Donald Sterling is not a progressive thinker

[Whiskeyjack]

Who enforces the fine? Can the commissioner just go around fining people for shit? I get if you fine a CURRENT player, coach, or owner because the implication is "pay the fine or you don't get to participate in the league." What's the incentive to pay here if he's banned for life anyways?

I'd assume it's contractual, so Silver can sue Sterling if he refuses to pay up. But if they're going to force him out anyway, the fine seems superfluous. Either fine him and let him stay, or force him out. Doing both is stupid.

 

[woolybug25]

Who enforces the fine? Can the commissioner just go around fining people for shit? I get if you fine a CURRENT player, coach, or owner because the implication is "pay the fine or you don't get to participate in the league." What's the incentive to pay here if he's banned for life anyways?

That was my question earlier and i'm still not sure how that would work.

Silver: You sir, are banned and fined $2.5M

Sterling: I won't pay it.

Silver: Then you can't sell your team.

Sterling: Ok. I'll continue owning them then.

Silver: No.. I mean… No! You can't own them!

Sterling: Ok. I'm not paying you then…

Silver: shit...

Sterling:

 

[wizards8507]

I'd assume it's contractual, so Silver can sue Sterling if he refuses to pay up.

I can't imagine anyone with the legal resources available to an NBA owner signing a contract with the language "Commissioner may, at Commissioner's sole discretion, impose a fine not to exceed $10M, payable by Owner for comments made publicly or privately by Owner regarding any such topic that may, at the Commissioner's sole discretion, be detrimental to the National Basketball Association, the NBA Players Association, the Commissioner or any other individual or entity. The Commissioner shall give written notice of any fines imposed on the Owner and the Owner shall be obligated to remit to the National Basketball Association payment by certified check in the full amount of the fine. The provisions contained herein shall be binding on all parties notwithstanding expulsion or disassociation of Owner from the National Basketball Association, whether voluntary or otherwise."

But if they're going to force him out anyway, the fine seems superfluous. Either fine him and let him stay, or force him out. Doing both is stupid.

Right.

 

[Whiskeyjack]

I can't imagine anyone with the legal resources available to an NBA owner signing a contract with the language "Commissioner may, at Commissioner's sole discretion, impose a fine not to exceed $10M, payable by Owner for comments made publicly or privately by Owner regarding any such topic that may, at the Commissioner's sole discretion, be detrimental to the National Basketball Association, the NBA Players Association, the Commissioner or any other individual or entity. The Commissioner shall give written notice of any fines imposed on the Owner and the Owner shall be obligated to remit to the National Basketball Association payment by certified check in the full amount of the fine. The provisions contained herein shall be binding on all parties notwithstanding expulsion or disassociation of Owner from the National Basketball Association, whether voluntary or otherwise."

See Cackalacky's post here.

 

[wizards8507]

See Cackalacky's post here.

I get it, but I still don't see where he can ban him AND fine him. I feel like once he bans him, his powers to fine no longer apply because he isn't an NBA owner anymore.

 

[irishog77]

I get it, but I still don't see where he can ban him AND fine him. I feel like once he bans him, his powers to fine no longer apply because he isn't an NBA owner anymore.

Except he is. He still owns the team. At least for the moment. Silver is looking to push him out, but who knows how that'll go.

Part of me thinks that the term "ban" may not mean what we think it means in this instance. I'm not sure how Silver can truly ban him while he actually owns the team. I mean I know Silver can obviously prevent Sterling from certain aspects of the team and league, but I don't think he can ban him from receiving money from the team. So if he still receives money, how "banned" is he truly? And I suppose if he wanted to, Sterling could drag the sell of the team out over a long period of time. While each potential new owner has to be vetted and approved by the owners (at least some type of majority approving, anyway), Sterling would still retain the right not to sell to certain prospective buyers, I would think.

 

[ND NYC]

somethin tells me this guy aint gonna "go quietly into that good night..."

ps the minute he lost the very first sponsor this guys days were numbered as an NBA owner.

 

[Huntr]

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p>All 29 other <a href="https://twitter.com/search?q=%23NBA&src=hash">#NBA</a> owners support Adam Silver's ban on Sterling, setting stage for vote to force <a href="https://twitter.com/search?q=%23Clippers&src=hash">#Clippers</a> sale: <a href="http://t.co/QnmyYqeCak">http://t.co/QnmyYqeCak</a></p>— Yahoo Sports (@YahooSports) <a href="https://twitter.com/YahooSports/statuses/461271660570873856">April 29, 2014</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

Includes Munson's info that was posted earlier, plus statements from all 29 other NBA owners supporting Silver. Vote to boot Sterling will be unanimous.

