the usual censorship from ivy of mjjcommunity(page 5)

pdfcrowd.comopen in browser PRO version Are you a developer? Try out the HTML to PDF API

Forum MJJCommunity - Michael Jackson Community Trials And Tribulations

Michael Jacksons Money Man Also Has Sony/ATV Side Gig

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register beforeyou can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want tovisit from the selection below.

Advanced Search register or login

FAQ Calendar Forum Actions Quick Links

what's new? articles blogs

Wills, Estates and Trusts35 years of legal experience Power of Attorney

Wills, Estates and Trusts35 years of legal experience Power of Attorney

forum


Thread: Michael Jacksons Money Man Also Has Sony/ATV Side Gig Tweet 0

Results 61 to 75 of 95

Page 5 of 7 ... 3 4 5 6 7First Last

Thread Tools Display

Today, 02:10 PM

Re: Michael Jacksons Money Man Also Has Sony/ATV Side Gig

Again, this assumes that the interests of Sony and of the Estate are separateand adversarial, when in practice, gains for Sony necessarily mean gains for

#61

Join Date:Location:

Posts:Thanks:Thanked 2,030 Times in 523 Posts

Jul 2011Appalachians in the

U.S.9,019637

Autumn II

Originally Posted by formj

About the ppl that talk about "partnership" with sony:

Branca ' sony/atv advisor job, is a job for sony in which Johnbranca represents sony's interests in sony/atv. Branca is notrepresenting the common interest by working for sony withthis job.

That is what the emails and documents proves. Branca getspaid by sony and he has fiduciary duties Toward sony for hisservice for sony.


and adversarial, when in practice, gains for Sony necessarily mean gains forthe Estate.

We KNOW Branca gets paid by Sony. That is not a secret.

As executor, dealing with Sony/ATV is not Branca's only responsibility forthe Estate. His expertise has benefit to Sony/ATV, and necessarily to theEstate as well. He is being paid to advise Sony to a greater extent that onlyhis work for the Estate would necessitate. Hence, the salary. What is nothere, in the logic, is HOW Sony and the Estate are adversarial. I have readthe emails (links above) and see NOTHING to indicate that the Estate"undersold" TII. So -- specifically, WHICH email is that info coming from?


There would have been no need to get paid/sign up for a jobfor sony and for Sony wanting fiduciary duties toward themfrom branca , if it was something for the common benefit ofthe joint venture , since branca has duties toward MJ's benefitsfrom sony/atv via his fiduciary duties toward MJ. if it was ajoint venture, sharing common interests , there would be noneed of this job and a salary from Sony with fiduciary duties.The "joint venture" would not have required a job for Sonyfrom branca and fiduciary duties toward sony for doing thecommon interest In sony/atv. There are 2 sides of the jointventure , and branca offered himself to work for sony's sides ,representing them and having fiduciaries duties toward them.


It does't exist on earth a Joint venture with 1 half paying the


Personally, I am on two boards of directors. Boards may have differentresponsibilities, but primarily they exist to advise and make decisions, for anon-profit or a business. With board membership, different tasks may beassigned to different board-members, in terms of expertise and focus ofattention. In Branca's fiduciary responsibilities for the Estate, his primarytask is to grow the wealth and income stream of the Estate. Sony/ATV ispart of that, but not all. With board membership at Sony, I assume the taskis decision-making about the health of the company, ouside of the scope ofduties toward the Estate (i.e. he could not justify time spent on that directlywith responsibilities to the Estate). The health of Sony impacts the revenueof the Estate. They are related, but not adversarial.

There is yet to be a valid example here of HOW those two entities areadversarial (and there is nothing in the emails that indicates TII wasundervalued. If that "fact" exists, WHERE is it?)

It does't exist on earth a Joint venture with 1 half paying thelawyer that represent the other half , to represent the interestof 1 side with fiduciary duties Toward 1 side....that is not ajoint venture...u do not get paid from 1 side of the partnershipand have fiduciary duties toward 1 side if you are in a jointventure that should have no sides and together look after thecommon interests With no money and fiduciaries involved.


MJ did not trust John branca for his promiscuity with sony andthere are other emails showimg how branca is after his owninterest (for representing sony in sony's affairs) and aftersony's interests.


And there we have it. Problem is, MJ's will IS valid and that will namesBranca as co-executor. One does not name as executor someone one doesnot TRUST.

