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

[Eff Pandas]

what's the link? I want to read them

https://www.courtlistener.com/docket...v-alan-haymon/

[Motorcity Cobra]

https://www.courtlistener.com/docket...v-alan-haymon/

Just glanced at it. FUCK! Can't imagine the legal fees for all of that. You think Haymon is gonna go after Golden Boy to recoup some of the legal fees?

[Eff Pandas]

Just glanced at it. FUCK! Can't imagine the legal fees for all of that. You think Haymon is gonna go after Golden Boy to recoup some of the legal fees?

I believe I heard them mention on Sunday Puncher that you can't in these types of cases apparently or you can only get a minimal amount back or covered or something like that. I don't remember exactly. But yea I'm sure these cost a ton of f#cking money for both sides with how expensive lawyers are & all the work that went into this. Sh^t same thing with the Arum case.

Also for the deniers Haymon says he waived his management fees during PBC's run so that bs thats been put to bed a couple times can be put to bed completely since GBP's people have obviously seen the documents or they'd have busted Haymon on the stand about that.

He also mentions that someone (anyone know who?) he manages signed with DiBella despite being told it was not in his best interest & was allowed to sign with DiBella.

[Motorcity Cobra]

I believe I heard them mention on Sunday Puncher that you can't in these types of cases apparently or you can only get a minimal amount back or covered or something like that. I don't remember exactly. But yea I'm sure these cost a ton of f#cking money for both sides with how expensive lawyers are & all the work that went into this. Sh^t same thing with the Arum case.

Also for the deniers Haymon says he waived his management fees during PBC's run so that bs thats been put to bed a couple times can be put to bed completely since GBP's people have obviously seen the documents or they'd have busted Haymon on the stand about that.

He also mentions that someone (anyone know who?) he manages signed with DiBella despite being told it was not in his best interest & was allowed to sign with DiBella.

His lawyer said Haymon is entitled to go after some of the court costs like disposition costs but not lawyer fees.

[Eff Pandas]

His lawyer said Haymon is entitled to go after some of the court costs like disposition costs but not lawyer fees.

Yea that sounds about right. I'm guessing disposition costs are a small expense vs the lawyer expenses. Its possible it might not even be worth the trouble if you got to retain lawyers to go after those expenses lol, but idk much about that so maybe you or someone else can correct me.

[mbase1235]

yes, I read that too. It says they "collect" it. The same way a Walmart cashier "collects" your money at the register. But they dont get to keep it. Think about it for a second. Since the promoter is being paid a flat-fee, who ultimately gets the revenue? If I tell you Im going to pay you $500k to run an event, and you collected $2.4 million in ticket sales and rights fees / commercials, after the expenses get paid do you think the "promoter" gets to keep the difference even though he already got his 500k?

wrong genius. All the judge said was that Golden Boy couldnt prove THEY were "damaged" by Haymons conduct.

Big difference. At least to people with an education past the 7th grade.

This case has been settled. The judge addressed both the alleged harm to Golden Boy, and more to the point of the argument on this thread, the judge also addressed Haymon's alleged violation of the Ali Act. The judge commented on and ruled against both charges, found both charges lacking, and dismissed the case, stating in the process that all Golden Boy did was harm itself in the process of suing Haymon.

The court obviously had access to a lot more evidence that we have and these judges and lawyers are more qualified to interpret and argue the law. The arguments on this forum are really going nowhere. We can all claim that the judge was wrong, inept, a hack or whatever. Both parties presented their case and Haymon won.

http://www.latimes.com/sports/boxing...126-story.html

A federal judge in Los Angeles Thursday dismissed the lawsuit by Oscar De La Hoya’s Golden Boy Promotions claiming that rival manager Al Haymon had engaged in monopolistic practices with his Premier Boxing Champions operation.

“Plaintiffs have been unable to present any evidence of harm to competition,” U.S. District Judge John F. Walter wrote at the close of his 24-page decision. “Instead, plaintiffs have merely presented evidence of harm to themselves.”….


…Golden Boy sought more than $300 million in the lawsuit, filed in 2015, which claimed Haymon sought to tie fighters up in extended exclusionary contracts with him while discouraging the boxers from promotional contracts….

Golden Boy additionally claimed Haymon, while assembling a 200-fighter stable, was “acting as both a boxing manager and promoter in violation of the Muhammad Ali Boxing Reform Act, engaging in predatory pricing by “reversing the ordinary flow of money from the network to the promoter, and instead buying air time on key television networks; and blocking access to venues for boxing bouts.”

Judge Walter noted that Golden Boy produced successful cards as the lawsuit was pending, including the lucrative Canelo Alvarez-Amir Khan fight in 2016 and the agreement this year with Haymon to stage an Alvarez bout against Haymon’s Julio Cesar Chavez Jr. in May, a bout hyped as “the biggest all-Mexican fight in boxing history.”

The judge additionally found that neither Fox nor ABC were precluded from broadcasting fights from other promoters despite their connections to PBC, and he noted Golden Boy and ESPN have entered into a new broadcast deal.

He also addressed the Ali Act violation claims and Golden Boy claims that Haymon manipulated “sham promoters.”

“Notwithstanding plaintiffs’ pejorative label, the promoters that work with the PBC vehemently disagree that they are ‘sham’ promoters,” Walter wrote.

“They have testified that their duties are substantially the same as their duties for non-PBC events, which include, for example: maximizing event revenues and generating media attention for the event; coordinating with the pertinent state boxing commission regarding the promoter’s various safety, financial, and technical obligations, including by ensuring the presence of medical personnel and safety equipment; executing bout agreements with the boxer, negotiating and entering into the venue agreement and pertinent sponsorship agreements, selling tickets, assisting with television production elements, and collecting the proceeds from ticket sales, gate revenue, and local sponsorship sales.

“In the cases where the television networks pay a license fee, the promoters collect those fees as well. The so-called ‘sham’ promoters are also responsible for overseeing the creation of advertising for the event and purchasing targeted advertising in various forms of the media. In addition, the promoters for PBC events handle event logistics, including travel, accommodations, and on-site coordination with the fighters, their camps, the media, and all other stakeholders.”

Walter wrote, “The court concludes that [Golden Boy has] failed to properly define the market, or show that there are significant barriers to entry in that market.”

While the PBC stable remains strong, Haymon has been required to assist on some premium-cable license fees to fighters to help stage fights like Saturday’s Carl Frampton-Leo Santa Cruz, Dejan Zlaticanin-Mikey Garcia doubleheader of title fights on Showtime too.

Judge Walter summarized his decision by writing, “It can’t be said often enough that the antitrust laws protect competition, not competitors. … [C]ompetition is essential to the effective operation of the free market because it encourages efficiency, promotes consumer satisfaction and prevents the accumulation of monopoly profits.

“When a producer is shielded from competition, he is likely to provide lesser service at a higher price; the victim is the consumer who gets a raw deal. This is the evil the antitrust laws are meant to avert. But when a producer deters competitors by supplying a better product at a lower price, when he eschews monopoly profits, when he operates his business so as to meet consumer demand and increase consumer satisfaction, the goals of competition are served. … While the successful competitor should not be raised above the law, neither should he be held down by the law.”

[Kigali]

His lawyer said Haymon is entitled to go after some of the court costs like disposition costs but not lawyer fees.

Please drop that ghetto ass siggy

Come on

You're better than that.