Sothron Question

[phoostal]

Sothron,

I hear everyone's theories on how the Hawks can get better, including yours. However, my question is this: Don't you think the ownership issue has to be the first dominoe to fall?

We can talk about trades, extensions for current players, and replacing the coach. But, it won't do us any good until we have an ownership group in place to make these happen.

Otherwise, no coach or free agent will come here. Players won't sign extensions. As trades go we won't get everyone to agree on a trade.

You have the pulse of the team. How long is this going to take? I am afraid the longer it goes the worse it is going to get for the team. Players will leave without compensation, we won't get the proper trades done, or get the proper coach. As well as players demanding to leave (possibly JJ) due to this non-activity.

What are your thoughts and solutions?

P

[Sothron]

I am no legal expert nor do I play one on television. However I have been told that if both sides drag it out to the fullest we could be looking at least another two years of legal fights and appeals before the ownership is finalized. And then if by some chance Belkin is the ultimate winner (we as fans don't want that I might add) then there is a huge question regarding Stern and the other owners actually letting him take control of the team.

This is a unique ownership fight and its going to be a painful process yet for years. I wish I had better tidings.

[Lawstudent101]

I've said this before to you idiots, but most of you ignore me...

Like I said, I'm a LAW STUDENT. (I know what I'm talking about, unlike you uneducated scums) The court "Win" for the ASG was not a "win" at all. The ASG is just spinning it so uneducated people (like you all reading this) will think the ASG was making great progress. You know what the appeals court did? Basically, they are back at square one, where we were 1 year ago...BEFORE the ASG appealed the trial court's decision (not the final decision, but a simple contract interpertation)

The only way the ownership gets fixed is if Belkin just settles and agrees to a fair buyout.

If not, look at 2 or 3 years of court before this gets fixed. Honestly I'll guesstimate and say 1 more year as a bright side guess....3 years for the doom and gloom crowd.

[AHF]

Quote:

---

I've said this before to you idiots, but most of you ignore me...

---

I wonder why someone doesn't listen to someone who calls them an idiot.

Quote:

---

Like I said, I'm a LAW STUDENT. (I know what I'm talking about, unlike you uneducated scums)

---

What was the totally inaccurate spewage about your first amendment rights being infringed by cites like RealGM if you know what you were talking about?

Quote:

---

The court "Win" for the ASG was not a "win" at all.

---

BS. When the case was appealed, the ASG were on their way out the door with a huge financial windfall coming to Belkin. The issue that was appealed was resolved in favor of the ASG. The order below was reversed and the case was remanded for further proceedings. That is a huge win for the ASG. It isn't winning the war. It is winning a battle that could have been fatal had it been lost.

Quote:

---

The ASG is just spinning it so uneducated people (like you all reading this) will think the ASG was making great progress. You know what the appeals court did? Basically, they are back at square one, where we were 1 year ago...BEFORE the ASG appealed the trial court's decision (not the final decision, but a simple contract interpertation)

---

This was a huge victory for the ASG. It is NOT the end of the case by any means, again it is a battle not the war. However, the trial court erroneously ordered that the ASG had violated the contract and triggered a right by Belkin to purchase the teams at the buy-in amounts spent by the other owners at the time of the original purchase. Getting that reversed is huge.

The case is still in a quagmire state. No doubt about that. The ASG doesn't have the legal right to proceed with an involuntary buyout of Belkin at this point. No argument there. However, it is a huge victory that Belkin doesn't have the right to buyout the rest of the ASG at this time and that the Court cannot repeat its prior interpretation of the contract (which means that, with a very significant adverse interpretation off the table for the trial court, the ASG is in a better position now than when the question was wide open at square one).

Quote:

---

The only way the ownership gets fixed is if Belkin just settles and agrees to a fair buyout.

If not, look at 2 or 3 years of court before this gets fixed. Honestly I'll guesstimate and say 1 more year as a bright side guess....3 years for the doom and gloom crowd.

---

1 year is pretty optimistic in my mind but I agree we are looking years down the line without a buyout. It is disheartening that there have been no signs of buyout discussions since the reversal by the Maryland appellate court.

