4 ms·

I’ve worked with the SEC on these matters, where do you get your information? Here is the Packers 2012 Public Offering Document: https://shareholder.broadridge

I’ve worked with the SEC on these matters, where do you get your information? Here is the Packers 2012 Public Offering Document: https://shareholder.broadridge.com/pdf/gbp/offering_document_with_canadian_wrap.pdf https://shareholder.broadridge.com/pdf/gbp/offering_document... see page 7 for the voting rights > On each matter submitted to a vote of the shareholders of the Corporation, the holders of outstanding shares of Common Stock are entitled to one vote per share. Among other things, shareholders vote annually to elect members of the Corporation’s Board of Directors. In terms of the amount the public offering document includes the price $250 per stock and the range 250,000-888,000 shares. These offerings historically sell out in minutes. I could pull the most recent SEC no action letter to confirm the amounts sold, but I don’t think it’s necessary at this point.

VWWHFSfQ 5y ago
I'm well aware of what this is and your description of it is quite overblown.
- throwawaycities 5y ago
  You went from calling everything I said “completely false” and going off on how there are no voting rights, to admitting you are fully aware of the Packers Public Offering Document but that my description is “overblown”. The public offering document speaks for itself and I quoted it, so what’s overblown about the description? If you think it’s fraudulent launch your complaint with the SEC instead of arguing on HN about it and prove your intellectual superiority.
- fivea 5y ago
  > I'm well aware of what this is and your description of it is quite overblown. Your comments could have some credibility if you provided any information or made any point. Unfortunately you're instead saying nothing and just adding noise to an otherwise interesting discussion.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
greenbaythrow 5y ago
While you’re mostly right on the stock structure, you’re both (a) overstating the capital raised in the offerings by a significant amount and (b) overstating that the team “has no owner”. The team has an owner. It’s Green Bay Packers, Inc., represented by an elected president. The ownership structure is tolerated by the NFL because they’re quite old school but it will never be repeated. If you work with the SEC on the governance of Green Bay Packers securities, it’s alarming how loose you are with facts. I suspect “work with the SEC” boils down to got coffee for your lawyer while you were in the room, because you’re saying some plainly false things that even Wikipedia, that bastion of truth, quickly proves wrong. Source: Shareholder.
- throwawaycities 5y ago
  Green Bay Packers, Inc. has no owners. Every other team is owned through a business organization, but no one refers to those organizations as the owner, they refer to the private individual billionaires (ie no one says the Kraft Group is the owner of the Patriots, they refer to Robert Kraft as the owner. Or Mark Cuban is the owner of the Dallas Mavericks). No one would argue in good faith they are not the owners. Your personal attacks are sad, FYI I am a lawyer.
  - greenbaythrow 5y ago
    So what entity owns the intellectual property associated with the team, like the uniform design? What entity countersigns a player’s contract? Who pays the Internet bill at the Packers head office? “The commonwealth of Green Bay represented by its quarter million shareholders?” There’s a board. And an entity. It’s a regular public company. It’s not like the hippies got together and founded the world’s most lax corporate governance in Green Bay, Wisconsin. It’s a corporation. Probably a C, but I’m too lazy to look. Come on, man. They have broadcast rights and multi-million dollar contracts. That’s simply not handled by a cooperative community water board with a treasurer. Yes, they’re publicly owned. But they’re owned. Formally, you know who the owners of a corporation are, and you know just as well as I do that the answer is not “nobody”. You’re turning linguistic semantics into legal concepts, your esquireness, and leaning into the ambiguity of the word “owner”. And you’re really laying on this “I can’t possibly be wrong on a forum full of Node.js hackers” schtick you’re doing when challenged on any point. It’s okay to be wrong. Happens to all of us. (Hint: you’re projecting the personal attack. Hope you don’t argue trial with that inability to read your counterparty.)

VWWHFSfQ 5y ago

I'm well aware of what this is and your description of it is quite overblown.

throwawaycities 5y ago
You went from calling everything I said “completely false” and going off on how there are no voting rights, to admitting you are fully aware of the Packers Public Offering Document but that my description is “overblown”. The public offering document speaks for itself and I quoted it, so what’s overblown about the description? If you think it’s fraudulent launch your complaint with the SEC instead of arguing on HN about it and prove your intellectual superiority.
fivea 5y ago
> I'm well aware of what this is and your description of it is quite overblown. Your comments could have some credibility if you provided any information or made any point. Unfortunately you're instead saying nothing and just adding noise to an otherwise interesting discussion.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

greenbaythrow 5y ago

While you’re mostly right on the stock structure, you’re both (a) overstating the capital raised in the offerings by a significant amount and (b) overstating that the team “has no owner”. The team has an owner. It’s Green Bay Packers, Inc., represented by an elected president. The ownership structure is tolerated by the NFL because they’re quite old school but it will never be repeated. If you work with the SEC on the governance of Green Bay Packers securities, it’s alarming how loose you are with facts. I suspect “work with the SEC” boils down to got coffee for your lawyer while you were in the room, because you’re saying some plainly false things that even Wikipedia, that bastion of truth, quickly proves wrong. Source: Shareholder.

throwawaycities 5y ago
Green Bay Packers, Inc. has no owners. Every other team is owned through a business organization, but no one refers to those organizations as the owner, they refer to the private individual billionaires (ie no one says the Kraft Group is the owner of the Patriots, they refer to Robert Kraft as the owner. Or Mark Cuban is the owner of the Dallas Mavericks). No one would argue in good faith they are not the owners. Your personal attacks are sad, FYI I am a lawyer.
- greenbaythrow 5y ago
  So what entity owns the intellectual property associated with the team, like the uniform design? What entity countersigns a player’s contract? Who pays the Internet bill at the Packers head office? “The commonwealth of Green Bay represented by its quarter million shareholders?” There’s a board. And an entity. It’s a regular public company. It’s not like the hippies got together and founded the world’s most lax corporate governance in Green Bay, Wisconsin. It’s a corporation. Probably a C, but I’m too lazy to look. Come on, man. They have broadcast rights and multi-million dollar contracts. That’s simply not handled by a cooperative community water board with a treasurer. Yes, they’re publicly owned. But they’re owned. Formally, you know who the owners of a corporation are, and you know just as well as I do that the answer is not “nobody”. You’re turning linguistic semantics into legal concepts, your esquireness, and leaning into the ambiguity of the word “owner”. And you’re really laying on this “I can’t possibly be wrong on a forum full of Node.js hackers” schtick you’re doing when challenged on any point. It’s okay to be wrong. Happens to all of us. (Hint: you’re projecting the personal attack. Hope you don’t argue trial with that inability to read your counterparty.)