Sony emails hack/leak

[passy001]

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. . .

Those who tend to think that way are pure idiots. JB is the only adviser in MJ circle that single handly made MJ wealthy. that's not an exaggeration.

let's have a look, shall we.

JB is the one that successfully negotiated the purchase of Neverland back in 1989.
JB is the one that successfully negotiated MJ contracts with sony in the 1980s, 1990s, and in the 2000s such that MJ was paid the highest royalty rate in the music industry.
JB is the one who successfully negotiated MJ contracts with sony such that MJ could still retain control of his music masters
JB is the one who successfully negotiated the purchase of the ATV catalog
JB is the one who successfully engineered the merging of ATV catalog with Sony in 1995, now known as Sony/ATV. in that deal MJ got $95m cash, and 50% stake in the venture, allowing him to increase his wealth even further. today sony/atv is the most important asset of the MJ estate.
JB is the one who successfully engineered the TII deals after MJ death, as well as cirques du soleil shows, thereby increasing the revenues of the estate which was facing immediate bankruptcy.
JB is the one who successfully renegotiated the burdensome MJ loans soon after MJ death, to the extent that the estate only has to pay a very low interest rate on such loans, then saving the estate massive amount of money.

all these smart moves, have enabled MJ and now his estate to accumulate a significant amount of wealth.

Is there any other adviser who even comes close? so the idea that JB will risk his reputation and his lucrative deal with the estate by working against the estate interests is STUPID. That's for the jacksons supporters to entertain. they've been doing so since day one, using JB as a scapegoat for their irrational frustrations.

This whole discussion is just HOT air, and a massive waste of time.

 

[barbee0715]

Those who tend to think that way are pure idiots. JB is the only adviser in MJ circle that single handly made MJ wealthy. that's not an exaggeration.

Excellent post. Branca's work has been inspired and remarkable since Michael hired him after Off The Wall.

(And don't forget he came up with the idea of "making of Thriller" to secure the financing.)

I have always thought they were absolutely great together-I think Michael's creativity inspired Branca to think outside the regular attorney box and came up with ideas and deals that were unprecedented. And due to the financial success of such deals, Michael's creativity was allowed to flourish without financial limitations.

 

[ivy]

You will receive from a discussion what you contribute.

this is so funny to me on so many levels.

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.

mentioning frustration isn't the same thing as reopening a hundreds of pages of discussion again. As autumn has mentioned before for example on this forum we discussed MJ's will for close to 2 yrs over hundreds of pages. Just don't be surprised if "been there, done that" people have no interest in rehashing the same things over and over again.

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

I'm not talking about Sony emails. Plus as the valuation goes people still gets confused between the market value versus tax value. TMZ article claimed Estate valued the catalog at $1.5 billion, there was a $700 M loan on it for buying other publishing , which brings it's net value to $800M, and Michael's share to $400. Minus MJ's personal $320 Million loan on it brings the tax value to close to zero. What I saw was an income statement for Sony/ATV (the one that showed around $14 million profit) and it showed a $680 Million (or something like that) loan for the catalogs. That's what I called as confirming TMZ story. Any loan amount needs to be subtracted from the market value to come to the tax value.

Again, I did not know you would create a separate thread when I originally posted my one reply post.

you know, you can create threads right? I would prefer that over coming to thread cleaned for off topic talk 3 times and starting a post with "I know this is off topic but I'll still post".

 

[Tygger]

mentioning frustration isn't the same thing as reopening a hundreds of pages of discussion again.

I would prefer that over coming to thread cleaned for off topic talk 3 times and starting a post with "I know this is off topic but I'll still post".

You are expressing frustration towards the actions of another member who has since been banned. I authored one post after you cleaned the thread and I asked one question about Katherine challenging the will which you were kind enough to respond. If you are stating my two posts frustrated you as well, I have no control there. As I said before, I believe it is the responsibility of forum moderators to decide if a discussion of these emails would occur because of their nature. I could not predict your creation of another thread or the re-opening of the original one and it is a bit illogical to believe I could have.

Plus as the valuation goes people still gets confused between the market value versus tax value.

Include Sony executives in your group of confused people.

 

[ivy]

You are expressing frustration towards the actions of another member who has since been banned. If you are stating my two posts frustrated you as well

no I'm not expressing frustration towards a banned member or your posts.

You mentioned "who are still frustrated that Katherine rejected restitution". the "frustration" I was mentioning was the frustration you mentioned. so what was trying to say was "there's a difference between a person who expresses their frustration in passing and a person who off topicly reopens an already in detail discussed old topic".

and this is the nature of a discussion forum. this is why we have several sections, thousands of threads. every thread is supposed to be about a certain topic and therefore people can chose decide if they are interested in that topic - hence will read/post or not. A certain level of off topic is okay but too much off topic actually takes it away from the actual discussion at hand. I wrote in my personal opinion, Branca advisor job was the most interesting/ controversial issue. I believe you expressed your desire to discuss it. So if we all agree that's an important topic,you would want the topic stay focused on that and not have the main topic get lost among all the side discussion.

