Sports FAQ
Home / Mixed Martial Arts

So who really gets the 40 million...?

ATroms2011-03-18 01:14:18 +0000 #1
As Ariel points out in the interview/announcement, StrikeForce did not have a sole owner. So what im wondering is how the money was broken up? If Zuffa pays 40 million for the purchase of the company, but yet they keep everyone employed that was previously there (owners included), did they actually spend any money?

I could never see the Fertittas allowing Coker, and whoever else to keep that money set aside for themselves, and contribute even more of their own money to enrich/enhance their recent purchase. So is that 40 mil. basically going to be recyclable jeopardy money for Coker to negotiate with regarding future fighter contracts? Was that money just a way to expand their empire, while still keeping it within their own rights to use at their leisure? Insight needed here...
Onion2011-03-18 01:24:58 +0000 #2
Are you serious?

Ownership money from profits, and job salaries are two different things.
ATroms2011-03-18 01:28:24 +0000 #3
Quote:

Originally Posted by Onion

Are you serious?

Ownership money from profits, and job salaries are two different things.

Could you explain?
Wahoo082011-03-18 02:02:48 +0000 #4
I'll be honest, I don't really understand your question ATroms.

First, (and this is just how I understand it) Coker was not the sole owner of Strikeforce. He co-owned the organization with San Jose Sports and Entertainment Enterprises. Early accounts are saying is was those guys that basically wanted out and forced Coker to sell his stakes. So all the former owners aren't employed by Zuffa, just Coker.

Secondly (and this is the part of your post that I really don't understand), why would Zuffa care what Coker does with his share of the money? How is this money "recyclable"? Are you implying Cokeris going to invest this money right back into Zuffa? If so, he must be one hell of an employee. I wouldn't give my employer a single dollar, let alone $20 million. Sure, in theory he could take the money and build a new organization from the bottom up (barring any possible no compete clause in the Strikeforce/Zuffa transaction), but I doubt Zuffa would worry too much about that. They would have already acquired the talent, the name, the television contracts, the video libraries, etc.
ATroms2011-03-18 02:41:20 +0000 #5
Quote:

Originally Posted by Wahoo08

I'll be honest, I don't really understand your question ATroms.

1. Early accounts are saying is was those guys that basically wanted out and forced Coker to sell his stakes. So all the former owners aren't employed by Zuffa, just Coker.

2. Secondly (and this is the part of your post that I really don't understand), why would Zuffa care what Coker does with his share of the money? How is this money "recyclable"? .

1. Right, The San Jose guys take their share of the buyout, and walk away with their tail between their legs i understand that part of it. do you know, or have an idea of the percentages the money was split between the parties?

2. Whatever money Coker got out of the deal, would Zuffa expect/force him to use any of that in order to be employed under their umbrella?

So for a hear-say example... Lets say it was divided 50/50 between Coker/San Jose Group (i know it wasnt). Is it possible Zuffa could then say alright Scott, the 20 mil. youve got out of the deal, if you want to remain employed with StrikeForce, you may keep 5 mil. but the other 15 will go toward future signings, endorsement deals etc. and well sort it out after we see how it goes down?
thekillerkiwi2011-03-18 03:05:54 +0000 #6
Quote:

Originally Posted by ATroms

1. Right, The San Jose guys take their share of the buyout, and walk away with their tail between their legs i understand that part of it. do you know, or have an idea of the percentages the money was split between the parties?

2. Whatever money Coker got out of the deal, would Zuffa expect/force him to use any of that in order to be employed under their umbrella?

So for a hear-say example... Lets say it was divided 50/50 between Coker/San Jose Group (i know it wasnt). Is it possible Zuffa could then say alright Scott, the 20 mil. youve got out of the deal, if you want to remain employed with StrikeForce, you may keep 5 mil. but the other 15 will go toward future signings, endorsement deals etc. and well sort it out after we see how it goes down?

They could never include such a clause that would force him to stay with the company and force him to spend the money he got from the buyout on the company which he no longer owns. There might be clauses that force him not to compete for a certain time or against doing something that willingly is detrimental to the company, that if he breaks he loses part of his buyout money. But other than that they can't force him to spend his 20 mil on StrikeForce.

Reply

Name:
Content:


Other posts in this category