tOffical all things Sterling thread

[JDM]

If you're not white, you're allowed to be as racist and hateful as you'd like.

 

[gohusk]

The conversations were legally recorded by Stiviano on behalf of Mr Sterling. She was his archivist and has over 100 hours of recordings. Sterling often forgets what he says(most like because he is senile) and was using them to review what he said.

LOL. Well that makes it simpler. They should just bring in a hooker with an offer from an ownership group and he might not remember he ever owned the Clippers tomorrow.

 

[True Lakers Fan]

If you mutually agree you can alter the contract at will.


If one side breaches the contract in a business as big as the NBA? We could be talking a billion in damages fairly easily.

Contracts are breached by one person all of the time and when they get to court - the other side nullifies the contract. In this case, however the board of governors may remove an owner with a 75% of the vote if they consider his statements and personal opinions harmful and detrimental to the NBA.

 

[JDM]

Contracts are breached by one person all of the time and when they get to court - the other side nullifies the contract. In this case, however the board of governors may remove an owner with a 75% of the vote if they consider his statements and personal opinions harmful and detrimental to the NBA.

No, they cannot. You cited the terms yourself that stated he had to have violated a rule for that to be the case.

 

[True Lakers Fan]

LOL. Well that makes it simpler. They should just bring in a hooker with an offer from an ownership group and he might not remember he ever owned the Clippers tomorrow.

Bottom line is those recordings were legal and even if illegally recorded - once Sterling makes the statement that he did not give Stiviano permission to record those conversations, then he is admitting he made those statements. Once he admits he said those things, he is admitting that those are his personal views and once that happens, the NBA could have still pounced on him and pounded him into the ground.

 

[beardown07]

Tonight's news...80 year old, white, billionaire NBA exec is racist.





Tomorrow. Water is wet.

 

[xpuctaqpGT]

Two other sections from the NBA bylaws:

"ARTICLE 17

AMENDMENTS

(a) Except as otherwise provided for in this Constitution
and By-Laws, the Constitution and By-Laws of the Association may be
amended by the votes of three-fourths (3/4) of all the Governors at any
meeting of the Board of Governors, provided that the nature of the
proposed amendment is set forth in the Written Notice of the meeting."

AND

"ARTICLE 19

MEETINGS OF THE BOARD OF GOVERNORS
(b) Special meetings may be called by the Commissioner
at any time and shall be called by the Commissioner whenever a
request is made for such meeting by six (6) or more Members by a
Writing."

So, even if the current situation isn't currently covered by the NBA bylaws, and emergency meeting of the Board of Governors can be called. And with a 3/4 majority, the bylaws can be amended.

Ultimately, the only real question is whether or not Silver will be able to get 3/4 of the owners to vote him out.

 

[xpuctaqpGT]

Two other sections from the NBA bylaws:

"ARTICLE 17

AMENDMENTS

(a) Except as otherwise provided for in this Constitution
and By-Laws, the Constitution and By-Laws of the Association may be
amended by the votes of three-fourths (3/4) of all the Governors at any
meeting of the Board of Governors, provided that the nature of the
proposed amendment is set forth in the Written Notice of the meeting."

AND

"ARTICLE 19

MEETINGS OF THE BOARD OF GOVERNORS
(b) Special meetings may be called by the Commissioner
at any time and shall be called by the Commissioner whenever a
request is made for such meeting by six (6) or more Members by a
Writing."

So, even if the current situation isn't currently covered by the NBA bylaws, and emergency meeting of the Board of Governors can be called. And with a 3/4 majority, the bylaws can be amended.

Ultimately, the only real question is whether or not Silver will be able to get 3/4 of the owners to vote him out.

 

[JDM]

Any bylaw change they make would also mean they could also be booted at will. They're not going to do that.

And doing that would give him an even better legal case against the league.

 

[gohusk]

Bottom line is those recordings were legal and even if illegally recorded - once Sterling makes the statement that he did not give Stiviano permission to record those conversations, then he is admitting he made those statements. Once he admits he said those things, he is admitting that those are his personal views and once that happens, the NBA could have still pounced on him and pounded him into the ground.

Whether or not what they did is legal or not is a matter of opinion at this point. I don't think anybody wold argue that if Sterling is inclined to he can dig his heels in and drag this out in the courts. He's probably just going to sell but lets not pretend that a vague clause in an ownership agreement that has never been tested in a court of law is legal or not.

 

[xpuctaqpGT]

Any bylaw change they make would also mean they could also be booted at will. They're not going to do that.

We'll find out in the next few weeks.

If it happens, I fully expect you to come on to this message board and admit that you have no knowledge of how business actually works.

If the owners do vote to remove him, will you admit to this?

 

[JDM]

We'll find out in the next few weeks.

If it happens, I fully expect you to come on to this message board and admit that you have no knowledge of how business actually works.

If the owners do vote to remove him, will you admit to this?

Voting to remove him as is won't stand up. They may do so, though it is unlikely, but there will be an extended legal battle if they do so, and they will lose.

Adding a clause as you are implying allowing them to remove him would require basically the ability to remove someone at will. No additional rule options would be able to be applicable retroactively, most likely.

 

[xpuctaqpGT]

Voting to remove him as is won't stand up. They may do so, though it is unlikely, but there will be an extended legal battle if they do so, and they will lose.

Adding a clause as you are implying allowing them to remove him would require basically the ability to remove someone at will. No additional rule options would be able to be applicable retroactively, most likely.

Quit trying to backpedal.

You said, and I quote: "They're not going to do that."

Do you stand by your words or not?

If they do in fact vote to dismiss him as an owner, will you admit you were wrong and do not understand how business actually works?

Or would you like to further try to amend your own statements?

 

[Psych-Ward]

Voting to remove him as is won't stand up. They may do so, though it is unlikely, but there will be an extended legal battle if they do so, and they will lose.

Adding a clause as you are implying allowing them to remove him would require basically the ability to remove someone at will. No additional rule options would be able to be applicable retroactively, most likely.

Answer his question dipshit!!!!!

When you are proven wrong are you going to admit your dumber than shit???

But we all know your inferiority complex wont let you do that. Because you live to be right on everything!!!
It could be sunny and 90 degrees outside and you would argue its snowing with 6 inches on the ground already!!!

 

[wildturkey]

If it makes you feel better, I chuckled

 

[True Lakers Fan]

We'll find out in the next few weeks.

If it happens, I fully expect you to come on to this message board and admit that you have no knowledge of how business actually works.

If the owners do vote to remove him, will you admit to this?

I don't expect him to - he's only trolling in here because the political forum is less interesting right now

 

[JDM]

Quit trying to backpedal.

You said, and I quote: "Any bylaw change they make would also mean they could also be booted at will. They're not going to do that."

Do you stand by your words or not?

If they do in fact vote to dismiss him as an owner, will you admit you were wrong and do not understand how business actually works?

Or would you like to further try to amend your own statements?

I said they're not going to make a bylaw change like you're stating. I've already said in this thread that there is a (low) chance they vote to kick him, but that that would be the start of a long legal battle they can not win.

 

[WhiteMamba]

If it makes you feel better, I chuckled

it does and I thank you.

 

[DoobeeDoobeeDoo]

 

[JDM]

Answer his question dipshit!!!!!

When you are proven wrong are you going to admit your dumber than shit???

But we all know your inferiority complex wont let you do that. Because you live to be right on everything!!!
It could be sunny and 90 degrees outside and you would argue its snowing with 6 inches on the ground already!!!

My stance has been consistent throughout the thread. It's not my fault he is trying to twist it to say something not comparable in any way to what was said.