Tony Finau being sued for $16 million

[nsxguy]

6 minutes ago, QuigleyDU said:

 

He may be. I don't know. Everything I have ever seen has shown Tony to be a wonderful human being but who knows. We need more info before making harsh or quick judgements on either person. 

 

You've got some nerve trying to maintain objectivity in the face of all these assumptions !!! 

 

 

I say HANG HIM !!!    (Just don't know which one )

 

 

Edited September 28, 2020 by nsxguy

[tbowles411]

7 minutes ago, QuigleyDU said:

 

He may be. I don't know. Everything I have ever seen has shown Tony to be a wonderful human being but who knows. We need more info before making harsh or quick judgements on either person. 

True enough.  Like I said, I'm sure he did back him, but the more I think about it, it's smelling funnier and funnier.

[QuigleyDU]

3 minutes ago, nsxguy said:

 

You've got some nerve trying to maintain objectivity in the face of all these assumptions !!! 

 

 

I say HANG HIM !!!    (Just don't know which one )

 

 

As I have aged, I have moved a bit away from the ready, fire, aim, mentality. To something a bit more, wait a min, lets dig in here.. 

 

 

[tbowles411]

4 minutes ago, QuigleyDU said:

As I have aged, I have moved a bit away from the ready, fire, aim, mentality. To something a bit more, wait a min, lets dig in here.. 

 

 

My filter doesn't work as well as it used to...I heard breaking 50 tends to do that!  Now I tend to say things, and think, that if you don't like it I don't give a flying F of what you think.  Until my wife tells me something!  LOL

[Pepperturbo]

Contract or not, victim or not, doesn't matter.  IF "Molonai Hola" covered the experiences of Finau and Gipper over multiple years, its only right, Finau should repay the money to that person.  It's a character issue more than anything.   If true, just because there was no signed contract does NOT mean it shouldn't be repaid. 

Edited September 28, 2020 by Pepperturbo

[tbowles411]

2 minutes ago, Pepperturbo said:

Contract or not, victim or not, doesn't matter.  IF "Molonai Hola" covered the experiences of Finau and Gipper over multiple years, its only right, Finau should repay the money to that person.  It's a character issue more than anything.   Just because no contract was signed does NOT mean it shouldn't be repaid. 

I don't think most people are disputing that.  I think it's the dollar amount he's asking for.  Re-paid is one thing.  This is not repayment.

[Pepperturbo]

4 minutes ago, tbowles411 said:

I don't think most people are disputing that.  I think it's the dollar amount he's asking for.  Re-paid is one thing.  This is not repayment.

Given the amounts in the article and "Hola claims he was promised 20% of the Finaus’ future professional earnings."  The total amount is likely more than most people here are considering but less than 16M which is probably high for negotiating purposes.   It appears Finaus' haven't bothered to pay anything back, forcing Hola to legally react.  Something is amiss for sure. 

[nsxguy]

10 minutes ago, tbowles411 said:

I don't think most people are disputing that.  I think it's the dollar amount he's asking for.  Re-paid is one thing.  This is not repayment.

 

Depends. The article says "The suit asks for that amount ($600K), plus interest and for compensatory damages of “at least $16 million, plus interest,” which the suit claims represents approximately 20% of the two golfers’ career earnings to date. Hola claims he was promised 20% of the Finaus’ future professional earnings."

 

Let's see now. My calculator says that $16M is 20% of $80M, not $20M.

 

The Finau brothers have made a bit over $20M in "earnings" so there seems to be some discrepancy there (or a simple mistake ? )

 

Further I think the history between when they started earning (2007) and the present might be interesting. I mean surely Mr Hola didn't wake up recently and say to his bookkeeper "Hey, BTW, how's that Finau guy I staked doing ?" 🙃

[tbowles411]

1 minute ago, Pepperturbo said:

Given the amounts in the article and "Hola claims he was promised 20% of the Finaus’ future professional earnings."  The total amount is likely more than most people here are considering but less than 16M which is probably high for negotiating purposes.   It appears Finaus' haven't bothered to pay anything back, forcing Hola to legally react.  Something is amiss for sure. 

