Comments Thread For: Peter Nelson Named Executive Vice President, HBO Sports

[OnePunch]

The link I posted is the most comprehensive article on PBC to date, one sourced from Ryan Caldwell, who facilitated the deal. As far as I know, it's still the only interview granted by any major player on the Haymon/W&R side. So unless you think they did the interview and then allowed him to post a blatant lie (after going through great lengths to keep interviews at a minimum), the answer is right in front of your face. Yeah, that's my source. What's yours?

I just dont think the article says what you think it says. People can interpret vague statements in different ways. Shocking concept, I know....

As to "source".........

uhmmmm, Im not the one claiming Haymon is kicking management fees to Waddell.

Maybe you dont know how this works, but usually the burden of providing a source falls on the person making the claim........

[IMDAZED]

uhmmmm, Im not the one claiming Haymon is kicking management fees to Waddell.

Maybe you dont know how this works, but usually the burden of providing a source falls on the person making the claim........

You're right. You aren't. Bill King wrote it in the article I linked. The article where Ryan Caldwell (who co-managed the fund) was interviewed. Also in that link, in case you missed it, King writes, "With Haymon's approval, however, Caldwell and Reed agreed to discuss the venture with SportsBusiness Journal, but declined to reveal financials." Which is why King writes who gets the revenue, but not the split. But...he's lying according to you. Which of course was sourced from your rear.

[OnePunch]

You're right. You aren't. Bill King wrote it in the article I linked. The article where Ryan Caldwell (who co-managed the fund) was interviewed. Also in that link, in case you missed it, King writes, "With Haymon's approval, however, Caldwell and Reed agreed to discuss the venture with SportsBusiness Journal, but declined to reveal financials." Which is why King writes who gets the revenue, but not the split. But...he's lying according to you. Which of course was sourced from your rear.

He did?? I must have missed that part. Maybe he used an invisible font.

[IMDAZED]

He did?? I must have missed that part. Maybe he used an invisible font.

Not invisible. I believe you tried to pretend it was really, really hard english to understand.

[OnePunch]

Not invisible. I believe you tried to pretend it was really, really hard english to understand.

in other words, you dont know. You are pretty good at replying without actually saying anything. Might want to consider a career in politics......

[IMDAZED]

in other words, you dont know. You are pretty good at replying without actually saying anything. Might want to consider a career in politics......

I don't know what? That you thought it was really hard english? You read all three lines and spent a whole post talking about how ambiguous it was. I guess if that was difficult for you, it isn't hard to see why the subsequent posts went way over your head. Anyway, like it or not, it's sourced from the only person W&R allowed to speak to the media. We don't know what the split is. And that's that.

[OnePunch]

You're really losing your grip on reality here. Al Haymon is a person. Al Haymon's company manages fighters. A group invested in that company. "PBC" *IS THE NAME OF A TV SHOW.* W&R are invested in Haymon's management en******. Management commissions go TO THE COMPANY, a company which W&R owns an UNKNOWN percentage of.

What exactly did you think W&R was investing in? That they were just giving Haymon $500 million but that Haymon would still get to keep 100% of his business?

What is it that you do for a living that you are so clueless about how the real world works?

I give up. Too many Fortune 500 businessmen here who know every ****ing thing. You dont have the first clue about how the Haymon/Waddell deal is structured. You are making assumptions, and treating them as fact. Im saying "I dont know, please provide source". you 2 clowns are saying "dont need no source, we are experts and know everything"

cool. whatever.



but but but Haymon Live Nation deal doe

[OnePunch]

This is common sense stuff. Owning a Fortune 500 company isn't required to understand the concept of someone investing in your company. They give you money, you give them an ownership stake. Were you not aware that's how business works?

Why do you refuse to answer any of my questions?

You seem to panic and run if asked what you do for a living. Why?

lol, if you say so. I figured the conversation was over. You're the big expert know-it-all, and had spoken. I assumed there was nothing else to say.

