Why was Raley's going bankrupt in 1973? Because the top three (3) men that were responsible for running Tom Raley's company in 1973 had very little experience in the grocery business. Back to top
	Why did Tom Raley have such inexperienced men running his stores in 1973? Probably because he knew his company was going to go bankrupt. Mr. Raley also knew that anybody with something on the ball surely didn't want to be associated with a chain of stores that was soon to be bankrupt. It appeared that a lot of individuals (those with some talent) were jumping ship a few years before Charles Nordby came onto the scene. And by that time, all that were left were Raley's faithful. Back to top
	Were there other contributing factors to why Raley's was going bankrupt? Yes, most of the major suppliers to Raley's in 1973 were (dishonestly) over charging Raley's large sums of money. Plus, Raley's stores were not being managed properly. Stores were filthy, thieve ridden, and many of Raley's own employee's were stealing large sums of money and merchandise. Add on the fact that the perishable departments were not being efficiently managed. Back to top
	Where was Tom Raley in 1973 when Raley's hired Charles Nordby? There really isn't much information pertaining to Tom Raley's whereabouts in 1973. However, according to documents filed in Nevada in 1973, Mr.Raley, along with Charles Collings and James Teel, were involved in a chain of grocery stores called "Eagle Thrifty." What is strange about all of this is the fact that Mr. Tom Raley never knew Charles Nordby, and Charles Nordby was hired right about the same time as the Eagle Thrifty stores were being taken over by Raley's. Plus, Charles Nordby was never even told about the Eagle Thrifty stores until months after he was hired to troubleshoot their Raley's stores. Back to top
	Why didn't Tom Raley know Charles Nordby in 1973? Based on the fact that Charles Collings defrauded Charles Nordby, it was probably very important for Mr. Collings to keep hidden from Tom Raley the employment of Charles Nordby. Back to top
	Why didn't Mr. Collings want Tom Raley to know who Charles Nordby was? Shortly after Mr. Nordby started to implement his profit increasing program at the six (6) stores that Raley's had given to Mr. Nordby to test his program, Mr. Nordby soon began uncovering where Raley's suppliers were stealing large sums of money from Raley's stores. Thefts that should have been uncovered by any competent bookkeeping department. Mr. Collings, being in charge of Raley's bookkeeping department for many years was humiliated by the fact that so many suppliers were stealing right underneath his nose. Also, Mr. Collings knew that just about everything that Charles Nordby discovered that was wrong with Raley's operation led straight to Mr. Collings desk. Would you want your boss to know how incompetent you are? That's probably the #1 reason why Mr. Collings didn't want Mr. Raley to know who Charles Nordby was. To see just how enept Mr. Collings was as president of Raley's, go to "Mr. Nordby's Resignation Letter" page. Back to top
	Why were so many of Raley's suppliers cheating Raley's back in 1973? It was Charles Nordby's belief that because Raley's owed these suppliers large sums of money, it would be prudent for these suppliers to get their money back from Raley's through dishonest invoicing in case Raley's filed for bankruptcy. These suppliers probably realized that once Raley's filed for bankruptcy, their chances of being fully paid would be diminished. These suppliers knew how to cheat Raley's because nobody in Raley's operation had the experience necessary to uncover their many ways to cheat on the invoices. Go to the "Dishonest Deli Supplier" page on this web site to see how one supplier was able to cheat Raley's in every which way possible. Back to top
	If rumors were circulating that Raley's was about to go bankrupt, why did Charles Nordby contact Raley's in the first place? While the word going around at this time in 1973 that Raley's was about to be taken over by another retailer was only a rumor, Mr. Nordby focused his attention on getting his program implemented into the Raley stores. His program was designed for grocers with low gross margins, and Raley's at this time were probably losing large sums of money throughout their operation. And after his initial contact with the three (3) men running Raley's, they didn't seem to indicate to him that they were on the verge of bankruptcy. Although, as the time went by, Charles Nordby realized by the amount of theft and mismanagement that he uncovered going on at all of the Raley's stores in 1973, that had he not been there to troubleshoot their stores, it would have been only a matter of time before the doors to all of the Raley's stores would have to be closed. However, what really caught Mr. Nordby by surprise was being told by Mr. Collings that Raley's weren't able to pay for the newly installed security windows that were fitted into the Raley stores. Back to top
