Axum Ezana
Driving in the fast lane
Oscar trying to milk that cow as much as he can before his fighter faces GGG
saving dave for canelo first title defense at mw i believe to get his feet wet . then maybe ggg next.
Al Haymon hit with $100 million lawsuit from TR to go along w/ $300 million lawsuit by GBP
- Thread starter Newzz
- Start date
saving dave for canelo first title defense at mw i believe to get his feet wet . then maybe ggg next.
Breadman breaks down GB/TR lawsuit against Al Haymon and PBC:
First off let me say I think Golden Boy is a great promotional company. They have a great staff and everybody over there that I have come into contact with is a class act. I don’t know Top Rank as well but I think they also have a great company and I think their matchmaking is the best in the history of boxing.
But if you are objective you know that a 9 figure lawsuit against Al Haymon is overkill. From my knowledge Oscar did get paid well for fighters he lost in the break up. But more importantly Oscar got to work with Haymon almost exclusively since Mayweather fought him in 2007. I never heard anyone claim any violations of the Muhammad Ali Act or Anti Trust Acts then. So why now? Maybe because they are not working together anymore I would suppose..… I also believe that Haymon offered Golden Boy the PBC idea and they rejected. From my knowledge you are creating a monopoly if you stop others from doing what you are doing. If Golden Boy was offered the PBC idea first, how can they claim Haymon is setting up a monopoly? Besides that everyone wanted big time boxing on network television. Now that’s it’s on in a big time fashion I don’t think it’s accurate to claim a monopoly because Haymon was the first to do it at this level in a long time. No cared that Mian Events was on NBC because the level of fighter they showcased was not as threatening….
It’s ironic because lets look at a promoter like Lou Dibella for example. He had Andre Berto since very early in his career. Once Haymon and Golden Boy started working together, Berto was fighting on Golden Boy Shows and not Dibella shows. No one was screaming and cheering to stand up against the monopoly then. Let’s also look at Dibella’s interaction with Top Rank.
Dibella was the promoter of Sergio Martinez who defeated the Ring Magazine champion in Kelly Pavlik a Top Rank fighter. Martinez got stripped by a sanctioning body and his opponent Sebastien Zbik was turned down for him to fight on HBO. Julio Cesar Chavez Jr. got to fight that same opponent for vacant belt that Martinez never loss on HBO.
After Chavez beat Zbik, Martinez had to come in on the B side and fight for his belt he never loss. Chavez is a Top Rank fighter. There was no outrage. No cheering on Twitter. I can give literally gives 100s of examples of simple mistreatment. This one was just perfect because Dibella has done business with Top Rank, Golden Boy and Haymon so he fits the perfect profile of someone who has been hurt and has benefited from the power brokers…..
Sure Haymon has signed lots of fighters. That’s obvious. But as far as I know there is no limit of how many fighters a manager or advisor can sign. It’s just up to Haymon to make sure those fighters get fights and get paid well. Thus far as a whole he has done a solid job of that. I’m not claiming that 100% of his clients are 100% pleased , but I am saying that the majority of his fighters love the guy and what he has done for them. The Muhammad Ali Act was set in place to protect the fighters foremost…..
Haymon also has taken a huge chance on his investment. But that’s something he has to deal with. Either the investors get a return, they break even or they lose. I’m sure the investors understand this. People seem to be concerned as to whether he can pay them back but that’s not a violation of a law. That’s a risky investment deal…
And yes you make a good point, what will happen to Haymon’s fighters inflated purses. I don’t know but I do know Haymon’s fighters have been well paid before these investors stepped in. Andre Berto has been one of the highest paid boxers of the last decade and Berto is not a super star or great fighter. So again that may be a concern but that’s not illegal.
Since we are on the topic of inflated purses, let’s talk about it. Was there outrage when Kelly Pavlik was making over 2 million dollars to fight Gary Lockett? Or was there outrage when Krusher Kovalev got 500k to fight Bernard Hopkins in a unification fight? I just gave you two extremes where one fighter was seemingly overpaid and the other was seemingly underpaid.
The Ali Act highlights full disclosure. Meaning the fighters get to know what the network is paying for the bout and they get to refer that to what their promoter is actually taking off the top. Lots of times the promoter makes almost as much if not more than the fighter which shouldn’t be. So I don’t get why Haymon’s fighters making more money than the average market value is a bad thing. It should be a good thing. And I assume that if Kovalev was with Haymon he wouldn’t have made 500k to fight in unification fight.
