Re: MJ Estate sues Tohme Tohme / Tohme countersues / Tohme's complaint @pg 14
There are three main issues at play here
1) Tohme's service rate
To start off, Tohme is charging MJ 15% which is extremely high even by Hollywood standard. Currently the executors are getting a combined 10% for doing the same thing, except that MJ is now dead. but they essentially provide the same service they would have had MJ been alive to date. Plus the court determined those fees based on what managers typically get in the industry. so it's not like the court pulled this percentage out of its butts. A good example is the cirque du soleil deal for which the executors are getting 10% of the deal. had MJ been alive he would be the one singing and dancing as opposed to a bunch of acrobats spinning to his songs. and he would still be paying 10% or less commissions to whoever would close the deal for him.
using the same standard, the court could reduce Tohme's rate to 10% or even less. but assuming the court takes this matter most favorably to Tohme it can settle the charging rate at 10%.
2) Tohme's illegal practice
Like any industry, you need a valid license in order to practice independently. doctors, lawyers, accountants and so on. Tohme was an independent practitioner who entered the artist management business without a valid licence. the law penalizes this by forfeiting the fees.
so the court may look at this and say "tohme we revoke your charging rate entirely by 100%". or if the court is lenient, it can decide to impose only 50% penalty. one of the things that will most likely affect the decision is whether Tohme knew or should have known he needed a licence to represent MJ.
again, assuming that the court looks at this matter in a manner that is most favourable to Tohme, it may decide to impose just 50% penalty.
so tohme rate will now be further reduced by 50%, meaning 50%*10% = 5%.
so at this point, taking into account the industry standard rate, and tohme's lack of a valid licence, the court could decide Tohme's charging rate should be reduced from 15% to 5%.
3) Tohme's involvement in the documentary
now, this is the biggest part and will keep both sides busy in court. How much involvement did Tohme had in the documentary originally? was that involvement covered by his monthly salary of $35000 per month? otherwise why was MJ paying him that money? and was that involvement part of the original this is it deal? if the answer to the last two questions is yes, then Tohme gets nothing. however if the answer is no, then the court could determine how can it be detached from the original concert deal and what portion it holds in the value of the entire documentary?
so as you can see, there are complications.
but to keep the argument simple, let's assume the court decides to detach his involvement completely from the original this is it concert deal by 100%.
and now the court must decide how much that part is worth in the entire documentary deal.
the court could decide his initial involvement represents 50% or 25% or 10% of the value of the entire documentary. again assuming the court looks at this in the most favorable way to tohme, they may settle at 50%. that means his contribution is worth 50% and the executors contribution is worth 50%. currently the executors are earning 10% of the entire thing. now with tohme in the picture they may earn 10% of (50% of the entire documentary value) since their contribution is now 50% as opposed to 100%.
in the end Tohme share could be: 5% of (50% of this is it documentary since he contributed 50% of the total value) = 2.5 % of this is it documentary.
obviously this is a very simplistic view of the matter, things are far more complicated than that and there is no guarantee that the court will even deliberate the way I've laid out above. so take this with a big fat grain of salt!
having said that, the idea of MJ paying 25 % ( 15% + 10%) commissions on the same product is too high. no-one in Hollywood, dead or alive, will agree to that.
Similarly, even if tohmes rate is reduced by 50%, MJ pays 17.5% (7.5% + 10%) commissions. that is still too high. and no-one in Hollywood will agree to that.
Mj should not pay more than 10% commissions. and that is the standard rate.
whatever the court decides, it is possible that the executors may have to share their earnings with Tohme. so that MJ does not pay more than 10% commissions. otherwise he would be double taxed, which is unfair to him and now his estate.
If the law is clear a non-licensed person is not eligible for compensation then, you are suggesting the Labor Commissioner is suggesting an illegal payment to Tohme. Surely the Estate' legal team would have commented on that if you are correct
Relax, the estate has filed a petition with the supreme court to disregard all the findings of the LC. they have asked for a trial.
LC findings make no sense. whatsoever and he sat on this thing for 20 months.
I will not repeat this again: Tohme is attempting receive compensation for services rendered. You would do better to compare him to Mesereau than Robson/Safechuck who are claiming fabricated, heinous acts to gain funding from the Estate. If you choose to continue to believe services rendered is synonymous with a faux molestation charges, so be it.
let's agree to disagree here. me charging you $100 for an apple that costs just $1 is what Tohme is trying to do to MJ and now his estate. this is unacceptable
. it's fraud!