Branca makes ten percent of the revenues of the Estate, potentially muchgreater than salary from Sony. (We KNOW his salary for consulting withSony.) Yes, Sony "used MJ for their own gain." They are a BUSINESS whoseproduct is, in part, the artistic production of their artists. That is what theyDO. They have not always treated MJ fairly, i.e. not adequately promotingVince. With Branca consulting, is is less likely that such negative decisionswill happen in the future.


The money that the executor makes via the estate is nothingcompared to the money branca 's Law firm makesrepresenting a big corporation like sony in their businessaffairs. Mj has been used as leverage for branca's personalbusiness for sony and Sony has used MJ for their own gain.

The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Autumn II For This Useful Post:


Annita, barbee0715, Bubs, LindavG, respect77

Today, 02:19 PM


"The new price is said to be $75 million. And thats not final yet. Im told itcould still go a little higher."

What part do you not understand, or maybe I should break it down?

First of all, we are talking about Roger F.Secondly, even if we take his word like true, it says in the article "the price issaid to be 75 million", meaning that there have been sources throwingnumbers up in the air, but nothing definite, as said in the article, "its notfinal yet". Capish?

#62

Join Date:Posts:Thanks:

Thanked 13,840 Times in 4,032 Posts

Jan 20126,49415,662

Bubs

The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Bubs For This Useful Post:

Annita, Autumn II, barbee0715, LindavG, respect77

Today, 02:33 PM #63



I think that this whole argument is predicated on the notion that "Michaeldid not trust Branca." And THAT idea is predicated on the notion that "thewill is not valid." But yet, the will has been ruled VALID, and Michael wouldnot name someone as executor he didn't trust. So really, it comes down to"belief" or intuition, but not fact. One can "feel" that Michael did not trustBranca, but there is no fact to support that idea. Moving right along. . .

Join Date:Location:



U.S.9,019637

Autumn II


barbee0715, Bubs

Today, 02:34 PM


#64

Join Date:Posts:

Apr 201518

formj

Originally Posted by Bubs

"The new price is said to be $75 million. And thats not finalyet. Im told it could still go a little higher."


it does not matter what R. Friedman or whoever else number was in amedia Article. The point is that John branca should have pushed for theprice to go up , even using at his advantage the article, and he did not ! Sony was afraid of the consequence that the article would have had on thesale price !! Branca did nothing beneficial for beneficiaries about it!Branca favorited Sony and it so obvious from the profits Sony made off avery small investment / buying price , that branca acceted from sony!

Posts:Thanks:

Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

180

yet. Im told it could still go a little higher."

What part do you not understand, or maybe I should break itdown?

First of all, we are talking about Roger F.Secondly, even if we take his word like true, it says in thearticle "the price is said to be 75 million", meaning that therehave been sources throwing numbers up in the air, butnothing definite, as said in the article, "its not final yet".Capish?

Today, 02:37 PM


#65

formj


The will should have given back to MJ when branca was fired and no willshould have been in possession of John branca .

No will was found in possession of MJ.

In that case , his heirs would have directly inherited MJ's belongings.

MJ did not trust John Branca and John branca could have even screwed upMJ right before he died and in daeath.

Sony was planning in June 3 2009 the sale of MiJAC to Simon Cowell, Johnbranca 's client !

Post 2009 John branca has favorited sony and his own interests over MJ'sand beneficiaries ' interests . John branca has even implemented 2009sony's plans about mijac!



Apr 2015180

Originally Posted by Autumn II

I think that this whole argument is predicated on the notionthat "Michael did not trust Branca." And THAT idea ispredicated on the notion that "the will is not valid." But yet, thewill has been ruled VALID, and Michael would not namesomeone as executor he didn't trust. So really, it comes downto "belief" or intuition, but not fact. One can "feel" that Michaeldid not trust Branca, but there is no fact to support that idea.Moving right along. . .


Today, 02:49 PM


I see that b_marco (aka formj aka thruth78) is poisoning all MJ forums

You repeat all day the same ish over and over. We all understood your agenda. Move on!

#66

Join Date:Location:Posts:Thanks:


Jul 2011France1,0601

marc_vivien

The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to marc_vivien For This Useful Post:

Annita, Bubs, LindavG, respect77

Today, 02:51 PM


On this board there is a tremendously long thread discussing the validity ofthe will, including the challenges to the will by the family, and the courtrulings. Been there/done that.

#67

Join Date: Jul 2011

Autumn II


Location:


Appalachians in theU.S.

