Tony Finau being sued for $16 million

[bscinstnct]

11 minutes ago, Krt22 said:

Not really, Im guessing TF legal team will ask for the whole thing to be dismissed because it's well outside the statute of limitations for personal debt. 

 

I think the correct term is “statue” of limitations ; )

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Krt22]

14 minutes ago, bscinstnct said:

 

I think the correct term is “statue” of limitations ; )

 

 

 

 

 

 

[MtlJeff]

19 minutes ago, aenemated said:

 

You don't seriously believe it was because this guy - a "defense contract consultant" - wanted to see some kids succeed? Gimme a break, man. This guy is a trashbag exploiting a poor family with talented kids for his own personal gain and the exorbitant amount he's looking for in the lawsuit proves this. 

 

It never ceases to amaze me the lengths people will go to defend the exploitation of the poor by the rich. And now that Tony has a few bucks, some equally trashbag lawyer is trying to help him take it. 

 

Kind of hard to tell who the poor and the rich are here, or who took advantage of who until we know more. I am guessing the Finau's are worth more than the plaintiff currently. If there WAS a deal (which there may not have been) , than who is exploiting who in the present tense?

 

As I asked earlier in the thread,  if someone has money, is it OK to exploit them? 

 

And if the answer is yes, than wait,  shouldn't it be OK to now exploit Tony Finau? He is an evil millionaire now himself

[Dr. Block]

1 hour ago, aenemated said:

 

You don't seriously believe it was because this guy - a "defense contract consultant" - wanted to see some kids succeed? Gimme a break, man. This guy is a trashbag exploiting a poor family with talented kids for his own personal gain and the exorbitant amount he's looking for in the lawsuit proves this. 

 

It never ceases to amaze me the lengths people will go to defend the exploitation of the poor by the rich. And now that Tony has a few bucks, some equally trashbag lawyer is trying to help him take it. 

I’m simply sharing my perspective as someone with first hand knowledge of these arrangements as they can exist. 
 

Without all the information, I don’t believe anything at this point.  I’m not defending or advocating for anyone or anything.

 

Go pour yourself a drink and calm down. 

Edited September 29, 2020 by Dr. Block

[MtlJeff]

31 minutes ago, bscinstnct said:

 

I think the correct term is “statue” of limitations ; )

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Bsc....it's a write-off for them

[MtlJeff]

2 minutes ago, aenemated said:

 

When the deal was entered, the Finaus were unquestionably poor. This is a big part of Tony's story. 

 

As a big nerd, I did some scouring on the plaintiff and dude's just another rich scumbag looking for another dollar. He sure as s*** didn't "invest" in Tony and his brother out of the kindness of his heart. If that were the case, it'd been a gift and not a transaction leveraging the future of children. 

 

Everything about this story stinks and is, in a way, super creepy. 

 

My thoughts are not based out of demonizing "millionaires." I mean ... that'd be pretty hypocritical on my part. What I'm demonizing is a*******. And this guy is surely one. 

 

Maybe you are right , it is certainly possible. I'm interested in seeing more details come out. If that is the case than I hope Tony comes out unscathed 

[ATLgopher]

4 hours ago, aenemated said:

 

Here's my issue.

 

The Finaus were a poor family. This scumbag rolls up taking advantage of talented kids by dangling "financing" in front of a poor family and trying to roll them for 20% of future earnings. 

 

That's basically predatory lending. And there are no bigger scumbags than predator lenders. 

 

 

Without that “greedy” person the family might still be in need today

 

that of course is pure speculation like every other comment here

[nsxguy]

23 minutes ago, MtlJeff said:

 

Bsc....it's a write-off for them

 

[Dog Lover]

11 hours ago, MillerLowLife said:

https://www.golfchannel.com/news/report-tony-finau-sued-16-million-former-financial-backer

 

“

PGA Tour veteran Tony Finau is being sued for more than $16 million by a former business associate who helped cover expenses during the early part of his pro career.

According to a Deseret News report, the suit was filed by 55-year-old Molonai Hola, who owns Icon Sports and got to know the Finau family in the early 90s when Finau, now 31, was still in grade school. Hola reportedly "began financing expenses" for both Tony and his younger brother, Gipper, which included mortgage payments, medical insurance, a new car and living expenses "for approximately a year" while the family moved to Florida to allow the brothers to take lessons from David Leadbetter. According to the lawsuit, filed in district court, those expenses totaled more than $592,000 over several years.