It is hard to believe that Stern hasn't stepped in here. This is an embarassment for the league. If this was the Lakers, Celtics, Knicks, etc. there would have been enormous pressure on every member of the ownership group a long time ago. I understand him not wanting to mess around very much with ownership dispute but when a team is not operating on a level playing field as a result of ongoing disputes that is a real credibility problem for the league. On that issue, I am surprised the union didn't protested the legal restrictions that were in place during the appeal. An inability to exceed the cap or sign contracts per the CBA limits money available to the players.

[Seano]

Quote:

---

I've said this before to you idiots, but most of you ignore me...

Like I said, I'm a LAW STUDENT. (I know what I'm talking about, unlike you uneducated scums) The court "Win" for the ASG was not a "win" at all. The ASG is just spinning it so uneducated people (like you all reading this) will think the ASG was making great progress.

---

LOL. This guy's a real charmer, isn't he?

[Diesel]

You said...

Quote:

---

However, it is a huge victory that Belkin doesn't have the right to buyout the rest of the ASG at this time and

that the Court cannot repeat its prior interpretation of the contract

(which means that, with a very significant adverse interpretation off the table for the trial court, the ASG is in a better position now than when the question was wide open at square one).

---

I don't doubt anything you say on this matter... I'm just asking what may be a dumb question..

Does this mean that Belkin cannot go to a "higher" court to seek a new ruling on the prior interpretation?

IF so, that's good news for the ASG and Hawks fans all around. Everybody with half a brain should have seen the the prior interpretation was logically wrong.

[Lawstudent101]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

I've said this before to you idiots, but most of you ignore me...

---

I wonder why someone doesn't listen to someone who calls them an idiot.

Quote:

---

Like I said, I'm a LAW STUDENT. (I know what I'm talking about, unlike you uneducated scums)

---

What was the totally inaccurate spewage about your first amendment rights being infringed by cites like RealGM if you know what you were talking about?

Quote:

---

The court "Win" for the ASG was not a "win" at all.

---

BS. When the case was appealed, the ASG were on their way out the door with a huge financial windfall coming to Belkin. The issue that was appealed was resolved in favor of the ASG. The order below was reversed and the case was remanded for further proceedings. That is a huge win for the ASG. It isn't winning the war. It is winning a battle that could have been fatal had it been lost.

Quote:

---

The ASG is just spinning it so uneducated people (like you all reading this) will think the ASG was making great progress. You know what the appeals court did? Basically, they are back at square one, where we were 1 year ago...BEFORE the ASG appealed the trial court's decision (not the final decision, but a simple contract interpertation)

---

This was a huge victory for the ASG. It is NOT the end of the case by any means, again it is a battle not the war. However, the trial court erroneously ordered that the ASG had violated the contract and triggered a right by Belkin to purchase the teams at the buy-in amounts spent by the other owners at the time of the original purchase. Getting that reversed is huge.

The case is still in a quagmire state. No doubt about that. The ASG doesn't have the legal right to proceed with an involuntary buyout of Belkin at this point. No argument there. However, it is a huge victory that Belkin doesn't have the right to buyout the rest of the ASG at this time and that the Court cannot repeat its prior interpretation of the contract (which means that, with a very significant adverse interpretation off the table for the trial court, the ASG is in a better position now than when the question was wide open at square one).

Quote:

---

The only way the ownership gets fixed is if Belkin just settles and agrees to a fair buyout.

If not, look at 2 or 3 years of court before this gets fixed. Honestly I'll guesstimate and say 1 more year as a bright side guess....3 years for the doom and gloom crowd.

---

1 year is pretty optimistic in my mind but I agree we are looking years down the line without a buyout. It is disheartening that there have been no signs of buyout discussions since the reversal by the Maryland appellate court.

It is hard to believe that Stern hasn't stepped in here. This is an embarassment for the league. If this was the Lakers, Celtics, Knicks, etc. there would have been enormous pressure on every member of the ownership group a long time ago. I understand him not wanting to mess around very much with ownership dispute but when a team is not operating on a level playing field as a result of ongoing disputes that is a real credibility problem for the league. On that issue, I am surprised the union didn't protested the legal restrictions that were in place during the appeal. An inability to exceed the cap or sign contracts per the CBA limits money available to the players.

