Sony emails hack/leak

[formj]

Regarding emails on wikileaks and emails that have been on twitter and on 2 other forums already for months before wikileak:

They are same emails.
You can locate the same emails on wikileaks . If something can not be located is either because of the limits of the online search engine of wikileak or also because wikileak have released a less amount of data compared to the 1st leak . There are at least 100gb of data (not emails) missing from wikileak rerelease.

Wikileaks posted 4 leaks related to documents:

https://wikileaks.org/sony/docs/filelist/

The original leak from SPE had more files and was about this:

1st part= more than 26 GB in data files

2nd part= more than 1GB of data files

3rd part= more than 100 GB of data files

4th part= more than 7GB of emails

5th part= 5gb of data

6th part= more than 3GB of emails

7th part= more than 6GB of data

8th part= more than 5GB of emails

9th part= about 800MB of emails

For the emails, It impossible to know if all the emails are on wikileaks unless u download them all and compare them/the number of emails with the number of emails released in the original leak.

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

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

Branca ' sony/atv advisor job, is a job for sony in which John branca represents sony's interests in sony/atv. Branca is not representing the common interest by working for sony with this job.

That is what the emails and documents proves. Branca gets paid by sony and he has fiduciary duties Toward sony for his service for sony.

There would have been no need to get paid/sign up for a job for sony and for Sony wanting fiduciary duties toward them from branca , if it was something for the common benefit of the joint venture , since branca has duties toward MJ's benefits from sony/atv via his fiduciary duties toward MJ. if it was a joint venture, sharing common interests , there would be no need of this job and a salary from Sony with fiduciary duties.
The "joint venture" would not have required a job for Sony from branca and fiduciary duties toward sony for doing the common interest In sony/atv. There are 2 sides of the joint venture , 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 lawyer that represent the other half , to represent the interest of 1 side with fiduciary duties Toward 1 side....that is not a joint venture...u do not get paid from 1 side of the partnership and have fiduciary duties toward 1 side if you are in a joint venture that should have no sides and together look after the common interests With no money and fiduciaries involved.

This is a job for sony and a conflict of interests that should have involved probate court. Point.


The conflict of interest has been discussed in the same email/document and they all hid and went behind probate court 's / beneficiaries' Back And they got exposed with these emails.

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

The money that the executor makes via the estate is nothing compared to the money branca 's Law firm makes representing a big corporation like sony in their business affairs. Mj has been used as leverage for branca's personal business for sony and Sony has used MJ for their own gain.

This is the same old story that has seen MJ being exploited in life from Sony and from the same lawyers , that are corporation 's lawyers.

 

[formj]

Regarding the 15M of cut price for sony over this is it, any decent business men doing beneficiaries' interests would have used as advantage the article and go for a higher selling price ....Instead John branca went for sony's price by making a few phone calls and shutting up the more than 60M sale price Spoken in the article ....

The rip-off deal that branca signed with Sony is so visible in these number$ of the Fully Financed Gross Profit (in Box Office only) that SONY have made off "This Is It"

https://t.co/hG00Ta2i8Y

Anyone can clearly see who have made benefits off mj and his heirs And how the price that Sony paid was a joke of a "deal" for beneficiaries ....

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

https://www.scribd.com/doc/262952118/Merged

 

[Autumn II]

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

Branca ' sony/atv advisor job, is a job for sony in which John branca represents sony's interests in sony/atv. Branca is not representing the common interest by working for sony with this job.

That is what the emails and documents proves. Branca gets paid by sony and he has fiduciary duties Toward sony for his service for sony.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The money that the executor makes via the estate is nothing compared to the money branca 's Law firm makes representing a big corporation like sony in their business affairs. Mj has been used as leverage for branca's personal business for sony and Sony has used MJ for their own gain.

Branca makes ten percent of the revenues of the Estate, potentially much greater than salary from Sony. (We KNOW his salary for consulting with Sony.) Yes, Sony "used MJ for their own gain." They are a BUSINESS whose product is, in part, the artistic production of their artists. That is what they DO. They have not always treated MJ fairly, i.e. not adequately promoting Vince. With Branca consulting, is is less likely that such negative decisions will happen in the future.