Include Sony executives in your group of confused people.

of course they are included and not even surprising. they neither knew details of MJ's debt situation and probably did not handle estate taxes personally. Plus the media stories were extremely confusing at that time. Media reported the catalog was valued at $0 or $300 M - they treated those numbers as market value numbers. It wasn't. (I think they referred to $300M as conservatively low but it wasn't the correct market value number) I think TMZ was the only one to correct the misconception in the link I posted - by stating the catalog's market value was $1.5 billion but due to all debts on it the tax value was $0.

 

[whoisitnew]

{posts merged}

Sony/ATV revenues from 2010 to 2014

https://www.scribd.com/doc/258313352/Sony-ATV-revenues-from-2010-to-2014

524 Million in 2010

June 3,2009: Sony's Plan with SYCO (Ziffren Brittenham's Client) to Sell MiJAC



June 3rd 2009 : Sony was planning behind MJ’s back to sell MiJAC with Simon Cowell, Simon Cowell represented by Ziffren Brittenham , Branca’s law firm.

http://t.co/rL1EXNbGN5

http://t.co/fF4i5dBwOY

John Branca has given to sony the administration of MiJAC .... the same sony that was planning behind MJ's back what to do with MiJAC , involving John Branca with John Branca's law firm's client

Today, Branca runs the business with sony, with Sony being the major beneficiary.
John Branca even cut prices for sony and not only for "this is it" , allowing sony to use MJ to promote Sony's products, for a cut price

Syco, John Branca's client

http://postimg.org/image/mx8xez0lz/

Year 2014

“Syco is an important part of our business; given that Simon Cowell’s contract is up soon, how do we plan to maintain this asset? How expensive will it be to restructure this asset?”

https://www.scribd.com/doc/262000273/Strategic-Questions-for-Preliminary-MRP-Aug-5th-2014


Sony Proposal to Extend the Relationship With Simon Cowell


https://www.scribd.com/doc/262000237/Sony-Proposal-to-Extend-the-Relationship-With-Simon-Cowell


SC JV Proposal - TV - MS Amends 16.10.14 - CC Comments


https://www.scribd.com/doc/262000203/SC-JV-Proposal-TV-MS-Amends-16-10-14-CC-Comments

SC JV Proposal - Music - MS Amends 16.10.14 - CC Comments

https://www.scribd.com/doc/262000174/SC-JV-Proposal-Music-MS-Amends-16-10-14-CC-Comments

Oct1614 Syco Deal Slides - Sussman

https://www.scribd.com/doc/261999822/Oct1614-Syco-Deal-Slides-Sussman

Branca, Byrnes - Ms Amends 16.10.14 - Cc Comments

https://www.scribd.com/doc/261999430/Branca-Byrnes-Ms-Amends-16-10-14-Cc-Comments

Simon cowell summary Revised

https://www.scribd.com/doc/261780857/Simoncowellsummary-Revised

Email confirming how Sony is considering the sale of Sony/ATV

SPE commenting about SONY/ATV

https://www.scribd.com/doc/258559565/SPE-Questions-about-SONY-ATV-Music-Publishing

Sale of Music Publishing SONY/ATV -related issues

https://www.scribd.com/doc/253645604/Re-Music-Publishing-SATV-sale-related-issues

https://www.scribd.com/doc/263460310/Discussion-Points-Re-SATV

Email confirming Sony planning the sale of Sony/ATV

http://postimg.org/image/pgkiv69gz/

https://www.scribd.com/doc/256962849/Email-confirming-Sony-planning-the-sale-of-Sony-ATV


https://www.scribd.com/doc/256864995/Sony-planning-the-sale-of-Sony-ATV

https://www.scribd.com/doc/256865944/141121-Follow-up-Items-From-Mid-range-Plan-Meeting

Sony Picture Music Publishing revenues (not including income from record/soundtrack royalties or licensing)
http://t.co/ziiuAZqjCN

Sony Picture Music Publishing was “captive” to Sony/ATV.

(2012) John Branca contacted Sony Pictures Entertainment to represent them in Sony Pictures Publishing Catalog Sale

http://imgur.com/wjm02rr


https://t.co/l2lA7YMGzj

Sony Pictures Music Publishing Catalog was administered (was “captive&#8221 by Sony/ATV

https://www.scribd.com/doc/25671693...stered-by-Sony-ATV-We-are-captive-to-Sony-ATV

https://www.scribd.com/doc/256719925/Fwd-Sony-Pictures-Publishing-Catalogue


http://www.docdroid.net/oanp/re-music-publishing-revenue.pdf.html

{posts merged}

 

[Tygger]

You mentioned "who are still frustrated that Katherine rejected restitution". the "frustration" I was mentioning was the frustration you mentioned. so what was trying to say was "there's a difference between a person who expresses their frustration in passing and a person who off topicly reopens an already in detail discussed old topic".

I believe I understood your point originally which is why I made the comparison: a poster attempting to discuss the will is similar to a person attempting to discuss Katherine not accepting restitution outside of their designated threads. I do not believe there is a difference between the two although I understand you see a difference and that difference is based on your view of those subjects.

