Latest on MJJC

Leonard Rowe

AnnieRUOkay89 said:
I don't get it? I didn't say when they severed ties, I said they severed ties once he found out Malnik had dealings with Made Men...Which is true, correct?
Click to expand...


I am not sure that is correct, not sure what he knew. Not trying to be argumentative or anything. I really can't believe he hadn't heard about Malniks past even before he met him, its so well known. I think it was the 80's he was unsuccessfully prosecuted.

I think he severed ties with those on the list at least by April 2005 because they wanted him to sell part or all of the Sony catalog. I think what the Jacksons did during the trial was that they had competing deals going for the refinancing. Joe called up Jesse Jackson for help according to what I read. I remember during the trial seeing a small video clip where Joe, MJ & some other people went into some motel to do some deal toward the end of the trial. It was written up but I can't seem to find it.

In May 2005 RF wrote this, a little contradictory saying that MJ froze Malnik out in 2003 because Malnik told him he needed to downsize etc, when he's helping him with Goldman Sachs with Koppelman & Branca:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,155529,00.html





***** Shocked by Sale of Loans
Michael Jackson was reportedly shocked Wednesday when he received word that Bank of America had sold him out.
I can tell you exclusively that Bank of America has sold Jackson's $270 million in loans to a private hedge fund. The group is called Fortress Investments, located in Manhattan.
Their principals are Peter L. Briger Jr., formerly with Goldman Sachs, plus Wesley R. Edens, Robert I. Kauffman, Randal A. Nardone and Michael E. Novogratz — all with substantial backgrounds in finance.
The firm's specialty, according to its Web site, is rescuing "undervalued, orphaned and distressed investments throughout the United States, Western Europe and Japan."

With this sale, Fortress now stands to become a 50 percent owner in Sony/ATV Music Publishing if Jackson should default on the loan.
Technically, he is already in default. Furthermore, Jackson's deal with Sony comes to an end this December, at which time the company can buy him out for $200 million if he can't come up with a new buyer or enough money to pay back the loan.
The Fortress deal is also rumored to include a $70 million loan Jackson has against his own publishing catalog, called MiJac.
Jackson was apparently shocked, according to sources, when he got word about the sale on Wednesday morning from Bank of America.
He had previously rejected a deal that would have netted him money, cleared his debt and left him in good shape with people who were longtime friends. But now he's in business with strangers.
Still in the equation, however, is grocery king Ron Burkle. He sent a letter to Bank of America several days ago saying that he needed 90 days to help Jackson refinance.
Burkle could still be Jackson's white knight and bail him out from Fortress, but so far he's done nothing.
In the meantime, Jackson remains cash-poor as he continues to stand trial for child molestation here in Santa Maria.
Michael Cooks His Own Goose
Michael Jackson has no one to blame but himself for what's happened to him now.
He can't say record producer Tommy Mottola is a racist or that producer Charles Koppelman is out to get him. He's cooked his own goose, with all the trimmings.
Jackson was severely taken aback to discover yesterday morning that Bank of America had sold his $270 million debt to a group of private investors.
But why was he surprised at all? In the last few weeks, Jackson has done nothing but spit in the faces of the people who have kept him solvent for the last 20 years.
First there was his private banker at Bank of America, Jane Heller. Heller came with Jackson's loan from NationsBank when it was merged into Bank of America. But the fact is, Heller has kept Jackson in carnival makeup and llama food for the two last decades.
Then there's Al Malnik and Koppelman. They're not the Red Cross; they're savvy businessmen. But they worked hard for Jackson over the last three years to help get his house in order and off the auction block. Jackson was frequent guest at Malnik's Miami manse, bringing with him kids, nannies, etc.
In 2003, Malnik told Jackson that he should downsize his life, take stock and stop inviting children into his bed, before the current scandal broke in the fall of 2003. Jackson froze him out and the two have not talked since then.
Jackson also long ago stopped speaking to Koppelman and to his longtime attorney John Branca — two more advisers who kept him afloat. Instead, Jackson turned to a succession of con artists and hustlers who promised him the moon but simply mooned him.
There was also the brief infatuation with the Nation of Islam and the ill-fated association with Shmuley Boteach. To this day no one knows where the money went from the Feb. 14, 2001, Carnegie Hall charity event hosted by Boteach and Jackson "for children."
But the one thing Jackson had with Heller, Malnik, Koppelman and Branca — besides a history — was affection. They cared about him even when he didn't care about them. They protected him, too.
But last month Jackson refused a deal they offered that would have bailed him out of debt. He didn't like it because he thought they would get something out of it.
In his characteristic sneaky manner, he turned to grocery king Rob Burkle of Yucaipa Companies to save the day.
Malnik, properly insulted, quit. The bank, which considered Malnik their only link to reality, obviously had had enough.
Who knows what the moneymen that bought out Jackson's debt have in mind for the loan.
One thing is for sure: The hedge fund's major principle, Peter L. Briger, doesn't know the former King of Pop and probably doesn't want to.
Briger will function very well as a stranger to Jackson, dispassionate and businesslike as the clock counts down to December 20: the day when Jackson will have to either put up or shut for good.
One thing's for sure: He will get exactly what he deserves.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,155529,00.html



Kind of ominous what RF wrote, don't you think?
 
Last edited:
jrsfan said:
Personally I find that Dileo has been a liar. He has had shady business dealings documented by Muzikfactory2. He lied on LKL about the meeting on May 15. He works for the estate. KJ felt that he was feeding the tabs in her book & said he was making her son look like an idiot (something to that effect) - I'd have to go read her book to get the exact quote.
Click to expand...