 

[Autumn II]

I think that this whole argument is predicated on the notion that "Michael did not trust Branca." And THAT idea is predicated on the notion that "the will is not valid." But yet, the will has been ruled VALID, and Michael would not 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 trust Branca, but there is no fact to support that idea. Moving right along. . .

 

[ivy]

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

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

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"

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

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

he doesn't make 10% from Estate. It was 10% for both executors - 5% each and later raised to about 7% each. We also know what he makes as an executor from the accounting documents. At 3rd accounting Total Co-executive & creative director compensation was $4,454,011. That means Branca 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 that amount from Estate in a single year)

 

[Bubs]

"Ps: it was funny reading the rest of the emails about sony's pal worrying about branca/Mj Estate "conspiring" against them , by using that article for bringing the sale price up... imagine what a $weet surprise Sony had when they saw John Branca going for 60M , shutting up that uncomfortable selling price, that sony's ppl thought was a way for Branca to make the selling 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 :rofl:

 

[Autumn II]

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-powered entertainment attorney -- it's really not. Plus, it is a fixed salary, while his percentage from the Estate depends on performance.

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

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." From reading the emails (from the links), this seems to be an internal conundrum within Sony. In any corporation there is vying for power among multiple CEOs, and that is what this seems to be. In the end, the primary goal of ANY corporation is to make money. The primary goal of the managing of the Estate is to MAKE MONEY. There has been no factual material yet presented here that points to a conflict of interest between the management of the Estate, and consulting work for Sony.

 

[Tygger]

Funny, LindavG asked receipts from Tygger and that person from LSA pops up here with same posts as in LSA

What are you attempting to suggest? I would also say some of the same dismissive posts from LSA appeared here as well.

Where does it say that Branca sold TII right at discount price?

The funny bit is that Branca was one of recipients that email was sent to

Allow me to clarify: ForMJ is correct. Yes Branca was on the original email but, he is not a recipient on any email in that chain past the original email. Those emails were solely between Sony executives. Sony was concerned that the Estate would raise the price and worse (as they said in their email) that the probate court would believe the TII rights’ price to be $75M instead of $60M. Branca’s calls were not to raise the price as Sony feared so Branca did indeed save Sony several millions at the cost of the Estate. That can be considered an act against fiduciary duty. (This is what the Estate is claiming Tohme is liable of doing by not entertaining Plainfield Asset Management NL offer.)

If you read several of these leaked emails, you will find that one email chain does not tell the whole story. Combine the two links below for the full details. (There are also emails regarding Friedman authoring articles in support of Sony and Forbes’ Greenberg being celebrated by Branca for his support of the Estate.)

http://www.scribd.com/doc/259975835/Fw-Hollywood-Reporter-Time-Sensitive1
http://www.scribd.com/doc/262952118/Merged

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

No. Sony executives authored these emails and THEY feared Branca raising the price. That cannot be defined as a preferred fan conspiracy. Whatever a fan chooses to believe about the parties motives is their choice however; it will not change the facts as per the statements in the emails.

Time to challenge a will was 120 days, it's over. Katherine were given the opportunity to challenge the executors, she dropped it....

But like I said there comes a point when you ask yourself how am I spending my time, how am I wasting my effort.

Again, I understand it is off-topic however; if Katherine challenged the will, she would be removed from it, correct?

Fans decide how they will defend Michael’s memory if they so choose. While you may feel one fan is wasting their efforts because they are on an opposing side of your view, those on the opposing side may feel the same regarding your particular effort(s). It is the primary reason behind the unnecessary and permanent division in the online fan community and that is the true waste.

 

[HIStory]

So basically Roger Friedman wrote an article saying that the Estate will sell TII for a higher price ($75 million) than what was initially negotiated ($60 million). And because that article did not turn out to be true (as several of Friedman's articles, I should add) and the Estate sold TII for$60, as initially negotiated, this is somehow turned into Branca "acting against his fiduciary duty for the Estate" by some? Sounds like grasping at straws.

 

[Tygger]

Respect77, no need to spin the email chain. There are only two links above for anyone who chooses to actually read them. If you read them, you will see Sony did not question Friedman's motives. Friedman was used by Sony to write supportive articles as per other emails. Sony questioned Branca's motives and was suspicious he may have told Friedman that figure to increase the price.