9,019637

Today, 02:58 PM


majority of the alleged conflict of interest is nothing more than personalperceptions or biases. Friedman writes an article that says the selling pricewas $75 Million. There's a talk about correcting that info. TII is sold for $60Million.

One person can look to this information and think "Friedman was wrong,he made up that number, who is his source, how would he know for sure"

Another person can look to it and say "Evil Branca! Why did it sell it to$60M, he could have gotten $75M"

#68

Join Date:Location:Posts:Thanks:


Sep 2009USA14,708413

ivy


and there is nothing in the emails that indicates TII wasundervalued. If that "fact" exists, WHERE is it?


I think Bubs wrote several days ago, if you start with wanting to find aconspiracy or problem in something, you probably would. even if it meansinterpreting stuff to fit your way of thinking.

he doesn't make 10% from Estate. It was 10% for both executors - 5% eachand later raised to about 7% each. We also know what he makes as anexecutor from the accounting documents. At 3rd accounting Total Co-executive & creative director compensation was $4,454,011. That meansBranca made 2.2 Million - a lot more than what Sony would pay.

(per email sony would pay him $2.25M in 3 years, Branca earns thatamount from Estate in a single year)

Branca makes ten percent of the revenues of the Estate,potentially much greater than salary from Sony. (We KNOW hissalary for consulting with Sony.)

Twitter : Ivy_4MJ

The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to ivy For This Useful Post:

Annita, Autumn II, barbee0715, Bubs, LindavG


Today, 03:06 PM


"Ps: it was funny reading the rest of the emails about sony's pal worryingabout branca/Mj Estate "conspiring" against them , by using that article forbringing the sale price up... imagine what a $weet surprise Sony had whenthey saw John Branca going for 60M , shutting up that uncomfortableselling price, that sony's ppl thought was a way for Branca to make theselling price go up!"

Do you know what is even funnier?The funny bit is that Branca was one of recipients that email was sent to

#69



Jan 20126,49415,662

Bubs

The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Bubs For This Useful Post:

Annita, Autumn II, barbee0715, krikzil, LindavG

Today, 03:17 PM


#70

Tygger



ForMJ, thanks for the information regarding the discrepancy. I will see if Ican locate the email/documents prior to mid 2013. It is those emails thatgive background to the situation as it was referred to in the emails youposted links to. Without that background there is far too much confusion.Readers are confused as to what is the conflict Sony feared - like the authorof this article. In this thread, it also causes very distracted discussion.Discussions about the will/trust, even pricing for TII rights, etc. has nothingto do with the topic of what Branca's consulting entailed.

Join Date:Posts:Thanks:Thanked 1,088 Times in 591 Posts

Jul 20121,8261,317


Regarding the emails related to branca's job, they have beenposted above in links.

The Following User Says Thank You to Tygger For This Useful Post:

barbee0715

Today, 04:05 PM


#71

formj



While MJ was alive, for Sony, MJ's interests were separate and adversarialand in fact they boycotted MJ and they kicked MJ out of the "partnership"equation!

John Branca have sucked MJ inside the corporation MJ spoke against andfrom whom MJ was planning to walk away from , with his own catalog(MiJAC) , while Sony was instead planning behind MJ's back to do withMiJAC what they wanted, with branca even knowing about it Becausebranca's client was getting involved! In the end John branca evenimplemented 2009 sony's plans!

All this is highly immoral.

John Branca has done sony 's interests while MJ was alive and is continuingdoing corporation 's interests , with MJ is dead, hiding behind the farse ofsony/MJ Estate "mutual convenience"!!

What the hell were Sony and john branca doing while MJ was alive?!Nothing that MJ want but instead everything that MJ did NOT want for him!!



Apr 2015180

Again, this assumes that the interests of Sony and of the Estateare separate and adversarial, when in practice, gains for Sonynecessarily mean gains for the Estate.


We KNOW Branca gets paid by Sony. That is not a secret.


Sure .It is not a secret also for us that MJ fired branca and he never hired himback and he wanted Branca out of sony/atv for his promiscuity with sony,because of that!

http://postimg.org/image/qiqumh1er/638ff166/

http://postimg.org/image/5kcs7w7ff/ccec4652/

The same promiscuity that we have seen for almost 6 years and that havesucked MJ into sony because of a corporate 's lawyer!

Number$ have shown how sony is benefiting off MJ and how the "deals"branca made with sony are underpriced deals favoring sony at the expenseof MJ. Who is making HUGE money here !!


