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

[snoopymiller]

Not trolling. We've already established that you're nuts. Very understandable that it would cause you to assume that others are the problem.




Depends on your definition of control. If a huge rock band has the leverage to negotiate a sweetheart deal with Live Nation where the band's manager makes most of the decisions and negotiates a 90/10 split in favor of the performer, who really is in control? But it's still a Live Nation event. And the manager isn't making a cent beyong their management commission. That is literally their job. Generate as much revenue as possible for the performer and then take a commission on that revenue.




I don't have to prove a negative. You are the one making allegations of massive fraud without a shred of evidence or proof.

Terry's problem is that he doesn't understand Haymon's business strategy at all.

He cannot fathom how it will work and that's why it bothers him to no end. Others can figure it out rather easily.

[original zero]

well the judge said its a flat fee. So I guess he's wrong or ******.

Depends on your interpretation of "flat fee." A truly flat fee would be a set dollar amount regardless of anything else. That isn't how it works. Judge wrote flat fee + reimbursements. Which allows a little more creativity with the numbers.

So as always, it was actually you that was wrong and ******.

Haymon wasn't going to explain any more about his operations than absolutely necessary. It was a frivolous lawsuit filed in hopes of learning more about how he operates.

And you're playing dumb to try to get me to open up more about how he operates since you know I'm friends with one of his promoters. Not going to do it. Not going to post checks or any other nonsense you request.

You're the one making these outlandish accusations without and proof or evidence. Haymon violating the Ali act is a figment of your imagination.

[snoopymiller]

Depends on your interpretation of "flat fee." A truly flat fee would be a set dollar amount regardless of anything else. That isn't how it works. Judge wrote flat fee + reimbursements. Which allows a little more creativity with the numbers.

So as always, it was actually you that was wrong and ******.

Haymon wasn't going to explain any more about his operations than absolutely necessary. It was a frivolous lawsuit filed in hopes of learning more about how he operates.

And you're playing dumb to try to get me to open up more about how he operates since you know I'm friends with one of his promoters. Not going to do it. Not going to post checks or any other nonsense you request.

You're the one making these outlandish accusations without and proof or evidence. Haymon violating the Ali act is a figment of your imagination.

In the bigger picture he is violating the Ali act based on minor technicalities but he would never get prosecuted for it. He is merely going over the top of everyone lol

[OnePunch]

Depends on your interpretation of "flat fee." A truly flat fee would be a set dollar amount regardless of anything else. That isn't how it works. Judge wrote flat fee + reimbursements. Which allows a little more creativity with the numbers.

So as always, it was actually you that was wrong and ******.

Haymon wasn't going to explain any more about his operations than absolutely necessary. It was a frivolous lawsuit filed in hopes of learning more about how he operates.

And you're playing dumb to try to get me to open up more about how he operates since you know I'm friends with one of his promoters. Not going to do it. Not going to post checks or any other nonsense you request.

You're the one making these outlandish accusations without and proof or evidence. Haymon violating the Ali act is a figment of your imagination.

Wrong. As usual you overstate your own importance.

Even if you take "potential profit" out of the equation, Haymon guaranteeing a fee to a "promoter" establishes a financial interest in the promotion. The Ali Act says that is a no no. Believe what you wish.

And it goes without saying that expecting an unbiased interpretation from someone (your friend) who is profiting from this arrangement is a fools errand.

No point in going any further, as this has devolved into schoolyard name calling.

[IMDAZED]

he is a licensed manager who has a financial interest in the promotional activities of his clients. The law states that is a no-no.

And its great that Haymon is playing Santa Claus, and being the "irrational player" who overpays everyone and puts smiley faces on their checks, but at some point he will have to transition to being more "rational"

Lets see if the love fest continues at that point......

I don't know if that's any better than making a ton of assumptions to conclude he's doing something nefarious. Why even do that?

[OnePunch]

In the bigger picture he is violating the Ali act based on minor technicalities but he would never get prosecuted for it. He is merely going over the top of everyone lol

on this point I agree. Unless the Justice Dept. sees a big deep-pocketed corporate entity (CarGill, Bank of America, etc) that they can extract "penalties" from, I do not expect them to get involved. The Act went into place over 15 years ago and they have never brought a single case......

[snoopymiller]

Wrong. As usual you overstate your own importance.

Even if you take "potential profit" out of the equation, Haymon guaranteeing a fee to a "promoter" establishes a financial interest in the promotion. The Ali Act says that is a no no. Believe what you wish.

And it goes without saying that expecting an unbiased interpretation from someone (your friend) who is profiting from this arrangement is a fools errand.

No point in going any further, as this has devolved into schoolyard name calling.

Just curious Terry... what is the biggest show you're put on in which you been the sole promoter?

[snoopymiller]

on this point I agree. Unless the Justice Dept. sees a big deep-pocketed corporate entity (CarGill, Bank of America, etc) that they can extract "penalties" from, I do not expect them to get involved. The Act went into place over 15 years ago and they have never brought a single case......

And that's the entire point... to state that there is no violation is absurd but to state that he should be prosecuted for it when there has been no harm to the fighters thus far is equally unrealistic.

[OnePunch]

Just curious Terry... what is the biggest show you're put on in which you been the sole promoter?

As the lead promoter the largest shows I did were several ESPN 2 cards.

On the Showtime, HBO, and HBO PPV shows I was involved in I was only a co-promoter. Gary Shaw, Golden Boy, and Star Boxing were the lead promoters on those shows....

[snoopymiller]

As the lead promoter the largest shows I did were several ESPN 2 cards.

On the Showtime, HBO, and HBO PPV shows I was involved in I was only a co-promoter. Gary Shaw, Golden Boy, and Star Boxing were the lead promoters on those shows....

That explains your perspective...

The focus of making small profits on each show. It's not a horrible business model but it is extremely limiting based on dependence on the top end budgets.