 

[HIStory]

I don't think I "spun" anything. Like you said, it's there to read for anyone and make their own conclusions. I do not see any evidence in them of Branca violating his fiduciary duty for the Estate. But some people will keep reaching nevertheless.

 

[Tygger]

I do not see any evidence in them of Branca violating his fiduciary duty for the Estate. But some people will keep reaching nevertheless.

Include Sony executives in your list of "some people." They were happy Branca benefited them by not increasing the price. They were obviously more happy that the probate judge was not aware of the higher price.

Adding: interesting that you and others do not see a possible fiduciary issue when Sony saw it quite clearly. Do you believe Sony is incorrect?

There are other emails where Sony questions some of the Estate's actions towards the beneficiaries; this is not the only instance.

 

[HIStory]

Being happy that media rumours about a higher price did not prove to be true is not saying Branca violated his fiduciary duty for the Estate.

Adding: interesting that you and others do not see a possible fiduciary issue when Sony saw it quite clearly. Do you believe Sony is incorrect?

Please point out to me where.

 

[ivy]

I have no interest in discussing some old topics raised in this thread but I'll post a piece of info

Again, I understand it is off-topic however; if Katherine challenged the will, she would be removed from it, correct?

No it's not correct. Judge ruled she could challenge the executors without risking her benefits and beneficiary position. She choose to not follow it through.

Link here for the news story : http://www.cnn.com/2009/SHOWBIZ/Music/09/18/jackson.estate.challenge/index.html

Copy of the relevant section below

Katherine Jackson can safely challenge the men who control singer Michael Jackson's estate without risking her benefits from her son's will, a judge has ruled.

Katherine Jackson and Joe Jackson attend the funeral for their son on September 3 in Glendale, California.

The decision by Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge Mitchell Beckloff, which was released Friday, sets up a possible trial in which Katherine Jackson can try to gain control of her son's estate.

Burt Levitch, a Jackson family lawyer, has said they have questions about possible conflicts of interest and the fitness of John Branca and John McClain, who were named as executors in the will the singer signed in 2002.

A provision in Jackson's will said that any beneficiary who contests it could be risk their benefits, but Beckloff's ruling said Katherine Jackson's challenge of executors "would not be a contest within the meaning of the Trust's no contest clause."

Beckloff has already set aside a week in mid-November for a trial to determine if Branca and McClain are fit to run the pop icon's estate.

 

[Bubs]

Being happy that media rumours about a higher price did not prove to be true is not saying Branca violated his fiduciary duty for the Estate.



Please point out to me where.

You won't find it anywhere unless you see it with mind of conspiracy.
I actually read those emails, and all I saw that Sony people were wondering whether Branca would be man for a job, because he has obligations as MJ's estate executor. Sony people were looking after themselves, not after Mj's estate.

 

[Bubs]

If you read several of these leaked emails, you will find that one email chain does not tell the whole story. Combine the two links below for the full details. (There are also emails regarding Friedman authoring articles in support of Sony and Forbes’ Greenberg being celebrated by Branca for his support of the Estate.)

http://www.scribd.com/doc/259975835/...ime-Sensitive1
http://www.scribd.com/doc/262952118/Merged
----------------------------------------

Omg, now poor Zack O'Malley Greenburg is dragged in to conspiracy too:bugeyed

Do you think outside of the conspiracy box at all?

I don't know how well you follow MJ news, but are you aware of that many people that talks nice of MJ, write nice articles of MJ, does something to enhance MJ's legacy, or even makes MJ's name trending gets rewarded by the estate somehow?

This boy mentioned in this article
http://www.billboard.com/articles/c...ael-jackson-billie-jean-hot-100-return-xscape
got invitation to MJOne all expenses paid. His reward.

Heck, just recently one fan club got reward from estate because their work to promote MJ. Are they too working for the estate?

D.B.Anderson who wrote a few great articles about MJ, and her articles were posted on official MJ fb account.
Her reward was being acknowledged by official MJ face book and that post was seeing over 60+ million people. Then she was attacked by conspiracy theorists only because official MJ fb posted her article, and they accused her being whatever plant.

Zack wrote nice book of MJ, and has written many nice articles of him and now he is another Branca plant :smilerolleyes:

This is email in question:
https://wikileaks.org/sony/emails/emailid/43589
Maybe the dinner was his reward for his work to help Michael's legacy and image in the media, or maybe when he was interviewing Branca , he liked Zack so much that he wanted to throw dinner for him?


