Jeez, it is just a CEO telling a short story about how the company was originally founded. Watch it or don't.

ABATTBQ11 said:

---

TexasRebel said:

---

BAM converted the consigned items to inventory by purchasing the consignment in the buyout to cover the ex-franchisee debt. The consigner still has to pay the consignee.

Was it handled properly? Not without an independent appraisal of the items or at least specifically telling anyone that's what the plan was.

---

Not how it works, and if that was what happened then BAM and the new franchisee would have been claiming that. They are not and never have. That said, BAM cannot purchase the consignment to cover the original franchisee debt because the consignment is not the property of the original franchisee. Only the consignment *contract* belonged to original franchisee, and that contract conveyed with the franchise. That contract is itself not an asset to cover debt either, because it is merely a right to sell and take a cut. It has no book value unless and until a sale is made.

The consignment contract was tied to the franchise and went along with it to BAM and then the new franchisees when BAM forced the seizure and sale. BAM cannot buy the consignment items from the original franchisees and have them pay Mansell his share because BAM, in taking over the franchise, became the contract holder and consignee. They took over all assets and liabilities, including any outstanding payments to Mansell for previous sales (he was paid on a monthly basis for any sales in the previous month) and the right to sell the remaining consignment for a share of the sale price. If they wanted to convert the consignment to inventory, they would have had to have bought it from themselves at market price and paid Mansell because the original franchisees were no longer a party to the consignment contract.

And we know this is how everyone saw it, or at least should have. In the video of the handoff of accounts in the store when BAM's agent showed up to take possession of everything, they were told by the original franchisee, "I still owe him money," because sets had been sold but the regular agreed upon payment date had not come yet. Once BAM and the new franchisee took possession of the store and accounts, "I still owe him money," turned into, "You owe him money," which they agreed to on camera in that conversation. At no point did BAM or the new franchisees ever pay for the consignment.

---

Thank you.

The clarification of inventory/consignment was needed for this discussion.

Also, the bolded section is one part that keeps being overlooked. The new franchisee admitted to this on camera, which agrees with the contract.

The issue, is that they started claiming alternate stories, once the youtuber got involved. They claimed it was their inventory as the new franchisee, they punted the responsibility of the consigned goods between the new franchisee, the old franchisee and corporate. Then they claimed they didnt have inventory (which was seen on video), they claimed they'd give it back, they claimed no one ever had legos, they claimed the agreement didnt exist, they claimed the youtuber stole the inventory, etc.

And throughout their various iterations, they threatened to bleed an old man dry, if he tried to sue them.

BAM handled this about as poorly as they could.

btw- $482k and counting, on the GoFundMe for the old man...

tk for tu juan said:

---

A better breakdown of the total value, amount sold, and what could be verified to be left in the store starts around 32 minute mark. Make sure to watch about the U-Haul truck earlier in the video

---

ROFL!!!

I didn't know Coffeezilla, so looked up his Wikipedia. AN AGGIE HAS JOINED THE CHANNEL!

"Findeisen holds a degree in chemical engineering from Texas A&M University."

Reddit has compiled way more evidence than I would have thought possible on a great number things.

It looks like the legal entity over BAM is a mechanism to sell franchises for several names with the intent of stealing the franchise back at a later date.


That and a ton more with supporting docs, videos, etc

And not only steal the franchise but the inventory.

And the corp over BAM and the other franchise companies is named, not joking, "Legally Mine"!

The initial franchisee cannot convey what they do not own, nor can the parent/franchisor take it. Basic legal principle. They can take over the franchise per the agreement; they cannot take this inventory. For anyone trying to figure out what's going in amidst all of this chaos, this is the most basic to anchor on.

Martels Hammer said:

---

And not only steal the franchise but the inventory.

And the corp over BAM and the other franchise companies is named, not joking, "Legally Mine"!

---

Never Lego! - Skyebrowshttps://t.co/8DA4LYNrhY

distro link: https://t.co/WRKNar0jh9 pic.twitter.com/wvywto8YkS

— Skye Freeman (@Skyebrows) June 14, 2026

Skybrows dropped a full on song if you're into it. The previous one was a bit rushed.

More scummy actions.

I'm going to be so frustrated if nothing happens to these scumbags.