In these plans - as have been given, plans as made by [
137]
would be satisfactory, and whatever was necessary for the
seat on board - if in keeping with the plans as outlined by
[
137] - then do so, but do NOT have much to do, nor would we
we advise the association, without the seat on the board,
as given; for there would conditions would arise that would
not be satisfactory. With the changes as would become
necessary with the plans, then [
900], [
195], and others,
would be as a unit. With the change as would come in the
new office and with [
900] in charge, would bring
satisfactory results. The change as would come would not
immediately cause the combination into a partnership but
would within the correct TIME bring about conditions that
would be satisfactory, were the plans first set in the
proper way and manner; for, as given [
900], without the seat
or the directorship safe, do not make the association.
These safe in proper hands, WHATEVER would be the outcome by
the changes would bring financial prestige and success. Do
that. Ready for questions.
(Q) Should plan be left as it now stands, and proceed? or
have more thorough understanding with Ferrari about
partnership?
(A) With the plans set for the directorship, then go ahead,
and leave that as will come for the partnership later.
Without the directorship DO NOT go in.
(Q) Will Ferrari and Sakolsky force partnership with us
shortly after new arrangements and on a profitable basis?
If so, would it be well to take them in as any kind of
partner? If not, then under existing conditions, had we
best drop Federal entirely?
(A) As given, the plans as are set by [
137], if these can be
made satisfactory, with the directorship and with the changes
in the office to handle the business, do so. If they cannot,
then drop Federal entirely - as given.
We are through.
BACKGROUND
See
900-361 on
1/04/28.
REPORTS
3/18/28 See
900-378 expanding on banking information in
900-373.



Edgar Cayce Readings © 1971, 1993, 1994, 1995 by the Edgar Cayce Foundation