Let's not bring Muzikfactory2 into this discussion
1. she's biased and do not allow opposite opinions/comments - these discussion we are having here is million times better simply because we can discuss and not force an opinion onto others
2. her source for all that information was (before burning the bridges) was Oxman. And Oxman is Joe's lawyer with Joe's best interest as his goal
3. she's racist and honestly I cannot understand how any MJ fan can continue to associate with her - remember one of the reasons Michael had issues with Mottola was he called a black artist N word. Anybody that uses N word (as Muzikfactory2 did) has no place in a MJ related community IMO.

how did he lie about the meeting at LKL? It's the same thing he said all along and at the Exel interview

KING: We're back with Michael Jackson's manager Frank DiLeo, in our exclusive appearance. Jim Moret, chief correspondent of "Inside Edition." What can you tell us about a meeting at the Beverly Hills Hotel, attended by Michael and his father Joe, before the concert tour? What was that all about?

DILEO: Here is what happened. That was the one day I happened to be out of town. Joseph wanted to have a meeting with Leonard Rowe, Michael, Randy Phillips and me, and Paul Gumbaway (ph). Katherine came to the meeting. It was at the Beverly Hills Hotel in a bungalow.

They got there early. Michael stayed in his car until Randy and Paul came. I was out of town. They went in. They had a meeting. Joe asked all these questions, him and Leonard. Randy answered them.

KING: You heard all this from Randy?

DILEO: I heard it from Michael.

KING: Oh.

DILEO: OK. This is May 15th. That is a Friday. I get back Sunday or Monday. Michael says, we have to get rid of Rowe. I said OK. He tells me everything that happened. May 20th -- KING: That letter went out.

DILEO: That letter went out and he received it.

KING: He said he didn't.

DILEO: I know he did. He got it. He also said that that meeting was three weeks before Michael died and that's not true. His timeline is way off.

KING: So Michael was kicked after that meeting?

DILEO: He forgot that he signed it. He signed it under pressure. But he forgot to send a letter out earlier. When they had the meeting and he saw how they acted, he said, Frank, we forgot. We have to remove Leonard. I said OK.
 
Last edited:
Wow! Very interesting. Thanks for posting these.

Looks like they did to MJ what they did to millions of morgage holders:
Bundle good risk and bad risk loans together, rate them AAA and sold them as CDOs to the Chinese.
Business as usual for Hedgefunds on Wall Street.


jrsfan said:
I am not sure that is correct, not sure what he knew. Not trying to be argumentative or anything. I really can't believe he hadn't heard about Malniks past even before he met him, its so well known. I think it was the 80's he was unsuccessfully prosecuted.

I think he severed ties with those on the list at least by April 2005 because they wanted him to sell part or all of the Sony catalog. I think what the Jacksons did during the trial was that they had competing deals going for the refinancing. Joe called up Jesse Jackson for help according to what I read. I remember during the trial seeing a small video clip where Joe, MJ & some other people went into some motel to do some deal toward the end of the trial. It was written up but I can't seem to find it.

In May 2005 RF wrote this, a little contradictory saying that MJ froze Malnik out in 2003 because Malnik told him he needed to downsize etc, when he's helping him with Goldman Sachs with Koppelman & Branca:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,155529,00.html





***** Shocked by Sale of Loans
Michael Jackson was reportedly shocked Wednesday when he received word that Bank of America had sold him out.
I can tell you exclusively that Bank of America has sold Jackson's $270 million in loans to a private hedge fund. The group is called Fortress Investments, located in Manhattan.
Their principals are Peter L. Briger Jr., formerly with Goldman Sachs, plus Wesley R. Edens, Robert I. Kauffman, Randal A. Nardone and Michael E. Novogratz — all with substantial backgrounds in finance.
The firm's specialty, according to its Web site, is rescuing "undervalued, orphaned and distressed investments throughout the United States, Western Europe and Japan."

With this sale, Fortress now stands to become a 50 percent owner in Sony/ATV Music Publishing if Jackson should default on the loan.
Technically, he is already in default. Furthermore, Jackson's deal with Sony comes to an end this December, at which time the company can buy him out for $200 million if he can't come up with a new buyer or enough money to pay back the loan.
The Fortress deal is also rumored to include a $70 million loan Jackson has against his own publishing catalog, called MiJac.
Jackson was apparently shocked, according to sources, when he got word about the sale on Wednesday morning from Bank of America.
He had previously rejected a deal that would have netted him money, cleared his debt and left him in good shape with people who were longtime friends. But now he's in business with strangers.
Still in the equation, however, is grocery king Ron Burkle. He sent a letter to Bank of America several days ago saying that he needed 90 days to help Jackson refinance.
Burkle could still be Jackson's white knight and bail him out from Fortress, but so far he's done nothing.
In the meantime, Jackson remains cash-poor as he continues to stand trial for child molestation here in Santa Maria.
Michael Cooks His Own Goose
Michael Jackson has no one to blame but himself for what's happened to him now.
He can't say record producer Tommy Mottola is a racist or that producer Charles Koppelman is out to get him. He's cooked his own goose, with all the trimmings.
Jackson was severely taken aback to discover yesterday morning that Bank of America had sold his $270 million debt to a group of private investors.
But why was he surprised at all? In the last few weeks, Jackson has done nothing but spit in the faces of the people who have kept him solvent for the last 20 years.
First there was his private banker at Bank of America, Jane Heller. Heller came with Jackson's loan from NationsBank when it was merged into Bank of America. But the fact is, Heller has kept Jackson in carnival makeup and llama food for the two last decades.
Then there's Al Malnik and Koppelman. They're not the Red Cross; they're savvy businessmen. But they worked hard for Jackson over the last three years to help get his house in order and off the auction block. Jackson was frequent guest at Malnik's Miami manse, bringing with him kids, nannies, etc.
In 2003, Malnik told Jackson that he should downsize his life, take stock and stop inviting children into his bed, before the current scandal broke in the fall of 2003. Jackson froze him out and the two have not talked since then.
Jackson also long ago stopped speaking to Koppelman and to his longtime attorney John Branca — two more advisers who kept him afloat. Instead, Jackson turned to a succession of con artists and hustlers who promised him the moon but simply mooned him.
There was also the brief infatuation with the Nation of Islam and the ill-fated association with Shmuley Boteach. To this day no one knows where the money went from the Feb. 14, 2001, Carnegie Hall charity event hosted by Boteach and Jackson "for children."
But the one thing Jackson had with Heller, Malnik, Koppelman and Branca — besides a history — was affection. They cared about him even when he didn't care about them. They protected him, too.
But last month Jackson refused a deal they offered that would have bailed him out of debt. He didn't like it because he thought they would get something out of it.
In his characteristic sneaky manner, he turned to grocery king Rob Burkle of Yucaipa Companies to save the day.
Malnik, properly insulted, quit. The bank, which considered Malnik their only link to reality, obviously had had enough.
Who knows what the moneymen that bought out Jackson's debt have in mind for the loan.
One thing is for sure: The hedge fund's major principle, Peter L. Briger, doesn't know the former King of Pop and probably doesn't want to.
Briger will function very well as a stranger to Jackson, dispassionate and businesslike as the clock counts down to December 20: the day when Jackson will have to either put up or shut for good.
One thing's for sure: He will get exactly what he deserves.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,155529,00.html



