Bob Arum: Teddy Atlas is Lying, I have a 3 Yr Contract Left on Manny Pacquiao

No, it's common sense that GBP is entitled to whatever the arbitrator ruled. I'm not sure exactly what that was other than "a percentage from Pacquiao's future fights". Just because they only had him signed to a seven fight deal doesn't necessarily mean that the arbitrator only awarded them a percentage from his next seven fights under TR. Afterall, they wouldn't be making nearly as much per fight from the percentage that they were awarded as they would have had Pacquiao honored his contract and they were the ones promoting his fights, would they? :think

 

And then there's this:

http://sports.espn.go.com/sports/boxing/news/story?id=5601657

September 21, 2010, 10:27 PM ET

"Golden Boy, which owns a percentage of Pacquiao's promotional contract, is seeking damages "in the range of $3 million to $5 million, plus attorneys fees," Judd Burstein, the attorney representing Golden Boy, told ESPN.com"

"Golden Boy alleges numerous instances in which Top Rank failed to report revenue from the fights and falsely inflated expenses. It also contends it is concerned that Top Rank will use similar accounting for Pacquiao's fight with Antonio Margarito on Nov. 13, which Arum recently began promoting."

So much for them not being entitled to any percentage after the Cotto fight...

 

I edited my post to include the Clottey fight, last fight they used in that suit. I was thinking seven fights after the ruling, which was in 07, Margarito fight could've fallen under that

 

I'd say it's pretty clear that they were entitled to a percentage from the Margarito fight. Why else would they give a **** about TR's accounting practices for that one?

So I guess the bottom line is that they were getting a percentage at least up until the Margarito fight, and whether or not they were/are entitled to any percentage of any of his fights beyond that we just don't know.

 

Arum ain't great, but Atlas is way worse. Teddy has made himself part of story, again.

 

Manny is screwed

 

:nut

 

Dann! You just schooled that *******

 

just to clear things up, in judge Weinstein's ruling, GBP gets a percentage from TR's promotional fee and not from Pac's guaranteed purse.

 

Source? :deal

 

Shame.

 

in orange.

which means GBP has a percentage in TR contract with Manny, which means GBP's share come's from TR's contract with Manny.

GBP's contract with Pac was voided.

 

True, the term sheet for the initial arbitral agreement was confidential. We don't know either way. I was going on the fact Pacquiao hasn't been listed as a Golden Boy fighter for a while (as the only bit of evidence they are no longer taking a cut of his fights), trying to match it up with the timeline of his 7 fight Golden Boy deal. It may have been dropped as you mentioned in the resolution of Pacquiao's personal lawsuit against Oscar, Schaefer and GBP. That's all speculation too.

Margarito fight fell in the 8th fight after the ruling in June 2007, and right at the end of the 4 year deal Pacquiao signed with Top Rank in late 2006. *Good point dodong above, GBP's cut was to be from the Top Rank's percentage of the revenue, thus relating to Top Rank's contract with Manny, which ended after the Margarito fight (if it was a four year deal signed in late 06).

Either way, Pacquiao would've had to have signed an extension being now in his 6th year with TR, getting back to the issue of the thread. I find it a bit fishy Arum first saying Pacquiao had a year and a half remaining on his contract after the fight, now he is saying it's 3 years a few days later, same day it is reported by a TR associate to ESPN that Pacquiao's next fight is confirmed as Marquez. Could Pacquiao have extended his contract by agreeing to fight Marquez again, Atlas being right? Why would Arum make such a mistake on Pacquiao's contract length after the fight?

 

A Hyundai is really a Lexus???
lol