Jack Nicklaus Sued by the Nicklaus Companies. 6/6/22 Update: Norman Calls out "Hypocrite" Nicklaus

[Big Cat 3]

The true Jack ... what a creep 

[Nard_S]

So the current owner of Nicklaus "brand" is upset that Jack praised some Belgium golfers playing in Saudi  Arabia. GTFOOH.

[Chunked]

5 hours ago, ChipStrokes said:

are you intimately familiar with jack and the people who run the nicklaus company?  if not, we’re free to speculate as much as you are. 

 

complaints and lawsuits don’t materialize out of complete thin air. there’s no telling what’s true, but the fact that he’s being sued over these allegations means that there’s definitely some meat on these bones. 

 

yes, we’ll have to wait and see what comes out in the wash, but this isn’t a look good for old jack. seems like he’s a shady businessman who tried double dipping on his name and it looks an awful lot like he wanted to stuff 100M of oil money in his pockets, despite what he said publicly. 

 

id have LOVED to see the thoughts on LIV golf if dear old jack was spearheading the campaign. 

I’m not sure where you get the idea that complaints don’t come out of thin air? 

[Chunkitgood]

5 hours ago, ChipStrokes said:

there’s gotta be a lot of truth in 39 pages of complaints. 

 

the LIV stuff starts on page 21 for any of those interested. 

 

https://www.scribd.com/document/574980451/Nicklaus-Companies-LLC-v-Nicklaus-Companies-LLC-SUMMONS-COMPLAINT-1

Wait til get you get sued.

[ChipStrokes]

33 minutes ago, Chunkitgood said:

Wait til get you get sued.

i’m a landlord. i’ve been sued a few times. 

 

the complaints always stemmed from some kernel of truth. they weren’t complete fabrications. 

 

they’re usually trumped up and seeking damages way above what’s reasonable, but it’s not like someone sued me for falling down a staircase in my building and they were never on the property. 

 

im not saying nicklaus companies is going to win. more likely this gets settled quietly and goes away, like someone else said. i just have a hard time believing they’d bring forth a completely made up suit. 

Edited May 23, 2022 by ChipStrokes

[bobfoster]

18 hours ago, ThinkingPlus said:

Three sides to every story.  The only thing we know for sure is that the lawyers will make lots of money.

This ^^^

 

In spades. And very odd and ironic. Seems (if you step back) like the Nicklaus Companies suing Jack Nicklaus for damaging the brand will actually damage the brand far more than anything Jack would do. How weird is that? Funny thing, this will likely destroy the Nicklaus Companies. The optics of them aggressively going after an almost universally respected 82 year old man, who is one of the top two or three greatest to ever play the game, and that has made their money by using his name are truly horrendous. 

 

This is a nuisance suit (dozens filed every day in corporate America). They assume it will settle out of court (with a binding NDA attached to the settlement) - as the vast majority of them do. They know an old guy with few years left of earth isn't going to spend what precious time is left in some long, protracted legal battle. The real winners will be law firms.

 

Sometimes I think that we should just take a million acres of the Australian Outback (just a "hobby farm" to quote Crocodile Dundee), and build a huge electrified fence around it. Ship every lawyer in the world there, and let them spend their lives suing each other without bothering the rest of us.  

 

Human civilization itself might be better off.

Edited May 23, 2022 by bobfoster

[ThinkingPlus]

1 minute ago, bobfoster said:

This ^^^

 

In spades. And very odd and ironic. Seems (if you step back) like the Nicklaus Companies suing Jack Nicklaus for damaging the brand will actually damage the brand far more than anything Jack would do. How weird is that? Funny thing, this will likely destroy the Nicklaus Companies. The optics of Companies aggressively going after an 82 year old man, who is one of the top two or three greatest to ever play the game, and that has made their money by using his name are truly horrendous. 

 

This is a nuisance suit (dozens filed every day in corporate America). They assume it will settle out of court (with a binding NDA attached to the settlement) - as the vast majority of those dozens do. They know an old guy with few years left of earth isn't going to engage in some long, protracted legal battle. The real winners will be law firms.

 

Sometimes I think that we should just take a million acres of the Australian Outback (just a "hobby farm" to quote Crocodile Dundee), and build a huge electrified fence around it. Ship every lawyer in the world there, and let them spend their lives suing each other without bothering the rest of us.  

 

Human civilization itself might be better off.

Amen.  The worst year of my life was the one where I had 3 instances of speaking with a lawyer.  One of them was my uncle who is a genuinely nice guy although why he became a lawyer I'll never know.  Lawyers are societal parasites.

[bladehunter]

8 minutes ago, ThinkingPlus said:

Amen.  The worst year of my life was the one where I had 3 instances of speaking with a lawyer.  One of them was my uncle who is a genuinely nice guy although why he became a lawyer I'll never know.  Lawyers are societal parasites.

Yep.  Until you need one to defend against another one’s attack.  Then it’s a necessary evil. Lol.  
 

24 minutes ago, bobfoster said:

This ^^^

 

In spades. And very odd and ironic. Seems (if you step back) like the Nicklaus Companies suing Jack Nicklaus for damaging the brand will actually damage the brand far more than anything Jack would do. How weird is that? Funny thing, this will likely destroy the Nicklaus Companies. The optics of Companies aggressively going after an 82 year old man, who is one of the top two or three greatest to ever play the game, and that has made their money by using his name are truly horrendous. 

 

This is a nuisance suit (dozens filed every day in corporate America). They assume it will settle out of court (with a binding NDA attached to the settlement) - as the vast majority of those dozens do. They know an old guy with few years left of earth isn't going to engage in some long, protracted legal battle. The real winners will be law firms.

 

Sometimes I think that we should just take a million acres of the Australian Outback (just a "hobby farm" to quote Crocodile Dundee), and build a huge electrified fence around it. Ship every lawyer in the world there, and let them spend their lives suing each other without bothering the rest of us.  

 

Human civilization itself might be better off.

True. But that’s only half the issue. You’d have to round up all the ones that finance the litigation too.  They’re the really dumb ones. 
 

And I agree. This suit is absolutely suicidal for the firm itself.  They’ll be labeled as lepers in no time flat. 

[Crn50]

1 hour ago, ChipStrokes said:

i’m a landlord. i’ve been sued a few times. 

 

the complaints always stemmed from some kernel of truth. they weren’t complete fabrications. 

 

they’re usually trumped up and seeking damages way above what’s reasonable, but it’s not like someone sued me for falling down a staircase in my building and they were never on the property. 

 

im not saying nicklaus companies is going to win. more likely this gets settled quietly and goes away, like someone else said. i just have a hard time believing they’d bring forth a completely made up suit. 

Problem is we can never know what the motivation is for this action, maybe just a power play within the Nicklaus companies. I'm leaning towards Jack being offered and seriously considering hundreds of millions of Dollars, he did start the current PGA Tour when PGA America caused a few problems back in 1968-ish. I'm thinking Jack wanted to do it all again, well for a $100,000,000,000 rewardI  sure would...

[hammersia]

I've read the story, and I've no idea what's going on. 

 

He sold his company, what services is he supposed to be providing to them?

 

Can anyone summarise?

[grm24]

7 minutes ago, hammersia said:

I've read the story, and I've no idea what's going on. 

 

He sold his company, what services is he supposed to be providing to them?

 

Can anyone summarise?

https://golfweek.usatoday.com/2022/05/22/report-jack-nicklaus-sued-nicklaus-companies/

 

 

[Crn50]

58 minutes ago, hammersia said:

I've read the story, and I've no idea what's going on. 

 

He sold his company, what services is he supposed to be providing to them?

 

Can anyone summarise?

I'd guess Speaking engagements at Fancy $10k per head dinners, showing his face at Tournaments pressing the flesh etc etc. I'd bet he can't have an opinion of his own because he sold his options to the Nicklaus Company for $$$Billions...

[hammersia]

24 minutes ago, Crn50 said:

I'd guess Speaking engagements at Fancy $10k per head dinners, showing his face at Tournaments pressing the flesh etc etc. I'd bet he can't have an opinion of his own because he sold his options to the Nicklaus Company for $$$Billions...

Seems a bit weird you would pay a 70 year old (at the time) loads of money for personal services work, not knowing for how long you would get those services?

[JungleJimbo]

34 minutes ago, Crn50 said:

I'd guess Speaking engagements at Fancy $10k per head dinners, showing his face at Tournaments pressing the flesh etc etc. I'd bet he can't have an opinion of his own because he sold his options to the Nicklaus Company for $$$Billions...

 

@Crn50: Unlikely to be "$$$Billions"? (but your main point is noted).
 

Extract/Quote: 

https://www.si.com/golf/news/jack-nicklaus-is-being-sued-by-the-nicklaus-companies

 

(same $ quantum also mentioned here: https://golfweek.usatoday.com/2022/05/22/report-jack-nicklaus-sued-nicklaus-companies/ )
 

Quote

"According to the complaint, Nicklaus was paid $145 million in 2007 to provide exclusive services and property to the Nicklaus Companies, which over time he has failed to live up to or has worked against the company directly."

 

Edited May 23, 2022 by JungleJimbo

[JohnnyCashForever]

IMO, this topic belongs on Page 6. 

[hammersia]

9 minutes ago, JohnnyCashForever said:

IMO, this topic belongs on Page 6. 

Thank you for that invaluable contribution

[deepred]

Jacks mistake was doing business with Howard Milstein. Do some research on what sort of business person he is. He has spent a fair amount of his life in courtrooms. Milstein was Dan Snyder’s original partner buying the Redskins but the NFL wanted nothing to do with him.

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/1999/02/15/milstein-always-plays-to-win/24a1b85c-c0da-419a-9eb0-d2c73ec7d131/

 

Edited May 23, 2022 by deepred
Added link

[Scotty1140]

51 minutes ago, JohnnyCashForever said:

IMO, this topic belongs on Page 6. 

 Says the guy who replied, thus bumping it to the top of page 1 😆

 

 

Edited May 23, 2022 by Scotty1140

[bscinstnct]

Is it the case that Jack gave up significant control of his own rights to do deals as “Jack Nicklaus” for the sum of $145MM?

 

I mean, that’s a ton of dough but I would have imagined Jack was in a position to not have to sell his rights in any way whatsoever/any amount of money, to do whatever he wants in his own name. 

Edited May 23, 2022 by bscinstnct

[Soloman1]

Call me old fashioned, but I think I’ll wait and see.

 

Milstein is a banker who makes lawyers look like saints. He seems to be using the same playbook from being sued himself for $145 million for the same thing a few years ago.

[iBanesto]

Nicklaus will be fine... just ask Claus von Bulow.

 

[me05501]

Selling the rights to your name is tricky, especially if you don't completely withdraw from the kinds of business dealings that are being done under your name by the people who paid you handsomely to use it. 

 

I assume the intent of the contract was for the new company to own the rights to the name "Jack Nicklaus" in the promotion of golf-related business activity. 

 

Jack has a big enough ego to start to feel the way a lot of people in the same situation feel: "by god, that's my birth name, it's who I am, and I built whatever value it has today so I'll do what I want to do." But the law says "not so fast, here are the contracts you signed that say you won't do that."

 

I agree with those who say it's for a judge or jury to decipher how the laws actually apply to each of these accusations, but it looks pretty clear that Jack has forgotten or ignored what he sold when he entered into the deal. Whether or not the specifics of his actions violate the specifics of the contract will be decided in the appropriate venue. 

[me05501]

Also, though I'm no legal expert I've always been told that rights agreements like the ones in question here are only as strong as your willingness to defend them. 

 

An easy example is squatter's rights or whatever it's legally termed. If your fence is 1' over your neighbor's property line, and it stays that way for a certain number of years and you maintain the property as if it was your own you can exercise a quitclaim deed seizing legal ownership of that small plot inside your fence because your neighbor failed to defend their property line. 

 

The filing says these issues have been ongoing and they have already presented Jack with a cease and desist letter. They say he's been told repeatedly and has given assurances that he won't continue to engage in the behavior, but hasn't changed course. 

 

The plaintiff is asserting their rights and defending their intellectual property so they don't lose it. It's possible that if they failed to do so Jack could eventually argue that their failure to enforce the contract was eventually understood as permission, or that they didn't intend to do so. 

[tiderider]

15 hours ago, Crn50 said:

Well dear old Jack has history setting up NEW tours right, "PGA America" transitions into "PGA Tour" ,,, but Jack can as you suggest start a New tour. But a non-american can not, dear old Jack sounds like a greedy man getting hundreds of millions of Dollars from left right and centre, fyi I would be doing the same can never have too much money right ????? Funny as yeah

the pgatour wasn't exactly a 'new' tour ... they decided that the wing of the pga of america that was already running the tournaments should have its own board/rules/etc ... the series of tournaments already existed ... not disagreeing with any statement about jack's intentions, cause he's not above being greedy af ... 

[me05501]

The complaint is pretty easy to read and understand if you're curious about the fact set. 

 

The video game deal and the promotion of the financial advisory firm suggest a pattern: 

• An organization approaches Jack or his family office directly to express interest in a project or endorsement.
• Jack tries to engage them directly for profit as best he can without violating his agreement with Nicklaus Companies. 
• The deal eventually bogs down as the suitor realizes that Jack can't give them what they actually want and need to make the deal worthwhile. 
• The suitor eventually engages Nicklaus Companies to get Jack's name, image and likeness, but by that time the deal is jacked up because Jack and fam were trying to keep it for themselves. 

 

[Titleist99]

The shocker for me was the fact that Jack sold his company for $145M back in 2007. That price seems a little low to me but I'm not privy to all the details...

 

If it's not settled quietly, then we'll get to see if Jack has any other business dealings.

 

I seriously doubt it but we'll see......

[Ferguson]

 

 

 

 

 

[me05501]

19 minutes ago, Titleist99 said:

The shocker for me was the fact that Jack sold his company for $145M back in 2007. That price seems a little low to me but I'm not privy to all the details...

 

If it's not settled quietly, then we'll get to see if Jack has any other business dealings.

 

I seriously doubt it but we'll see......

 

It's hard to comprehend how out-of-whack today's deals are compared to what's normal. I'm sure that was a blockbuster deal at the time, but it's been fifteen years. 

[bscinstnct]

20 minutes ago, Titleist99 said:

The shocker for me was the fact that Jack sold his company for $145M back in 2007. That price seems a little low to me but I'm not privy to all the details...

 

If it's not settled quietly, then we'll get to see if Jack has any other business dealings.

 

I seriously doubt it but we'll see......

 

Maybe Jack be like,

 

Hmmmm, what’s this FanDuel thingy do?

 

🤣

[capking]

It’s kind of Ironic the company is suing him for allegedly ruining his brand and allegedly violating their contract but no one really knew about it until they filed a lawsuit. 

Edited May 23, 2022 by capking
Typo