Kind of ominous what RF wrote, don't you think?
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
ivy said:
Let's not bring Muzikfactory2 into this discussion
1. she's biased and do not allow opposite opinions/comments - these discussion we are having here is million times better simply because we can discuss and not force an opinion onto others
2. her source for all that information was (before burning the bridges) was Oxman. And Oxman is Joe's lawyer with Joe's best interest as his goal
3. she's racist and honestly I cannot understand how any MJ fan can continue to associate with her - remember one of the reasons Michael had issues with Mottola was he called a black artist N word. Anybody that uses N word (as Muzikfactory2 did) has to place in a MJ related community IMO.

how did he lie about the meeting at LKL? It's the same thing he said all along and at the Exel interview

KING: We're back with Michael Jackson's manager Frank DiLeo, in our exclusive appearance. Jim Moret, chief correspondent of "Inside Edition." What can you tell us about a meeting at the Beverly Hills Hotel, attended by Michael and his father Joe, before the concert tour? What was that all about?

DILEO: Here is what happened. That was the one day I happened to be out of town. Joseph wanted to have a meeting with Leonard Rowe, Michael, Randy Phillips and me, and Paul Gumbaway (ph). Katherine came to the meeting. It was at the Beverly Hills Hotel in a bungalow.

They got there early. Michael stayed in his car until Randy and Paul came. I was out of town. They went in. They had a meeting. Joe asked all these questions, him and Leonard. Randy answered them.

KING: You heard all this from Randy?

DILEO: I heard it from Michael.

KING: Oh.

DILEO: OK. This is May 15th. That is a Friday. I get back Sunday or Monday. Michael says, we have to get rid of Rowe. I said OK. He tells me everything that happened. May 20th -- KING: That letter went out.

DILEO: That letter went out and he received it.

KING: He said he didn't.

DILEO: I know he did. He got it. He also said that that meeting was three weeks before Michael died and that's not true. His timeline is way off.

KING: So Michael was kicked after that meeting?

DILEO: He forgot that he signed it. He signed it under pressure. But he forgot to send a letter out earlier. When they had the meeting and he saw how they acted, he said, Frank, we forgot. We have to remove Leonard. I said OK.
Click to expand...


While Muzikfactory2 apparently did get help from Oxman according to what I saw Oxman write, not sure how much. According to Muzikfactory2 it is the fans who are coming up with all the evidence. IDK. I do think the info about Dileo's business was accurate, doesn't matter whether her info was from Oxman or not. Stan Goldman (law prof at USC, I think & he comment on TV) says that Oxman is very good at preparation, sometimes lacks judgment - so Oxman is probably good at gathering info & putting it together. Unfortunately her vids are no longer there, for the most part. I read some of the racist things she apparently wrote - very shocking. I have read some of her comments directed to the Jackson family on her actual site & she really is overboard. I do think she is very unfair to them, I wish them all well. I support whatever the Jacksons do to get justice - they are really the ones dealing with the criminal justice system. Her vids are still good though so I think the contents of the vids are good for discussion.

What I do find dishonest about Dileo in what he said about the meeting is when he says he "just happened to be out of town". It really was a big deal, it was written up before it even happened, it was planned in advance. Why be out of town? AGE possibly? He signed the contract & it was notarized. MJ was obviously unhappy about things for that meeting to take place & knew that his dad would end up yelling, children know their parents - Michael had been in countless meetings with him before. I believe Joe's account about it - where he talks about getting paid in dollars versus pounds, etc.

I do believe the FFs about him saying about the 50 shows. I do believe the vid where MJ said it has disappeared for a reason. Dileo acknowledged that MJ would say that, but makes it like he was joking around, no big deal sort of thing. That is spinning & Dileo is good at it. KJ did not like him for a reason.
 
jrsfan said:
While Muzikfactory2 apparently did get help from Oxman according to what I saw Oxman write, not sure how much. According to Muzikfactory2 it is the fans who are coming up with all the evidence. IDK. I do think the info about Dileo's business was accurate, doesn't matter whether her info was from Oxman or not. Stan Goldman (law prof at USC, I think & he comment on TV) says that Oxman is very good at preparation, sometimes lacks judgment - so Oxman is probably good at gathering info & putting it together. Unfortunately her vids are no longer there, for the most part. I read some of the racist things she apparently wrote - very shocking. I have read some of her comments directed to the Jackson family on her actual site & she really is overboard. I do think she is very unfair to them, I wish them all well. I support whatever the Jacksons do to get justice - they are really the ones dealing with the criminal justice system. Her vids are still good though so I think the contents of the vids are good for discussion.

What I do find dishonest about Dileo in what he said about the meeting is when he says he "just happened to be out of town". It really was a big deal, it was written up before it even happened, it was planned in advance. Why be out of town? AGE possibly? He signed the contract & it was notarized. MJ was obviously unhappy about things for that meeting to take place & knew that his dad would end up yelling, children know their parents - Michael had been in countless meetings with him before. I believe Joe's account about it - where he talks about getting paid in dollars versus pounds, etc.