The Ali Act also prevents managers from being promoters. And Haymon has more power than the “average” manager I get that. But so does Cameron Dunkin. So does J Prince. So does Frank Espinoza. So did Shelly Finkel. There are regular managers then there are the power broker types who just have more influence. There are the guys that have leverage with promoters because they will simply take elite talent elsewhere. We all know that. I could give exact specific examples of manager/promoter relationships in which the manager has more control than the promoter or in which there is a major conflict of interest. I’m not claiming it’s right, but what I am saying is if you take this court some of these things will blow up everyone’s face because TR and GB willingly do business with some of these same relationships…
Last thing, Haymon for a time worked mostly with Golden Boy. Now he’s working with Dibella, Goosen and Warriors. There was a time when Cameron Dunkin was a really hot manager and he took most of his talent to guess who, Top Rank. I didn’t hear any outrage over that. Was Dunkin a manager and promoter or was he taking his talent where he had the most control?
After the biggest fight in history gets made, I just think it’s ridiculous a lawsuit like this comes about where the three most powerful entities in boxing will have more obstacles in making big fights. …..
Sometimes court is a good thing. Because in court there is something called discovery that has to be turned over. I was looking forward to the discovery in the Pacquiao/Mayweather lawsuit that never came about. And now I’m looking forward to the discovery in this case if it goes that far. We shall see…..
http://www.boxingscene.com/?m=show&opt=printable&id=93171
First off let me say I think Golden Boy is a great promotional company. They have a great staff and everybody over there that I have come into contact with is a class act. I don’t know Top Rank as well but I think they also have a great company and I think their matchmaking is the best in the history of boxing.
But if you are objective you know that a 9 figure lawsuit against Al Haymon is overkill. From my knowledge Oscar did get paid well for fighters he lost in the break up. But more importantly Oscar got to work with Haymon almost exclusively since Mayweather fought him in 2007. I never heard anyone claim any violations of the Muhammad Ali Act or Anti Trust Acts then. So why now? Maybe because they are not working together anymore I would suppose..… I also believe that Haymon offered Golden Boy the PBC idea and they rejected. From my knowledge you are creating a monopoly if you stop others from doing what you are doing. If Golden Boy was offered the PBC idea first, how can they claim Haymon is setting up a monopoly? Besides that everyone wanted big time boxing on network television. Now that’s it’s on in a big time fashion I don’t think it’s accurate to claim a monopoly because Haymon was the first to do it at this level in a long time. No cared that Mian Events was on NBC because the level of fighter they showcased was not as threatening….
It’s ironic because lets look at a promoter like Lou Dibella for example. He had Andre Berto since very early in his career. Once Haymon and Golden Boy started working together, Berto was fighting on Golden Boy Shows and not Dibella shows. No one was screaming and cheering to stand up against the monopoly then. Let’s also look at Dibella’s interaction with Top Rank.
Dibella was the promoter of Sergio Martinez who defeated the Ring Magazine champion in Kelly Pavlik a Top Rank fighter. Martinez got stripped by a sanctioning body and his opponent Sebastien Zbik was turned down for him to fight on HBO. Julio Cesar Chavez Jr. got to fight that same opponent for vacant belt that Martinez never loss on HBO.
After Chavez beat Zbik, Martinez had to come in on the B side and fight for his belt he never loss. Chavez is a Top Rank fighter. There was no outrage. No cheering on Twitter. I can give literally gives 100s of examples of simple mistreatment. This one was just perfect because Dibella has done business with Top Rank, Golden Boy and Haymon so he fits the perfect profile of someone who has been hurt and has benefited from the power brokers…..
Sure Haymon has signed lots of fighters. That’s obvious. But as far as I know there is no limit of how many fighters a manager or advisor can sign. It’s just up to Haymon to make sure those fighters get fights and get paid well. Thus far as a whole he has done a solid job of that. I’m not claiming that 100% of his clients are 100% pleased , but I am saying that the majority of his fighters love the guy and what he has done for them. The Muhammad Ali Act was set in place to protect the fighters foremost…..
Haymon also has taken a huge chance on his investment. But that’s something he has to deal with. Either the investors get a return, they break even or they lose. I’m sure the investors understand this. People seem to be concerned as to whether he can pay them back but that’s not a violation of a law. That’s a risky investment deal…
And yes you make a good point, what will happen to Haymon’s fighters inflated purses. I don’t know but I do know Haymon’s fighters have been well paid before these investors stepped in. Andre Berto has been one of the highest paid boxers of the last decade and Berto is not a super star or great fighter. So again that may be a concern but that’s not illegal.
Since we are on the topic of inflated purses, let’s talk about it. Was there outrage when Kelly Pavlik was making over 2 million dollars to fight Gary Lockett? Or was there outrage when Krusher Kovalev got 500k to fight Bernard Hopkins in a unification fight? I just gave you two extremes where one fighter was seemingly overpaid and the other was seemingly underpaid.