And that's why I posted that he's probably trying to get their attention with the crazy dollar amount.  TF probably thought that he never agreed to that, and that might actually save him if he went to court.  But if he would just make good with the initial investment and the other guy balked at it, then you have your answer.

 

[Kilo1545]

If this guy wants that much of Finau's money, he should have been a woman, married him, and handled this in divorce court.  😆

[DON SVO]

18 minutes ago, Pepperturbo said:

Given the amounts in the article and "Hola claims he was promised 20% of the Finaus’ future professional earnings."  The total amount is likely more than most people here are considering but less than 16M which is probably high for negotiating purposes.   It appears Finaus' haven't bothered to pay anything back, forcing Hola to legally react.  Something is amiss for sure. 

 

I'll go ahead and play Devil's Advocate here, since this is all supposition and 3rd party hearsay at this point... Tony Finau is 31 years of age. Gipper, his brother, is younger than him. The story from Hola states that the agreement was reached in order to move the brothers to Florida to work with Leadbetter. Can anyone find the date of when that happened? I know when they got staked in that big Las Vegas tournament for $50,000 a piece they were both still minors. Long story short, if they were minors at the time, Hola's lawsuit would exclude them both and be focused on the parents (who have been in the press repeatedly for not taking their kid's money and being very frugal and humble). If so, it smells like he waited until Tony had gotten somewhere that he felt he could leverage him with this suit instead of their (relatively speaking) broke parents.

[JDCON]

3 hours ago, Krt22 said:

Indeed, and even if he was aware, he was a minor at the time. If this person is really suing just TF and not his family members, well then good luck. Trying to collect on a 20+ year old debt  stemming from a verbal contract with a minor...lol

That’s just it... a verbal contract and possibly with a minor? Nobody in their right mind would think that would hold up to any scrutiny.

[Krt22]

43 minutes ago, DON SVO said:

 

I'll go ahead and play Devil's Advocate here, since this is all supposition and 3rd party hearsay at this point... Tony Finau is 31 years of age. Gipper, his brother, is younger than him. The story from Hola states that the agreement was reached in order to move the brothers to Florida to work with Leadbetter. Can anyone find the date of when that happened? I know when they got staked in that big Las Vegas tournament for $50,000 a piece they were both still minors. Long story short, if they were minors at the time, Hola's lawsuit would exclude them both and be focused on the parents (who have been in the press repeatedly for not taking their kid's money and being very frugal and humble). If so, it smells like he waited until Tony had gotten somewhere that he felt he could leverage him with this suit instead of their (relatively speaking) broke parents.

I was curious about that as well, since it has never really been talked about much before. Found this, they were both indeed minors at the time it seems, and the way it is written it seems like Callaway may have had some influence on it.

 

https://www.sltrib.com/sports/2018/04/03/boyd-summerhays-is-back-in-the-masters-this-time-as-the-swing-coach-for-tony-finau-and-yuxin-lin/

[Sean2]

1 hour ago, QuigleyDU said:

As I have aged, I have moved a bit away from the ready, fire, aim, mentality. To something a bit more, wait a min, lets dig in here.. 

 

 

Ready, fire, aim is becoming status quo...then those same people complain when the miss the target, lol. 

[aenemated]

20% of future earnings ... of a couple kids? LOL

 

This guy sounds like a grade A scumbag. 

[QuigleyDU]

1 minute ago, Sean2 said:

Ready, fire, aim is becoming status quo...then those same people complain when the miss the target, lol. 

 

 

It is a phrase I use quite regularly to describe things. 

[Krt22]

1 hour ago, Pepperturbo said:

Given the amounts in the article and "Hola claims he was promised 20% of the Finaus’ future professional earnings."  The total amount is likely more than most people here are considering but less than 16M which is probably high for negotiating purposes.   It appears Finaus' haven't bothered to pay anything back, forcing Hola to legally react.  Something is amiss for sure. 

