RIP Couchsurfing: Sell-out? Betrayal? Fraud?
Checking my spam-mail today, I was surprised to see an email from Couchsurfing.org - a "Non-Profit" organisation, that I've been a member of for some time. I was even one of the people who made a donation to the organisation in the form of becoming "verified".
The thing that really surprised me was the announcement that suddenly Couchsurfing as become a "Certified B Corporation". What does that mean? They are apparently now a company that makes a profit, but promises to be good.
For me, what made Couchsurfing different was that it seemed like a genuine organistaion with millions of open-minded members, that wasn't motivated by money. In fact one of the conditions of Couchsurfing is that your couch has to be free: " It will always be free to join CouchSurfing. Hosts should never charge their CouchSurfers; anyone who does will be removed from the site." So its against the terms of Couchsurfing to make a profit from the "cultural experience".
Of course, what many hadn't counted on was that this didn't principle doesn't apply to the founders - who recently agreed to $7.6 Million in Venture Capital funding. Naturally they make no mention of the cash in their slick "why we had to change" video.
Apart from leaving a very bad aftertaste, this whole transaction raises a number of questions (that will no doubt remain unanswered!):
- How can a "not-for profit" corporation suddenly turn into a "for profit" overnight, without any notice to the community, or compensation for the transfer of the "not-for profit's" assets?
- Was Couchsurfing ever a properly registered not-for profit organisation?
- Why is the latest financial statement posted on the website from 2009?
- Who gets the $7.6 Millon in venture funding, and who now owns Couchsurfing?
I notice I now have a nice "pioneer" badge - the thing is though, I'd much participate in a genuine community along the lines that many believed existed in Couchsurfing.
If you're an active couchsurfer, I'd encourage you to join the group that is discussing the changes, and possibly setting up an alternative: "We don't like CS becoming a Corporation!"
Daily Travel Photo: In place of the regular photo, there's a collage of protest avatars currently being used by couchsurfing members. At least I' not alone in my sense of betrayal! I'd appreciate your thoughts!
There are also a few (now)
There are also a few (now) notorious tales of outright thieves, and an actual rapist, making use of Couchsurfing to acquire victims. And worse than that, is the fact the the founders have both ignored reports from the victims, and made every attempt to sweep the issues under the rug.
Casey Fenton is one of the most deceitful and manipulative human beings on the planet today.
Read up, here: http://opencouchsurfing.org
READ THIS: ORIGINAL TEXT BY
READ THIS:
ORIGINAL TEXT BY LUCAS :
I have translated most of a post that Cedric posted in Paris group. Some really interesting facts...
Sorry for the mistakens I've done:
"After a long discussion via Skype with a friend from NY, which is a jurist and that knows well the question, there were many options to transfer CS to another status or to another place.
The payment in advance of the servers and programmers with the money in stock and the reopening in another place, using the same pre-paid servers and programmers was a solution. The creation of a new "charitable association" and the donation of all material/fund to a new association was another solution. And there are many others legal options in USA. Only, the money have to be spent before the dissolution.
(...)
I would also like to call your attetion to another contradiction:
Casey intends that if CS quit New Hampshire, the state would reclaim 1 million dollars.
I searched and I found this:
http://www.sos.nh.gov/corporate/Nonprofitforms.html
I read "non-profit dissolution = free".
At the time of a dissolution, the status that applies is the one that the organization have registred. If the registration status is eventually denied, either the organization evolves to another status (which Casey proposed), or it has to be closed or migrate. But in this case, there's no penalty.
We come back to the problem cited above: the goods of the organisation have to be given away. But, from the fact that there are solutions to avoid this problem (see above), we have to observe this:
Since there's no penalty or cost to dissolve in New Hampshire, we can conclude that the "more than 1 million dollars" mentioned by Casey corresponds to the CS's goods which should be given to other associations or paid.
But in the same phrase he says that "Couch Surfing had nothing to offer the banks as collateral! According to Casey, all the organization could possibly offer the banks as collateral was some 10.000 dollars worth of computers, and that was obviously not enough to apply for a million-dollar loan. For a moment, Casey and a few others even considered offering their own personal houses as collateral to the banks...".
So if the organization has only 10.000 USD stocked, in material, so the change of place wouldn't cost 1 million dollars, but 10.000 dollars, which should be paid or given.
(...)
One last thing: Casey uses intermediates to pass the infos. Why?
Because the New Hampshire state could sue him for publishing fake informations concerning the registration, dissolution and functioning of charitable associations in this state, prejudicial informations to this state.
That's why he uses private conversations in skype, and why we won't find nowhere written these mistaken informations concerning the cost of a CS relocation.
That's because, this cost doesn't exist. Or because CS is an extremly WEALTHY organisation.
(...)"See More
N.H. Department of State, Corporate Division; Forms To File A Domestic Nonprofit Corporation
www.sos.nh.gov
Post new comment