The Ali Act highlights full disclosure. Meaning the fighters get to know what the network is paying for the bout and they get to refer that to what their promoter is actually taking off the top. Lots of times the promoter makes almost as much if not more than the fighter which shouldn’t be. So I don’t get why Haymon’s fighters making more money than the average market value is a bad thing. It should be a good thing. And I assume that if Kovalev was with Haymon he wouldn’t have made 500k to fight in unification fight.
The Ali Act also prevents managers from being promoters. And Haymon has more power than the “average” manager I get that. But so does Cameron Dunkin. So does J Prince. So does Frank Espinoza. So did Shelly Finkel. There are regular managers then there are the power broker types who just have more influence. There are the guys that have leverage with promoters because they will simply take elite talent elsewhere. We all know that. I could give exact specific examples of manager/promoter relationships in which the manager has more control than the promoter or in which there is a major conflict of interest. I’m not claiming it’s right, but what I am saying is if you take this court some of these things will blow up everyone’s face because TR and GB willingly do business with some of these same relationships…
Last thing, Haymon for a time worked mostly with Golden Boy. Now he’s working with Dibella, Goosen and Warriors. There was a time when Cameron Dunkin was a really hot manager and he took most of his talent to guess who, Top Rank. I didn’t hear any outrage over that. Was Dunkin a manager and promoter or was he taking his talent where he had the most control?
After the biggest fight in history gets made, I just think it’s ridiculous a lawsuit like this comes about where the three most powerful entities in boxing will have more obstacles in making big fights. …..
Sometimes court is a good thing. Because in court there is something called discovery that has to be turned over. I was looking forward to the discovery in the Pacquiao/Mayweather lawsuit that never came about. And now I’m looking forward to the discovery in this case if it goes that far. We shall see…..
http://www.boxingscene.com/?m=show&opt=printable&id=93171
LinusCaldwell
From The Eastside with Love
Al haymon what have you done 
Breadman breaks down GB/TR lawsuit against Al Haymon and PBC:
First off let me say I think Golden Boy is a great promotional company. They have a great staff and everybody over there that I have come into contact with is a class act. I don’t know Top Rank as well but I think they also have a great company and I think their matchmaking is the best in the history of boxing.
But if you are objective you know that a 9 figure lawsuit against Al Haymon is overkill. From my knowledge Oscar did get paid well for fighters he lost in the break up. But more importantly Oscar got to work with Haymon almost exclusively since Mayweather fought him in 2007. I never heard anyone claim any violations of the Muhammad Ali Act or Anti Trust Acts then. So why now? Maybe because they are not working together anymore I would suppose..… I also believe that Haymon offered Golden Boy the PBC idea and they rejected. From my knowledge you are creating a monopoly if you stop others from doing what you are doing. If Golden Boy was offered the PBC idea first, how can they claim Haymon is setting up a monopoly? Besides that everyone wanted big time boxing on network television. Now that’s it’s on in a big time fashion I don’t think it’s accurate to claim a monopoly because Haymon was the first to do it at this level in a long time. No cared that Mian Events was on NBC because the level of fighter they showcased was not as threatening….
It’s ironic because lets look at a promoter like Lou Dibella for example. He had Andre Berto since very early in his career. Once Haymon and Golden Boy started working together, Berto was fighting on Golden Boy Shows and not Dibella shows. No one was screaming and cheering to stand up against the monopoly then. Let’s also look at Dibella’s interaction with Top Rank.
Dibella was the promoter of Sergio Martinez who defeated the Ring Magazine champion in Kelly Pavlik a Top Rank fighter. Martinez got stripped by a sanctioning body and his opponent Sebastien Zbik was turned down for him to fight on HBO. Julio Cesar Chavez Jr. got to fight that same opponent for vacant belt that Martinez never loss on HBO.
After Chavez beat Zbik, Martinez had to come in on the B side and fight for his belt he never loss. Chavez is a Top Rank fighter. There was no outrage. No cheering on Twitter. I can give literally gives 100s of examples of simple mistreatment. This one was just perfect because Dibella has done business with Top Rank, Golden Boy and Haymon so he fits the perfect profile of someone who has been hurt and has benefited from the power brokers…..
Sure Haymon has signed lots of fighters. That’s obvious. But as far as I know there is no limit of how many fighters a manager or advisor can sign. It’s just up to Haymon to make sure those fighters get fights and get paid well. Thus far as a whole he has done a solid job of that. I’m not claiming that 100% of his clients are 100% pleased , but I am saying that the majority of his fighters love the guy and what he has done for them. The Muhammad Ali Act was set in place to protect the fighters foremost…..
