Determine 'equivalent?'

[Trevor]

Ah. Thank you so much for addressing my issue! Thank you!(Yes. I understand Jack has an insurance/landlord background.)An attorney for the Departing Partner drafted the contract.Y'know, I honestly thought "equivalent" meant "other than cash" in this particular situation. We had a partially bartering type of relationship with Deadbeat Client. For example, we would run ads for trade shows in our magazine, and in turn, the Deadbeats would get a "free" booth at the trade show... that type of thing.I honestly thought "equivalent" in this context meant if they gave us software or plane tickets or something of that sort in lieu of cash. That fits my definition of "equivalent." I just cannot see how doing new work and getting paid for that work is logically or mathematically "equivalent." I do see your point about "what funds were meant to qualify..." Yes. It's ambiguous. The exact wording in the contract for this provision is:[___________(Remaining Partners) hold harmless and indemnify (Departing Partner) from any obligation, liability, indebtedness or payment which may be due to the SBA, (Bank X) or any other authority for any obligation, indebtedness or liability of the Partnership; provided, however, that until such time as the receivables set forth on Exhibit A, or such equivalent amount has been collected by the Partnership, (Departing Partner) consents and agrees to remain liable for an amount equal to 1/3 of the $55,000 existing liability to the SBA. __________]I find this to be utterly fascinating. To me, it's as if I had a 160 hour per month job that paid $10 per hour. At the end of January, my boss comes to me and says: "Bad news... can't make January payroll, but the good news is, if you work double time in Feb., you'll come out even and wind up with the "equivalent" of what you would have gotten! Cool, right?" Noooo. Not cool. I will have worked 480 hours for my $3200, which means for two months, I was only making $6.66 per hour. Clearly NOT equivalent.How is my sitch different from that analogy?How could having to go out and earn new money be "equivalent" to being paid for past invoices? How does that even qualify as "consideration?" -- earning my own additional money without assistance from Departing Partner. ???(Thanx again for engaging in this nutty discussion!)

[Filbert]

Well, I suppose I view it in this way: State I owe you 0. Scenario A-- I provide you five CDs having a worth of $10 each being an "equivalent."Situation B -- I inform you I can't spend you back the 0, but rather, you may come around and cut my garden four-times, and that I'll provide you $25 every time, and we are all square.Because in situation W, I'm you. And, I am not ok with needing to re-generate my own personal cash. By reasoning and by math, this isn't an "equal" scenario. I'm not gathering my unique 0 here.If it is "anything gained and gathered" (as opposed to the particular invoices) why did they have to listing the invoices? And so I might request you, "why create the difference, certainly???"I dunno... It generally does not seem that simple in my experience?