PS, The estate or who ever runs MJ's official website, usually don't allow or promote books or stuff from outsiders, but Zack and Joe Vogel's contributions for MJ's legacy have not been unnoticed, thus their books are available to purchase in MJ's website, also both of them were in LV last year doing book signing in MJONE gift shop.

I don't know how you don't see it yourself, but by the day, these conspiracy theories are getting crazier and crazier. If you are not careful, you are going to top up Randy J conspiracy theory that PPB are working with executors to make KJ to do what they want.

 

[Tygger]

Please point out to me where.

You won't find it anywhere unless you see it with mind of conspiracy.

Interesting responses. Question please: what do you believe the below statement means?

Are we worried this is the Estate prepping to come back to us for more $$ (in light of music situation or otherwise)? Let me know if you want me to call Burkow and see if anything is up. [Or worse, that probate court is now going to think it's worth $75m.]

A provision in Jackson's will said that any beneficiary who contests it could be risk their benefits, but Beckloff's ruling said Katherine Jackson's challenge of executors "would not be a contest within the meaning of the Trust's no contest clause."

Thank you.

I actually read those emails, and all I saw that Sony people were wondering whether Branca would be man for a job, because he has obligations as MJ's estate executor. Sony people were looking after themselves, not after Mj's estate.

I believe this comment should be in the Branca's consulting role thread. Maybe you can explain what you believe the consulting role entailed in the appropriate thread.

Omg, now poor Zack O'Malley Greenburg is dragged in to conspiracy too
Do you think outside of the conspiracy box at all?

Two questions: Have you read the emails regarding Greenburg? Can you post where I portrayed the Estate's support of Greenburg due to his support of the Estate as a negative?

It seems you cannot view any response regarding these leaked emails as anything other than a conspiracy (of what I have no clue) and/or an anti-Estate rant which is interesting because they are ALL Sony authored emails. Not one word was written by a anti-Estate and/or conspiracy-inclined fan.

Such a limited view limits what you can offer to a discussion regarding the leaked emails. I assure you that no email had a negative word about Michael which is quite interesting because some of Michael's fans are so resistant to actually reading them and/or having a true conversation about them.

 

[HIStory]

Interesting responses. Question please: what do you believe the below statement means?

It means they are confused about Friedman's report and they do not really know if there is really anything in it or not. How does it turn into Branca violating his fiduciary duty for the Estate in some minds, I do not know. Not even close.

 

[Tygger]

Respect77, no deflecting. Focus on the statement below. Friedman is not in that statement.

Are we worried this is the Estate prepping to come back to us for more $$ (in light of music situation or otherwise)? Let me know if you want me to call Burkow and see if anything is up. [Or worse, that probate court is now going to think it's worth $75m.]

 

[HIStory]

Respect77, no deflecting. Focus on the statement below. Friedman is not in that statement.

There is no deflecting at all. You took it out of context, but of course it DOES refer to the Friedman article (the whole correspondence is about that) or what else do you think "this" means in that context ("Are we worried this is the Estate prepping to come back to us for more $$ (in light of music situation or otherwise")?

Please show me as if I was a 4 year old where does this say that Branca violated his his fiduciary duty for the Estate?

 

[ivy]

Interesting responses. Question please: what do you believe the below statement means?

Are we worried this is the Estate prepping to come back to us for more $$ (in light of music situation or otherwise)? Let me know if you want me to call Burkow and see if anything is up. [Or worse, that probate court is now going to think it's worth $75m.]

Estate is in probate and every deal they make is approved by the judge. All business deals are sealed so we don't see them but Estate explains to the judge that what the deal is and convince the judge to sign on it. "Or worse, that probate court is now going to think it's worth $75m." refers to that. It refers that The $60 Million Sony deal for TII would be presented to the judge and the judge -assuming he reads the tabloids - would question them with "why $60M? why not $75M?" and would not sign on the deal. I would say it was an empty worry that the judges don't make decisions based on tabloids as source.

As far as I can see from the exchange, Friedman's posts creates some worry in Sony. They worry if Estate can use that story to demand more money from them. However they are also very clear that it's nothing more than a rumor, "allegedly estate is making calls", "it's a rumor" , "let's wait them to come to us" etc all shows that Sony gets worried, knows it is a rumor and have a "let's wait and see approach".