Haymon also has taken a huge chance on his investment. But that’s something he has to deal with. Either the investors get a return, they break even or they lose. I’m sure the investors understand this. People seem to be concerned as to whether he can pay them back but that’s not a violation of a law. That’s a risky investment deal…
And yes you make a good point, what will happen to Haymon’s fighters inflated purses. I don’t know but I do know Haymon’s fighters have been well paid before these investors stepped in. Andre Berto has been one of the highest paid boxers of the last decade and Berto is not a super star or great fighter. So again that may be a concern but that’s not illegal.
Since we are on the topic of inflated purses, let’s talk about it. Was there outrage when Kelly Pavlik was making over 2 million dollars to fight Gary Lockett? Or was there outrage when Krusher Kovalev got 500k to fight Bernard Hopkins in a unification fight? I just gave you two extremes where one fighter was seemingly overpaid and the other was seemingly underpaid.
The Ali Act highlights full disclosure. Meaning the fighters get to know what the network is paying for the bout and they get to refer that to what their promoter is actually taking off the top. Lots of times the promoter makes almost as much if not more than the fighter which shouldn’t be. So I don’t get why Haymon’s fighters making more money than the average market value is a bad thing. It should be a good thing. And I assume that if Kovalev was with Haymon he wouldn’t have made 500k to fight in unification fight.
The Ali Act also prevents managers from being promoters. And Haymon has more power than the “average” manager I get that. But so does Cameron Dunkin. So does J Prince. So does Frank Espinoza. So did Shelly Finkel. There are regular managers then there are the power broker types who just have more influence. There are the guys that have leverage with promoters because they will simply take elite talent elsewhere. We all know that. I could give exact specific examples of manager/promoter relationships in which the manager has more control than the promoter or in which there is a major conflict of interest. I’m not claiming it’s right, but what I am saying is if you take this court some of these things will blow up everyone’s face because TR and GB willingly do business with some of these same relationships…
Last thing, Haymon for a time worked mostly with Golden Boy. Now he’s working with Dibella, Goosen and Warriors. There was a time when Cameron Dunkin was a really hot manager and he took most of his talent to guess who, Top Rank. I didn’t hear any outrage over that. Was Dunkin a manager and promoter or was he taking his talent where he had the most control?
After the biggest fight in history gets made, I just think it’s ridiculous a lawsuit like this comes about where the three most powerful entities in boxing will have more obstacles in making big fights. …..
Sometimes court is a good thing. Because in court there is something called discovery that has to be turned over. I was looking forward to the discovery in the Pacquiao/Mayweather lawsuit that never came about. And now I’m looking forward to the discovery in this case if it goes that far. We shall see…..
http://www.boxingscene.com/?m=show&opt=printable&id=93171
Another angle on the GB/TR vs. PBC lawsuits suggesting that the legal maneuvering from Arum and Fishnets is to simply scare the investors involved.
http://theboxingtribune.com/2015/07...-target-beyond-the-target-magnos-monday-rant/
Don’t pretend you know anything more about Al Haymon’s level of culpability than anyone else.
With lawsuits seeking damages from both Golden Boy and Top Rank, Haymon faces charges of shady business tactics as well as widespread violations of the Muhammad Ali Act. But, again, don’t pretend that you know anything regarding whether those allegations are actually true. The media doesn’t really know and you, the reader, only know what the media would like you to believe.
Efforts will have to be made to determine the nature of Haymon’s business dealings and the actual legal nature of his role in running shows featuring “his” fighters. The courts will sift through all the papers and determine whether Haymon’s advisor role is actually one of manager, promoter, both, or neither.
That is, of course, if the lawsuits ever go to court– which they probably won’t.
Going to court means going through a discovery process that would flatten all parties involved and, likely, open the doors for the world to see that those filing the lawsuits have been using some of the same shady business practices they attribute to Haymon. Top Rank and Golden Boy are smart enough to realize that.
So, then, why file lawsuits that are not likely to actually produce a court decision? To find out the possible answer to that question, one needs to look at the money behind the Premier Boxing Champions (PBC) power broker and what the PBC project means to boxing’s core structure.
Investment firm Waddell & Reed specializes in what are called “mom and pop” investors– regular people investing their money in business ventures under the guidance of the firm’s financial team. Reports have stated that Waddell & Reed has gathered as much as $400 million for the PBC project.
Per the Wall Street Journal, this type of mom and pop base “makes it more susceptible to shifts in popular sentiment than larger competitors.” And, likely, those investors involved with funding PBC are not savvy boxing insiders familiar with the feints, bluffs, and hustles that make up a good portion of the sport’s business practices.
A regular, every day investor– which make up about 86% of Waddell & Reed’s clientele– only reads news reports and website articles.
Who would not panic at article headlines proclaiming that the object of their hard-earned monetary investment is “surrounded” or “under fire?” What Waddell & Reed investor would not wince at Top Rank attorney, Daniel Petrocelli’s insistence that Federal laws have been violated with the “financial backing, complicity, and material assistance of Waddell & Reed?”
