Random Conspiracy theory about Curlin
 

So I just realized something, and it is probably out there, and while I understand the reason to run in Dubai, the prep race still kinda makes me wonder some things.

What if, the Shiek also has a handshake agreement with Jackson and the other partners that 'got bought out' to stand Curlin, I mean, given his buying binge, it sure as hell would make sense for him to have his hands on Curlin also.

Lets think about this in steps on how it could have happen

1) Sheik's peeps call Jackson and other people, tell them they want Curlin, Jackson says sure but pending lawsuit a pain in the ass
2) Sheik says I will pay this amount, just figure it out on your end
3) Jackson and those other people come up with plan to consolidate ownership to give Jackson 'power', but keep other people silent partners and 'still in' on the stud deal.
4) Sheik is happy, says he wants Curlin to run in both prep bs race, and the DWC

While their are obvious ethical issues here, from a legal standpoint, I don't see anything wrong with the above.

Quiet Sunday night... huh Scav

you must be bored.:p

not at all, as I told another friend on here, sometimes these random ideas/thoughts just pop into my brain, and I either run into a wall with them, or run them out

Contrary right now, break time from writing a Strategic Audit report

he is right...dude comes up with some off the wall sh*t at times.

actually fairly believable theory.

rather convoluted.
still doesn't explain why curlin would be running, rather than playing it safe-especially since the other three purchases all went into retirement after the bc.

It is, that hilarious prep race BS is what keyed to the possibilities...IF this is true, imagine the door that gets opened for Assmussen.

Um, SURE IT does, they wouldn't be able to stand him now ANYWAYS becuase of the lawsuit and the 20% ownership of the jailbirds.....

It wouldn't surprise me if Curlin ends up standing at Adena Springs... aren't Jess and Frank pretty tight?

actually, they could have stood him somewhere. trick is whether any monies collected would have to be held in escrow until everything is cleared up. it's not as tho all these plaintiffs who are looking at curlin like he may be their lotto ticket are helping pay his expenses.

Do you think that the owners want these random ass people getting a piece of that breeding deal? I'll answer for you, no...

I don't think the "20%" problem is a problem at all. The "plaintifss" interest -- they have lack of control, a minority interest, lack of marketability, etc. -- all reasons that their interest is worth less than 20% of whatever Curlin is worth. The sum of the parts is not equal to the sum of the whole in this particular case.

The plaintiff's have lost every motion they've made before the court, will not be able to force a liquidation or buy out and can scream shareholder suppression from the highest mountaintops. I don't understand how the potential litigation affects anything. They are along for the ride. I don't see it any different. Jackson has more than enough money to litigate.

I did wonder why the others sold out. I don't think your theory or something similar is that absolutely unbelievable or impossible. There might be "claw backs" or something, residuals, etc. Sanan especially could have negotiated shares, seasons, etc.

Eric

George Bolton got out simply because of the risk of running the year v. the lucrative financial reward. Can't say about Sanan.

And the plaintiffs have NOT lost every motion they've filed. Expect Angela Ford back on ATR this week..

I think they snuck a sample of Curlin's seed and found him sterile

so the plan is to shatter the earnings record

:p

i think jess jackson is an old man who would rather have a horse with an earnings record and a legacy to build then wonder 'what if' on his death bed. as for the plaintiffs and midnight cry, i think that's only a small part of the issue. i think bolton and sanan took the money and ran, as it's the same money they'd have gotten with any stud deal. no risk involved.
as for the 20%-the plaintiffs can only touch midnight cry's portion-jackson won't get the other 20% anyway, why would he care who did?

Now that's a conspiracy theory!

Are you out of your mind in regards to the same amount via a stud deal? Do you realize how much horses make at stud, lets say he stands for 100k to start, and covers 200 mares, all realistic numbers, that is 20 million, IN HIS FIRST YEAR, and lets say he can cover mares for 10 years, that is 200 million, that is 50 million just for 25%, do you realistically think they were bought out for 50 million? And what happens if he turns into a 250k stallion, thus numbers increase by 2.5.....

20% of 200 million is 40 million, 20% of 10 million is 2 million for these plantiffs,

...and they would've got away with it too if it wasn't for that meddling scavs!

LOL....

Brain was fried from staring at a computer and idea popped into my head so I said why the heck not and run with it.

Memphis up to -2, more in Sports Bar and Grill

I think the death bed theory sounds great. The man needs not for money . A horse like this comes around ... like how often in anybody's lifetime? He Obviously loves the sport. Plus how much more will that fee be if he keeps on winning? It's the ultimate gamble for an owner. If he breaks down he goes out a legend, and if he keeps running he adds to it. $$$$$$ !

i'd imagine jess jackson bought them out for what a stud farm would have bought them out for. obviously not the type of numbers you're putting up there-and you also need to recall when the buyout was done-all the risk at that point was on jackson, none on bolton and sanan.
also, stud fees are based on the first few years, when you 'get out' on a horse. you're seriously telling me that a stud horse makes 200 million in ten years?

also, could you name one proven sire by smart strike?

Steve, while I am not a practicing attorney and don't play one on TV or the internet, I can say that I've spoke with enough people who -- let's just say -- know enough about the case to speak to the issues. I certainly understand them from legal perspective. My "every motion" comment refers directly to the motions to compel to act. They have not won one. Yes, they have won a motion to produce documentation, be kept abreast of the status, etc. -- all hollow, meaningless victories in this situation. I would hope that whatever monies were attributable to the 20% interest in question -- purse monies -- those monies were "attachable" so to speak. Of course it's not that simple.

I don't think we will see the plaintiffs and their legal counsel be able to force a liquidation, or get their hands on the lever of control. Nor will we see them be able to obtain dollars attributable to anything over and above their 20%.

I would take everything said from either side's legal counsel -- with a grain of salt, not because of anything personal, but only because it's S.O.P.

I can understand that reasoning from Bolton. It makes all the sense in the world for some, many, etc. people. I don't know anything about Sanan and his decision as I said. However, I am not sure I see anything changing the direction of where this is going now.

Eric

Your numbers are fantasy