---

The spewage about my first amendment rights was clearly a joke. I know I don't have that right(or any) when dealing with a private site, such as realgm or hawksquawk. So chill and learn to take a joke my child.

when the case was appealed they simply appealed Belkin's claim (which the trial court agreed with) in which he was saying he had the right to choose the 3rd accounting firm to value the team to get a number for a buyout....supposedly the contract is unclear about who gets to pick the 3rd accounting firm, if they both disagreed with the 2nd firm's appraisal...

The appeals court said "no ya don't the ASG does"

Belkin could have appealed this decision, but I doubt the supreme court in that state (is it maryland or mass. where this court battle is taking place? either way it doesn't matter) that state supreme court *could* take on Belkin's appeal, but Belkin decided not to appeal that ruling from the appeals court. Believe it or not, if the ASG had lost the appeal, this would have been over sooner than later. Either the ASG would buyout Belky or vice versa, W/E.

I agree though, yeah it was a "win" for the ASG.....yay?

Sorry that I'm not more excited...lol

I agree that Stern should have stepped in awhile ago...but what can you do? We are the Hawks! .....yay?

Fact is, this legal battle has not progressed as far as everyone seems to think it has... I believe the next court date is early next year? In Feb or March? Needless to say, this will carry over into this offseason..NO DOUBT ABOUT IT FOLKS.

Yeah sorry for calling you an idiot, and everyone else.

I'm just so damn pissed at the state of my hawks right now.

And I have every right to be, so please excuse my harsh language.

[Lawstudent101]

Quote:

---

You said...

Quote:

---

However, it is a huge victory that Belkin doesn't have the right to buyout the rest of the ASG at this time and

that the Court cannot repeat its prior interpretation of the contract

(which means that, with a very significant adverse interpretation off the table for the trial court, the ASG is in a better position now than when the question was wide open at square one).

---

I don't doubt anything you say on this matter... I'm just asking what may be a dumb question..

Does this mean that Belkin cannot go to a "higher" court to seek a new ruling on the prior interpretation?

IF so, that's good news for the ASG and Hawks fans all around. Everybody with half a brain should have seen the the prior interpretation was logically wrong.

---

Belkin could have gone to a higher court to seek a new ruling to the prior interpretation, however the Maryland supreme court most likely would not have taken the case. In addition, the timeframe to appeal that ruling has passed a long time ago, so that issue is now set in stone.

Yeah D, I guess it's "good news" yay! let me tell you what is gonna happen barring a settlement agreement, okay?

The next court date will be in March...it will take a few months to (at BEST) for the trial court to decide the case,(as long as everything goes smoothly) if Belkin wins, it will be appealed, (we are talking appeal court date in november or dec of next year)

If the ASG win, Belkin will appeal (see above for dates)

So we are looking at a MIN of 1 more year of litgation, Isn't it awesome to be a fan?

The ASG should just give Belkin 10% morethan what he put into the investment and be done with it.

They will instantly make it back once this dispute is resolved anyway as the team's market value will increase by that much as soon as he is bought out anyway...

Just my two cents

[leftwich]

Quote:

---

The ASG should just give Belkin 10% morethan what he put into the investment and be done with it.

They will instantly make it back once this dispute is resolved anyway as the team's market value will increase by that much as soon as he is bought out anyway...

Just my two cents

---

I imagine the ASG would prefer to recognize a gain in a couple of years as opposed to breaking even now.

[phoostal]

Bottom line Sothron, is this team handicapped until ownership gets settle? Yes or No. Meaning we are tied down with the trades, extensions, and coaches we would like to move forward with.

P

Lawstudent I didn't care about the legal system, I wanted to know the ramification of the legal matters as it effects my team the Hawks.

[Final_quest]

Quote:

---

I've said this before to you idiots, but most of you ignore me...

Like I said, I'm a LAW STUDENT. (I know what I'm talking about, unlike you uneducated scums)

---

I thought it was just as easy to get into law school as it is to get into real estate school. If you're willing to write a check they'll let you in.

[AHF]

Quote:

---

when the case was appealed they simply appealed Belkin's claim (which the trial court agreed with) in which he was saying he had the right to choose the 3rd accounting firm to value the team to get a number for a buyout....supposedly the contract is unclear about who gets to pick the 3rd accounting firm, if they both disagreed with the 2nd firm's appraisal...

---

I think you are confused here.

Belkin's claim was that he had the right to pick the 2nd firm to make an appraisal of the team because he was the first to object to the appraisal from the firm he originally hired.

