mjforever
Speechless
Michael jackson die Legende lebt für immer
Posts: 18
|
Post by mjforever on Apr 27, 2018 20:27:53 GMT
There may have been a reason why Michael Jackson fired John Branca in 2006 and that jz proves himself slowly Example: Michael Jackson fought to the death to keep his ATV catalog share and John this bastard just sold him Sony dan makes ehr his job not decent it will still be worse and depressing senseless project 2017 and the next time probably also meaningless projects
|
|
|
Post by Vega on Apr 28, 2018 0:44:43 GMT
It's all about the scrilla at this point, pal.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 28, 2018 6:33:52 GMT
"Michael" released 2010
#neverforget
|
|
|
Post by HIStoric on Apr 28, 2018 14:38:53 GMT
Do you actually have any clue as to how the sale of the ATV catalogue share happened? You sound like one of those people who thinks they did it voluntarily when really they were forced.
Here's quickly what happened: In 2006 Michael Jackson and Sony signed an agreement that involved a shotgun clause. Basically, either party could enact a clause that would allow them to buy out the other half's portion of the catalogue, however once enacted, the other party would have the option to buy out the first parties share. In this case, one party is going to get it all.
Sony enacted this clause a few years ago. This meant that the Estate of Michael Jackson had to come up with $750,000,000 to buy out Sony's half of the catalogue, or sell the catalogue to Sony for $750,000,000. It goes without saying this is an insanely ridiculous amount of money and it would be very, very difficult for the Estate to raise this kind of money. There was literally no way around it, this is a direct result of the deal Michael signed with Sony in order to not go bankrupt. Sony could've enacted the clause in the last year or two of Michael's life if they wanted to and the same result would've happened because Mike wasn't in that great of a financial position.
|
|
mjforever
Speechless
Michael jackson die Legende lebt für immer
Posts: 18
|
Post by mjforever on Apr 29, 2018 20:44:44 GMT
Do you actually have any clue as to how the sale of the ATV catalogue share happened? You sound like one of those people who thinks they did it voluntarily when really they were forced. Here's quickly what happened: In 2006 Michael Jackson and Sony signed an agreement that involved a shotgun clause. Basically, either party could enact a clause that would allow them to buy out the other half's portion of the catalogue, however once enacted, the other party would have the option to buy out the first parties share. In this case, one party is going to get it all. Sony enacted this clause a few years ago. This meant that the Estate of Michael Jackson had to come up with $750,000,000 to buy out Sony's half of the catalogue, or sell the catalogue to Sony for $750,000,000. It goes without saying this is an insanely ridiculous amount of money and it would be very, very difficult for the Estate to raise this kind of money. There was literally no way around it, this is a direct result of the deal Michael signed with Sony in order to not go bankrupt. Sony could've enacted the clause in the last year or two of Michael's life if they wanted to and the same result would've happened because Mike wasn't in that great of a financial position. Exactly this is again the portrayal of John Branca true to Michael Jackson's lifetime attorney, in which it should not have come so far that Michael was in such a position in the last few years, sure there are more responsible ones but John Branca is one of them
|
|
|
Post by HIStoric on Apr 29, 2018 23:13:59 GMT
Do you actually have any clue as to how the sale of the ATV catalogue share happened? You sound like one of those people who thinks they did it voluntarily when really they were forced. Here's quickly what happened: In 2006 Michael Jackson and Sony signed an agreement that involved a shotgun clause. Basically, either party could enact a clause that would allow them to buy out the other half's portion of the catalogue, however once enacted, the other party would have the option to buy out the first parties share. In this case, one party is going to get it all. Sony enacted this clause a few years ago. This meant that the Estate of Michael Jackson had to come up with $750,000,000 to buy out Sony's half of the catalogue, or sell the catalogue to Sony for $750,000,000. It goes without saying this is an insanely ridiculous amount of money and it would be very, very difficult for the Estate to raise this kind of money. There was literally no way around it, this is a direct result of the deal Michael signed with Sony in order to not go bankrupt. Sony could've enacted the clause in the last year or two of Michael's life if they wanted to and the same result would've happened because Mike wasn't in that great of a financial position. Exactly this is again the portrayal of John Branca true to Michael Jackson's lifetime attorney, in which it should not have come so far that Michael was in such a position in the last few years, sure there are more responsible ones but John Branca is one of them Ignoring the fact that it was Branca who negotiated on Michael's behalf to get the catalogue in the first place, at the end of the day the ultimate responsibility for Michael Jackson's financial situation is Michael himself and who he chooses to listen to - which was more than just Branca. Branca actually did speak up about the 2006 deal because he did not trust the advisors working with Michael on this deal, yet Michael chose to continue working with these advisors instead. This disagreement resulted in Branca and Michael parting ways in 2006 - but on good terms. Ultimately, it was Michael Jackson who signed the agreement and agreed to the shotgun clause so that was in his shoulders.
|
|
|
Post by aazzaabb on Dec 17, 2018 22:10:51 GMT
Exactly this is again the portrayal of John Branca true to Michael Jackson's lifetime attorney, in which it should not have come so far that Michael was in such a position in the last few years, sure there are more responsible ones but John Branca is one of them Ignoring the fact that it was Branca who negotiated on Michael's behalf to get the catalogue in the first place, at the end of the day the ultimate responsibility for Michael Jackson's financial situation is Michael himself and who he chooses to listen to - which was more than just Branca. Branca actually did speak up about the 2006 deal because he did not trust the advisors working with Michael on this deal, yet Michael chose to continue working with these advisors instead. This disagreement resulted in Branca and Michael parting ways in 2006 - but on good terms. Ultimately, it was Michael Jackson who signed the agreement and agreed to the shotgun clause so that was in his shoulders. You make some interesting points here. I was a little pissed at what happened initially but when you consider MJ’s financial position when he was alive and what his estate is now worth you’ve got to respect the financial turn around.
|
|
|
Post by SmoothGangsta on Dec 23, 2018 22:05:59 GMT
Yeah he is a bit shit but the whole conspiracy thing was just mj listening to people whispering in his ear. He had him investigated and found nothing but still decided to get rid of him.
|
|
|
Post by kremlinshadow on Dec 30, 2018 23:27:40 GMT
Yeah he is a bit shit but the whole conspiracy thing was just mj listening to people whispering in his ear. He had him investigated and found nothing but still decided to get rid of him. I thought he had been investigated and found to be a conflict of interest as he was advising both Sony & MJ??
|
|
|
Post by HIStoric on Dec 31, 2018 3:48:04 GMT
Yeah he is a bit shit but the whole conspiracy thing was just mj listening to people whispering in his ear. He had him investigated and found nothing but still decided to get rid of him. I thought he had been investigated and found to be a conflict of interest as he was advising both Sony & MJ?? From what I can tell, Branca was investigated in 2003, but no wrongdoing was found on Branca's part and he returned to working for Michael later that year. There's a number of documents showing he continued to represent MJ after this date. I was having a look through two sources that provided documents and the like showing his continued representation (Sources 1, 2).
|
|
|
Post by kremlinshadow on Dec 31, 2018 8:13:11 GMT
I thought he had been investigated and found to be a conflict of interest as he was advising both Sony & MJ?? From what I can tell, Branca was investigated in 2003, but no wrongdoing was found on Branca's part and he returned to working for Michael later that year. There's a number of documents showing he continued to represent MJ after this date. I was having a look through two sources that provided documents and the like showing his continued representation (Sources 1, 2).
I don't know where all this screaming at the mention of his name comes from then, I'm sure there were various sources who confirmed this?
|
|