As to what I do / did for a living, you obviously have no real interest, and are only looking to cast insults to make yourself feel superior, but fine, I'll play along. Ive done alot of things over the years. Ad agency work, owned a printing business, dabbled in real estate, mortgages, and private equity, promoted fights for 12 years, and now Im at a place in life where I do pretty much whatever I feel like doing. Currently I own a small furniture store that family members help me run, and I do a few other things on the side here and there when I feel like it. Life is good.

[OnePunch]

Terry -

Has nothing to do with wanting to feel superior. I was a fan of your shows and attended several of them. I personally have always felt it was unwise to promote boxing, which is why (at least in this state), I've always stuck with wrestling. I was on your side 100% though and loved when you called the commission out. Clearly you ran shows because you were passionate about the sport and that's admirable. Personally, I think fighting (all forms) is silly, but if there is money to be made, I'm interested.

But my point is simply that someone in your shoes, with business experience, should be smart enough to realize that W&R was getting a stake (most likely sizable) for their $500 million. Did you think it was just charity on their part? What did you think they were putting the money up for?

Unless you're just so anti-Haymon that your view of the situation is clouded. Otherwise, I can't figure out how someone who has had success in several industries like you have, and someone who ran great shows, can't see the relatively simple arrangement between Haymon and W&R, an arrangement they went on the record about (while wisely declining to reveal the split).

that whole other debate was more about IMDAZED simply wanting to argue with me. OF COURSE Waddell Reed arent in the charity business. My whole point is that nobody knows how their deal is structured, and those guys were trying to claim that Haymon is kicking 100% of his management fees to Waddell, which is a ******ed premise.

Bottom line is nobody knows how the deal is structured, or what assets/en****** Waddell has a piece of. Haymon has twisted the thing up across a half-dozen companies. It would probably take an SEC investigative team to figure it out.

To me it depends on what Waddell considers to be the biggest viable "asset". Is it the PBC brand? The potential advertisers / content buyers? The management fees? Some combination of all? Nobody knows. Yet people, wanting to prove how smart they are, think they can decipher the internal structure of the whole thing via one opaque line in a news story. The whole thing was absurd. And if it hadnt been such a boring evening with me stuck at the computer doing other stuff, he would have gotten 2 replies and that would have been the end of it.


And as for shows, on the club level there is no money in it. I did them because I enjoyed it, and I didnt care if it lost 5 grand or whatever per show. I was having fun. When it stopped being fun, and all my contractural obligations had been met, I stopped doing them. Towards the end, I enjoyed going out and doing the site coordination for Shaw, or Golden Boy, King, or whoever, more than I enjoyed doing shows. Go out on Wednesday, back home on Sunday, with no stress lol

[IMDAZED]

that whole other debate was more about IMDAZED simply wanting to argue with me. OF COURSE Waddell Reed arent in the charity business. My whole point is that nobody knows how their deal is structured, and those guys were trying to claim that Haymon is kicking 100% of his management fees to Waddell, which is a ******ed premise.

Bottom line is nobody knows how the deal is structured, or what assets/en****** Waddell has a piece of. Haymon has twisted the thing up across a half-dozen companies. It would probably take an SEC investigative team to figure it out.

To me it depends on what Waddell considers to be the biggest viable "asset". Is it the PBC brand? The potential advertisers / content buyers? The management fees? Some combination of all? Nobody knows. Yet people, wanting to prove how smart they are, think they can decipher the internal structure of the whole thing via one opaque line in a news story. The whole thing was absurd. And if it hadnt been such a boring evening with me stuck at the computer doing other stuff, he would have gotten 2 replies and that would have been the end of it.


And as for shows, on the club level there is no money in it. I did them because I enjoyed it, and I didnt care if it lost 5 grand or whatever per show. I was having fun. When it stopped being fun, and all my contractural obligations had been met, I stopped doing them. Towards the end, I enjoyed going out and doing the site coordination for Shaw, or Golden Boy, King, or whoever, more than I enjoyed doing shows. Go out on Wednesday, back home on Sunday, with no stress lol

Nope. Wasn't trying to claim it all went to Waddell and Reed. Said the opposite multiple times. How pighead are you? Accept you were wrong and move on.