Sparks' or the
REIT, does 'Sparks' magically become the new owner of the
bottle, somehow? How can this be?
--Winston |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| RAM³... |
| Posted: Tue Oct 27, 2009 6:17 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Winston <Winston at (no spam) bigbrother.net> wrote in
news:hc80sh0q9h at (no spam) news2.newsguy.com:
[quote]RAM³ wrote:
Winston <Winston at (no spam) bigbrother.net> wrote in
news:hc7uhb0nom at (no spam) news2.newsguy.com:
If no one has
legal, legitimate ownership, can we safely assume that the
lessee assumes legal title?
A moot point: unless the lessor simply abandons everything -
including buildings, equipment, etc. - and shuts down operations
without ANY outstanding bills then SOMEBODY took ownership of the
business including ALL assets.
This includes any bottles "on lease" at the time of the closure.
Therefore SOMEBODY actually OWNS the "on lease" bottles even though
that SOMEBODY may not have any business presence within 3,000 miles.
So, 'Burns Welding' of Barstow, CA goes out of business.
The receiver is a Real Estate Investment Trust based in Manhattan.
Fred brings his 'Burns' leased bottle into 'Sparks' for a swap.
Sans any legal agreement between 'Burns', 'Sparks' or the
REIT, does 'Sparks' magically become the new owner of the
bottle, somehow? How can this be?
--Winston
[/quote]
Since the individual who presented the bottle is NOT the owner (as
evidenced by the marked ring) the supplier is simply "protecting" the
customer by taking the "stolen property" [Theft By Bailee] off his hands
and holding it for delivery to the proper owner - REIT according to your
scenario....
FWIW, your original question only proposed "ownership" of "orphan
bottles" be vested in the possessor. <grin> |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| SteveB... |
| Posted: Tue Oct 27, 2009 6:40 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
"Rich Grise" <richgrise at (no spam) example.net> wrote
[quote]Is there a special mark that's used for bottles that can be personally
owned by an individual?
Thanks,
Rich
[/quote]
The "collar", or area that looks like cast metal just below the threads is
where MOST identifying marks are. It goes around the tank, and is about one
inch wide. Embossed means that the letters or symbols are cast in sand, and
are raised. They can also be stamped in metal stamp numbers and letters
just below that where the dates of hydro testing appears.
Usually, the "owner" bottles have a "collar" that has no embossed lettering,
as in company name. There are a lot of USN tanks around, meaning U. S.
Navy, but those were sold as surplus, and are considered "owner" tanks. So
it is with bankrupt companies, and companies that are out of business
provided the ensuing company does not claim rights to them. They can be
traded bottle for bottle, provided they are within hydro, have an
identifying paper ID label designating what gas is inside, and that they
have no manually stamped ID below that. If they are not in hydro, and you
are a good customer, they may forego that, and just trade you out. Worst
thing is to have an open valve, or a cylinder with no paper label on it, as
then it has to be emptied, purged, and tested. With an open valve, there is
a chance that moisture has gotten in there, and the valve has to be removed,
the cylinder has to be endoscopically inspected, and maybe polished
internally by rolling with ball bearings and an abrasive medium. Then
purged and filled. So, when you use your cylinders, resist the urge to
drain them dry, and leave SOME pressure in them.
Next time you're at your gas supplier, ask the counter geek, and they will
probably give you a tour and explain it so you understand when you are
looking at bottles for sale what exactly you are looking at and whether or
not it coincides with the story your being given.
Steve |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| SteveB... |
| Posted: Tue Oct 27, 2009 6:42 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
"Steve W." <csr684 at (no spam) NOTyahoo.com> wrote
bullshit snipped
I own the bottle. I paid for it. It has no identifying marks. It has
since been traded for a full bottle.
Case closed.
Steve |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| SteveB... |
| Posted: Tue Oct 27, 2009 6:44 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
"Ignoramus27237" <ignoramus27237 at (no spam) NOSPAM.27237.invalid> wrote in message
news:CMudneUpQaOk6nrXnZ2dnUVZ_i2dnZ2d at (no spam) giganews.com...
[quote]Regarding the ethics of rental tanks: as far as I know, for each of
the "company owned" tanks, there was a deposit paid that exceeds the
value of the tank. When these tanks later change hands, the gas
supplier keeps the deposit, whihc is the money that it also had an
opportunity to use for years. This was the case with my own bottle
rental from Terrace: they took a big deposit and gave me a bottle.