I do believe the FFs about him saying about the 50 shows. I do believe the vid where MJ said it has disappeared for a reason. Dileo acknowledged that MJ would say that, but makes it like he was joking around, no big deal sort of thing. That is spinning & Dileo is good at it. KJ did not like him for a reason.
Click to expand...

Yes, let's not throw the baby out with the bath water. Just use caution and question everything.

Speaking of which, can anybody find out who was the reporter for this piece (see video below) and ask him where he got that info?

 
IF Oxman was a brillant lawyer, he would be involved in big cases.

The guy don"t even know to file papers properly.

And his judgment ? 0
 
jrsfan said:
While Muzikfactory2 apparently did get help from Oxman according to what I saw Oxman write, not sure how much. According to Muzikfactory2 it is the fans who are coming up with all the evidence. IDK. I do think the info about Dileo's business was accurate, doesn't matter whether her info was from Oxman or not. Stan Goldman (law prof at USC, I think & he comment on TV) says that Oxman is very good at preparation, sometimes lacks judgment - so Oxman is probably good at gathering info & putting it together. Unfortunately her vids are no longer there, for the most part. I read some of the racist things she apparently wrote - very shocking. I have read some of her comments directed to the Jackson family on her actual site & she really is overboard. I do think she is very unfair to them, I wish them all well. I support whatever the Jacksons do to get justice - they are really the ones dealing with the criminal justice system. Her vids are still good though so I think the contents of the vids are good for discussion.

What I do find dishonest about Dileo in what he said about the meeting is when he says he "just happened to be out of town". It really was a big deal, it was written up before it even happened, it was planned in advance. Why be out of town? AGE possibly? He signed the contract & it was notarized. MJ was obviously unhappy about things for that meeting to take place & knew that his dad would end up yelling, children know their parents - Michael had been in countless meetings with him before. I believe Joe's account about it - where he talks about getting paid in dollars versus pounds, etc.

I do believe the FFs about him saying about the 50 shows. I do believe the vid where MJ said it has disappeared for a reason. Dileo acknowledged that MJ would say that, but makes it like he was joking around, no big deal sort of thing. That is spinning & Dileo is good at it. KJ did not like him for a reason.
Click to expand...


if muzikfactory2 videos were available we could discuss them. I didn't see the one about the Dileo therefore I cannot comment on it. The ones I saw was biased and full of errors. I tried to contact her about a post about the will/trust and the errors that it had, her answer was like f* off - very similar to her reactions to Oxman, Jacksons and even Karen Faye as of recently.

I value intelligent discussion - like we have here - and you know that the minute the opposite side can only reply to you in insult format, they got nothing to back up what they say and it's complete waste of time trying to talk to such people.

anyway back to our topic

about the 50 concert issue I'm 50-50 between Dileo and Follower Fans.

- The contract is obvious with a minimum concert number - which wasn't 10. numbers were between 18 to 31.
- With close to $30M in production costs it was also obvious that cannot be covered with only 10 concerts. and I agree with Dileo that this should be obvious to Michael.
- However with what the FF's say and quoting Samantha "He told us he did eventually want to do some shows in other countries. But the idea was over a period of 2 years, not 50 shows in one place all at once". I believe that he knew that he was going to do more than 10 shows but his plan was to it around the world over a longer period of time (such as 10 in london, 10 in germany etc over 2-3 years).


regardless like I said any issues about an already signed contract would require a lawyer to solve it not concert promoter.

can somebody explain it to me what difference does it make if he was paid dollars or pounds?

and Oxman please ! he's good at coming up with 50 different things for 50 different lawsuits but he really doesn't think if he's hurting any other things such as investigation and criminal lawsuit (even his own lawsuits) and cannot even properly file anything.
 
Last edited:
leonard rowe is another person i don't have any respect for he sold his self out to he only speaking out because he got played
 
ivy said:
if muzikfactory2 videos were available we could discuss them. I didn't see the one about the Dileo therefore I cannot comment on it. The ones I saw was biased and full of errors. I tried to contact her about a post about the will/trust and the errors that it had, her answer was like f* off - very similar to her reactions to Oxman, Jacksons and even Karen Faye as of recently.

I value intelligent discussion - like we have here - and you know that the minute the opposite side can only reply to you in insult format, they got nothing to back up what they say and it's complete waste of time trying to talk to such people.

anyway back to our topic

about the 50 concert issue I'm 50-50 between Dileo and Follower Fans.

- The contract is obvious with a minimum concert number - which wasn't 10. numbers were between 18 to 31.
- With close to $30M in production costs it was also obvious that cannot be covered with only 10 concerts. and I agree with Dileo that this should be obvious to Michael.
- However with what the FF's say and quoting Samantha "He told us he did eventually want to do some shows in other countries. But the idea was over a period of 2 years, not 50 shows in one place all at once". I believe that he knew that he was going to do more than 10 shows but his plan was to it around the world over a longer period of time (such as 10 in london, 10 in germany etc over 2-3 years).


regardless like I said any issues about an already signed contract would require a lawyer to solve it not concert promoter.

can somebody explain it to me what difference does it make if he was paid dollars or pounds?

and Oxman please ! he's good at coming up with 50 different things for 50 different lawsuits but he really doesn't think if he's hurting any other things such as investigation and criminal lawsuit (even his own lawsuits) and cannot even properly file anything.
Click to expand...

Yes well, we all have our own opinions and truth be told, we are all biased in them.
As far as the lawyer goes for the contract, Michael didn't have one he could trust. The ones he had read the contract were dishonest and sided with AEG, and Michael knew that.
The difference in Michael being paid in dollars or pounds was the exchange rate. AEG was collecting all profits in pounds, yet wanted to pay Michael in US dollars. At the time, Michael would have lost money, because the pound was worth more than the US dollar. Just one more way to screw him.
 
marc_vivien said:
in his book, Rowe said himself the AGE contract was from him.

