The MJ Estate are close to a 50% sale of MJs catalog

Mister_Jay_Tee said:
No, it was not. The will literally dated 2OO2 had him as Executer. And then in June 2009
Click to expand...
Zeus 7 said:
He was re hired during the TII rehearsals
Click to expand...

Source?


In the Michael Jackson probate case, Branca produced Jackson's final will and testament, which designated Branca as executor. The Jackson family filed a preemptive probate action in the Los Angeles Superior Court, based on the allegation that Jackson died "intestate," without a valid will. Branca filed the will in Los Angeles on July 1, 2009, and was appointed co-executor.[9] After initially contesting the appointment of Branca and John McClain as executors of Michael's will, his mother Katherine withdrew her objections on November 10, 2009. According to the Associated Press, her attorney, Adam Streisand, said "Mrs. Jackson felt it was time legal fighting ended and that her actions were in the best interest of Michael's children."[10]

en.wikipedia.org

John Branca - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org

i remember when everywhere it was said mike didnt want him back.
 
Last edited:
mjchris said:
Source?
Click to expand...
Branca himself, and multiple articles.

www.tmz.com

Jackson Family Claims MJ Fired Branca

TMZ has learned an attorney acting on behalf of at least two members of Michael Jackson's family will go to court tomorrow and ask the judge to boot named co-executor John Branca from the case, but there's something they don't know.
www.tmz.com www.tmz.com

Branca served as Jackson's lawyer on and off for 29 years. Sources connected to Branca freely admit Jackson fired the lawyer in 1990, but rehired him 3 years later. We're also told Branca quit Michael in 2006 because Jackson insisted on hiring "advisors" Branca believed would do great harm to MJ.

A month before Jackson died, he began conversations with Branca, saying he wanted him back in the fold. We've learned on June 17, eight days before Jackson died, Jackson signed a letter hiring Branca back as his lawyer.


The singer's mother, Katherine Jackson, had applied to oversee her son's estate, but that was before the will surfaced. Her attorney, Burt Levitch, expressed concerns about McClain and Branca's financial leadership.

"We're not aware of any real conflicts at all," he said in response to a claim that the men may have business dealings with parties such as concert promoter AEG Live.

In contrast, Hoffman said Jackson's mother had more of a potential conflict administering the estate because she is a likely beneficiary.
 
Mister_Jay_Tee said:
Branca himself, and multiple articles.

www.tmz.com

Jackson Family Claims MJ Fired Branca

TMZ has learned an attorney acting on behalf of at least two members of Michael Jackson's family will go to court tomorrow and ask the judge to boot named co-executor John Branca from the case, but there's something they don't know.
www.tmz.com www.tmz.com

Branca served as Jackson's lawyer on and off for 29 years. Sources connected to Branca freely admit Jackson fired the lawyer in 1990, but rehired him 3 years later. We're also told Branca quit Michael in 2006 because Jackson insisted on hiring "advisors" Branca believed would do great harm to MJ.

A month before Jackson died, he began conversations with Branca, saying he wanted him back in the fold. We've learned on June 17, eight days before Jackson died, Jackson signed a letter hiring Branca back as his lawyer.


The singer's mother, Katherine Jackson, had applied to oversee her son's estate, but that was before the will surfaced. Her attorney, Burt Levitch, expressed concerns about McClain and Branca's financial leadership.

"We're not aware of any real conflicts at all," he said in response to a claim that the men may have business dealings with parties such as concert promoter AEG Live.

In contrast, Hoffman said Jackson's mother had more of a potential conflict administering the estate because she is a likely beneficiary.
Click to expand...
Branca and TMZ are not sources. And as long as i dont see a letter signed bei Mike, its only rumors.
 
mjchris said:
Branca and TMZ are not sources. And as long as i dont see a letter signed bei Mike, its only rumors.
Click to expand...
They are sources.

There's also the Will itself.

