- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: 'Fixer Upper's' Chip Gaines sued by former business partners for fraud
Posted on 4/28/17 at 11:00 am to Ex-Popcorn
Posted on 4/28/17 at 11:00 am to Ex-Popcorn
quote:
What matters is that Chip knew that the Gaines company--no matter what it was called--would necessarily profit from the show.
How did he know that?
Posted on 4/28/17 at 11:00 am to Mo Jeaux
quote:
you and fiduciary boy seem to imply that Chip knew the show would become massively successful and hid that knowledge from the sellers
He doesn't have to "know" the results. It only matters that he breached his duty of loyalty.
Posted on 4/28/17 at 11:00 am to Mo Jeaux
quote:
"Your honor, he knew that the contract for a pilot television show with HGTV would in five years' time become more massively successful than anyone could imagine and lead to immense financial success that would in turn affirmatively influence our realty business and increase our wealth."
They should sue Chip for not giving them the winning lottery numbers too.
you are being obtuse
if Chip held material information, which tv contract may or may not be, would that be an argument?
Posted on 4/28/17 at 11:01 am to Ex-Popcorn
quote:So I assume the partners where aware of the pilot being filmed?
Pilot airs. It had been filmed in 2012.
Posted on 4/28/17 at 11:01 am to Ex-Popcorn
quote:
It only matters that he breached his duty of loyalty.
That's a legal conclusion. How are you making that?
Posted on 4/28/17 at 11:02 am to thelawnwranglers
quote:
f Chip held material information, which tv contract may or may not be, would that be an argument?
If he willingly withheld material information in respect of the transaction, sure, it could be troublesome.
Posted on 4/28/17 at 11:02 am to PearlJam
quote:
So I assume the partners where aware of the pilot being filmed?
They allege no. I don't know, though.
Posted on 4/28/17 at 11:03 am to PearlJam
quote:
So I assume the partners where aware of the pilot being filmed?
I can't imagine that they would not be aware of it.
Posted on 4/28/17 at 11:03 am to Ex-Popcorn
quote:
They allege no.
Posted on 4/28/17 at 11:03 am to Mo Jeaux
quote:
If he willingly withheld material information in respect of the transaction, sure, it could be troublesome
Well, that's what has been alleged.
Posted on 4/28/17 at 11:04 am to Ex-Popcorn
quote:Did he have a duty of loyalty related to performing in a reality television show? Did the partners not know about the filming of the pilot? If he was not the sole owner of magnolia, could he have just not used that brand in the tv show? What then would the value of the magnolia brand be? Did he owe the partners a duty to advertise magnolia in his other business ventures?
It only matters that he breached his duty of loyalty.
This post was edited on 4/28/17 at 11:06 am
Posted on 4/28/17 at 11:04 am to Ex-Popcorn
To be fair we are only getting one side of the story right now
Devil's Advocate:
What if chip and jo mentioned the possibility of a tv show, and these guys balked at the idea and figured it'd never take off.. so chip offered to buy them out and they accepted. Now they're mad because their ex partners have now found success and they feel like they're entitled to some of that
Purely speculation though..
In the end, chip goes home a winner no matter what
Devil's Advocate:
What if chip and jo mentioned the possibility of a tv show, and these guys balked at the idea and figured it'd never take off.. so chip offered to buy them out and they accepted. Now they're mad because their ex partners have now found success and they feel like they're entitled to some of that
Purely speculation though..
In the end, chip goes home a winner no matter what
This post was edited on 4/28/17 at 11:05 am
Posted on 4/28/17 at 11:07 am to TheCaterpillar
quote:yes, yes it is - real estate is very cheap - O & G slow down.
Is Waco that fricking cheap?
Posted on 4/28/17 at 11:12 am to Mo Jeaux
I do not know if you could say that he did not know he would profit, you could obviously say he did not know how much however
I am assuming monetary compensation was part of the contract, also assuming it called for everything to be pushed through magnolia
I am assuming there was a base line profit to be made no matter the outcome of the show. Again all assumptions without the details
I do know somewhat of how the HGTV show process works. They will shadow potential talent for a while and that talent will most definitely know about it and be informed of it
I am assuming monetary compensation was part of the contract, also assuming it called for everything to be pushed through magnolia
I am assuming there was a base line profit to be made no matter the outcome of the show. Again all assumptions without the details
I do know somewhat of how the HGTV show process works. They will shadow potential talent for a while and that talent will most definitely know about it and be informed of it
Posted on 4/28/17 at 11:14 am to Mr. Hangover
This is really not hard...
1) They got a show.
2) They needed an entity to showcase and utilize for day to day operations so they could profit if the show took off.
3) They decided that entity would be Magnolia.
4) They did not tell the other owners any of the above.
5) They bought out other owners saying there were no assets.
6) The show did well.
7) Magnolia profited.
This is exactly the sort of scheme that fiduciary duties are intended to protect against.
1) They got a show.
2) They needed an entity to showcase and utilize for day to day operations so they could profit if the show took off.
3) They decided that entity would be Magnolia.
4) They did not tell the other owners any of the above.
5) They bought out other owners saying there were no assets.
6) The show did well.
7) Magnolia profited.
This is exactly the sort of scheme that fiduciary duties are intended to protect against.
Posted on 4/28/17 at 11:14 am to thelawnwranglers
quote:
I would be if he negotiated the deal on behalf and hid it
And you wouldnt be able to do a damn thing about it except for some frivolous lawsuit that will end up getting thrown out.
Posted on 4/28/17 at 11:15 am to Ex-Popcorn
quote:
quote:
If he willingly withheld material information in respect of the transaction, sure, it could be troublesome
Well, that's what has been alleged.
I think we all agree mostly
biggest non-argument ever
Posted on 4/28/17 at 11:15 am to ThePoo
quote:
I am assuming monetary compensation was part of the contract, also assuming it called for everything to be pushed through magnolia
Why would compensation necessarily be pushed through the realty company? They should have set up a separate entity to enter into the contract with HGTV. I don't know all of the details, just guessing.
Posted on 4/28/17 at 11:17 am to thelawnwranglers
quote:
I think we all agree mostly
biggest non-argument ever
Posted on 4/28/17 at 11:18 am to Ex-Popcorn
quote:Actually, I just read the complaint. They knew about the pilot, but claimed they had no reason to think it was going anywhere. Their allegation is that chip knew the a 1 hour show pilot was being aired and they didn't know that when they sold.
They allege no. I don't know, though.
They are also claiming that chip pressured this attorney and real estate broker into selling their shares is a company with zero assets in which they invested zero dollars.
Popular
Back to top


2