In the meeting, Rowe and Joe were there for the AGE concert, not the AEG concerts.
Days later, he was fired.
Click to expand...


earth child said:
No, what Rowe said is he was trying to help out Janet and yes, he was involved with trying to get Michael signed.
Click to expand...


So he actually admits that he wanted to sign MJ to do the family-reunion show? Interesting especially since he were on all major tv outlets saying MJ was a druggie, he wanted an intervention since he had reasons to believe MJ had an addiction, MJ would never make it to London, MJ wasnt fit to perform, MJ was too thin, that anyone could pull of the moves MJ did in TII (a big fat LOL to that) etc. So, MJ was incapable of performing for AEG but not for AllGood? LOL Gimme a break! Ha!

Imo, it doesnt matter if it was only about one concert for AllGood.. are you unfit, then you are unfit and shouldnt perform at all-whether it be one show for AllGood or ten shows for AEG. I "like" this quote from Randy Phillips.. "MJ had two and a quarter shows as week, if that was too many, the one would have been too many".
 
Last edited:
Vici said:
So he actually admits that he wanted to sign MJ to do the family-reunion show? Interesting especially since he were on all major tv outlets saying MJ was a druggie, he wanted an intervention since he had reasons to believe MJ had an addiction, MJ would never make it to London, MJ wasnt fit to perform, MJ was too thin, that anyone could pull of the moves MJ did in TII (a big fat LOL to that) etc. So, MJ was incapable of performing for AEG but not for AllGood? LOL Gimme a break! Ha!

Imo, it doesnt matter if it was only about one concert for AllGood.. are you unfit, then you are unfit and shouldnt perform at all-whether it be one show for AllGood or ten shows for AEG. I "like" this quote from Randy Phillips.. "MJ had two and a quarter shows as week, if that was too many, the one would have been too many".
Click to expand...


The one concert with Allgood would have been alot different as he wouldn't been the main performer for the entire show, the family would have numbers. Alot less work.

I thought somewhere I read that MJ was requesting at the end to just do one concert & have it Pay per view. May have just been a tabloid.
 
Vici said:
So he actually admits that he wanted to sign MJ to do the family-reunion show? Interesting especially since he were on all major tv outlets saying MJ was a druggie, he wanted an intervention since he had reasons to believe MJ had an addiction, MJ would never make it to London, MJ wasnt fit to perform, MJ was too thin, that anyone could pull of the moves MJ did in TII (a big fat LOL to that) etc. So, MJ was incapable of performing for AEG but not for AllGood? LOL Gimme a break! Ha!

Imo, it doesnt matter if it was only about one concert for AllGood.. are you unfit, then you are unfit and shouldnt perform at all-whether it be one show for AllGood or ten shows for AEG. I "like" this quote from Randy Phillips.. "MJ had two and a quarter shows as week, if that was too many, the one would have been too many".
Click to expand...

Take a look at the schedule. MJ had more than 2 and quarter shows a week.That is just one more of Randy's lies.
He wasn't doing 10 shows for AEG but 50! That is a really big difference from one, where others are headlining with you. Not to mention, they could have given Michael time to put some weight on and become healthy. Boom, one show, your done!
Verses, you complete one, you got 49 more to go!
Michael would loose 5lbs a night touring. He wasn't heavy enough to be able to loose that much weight, and never mind what they claimed he weighed, my eyes can see he couldn't afford to loose weight like that.
 
jrsfan said:
The one concert with Allgood would have been alot different as he wouldn't been the main performer for the entire show, the family would have numbers. Alot less work.

I thought somewhere I read that MJ was requesting at the end to just do one concert & have it Pay per view. May have just been a tabloid.
Click to expand...

..and we all know how much Michael wanted to perform with his siblings again, seriously. He released a statement in late October 2008 (if im not mistaken, AllGood started their "negotiations" in November 2008). This is Michaels statement "My brothers and sisters have my full love and support, and we’ve certainly shared many great experiences, but at this time I have no plans to record or tour with them. I am now in the studio developing new and exciting projects that I look forward to sharing with my fans in concert soon.”

We also know that some of the follower fans knew MJ was gonna tour in London, he had told them about it and was excited about it back then.

MJ was not requesting pay per view. AllGood wanted it like that, they came up with that concept.

earth child said:
Take a look at the schedule. MJ had more than 2 and quarter shows a week.That is just one more of Randy's lies.
He wasn't doing 10 shows for AEG but 50! That is a really big difference from one, where others are headlining with you. Not to mention, they could have given Michael time to put some weight on and become healthy. Boom, one show, your done!
Verses, you complete one, you got 49 more to go!
Michael would loose 5lbs a night touring. He wasn't heavy enough to be able to loose that much weight, and never mind what they claimed he weighed, my eyes can see he couldn't afford to loose weight like that.
Click to expand...

Dont get me wrong. I know its a big difference of doing 1 show or 50 shows.. BUT my issue is Leonard Rowe.. if Michael was sooo sick, soo unfit and such a junkie.. then WHY did he try to sign MJ to do the show for AllGood?? If he was so unfit, then he shouldnt perform one show either.
 
Last edited:
Vici said:
..and we all know how much Michael wanted to perform with his siblings again, seriously. He released a statement in late October 2009 (if im not mistaken, AllGood started their "negotiations" in November 2008). This is Michaels statement "My brothers and sisters have my full love and support, and we’ve certainly shared many great experiences, but at this time I have no plans to record or tour with them. I am now in the studio developing new and exciting projects that I look forward to sharing with my fans in concert soon.”

We also know that some of the follower fans knew MJ was gonna tour in London, he had told them about it and was excited about it back then.

MJ was not requesting pay per view. AllGood wanted it like that, they came up with that concept.