A certain level of off topic is okay but too much off topic actually takes it away from the actual discussion at hand. I wrote in my personal opinion, Branca advisor job was the most interesting/ controversial issue. I believe you expressed your desire to discuss it. So if we all agree that's an important topic,you would want the topic stay focused on that and not have the main topic get lost among all the side discussion.

We agree. Unfortunately with the consulting position thread, as with many of the other emails, a clean discussion is difficult as many see any discussion of these emails as anti-Estate and/or conspiracy-inclined. I cannot repeat enough how illogical that reasoning is as no fan authored those emails; only Sony executives and they are entitled to their views.

they neither knew details of MJ's debt situation and probably did not handle estate taxes personally.

I believe Sony would be aware or at least somewhat aware of Michael leveraging this asset because they are co-owners.

 

[whoisitnew]

Those who tend to think that way are pure idiots. JB is the only adviser in MJ circle that single handly made MJ wealthy. that's not an exaggeration.

let's have a look, shall we.

JB is the one that successfully negotiated the purchase of Neverland back in 1989.
JB is the one that successfully negotiated MJ contracts with sony in the 1980s, 1990s, and in the 2000s such that MJ was paid the highest royalty rate in the music industry.
JB is the one who successfully negotiated MJ contracts with sony such that MJ could still retain control of his music masters
JB is the one who successfully negotiated the purchase of the ATV catalog
JB is the one who successfully engineered the merging of ATV catalog with Sony in 1995, now known as Sony/ATV. in that deal MJ got $95m cash, and 50% stake in the venture, allowing him to increase his wealth even further. today sony/atv is the most important asset of the MJ estate.
JB is the one who successfully engineered the TII deals after MJ death, as well as cirques du soleil shows, thereby increasing the revenues of the estate which was facing immediate bankruptcy.
JB is the one who successfully renegotiated the burdensome MJ loans soon after MJ death, to the extent that the estate only has to pay a very low interest rate on such loans, then saving the estate massive amount of money.

all these smart moves, have enabled MJ and now his estate to accumulate a significant amount of wealth.

Is there any other adviser who even comes close? so the idea that JB will risk his reputation and his lucrative deal with the estate by working against the estate interests is STUPID. That's for the jacksons supporters to entertain. they've been doing so since day one, using JB as a scapegoat for their irrational frustrations.

This whole discussion is just HOT air, and a massive waste of time.

http://postimg.org/image/ju7s3yo5v/

http://postimg.org/image/qw00zoehn/

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

“Please note that although the units and the synchs have a value of more than $10m, the Estate has agreed to them and to provide even further deliverables.“

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

• “Wanna Be Startin’ Somethin’” and “STTR” synchs, which have market values of $1.2m and $4m respectively;

• Sony branding on all album events;

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

• Exclusive behind-the-scenes footage of the choreography for the hologram;

• Exclusive premiere and streaming period for the album

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

• Exclusive bonus content;

• Exclusivity in the category of phones and electronics;

• Exclusivity for “STTR” across all brands regardless of category;

• Provision of product placement opportunities to Sony if creative allows;

• Pass through of rights to telecom and retail partners;

• Wallpaper of album art;

• High-res image of the album art;

• Inclusion of audio at retail bays;

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

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

 

[passy001]

http://postimg.org/image/ju7s3yo5v/

http://postimg.org/image/qw00zoehn/

lol

Pretty Pathetic on your part really.

MJ removed JB in 2003 and then re-hired him in 2009 as he was preparing for his TII concert series. MJ also removed Frank Dileo back in the 1990s and then re-hired him in 2009 as he was preparing for the TII concert.

JB is the one that built MJ empire. the main assets (Publishing assets, Neverland, music masters) that MJ owned at the time of his death are the result of Branca's brilliance, like it or not.

 

[whoisitnew]

lol

Pretty Pathetic on your part really.

MJ removed JB in 2003 and then re-hired him in 2009 as he was preparing for his TII concert series. MJ also removed Frank Dileo back in the 1990s and then re-hired him in 2009 as he was preparing for the TII concert.

JB is the one that built MJ empire. the main assets (Publishing assets, Neverland, music masters) that MJ owned at the time of his death are the result of Branca's brilliance, like it or not.

Any re-hiring letter with MJ' signature ?



----------
Different topic:

About the low declaration to the IRS of MJ' sony/atv worth , with this alleged 700 M loan on sony/atv for buying other publishing?

Who opened that loan in behalf of the half of MJ , when MJ was already himself in loans against sony/atv?

How MJ would have been able to pay back his own loan against sony/atv while on MJ there was allegedly also the pay back of the half of loan ("Mj's half") that sony/atv had , for buying other publishing?

Were they taking money from MJ's half of profits off sony/atv?

Were sony expanding sony/atv at the expense of MJ, that would have never been able to pay back all these loans?

Don't usually people pay back existing loans before jumping into more loans?

 

[passy001]

Any re-hiring letter with MJ' signature ?