And Randy Sullivan's book, Untouchable. Among other things

Weitzman responded forcefully and persuasively to the question about whether Branca was rehired in 2009, first by arranging a conference call with Michael Kane, who had been hired as Michael’s business manager shortly before his death and who continued to serve in that capacity for the estate. Kane told me [Randall Sullivan] that he had personally witnessed the meeting between Branca and Jackson at the Forum, and had in fact participated in some of it. Weitzman also arranged a conference call with Joel Katz, who had been hired as Jackson’s entertainment lawyer in the spring of 2009, and Katz told me he was certain that Branca and Jackson had met as claimed, because he had spoken to Michael Jackson about the meeting a short time afterward. He had asked Michael if he minded John joining the team, Katz said, and Michael had told him he did not. Not long after this, Katz said, he saw a document signed by Michael Jackson that approved a business plan that would be directed by John Branca. Members of the Jackson family and critics of John Branca retorted that Kane and Katz were employees of the estate and allies of Branca. I see no legitimate basis for insulting Mr. Kane and Mr. Katz with the suggestion that they would lie at John Branca’s behest and I accept that Branca did in fact meet with Michael Jackson at the Forum and likely was rehired as one of Jackson’s entertainment attorneys. For me, that controversy has been settled in Mr. Branca’s favor.

But believe whatever you want, you can probably believe a random tweet from some nutter like so:

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1616171788131786753

But just accepting the legality of being appointed the Executors of the State just seems like too much somehow?
 
Prometheus77 said:
Exactly. And if Branca wasn't gonna be the executor, Michael, for sure, would have appointed someone else. And in all likelyhood, he wouldn't have just sprung that on someone, without talking to that person beforehand. No one ever came up and claimed that Michael talked to him/her about being executor.
Click to expand...

I don't think Michael would necessarily have informed Branca and MacClain that he deposed them, but he would have informed and coordinated with the newly appointed executor and they would have known where the will is located. And it's also a bit preposterous to think that after his death, Michael would have wanted Randy, Janet, or some other family member to manage his estate and the business that goes with it, if he kept his family away from it throughout his whole adult life. The famliy attempts to get over his Estate were desperate. Remember the embrassing actions from Randy and Janet just a few years ago and then the Granny-kidnapping, oh my god.
 
Mister_Jay_Tee said:
They are sources.

There's also the Will itself.

And Randy Sullivan's book, Untouchable. Among other things

Weitzman responded forcefully and persuasively to the question about whether Branca was rehired in 2009, first by arranging a conference call with Michael Kane, who had been hired as Michael’s business manager shortly before his death and who continued to serve in that capacity for the estate. Kane told me [Randall Sullivan] that he had personally witnessed the meeting between Branca and Jackson at the Forum, and had in fact participated in some of it. Weitzman also arranged a conference call with Joel Katz, who had been hired as Jackson’s entertainment lawyer in the spring of 2009, and Katz told me he was certain that Branca and Jackson had met as claimed, because he had spoken to Michael Jackson about the meeting a short time afterward. He had asked Michael if he minded John joining the team, Katz said, and Michael had told him he did not. Not long after this, Katz said, he saw a document signed by Michael Jackson that approved a business plan that would be directed by John Branca. Members of the Jackson family and critics of John Branca retorted that Kane and Katz were employees of the estate and allies of Branca. I see no legitimate basis for insulting Mr. Kane and Mr. Katz with the suggestion that they would lie at John Branca’s behest and I accept that Branca did in fact meet with Michael Jackson at the Forum and likely was rehired as one of Jackson’s entertainment attorneys. For me, that controversy has been settled in Mr. Branca’s favor.

But believe whatever you want, you can probably believe a random tweet from some nutter like so:

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1616171788131786753

But just accepting the legality of being appointed the Executors of the State just seems like too much somehow?
Click to expand...

its that i dont believe these stories. someone tells this, another one tells this. and then the timing. later, when someone isnt here anymore, people can talk about you whatever they want, without any proove. and do whatever they want, when they have the power for this. and there isnt the letter with the signing, or audio/video document that prooves it.
i believe there's something fishy about that.
 