So, taking that bottle does not result in that supplier being hurt
financially.
The so called "ownership", in this case, is just a way to prevent
people from going to other suppliers with that bottle, in other words,
this is basically a legalized racket.
i
[/quote]
The company I leased a bottle from charges 60% or more to refill a bottle
than the company that exchanges owner bottles.
Steve |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| SteveB... |
| Posted: Tue Oct 27, 2009 6:46 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
"Winston" <Winston at (no spam) bigbrother.net> wrote in message
news:hc7uhb0nom at (no spam) news2.newsguy.com...
[quote]SteveB wrote:
"Winston" <Winston at (no spam) bigbrother.net> wrote > SteveB wrote:
"Winston" <Winston at (no spam) bigbrother.net> wrote
Turning down the collar would make a perfectly acceptable trade-in
hinky, yes? I don't get it.
--Winston
You really don't know what we're talking about, do you?
We shall see. (I was just asking a question, Steve.)
You are obviously not talking about lease bottles with their name in
the cast collar.
Why do you say that? I thought I was.
Because bottles with names cast in the collars are owned by the company,
and not able to be just exchanged freely as you claim, rather exchanged
under the terms of the rental/lease agreement.
I never questioned that point, for bottles who's lessors
still exist and have legal ownership. I still think that
returning the lessors property is the best course.
Let's agree to disagree about bottles that lost their
lessors during times of economic downturn. If no one has
legal, legitimate ownership, can we safely assume that the
lessee assumes legal title?
Does 'Sparks Welding' assume legal title to 'Burns Welding'
outstanding lease stock after 'Burns' goes out of business,
sans any contractual agreement between them?
I hardly think that 'Sparks' has any standing at all, here.
But that's why I ask.
--Winston
[/quote]
And if I'm a customer with an account who has already spent $3k with you
this year and I bring in a bottle, what do you do? Do you insist that I
give it back, or do you bend a bit and make some sort of a compromise to
keep my business? This company was not bending at all.
Steve |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Ignoramus27237... |
| Posted: Tue Oct 27, 2009 7:27 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On 2009-10-28, SteveB <oldfart at (no spam) depends.com> wrote:
[quote]
"Ignoramus27237" <ignoramus27237 at (no spam) NOSPAM.27237.invalid> wrote in message
news:CMudneUpQaOk6nrXnZ2dnUVZ_i2dnZ2d at (no spam) giganews.com...
Regarding the ethics of rental tanks: as far as I know, for each of
the "company owned" tanks, there was a deposit paid that exceeds the
value of the tank. When these tanks later change hands, the gas
supplier keeps the deposit, whihc is the money that it also had an
opportunity to use for years. This was the case with my own bottle
rental from Terrace: they took a big deposit and gave me a bottle.
So, taking that bottle does not result in that supplier being hurt
financially.
The so called "ownership", in this case, is just a way to prevent
people from going to other suppliers with that bottle, in other words,
this is basically a legalized racket.
i
The company I leased a bottle from charges 60% or more to refill a bottle
than the company that exchanges owner bottles.
[/quote]
Why am I not surprised...
i |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Martin H. Eastburn... |
| Posted: Tue Oct 27, 2009 7:43 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Face plate 
Martin
Ignoramus27237 wrote:
[quote]On 2009-10-27, Gunner Asch <gunner at (no spam) NOSPAMlightspeed.net> wrote:
On Mon, 26 Oct 2009 21:53:12 -0500, Ignoramus21577
ignoramus21577 at (no spam) NOSPAM.21577.invalid> wrote:
The welder was sold, for 33% more than I was asking here.
I also learned something today. He wanted the tank (fine) I asked the
buyer, who lived 50 miles from here, what will he do with a tank with
a local supplier's name on the collar.
He said, GET THIS, that he puts them in his lathe, and simply turns
the collar down on the lathe, so that all lettering is removed. That's
a big MF of a lathe!
i
You dont have access to one? I can go up to 26"....through the
spindle...
Gunner, I would really like to have a bg shed with several big
machines in it. Whenever I see those liquidation sales, with 20x78"
lathes going for $600 or something, my heart bleeds.
i[/quote] |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Gunner Asch... |
| Posted: Tue Oct 27, 2009 7:47 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Tue, 27 Oct 2009 18:44:14 -0600, "SteveB" <oldfart at (no spam) depends.com>
wrote:
[quote]
"Ignoramus27237" <ignoramus27237 at (no spam) NOSPAM.27237.invalid> wrote in message
news:CMudneUpQaOk6nrXnZ2dnUVZ_i2dnZ2d at (no spam) giganews.com...