Hola claims he had an agreement with the family to be paid back but has yet to be compensated. Additionally, he claims to have been promised 20 percent of future professional earnings for both Tony and Gipper, leading to the suit's claim of "at least $16 million" to recoup the money Hola paid, plus interest and compensatory damages.

Finau has made more than $20.2 million in his career across the Korn Ferry and PGA Tour, and while he turned pro in 2007 at age 17 the vast majority of those earnings have come since he reached the PGA Tour in 2015. Finau's lone Tour win came in 2016 and he has made at least $2.9 million in on-course earnings for each of the last four seasons. Ranked No. 14 in the world, Finau finished T-8 at last week's U.S. Open.

"We are aware of the matter and have the utmost faith in the legal process," Finau's agent, Chris Armstrong, reportedly said in a statement. "We will not be making further comment at this time."

 

 

 

Being promised 20% seems like a bit of a stretch. 

Finau is represented by Wasserman who I believe was named in the suit.  Wasserman is top 3 talent agency in the sports world and has many big time music and creative talent clients as well. Good luck with that......

Edited September 29, 2020 by Dog Lover

[bscinstnct]

10 minutes ago, nsxguy said:

 

 

 

[PrettyGood]

13 hours ago, Krt22 said:

still not valid if one party is a minor. 

 

 

 

Yah, from memory, there is a presumption against contracts entered into by minors.

 

But there are some exceptions with contracts for benefit or necessities, though. 

[extrastiff]

20 hours ago, J13 said:

 

 

Those days are long gone.  Look at the state of affairs in our country lol.  Parents can't legally sign away their childs future earnings.  Doesn't work that way and it's highly illegal and even with a contract wouldn't hold up in the court.

Those days were only ever around for a certain demographic anyways.. some handshake deals left certain people only with itchy blankets and ....well you know the rest. 

 

hopefully finau and this guy settle up without it turning into a pr mess for all involved 

Edited September 29, 2020 by extrastiff

[nsxguy]

14 hours ago, Krt22 said:

I did happen to stay at a Holiday in Express last night. That is the nice part of the law, it can all be researched and read if you are bored enough

 

2 hours ago, PrettyGood said:

 

Yah, from memory, there is a presumption against contracts entered into by minors.

 

But there are some exceptions with contracts for benefit or necessities, though. 

 

Pun intended but pretty good. 👍

 

 

Just to keep all the assumptions and speculation going,,,,,, you don't have to be all that bored to find this - https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/lack-capacity-to-contract-32647.html

 

Now *I* am certainly not a lawyer and I have NO idea how valid or not this site is but "we" might particularly want to note the example given about "Sean".

 

 

[BlackDiamondPar5]

When I hear about the guy going after Tony, I think of this Fat Slob... 

 

[Krt22]

1 hour ago, nsxguy said:

 

 

Pun intended but pretty good. 👍

 

 

Just to keep all the assumptions and speculation going,,,,,, you don't have to be all that bored to find this - https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/lack-capacity-to-contract-32647.html

 

Now *I* am certainly not a lawyer and I have NO idea how valid or not this site is but "we" might particularly want to note the example given about "Sean".

 

 

Not quite the same scenario, which is important when it comes down to these things. Valid contracts can exist for minors, but they need to be formal, and in most states approved by a court. If 15+ year verbal contracts with minors were enforceable, we'd see much more lawsuits of this variety. 

[LeoLeo99]

It's a big risk lending someone a half million that they only need to pay back if the recipient strike it rich.  As a lender, you need a big vig to make that worthwhile.  And after watching 90 Day Fiance, the Samoans have a different attitude towards money which may or may not be a part of this.  

 

I've watched enough Judge Wapner to know that if there is a meeting of the minds, there is a contract whether or not it's in writing.  

 

 

[nsxguy]

15 minutes ago, Krt22 said:

Not quite the same scenario, which is important when it comes down to these things. Valid contracts can exist for minors, but they need to be formal, and in most states approved by a court. If 15+ year verbal contracts with minors were enforceable, we'd see much more lawsuits of this variety. 

 

Forgive me if I missed it, or forgot it, but has the contract, in this case, been established as verbal or written ?

 

Or is that just one more thing we're all(?) speculating on ?

[Pepperturbo]

21 hours ago, Krt22 said:

You don't find it odd that he waited so long to "legally" act? And do you really think an adult has legal grounds to garnish the future wages of a minor, once they become an adult? 