Dude, those are confidential documents. whoever sent you here on 03-05-2015 to stir up some shit against JB, please go tell them it's not working.
JB will remain the executor of the estate for a while, like it or not.

You people are pathetic. First "the will is fake", and then "the will is invalid". now this? are you that desperate?

 

[HIStory]

Dude, those are confidential documents. whoever sent you here on 03-05-2015 to stir up some shit against JB, please go tell them it's not working.
JB will remain the executor of the estate for a while, like it or not.

He's B_Marco. The same person who was already banned here with another user name (forMJ).

 

[barbee0715]

700 M loan on sony/atv for buying other publishing?

Who opened that loan in behalf of the half of MJ , when MJ was already himself in loans against sony/atv?

Are you talking about the purchase of the EMI catalog, when Sony/ATV expanded their business and their assets? The Estate was represented, and anything they do has to be approved by the probate court.

And what do these letters that you posted terminating John Branca back in 2003 and giving management to Charles Koppleman have to do with the conflict of interest of him as an adviser to Sony as well as being on the board of Sony/ATV? Where are those emails?

And do you think Charles Koppleman is still in charge? What does he say about it? Nothing.

 

[ivy]

He's B_Marco. The same person who was already banned here with another user name (forMJ).

If that's the case, alert Gaz so he can check it and act on it if needed.

 

[whoisitnew]

Are you talking about the purchase of the EMI catalog, when Sony/ATV expanded their business and their assets? The Estate was represented, and anything they do does have to be approved by the probate court.

And what do these letters that you posted terminating John Branca back in 2003 and giving management to Charles Koppleman have to do with the conflict of interest of him as an adviser to Sony as well as being on the board of Sony/ATV? Where are those emails?

And do you think Charles Koppleman is still in charge? What does he say about it? Nothing.

I was talking about the low declaration to the IRS of MJ' sony/atv worth , with this alleged 700 M loan on sony/atv for buying other publishing.

You are mixing different topics.

About Charles Koppleman, he was partner of bandier and today he is partner with both branca and sony/bandier in sony/atv/emi

 

[barbee0715]

I was talking about the low declaration to the IRS of MJ' sony/atv worth , with this alleged 700 M loan on sony/atv for buying other publishing.

You are mixing different topics.

Well, not to be rude, but the way you're throwing stuff out there when we trying to figure out a conflict of interest going on now, is unbelievably confusing-you're going on about the will, you're going on about the supposed "undervaluation of TII", you're going on about a management termination back in 2003.
So who was Michael's managers/attorneys when the 680 million dollar loan was authorized to buy more catalogs?

 

[ivy]

I was talking about the low declaration to the IRS of MJ' sony/atv worth , with this alleged 700 M loan on sony/atv for buying other publishing.

alleged? lol

For Estate tax assets 2009 values were used. Below shows around $700 Million Acquisition loan Sony/ATV has in 2009. It looks like Sony/ATV borrowed money from Sony Corp to acquire more catalogs and have been paying to Sony Corp from the revenues Sony/ATV brings.

Sweet deal if you ask me. Sony/ATV borrows from their parent company to acquire more catalogs to add to Sony/ATV and pay the debt back from their revenues - which means MJ wouldn't need to pay for such debt from his pocket.

and any outstanding debt on an asset would reduce it's tax value. Math would be

Market value of the catalog minus acquisition loans on catalog
Divide this by half to find value of MJ's share
Value of MJ's share minus personal loans MJ took showing the catalog as collateral = tax value

As TMZ said "Sources connected with the Estate tell TMZ ... they never suggested the Beatles catalog was worth ZERO -- to the contrary they agree it's worth around $1.5 BILLION. That said ... sources say there's a reason they put a big fat zero in the Beatles column when they filed tax returns just after Michael died. They say there was a $700 million loan taken against the purchase of the catalog, bringing the net value to $800 million. Michael and Sony were 50/50 partners ... which means Michael's share was around $400 million. Now the debt. Michael leveraged his interest to the hilt -- he borrowed $320 million against the catalog. And He owed another $200 million in personal debt ... And that's why they put ZERO."

ps: I have no idea where that $200M in personal debt comes from.

This is from the same document that showed a low net income and only $23.1 Million guaranteed payment and expected lower revenues and then an improvement due to focusing on streaming

 

[whoisitnew]

alleged? lol

For Estate tax assets 2009 values were used. Below shows around $700 Million Acquisition loan Sony/ATV has in 2009. It looks like Sony/ATV borrowed money from Sony Corp to acquire more catalogs and have been paying to Sony Corp from the revenues Sony/ATV brings.