There is no question as to who gets to select the first appraiser or third appraiser under the contract. The ambiguity was who had the right to select the second appraiser where both parties objected to the first appraisal. The trial court read a "first in time, first in right" clause into the contract on this issue that did not appear in the language of the contract. Since Belkin objected to the first appraisal minutes before the ASG, the court held that he had the right to select the second appraiser and that the ASG had breached the contract by not proceeding with the buyout.

Under the contract if he had the right to do that, the ASG had to ask the NBA to select a firm to make a third appraisal and the sides would be stuck with the middle number from the 3 appraisals. There were time limits on this process and the trial court ruled that since the ASG had not completed the buyout within the time period prescribed in the contract that it invoked a clause permitting Belkin to buy the other owners out at their original buy-in price.

(The case is in Maryland.)

[AHF]

Quote:

---

The ASG should just give Belkin 10% morethan what he put into the investment and be done with it.

---

Is this a joke?

The ASG would do 10% in a heartbeat. They would give him 100% more than he put into the investment in a heartbeat.

The problem is that Belkin wants $140 million (the value of the second appraisal) and he bought into the team for $11.7 million. Hence, he wants more than 1000% of what he bought into the teams for.

[Sothron]

Legally at this moment I believe all their hands are free. But realistically? No. They aren't going to spend a huge amount of money on this franchise until the legal situation is settled. These guys are business owners, they don't want to risk even more money than they already have when there is a real chance they could lose everything.

[Lawstudent101]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

I've said this before to you idiots, but most of you ignore me...

Like I said, I'm a LAW STUDENT. (I know what I'm talking about, unlike you uneducated scums)

---

I thought it was just as easy to get into law school as it is to get into real estate school. If you're willing to write a check they'll let you in.

---

Final Quest, it sure is easy if you go to an unaccredited school, or a tier 4...then yeah, those schools are in it strictly for profit.

I don't go to an unaccredited school or a tier 4, so yeah, you gotta compete to get into a limited number of seats. Don't be jealous now my son.

[Lawstudent101]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

The ASG should just give Belkin 10% morethan what he put into the investment and be done with it.

---

Is this a joke?

The ASG would do 10% in a heartbeat. They would give him 100% more than he put into the investment in a heartbeat.

The problem is that Belkin wants $140 million (the value of the second appraisal) and he bought into the team for $11.7 million. Hence, he wants more than 1000% of what he bought into the teams for.

---

How is it possible that someone claimed the market value of his share is 140 million when he bought the team for 11.7?

If that's the case, the other owners should just accept a buyout from BELKIN of their 70% stake. what would that be? 300 million? Sounds good.

Why aren't they doing that AHF?

Use Belkin's BS against him

[Guest]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

The ASG should just give Belkin 10% morethan what he put into the investment and be done with it.

---

Is this a joke?

The ASG would do 10% in a heartbeat. They would give him 100% more than he put into the investment in a heartbeat.

The problem is that Belkin wants $140 million (the value of the second appraisal) and he bought into the team for $11.7 million. Hence, he wants more than 1000% of what he bought into the teams for.

---

I was fairly certain Belkin bought more than just $11.7 million. Maybe you are talking about specifically the Hawks, but I know the whole group spent $240 million to buy the rights of the Hawks, Thrashers, and Philips. Where does the $11.7 come from, the amount of money specifically he had tied into the Hawks?

[AHF]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

The ASG should just give Belkin 10% morethan what he put into the investment and be done with it.

---

Is this a joke?

The ASG would do 10% in a heartbeat. They would give him 100% more than he put into the investment in a heartbeat.

The problem is that Belkin wants $140 million (the value of the second appraisal) and he bought into the team for $11.7 million. Hence, he wants more than 1000% of what he bought into the teams for.

---

How is it possible that someone claimed the market value of his share is 140 million when he bought the team for 11.7?

If that's the case, the other owners should just accept a buyout from BELKIN of their 70% stake. what would that be? 300 million? Sounds good.

Why aren't they doing that AHF?

Use Belkin's BS against him

---

The contract is written very favorably to Belkin from that perspective.

It permits the ASG to buy him out for the current fair market value of his share of the franchises. That is why they wrote language in there to have it appraised.