Regarding the ethics of rental tanks: as far as I know, for each of
the "company owned" tanks, there was a deposit paid that exceeds the
value of the tank. When these tanks later change hands, the gas
supplier keeps the deposit, whihc is the money that it also had an
opportunity to use for years. This was the case with my own bottle
rental from Terrace: they took a big deposit and gave me a bottle.
So, taking that bottle does not result in that supplier being hurt
financially.
The so called "ownership", in this case, is just a way to prevent
people from going to other suppliers with that bottle, in other words,
this is basically a legalized racket.
i
The company I leased a bottle from charges 60% or more to refill a bottle
than the company that exchanges owner bottles.
Steve
Sounds like those bastards at Airgas. I do as little business with them[/quote]
as I possibly can. They are expensive as hell and with few
exceptions..the personal are either pricks or morons
Gunner
"Upon Roosevelt's death in 1945, H. L. Mencken predicted in his diary
that Roosevelt would be remembered as a great president, "maybe even
alongside Washington and Lincoln," opining that Roosevelt "had every
quality that morons esteem in their heroes."" |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Winston... |
| Posted: Tue Oct 27, 2009 9:17 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
RAM³ wrote:
[quote]Winston <Winston at (no spam) bigbrother.net> wrote in
news:hc80sh0q9h at (no spam) news2.newsguy.com:
[/quote]
(...)
[quote]Fred brings his 'Burns' leased bottle into 'Sparks' for a swap.
Sans any legal agreement between 'Burns', 'Sparks' or the
REIT, does 'Sparks' magically become the new owner of the
bottle, somehow? How can this be?
--Winston
Since the individual who presented the bottle is NOT the owner (as
evidenced by the marked ring) the supplier is simply "protecting" the
customer by taking the "stolen property" [Theft By Bailee] off his hands
and holding it for delivery to the proper owner - REIT according to your
scenario....
[/quote]
I didn't see a smiley, RAM³.
If I park my Hertz rental around the corner in the Avis lot to check
on a friend's reservation and Avis has my rental towed to impound,
I am the one being protected, yes? All agree that I don't own the
Hertz car, but Avis has the obligation to assume that I stole it
and will 'protect' me thusly? Did I get that right? :)
How often do you suppose that 'Sparks Welding' delivers off-lease
'Burns Welding' gas bottles across the country to the Manhattan
offices of the Real Estate Investment Trust? 'Sparks' wouldn't
keep the bottles for their own use, do you suppose?
Why is this is not considered theft from the lessee?
[quote]FWIW, your original question only proposed "ownership" of "orphan
bottles" be vested in the possessor. <grin
[/quote]
My original question was poorly worded. It was:
"Turning down the collar would make a perfectly acceptable trade-in
hinky, yes?"
I meant to ask if a reasonably attentive welding outlet
would suspect fraud if presented with a gas cylinder that
had been modified to remove identifying information that
named another 'local supplier' as it's owner.
In the same post, I said that modifying the bottle would
be "self defeating".
It would be *much* better for the possessor to leave the bottle
un-modified and return it to that 'local supplier'. I implied
that an off-lease 'Burns Welding' bottle that had no current owner
might easily be returned to 'Sparks Welding' for cylinder credit
just as if it were an 'owner' bottle. Why not?
--Winston |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| SteveB... |
| Posted: Tue Oct 27, 2009 9:44 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
"Winston" <Winston at (no spam) bigbrother.net> wrote
[quote]My original question was poorly worded. It was:
"Turning down the collar would make a perfectly acceptable trade-in
hinky, yes?"
[/quote]
What the fuck is a "hinky"? |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Bruce L. Bergman... |
| Posted: Tue Oct 27, 2009 10:32 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Tue, 27 Oct 2009 20:17:20 -0700, Winston <Winston at (no spam) bigbrother.net>
wrote:
[quote]RAM³ wrote:
Winston <Winston at (no spam) bigbrother.net> wrote in
news:hc80sh0q9h at (no spam) news2.newsguy.com:
(...)
Fred brings his 'Burns' leased bottle into 'Sparks' for a swap.
Sans any legal agreement between 'Burns', 'Sparks' or the
REIT, does 'Sparks' magically become the new owner of the
bottle, somehow? How can this be?