Sweet deal if you ask me. Sony/ATV borrows from their parent company to acquire more catalogs to add to Sony/ATV and pay the debt back from their revenues - which means MJ wouldn't need to pay for such debt from his pocket.

and any outstanding debt on an asset would reduce it's tax value. Math would be

Market value of the catalog minus acquisition loans on catalog
Divide this by half to find value of MJ's share
Value of MJ's share minus personal loans MJ took showing the catalog as collateral = tax value

As TMZ said "Sources connected with the Estate tell TMZ ... they never suggested the Beatles catalog was worth ZERO -- to the contrary they agree it's worth around $1.5 BILLION. That said ... sources say there's a reason they put a big fat zero in the Beatles column when they filed tax returns just after Michael died. They say there was a $700 million loan taken against the purchase of the catalog, bringing the net value to $800 million. Michael and Sony were 50/50 partners ... which means Michael's share was around $400 million. Now the debt. Michael leveraged his interest to the hilt -- he borrowed $320 million against the catalog. And He owed another $200 million in personal debt ... And that's why they put ZERO."

ps: I have no idea where that $200M in personal debt comes from.

This is from the same document that showed a low net income and only $23.1 Million guaranteed payment and expected lower revenues and then an improvement due to focusing on streaming

1) you are talking aboutc and posting a picture from a document of SONY/ATV /EMI of 2014. We are talking about 2009 when only Sony/ATV existed and u mentioned a loan.

2) We are talking about 2009/2010 . Sweet deal for who? Not for MJ that had already loans against sony/atv and more revenues in his pockets ,would have benefited him, instead of more loans.... Loans against MJ were different than loans against a corporations like sony that makes billions in revenues with the whole corporations.

You did not answered my questions about these 2009/2010 loan and who did it for MJ....wI will repeat them again:

- About the low declaration to the IRS of MJ' sony/atv worth , with this alleged 700 M loan on sony/atv for buying other publishing?

Who opened that loan in behalf of the half of MJ , when MJ was already himself in loans against sony/atv?

How MJ would have been able to pay back his own loan against sony/atv while on MJ there was allegedly also the pay back of the half of loan ("Mj's half") that sony/atv had , for buying other publishing?

Were they taking money from MJ's half of profits off sony/atv?

Were sony expanding sony/atv at the expense of MJ, that would have never been able to pay back all these loans?

Don't usually people pay back existing loans before jumping into more loans?

 

[Tygger]

Sweet deal if you ask me. Sony/ATV borrows from their parent company to acquire more catalogs to add to Sony/ATV and pay the debt back from their revenues - which means MJ wouldn't need to pay for such debt from his pocket.

I am unsure if it was always that way. Michael must have had some debt to Sony for the below to occur and that may have included acquisition costs. If I am remembering correctly, the Estate has since negotiated an even lower rate.

In late 2005, while Mr. Jackson was living in the Middle East after being acquitted of child molestation, his finances were particularly precarious. Sony then negotiated a deal with the singer that resulted in Mr. Jackson paying a lower interest rate on his debt in return for Sony gaining more authority to operate Sony/ATV and the option to buy half of Mr. Jackson’s share.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/27/business/media/27finances.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

June 3,2009: Sony's Plan with SYCO (Ziffren Brittenham's Client) to Sell MiJAC

June 3rd 2009 : Sony was planning behind MJ’s back to sell MiJAC with Simon Cowell, Simon Cowell represented by Ziffren Brittenham , Branca’s law firm.

The same article had the below to say about Michael's masters in June 2009. The masters had not reverted to Michael by that time so, Sony had publishing rights to those masters. This allowed them to offer a portion to Cowell at the time. The sale never happened and it may have been due to Michael's passing. Fortunately, his heirs own the catalog 100%.

And since Sony’s rights to his master recordings are set to expire in the next several years and would become owned by Mr. Jackson, according to one of his advisers, his estate would stand to earn even more from sales and from the licensing of music to film, television and any other media.http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/27/business/media/27finances.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

Adding:

Any re-hiring letter with MJ' signature ?

Randy Phillips was behind Branca's rehire, not Michael.

 

[Bubs]

Dude, those are confidential documents. whoever sent you here on 03-05-2015 to stir up some shit against JB, please go tell them it's not working.
JB will remain the executor of the estate for a while, like it or not.

You people are pathetic. First "the will is fake", and then "the will is invalid". now this? are you that desperate?

There was a hiring letter presented in probate court as well KJ and her attorneys, but even if it is made public, these guys would come up with stories of fake, fraudulent and forged...........


Addition, regarding Randy P hiring Branca:
"Putnam asked Phillips about several people involved in Jackson’s business affairs. He asked about estate executor John Branca. Phillips recounted their history, that Branca had represented Jackson for part of his career, but the pair had a falling out. “Michael brought him back in,” Phillips said of Branca, just before the singer’s death."

 

[Bubs]

June 3rd 2009 : Sony was planning behind MJ’s back to sell MiJAC with Simon Cowell, Simon Cowell represented by Ziffren Brittenham , Branca’s law firm.

http://t.co/rL1EXNbGN5

http://t.co/fF4i5dBwOY
----------------------------

How was Sony going to sell anything that is not theirs to sell beginning with :scratch:

Marco B, you need to get some common sense and stop that foolish conspiracy nonsense, and perhaps start seeing things from different angle.
First thing, the date on that was June 3rd 2009. Think about that.
Secondly, you need to learn to read. It doesn't say Sony was going to sell Mijac, and if you had read the title of that document, it would have told you what is it: Potential Venture contributions.
Because Sony and Syco has some sort of partnership, it is not shocking that they looking into if they could buy Mijac. Well, that didn't happen because Branca didn't sell.
Same goes with Sony planning to sell Sony/ATV. They can sell their 50% if they want,and MJ could have sold his 50% stake if he wanted, but as far as I know, they cannot sell MJ's share. If they sell they share, the new owner become MJ's 50% partner. So what is the problem?