Dont get me wrong. I know its a big difference of doing 1 show or 50 shows.. BUT my issue is Leonard Rowe.. if Michael was sooo sick, soo unfit and such a junkie.. then WHY did he try to sign MJ to do the show for AllGood?? If he was so unfit, then he shouldnt perform one show either.
Click to expand...

Keep in mind, it was Dileo's name all over the paper work. Not Rowe's.

Rowe had talked about it, in order to get Janet work to pay her band and then he was out of the deal, once it wasn't going to work out as a summer gig. Once Rowe met with and saw the condition Michael was in, he did feel he needed help before he would be able to perform.
Personally, I can see where people from the outside looking in, may have thought Michael had a problem. They knew something was wrong, so just assumed he was back on drugs.
Not that far fetched considering Michael a problem in the passed.
I believe that Michael was being drugged, in order to get him on stage. Different drugs for a different reason. All those trips to Klein's office, seem a little off to me?
 
earth child said:
Take a look at the schedule. MJ had more than 2 and quarter shows a week.That is just one more of Randy's lies.
He wasn't doing 10 shows for AEG but 50! That is a really big difference from one, where others are headlining with you. Not to mention, they could have given Michael time to put some weight on and become healthy. Boom, one show, your done!
Verses, you complete one, you got 49 more to go!
Michael would loose 5lbs a night touring. He wasn't heavy enough to be able to loose that much weight, and never mind what they claimed he weighed, my eyes can see he couldn't afford to loose weight like that.
Click to expand...

According to MichaelJackson.com, he had 2 shows a week, with the occasional 3rd show falling on a weekend date. He'd have 1 or 2 rest days between shows, he wasn't going out there night after night. In fact, towards the end the gap between shows increases by 3-5 days, not to mention in the month of November, he'd have a succession of shows, with the last one being on the 10th, and then resuming on the 21st, that's almost a two week rest period, and I believe this would occur more than once. Where do you get your information from, just out of curiosity?
 
Last edited:
earth child said:
Keep in mind, it was Dileo's name all over the paper work. Not Rowe's.

Rowe had talked about it, in order to get Janet work to pay her band and then he was out of the deal, once it wasn't going to work out as a summer gig. Once Rowe met with and saw the condition Michael was in, he did feel he needed help before he would be able to perform.
Personally, I can see where people from the outside looking in, may have thought Michael had a problem. They knew something was wrong, so just assumed he was back on drugs.
Not that far fetched considering Michael a problem in the passed.
Click to expand...

I know Dileo was the only one that got sued but Rowe actually admits he tried to sign MJ to do one show for another company. I wanna ask one thing.

Leo Rowe saw MJ at the now infamous meeting at the Beverly Hills Hotel in mid-May, he then got fired a few days later. We all know they discussed AllGood vs AEG during that meeting. It was all over TMZ and both Patrick Allocco from AllGood (who was present at that meeting) and Dileo have confirmed it. So, at that meeting we can safely say that L Rowe tried to get MJ on board for the familyshow or why else would he be present at the meeting?

So when exactly did Rowe see MJs declining health? When did it first occur to him that MJ was a junkie? When did he see MJ being way too thin? When did he make the opinion that MJ was never gonna make it to London? Was it at the same meeting that he tried to sign MJ to do a show for him? Ha! Please dont forget that Michaels mother and children went along to the meeting and then MJ went to a toystore with the kids. I think it is highly disrespectful of him to claim this, that MJ was an obvious junkie infront of his kids. I really believe this is the last time he and MJ saw each other and there are no proof of them catching up after he got fired. I cant see them get together after MJ fired him a few days after the meeting.. so my question is when did Rowe become soo worried for MJs health? At the same meeting he tried to sign MJ to do the familyshow or not?
 
AnnieRUOkay89 said:
Leonard Rowe was involved in the supposed intervention 2 weeks before Michael's death, supposedly.
Click to expand...


Was this the meeting that happened with Murray, Dileo, Phillips, & MJ on Jun 18, which was a week before he passed or is this a different one?

Is this info in Rowe's book?
 
According to this link for his book, Rowe saw him a few days before his death. What a few days exactly is, not sure what date that is:

http://www.prnewswire.com/news-rele...published-to-ebook-by-fastpencil-97166569.htm


In the book, Rowe, who was with Michael just a few days before he passed, writes that he believes there was a conspiracy behind the murder of Michael Jackson relating to his 50 percent ownership of the entire Sony catalogue, which is now worth billions of dollars.
 
jrsfan said:
Was this the meeting that happened with Murray, Dileo, Phillips, & MJ on Jun 18, which was a week before he passed or is this a different one?

Is this info in Rowe's book?
Click to expand...


No, this was the one with Joe, Rowe and members of the Jackson family...According to reports, they attempted an intervention in 06, while he was still in Vegas then again just a few months before he died. The first time, according to reports, Michael got angry and vehemently denied an addiction. :bs:


After he died, I believe it was Leonard Rowe and Susan Etok who came up with the story that an intervention was meant to take place a week before the 25th, but Rowe, and select members of the family, apparently couldn't get it together? He also supposedly suggested to AEG that they put Michael in rehab.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yO9-JxeDiWw


My question is, if these supposed interventions did happen, and you were well aware that a person had an addiction, why would you try to court that person into participating in a concert (AGE) anyway? Also in this thread, it's been said Rowe was contacted to supervise the finances Michael would gain from TII, and that AEG were cheating Michael out of money. Yet in the above posted video, he says AEG had Michael covered, as long as he followed with what they told him to do....Kind of confusing if you ask me. :scratch:
 
AnnieRUOkay89 said:
No, this was the one with Joe, Rowe and members of the Jackson family...According to reports, they attempted an intervention in 06, while he was still in Vegas then again just a few months before he died. The first time, according to reports, Michael got angry and vehemently denied an addiction. :bs:


After he died, I believe it was Leonard Rowe and Susan Etok who came up with the story that an intervention was meant to take place a week before the 25th, but Rowe, and select members of the family, apparently couldn't get it together? He also supposedly suggested to AEG that they put Michael in rehab.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yO9-JxeDiWw


My question is, if these supposed interventions did happen, and you were well aware that a person had an addiction, why would you try to court that person into participating in a concert (AGE) anyway? Also in this thread, it's been said Rowe was contacted to supervise the finances Michael would gain from TII, and that AEG were cheating Michael out of money. Yet in the above posted video, he says AEG had Michael covered, as long as he followed with what they told him to do....Kind of confusing if you ask me. :scratch:
Click to expand...

