Bubs;4089022 said:
There was a hiring letter presented in probate court
Bubs;4089069 said:
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
Bubs;4089074 said:
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.
ivy;4089075 said:
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.