All I saw in that first link is that they could have thought, because MJ died, his catalogues were going to be up for sale, nothing more.

 

[Tygger]

Bubs, the full June 13th tweet from Phillips testimony:

Anthony McCartney ‏@mccartneyAP
“Michael brought him back in,” Phillips said of Branca, just before the singer’s death. Katherine Jackson shook her head.

Phillips also testified Michael brought back Dileo when he did not and hired the doctor when he did not. These among the few events he could actual recollect.

By the way, if Phillips brought Branca back as opposed to Michael (which Phillips did) why is that considered a negative?

Regarding Mijac, Sony owned the publishing rights to Michael masters and they were selling a third of those rights to Cowell.

Do you truly believe the Estate was going to retain 50% of Sony/ATV with Branca as sales consultant?

 

[Bubs]

Anthony McCartney ‏@mccartneyAP
“Michael brought him back in,” Phillips said of Branca, just before the singer’s death. Katherine Jackson shook her head.

I know your tactics Tygger. You tried to insinuate that Michael didn't hire Branca, that it was Philips that brought Branca back to fold. Sorry, but you are mistaken and you need to come up more than KJ shaking her head to prove otherwise.

As for this bit:
"By the way, if Phillips brought Branca back as opposed to Michael (which Phillips did) why is that considered a negative?"

Invalid question, and not really worth of arguing until you bring me the receipts, and btw KJ's head shake is not valid proof. Until then, it is nothing more than stale Internet conspiracy theory.
-------------------------


Jackson’s estate made clear in a message distributed to fan sites that it still owned Mijac and had no plans to sell. “Sony/ATV is a great company and the estate owns half of it but no one, not even Sony/ATV, will ever own Mijac while John McClain and I remain in charge,” said John Branca, coexecutor with Mr McClain.
Sony/ATV would administer the catalogue “for a limited term” and on ”unprecedented favourable terms”, he said. “Mijac and Michael’s masters [the master rights] remain secure for the benefit of Michael’s children for years to come.”

 

[ivy]

I am unsure if it was always that way. Michael must have had some debt to Sony for the below to occur and that may have included acquisition costs.

No, those are different stuff in my opinion. See the thing is Michael had personal loans that matured and he either needed to pay them or get another loan to cover them. There was one financing during 2005. this is when Randy Jackson brought his friend Stabler and it resulted in a lawsuit. The issue with Michael's personal loans by using the catalog as collateral, he had taken as much loan as possible and no one was willing to give him any more money. Sony was backing him up in 2005. They secured a loan - the $320 Million loan- for Michael, Michael kept his catalog and Sony got some perks. That loan was to mature in 2010-2011.

The same article had the below to say about Michael's masters in June 2009. The masters had not reverted to Michael by that time so, Sony had publishing rights to those masters. This allowed them to offer a portion to Cowell at the time.

Well I think some things are getting mixed up due to the complex nature. As far as I know Sony had distribution right to MJ's songs - meaning could release, repackage the already released songs as they want. I don't think they ever had ownership over Mijac. and that distribution rights were extended to 2017 with the new deal. catalogs is a complex thing. there's management/administration of songs, there are distribution/publishing rights but that doesn't equal to owning and/or ability to sell the songs/catalog.

Plus you are stating conflicting stuff. If you believe Sony had full control over Mijac and could sold 1/3rd of it, Michael being dead or alive, executors etc wouldn't be a factor and they would carry on with the sale. If you think the sale did not happen due to executors and such, then it shows Sony didn't have the power to do the sale.

and I agree with Bubs and it's not certain to me what it means to be honest. Did they wanted to acquire a portion of Mijac? did they want to come to an agreement with Simon Cowell so MJ's songs could be used on his shows? Or even did MJ wanted to sell a portion of the catalog and/or join to a venture to generate some revenue to pay his debts? We don't know for sure. When not certain, I wouldn't treat anything as fact.

 

[passy001]

KJ shaking head. LOL.

That's the same woman who knew and still knows NOTHING about MJ business affairs.

 

[elusive moonwalker]

Of cause she shaked her her head she wants randy as executor etc lol. like she or the family had a clue about mjs life. be it business or personal but then they wouldnt want to ruin the "tight nit" image

 

[barbee0715]

Or even did MJ wanted to sell a portion of the catalog and/or join to a venture to generate some revenue to pay his debts? We don't know for sure. When not certain, I wouldn't treat anything as fact.

I think that's entirely possible-in some other thread (maybe the one about Thome and the Neverland deal?), I raised an eyebrow at Michael raising the possibility of Thomas Barrack being interested in a joint venture in Sony/ATV and the only reason for that would be to generate some cash, like he did in 95.