I don't trust Branca one bit. The guy is a fucking snake. He's worked with both Sony and then as Michael's manager, got fired, then magically is rehired the year Michael dies? Seems fishy if you ask me.

The guy has done a piss poor job of keeping up Michael's legacy. Xscape and Bad25 are the ONLY good music releases during his control. Michael album was a disaster and don't get me started on the lack of quality for Thriller40.

Guy is a rat and needs to be removed IMO.
 
Prince Of Pop said:
I don't trust Branca one bit. The guy is a fucking snake. He's worked with both Sony and then as Michael's manager, got fired, then magically is rehired the year Michael dies? Seems fishy if you ask me.

The guy has done a piss poor job of keeping up Michael's legacy. Xscape and Bad25 are the ONLY good music releases during his control. Michael album was a disaster and don't get me started on the lack of quality for Thriller40.

Guy is a rat and needs to be removed IMO.
Click to expand...
mjjjusticeproject.wordpress.com

John Branca; Was He Really Fired In 2003? If So, Was He Rehired? A Documented Time Line

NOTE from MJJJP- The information, quotes, comments, links and timeline below have been compiled and sent to MJJJP from a MJ fan Twitter Account – ItsBlackItsWhite– Their wish is to present this i…
mjjjusticeproject.wordpress.com mjjjusticeproject.wordpress.com

This whole debate is old as dirt. MJ hired the guy back himself. And not just in 2009. The guy is privy to MJ's camp period, plus I'll take him over lots of the other shmucks MJ did choose to have support him that have actually never came back.

And then, if you don't like the projects. That's fine. But that's just you, so just say that. This is it, the musical and the Cirque show all were spinning money anyway. What's actually keeping up MJs legacy? The music he actually made to completion and approved to release. You want them to Tupac MJ? There ain't no artist who's posthumous works matter more than their living work.
 
I really like that they dropped this news right after that Dan Reed crap. Maybe someday these idiots will agree that they make more spinning the positive than the negative. Crazy that they rather hedge their bets making a scapegoat, but, that's just probably some perverted old exec who needs to be ousted, and maybe suffer a heart attack to boot. They'll get found out. They all will get theirs.
 
www.mjvibe.com

The Estate of Michael Jackson wants judge to dismiss Katherine Jackson's objection - MJVibe

The Estate of Michael Jackson wants judge to dismiss Katherine Jackson's objection on a secret deal that could bring millions to the Estate.
www.mjvibe.com www.mjvibe.com

Last November, the Estate of Michael Jackson asked permission to the court to go ahead with a secret transaction.

The court documents are sealed and non of us know what this is about but speculations point out to the selling of Michael’s catalogue.

Last month, Katherine Jackson filled an objection to the transaction in question.

Now the Estate led by John Branca, is asking the court to dismiss Katherine’s objections to the proposed transaction and to move forward with the deal in question.

In their motion, the estate lays out how they turned Michael’s estate around. Branca and McClain said when they took over the pop star was drowning in debt.

“The Estate was teetering on the verge of collapse, with more than $400 million in debt that encumbered Michael’s most significant assets and little or no liquidity or means to service that debt. Through creative thinking, hard work and business savvy—and, of course, Michael’s extraordinary creative legacy—the Executors transformed the MJJ Business into a profitable enterprise,” the motion reads.

The executors pointed out they have been incredibly successful over the past 14 years in charge. “Desperate for creative opportunities to generate income and stave off foreclosures, the Executors negotiated a unique deal to co-produce the film This Is It with AEG using rehearsal footage from the farewell tour of the same name that Michael was preparing for when he passed,” the estate said.