Now there's nothing to suggest that there was a $75 M deal on the table. You only have Friedman's speculation of the offers. He can be wrong. So without an actual $75 Million deal, you cannot really accuse Estate of going with a bad deal to favor Sony. Even if there was a $75 Million offer, conditions of $60 million deal could have made it a better deal (such as a lower upfront payment but bigger profit share deal could be better than higher upfront payment but lower profit share deal) I have seen some argue that "well Estate could have used that news story to demand more money from Sony". Well that's basically extortion. Yes executors have a fiduciary duty to act in MJ's/Estate's best interest but that doesn't mean act unethical, illegal, use, abuse, hurt others in the process.

And at this moment in time it would be really hard to argue problems with fiduciary duty. Wasn't TII a good deal? $60 Million up front, 90% of profits, $200 - $300 Million in gross revenues, an album that sold well, merchandise, tshirts etc? So however you look at it, it was a good deal. So how are you gonna argue that deal wasn't in Estate's best interest?

 

[Tygger]

I would say it was an empty worry that the judges don't make decisions based on tabloids as source.

Be that as it may, Sony felt differently and was concerned.

However they are also very clear that it's nothing more than a rumor, "allegedly estate is making calls", "it's a rumor" , "let's wait them to come to us" etc all shows that Sony gets worried, knows it is a rumor and have a "let's wait and see approach".

Sony knows it is a rumor however they wanted to "wait and see" how the Estate would react to the article. The Estate calmed Sony's fears and agreed to $60M.

You only have Friedman's speculation of the offers.

From the emails:

The estate is alledgedly making calls. Just not sure where this is coming from and we have told them off the record what the situation is.

Read the above again. Sony told Friedman off the record and the $60M figure is correct in Friedman's article. Remember, there are also emails regarding Friedman authoring articles in support of Sony. Sony was concerned the Estate floated the $75M figure to Friedman.

Even if there was a $75 Million offer, conditions of $60 million deal could have made it a better deal

If that is how you feel, that is how you feel. Others may feel differently.

So without an actual $75 Million deal, you cannot really accuse Estate of going with a bad deal to favor Sony.

And at this moment in time it would be really hard to argue problems with fiduciary duty.

So how are you gonna argue that deal wasn't in Estate's best interest?

I am using your statements as an example of other similar statements. I did not accuse the estate of anything. This is what I wrote originally:

Sony was concerned that the Estate would raise the price and worse (as they said in their email) that the probate court would believe the TII rights’ price to be $75M instead of $60M. Branca’s calls were not to raise the price as Sony feared so Branca did indeed save Sony several millions at the cost of the Estate. That can be considered an act against fiduciary duty.

Adding: interesting that you and others do not see a possible fiduciary issue when Sony saw it quite clearly.

SONY executives authored these emails. SONY executive felt that way. The sooner some fans grasp that and refrain from using the discussion to incorrectly characterize other posters as anti-Estate or conspiracy-inclined, the discussions can focus on the actual emails and what can learned from them.

The emails said exactly what I said when I clarified ForMJ’s post above. I do not need to argue Sony’s feelings. They felt that way and they may have had very good reason for feeling that way. As I said before, there are other emails where Sony questions some of the Estate's actions towards the beneficiaries; this is not the only instance. It is Sony's right to feel that way.

 

[ivy]

If that is how you feel, that is how you feel. Others may feel differently.

Actually what we - I, you,others- feel is totally irrelevant in my opinion. Judge approved the TII deal. The alleged conflict of interest and/or act against fiduciary duty information is out. Will the beneficiaries - who can challenge the executors without losing their beneficiary position - do anything? Until then this is really a moot discussion in my opinion. You think this, I think that, what difference does any of it make? None.

 

[barbee0715]

And at this moment in time it would be really hard to argue problems with fiduciary duty. Wasn't TII a good deal? $60 Million up front, 90% of profits, $200 - $300 Million in gross revenues, an album that sold well, merchandise, tshirts etc? So however you look at it, it was a good deal. So how are you gonna argue that deal wasn't in Estate's best interest?

