Comments Thread For: Margules Reacts To Top Rank/Golden Boy Claims on PBC

[Eff Pandas]

His title is all that matters here. Your breakdown is based on two title Manager/Promoter. He is neither. You can say he's acting like both, but you can't prove it. Hell he's more of an HBO than a promoter. He pays promotional outfits to fight on his broadcast dates, He helps with the costs like HBO does, he signs fighters to exclusive contracts like HBO, and helps to big up their name like HBO does. Whats the difference? He doesn't own the network? So what, he owns the broadcast. If HBO isn't in violation of this act then how is Haymon?

As far as the promoters go, they would have to proved that these fighters would've definitely signed with them, which they can't, and that the deals were gotten illegally, which they weren't, as well as the deals would have rightfully went to them, which again they wouldn't.

This is what I've been saying. If Haymon is breaking the rules, HBO has been breaking the rules for decades.

[Sweet Jones]

This is what I've been saying. If Haymon is breaking the rules, HBO has been breaking the rules for decades.

Exactly. This newfound concern for the sanctity of the Ali Act is comical.

[peplz]

Easy, if Haymon is violating the Ali Act to sign an army of fighters some of which who otherwise would be signing to reputable promotional companies like GB or Top Rank that is causing damage. If Haymon is violating the Ali Act to secure TV deals that compete with GB or Top Rank that is causing damage. If Haymon is violating the Ali Act to book venues to shut out GB or Top Rank that is causing damage. You can question the motives behind GB and Top Rank but it's clear to everyone who follows boxing that Haymon is circumventing the Ali Act and is acting as manager and promoter. His fighters think he is a promoter which is why many have referred to him as such. He is handling promoter duties including paying fighters purses something that is illegal for a manager to do.

There is a reason why he doesn't do appearances at his events or grant interviews and it's not because he is shy. It's to avoid having to answer questions about his shady role. There is a reason why many top media outlets and boxing writers have been denied press passes to PBC events. Many of which have been critical about his role. It's because he doesn't want these guys asking hard questions. Imagine if the NFL refused to make Roger Goddell ever speak to the media or he never appeared at any NFL games. And the NFL barred writers who were critical about Goddell from showing up to cover their games.

The Ali Act is not meant to protect promoters from being out maneuvered by managers or other promoters. To say that Al Haymon's business practices have subverted the Ali Act and put the fighters that he represents at possible future risk is one thing. But to say that he is liable to the promoters who willfully have chosen to attempt to blackball and ostresize him is a quantumm leap in the realm of culpability. They all chose to oppose and pit themselves against Al Haymon now they want their big brother in the court house to come take up for them after getting their butts kicked. It's as simple as that.

[MASTERBX]

Winning

No One Can Stop An Idea Whose Time Has Come.
Thank You Al Haymon!

[MC Hammer]

Greg Bishop, New York Times:



http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/18/sp...game.html?_r=0

Kevin Iole, Yahoo:

http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/boxing/main-events-lawsuit-in-stevenson-case-has-potential-to-shake-boxing-to-its-core-000845722.html

Thomas Hauser, BoxingScene:



http://www.boxingscene.com/?m=show&o...table&id=79627

I'm willing to admit when I'm wrong, and you definitely got me about the licensed manager thing. But still they are suing in California, it didn't say anything about him being licensed there. So does a Nevada management license matter in California, and does that mean that necessarily signed on to be each fighters manager