[News] Wasserman Talent Agency put up for sale after Epstein files fallout

[Ped]

Incredibly poor taste joke tkflames

[Locke]

Originally Posted by 3thirty

Well 3 major music artists have left already. I'm the sure clauses work both ways for bad behaviour and options.

It really, really, really depends.

In that particular industry? I'd imagine those Non-Competes would have to be pretty iron-clad, otherwise agents would be bailing with their clients left, right and centre all the time.

In principle they're designed to prevent this, there are also laws, in certain jurisdictions, that an individual cannot be legally prevented from using their skills and abilities to earn a living.

I dont know.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by metroneck

Without knowing the in’s and out’s of the specific contracts the players have with their agents, they may have a term (1, 2 year etc).

Getting out of that contract is probably not as easy as ‘firing’ the agent. For the Agents that are not part of the ‘issue’, they most likely can’t just leave with their client list.

The valuation of the firm is based on guaranteed money coming in (contracts), the market will dictate how much the risk of losing those contracts is worth vs the valuation.

That's just part of the valuation. But they are not just selling off contracts but the overall business which includes their customer list, pipeline, relationships, reputation etc. That's why the valuation is likely to take a hit and also why they would be in a hurry to sell and get his name off the masthead.

[D as in David]

Does Wasserman own 100% of the company? It wouldn't surprise if he had already sold minority stakes to other agents.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by metroneck

You would have non-compete and anti-poaching clauses in your contract for a period of time.

Yeah, but non-competes are read strictly by the courts and if the business is sold there might be a change of control exclusion (or they might argue that the company has suffered a material adverse change).

[Yrebmi]

Originally Posted by 1Nite

One guy at work, likes reading "special news sources" he suggests that it was more than being perverts and pedos, it was about gathering & getting dirt on everyone with wealth and or power, and that there is a lot more blackmail stock than just what was in the epstein files.

I would think that part is obvious and goes without saying.
However saying that it is more than the abuse of innocents, is like saying a block buster trade is more than just the hockey stars traded, there was a 7th round pick too.
The power games is likely the main motivator even, but the true evil is the abuse.
The fact that much of it was (is?) perpetrated by not dregs, but society leaders is horrifying

[Titan2]

Originally Posted by Yrebmi

I would think that part is obvious and goes without saying.
However saying that it is more than the abuse of innocents, is like saying a block buster trade is more than just the hockey stars traded, there was a 7th round pick too.
The power games is likely the main motivator even, but the true evil is the abuse.
The fact that much of it was (is?) perpetrated by not dregs, but society leaders is horrifying

I am not sure it goes without saying. I hadn't really thought of the blackmail angle but it would be a way to keep the evil going. No one is going to blow the whistle because he has incriminating videos of you. There is a ton of power and leverage in that. As we have found out, even being on the island or conversing with him is enough to destroy people. That is a lot of power and is a pretty good reason to 'help' him commit suicide once the chance presented itself. Doesn't seem like a far-out theory to me.

I really shouldn't have to say the abuse is much worse. Two things can be true at once.

[heep223]

That is a shocking valuation number, as someone pointed out to previously, for a pro services business that’s effectively reputation based and transactional.

[D as in David]

Originally Posted by heep223

That is a shocking valuation number, as someone pointed out to previously, for a pro services business that’s effectively reputation based and transactional.

Is it? With an estimated annual revenue between $500 million and over $676 million, with no information about net income due to it being a private company, it is pretty difficult to make that determination based merely on the nature of its services.

[Bubba17]

Originally Posted by 3thirty

But when artists and players start leaving so does that money.

I don't think agents, or the agency, gets paid per year. They get all of their money up front when the contract is signed. So using easy numbers, McDavid signs for $100M and agents fee is 5%, he gets his $5M up front.

[cam_calderon]

Originally Posted by tkflames

Your right...Jake didn't do anything...he was just there and watched.

Not true, he was also eating pizza.

[D as in David]

Originally Posted by Bubba17

I don't think agents, or the agency, gets paid per year. They get all of their money up front when the contract is signed. So using easy numbers, McDavid signs for $100M and agents fee is 5%, he gets his $5M up front.

I dont have information that says otherwise but my guess is the agent's fee would be paid over the life if the contract. In your example, the agent would be paid $5M well before the player has received that amount in after tax dollars.

[Bubba17]

Originally Posted by D as in David

I dont have information that says otherwise but my guess is the agent's fee would be paid over the life if the contract. In your example, the agent would be paid $5M well before the player has received that amount in after tax dollars.

It is only what I read somewhere but can't remember where it was. I think it is because the player contract is guaranteed so the agent gets his money off the total of the deal up front, but I could be incorrect.

[3thirty]

Originally Posted by Bubba17

It is only what I read somewhere but can't remember where it was. I think it is because the player contract is guaranteed so the agent gets his money off the total of the deal up front, but I could be incorrect.

How would the player pay this though? Unless it was a huge signing bonus they haven't earned enough to pay it.

[Ryan Coke]

If I had to go into debt to front my agent his cut at the beginning of my contract I’d find a different agent.

I’m sure it doesn’t work that way.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Bubba17

It is only what I read somewhere but can't remember where it was. I think it is because the player contract is guaranteed so the agent gets his money off the total of the deal up front, but I could be incorrect.

highly unlikely

Unless the player was paid a massive bonus up front, there would not be enough payment made, to cover the fee of the agent.

Like DasinDavid, I don't have specifics for this industry, but in every industry that I do have familiarity with, fees are paid as the money is earned, not up front.

Imagine a case where the player didn't honour the contract - in this scenario, the agent would have already received full fees on a contract that won't even be completed.

It is EXTREMELY unlikely that you are correct on this

[Jay Random]

I know for a positive fact that literary agents are paid out of the author's earnings as they are received from the publishers. Writers' organizations regularly warn that any agent who asks for an up-front payment from a would-be client is a scammer. (Publishing contracts for agented authors typically call for all payments to be sent directly to the agent, who then deducts his commission before sending the remainder to the author. There have been cases where the author never got any money because the agent went bust.)

I understand that this is the practice with entertainers' and performers' agents, and I would be very surprised if there was a different practice for athletes' agents.