--Winston
Since the individual who presented the bottle is NOT the owner (as
evidenced by the marked ring) the supplier is simply "protecting" the
customer by taking the "stolen property" [Theft By Bailee] off his hands
and holding it for delivery to the proper owner - REIT according to your
scenario....
I didn't see a smiley, RAM³.
If I park my Hertz rental around the corner in the Avis lot to check
on a friend's reservation and Avis has my rental towed to impound,
I am the one being protected, yes? All agree that I don't own the
Hertz car, but Avis has the obligation to assume that I stole it
and will 'protect' me thusly? Did I get that right? :)
How often do you suppose that 'Sparks Welding' delivers off-lease
'Burns Welding' gas bottles across the country to the Manhattan
offices of the Real Estate Investment Trust? 'Sparks' wouldn't
keep the bottles for their own use, do you suppose?
[/quote]
Well, they do keep them - Sorta. One supplier I used to frequent a
lot had their entire back yard rear and side fences lined with old
bottles - from other suppliers.
And they weren't 3000 miles away, many were within 100 miles, and
there were often a few dozen from the same supplier batched up in a
row, enough to make it worth sending a truck over to pick them up. ANd
not from the 1930's, many weren't all that old or obviuously damaged -
they just had that collar on them.
When I asked, I was told they never even try to contact the alleged
owners, they just "recover" them from the people who "stole" them and
treat them as 'Found Steel Pipe in an odd shape." And turned them
into a nice fence.
[quote]Why is this is not considered theft from the lessee?
[/quote]
It is theft, but they do this as a "Professional Courtesy" - and then
they keep what they recover for their own. Something still seems
mighty wrong with this...
[quote]FWIW, your original question only proposed "ownership" of "orphan
bottles" be vested in the possessor. <grin
My original question was poorly worded. It was:
"Turning down the collar would make a perfectly acceptable trade-in
hinky, yes?"
I meant to ask if a reasonably attentive welding outlet
would suspect fraud if presented with a gas cylinder that
had been modified to remove identifying information that
named another 'local supplier' as it's owner.
In the same post, I said that modifying the bottle would
be "self defeating".
It would be *much* better for the possessor to leave the bottle
un-modified and return it to that 'local supplier'. I implied
that an off-lease 'Burns Welding' bottle that had no current owner
might easily be returned to 'Sparks Welding' for cylinder credit
just as if it were an 'owner' bottle. Why not?
[/quote]
It would be nice iof you could take that long drive to the next
county and turn that "Burns" botle back to a Burns location and get a
nice 'Finders Fee' for your trouble.
The only thing you are liable to get is arrested for stealing. Insane,
but true.
Someone pass me the die grinder.
The trick is to match the patina after you finish the grinding duties,
so you don't have a very obvious shiny spot on an otherwise mill
finish ring. I know it'll be a problem, but I've never had to tackle
the problem myself... Sandblast with silica? Shot peen? Bead blast?
Chlorine Bleach wipe to accelerate rust patina?
--<< Bruce >>-- |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Gunner Asch... |
| Posted: Tue Oct 27, 2009 10:33 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Tue, 27 Oct 2009 21:44:37 -0600, "SteveB" <oldfart at (no spam) depends.com>
wrote:
[quote]
"Winston" <Winston at (no spam) bigbrother.net> wrote
My original question was poorly worded. It was:
"Turning down the collar would make a perfectly acceptable trade-in
hinky, yes?"
What the fuck is a "hinky"?
[/quote]
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=hinky
1. hinky
Something as yet undefinable is wrong, out of place; not quite right.
There's something hinky about the deal.
A cop's version of "I've a bad feeling about that"
An event or thing which is
1) Out of whack
2) Wrong
3) Off kilter
That porridge taste hinky to you?
the instant of knowledge when one becomes deeply aware that there is
pure evil fuckery afoot.
She knew something was hinky when her husband returned from the store
without his underwear...
*******************************
Must be an east coaster..or someone living in a monastary for most of
his life to not have heard the word.....
Shrug
<G>
Gunner
"Upon Roosevelt's death in 1945, H. L. Mencken predicted in his diary
that Roosevelt would be remembered as a great president, "maybe even
alongside Washington and Lincoln," opining that Roosevelt "had every
quality that morons esteem in their heroes."" |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
All times are GMT - 5 Hours
The time now is Sun Dec 06, 2009 4:09 am
|
|