First off, Rowe wasn't at that meeting to court Michael into doing the All Good shows. Rowe brought up to Randy Phillips at that meeting, things like paying Michael in US dollars instead of pounds and the scalping of tickets at inflated prices, of which Michael would see no profit.
I think you are a bit confused about what Rowe is saying in the video. He is saying Phillips and AEG were manipulating Michael with his finances, not that they had him covered. If Michael didn't go along with everything they said, they were threatening to pull the rug out from under him. Considering he by then knew he had signed a contract that stated AEG could take all of his assets, including his catalogs, to cover their expenses, he was stuck. He could have lost everything had he done the shows or not, by the way they worded the "advances" to the artist in the contract. Michael would have made very little money after he paid back everything AEG was counting as advances, including production cost for the shows.
 
earth child said:
First off, Rowe wasn't at that meeting to court Michael into doing the All Good shows. Rowe brought up to Randy Phillips at that meeting, things like paying Michael in US dollars instead of pounds and the scalping of tickets at inflated prices, of which Michael would see no profit.
I think you are a bit confused about what Rowe is saying in the video. He is saying Phillips and AEG were manipulating Michael with his finances, not that they had him covered. If Michael didn't go along with everything they said, they were threatening to pull the rug out from under him. Considering he by then knew he had signed a contract that stated AEG could take all of his assets, including his catalogs, to cover their expenses, he was stuck. He could have lost everything had he done the shows or not, by the way they worded the "advances" to the artist in the contract. Michael would have made very little money after he paid back everything AEG was counting as advances, including production cost for the shows.
Click to expand...

No, that's not what he said, that's what YOU just said. He didn't say anything about AEG manipulating Michael's finances, he said specifically AEG was controlling Michael, with finances, "they were taking care of Michael financially", those were his words. As long as Michael continued doing what AEG asked of him, he'd be getting paid. Not trying to be mean, but this is where fabrications come in, when people twist words, I just watched it again to be sure, what he's saying is, if Michael didn't follow what AEG did, he'd remain "in debt". AEG taking control of his catalog, just isn't true...According to Rowe they didn't have Michael's best interests at heart, all they saw was money, in order to keep Michael satisfied and under their control, they had to court him with promises of financial gain, whether it was detrimental to his health or not.

Rowe never said anything about pounds/US dollars or ticket scalping, not in this video anyway.
 
earth child said:
As far as the lawyer goes for the contract, Michael didn't have one he could trust. The ones he had read the contract were dishonest and sided with AEG, and Michael knew that.
Click to expand...

Okay who are the lawyers that you are talking about? this was before Branca and Dileo came on board. Dileo said in LKL that "3 lawyers" read Michael the contract so who are the lawyers?

earth child said:
The difference in Michael being paid in dollars or pounds was the exchange rate. AEG was collecting all profits in pounds, yet wanted to pay Michael in US dollars. At the time, Michael would have lost money, because the pound was worth more than the US dollar. Just one more way to screw him.
Click to expand...

I need more explanation than this. Now even if AEG paid Michael pounds he would have need to change it to dollars to bring it to US - hence be affected by the exchange rates regardless. If they were paying him the dollar equivalent of the profits in pounds (such as giving him $1.5M for £1M), what's the issue? Is the argument that the exchange rate will change dramatically that Michael would be in disadvantage in the long run? I need more explanation of the financial logic to understand the argument here.


earth child said:
Michael would loose 5lbs a night touring.
Click to expand...

here I have to add that there's a huge difference between touring and a residency.

I worked as an assistant to a pop/rock band before. I experienced both first hand. Touring is really hard and mainly because of all the travel, the time differences. You can't really eat or sleep and find time to rest so it takes it's toll on you. (We would be able to go bed in 4AM, get up 6:30AM to go the next city, hardly have 2 meals a day, always feel tired) Residency on the other hand is a LOT better. there's no travel, no time difference, you go from your home to the venue and back.(it was like a holiday compared to touring, we'd leave the house for a few hours to perform and then comeback, all the working time would equal to 15-20 hrs a week)



earth child said:
Keep in mind, it was Dileo's name all over the paper work. Not Rowe's.
Click to expand...

Vici said:
I know Dileo was the only one that got sued but Rowe actually admits he tried to sign MJ to do one show for another company. I wanna ask one thing.
Click to expand...

Rowe admits it. AllGood also states in their lawsuit that they had the talks with the Joe (and Rowe) and they are the ones that send AllGood to Frank. So I don't think that Frank should be blamed as he wasn't the one to started this All Good saga.


earth child said:
All those trips to Klein's office, seem a little off to me?
Click to expand...

Klein filed a creditor claim citing 70 some procedures in the last few months. All were botox injections or similar things. And seriously when compared to previous years Michael's face looked fuller. It's obvious that it wasn't due to gaining weight. To me it was obvious that Klein was working on Michael's face.

Plus I believe that drugs can be determined in the body and in hair - none of which was found in the autopsy results. so if he was being drugged where is the trace of those drugs?
 
AnnieRUOkay89 said:
No, that's not what he said, that's what YOU just said. He didn't say anything about AEG manipulating Michael's finances, he said specifically AEG was controlling Michael, with finances, "they were taking care of Michael financially", those were his words. As long as Michael continued doing what AEG asked of him, he'd be getting paid. Not trying to be mean, but this is where fabrications come in, when people twist words, I just watched it again to be sure, what he's saying is, if Michael didn't follow what AEG did, he'd remain "in debt". AEG taking control of his catalog, just isn't true...According to Rowe they didn't have Michael's best interests at heart, all they saw was money, in order to keep Michael satisfied and under their control, they had to court him with promises of financial gain, whether it was detrimental to his health or not.