I remember when TII was released and reading about the 90% profit going to the Estate. I was very surprised that it was that high of a percentage. If I remember right, wasn't that right around the time they announced the record deal also? I just wonder why they negotiated that deal that really wasn't at all in their favor.

 

[Tygger]

Ivy, if you truly believe yours and others’ views are irrelevant, there is no purpose to a discussion board regarding any MJ topic let alone Sony’s leaked emails.

I have discussed these emails with others and it is an interesting discussion as the focus is on what information one can learn from the emails. The information is plentiful, varied, and at times, amusing. I found Schlessel’s first response to the $75M figure to be hilarious! “Is this a bad dream?” I believe I understand why there was not a third single for Xscape despite it generating $29M in revenue in approximately five months. The American Masters thread (http://www.mjjcommunity.com/forum/threads/135550-American-Masters-Michael-Jackson) actually belongs in this thread as it was part of the Sony email leaks.

 

[barbee0715]

I have discussed these emails with others and it is an interesting discussion as the focus is on what information one can learn from the emails. The information is plentiful, varied, and at times, amusing.

The information on the American Masters show, I thought, was pretty interesting-especially when I looked up the producer and found that he was the same person who did 2 excellent PBS docs about Broadway-they were both exceptional. If he spends that kind of time on the one for Michael, it could really be great. The highlight for me was that they actually found a home movie that somebody filmed of Gene Kelly performing "Pal Joey" on Broadway-where he became a superstar and was signed to his MGM contract. My jaw dropped-never ever thought I would see even that snippet.

And I laughed at the emails where they were discussing the cap on Branca's hotel rooms-discussing they could raise the cap to $1,000 a night-but he was used to staying in $4,000 a night rooms-I, for some reason, just thought that was hilarious-but the rich are different.:yes:

 

[ivy]

Ivy, if you truly believe yours and others’ views are irrelevant, there is no purpose to a discussion board regarding any MJ topic let alone Sony’s leaked emails.

I didn't say that. I was trying to say arguing about it was quite meaningless as we have no power to change anything. Plus some of these things happened years ago (such as TII) deal, so sorry if I don't feel interested in them.

The information is plentiful, varied, and at times, amusing.

huh and I found majority of them - talking about scribd documents posted here- very routine and boring chit chat. I think Branca advisor position was the most interesting / controversial issue. American Masters and Broadway Play mentions gave us hints about possible future projects. TII situation was in my opinion just a tabloid speculation.

I saw something on twitter about Sony/ATV income statement. To me that was interesting. Not only it showed around $14 M net income for Sony - explaining why they might have considered to sell it but it also showed a $600-$700 loan on the catalog - most probably due to acquiring other catalogs. Which totally proved this TMZ story (http://www.tmz.com/2014/02/10/michael-jackson-estate-irs-taxes-howard-weitzman-john-branca/)

The American Masters thread (actually belongs in this thread as it was part of the Sony email leaks.

No. That's about a possible future release hence satisfies "MJ happenings" criteria. This section and this thread is used for more controversial and legal topics such as discussion of fiduciary duty. Branca advisor job has its own thread, as it generated a media story. This thread as you know was created for the rest as there was a quite insistence of continuing to be off topic.

 

[Bubs]

D.B.Anderson who wrote a few great articles about MJ, and her articles were posted on official MJ fb account.
Her reward was being acknowledged by official MJ face book and that post was seeing over 60+ million people. Then she was attacked by conspiracy theorists only because official MJ fb posted her article, and they accused her being whatever plant.

I wanted to expand this a little bit as I mentioned DB was accused of being estate plant or whatever by these conspiracy theorists, and had to set her tweets protected from outsiders at times, because of the abuse she got from these people. DB was interviewed by Will from DWE, and this is what she said:
The biggest compliment I got was the estate posted a link to “Messenger King” on Michael’s official website. That will always be special to me. But for purposes of this discussion, their doing so has a message: “We endorse and agree with the position. This is who Michael was.” I think they’re telling us how we can help them.

Willa: That’s interesting. So you took the initiative and wrote that first article and got it published, and at just the right time when it would garner a lot of attention. But then once it started gaining momentum, the Estate helped push things along?

D.B.: I’m not sure how it occurred exactly. I just know that after, maybe 4 days or so, someone contacted me and said, go look at Michael’s Facebook page. The estate had seen the article – whether they are always scanning the media or whether someone sent it to them, I don’t know – they had seen it and posted about it on his website and then promoted it through his social media. And I was just stunned because I haven’t ever seen them do this before.