 

I'd venture to say this guy has already been paid back in full and now he's just being greedy and trying to capitalize on TFs fame and fortune to extort additional funds, thinking his early contributions "made" TF into who he is today

 

Let me remind you - I am CEO of a North American company that provides broad HR services to Fortune 1000 on three continents, and "yes".  We've seen legal grounds put in place to garnish future wages of people that lost a court case.  I suspect he waited till both were of age.  I won't venture any other guesses because we don't have all the facts. 

[ckay]

A lot of assumptions in this thread, including the citing of 90 Day Fiancee as a source for Samoan culture and finances.  Great job WRX.

[ClarkGrswld4]

As is usually the case, there are two sides to each story and I'm sure the truth falls somewhere in the middle.

[blueonblack]

1 hour ago, Pepperturbo said:

 

Let me remind you - I am CEO of a North American company that provides broad HR services to Fortune 1000 on three continents, and "yes".  We've seen legal grounds put in place to garnish future wages of people that lost a court case.  I suspect he waited till both were of age.  I won't venture any other guesses because we don't have all the facts. 

May I ask: have you seen it where someone made a deal with minors and/or their parents and it held up, though? I think that is the only scenario where this guy's case gets case law traction. If there were some binding deal with of age persons, then... all bets off. Would you say?

[BlackDiamondPar5]

Giving something of value to a minor reminds me of this... No one paid for those either. 

[aenemated]

22 hours ago, nsxguy said:

 

Great post.

 

Of course it's common !!!

 

Many business startups rely on venture capital to get going. And in turn the get a percentage.

 

Venture capitalists invest money and expect to see large percentage returns because so FEW of them ever generate ANY returns/profits. It is a very risky business.

 

"Predatory lending" ? Good grief.

 

 

 

 

 

I'm a founder of a company that got started with seed funding. 

 

And there's absolutely no universe where I'd have given up a 20% stake for a measly half a mil. Not even freakin close. 

[BlackDiamondPar5]

6 minutes ago, aenemated said:

 

I'm a founder of a company that got started with seed funding. 

 

And there's absolutely no universe where I'd have given up a 20% stake for a measly half a mil. Not even freakin close. 

Shark Tank 

[MtlJeff]

5 minutes ago, BlackDiamondPar5 said:

Shark Tank 

 

haha that's what i said!!!

 

BTW many of those deals are fake, which you probably know. I'm in the tech space and know some companies that were on that show. The "deals" often are backed out of and many of the updates are also fake when they talk about sales the companies are doing. 

 

That being said i do own the Fizzics beer dispenser, which was on that show, and is a real thing!

 

[dlygrisse]

On 9/28/2020 at 4:17 PM, aenemated said:

 

Here's my issue.

 

The Finaus were a poor family. This scumbag rolls up taking advantage of talented kids by dangling "financing" in front of a poor family and trying to roll them for 20% of future earnings. 

 

That's basically predatory lending. And there are no bigger scumbags than predator lenders. 

 

 

I will disagree.  How many kids have talent and it never pays off? In this case it was 50%, how much has Gipper earned in his career?  I think this guy knew he had at best a 10% chance of one of these guy making it big.  
 

20% isn’t outrageous in this case, although it should probably be capped at so many years or a dollar ceiling. 
 

I mean seriously, pay the guy his money back with some interest. Should have happened years ago. 

[Sean2]

5 hours ago, Pepperturbo said:

 

Let me remind you - I am CEO of a North American company that provides broad HR services to Fortune 1000 on three continents, and "yes".  We've seen legal grounds put in place to garnish future wages of people that lost a court case.  I suspect he waited till both were of age.  I won't venture any other guesses because we don't have all the facts. 

I made that point earlier. We don't know nearly enough to decide who is in the right and who is in the wrong. 

[GreatStrike]

[iBanesto]

On 9/29/2020 at 12:19 AM, 1s1k said:

Good luck gold digger without a signed contract.  

 

Probably has no paper trail or records of any payments made to Finau as well.

[bscinstnct]

2 hours ago, aenemated said:

 

I'm a founder of a company that got started with seed funding. 

 

And there's absolutely no universe where I'd have given up a 20% stake for a measly half a mil. Not even freakin close. 

 

Yeah but your angels wouldn’t have done the “typical” 15% for a million if your product did nothing for 15 years and it’s chance of success was 1 in 50,000, right?