In contrast (and why the ASG agreed to this is beyond me), there is a provision that permits Belkin to buy the rest of the ASG out for the amount they originally invested - which is much less than the fair market value of their shares. That provision is only triggered if the deal goes forward and the ASG drags its collective feet so the deal isn't completed within the designated time limit.

I can't imagine why the ASG agreed to that buyout provision. It is foolish beyond justification and encourages the exact type of gamesmanship that Belkin has engaged in since then. If Belkin wanted to protect against a prolonged buyout, the ASG should have agreed to an interest rate on the money or liquidated damages or some other financial penalty. The buyout provision allowing Belkin to acquire the team for a fraction of the value is a death knell rather than an incentive for a timely buyout. Just inexplicable.

[Lawstudent101]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

The ASG should just give Belkin 10% morethan what he put into the investment and be done with it.

---

Is this a joke?

The ASG would do 10% in a heartbeat. They would give him 100% more than he put into the investment in a heartbeat.

The problem is that Belkin wants $140 million (the value of the second appraisal) and he bought into the team for $11.7 million. Hence, he wants more than 1000% of what he bought into the teams for.

---

How is it possible that someone claimed the market value of his share is 140 million when he bought the team for 11.7?

If that's the case, the other owners should just accept a buyout from BELKIN of their 70% stake. what would that be? 300 million? Sounds good.

Why aren't they doing that AHF?

Use Belkin's BS against him

---

The contract is written very favorably to Belkin from that perspective.

It permits the ASG to buy him out for the current fair market value of his share of the franchises. That is why they wrote language in there to have it appraised.

In contrast (and why the ASG agreed to this is beyond me), there is a provision that permits Belkin to buy the rest of the ASG out for the amount they originally invested - which is much less than the fair market value of their shares. That provision is only triggered if the deal goes forward and the ASG drags its collective feet so the deal isn't completed within the designated time limit.

I can't imagine why the ASG agreed to that buyout provision. It is foolish beyond justification and encourages the exact type of gamesmanship that Belkin has engaged in since then. If Belkin wanted to protect against a prolonged buyout, the ASG should have agreed to an interest rate on the money or liquidated damages or some other financial penalty. The buyout provision allowing Belkin to acquire the team for a fraction of the value is a death knell rather than an incentive for a timely buyout. Just inexplicable.

---

Ahh, I gotcha. So basically the ASG had a shitty contracts lawyer. I see.

Well, this sucks.

BTW AHF, do you like me now?

[AHF]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

The ASG should just give Belkin 10% morethan what he put into the investment and be done with it.

---

Is this a joke?

The ASG would do 10% in a heartbeat. They would give him 100% more than he put into the investment in a heartbeat.

The problem is that Belkin wants $140 million (the value of the second appraisal) and he bought into the team for $11.7 million. Hence, he wants more than 1000% of what he bought into the teams for.

---

How is it possible that someone claimed the market value of his share is 140 million when he bought the team for 11.7?

If that's the case, the other owners should just accept a buyout from BELKIN of their 70% stake. what would that be? 300 million? Sounds good.

Why aren't they doing that AHF?

Use Belkin's BS against him

---

The contract is written very favorably to Belkin from that perspective.

It permits the ASG to buy him out for the current fair market value of his share of the franchises. That is why they wrote language in there to have it appraised.

In contrast (and why the ASG agreed to this is beyond me), there is a provision that permits Belkin to buy the rest of the ASG out for the amount they originally invested - which is much less than the fair market value of their shares. That provision is only triggered if the deal goes forward and the ASG drags its collective feet so the deal isn't completed within the designated time limit.

I can't imagine why the ASG agreed to that buyout provision. It is foolish beyond justification and encourages the exact type of gamesmanship that Belkin has engaged in since then. If Belkin wanted to protect against a prolonged buyout, the ASG should have agreed to an interest rate on the money or liquidated damages or some other financial penalty. The buyout provision allowing Belkin to acquire the team for a fraction of the value is a death knell rather than an incentive for a timely buyout. Just inexplicable.

---

Ahh, I gotcha. So basically the ASG had a shitty contracts lawyer. I see.

Well, this sucks.

BTW AHF, do you like me now?

---

This exchange has gone from obnoxious to civil. Definite progression.

If memory serves me, ASG used King & Spaulding for this so I am not sure where the breakdown occured - but it clearly did. K&S is a top firm in Atlanta for those who aren't familiar with them. They are very highly regarded.