 

[Tygger]

There was a hiring letter presented in probate court

First thing, the date on that was June 3rd 2009. Think about that.

It doesn't say Sony was going to sell Mijac

Well, that didn't happen because Branca didn't sell.

because MJ died, his catalogues were going to be up for sale

I know your tactics Tygger. You tried to insinuate that Michael didn't hire Branca, that it was Philips that brought Branca back to fold. Sorry, but you are mistaken and you need to come up more than KJ shaking her head to prove otherwise.

Invalid question, and not really worth of arguing until you bring me the receipts, and btw KJ's head shake is not valid proof. Until then, it is nothing more than stale Internet conspiracy theory.

Bubs, the logic in these statements is extremely difficult to follow. I must ask: what logic makes you believe the statement regarding Katherine is proof of anything? Michael’s manager was Tohme and Phillips brought Dileo back. Michael's lawyers were Dennis Hawk and Peter Lopez and Phillips brought Branca back. I never insinuated that Phillips brought Branca back; I clearly stated several times Phillips brought Branca back.

As for the Estate’s statement regarding Mijac: that was to quell some fans’ fear that the catalog was being sold to Sony/ATV. Sony/ATV was only administering the catalog.



Ivy, I understand the scenario however; are you suggesting Michael, as co-owner of Sony/ATV, never funded a Sony/ATV acquisition? Could such acquisitions have been a portion of his personal loan? It is a bit difficult to fathom why Michael would need such a large personal loan without excessive luxuries to show for it. Before those who view Michael as irresponsible with monies respond in force, can anyone show what luxuries Michael purchased to the value of $320M?? It perpetuates the myth that Michael lifestyle was so lavish that he indebted himself to half billion as many reports stated erroneously after his passing. Sony most likely was consistently borrowing from their parent company for acquisitions prior to 2005. Where would Michael, as a private individual, borrow for acquisitions?

Regarding publishing/masters: one can own the publishing of a song (the rights to a song) and one can own the masters (the recording of a song). It was news in 2013 that Paul McCartney would receive the rights to the Beatles’ masters. Sony/ATV will continue to own the rights to those songs when McCartney receives the rights to the recordings from EMI (the label not the publishing) and Apple Corps. Sony/ATV does not own the rights to those recordings and I do not believe they ever have.

Mijac owned the rights to Michael’s songs; not the masters. Sony owned Michael’s masters. I have seen two dates for the reversion of those masters to Michael; July 2009 and Dec 2011. If the Estate does not have ownership of Michael’s masters at this time then, Sony continues to own Michael’s masters.

and I agree with Bubs and it's not certain to me what it means to be honest. Did they wanted to acquire a portion of Mijac? did they want to come to an agreement with Simon Cowell so MJ's songs could be used on his shows? Or even did MJ wanted to sell a portion of the catalog and/or join to a venture to generate some revenue to pay his debts? We don't know for sure. When not certain, I wouldn't treat anything as fact.

In the presentation Whoisitnew posted, it clearly states Sony was willing to finance or arrange financing for Cowell to purchase up to a third interest in Mijac (33%). I am unsure what circumstances Sony had ownership of Mijac however; Sony could not offer a third of Mijac without owning such a portion. I am not confusing the fact that Sony did not manage/administer Mijac before Michael’s passing; Warner Chappell did. (Michael may have purposely kept his catalog from Sony/ATV.) If Michael wanted to generate funding, he would do so through Warner Chappell, not Sony. There is no need for Cowell to purchase a percentage of any catalog for his singing competition shows. Therefore, for Sony to offer a third to Cowell, they had to have had some ownership of Mijac.

Plus you are stating conflicting stuff. If you believe Sony had full control over Mijac and could sold 1/3rd of it, Michael being dead or alive, executors etc wouldn't be a factor and they would carry on with the sale. If you think the sale did not happen due to executors and such, then it shows Sony didn't have the power to do the sale.

Allow me to clarify my meaning: the date of that presentation was June 3, 2009 and we know the date of Michael’s passing. To sell a portion of Michael catalog after his passing would not be seen positively by the public. Thus; Michael’s passing may have hindered the sale.

As per my statement to Bubs, we have seen how fans’ were reassured by the Estate after the news of Sony/ATV administering Mijac and not having any ownership of Mijac through purcahse. We have seen reports of the purchase of Calabasas months before the reports of the sale of NL. We have seen reports denying the Sony/ATV catalog would be sold after Sony’s leaked emails suggested otherwise. Public opinion does matter.

Adding: Ivy, question please: do you know if Michael's ownership in Mijac was 100% on the first Estate accounting? If so, I am inclined to believe Sony (who was rumored to desire a percentage in Mijac) would offer Michael funding through their joint venture with Cowell, Syco, because Mijac was leveraged as well. This is similar to their deal with Michael in 2005 where they would have the option to purchase half of Michael's Sony/ATV ownership.

In this scenario, Michael's passing could have hindered this option as well as per the Estate's reassurance to fans when some believed Sony was purchasing Mijac. In this scenario, if Michael had not passed; Branca would represent all three parties (Michael, thanks to Phillips, and Syco, i.e. Sony and Cowell) which would be quite conflicting.