It’s easy to understand how investors would be quick to distance themselves from PBC and, quite possibly, Waddell & Reed as well.
And that may be the very reason behind the two lawsuits recently filed.
Forget about the $300 million wanted by Golden Boy and the $100 million wanted by Top Rank, the real goal of these high profile lawsuits could be to rattle investors enough to remove their funds from Waddell & Reed and immediately defund Al Haymon and Haymon Boxing.
Without the war chest money, Haymon cannot continue with the PBC project and, while remaining a major player in the game with plenty of assets, he won’t have the funding to be anything more than a cog in the machine.
The Boxing Tribune’s own Fox Doucette, who has a bachelor’s degree in accounting from the University of Nevada, Reno, took a look at Waddell & Reed’s earnings, strategies, and general investor profile and found it, by nature, to be a firm ruled by a “restrictive financial model for capital budgeting” due to the nature of its investors.
“They don’t stick around when an investment starts to go sour,” Doucette said. “Top Rank and Golden Boy know it…
“Arum and Oscar don’t have to bankrupt Haymon. They just have to drive his ROI down below the opportunity cost of his investors just bailing on him and putting that money somewhere else.”
In other words, a really good bluff may be all that’s needed to break apart the coalition funding of Haymon and PBC.
Believe me, there is a great interest in “defeating” Haymon and eventually removing him from the sport. There’s a reason he is attacked with the wave after wave ferocity reserved for trouble-making outsiders and those trying to work outside of the existing constructs of the game. And there’s a reason this has been the case ever since he first got into the game as the moonlighting manager of Vernon Forrest.
Like him or not, agree with his business tactics or not, a successful Haymon (as well as a successful PBC) represents a complete restructuring of the sport. It represents a turning away from the current system where the promoters wield every bit of the power, from control over sanctioning bodies to TV deals, and right down to the specifics of judging, officiating, and working with commissions (that are often beholden to those same promoters). A shift in power that puts more control into the hands of the fighter, manager, and TV people would immediately strip guys like Bob Arum of his omnipotent power broker status and turn him into someone who “just” promotes fights.
Obviously, this is not good for those promoters who currently wield the most power. It’s also not good for the sanctioning bodies, which are little more than puppets for the promoters in power, or for select stooges placed in state commissions, who make a killing from playing dumb for the benefit of keeping favored promoters happy.
So, the Crush Haymon initiative, if there is one, is a no-brainer.
And, in boxing, where the will of the promoters goes, so does the willing flesh of the media.
We’ve talked about this before in the Monday Rant and will talk about it again, but boxing’s media is, in great part, subsidized or, in some cases, flat-out owned by boxing’s promoters. A great many media jobs are owed to promoters who know that a fat, complacent, conveniently inept media is pure advertising power– and nobody is even trying to hide it anymore.
The Friday before ESPN’s Dan Rafael “broke” the Top Rank lawsuit story, he was wined and dined at Bob Arum’s Beverly Hills mansion, where he took snapshots to share with his Twitter followers. The following Wednesday, Rafael blasted the Top Rank vs. Haymon news throughout the Universo Pugilistico. The rebuttal from Haymon’s attorneys was posted later that same day by Rafael, but was buried deep inside a lengthy article that once again spotlighted the allegations against Haymon and company.
Almost exactly one week prior to the Top Rank lawsuit being filed, veteran scribe and Rafael’s BWAA brother, Ivan Goldman of Boxing Insider, wrote a table-setting piece regarding the California State Athletic Commission (CSAC) “busting” Haymon for “sabotaging” rivals’ shows. Just about every media outfit ran with the story, reprinting the juicy details of Haymon plans foiled by a plucky commission. And after the Top Rank lawsuit was announced, they referred back to the Goldman piece as implied proof positive of Haymon’s wrongdoing.
Except, the day after the lawsuit news hit the web, in a piece published in Boxingscene, the CSAC denied that any actions had been taken against Haymon at all and that there has been no investigation of Haymon by the commission, “either formally or informally.” Commission member, John Frierson, who Goldman quoted in his article, was even reportedly denying the words attributed to him, especially those regarding the commission “busting” Haymon.
Goldman, however, doubled down on his claims, posting a piece entitled, “California Commissioners Get Cold Feet after Crossing Mighty Al Haymon.”
At this point it should be noted that Goldman has been a loud and long-time critic of both Floyd Mayweather and Al Haymon, taking the position of serial penny-click Mayweather/Haymon antagonizer at Boxing Insider from “Scoop” Malinowski. Most Goldman columns these days are anti-Mayweather or anti-Haymon rants.