 

[Irish Insanity]

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p>All 29 other <a href="https://twitter.com/search?q=%23NBA&src=hash">#NBA</a> owners support Adam Silver's ban on Sterling, setting stage for vote to force <a href="https://twitter.com/search?q=%23Clippers&src=hash">#Clippers</a> sale: <a href="http://t.co/QnmyYqeCak">http://t.co/QnmyYqeCak</a></p>— Yahoo Sports (@YahooSports) <a href="https://twitter.com/YahooSports/statuses/461271660570873856">April 29, 2014</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

Includes Munson's info that was posted earlier, plus statements from all 29 other NBA owners supporting Silver. Vote to boot Sterling will be unanimous.

If the votes are cast privately, I don't expect it to be unanimous. Cuban brought up a good point when he asked if this happens, what doors does that open in the future in regards to ousting owners. Its easy to cast a vote publicly to back the NBA.

 

[NoJusticeNoPeace]

That was my question earlier and i'm still not sure how that would work.

Silver: You sir, are banned and fined $2.5M

Sterling: I won't pay it.

Silver: Then you can't sell your team.

Sterling: Ok. I'll continue owning them then.

Silver: No.. I mean… No! You can't own them!

Sterling: Ok. I'm not paying you then…

Silver: shit...

Sterling:

Breach of contract and the NBA can take the team.

 

[Irish Insanity]

Breach of contract and the NBA can take the team.

No. What contract did he breach? And even if so, that wouldn't allow the NBA to seize a Billion dollar asset.

 

[Irish Houstonian]

No. What contract did he breach? And even if so, that wouldn't allow the NBA to seize a Billion dollar asset.

Back of the napkin, and assuming it's similar to the NFL:

NBA, LLC (probably not its real name) is constituted by 30 equal Members and governed by an LLC Agreement/"Constitution" if you will.

One member of the LLC is Clippers Basketball Team L.P. (probably not its real name), which is controlled by Sterling.

Silver can ban Sterling the human from activities per his powers as commissioner, but the Limited Partnership still receives the rights/distributions under the LLC Agreement/Constitution.

So then, under the "Constitution", NBA, LLC can liquidate the Limited Partnership's interest in the LLC upon the affirmative vote of 75% of the Members, if certain conditions are met allowing the vote to take place. There will probably be a lengthy procedural process as to whether the vote can take place, decided by a arbitrator whose opinion is binding.

Whether the vote will actually take place, or whether the League will just use it as leverage to force a sale is anyone's guess. But one thing's for sure: Sterling's screwed.

 

[irishfan]

Donald Sterling, NBA set for epic legal fight over Clippers - NBA - Michael McCann - SI.com

Great article explaining the legal action Sterling can take. SI expects him to sue if outed, and SI also does not think the owners are a lock to vote him out.

 

[WakeUpEchoes]

Donald Sterling, NBA set for epic legal fight over Clippers - NBA - Michael McCann - SI.com

Great article explaining the legal action Sterling can take. SI expects him to sue if outed, and SI also does not think the owners are a lock to vote him out.

Nice. Thanks for the post.

Just FYI, if you guys are interested in a great sports law blog, my professor is one of the founders of this one. Sports Law Blog

The guy in the SI article that you posted (McCann) is also a founder and a regular poster on the site.

Edit: This is an awesome article.

 

[irishfan]

Nice. Thanks for the post.

Just FYI, if you guys are interested in a great sports law blog, my professor is one of the founders of this one. Sports Law Blog

The guy in the SI article that you posted (McCann) is also a founder and a regular poster on the site.

Edit: This is an awesome article.

SI is really my go-to for sports stories. ESPN always seems to have somewhat of an agenda. I'll check scores and stats on ESPN, but the journalism at SI is really top notch.

 

[WakeUpEchoes]

SI is really my go-to for sports stories. ESPN always seems to have somewhat of an agenda. I'll check scores and stats on ESPN, but the journalism at SI is really top notch.

I never even thought of the tax implications. The fact that Sterling could save hundreds of millions by fighting this thing and delaying the forced sale until his death is nuts.

 

[Monk McGinn]

Not a fan of the NBA anyway,this story is ridiculous.
Nice to see Freedom Of Speech alive and well in America.
Whatever,spoiled rich pricks fighting over other spoiled rich pricks.

 

[NoJusticeNoPeace]

Not a fan of the NBA anyway,this story is ridiculous.
Nice to see Freedom Of Speech alive and well in America.
Whatever,spoiled rich pricks fighting over other spoiled rich pricks.