As excutor, dealing with Sony/ATV is not Branca's onlyresponsibility for the Estate. His expertise has benefit toSony/ATV, and necessarily to the Estate as well. He is beingpaid to advise Sony to a greater extent that only his work forthe Estate would necessitate. Hence, the salary. What is nothere, in the logic, is HOW Sony and the Estate are adversarial. Ihave read the emails (links above) and see NOTHING toindicate that the Estate "undersold" TII. So -- specifically,WHICH email is that info coming from?


John branca belongs to sony and he knows the amount of money thecorporation is making off MJ and he sell out Mj to Sony with a low price forthis is it and with a low price for the unreleased songs that Sony is using fortheir releases and for promoting sony 's brand. We have seen numbers thatcorporations have made off branca's "deals" with Sony and there is nocomparison whatsoeve!

For this is it, John Branca did NOTHING to push that price up! He went for alow price despite sony's worries and sony made a huge profits, while whatbeneficiaries made is nothing !


Personally, I am on two boards of directors. Boards may havedifferent responsibilities, but primarily they exist to advise andmake decisions, for a non-profit or a business. With boardmembership, different tasks may be assigned to differentboard-members, in terms of expertise and focus of attention.In Branca's fiduciary responsibilities for the Estate, his primarytask is to grow the wealth and income stream of the Estate.Sony/ATV is part of that, but not all. With board membershipat Sony, I assume the task is decision-making about the healthof the company, ouside of the scope of duties toward theEstate (i.e. he could not justify time spent on that directly withresponsibilities to the Estate). The health of Sony impacts therevenue of the Estate. They are related, but not adversarial.

There is yet to be a valid example here of HOW those twoentities are adversarial (and there is nothing in the emails thatindicates TII was undervalued. If that "fact" exists, WHERE is it?)


In this case there is 1 board and an executor working at the same time forthe 2 sides !

sony's interests can be different and even adversarial to MJ's interests insony/atv and branca has a responsability toward sony now , because of thisjob .

Who draw and set the fiduciary's line toward one or another side?John branca with an auto certification of "not breaching fiduciary duties" ? Really ?Where is probate court and beneficiaries in this puzzle ?

Why sony and John branca did not go in front of probate court for talkingabout this job for Sony and the fiduciary duties that are demanded by it?

An executor that was fired and never rehired back after the date of the willsigned in LA the day MJ was in NYC.....A will that should have not beenexisted because MJ demanded it back from branca and MJ did not have inhis hands , when he died!


And there we have it. Problem is, MJ's will IS valid and that willnames Branca as co-executor. One does not name as executorsomeone one does not TRUST.


Branca makes a huge more amount of money with his law firmrepresenting sony for any other sony's business deal. John Branca's lawfirm represents sony's business and clients that deal with sony.

The 10% branca makes off MJ Estate is nothing compared to representingsony,( a billion dollars worth corporation ) in their business deals!

Really convenient for branca to use mj as leverage for doing more businesswith sony! The mutual convenience of 2 crooks!

John Branca has even allowed the exploitation of MJ's image and likenessfor xscape to promote sony's products,


Branca makes ten percent of the revenues of the Estate,potentially much greater than salary from Sony. (We KNOW hissalary for consulting with Sony.)


Yes, Sony "used MJ for their own gain." They are a BUSINESSwhose product is, in part, the artistic production of theirartists. That is what they DO. They have not always treated MJfairly, i.e. not adequately promoting Vince. With Brancaconsulting, is is less likely that such negative decisions willhappen in the future.


for xscape to promote sony's products,for a cut price !

" 1 million album units on Sony phones at $5 per unit;

Wanna Be Startin Somethin and STTR synchs, which have marketvalues of $1.2m and $4m respectively;

Sony branding on all album events;

Inclusion of hologram in launch events, which will include Sony branding;

Exclusive behind-the-scenes footage of the choreography for thehologram;

Exclusive premiere and streaming period for the album

Use of album art and approved artist images in Sony marketing andpromotion materials that include a mention of the album;

Exclusive bonus content;

Exclusivity in the category of phones and electronics;

Exclusivity for STTR across all brands regardless of category;

Provision of product placement opportunities to Sony if creative allows;

Pass through of rights to telecom and retail partners;

Wallpaper of album art;


Wallpaper of album art;

High-res image of the album art;

Inclusion of audio at retail bays;

Transfer of select catalogue content to 4K and the exploitation of suchcontent through Music Unlimited and Video Unlimited; and

Inclusion of links stating that tracks are available on Music Unlimited.

