Sunday, August 29, 2010

The McCourt Divorce: A Viewer's Guide.

The McCourt Divorce VG Final
Posted by Josh Fisher at 7:23 PM
Labels: , ,

14 comments:

  1. Tony ForkushAugust 29, 2010 at 11:44 PM

    Hello Josh,
    Welcome to sunny LA. First off manana, Leah Bishop. Over thirty seats will be used for the media, including CNN, ESPN, NY Post (of course), etc.

    I will be avoiding tomorrow and wait and see what kind of dog and pony show it is. Plus, I am still biting my pillow due to the straight waiver claim/salary dump of ManRam by the team to the pale hose. Sniffle.

    Best of luck. It's only four days this week, then two weeks off, then back on again. By that time I will be back to work as a library assistant at Hollywood High School, from my very long summer.

    I'll let you know if I make it down there. And now, on to your primer.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Tony ForkushAugust 30, 2010 at 2:23 AM

    Pulling night shift in prep for day one.

    Some thoughts:

    -If I were Jamie McCourt, I would not be all that comfortable with a Judge who specializes in Adolf Hitler while appointed by our Governor you know who. Maybe that's my own Semitic paranoia, but what can I say. It's Chinatown, Jake.

    -What if the Silverstein error is in fact really, truly an error by his legal sec. and they lose the case? Talk about needing white out.

    -I have a doctor's appointment for an MRI (with apologies to Manny)at 4:30PM with Dr. Charles, you got it, Gordon. Thank you, Carl Jung.

    Still reading the mishugas. Wonderful!

    ReplyDelete
  3. Tony ForkushAugust 30, 2010 at 2:28 AM

    p.s. Question-

    If Frank loses and is forced to sell, would an appeal delay such a sale, or would he continue to appeal after a Dennis Gilbert/Cuban/Torre/Broad/Checketts/Glazer/O'Malley/Wasserman/investor group took over?

    ReplyDelete
  4. Tony ForkushAugust 30, 2010 at 2:34 AM

    p.s.s., or p.p.s.,whichever-

    Does anyone actually have the burden of proof here? Or is it solely based on the arguments of the attorneys?

    ReplyDelete
  5. J1August 30, 2010 at 9:14 AM

    Great article summarizing everything, it was very helpful and clear. I was wondering though, who actually has an advantage? Besides Jamie's *Emotional* point.

    ReplyDelete
  6. AnonymousAugust 30, 2010 at 10:08 AM

    Great article. You do a great service to the fans that are interested in this case.

    ReplyDelete
  7. David NegusAugust 30, 2010 at 2:16 PM

    Correct me if am wrong, but Frank has the burden of proof to show there is an MPA; Jamie has the burden to show fraud. If the judge decides nobody is credible, then everything is community property.

    ReplyDelete
  8. AnonymousAugust 30, 2010 at 5:38 PM

    Excellent article and well written. Prediction - the whole MPA will be disqualified and the Dodgers will end up as CA community property.

    ReplyDelete
  9. David NegusAugust 30, 2010 at 6:25 PM

    On the other hand, the fact that Jamie is presenting evidence first suggests she has the burden of proof in this hearing.

    ReplyDelete
  10. UnknownSeptember 2, 2010 at 5:27 PM

    Thank you. Excellent presentation. While the whole Dodger Divorce reeks, it is an interesting look into MLB financing. I feel pretty sure the loans and indebtedness of the Dodgers is not that different from many other MLB teams. The players salaries plainly cannot be supported by fan attendance alone. For a team to be financially viable, they must have income from other sources, be it broadcast or larger corporation money.

    ReplyDelete
  11. AnonymousSeptember 2, 2010 at 11:40 PM

    I am hopeful for Frank to prevail in this Divorce proceeding. Frank is a visionary, a risk taker, and a hard worker. He is leaving his wife rich and his four sons richer. I would like to see Frank complete work. Jamie will be just fine. Jamie will get her four or five homes she sought out to preserve in all of this. Jamie wanted small or no risk, therefore she can't have it both ways.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Mark BernsteinSeptember 20, 2010 at 12:53 PM

    Frank is nothing but a snake oil salesman. And she is a lawyer who does not read her own contracts. He always said "it's all about the fans." Did he mean the ceiling fans for his collection of houses? Selig steered the deal to the McCourt's so they would go along with the collusion/non-collusion of cost control of players payroll except for the usual 5 suspects allowed. Sorry Josh Fisher, your Dodgers are going to be a fourth or third place team for the next two or three years. Or worse!

    ReplyDelete
  13. AnonymousDecember 8, 2010 at 8:02 PM

    I'm rooting like heck for Jaime to win.
    Whenever real estate people get involved with sports it's bound to be bad for the general public(see Roosevelt Raceway sale in New York). These people push themselves into a situation looking to make a quick score on the real estate end and not really caring about the business(in this case, the team itself). I hope
    carpet-bagger Frankie has to sell the team and he go can slithering off into the sunset with his precious parking lots.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Nevada DivorceApril 1, 2013 at 2:27 PM

    I don't think it's fair to refer to Frank as a snake oil salesman. Limiting people to old metaphors is never helpful.

    ReplyDelete

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)