They said despite negotiating extraordinarily favorable terms for the Estate, Katherine objected to the proposed transaction. The court eventually allowed the executors to move forward despite the objection.
Branca and McClain point out the film became the highest-grossing documentary/concert film of all time, “and the income, public interest, and reputational boost it generated for the Estate paved the way for the Executors’ many successes since.”
The executors said their work has provided, “provided the Beneficiaries financial security and freedom.” Branca and McClain used Katherine’s past objection as a reason to not be swayed by her current objection.
The estate said none of Michael’s children have raised issues with the deal. The executors argue Katherine should not be allowed to prevent the three beneficiaries from benefiting from the deal and they said that Katherine’s objections are “misplaced”.
The court has not yet ruled on this dispute and for sure, like me, you are a bit confused to what’s going on and what is this transaction. But if the court rules in favour of the Estate, we will see that deal to come to light.
To be continued…
 
MJbr2 said:
That is why my eyes roll when I see people trying to defend this old man.
Click to expand...
Putting aside the dodgy music releases, the estate has done a phenomenal job in turning around MJ's fortune.

It's a business at the end of the day and about making as much money as possible.

You could argue that MJ would not have agreed with certain deals that the estate has made but the guy was heavily in debt and would have possibly spiralled even further if he was still alive.

Making over a billion by selling half of his catalogue is surely a smart move.
 
BuffaloBill87 said:
Putting aside the dodgy music releases, the estate has done a phenomenal job in turning around MJ's fortune.

It's a business at the end of the day and about making as much money as possible.

You could argue that MJ would not have agreed with certain deals that the estate has made but the guy was heavily in debt and would have possibly spiralled even further if he was still alive.

Making over a billion by selling half of his catalogue is surely a smart move.
Click to expand...
Selling the catalogue (maintenance and song usage rights, not the songs themselves) is way less of an issue now than it was before. I feel like the sentiments is what makes people react this way. Mostly, MJ saying it, even though he played just as fast and loose with that throughout his life. All he would've had to have done to stay liquid was just start with vault releases.
 
#BreakingNews Michael Jackson estate fights late pop star's mother Katherine over secret settlement, claim Paris and Prince have no problem with proposal

April 17, 2023
The executors of Michael Jackson's estate returned to court to fight the late pop star's mother, Katherine , over her attempt to shut down a potentially lucrative deal.

According to court documents obtained by RadarOnline, the estate, led by John Branca and John McClain , is asking a court to dismiss Katherine's objections to the proposed transaction.

As we first reported, in November, the estate asked the court to approve a deal they had secured. Branca and McClain explained that they "have an opportunity that they believe is a substantial advantage to the Estate and in the best interests of the beneficiaries."

Branca and McClain have been in charge of Michael's estate since his death on June 25, 2009. The beneficiaries of the estate are Michael's three children, Prince , Paris and Blanket . However, Michael's will made sure to provide for his mother Katherine for the rest of his life.

The estate did not provide details of the settlement in question. A couple of months later, Katherine filed an objection to the deal. Her filing was sealed by the court. She has yet to publicly disclose her reasoning.

Now, in a new filing, the estate has asked the court to dismiss Katherine's plea and allow them to move forward with the deal.

Already a decade ago Katherine then went after MJ executor John Branca -- saying, "Mr. Branca was a man that my son was very worried about."

She added, "Michael told me on more than one occasion that he did not like this man and did not trust him, he told me that John had stolen from him."

Katherine continued, "This lawsuit is exactly the type of awful thing that Michael said he was capable of doing."

I been telling yall about branca! I feel like he has a role in the death of mj...imo
 
wonderouzmj said:
#BreakingNews Michael Jackson estate fights late pop star's mother Katherine over secret settlement, claim Paris and Prince have no problem with proposal

April 17, 2023
The executors of Michael Jackson's estate returned to court to fight the late pop star's mother, Katherine , over her attempt to shut down a potentially lucrative deal.

According to court documents obtained by RadarOnline, the estate, led by John Branca and John McClain , is asking a court to dismiss Katherine's objections to the proposed transaction.