Goldman is also the writer who, not too long ago, wrote a totally fallacious piece about Shane Mosley being destitute and forced to live in the basement of his ex-wife’s home. When that story proved to be completely incorrect, he refused to own up to his lack of due diligence, insisting that he had not really reported it as fact and blaming the misinformation on summaries he read of a TV reality dating show “by the kind of media that cover this stuff.”
At any rate, The CSAC’s denial of Goldman’s story got almost no traction in the boxing media– and certainly not as much as Goldman’s questionable and disputed hit piece.
Other stories have been floated into the public consciousness by the media, intended to foster the idea that Haymon has broken Federal law, is intent upon establishing a monopoly, and is producing an utterly inferior product that is no threat to non-Haymon entities, is hemorrhaging all sorts of money, and is completely out of favor with fans. Assorted writers, all with connections to either the BWAA or directly to Top Rank Promotions in some manner, have made it a full-time job to turn their social media timelines into a round-the-clock attack on Haymon, PBC, Waddell & Reed, and any fighter associated with them. Sadly, some fans have been lured into the partisan fray.
Of course, it’s all educated guessing on my part as to whether the lawsuits and media attacks are all just parts of an organized effort to defund and crush Haymon/PBC. But it’s no more conjecture than what the boxing media has been passing off as fact.
The truth is that nobody knows the real nature of Haymon’s business dealings until some neutral third party begins sifting through the actual paperwork.
We only know what the media has reported and what the usually clueless bloggers have pieced together from Instagram photos and Twitter buzz.
I may be the only voice out there not jumping to convenient conclusions and I’m definitely the only one out there talking about why the old guard of boxing may be conspiring to eliminate Haymon from the sport. Note, though, that I’m not proclaiming Haymon’s innocence. It’s just that I don’t have enough information available to me to declare whether he is actually guilty of violating the Ali Act, or any other laws. And, if you’re honest with yourself, you’d admit the same.
This Rant will likely produce cries of pro-Haymon bias or allegations of me being in someone’s pocket– that’s to be expected when you buck the system and insist that people actually (gasp) think. However, I do like the idea of the PBC in concept (I also have some problems with its execution thus far) and I am for sure in favor of making major changes to the sport’s current infrastructure. Maybe that makes me less receptive to the lynch mob mentality boxing has when it comes to uppity outsiders.
But, unlike many of those going for Haymon’s throat every single day, I’ve never dined at Bob Arum’s Beverly Hills Mansion; I’ve never played golf at a ritzy country club with anyone from Golden Boy; I’ve never been on all-expenses-paid sightseeing junkets with Top Rank staff. My site is entirely funded by independent ad revenue and reader donations. I have no monetary interest in the outcome of any of this. My only interest is in telling the truth and in the betterment of the sport.
http://theboxingtribune.com/2015/07...-target-beyond-the-target-magnos-monday-rant/
Don’t pretend you know anything more about Al Haymon’s level of culpability than anyone else.
With lawsuits seeking damages from both Golden Boy and Top Rank, Haymon faces charges of shady business tactics as well as widespread violations of the Muhammad Ali Act. But, again, don’t pretend that you know anything regarding whether those allegations are actually true. The media doesn’t really know and you, the reader, only know what the media would like you to believe.
Efforts will have to be made to determine the nature of Haymon’s business dealings and the actual legal nature of his role in running shows featuring “his” fighters. The courts will sift through all the papers and determine whether Haymon’s advisor role is actually one of manager, promoter, both, or neither.
That is, of course, if the lawsuits ever go to court– which they probably won’t.
Going to court means going through a discovery process that would flatten all parties involved and, likely, open the doors for the world to see that those filing the lawsuits have been using some of the same shady business practices they attribute to Haymon. Top Rank and Golden Boy are smart enough to realize that.
So, then, why file lawsuits that are not likely to actually produce a court decision? To find out the possible answer to that question, one needs to look at the money behind the Premier Boxing Champions (PBC) power broker and what the PBC project means to boxing’s core structure.
Investment firm Waddell & Reed specializes in what are called “mom and pop” investors– regular people investing their money in business ventures under the guidance of the firm’s financial team. Reports have stated that Waddell & Reed has gathered as much as $400 million for the PBC project.
Per the Wall Street Journal, this type of mom and pop base “makes it more susceptible to shifts in popular sentiment than larger competitors.” And, likely, those investors involved with funding PBC are not savvy boxing insiders familiar with the feints, bluffs, and hustles that make up a good portion of the sport’s business practices.
A regular, every day investor– which make up about 86% of Waddell & Reed’s clientele– only reads news reports and website articles.
Who would not panic at article headlines proclaiming that the object of their hard-earned monetary investment is “surrounded” or “under fire?” What Waddell & Reed investor would not wince at Top Rank attorney, Daniel Petrocelli’s insistence that Federal laws have been violated with the “financial backing, complicity, and material assistance of Waddell & Reed?”