Since then, the estate has taken the social justice theme and run with it several times. They posted about Michael’s work during Charlie Hebdo attacks, when people were singing “Heal The World,” things like that. And, Willa, since we began this conversation yesterday, the estate has just done a post on the Baltimore dancer we spoke of! So it’s clear to me, this is where they most want the global conversation to go, in terms of his image, and well it should, because it’s absolute truth about him as a person.

-----------------------------------------------

 

[Bubs]

"Two questions: Have you read the emails regarding Greenburg? Can you post where I portrayed the Estate's support of Greenburg due to his support of the Estate as a negative?"

1)I have read the emails regarding Zack and here you go:
2)Forbes’ Greenberg being celebrated by Branca for his support of the Estate.

Can you post me email where does it say that dinner was for Zach's support for the estate?

This is the email in question:
John Branca/Estate Of Michael Jackson reception for Zack Greenburg - june 20 home of John Branca


HI, I wanted to make sure you were in receipt of an invitation to a special event honoring Zack Greenburg/Forbes at the home of John Branca. Please let us know if you are able to stop by, Kindest regards.

You have no ounce of evidence that dinner was for Zack for his support to estate, that is your very own conspiracy theory.

 

[Tygger]

Barbee0715, I thought it was highly amusing that Sony spent the lesser amount of $7.5K sponsoring a table where Branca would be honored because they pledged $65K to MusicCares honoring Paul McCartney. I would hope there would be an American Masters episode however; I do not know the status of that project.

Plus some of these things happened years ago (such as TII) deal, so sorry if I don't feel interested in them.

You will receive from a discussion what you contribute. As there are posters here who are still frustrated that Katherine rejected restitution several years ago, I do not believe the date of an event(s) is truly an issue.

I saw something on twitter about Sony/ATV income statement. To me that was interesting. Not only it showed around $14 M net income for Sony - explaining why they might have considered to sell it but it also showed a $600-$700 loan on the catalog - most probably due to acquiring other catalogs. Which totally proved this TMZ story

Hopefully you saw other supporting documentation that showed the issue was Sony/ATV not restructuring their business model. The revenues for Sony/ATV were/are quite healthy indeed which is why the choice to sell spoke to Sony’s not restructuring this business model in a timely manner. Thus the article I posted previously:

Another positive effect of the leaked emails! It seems Sony will now focus on a restructuring of its business model so as to be more effective and reflective of the current climate.

Sony/ATV hires former PRS exec Moses Martiny
Sony/ATV Music Publishing has appointed Moses Martiny to the role of vice president digital, Europe.

In this newly created position, Martiny will be responsible for negotiating terms with digital service providers for new digital music products and services.

Discussing the hire, Sony/ATV EVP of digital and society relations Europe, Antony Bebawi, said: “I am delighted that Moses has joined us. He brings a complementary set of skills and valuable experience to our team which will further enhance our growing digital licensing business and help us to continue to deliver improved results for our songwriters during these exciting yet challenging times for the music business.”

Martiny said: “I am excited to join the renowned team at Sony/ATV. As the leading music publisher Sony/ATV is playing a key role in enabling and shaping the expanding digital music eco-system. The challenge is to support a vibrant and growing market, while also ensuring fair compensation to the creators of music.
http://www.musicweek.com/news/read/sony-atv-hires-former-prs-exec-moses-martiny/060616

Sony was quite shocked the Estate valued the catalog “conservatively low” for tax purposes which is what the TMZ article you posted refers to.

No. That's about a possible future release hence satisfies "MJ happenings" criteria.

As you say. Fortunately for the leak, fans learned about it. As I said the information is plentiful, varied, and at times, amusing.

This thread as you know was created for the rest as there was a quite insistence of continuing to be off topic.

Again, I did not know you would create a separate thread when I originally posted my one reply post. Had I predicted such, I would have waited for the this thread's creation.

Bubs, when in doubt contribute any and all post to a conspiracy, eh? Have you read Greenburg’s articles that are supportive of the Estate? I will continue to wait for you to show where I portrayed the Estate's support of Greenburg due to his support of the Estate as a negative.