As we first reported, in November, the estate asked the court to approve a deal they had secured. Branca and McClain explained that they "have an opportunity that they believe is a substantial advantage to the Estate and in the best interests of the beneficiaries."

Branca and McClain have been in charge of Michael's estate since his death on June 25, 2009. The beneficiaries of the estate are Michael's three children, Prince , Paris and Blanket . However, Michael's will made sure to provide for his mother Katherine for the rest of his life.

The estate did not provide details of the settlement in question. A couple of months later, Katherine filed an objection to the deal. Her filing was sealed by the court. She has yet to publicly disclose her reasoning.

Now, in a new filing, the estate has asked the court to dismiss Katherine's plea and allow them to move forward with the deal.

Already a decade ago Katherine then went after MJ executor John Branca -- saying, "Mr. Branca was a man that my son was very worried about."

She added, "Michael told me on more than one occasion that he did not like this man and did not trust him, he told me that John had stolen from him."

Katherine continued, "This lawsuit is exactly the type of awful thing that Michael said he was capable of doing."

I been telling yall about branca! I feel like he has a role in the death of mj...imo
Click to expand...
The only people who had a role in the death of MJ was himself and Murray.

The Jackson family are also not innocent in all of this, they want their piece of the pie too 💰💰
 
Branca is a very abrasive person regardless. Doesn't mean he's a criminal, but I can understand that she wouldn't like him. She's going off of sentiment and that's her right, obviously. Still, I just don't see anything wrong with the idea.

Also a whole decade ago she stated those things. Based off how MJ felt when he was in his 20s and 30s. Far removed from when he was 50 and seemingly rehired Branca in June of 2009.

I'll still take Branca over Tohme Tohme anyway. Like who do the fans even want in charge of the estate? The kids ain't doing it so who even?
 
Branca is an amazing lawyer and has made so much profit and so many great deals for MJ Estate.

He is a great businessman and MJ Estate is a business. Many many artists sell the rights to their catalougs these days. It is not tha same now as it was 20 years ago when MJ was against it.

I feel pretty sure, MJ being as clever as he was, that he himself would also sell the cataloug if he was still alive.

Of all the wrongdoings Branca has done, this is, IMO, not a bad or wrong decision. It's simply clever and smart. And generates a HUGE income right now. - That money can be invested and make J3 more money in the future.
 
Fans care more about how the estate is ran than the beneficiaries.

Prince, Paris and Blanket aren't making any noise about this so why should we?

Honestly as fans you should be happy to see the catalogue be sold, that means whoever buys it will have an incentive to actually do something with it in order to make their money back.

Dangerous 40, HIStory 30, etc - I want the catalogue to be milked, that's how you introduce it to new audiences and keep MJ's legacy alive.
 
Annita said:
I think Prince is allready involved and I think he is intrested to take more responsibility.
Click to expand...
Yes, that is true. And I hope it leads to more. But it just seems more likely that one of the brothers would end up taking more of a role. I mean, tbf, I would be ok with Jackie doing it. He's already involved in the Estate's affairs anyway.
 
SeriousEffect. said:
Fans care more about how the estate is ran than the beneficiaries.

Prince, Paris and Blanket aren't making any noise about this so why should we?

Honestly as fans you should be happy to see the catalogue be sold, that means whoever buys it will have an incentive to actually do something with it in order to make their money back.

Dangerous 40, HIStory 30, etc - I want the catalogue to be milked, that's how you introduce it to new audiences and keep MJ's legacy alive.
Click to expand...

AMEN... Absolutely agree.

If J3 has no objections... Then why on earth would we have?? Makes no sense. - "But MJ himself said... bla bla bla..."
What MJ said was said in a totally different time and different music business. He was smart, so he would follow trends and see and evaluate the marked, so he would propably do the same if he was still alive. Many of the biggest artists in the world sell their catalougs these days. It makes a lot of sense in 2023 - maybe it did not make sense in 2005, but the music business is 100 % different now. All digital, streaming etc.

