Go look at a case study of MLB trying to take over the Dodgers. Everything I had ever learned about DIP financing in 20 years of deals I unlearned in that case. Fascinating. I had epic fights with my chief risk officer about the value of the the Dodgers vis a vis the Montreal Expos. We still mock each other to this day, but I was right. _
No, the Divorce Court shouldn't really have a say other than to ascribe a value to the asset that must be divided. Possibly Mr. Sterling would want to use an inflated value if ceding ownership to his wife. Of course that assumes Mrs. Sterling wants to keep the team which sounds like what she's been angling for over the last 24-36 hours. It also assumes the NBA owners, having kicked Sterling out would find the estranged wife acceptable to join their club.
Again, I don't think a divorce court has the ability to ascribe a value to something that cannot be sold without the consent of the super-majority owners. I don't do family law, but I'm not sure there is a value attributable to an asset that has the chilling effect of basically a right of first refusal. Stirling can't sell the franchise without league approval, therefore a court can't say the Clippers are worth $xx. The owners have to allow him to sell it and whatever that number is is what a divorce court will decide gets split. A divorce court can't ascribe a value absent a willing buyer AND a willing group of owners willing to allow it to be sold. _
I hope the irony of you calling anyone a fool is not lost on you. If you want to engage in adult conversation, please refrain from acting like a child. Actually, why don't you just go work on your punctuation, syntax, diction, spelling and logic. So you don't sound like, you know, a fool. _
Btw, Cakes was right about you. An immature child. I can't believe how naive you are. Tell me again about those "ownership laws" lol. _
Well next Jets game, ill drive ya, and I wont forget the booster seat, I dont want to get a ticket ya know.
