Comments Thread For: Judge Rules Against Golden Boy in Its Lawsuit Against Al Haymon

[The Big Dunn]

Stop lying. I never said that. My position has been consistent from Day 1. I believe that Haymons business model runs afoul of the Ali Act, because he is a licensed manager who is controlling promotional event revenue. I believe its obvious that is a violation of the Ali Act. I have never said Haymon stole a dime from anyone. I have a big problem with the obvious conflict of interests, and what it means going forward. Imagine for a second it wasnt Haymon in the drivers seat, but someone else. What if it were King, or Gary Shaw, or someone you dont admire as much?

You are making it about the person. It isnt. Its the model that I object to.

And Im not a hard person to find. I am not so ashamed of my own viewpoints that I have to hide in anonymity on the internet. If Haymons people feel I have slandered them, there is ample remedies they can seek.......

Where does the Ali Act specifically state a fighters adviser or manager can't control revenue from a fight that one of his fighters participates in?

SEC. 5. CONFLICT OF INTEREST.
Section 17 of the Professional Boxing Safety Act of 1996 (15 U.S.C. 6308) (as redesignated by section 4 of this Act) is amended–

(1) in the first sentence by striking `No member’ and inserting `(a) REGULATORY PERSONNEL- No member’; and

(2) by adding at the end the following:

`(b) FIREWALL BETWEEN PROMOTERS AND MANAGERS-

`(1) IN GENERAL- It is unlawful for–

`(A) a promoter to have a direct or indirect financial interest in the management of a boxer; or

`(B) a manager–

`(i) to have a direct or indirect financial interest in the promotion of a boxer; or

`(ii) to be employed by or receive compensation or other benefits from a promoter, except for amounts received as consideration under the manager’s contract with the boxer.

(2) EXCEPTIONS- Paragraph (1)–

`(A) does not prohibit a boxer from acting as his own promoter or manager; and

`(B) only applies to boxers participating in a boxing match of 10 rounds or more.

[OnePunch]

Now you're moving the goal posts. It's finally dawning on you that your fairy tale wasn't true, so now you're trying to shift the argument completely. Before you claimed the business model was that Haymon would profit from minimizing purses. Now you're trying to pull a fast one and shift your claim to it being too risky to trust Haymon not to do that. Which is a completely different argument.




Speak for yourself dude. I've worked for Haymon promoters and unlike you I'm not just dreaming up delusional nonsense. Nobody is alleging Haymon is a non-profit charity. Haymon is a talent manager. He gets his talent the most money possible and takes a percentage of the money. This is very very simple stuff. You're the one conjuring these ludicrous conspiracy theories while offering zero proof and zero evidence.

The promoters testified under oath that they collect the revenue. Which has been brought to your attention over and over and over. But since you're allergic to facts, logic, reason, evidence and proof, you just keep spouting the same insane rantings.

keep dreaming. My argument is the same. The Act prohibits managers from profiting from events because the conflict is OBVIOUS.

Except to you.

[original zero]

Stop lying. I never said that. My position has been consistent from Day 1. I believe that Haymons business model runs afoul of the Ali Act, because he is a licensed manager who is controlling promotional event revenue. I believe its obvious that is a violation of the Ali Act. I have never said Haymon stole a dime from anyone.

Hahahaha, your position hasn't even been consistent TODAY, let alone day one. You were JUST arguing that Haymon profits from minimizing purses and now you've completely switched the argument to him acting appropriately, but you not being comfortable with him having access to funds.

Even though it's already been pointed out to you over and over and over that the promoters testified under oath that they receive the funds.

[OnePunch]

Where does the Ali Act specifically state a fighters adviser or manager can't control revenue from a fight that one of his fighters participates in?

(b) Firewall between promoters and managers
(1) In generalIt is unlawful for—
(A) a promoter to have a direct or indirect financial interest in the management of a boxer; or
(B) a manager—
(i) to have a direct or indirect financial interest in the promotion of a boxer; or
(ii) to be employed by or receive compensation or other benefits from a promoter, except for amounts received as consideration under the manager’s contract with the boxer.

[snoopymiller]

keep dreaming. My argument is the same. The Act prohibits managers from profiting from events because the conflict is OBVIOUS.

Except to you.

You're ******... the Act would never be enforced unless it harmed the fighters.

[b00g13man]

Did Haymon ruin OnePunch or something? Damn!

[original zero]

keep dreaming. My argument is the same. The Act prohibits managers from profiting from events because the conflict is OBVIOUS.

Except to you.

Yes, the act does prohibit that, but that isn't what he's doing and there is zero proof and zero evidence suggesting otherwise.

You can't even keep your argument consistent from one post to the next. You've literally flip flopped your argument back and forth in the last three posts. This is lunacy.

[OnePunch]

Hahahaha, your position hasn't even been consistent TODAY, let alone day one. You were JUST arguing that Haymon profits from minimizing purses and now you've completely switched the argument to him acting appropriately, but you not being comfortable with him having access to funds.

Even though it's already been pointed out to you over and over and over that the promoters testified under oath that they receive the funds.

reading comprehension must not be your strong suit. I said the conflict of interest COULD incentivize a "manager" to pay the fighters less, because 100% is more than 10-15%. That is a conflict of interest, whether you can grasp it or not.

[OnePunch]

Did Haymon ruin OnePunch or something? Damn!

lol I was retired long before he started the PBC....

[original zero]

(B) a manager—
(i) to have a direct or indirect financial interest in the promotion of a boxer; or

he doesn't have a direct or indirect financial interest in the promotion of a boxer. he makes his money from management commissions. he doesn't make any money from the promotion other than his management percentage of the money due to the fighter.

you have zero evidence or proof suggesting otherwise. it's just a conspiracy theory you invented in your head.