Tweet
Originally posted by Hype job
View Post
Bonquisha.............
-
a name like bonquisha is better than any europeon name a nubian could ever have -
so you're suggesting what exactly? I mean i know the thinly veiled references and associations but I WANT TO SEE YOU SAY ITOriginally posted by Malgus View PostI bet Haymon's fans are swinging through trees in excitement.
Comment
-
can you imagine the circle jerk if haymon got owned in court by arum.. Boxing fans i tell yaOriginally posted by bigjavi973 View PostComment
-
-
Looking at that Reddit guys post I don't understand how the below is even a problem.
If Business A offers a better deal to your company than Business B who gives a **** if its profitable for Business A besides the people at Business A. And doesn't that happen all the time that people make ****ty deals? I believe 85% of business fail within the first five years. My assumption is the $ never made sense in most of those 85% & thats why their out of business. If Haymon is overspending than he'll just go outta business eventually. Thats the marketplace at work.1. Anti-Trust Injury. According to the judge, TR has not sufficiently alleged injury to itself. The judge suggests that TR will have to provide factual support that it has been prevented from promoting a bout by Haymon, has been blocked from a venue by Haymon, or has been refused by a network due to Haymon's activities/exclusive contracts. The judge agreed with TR that being "frozen out" of a market by Haymon would be sufficient, but that TR has to allege facts supporting that conclusion. Interestingly, GBP can establish that Haymon has blocked them from all of these things (Mares-Santa Cruz, Stub Hub, Fox). I'm not sure that Top Rank can. They had shows on ESPN and Showtime in the past, perhaps that is enough?
Isn't the strategy Haymon is likely employing similar to WalMarts strategy back in the day? WalMart used to come into towns a take a L on profit to put mom & pop business outta business. Then they went back to market prices (or market prices for WalMart anyway) once the mom & pop's were gone. Haymon is offering more money to fighters seemingly with hopes of acquiring talent & taking up as much TV time as possible. The key to building names is to have them on TV. Right now few can build names by any means except foreign TV, HBO & a handful of open dates on the small handful of TV channels who don't have a deal with Haymon.
And I'll never understand how spending money on TV dates that anyone can spend money on or how acquiring too many fighters is a monopoly. Anyone could've offered the same deal or a better deal & gotten those deals before Haymon. And if Haymon has acquired too many fighters, shouldn't the NFL have to send some guys to the Canadian Football & Arena Leagues or something? Or NBA should be having to send LeBron to China or some offshoot league (is the CBA still around? idk) to play cuz its unfair all the best basketball players are in the NBA? I see nothing wrong with being awesome at your job & getting the best people signing to you. Seems to go against capitalism to me. The phone company was a monopoly...til cellphones came out & now phone companies are losing business & customers left & right. Haymon is more like a cellphone company bringing a better product than he's the phone company who was allowed to stay on top for decades due to monopolistic practices (imo).
Btw, Reddit guy post: https://www.reddit.com/r/Boxing/comm...n_temporarily/ & the motion: https://www.scribd.com/doc/285449958...ainst-Top-Rank if you wanna check out.Comment
-
He's quite wrong imo I think he's looking it from a highly biased position. Haymon does not own a monopoly and he's not techically locking any of these promotions out from the market. He's making deals that each and everyone of them have the ability to make. The strength of their case absolutely dies not lie there. I mean did the ABA sue the NBA when the NBA, the more marketable league, started eating up all.the revenue and top venue spaces? No. It's not enough to just show one business injured another. There has to be some evidence of more than that.Originally posted by Eff Pandas View PostComment
-
Originally posted by IMDAZED View PostYeah I don't think it strengthens GBP's case at all.
But I'm a Floyd stan so what do I know? Except that Manny would end up taking the test, that he would lose to Floyd, that the Mayweather-Showtime deal would be a great one for all involved parties (not some major loss), that Espinoza would not get fired but maybe even promoted and now in spite of what people are saying, that PBC is actually doing quite well. Maybe I'm just dealing in reality, I don't know.
But I digress. GBP has been featured on other networks, has done a lot of business with Haymon and enjoyed exclusitivity contracts with venues, etc. So their argument boils down to the fact that Haymon has moved on and the fighters chose to go with him. Keep in mind that if these fighters didn't have a contract with GBP before the rift, that means Haymon allowed his fighters to work with Golden Boy even though they weren't contracted to. And that case was settled. Only thing that's changed now is that he's doing it with other promoters. I mean the list goes on as far as why GBP's case isn't strengthened (the opposite actually) but what do I know? I'm just a Floyd stan
Originally posted by Kagami Taiga View Post
https://www.reddit.com/r/Boxing/comm...n_temporarily/Originally posted by Eff Pandas View Post
He's been making comments and watching since everything went down last year. Like I said, he said it strengthens GBP's case. I don't know, If you guys can dispute what he's saying then I wouldn't know the difference because I'm not a Lawyer. All I know is this guy has been watching and making comments since last year
While this is not great for Top Rank, this kind of detailed guidance from the judge is useful. TR's biggest (and perhaps only) real hurdle is providing evidence of injury. I'm not sure how TR can do that. However, this will be extremely helpful for GBP. GBP can prove injury and can amend its complaint to follow the judge's instructions to the letter. GBP had already dismissed Waddell without prejudice. Its case is looking much better than TR's right now.
ETA: Top Rank could have proved that they were injured when Haymon stole Chavez Jr from them. Unfortunately, TR settled with Haymon so they won't be able to use it. Not sure it was worth whatever Haymon paid them!Comment
-
It's not enough to prove that they were damaged by Al Haymon's conduct. If that were the case, any company could sue their competitors for providing a better contract. They have to prove that the damages resulted from unlawful conduct. GBP is in the same position, and I doubt they will be successful.
Still, it'll be funny observing how everything plays out.Comment
-
Yeah I've been reading his comments and I don't agree either. But like you, I'm no lawyer, just using my common sense.Originally posted by Hougigo View PostComment
-
He's basically stating whst I'm saying. But saying it gives GBP a chance to amend their complaint I'd not the sane thing as saying it strengthend their complaint. It doesn't. And like I said, GBP certainly dressed their case up a whole lot better. But with that said, their reliance on the Ali act is quite questionable.Originally posted by Hougigo View PostComment
Comment