Pbc getting sued! Fat dan on twitter

And its just a coincidence Haymon gave the ex-manager a job after him handing a billion dollars to PBC?

You are ****ing pathetic.

 

Beginning in April 2013, the plaintiffs say, the trustees let Ryan Caldwell, one of the two portfolio managers of Ivy Asset Strategy Fund and the Waddell & Reed Asset Strategy Fund, spend approximately $925 million on "a start-up and potentially criminal" professional boxing promotion company.

I thought Haymon wasn't a promoter?:huh

 

Um, the company was going to hand him the money regardless of what fund it was in.

PBC was just included in the conservative investment fund instead of the riskier investment fund. And the investors in the conservative fund thought PBC should've been in the riskier fund instead.

You don't even know what you're angry about.

Which is actually pathetic.

Learn to read.

 

I made a comment earlier along these lines, investors get ****y when they don't get their precious return, it happens. But that's not what's happening here. They ARE suing because they broke the law, artificially gaining funds for an obviously risky start up, for personal gain.
Haymon isn't included in this trial, but if in the process it's established he paid off Caldwell, he certainly will be in another.
You said yourself PBC was far riskier than Chipotle, so that comparison doesn't work, and if he'd resigned to take some dubious role at Chipotle immediately after raising 1$bn, they'd be under scrutiny too.

 

It shouldn't have been in any fund because it lost money and was forecast to lose money. Boxing didn't get hit with Eco Li like Chipotole. It was hit by a unknown cancer at the time.

 

You are ****ing pathetic. You twist and spin and then try ad hominem. You must think everyone is stupid don't you? Try looking in the mirror sometime.

 

Haymon may be found dead in a garbage dumpster soon.

 

That's.... threatening

Lemme know where you live, I'm fleecing his cadaverous wallet.

 

PBC is a risky investment. It shouldn't have been in that fund with more stable established companies. It should've been in the funds Waddell has that are riskier investments. I think I've said that a half-dozen times already.

And the shareholders are suing because it was too risky of an investment (it's a start-up) and it shouldn't have been in that particular fund.

But you said paid off Caldwell. Paid off Caldwell to do what? To put his company in a conservative fund instead of a risky fund? For what purpose? To **** people off?

And you don't think investment managers have to get approval on what companies they include in which funds? Every fund includes varying degrees of risky investments, depending on how much risk you're willing to take. Start-ups are just too risky for a fund like that particular one.

 

Twist and spin what?

Investors are suing Waddell for putting PBC in a conservative investment fund instead of a riskier fund.

That's the suit. They lost $1 a share. They didn't think they'd lose any.

Sorry there are no dead bodies or epic tragedies or whatever you were looking for.

PBC continues on ... in the riskier investment fund no doubt. .:happy:good:thumbsup

 

Because funds consisting of Microsoft, Coca-Cola etc get a **** load more investment than a boxing startup. The only possible way to raise that much is to do what they did and hope nobody notices.

You think Caldwell did it by mistake, or misjudgement? Ok, it's possible. You think he did it by mistake, gave Haymon $1bn, and then resigned to become Haymon's employee immediately afterwards? **** no. And that is what the lawsuit is implying.

 

No, they were going to hand him SOME money, but nowhere near that much.

 

Haymon In Hand Cuffs!:happy

 

First, nearly all the funds include Coke and Microsoft. Some include more Coke and Microsoft, some include less. Depending on how much risk you're willing to accept.

Second, Caldwell didn't do anything alone. Caldwell isn't even being sued. Neither is Al Haymon. Neither is PBC. So your whole "DID AL HAYMON PAY OFF CALDWELL" to do whatever you think he did isn't even a part of this.

Third, Waddell had to approve the companies included in the funds, which is why Waddell is being sued.

Finally, every lawsuit "implies" things.

They said PBC shouldn't have been included in the conservative fund because it was "possibly criminal" ... because they are being sued by Golden Boy for violating the Muhamamd Ali Act.

Chipotle is "possibly criminal" too, because they are being sued by people who got e-coli.

Every company that's being sued right now, including Coke, which is always being sued by someone who claims they drank something out of a can that shouldn't have been in there ... and Microsoft, which is sued daily ... are "possibly criminal" of something.

There are investors who lost $1 a share when they thought they wouldn't lose anything. Their shares were worth $8 and now they are worth $7. Hold on ... the world is coming to an end.

They are suing for ridiculous money.

Whatever hyperventilating you guys were doing when you saw the title of this thread ... nobody in this case is looking to destroy PBC.

The investors just don't think it should've been included in the fund they were investing in.

That's all.

You'll have to wait for another "scandal" or "murder" or "felony" or the "downfall of PBC" to get what you thought you were going to get here.

This involves none of that. Sorry.:hi:

 

What were they going to hand him?

Before they decided to hand him what they did?

Or are you just making that up?