 

[ivy]

Ivy, I understand the scenario however; are you suggesting Michael, as co-owner of Sony/ATV, never funded a Sony/ATV acquisition?

yes, not personally. that's the difference between a business loan and a personal loan. In this instance they got acquisition loans - to acquire other catalogs. such loans are generally guaranteed by the asset being acquired. The idea is not to use all of your own capital, increase shareholder value. With the right acquisition the entity becomes more stronger and profitable and pays back the business loan. In other words Sony/ATV takes loans to acquire other catalogs, increase their song numbers, increase their value, increase their profits and pay back the loan from that increased income. Like mentioned before you can argue "acquisition debt reduces the income" but also "with no acquisition revenues would have been lower".

Could such acquisitions have been a portion of his personal loan?

no I don't believe they are

It is a bit difficult to fathom why Michael would need such a large personal loan without excessive luxuries to show for it. Before those who view Michael as irresponsible with monies respond in force, can anyone show what luxuries Michael purchased to the value of $320M?? It perpetuates the myth that Michael lifestyle was so lavish that he indebted himself to half billion as many reports stated erroneously after his passing.

Well I wouldn't use such negative words to describe the situation. The reason for the personal loans was living expenses. After the accusations and especially after history Michael's income had dropped but his living expenses remained the same. so in order to cover such expenses he needed loans. In 2005 trial , it was testified that his expenses were $20-$30 Million more than his income level. Plus according to financial statements filed at divorce case in 1999, MJ's monthly cost of living was $2,339,300 - that would make $28 Million annually.That's the reason for the loans.

Mijac owned the rights to Michael’s songs; not the masters. Sony owned Michael’s masters. I have seen two dates for the reversion of those masters to Michael; July 2009 and Dec 2011.

Well even if we accept the above as correct - Sony owned MJ masters and it was supposed to revert to MJ at 2009/2011- it shows that was a temporary control and with temporary control you cannot sell something for good. How could Sony have 1-3 yr left but can sell it to Cowell for good? Nope sorry but some of the arguments doesn't make sense to me. I don't think they had ownership or at least I haven't seen anything that would confirm that to me for certain. Some sort of temporary control, probably. ownership, I'm not convinced.

Sony could not offer a third of Mijac

where does it say they offered?

and you know what? as I'm writing this something stood out to me

it clearly states Sony was willing to finance or arrange financing for Cowell to purchase

so your theory is Sony had ownership over MIJAC, they offered to sell it to Cowell and they offered to finance or arranging him to purchase it. In other words Sony was willing to give Cowell millions of dollars so that Cowell could give back Sony the same millions of dollars to purchase 1/3rd of Mijac? Why even bother? Doesn't make sense at all. It's like putting your house on sale and then telling the buyer "here I'll give you the money so that you can buy it from me". Doesn't make sense to me.

So I would again ask, couldn't MJ wanted to sell a portion of the catalog and/or join to a venture to generate some revenue to pay his debts? Cowell wants to buy it and Sony says we'll help you with financing and we'll form partnership?

 

[Tygger]

yes, not personally

Ivy, how would Michael, as co-owner of Sony/ATV fund acquisitions if not through loans? As a private individual and co-owner, Michael never had to fund an acquisition?

Well I wouldn't use such negative words to describe the situation. The reason for the personal loans was living expenses.

Others have. You have seen the accounting. What personal expenses are worth half a billion?

Mijac owned the rights to Michael’s songs; not the masters. Sony owned Michael’s masters. I have seen two dates for the reversion of those masters to Michael; July 2009 and Dec 2011.

Well even if we accept the above as correct - Sony owned MJ masters and it was supposed to revert to MJ at 2009/2011- it shows that was a temporary control and with temporary control you cannot sell something for good. How could Sony have 1-3 yr left but can sell it to Cowell for good? Nope sorry but some of the arguments doesn't make sense to me.

My statement refers to Sony’s ownership of Michael’s masters. You are confusing it with Mijac, Michael’s publishing and that is why it is illogical to you. Sony could not sell Michael's masters. Sony could sell a portion of Mijac provided they owned such portion.

In other words Sony was willing to give Cowell millions of dollars so that Cowell could give back Sony the same millions of dollars to purchase 1/3rd of Mijac? Why even bother?

It is quite logical and happens every day. It is called a loan and usually one receives interest for the monies loaned.

So I would again ask, couldn't MJ wanted to sell a portion of the catalog and/or join to a venture to generate some revenue to pay his debts? Cowell wants to buy it and Sony says we'll help you with financing and we'll form partnership?

Hopefully you have seen I added a second theory. I personally would not place Michael as the originator of the scenario you are suggesting here because Michael most likely and purposely kept Mijac separate from Sony/ATV for his own reasons. If my second theory is correct, Sony sought to gain interest in Mijac as they were rumored to desire such. Sony sought to capitalize on Michael's leveraging of Mijac and felt they could do so through their partnership with Cowell.