Lip Man 1 Posted June 17, 2016 Share Posted June 17, 2016 (edited) QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jun 17, 2016 -> 10:40 AM) Actually you are wrong. Majority shareholder is 50% +1. Seems to me you are splitting hairs from a legal perspective. The Sox have so many investors no one has 50% +1. The reality is though he has the most ownership shares, he has the largest percentage AND he has the power to control the day to day operations in his contract. From a practical standpoint he is the "majority". 50% + 1 or not. Mark Edited June 17, 2016 by Lip Man 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted June 17, 2016 Share Posted June 17, 2016 (edited) QUOTE (Lip Man 1 @ Jun 17, 2016 -> 01:46 PM) Seems to me you are splitting hairs from a legal perspective. The Sox have so many investors no one has 50% +1. The reality is though he has the most ownership shares, he has the largest percentage AND he has the power to control the day to day operations in his contract. From a practical standpoint he is the "majority". 50% + 1 or not. Mark Then, by definition, they have no majority shareholder. If a majority was needed to do things, JR wouldn't have a rubber stamp even if he owned 49.9% of the team and the rest was shared by 500 people. He has a rubber stamp because of how the partnership was set up, not because of the size of the shares in his possession. He has always been able to run things even when his stake was lower than it is today. I had heard at one time the Fanning guy from Fanning Cadillac owned more shares than anyone. Edited June 17, 2016 by Dick Allen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted June 17, 2016 Share Posted June 17, 2016 QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Jun 17, 2016 -> 12:58 PM) Tex told me that the tacos at the Cell are better than San Antonio tacos* *he didnt really tell me that I was trying to remember when we had a drunken conversation while eating Cell tacos. I'm picturing sauce dripping down my chin. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted June 17, 2016 Share Posted June 17, 2016 QUOTE (Lip Man 1 @ Jun 17, 2016 -> 01:46 PM) Seems to me you are splitting hairs from a legal perspective. The Sox have so many investors no one has 50% +1. The reality is though he has the most ownership shares, he has the largest percentage AND he has the power to control the day to day operations in his contract. From a practical standpoint he is the "majority". 50% + 1 or not. Mark He still needs the cooperation of some number of shares, from the numbers you listed at least 1/6 of the remaining share holders. That means he does not have unilateral power in a true sense. If the shareholders truly felt Jerry wasn't representing their interests, they could easily oust him or out-vote him. If he holds 33%, it means 67% is still out there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted June 17, 2016 Share Posted June 17, 2016 QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Jun 17, 2016 -> 01:59 PM) Then, by definition, they have no majority shareholder. If a majority was needed to do things, JR wouldn't have a rubber stamp even if he owned 49.9% of the team and the rest was shared by 500 people. He has a rubber stamp because of how the partnership was set up, not because of the size of the shares in his possession. He has always been able to run things even when his stake was lower than it is today. I had heard at one time the Fanning guy from Fanning Cadillac owned more shares than anyone. Yeah, respecting Jerry's business accumen and allowing him to run the company is different than his unilaterally controlling the company. They obviously trust Jerry a lot, because you don't hear about problems from inside of the ownership structure. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hatchetman Posted June 18, 2016 Share Posted June 18, 2016 If the others are limited partners he doesn't need majority equity to do whatever he wants. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thad Bosley Posted June 18, 2016 Share Posted June 18, 2016 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jun 17, 2016 -> 06:29 PM) Yeah, respecting Jerry's business accumen and allowing him to run the company is different than his unilaterally controlling the company. They obviously trust Jerry a lot, because you don't hear about problems from inside of the ownership structure. Well of course the investors trust him. He's done very well by them over the past 36 years, making each of them a whole lotta dough along the way. It's the fans who haven't made out any where near as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted June 18, 2016 Share Posted June 18, 2016 QUOTE (Thad Bosley @ Jun 17, 2016 -> 07:44 PM) Well of course the investors trust him. He's done very well by them over the past 36 years, making each of them a whole lotta dough along the way. It's the fans who haven't made out any where near as well. The trophy generation has spoken. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thad Bosley Posted June 18, 2016 Share Posted June 18, 2016 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jun 17, 2016 -> 07:55 PM) The trophy generation has spoken. And rather accurately at that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soxforlife05 Posted June 18, 2016 Share Posted June 18, 2016 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jun 17, 2016 -> 06:55 PM) The trophy generation has spoken. When you run a baseball team like a small market team in a major market like Chicago, expect some backlash from the fans when the team sucks for decades at a time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SI1020 Posted June 18, 2016 Share Posted June 18, 2016 QUOTE (soxfan2014 @ Jun 17, 2016 -> 10:34 AM) Nope. I see his posts and see how long they are that there is no way his keyboards can survive. The thought of reading a real book must give you a headache. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted June 18, 2016 Share Posted June 18, 2016 QUOTE (soxforlife05 @ Jun 18, 2016 -> 06:01 AM) When you run a baseball team like a small market team in a major market like Chicago, expect some backlash from the fans when the team sucks for decades at a time. Mostly because the White Sox have a small market fan base. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thad Bosley Posted June 18, 2016 Share Posted June 18, 2016 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jun 18, 2016 -> 09:20 AM) Mostly because the White Sox have a small market fan base. Resulting from routine failure by ownership and management to present a product that would/could grow a fan base. Constant losing isn't attractive. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted June 18, 2016 Share Posted June 18, 2016 QUOTE (soxforlife05 @ Jun 18, 2016 -> 06:01 AM) When you run a baseball team like a small market team in a major market like Chicago, expect some backlash from the fans when the team sucks for decades at a time. They have half of a large market. Name a better ownership group in Chicago in the past 100 years? And that may be more a comment on the quality of ownership groups in Chicago sports than a comment on the quality of the current Sox owners but you understand my point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted June 18, 2016 Share Posted June 18, 2016 QUOTE (Tex @ Jun 18, 2016 -> 09:47 AM) They have half of a large market. Name a better ownership group in Chicago in the past 100 years? And that may be more a comment on the quality of ownership groups in Chicago sports than a comment on the quality of the current Sox owners but you understand my point. They have less than half. If you actually look at it like that, the White Sox have a smaller fan base than most of the AL Central. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted June 18, 2016 Share Posted June 18, 2016 QUOTE (Thad Bosley @ Jun 18, 2016 -> 09:32 AM) Resulting from routine failure by ownership and management to present a product that would/could grow a fan base. Constant losing isn't attractive. *or whatever the excuse of the day is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thad Bosley Posted June 18, 2016 Share Posted June 18, 2016 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jun 18, 2016 -> 10:15 AM) *or whatever the excuse of the day is. Lol - no one is making excuses. That's a figment of your imagination. No, turns out people aren't really all that interested in lousy baseball. Take the last few seasons, for example. Were people staying away because they were simply making up dopey excuses to do so? Or was the baseball product so bad that the consumer wasn't interested in purchasing it? The answer is pretty obvious, at least to most. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted June 18, 2016 Share Posted June 18, 2016 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jun 18, 2016 -> 10:14 AM) They have less than half. If you actually look at it like that, the White Sox have a smaller fan base than most of the AL Central. And not all fans are created equally. My hunch has been for a long time that both teams are about equal in the number of knowledgeable baseball fans. The Cubs kick our ass in the casual fan who enjoys going to a game now and then and may watch a little on TV. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted June 18, 2016 Share Posted June 18, 2016 QUOTE (Thad Bosley @ Jun 18, 2016 -> 10:31 AM) Lol - no one is making excuses. That's a figment of your imagination. No, turns out people aren't really all that interested in lousy baseball. Take the last few seasons, for example. Were people staying away because they were simply making up dopey excuses to do so? Or was the baseball product so bad that the consumer wasn't interested in purchasing it? The answer is pretty obvious, at least to most. After seeing this fan base for decades, the narrative changes almost annually. So yes, I have seen tons of excuses. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted June 18, 2016 Share Posted June 18, 2016 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jun 18, 2016 -> 01:13 PM) After seeing this fan base for decades, the narrative changes almost annually. So yes, I have seen tons of excuses. It is kind of amazing that the team isn't in Florida. And the Cubs would become the biggest draw in baseball. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hatchetman Posted June 18, 2016 Share Posted June 18, 2016 The excuses come from the front office for why they suck every year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bigsoxhurt35 Posted June 18, 2016 Share Posted June 18, 2016 This all starts with the front office and their ability to build a consistent contender and not once every 8 years or whatever. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sammy esposito Posted June 19, 2016 Share Posted June 19, 2016 QUOTE (SouthSideSale @ Jun 18, 2016 -> 01:45 PM) This all starts with the front office and their ability to build a consistent contender and not once every 8 years or whatever. On a positive note they are doing better than last year but when you go 13 over 5oo to 14 under it leaves you with a bigger let down. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thad Bosley Posted June 19, 2016 Share Posted June 19, 2016 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jun 18, 2016 -> 01:13 PM) After seeing this fan base for decades, the narrative changes almost annually. So yes, I have seen tons of excuses. Then share your data points with us. Show us these "tons of excuses" you have magically seen that the rest of us haven't, at the quantity with which you must have in order to make your silly conclusions about an entire fan base that you've done. Just show us. You are making conclusions about an entire fan base and representing yourself as some sort of expert without providing one iota of evidence to do so. So that's the ask: provide some concrete evidence that supports your wild claims about the fan base, or cease and desist with making these unproven assertions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted June 19, 2016 Share Posted June 19, 2016 QUOTE (Thad Bosley @ Jun 18, 2016 -> 08:46 PM) Then share your data points with us. Show us these "tons of excuses" you have magically seen that the rest of us haven't, at the quantity with which you must have in order to make your silly conclusions about an entire fan base that you've done. Just show us. You are making conclusions about an entire fan base and representing yourself as some sort of expert without providing one iota of evidence to do so. So that's the ask: provide some concrete evidence that supports your wild claims about the fan base, or cease and desist with making these unproven assertions. What? You are joking right? Are you new to the internet, or is your head just buried that deep? The slope of the upper deck, the height of the upper deck, the parking situation, the neighborhood around the ballpark, the park was too sterile, there was no where to go after a game, Jerry Reinsdorf doesn't care enough about the team, Jerry Reinsdorf has too much control over the team, threatening to move the team to Tampa, White Flag, not winning a World Series, not winning, no winning multiple seasons in a row, not going to the playoffs enough times in a short enough period of time, Kenny Williams, the park should have been built in the (suburbs, south side of downtown, downtown), unlikable players, Hawk Harrelson, losing Harry Carry to the Cubs, The Cubs in general, and I will finish with all my time favorite, the color of the f***ing seats. Seriously. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.