It’s easy to understand how investors would be quick to distance themselves from PBC and, quite possibly, Waddell & Reed as well.
And that may be the very reason behind the two lawsuits recently filed.
Forget about the $300 million wanted by Golden Boy and the $100 million wanted by Top Rank, the real goal of these high profile lawsuits could be to rattle investors enough to remove their funds from Waddell & Reed and immediately defund Al Haymon and Haymon Boxing.
Without the war chest money, Haymon cannot continue with the PBC project and, while remaining a major player in the game with plenty of assets, he won’t have the funding to be anything more than a cog in the machine.
The Boxing Tribune’s own Fox Doucette, who has a bachelor’s degree in accounting from the University of Nevada, Reno, took a look at Waddell & Reed’s earnings, strategies, and general investor profile and found it, by nature, to be a firm ruled by a “restrictive financial model for capital budgeting” due to the nature of its investors.
“They don’t stick around when an investment starts to go sour,” Doucette said. “Top Rank and Golden Boy know it…
“Arum and Oscar don’t have to bankrupt Haymon. They just have to drive his ROI down below the opportunity cost of his investors just bailing on him and putting that money somewhere else.”
In other words, a really good bluff may be all that’s needed to break apart the coalition funding of Haymon and PBC.
Believe me, there is a great interest in “defeating” Haymon and eventually removing him from the sport. There’s a reason he is attacked with the wave after wave ferocity reserved for trouble-making outsiders and those trying to work outside of the existing constructs of the game. And there’s a reason this has been the case ever since he first got into the game as the moonlighting manager of Vernon Forrest.
Like him or not, agree with his business tactics or not, a successful Haymon (as well as a successful PBC) represents a complete restructuring of the sport. It represents a turning away from the current system where the promoters wield every bit of the power, from control over sanctioning bodies to TV deals, and right down to the specifics of judging, officiating, and working with commissions (that are often beholden to those same promoters). A shift in power that puts more control into the hands of the fighter, manager, and TV people would immediately strip guys like Bob Arum of his omnipotent power broker status and turn him into someone who “just” promotes fights.
Obviously, this is not good for those promoters who currently wield the most power. It’s also not good for the sanctioning bodies, which are little more than puppets for the promoters in power, or for select stooges placed in state commissions, who make a killing from playing dumb for the benefit of keeping favored promoters happy.
So, the Crush Haymon initiative, if there is one, is a no-brainer.
And, in boxing, where the will of the promoters goes, so does the willing flesh of the media.
We’ve talked about this before in the Monday Rant and will talk about it again, but boxing’s media is, in great part, subsidized or, in some cases, flat-out owned by boxing’s promoters. A great many media jobs are owed to promoters who know that a fat, complacent, conveniently inept media is pure advertising power– and nobody is even trying to hide it anymore.
The Friday before ESPN’s Dan Rafael “broke” the Top Rank lawsuit story, he was wined and dined at Bob Arum’s Beverly Hills mansion, where he took snapshots to share with his Twitter followers. The following Wednesday, Rafael blasted the Top Rank vs. Haymon news throughout the Universo Pugilistico. The rebuttal from Haymon’s attorneys was posted later that same day by Rafael, but was buried deep inside a lengthy article that once again spotlighted the allegations against Haymon and company.
Almost exactly one week prior to the Top Rank lawsuit being filed, veteran scribe and Rafael’s BWAA brother, Ivan Goldman of Boxing Insider, wrote a table-setting piece regarding the California State Athletic Commission (CSAC) “busting” Haymon for “sabotaging” rivals’ shows. Just about every media outfit ran with the story, reprinting the juicy details of Haymon plans foiled by a plucky commission. And after the Top Rank lawsuit was announced, they referred back to the Goldman piece as implied proof positive of Haymon’s wrongdoing.
Except, the day after the lawsuit news hit the web, in a piece published in Boxingscene, the CSAC denied that any actions had been taken against Haymon at all and that there has been no investigation of Haymon by the commission, “either formally or informally.” Commission member, John Frierson, who Goldman quoted in his article, was even reportedly denying the words attributed to him, especially those regarding the commission “busting” Haymon.
Goldman, however, doubled down on his claims, posting a piece entitled, “California Commissioners Get Cold Feet after Crossing Mighty Al Haymon.”
At this point it should be noted that Goldman has been a loud and long-time critic of both Floyd Mayweather and Al Haymon, taking the position of serial penny-click Mayweather/Haymon antagonizer at Boxing Insider from “Scoop” Malinowski. Most Goldman columns these days are anti-Mayweather or anti-Haymon rants.