If J3 wants to sell (some) of the ownership to MJ's catalogue and the can make a lot of money they can then invest better - then go for it.

Great work Branca. - The deal sounds absolutely amazing.
 
The music industry will keep changing. This is a very shortsighted decision, only serving to elevate the legacies of the ”estate” in the history books, B especially, who wants his name on everything successful associated with Michael.

Why should anyone other than Michael’s closest have control over how his music and videos are officially presented? I understand some couldn’t care less about the actual feelings of Jackson’s beneficiaries, while I feel those who care know how Michael felt about B, even in his last years. If he actually rehired him (in the week before Michael’s death) it was under enormous pressure, and we all know the pressure didn’t subside…

The estate did not need to publish that heavily edited This Is It. They knew whatever they presented would be record shattering at that time… It was tasteless, largely serving creditors who put the pressure on Michael and saving the faces of people who ultimately failed him. They’ll keep presenting a mere product in Michael’s image, of their own inauthentic and aggrandizing devices. Virtually no one who pays a billion for song usage rights would be interested in presenting Michael in tasteful and authentic ways. If deals like these keep going through, everything presented is just a product that tickles the imagination because of how his previous work is remembered.
Note especially how the estate conveys to the court and public the turning around of debts in order to seem like the heroes, as if Michael was solely responsible, feeding the falsehood that his spending habits were mostly to blame. They don’t mention how much of his money was squandered and stolen by people he had trusted, including B, while hiding the reality from him.

Industrial complexes have no place for soul, especially Michael’s. That’s why he tried his best moving away from them in favor of self publishing. It will continue to be up to fans to keep Michael’s authentic heartfelt vision alive.
 
Last edited:
Sensual visionary said:
The music industry will keep changing. This is a very shortsighted decision, only serving to elevate the legacies of the ”estate” in the history books, B especially, who wants his name on everything successful associated with Michael.

Why should anyone other than Michael’s closest have control over how his music and videos are officially presented? I understand some couldn’t care less about the actual feelings of Jackson’s beneficiaries, while I feel those who care know how Michael felt about B, even in his last years. If he actually rehired him (in the week before Michael’s death) it was under enormous pressure, and we all know the pressure didn’t subside…

The estate did not need to publish that heavily edited This Is It. They knew whatever they presented would be record shattering at that time… It was tasteless, largely serving creditors who put the pressure on Michael and saving the faces of people who ultimately failed him. They’ll keep presenting a mere product in Michael’s image, of their own inauthentic and aggrandizing devices. Virtually no one who pays a billion for song usage rights would be interested in presenting Michael in tasteful and authentic ways. If deals like these keep going through, everything presented is just a product that tickles the imagination because of how his previous work is remembered.
Note especially how the estate conveys to the court and public the turning around of debts in order to seem like the heroes, as if Michael was solely responsible, feeding the falsehood that his spending habits were mostly to blame. They don’t mention how much of his money was squandered and stolen by people he had trusted, including B, while hiding the reality from him.

Industrial complexes have no place for soul, especially Michael’s. That’s why he tried his best moving away from them in favor of self publishing. It will continue to be up to fans to keep Michael’s authentic heartfelt vision alive.
Click to expand...
The legacies in the history books literally ends with Michael. Absolutely no one ranks post 2009 goings on in the biography of MJ, period. And I say this as someone who likes most of them. Like, when do we ever? Nothing posthumous captivates like their living works, unless it bears as much of their influence as it can, ala David Bowie's Blackstar. Michael had no such record prepared yet.

Anyway, why should anyone else have a say? They already do. Unless you're talking about LaToya. Katherine admittedly has her misgivings, and legally they will consider her. Otherwise it seems they are mostly making moves to secure MJs assets get utilized, not just "maintained", in a vault. There's more ways to remember MJ than to just play his classics on Radio every day.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top