Rowe never said anything about pounds/US dollars or ticket scalping, not in this video anyway.
Click to expand...

I guess you will need to read his book if you want the information, because it is all in there. Not fabricating a thing, I read it so I know what he means in the video when he makes that comment.
 
AnnieRUOkay89 said:
No, this was the one with Joe, Rowe and members of the Jackson family...According to reports, they attempted an intervention in 06, while he was still in Vegas then again just a few months before he died. The first time, according to reports, Michael got angry and vehemently denied an addiction. :bs:


After he died, I believe it was Leonard Rowe and Susan Etok who came up with the story that an intervention was meant to take place a week before the 25th, but Rowe, and select members of the family, apparently couldn't get it together? He also supposedly suggested to AEG that they put Michael in rehab.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yO9-JxeDiWw


My question is, if these supposed interventions did happen, and you were well aware that a person had an addiction, why would you try to court that person into participating in a concert (AGE) anyway? Also in this thread, it's been said Rowe was contacted to supervise the finances Michael would gain from TII, and that AEG were cheating Michael out of money. Yet in the above posted video, he says AEG had Michael covered, as long as he followed with what they told him to do....Kind of confusing if you ask me. :scratch:
Click to expand...

See the thing is, when someone insist that Michael was an addict, to me it makes everything else they have to say irrelevent because the OFFICIAL autopsy report has NOT revealed any other drugs other than the ones Murray was giving him to get some shut eye.
And any medical book will tell you that the half life of drugs like Xanex, Demerol. Prozac etc., can be detected after several weeks and months in some case.

So show me the proof! Until then, shove off Lenny! :tease:
 
ivy said:
Okay who are the lawyers that you are talking about? this was before Branca and Dileo came on board. Dileo said in LKL that "3 lawyers" read Michael the contract so who are the lawyers?
Click to expand...

The only entertainment lawyers we know working for MJ around that time were Londell McMillan and Peter Lopez. This article says it was Lopez who handled the AEG concerts.

Michael wanted to do something for his Spanish speaking audience whom he loved very much", explains Peter Lopez, a Mexican-American lawyer, who orchestrated Michael Jackson's comeback. Darius Jordi Lassus, President and CEO of IMC Records adds, "in the past three years, Peter Lopez helped Michael Jackson launch the Life Water "Thrillicious" Super Bowl ad featuring Naomi Campbell, the release of "Thriller 25" (the 25th Anniversary edition of the biggest selling album in music history with new mixes featuring Wil.i.am, Kanye West, Akon and Fergie), "Thriller the Musical", the "This Is It" tour with AEGand an MJ inspired clothing line with Christian Audigier, you simply couldn't stop them, they were on fire."
(http://www.blackvibes.com/features/news/michael-jackson-was-planning-record-spanish-king-po/)
Click to expand...

So, were Lopez/McMillan the dishonest ones? We have Peter Lopez who started to work for MJ in 2006 and whom some fans believe were killed due to his connections to MJ, apparantly, he knew a lot about MJs murder they claim. So he was the dishonest one? Then we have Londell McMillan, he worked with MJ since 2006 and are a Jackson familyfriend. Some ppl really need to find facts (as in WHO represented MJ at that time) before they make claims and dont speculate because what we know of so far, it was Lopez and McMillan in charge at that time, seriously.¨If anyone can dispute that with fact/names of other lawyers, please share!!

ivy said:
Rowe admits it. AllGood also states in their lawsuit that they had the talks with the Joe (and Rowe) and they are the ones that send AllGood to Frank. So I don't think that Frank should be blamed as he wasn't the one to started this All Good saga.
Click to expand...

Oh I didnt know this, thanks. It is just sooo very sad how Frank is on one side and Rowe/Joe on the other side nowadays. Some fans believes Frank is very much invovled in the conspiracy against MJ and sees him as the likes of Branca etc. Ive seen posters from court hearings where they have put up Franks picture next to Branca, Tohme, Sneddon etc. I really wonder if these ppl knew that Joe/Rowe actually told AllGood to go to Frank. What a flippin mess!

earth child said:
First off, Rowe wasn't at that meeting to court Michael into doing the All Good shows. Rowe brought up to Randy Phillips at that meeting, things like paying Michael in US dollars instead of pounds and the scalping of tickets at inflated prices, of which Michael would see no profit.
Click to expand...

True, we dont know if he were there to sign him on but what we do know is that they did talk about AllGood. Remember Patrick Allocco from AllGood were present at the meeting. This was then all over TMZ with him confirming to them that he had given MJ an offer and if he did not accept it, he was gonna sue him.

And why is Joe Jackson saying this
" So Joe met AEG boss Randy Phillips to fight his corner at the Beverly Hills Hotel. Michael told me he had signed for just 15 shows, but was doing 50, and it was too much in one go," says Joe. "I warned Randy that Michael would be pushed to the edge. I got angry and started shouting, but Michael and his mother just sat in the corner laughing out loud.
http://www.newsoftheworld.co.uk/sho...acksons-dad-blames-wife-for-Jackos-death.html
Click to expand...

AnnieRUOkay89 said:
he said specifically AEG was controlling Michael, with finances, "they were taking care of Michael financially", those were his words. As long as Michael continued doing what AEG asked of him, he'd be getting paid.
Click to expand...

yeah what has been reported widely is that AEG paid MJs bills. I remember an article saying that when Katherine requested to see the contract between AEG and MJ it was because she claimed the right to view it since they paid for all of his bills. So I guess Rowe claims AEG could just put MJ on the street if he refused to do the shows and therefore he were forced to do them.
 
Last edited:
plenty of BS

He don't talk about the artists he scammed. He's playing the good guy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top