Goldman is also the writer who, not too long ago, wrote a totally fallacious piece about Shane Mosley being destitute and forced to live in the basement of his ex-wife’s home. When that story proved to be completely incorrect, he refused to own up to his lack of due diligence, insisting that he had not really reported it as fact and blaming the misinformation on summaries he read of a TV reality dating show “by the kind of media that cover this stuff.”
At any rate, The CSAC’s denial of Goldman’s story got almost no traction in the boxing media– and certainly not as much as Goldman’s questionable and disputed hit piece.
Other stories have been floated into the public consciousness by the media, intended to foster the idea that Haymon has broken Federal law, is intent upon establishing a monopoly, and is producing an utterly inferior product that is no threat to non-Haymon entities, is hemorrhaging all sorts of money, and is completely out of favor with fans. Assorted writers, all with connections to either the BWAA or directly to Top Rank Promotions in some manner, have made it a full-time job to turn their social media timelines into a round-the-clock attack on Haymon, PBC, Waddell & Reed, and any fighter associated with them. Sadly, some fans have been lured into the partisan fray.
Of course, it’s all educated guessing on my part as to whether the lawsuits and media attacks are all just parts of an organized effort to defund and crush Haymon/PBC. But it’s no more conjecture than what the boxing media has been passing off as fact.
The truth is that nobody knows the real nature of Haymon’s business dealings until some neutral third party begins sifting through the actual paperwork.
We only know what the media has reported and what the usually clueless bloggers have pieced together from Instagram photos and Twitter buzz.
I may be the only voice out there not jumping to convenient conclusions and I’m definitely the only one out there talking about why the old guard of boxing may be conspiring to eliminate Haymon from the sport. Note, though, that I’m not proclaiming Haymon’s innocence. It’s just that I don’t have enough information available to me to declare whether he is actually guilty of violating the Ali Act, or any other laws. And, if you’re honest with yourself, you’d admit the same.
This Rant will likely produce cries of pro-Haymon bias or allegations of me being in someone’s pocket– that’s to be expected when you buck the system and insist that people actually (gasp) think. However, I do like the idea of the PBC in concept (I also have some problems with its execution thus far) and I am for sure in favor of making major changes to the sport’s current infrastructure. Maybe that makes me less receptive to the lynch mob mentality boxing has when it comes to uppity outsiders.
But, unlike many of those going for Haymon’s throat every single day, I’ve never dined at Bob Arum’s Beverly Hills Mansion; I’ve never played golf at a ritzy country club with anyone from Golden Boy; I’ve never been on all-expenses-paid sightseeing junkets with Top Rank staff. My site is entirely funded by independent ad revenue and reader donations. I have no monetary interest in the outcome of any of this. My only interest is in telling the truth and in the betterment of the sport.
ChocolateGiddyUp
Superstar
Please Haymon crush these fakkits 
That Spoonface Steve Kim was taking credit for the Cali Commission story N then when it was proved false was on that they were scary of Allah narrative
Kovalev getting paid less then LSC did to fight the Churro cart guy
No fukking wonder Duva is pissed af
That Spoonface Steve Kim was taking credit for the Cali Commission story N then when it was proved false was on that they were scary of Allah narrative
Kovalev getting paid less then LSC did to fight the Churro cart guy
No fukking wonder Duva is pissed af
Amare's Right Hook
Southeast World Champion
Axum Ezana
Driving in the fast lane
Knicksman20
Superstar
From the moment I heardabout issues with Haymon/Arum/Fishnets the red flag went off. They've been trying to push Haymon out of boxing for a min now because he's empowering his fighters more & actually getting them good paydays. The "old guard" ain't having that & want him out
LeVraiPapi
Redemption is Coming
You guys won't believe the fighters knocking at Haymons door based on what my dude is telling me lol.
I'll give you guys one so far. Terrence Crawford.
Can't deal with lawsuits so I'll chill lol
I'll give you guys one so far. Terrence Crawford.
Can't deal with lawsuits so I'll chill lol
They're all pissed bc the fighters are getting paid! shyt is ridiculous. Haymon is said to take between 7-10% compared to the usual managers fee of 33%.Please Haymon crush these fakkits
That Spoonface Steve Kim was taking credit for the Cali Commission story N then when it was proved false was on that they were scary of Allah narrative
Kovalev getting paid less then LSC did to fight the Churro cart guy
No fukking wonder Duva is pissed af
Axum Ezana
Driving in the fast lane
You guys won't believe the fighters knocking at Haymons door based on what my dude is telling me lol.
I'll give you guys one so far. Terrence Crawford.
Can't deal with lawsuits so I'll chill lol
@Newzz
Broner bout to get that work.
You guys won't believe the fighters knocking at Haymons door based on what my dude is telling me lol.
I'll give you guys one so far. Terrence Crawford.
Can't deal with lawsuits so I'll chill lol
Any other info?
