Chi84
Premium Member
Can you cite some support for your definition of a “shill company?” It seems you’re describing shell corporations but replacing the word “shell” with “shill.”
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
News Walt Disney Company plans to spend $17 billion at Walt Disney World over the next ten years
- Thread starter wdwmagic
- Start date
By hiding the land purchases behind shill companies, Disney was not known as the true buyer. This secrecy benefited Disney in a couple of ways. 1) They were able to buy land at a low price 2) They were able to buy land from people who might not have normally dealt with an out of state California based corporation. Why else would Disney have done this?
Can someone please let this person use their Google search? Thanks
UNCgolf
Well-Known Member
You missed the point.
That's not what a shill is -- in fact, read your own definition. The point of a shill is to promote something.
A shill, e.g., could be someone who writes a bunch of positive reviews for a product without disclosing that they are being paid for those reviews.
What you are describing is not a shill.
Not just tried to say it, but mocked me for it! Now that’s embarrassing.
Chi84
Premium Member
Yes, but that’s description of a shell corporation. Where did you get the idea that the correct word is “shill?”
Chi84
Premium Member
Please don’t be condescending. More than one person is questioning your use of the word.
You are misinterpreting the definition.
It gave credibility to the buyer, who was secretly walt Disney.
This is why the person planted in an audience such as in Pete's Dragon that gives the Snake Oil Salesman credibility would be called a shill.
It is Shill.
A Shell company is a different term.
Some people never took the MGM Studios Backlot Tour and it shows. ;P
No amount of mansplaning is going to help you with this. Best to let it go…
UNCgolf
Well-Known Member
This is baffling. How is it possible that you understand what a shill is in the Pete's Dragon example but so wildly misapply it to the other situation? They are not remotely the same thing.
UNCgolf
Well-Known Member
I was trying to help you.
When you're wrong about something, you should accept the correction instead of doubling down.
Maybe slow down and it won't baffle you as much?
James Alucobond
Well-Known Member
Literally stated six posts before this. They didn't want buyers to know that a wealthy company was looking to purchase their land because the sellers would then artificially inflate the prices beyond their actual value to fish for a payday. There is nothing illegal about this, and it's done frequently. Furthermore, no one else who has ever done this in the state of Florida has been the subject of targeted legislation from the governor.
Here, I’ll look it up for you:
The definition of Shill: A shill, also called a plant or a stooge, is a person or entity who publicly helps or gives credibility to a person or organization without disclosing that they have a close relationship with said person or organization.
The definition of Shill: A shill, also called a plant or a stooge, is a person or entity who publicly helps or gives credibility to a person or organization without disclosing that they have a close relationship with said person or organization.
Go ahead and share the definition of Shell Corporation or company. I will be happy to do this for you if you put in the effort. It is similar to what I do with my students. But if you won't show listening to reason I am not going to help you.
I don't feel embarrassed at all, so unless you want to keep passively calling me and others ignorant. You can let that go.
BlakeW39
Well-Known Member
it's called a shell company pal. let it go.
a shill can be something mildly similar but it's not used in the context you're trying to use it. i.e. "shell company" yeah find me somewhere someone uses those two terms together like that.
Chi84
Premium Member
There is a difference between a “corporate shill” and a “shell corporation.” Please give me a cite to a credible source that uses “shill corporation” the way it’s being used here. And please no condescending comments about google or mansplaining.
James Alucobond
Well-Known Member
In a similar vein, I would encourage you to present prominent examples where "shill" is used as a noun adjunct. While I can see the argument that the company in question is a shill, the phrase "shill corporation" is not anything that appears in common parlance, and "shill" is generally used as a noun or verb. The phrasing is awkward at best and obviously confusing because of its similarity to an actual turn of phrase in "shell corporation".
Sure. I teach language so you will not hear me use the terms Mansplaining or telling someone aggressively they do not use Google. I do get snappy when people tell me I should be embarrassed or attempt other digs
Yes, a corporate shill is not a term I used. A corporate shill is different to these two terms being debated.
A Shill company is what helped buy Disney's land. You could also call it a proxy buyer. The name of the buyer was a role played. A shill. A ruse.
If you look up any credible source to define Shell Company:
Shell Corporation or Shell Company is a company that is used to avoid taxes or governmental dues and holds no assets. Not for buying or swiping land from sellers. It can be borderline illegal depending on the law of the land. It is a real term, but different than what Walt did. They typically have no legitimate assets.
Using shell companies is to buy land IS NOT illegal.
Using shills to drive up prices in an auction IS illegal.
Disney used shell companies, but did not use shills.
Last edited by a moderator: