04-30-2014, 09:53 AM
Not all of the tape has been released; just the 5 minute piece initially distributed to TMZ and then a 15 minute piece released to Deadspin.
This is straight outta the Oksana playbook -- release pieces hoping to get what she wants from him -- release more if she doesn't, drop it if she does.
That's assuming V. released the tapes (through someone else; she wouldn't have done it herself) and they weren't say part of what a PI got from spying on Sterling on behalf of his wife. I think V. released them, but all involved here are self-centered greedy nutbags, so who knows?
If I were Rochelle Sterling and I really wanted the Clippers team to stay in the family and wasn't trying to publicly humiliate my husband, I'd be kicking myself in the ass right now.
Filing suit against the mistress suggesting that Donald Sterling isn't a shrewd enough businessman to make his own decisions on how to spend his money and going public to try and get back property that amounts to about $2 million? That was either a very stupid vindictive move by Mrs. Sterling or a brilliant power play to bring him to his knees. If Rochelle really just wanted the money back and to punish V. for milking her husband, colossal fail and backfire. Sterling's fine was more than that. And, if he's forced to sell rather than leave the team to his family as inheritance, he'll pay somewhere in the neighborhood of $300 million in capital gain taxes.
Anyway, this is the article that I've been waiting for -- written by a sports and entertainment attorney. It covers the contractual angles of the NBA's action against Sterling, the financial impacts, the obstacles that might prevent "forced sell", etc.. Good piece for those interested in the business and legal side of things:
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/nba/new...etime-ban/
This is straight outta the Oksana playbook -- release pieces hoping to get what she wants from him -- release more if she doesn't, drop it if she does.
That's assuming V. released the tapes (through someone else; she wouldn't have done it herself) and they weren't say part of what a PI got from spying on Sterling on behalf of his wife. I think V. released them, but all involved here are self-centered greedy nutbags, so who knows?
If I were Rochelle Sterling and I really wanted the Clippers team to stay in the family and wasn't trying to publicly humiliate my husband, I'd be kicking myself in the ass right now.
Filing suit against the mistress suggesting that Donald Sterling isn't a shrewd enough businessman to make his own decisions on how to spend his money and going public to try and get back property that amounts to about $2 million? That was either a very stupid vindictive move by Mrs. Sterling or a brilliant power play to bring him to his knees. If Rochelle really just wanted the money back and to punish V. for milking her husband, colossal fail and backfire. Sterling's fine was more than that. And, if he's forced to sell rather than leave the team to his family as inheritance, he'll pay somewhere in the neighborhood of $300 million in capital gain taxes.
Anyway, this is the article that I've been waiting for -- written by a sports and entertainment attorney. It covers the contractual angles of the NBA's action against Sterling, the financial impacts, the obstacles that might prevent "forced sell", etc.. Good piece for those interested in the business and legal side of things:
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/nba/new...etime-ban/