Please note that although the units and the synchs have a value of morethan $10m, the Estate has agreed to them and to provide even furtherdeliverables. "

Today, 04:18 PM


I stand corrected (about percentage for executors). The fact does remain,Branca makes MUCH more as executor of the Estate than he will from Sony.His salary for consulting may seem like a lot, but for a high-poweredentertainment attorney -- it's really not. Plus, it is a fixed salary, while hispercentage from the Estate depends on performance.

It's commonly known that R.F. is a tabloid hack. There is no way to knowwhat is factual and what is not (even a stopped clock is right, twice a day.)

#72

Join Date:Location:



U.S.9,019637

Autumn II


Right. The pricing of TII and the "been there/done that" issue of the will,have nothing to do with the thread topic, which is Branca's "side-gig." Fromreading the emails (from the links), this seems to be an internal conundrumwithin Sony. In any corporation there is vying for power among multipleCEOs, and that is what this seems to be. In the end, the primary goal of ANYcorporation is to make money. The primary goal of the managing of theEstate is to MAKE MONEY. There has been no factual material yet presentedhere that points to a conflict of interest between the management of theEstate, and consulting work for Sony.

Last edited by Autumn II; Today at 04:40 PM.


barbee0715, Bubs, LindavG, respect77

Today, 04:27 PM


#73

formj


Which emails and documents are you talking about ? The ones already outthere for a few months or others?



Apr 2015180

Originally Posted by Tygger

ForMJ, thanks for the information regarding the discrepancy. Iwill see if I can locate the email/documents prior to mid 2013.It is those emails that give background to the situation as itwas referred to in the emails you posted links to. Without thatbackground there is far too much confusion. Readers areconfused as to what is the conflict Sony feared - like the authorof this article. In this thread, it also causes very distracteddiscussion. Discussions about the will/trust, even pricing for TIIrights, etc. has nothing to do with the topic of what Branca'sconsulting entailed.

Today, 04:32 PM


#74



Apr 2015180

formj

Originally Posted by Bubs

"Ps: it was funny reading the rest of the emails about sony'spal worrying about branca/Mj Estate "conspiring" against them, by using that article for bringing the sale price up... imaginewhat a $weet surprise Sony had when they saw John Brancagoing for 60M , shutting up that uncomfortable selling price,


Even worse!

Why branca did not use sony 's fear for beneificiarie's advantage bydemanding more money since the worth of those footage was so muchundervalued and convenient for sony as proved by the money sony madeoff of it?!?!

going for 60M , shutting up that uncomfortable selling price,that sony's ppl thought was a way for Branca to make theselling price go up!"

Do you know what is even funnier?The funny bit is that Branca was one of recipients that emailwas sent to

Today, 04:40 PM


Why don't you take a phone call to Branca and ask him yourself?You must love Branca so much because his name is in every single sentence

Btw, MJ left his will to person who drafted it in the first place, that is thereason Branca couldn't give it back because he didn't have it beginning with.I believe that one goes way over your head, but thats ok:-)

#75

Join Date: Jan 2012

Bubs


Previous Thread | Next Thread

Posts:Thanks:


6,49415,662

Page 5 of 7 ... 3 4 5 6 7First Last

Quick Navigation Trials And Tribulations Top

Facebook

Twitter

Google

Digg

Bookmarks

You may not post newthreadsYou may not post repliesYou may not postattachmentsYou may not edit yourposts

Posting Permissions

BB code is OnSmilies are On[IMG] code is On[VIDEO] code is OnHTML code is On

Forum Rules


about mjjcommunityWe are MJJCommunity - The MichaelJackson Community, here for Michael hislegacy and the fans since 2001, weencompass all areas of the web so why notjoin us the fans of Michael Jackson.

linksMJJCommunity

MJJCommunityBlog

MJJCommunityRadio

---- MJJC v2.0 Widescreen

join us

Contact Us | MJJCommunity - Michael Jackson Community - Official Fan

Club Forum | Archive | Top

All times are GMT. The time now is 10:11 PM.

Powered by vBulletin Version 4.2.2 Copyright 2015 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.

MJJCommunity - Michael Jackson Community 2014

the usual censorship from ivy of mjjcommunity(page 5)

Documents