Freedom of speech is protection from the government, not a private company.

 

[Kaneyoufeelit]

Not a fan of the NBA anyway,this story is ridiculous.
Nice to see Freedom Of Speech alive and well in America.
Whatever,spoiled rich pricks fighting over other spoiled rich pricks.

 

[pkt77242]

Not a fan of the NBA anyway,this story is ridiculous.
Nice to see Freedom Of Speech alive and well in America.
Whatever,spoiled rich pricks fighting over other spoiled rich pricks.

Um, this has nothing to do with Freedom of Speech but nice try.

 

[Monk McGinn]

Um, this has nothing to do with Freedom of Speech but nice try.

Um,thanks for letting me know boss. Carry on the intellectual conversation.

 

[IrishJayhawk]

Um,thanks for letting me know boss. Carry on the intellectual conversation.

He's absolutely right, boss. He's not being legally prosecuted for his heinous views. He's being punished by the private organization that he's part of. Not a constitutional issue.

 

[TheRealLynch51]

Not a fan of the NBA anyway,this story is ridiculous.
Nice to see Freedom Of Speech alive and well in America.
Whatever,spoiled rich pricks fighting over other spoiled rich pricks.

A racist piece of shit deserves no safety blanket from a private enterprise (the NBA). While taking a team away from an owner is a slippery slope, a man with a documented racist agenda deserves to not have the opportunity to profit off of a race that is "less than his". To me, this literally sounds like something a plantation owner would say back in the days of slavery. "They can work for me, but they dont have a place in masters house."

 

[Monk McGinn]

I'm talking about Speech in general,how people jump down people's
throats because they don't believe in what the other person says.
My god,some of you guys are hysterical. I don't give two craps about
Stirling or this whole fiasco. I think it's ridiculous all the way around.
Anyone else want to jump on my back? You guys need to chill out.
It's the internet,how you want to say things comes out wrong and
sarcasm is one of them.

 

[IrishJayhawk]

I'm talking about Speech in general,how people jump down people's
throats because they don't believe in what the other person says.
My god,some of you guys are hysterical. I don't give two craps about
Stirling or this whole fiasco. I think it's ridiculous all the way around.
Anyone else want to jump on my back? You guys need to chill out.
It's the internet,how you want to say things comes out wrong and
sarcasm is one of them.

You specifically referenced "freedom of speech." You'll forgive people for interpreting that as you claiming that his constitutional rights were violated.

If you think people have overreacted, that's fine. Argue that point.

 

[no.1IrishFan]

Not defending him, I just can't help but think that we'd all be fired from our jobs if someone with an agenda secretly taped some of the conversations we've had in the presumed privacy of our own homes.

 

[gkIrish]

I listened to the entire tape again and I have a couple more comments.

1. It sounded more "racist" than I originally thought. In other words, I was wrong when I said he didn't say anything blatantly racist. However, I do still think what he was saying is more ignorant/crazy than genuinely racist.

2. Dude sounds senile during some portions of the tape. Honestly sounds like he has Alzheimer's or something.

Because of #2 I wouldn't be surprised if he comes out in the next few days and announces he has been diagnosed with early stages of ___ disease and that it clouded his thoughts and speech. Could be complete B.S. but would be a huge problem for the NBA. He could sue the living hell out of them and also make this a mental health issue. Maybe this sounds crazy but I really wouldn't be surprised considering he hasn't really made public statements.

 

[GoldenToTheGrave]

Can I call dibs on Sterling's girlfriend...or wife?

WAY out of your price range

 

[Monk McGinn]

You specifically referenced "freedom of speech." You'll forgive people for interpreting that as you claiming that his constitutional rights were violated.

If you think people have overreacted, that's fine. Argue that point.

I'm 43 freakin years old man,I don't need to "argue" the point with you or
anyone else for that matter. I stated what I tried to come across and was
using "Freedom Of Speech" because let's face it in this day and age our
amendments are withering away on all fronts. I'm sure someone else
will be more then happy to argue the meaning of life with you. Have a nice day.

 

[IrishJayhawk]

I'm 43 freakin years old man,I don't need to "argue" the point with you or
anyone else for that matter. I stated what I tried to come across and was
using "Freedom Of Speech" because let's face it in this day and age our
amendments are withering away on all fronts. I'm sure someone else
will be more then happy to argue the meaning of life with you. Have a nice day.

I literally have no idea what you're talking about.

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/RjF93E4LjlA" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

You just referenced the Bill of Rights again. This isn't a constitutional issue.

And "arguing" doesn't have to be malicious. It just means defending your beliefs with reason and logic. You're reading a tone that I'm not intending.