	Why did Tom Raley promote Charles Collings president in 1969? It is not completely clear why Tom Raley promoted Charles Collings to be president of his company in 1969. However, knowing that Jim Teel (Mr. Raley's son-in-law) seemed to be Mr. Raley's best choice for a promotion during this time period (1969), Mr. Raley's decision to promote Mr. Collings didn't make a whole lot of sense if Raley's financial health was good at the time. Tom Raley had a progression of promotions for Jim Teel during the 60's, and if Raley's was healthy financially in 1969, Jim Teel seemed like the best man to be promoted to President. The fact that Mr. Collings was the man in charge in 1973 might suggest that Tom Raley also wanted to make sure his son-in-law Jim wasn't the top man when his stores went bankrupt. Having Mr. Collings at the helm in 1973 might also suggest that Tom Raley needed a good con artist to help deceive Raley's suppliers into believing that everything at Raley's was fine and that they were in good financial shape. Back to top
	Was Tom Raley a millionaire before he bought the Eagle Thrifty stores in Nevada? Based on the Sac Bee newspaper article published in June of 1973, Tom Raley bought the Eagle Thrifty stores with cash. Raley's 1989 history book stated that the Eagle Thrifty chain required 3.5 million dollars. So this information alone indicated that Tom Raley was a millionaire when he bought the Eagle Thrifty in 1973. However, Raley's history book stated that this Eagle thrifty purchase, that Tom Raley made in 1973, was the big gamble that made Tom Raley a millionaire several times over. So truthfully speaking, Tom Raley couldn't have been a millionaire back in June of 1973 if buying these stores made him a millionaire several times over. In fact, Raley's history book stated that it took three years for Raley's to pay off this $3.5 million purchase. The Eagle Thrifty purchase was just a scam for Chuck Collings and Jim Teel to obtain some quick cash from a chain of stores that they were going to bankrupt! Check out the information found on the "Eagle Thrifty $10" page and see for yourself some real questionable activities going on after Chuck Collings, Jim Teel, and supposedly Tom Raley, set up the Eagle Thrifty Corporation in Nevada! Back to top
	Why did Charles Nordby quit Raley's? Mr. Nordby quit Raley's because he could no longer associate himself with an individual that claimed to be a Christian, claiming his word was his bond, and yet reneged on his promises made to Mr. Nordby concerning being rewarded with monetary bonuses if his profit increasing program would increase Raley's profits. Back to top
	How profitable was Mr. Nordby's program to Raley's for the first year? The profits were tripled what Mr. Nordby had promised Raley's for the first year. Today, Raley's is worth over $1.1 billion dollars...Not bad for a company that had a value of less than one (1) dollar in 1973. Back to top
	Raley's value in 1973? It was in Charles Nordby's opinion that Raley's grocery stores had a value of less than $1 when he approached Raley's in 1973. Back to top
	How many people do you believe actually think that Charles Collings didn't cheat Charles Nordby? There might be just one person. And that person being Pastor Glen Cole. Pastor Glen Cole might have an attitude that whoever is capable of buying Mr. Cole the most expensive lunch is probably the person telling the truth. Mr. Cole might even know of a Bible scripture that brings home that message. Back to top
	Why didn't Raley's sue Charles Nordby? Because Raley's were probably advised by there attorney's that once they sued, Charles Nordby would be able to obtain discovery. Plus, Raley's has been so dishonest over the years, it would probably be very disturbing for the public to find out all the dishonest shenanigans that Raley's has been involved in over the years. Back to top
	Why didn't the news media report this story to the public? The number one reason is because they too were embarrassed by this story. News media celebrities and Religious leaders had friendships with Chuck Collings, Joyce Raley Teel and they weren't going to allow an unknown person by the name of Charles Nordby to expose the big lie going on in Sacramento. Stan Atkinson, Glen Cole, Louis Neely, and the rest of them should be ashamed of themselves for assisting Raley's in denying Charles Nordby his pursuit for justice. Back to top
	What is a "Conspiracy of Silence." Webster's Dictionary: a secret agreement to keep silent about an occurrence, situation, or subject especially in order to promote or protect selfish interests. From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia The expression conspiracy of silence, or culture of silence, relates to a condition or matter which is known to exist, but by tacit communal unspoken consensus is not talked about or acknowledged. Commonly such matters are considered culturally shameful. Back to top
	What are the effects of "Conspiracy of Silence?" A conspiracy of silence in some field, has effects at many levels: Those who are directly suffering, or causing others to suffer, perpetuate their cycle of harm and suffering. Those who have suffered have their suffering extended by having their condition ignored or minimized, and are not considered seriously or redressed appropriately. Lessons that might be learned for future are not learned. Back to top