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

[farmer]

There was a local girl here who married a kid who wanted to be a pro.  This was back in the late 70's.  Good player, played at OU, won some D1 tournaments but could not make it through Q school.  His FIL lined up 10 locals who fronted him 5k each to try the Euro tour.  His contract was that he would pay back the money out of his winnings each year, not in a lump sum at some future date.  Didn't matter, he made about $273.00 in some tournament in Sweden.

[J13]

42 minutes 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

 

 

You cannot under law have minors agree to forfeit future earnings when they become adults nor can his parents.  The plaintiff should be compensated for invested money and maybe some juice (maybe 25% on the investment).  If Finau already paid him back then he will take it to court.  If Finau hasn't then they will settle out of course for $750k-1M.

[MtlJeff]

4 hours ago, blueonblack said:

This feels "dirty" like Lebraun James getting HumVee's in high school kind of thing, doesn't it?

 

If i recall, Lebron got the Hummer due to his parents taking out a loan based on his future earnings . It was pretty well publicized that he was driving that (the fact that i remember it 20 years later LOL), so i am pretty sure it was all above board

 

[MtlJeff]

I don't think people should rush to judge either person here. Once money gets involved in things i have seen people act very strange, even amongst family members let alone others. 

 

The 16M as others have said is probably just a crazy inflammatory number to try to push for a settlement. 

 

If this guy did finance them as he claims with an agreement to be paid back, i hope that he does get compensated for that because that does kind of suck and many golfers rely on people like that early in their careers. 

 

BTW kind of funny how most responses are kind of like "F this guy". Is it because we presume he is already succesful and doesn't need the money? Or we immediately assume he is lying? Last i recall El Tucan didn't have a contract with Matt Kuchar either and people did everything short of put out a contract murder on Kuchar. If the victim doesn't fit the right profile than we don't care if he gets what he arguably deserves? Does that seem right? 

 

Or....this dude is lying and i hope he doesn't get anything. Like i said I'm not gonna rush to judge here because i'm sure more will come out

 

 

 

Edited September 28, 2020 by MtlJeff

[Sean2]

1 hour 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

Maybe he tried to get his money back in other ways before going the lawsuit route?

 

Not enough information to make an informed decision about either party's culpability. 

Edited September 28, 2020 by Sean2

[jimbonecrusher]

4 hours ago, blueonblack said:

This feels "dirty" like Lebraun James getting HumVee's in high school kind of thing, doesn't it?

Exactly.  Many "investors" support juvenile athletes in the hope that they blossom into professionals.

 

I would believe that the money was given to the parents to support the development of Tony and Gipper.  The "investor" was probably smart enough to know that he shouldn't be making a deal with a minor.  This is the same way that boosters whether high school boosters or college boosters "help" the parents of an aspiring athlete.

[Krt22]

2 minutes ago, MtlJeff said:

I don't think people should rush to judge either person here. Once money gets involved in things i have seen people act very strange, even amongst family members let alone others. 

 

The 16M as others have said is probably just a crazy inflammatory number to try to push for a settlement. 

 

If this guy did finance them as he claims with an agreement to be paid back, i hope that he does get compensated for that because that does kind of suck and many golfers rely on people like that early in their careers. 

 

BTW kind of funny how most responses are kind of like "F this guy". Is it because we presume he is already succesful and doesn't need the money? Last i recall El Tucan didn't have a contract with Matt Kuchar either and people did everything short of put out a contract murder on Kuchar. If the victim doesn't fit the right profile than we don't care if he gets what he arguably deserves? Does that seem right?

 

Or....this dude is lying and i hope he doesn't get anything. I'm not gonna rush to judge here

 

 

 

Let's be real here, if someone really has 600k to blow on financing junior golfers, they likely are not in need of the money, especially if they made a 600k collateral free loan.

 

Im also mainly interested in the actual legal aspect of it, less so the optics of the whole thing. From the sounds of it, the agreement itself was not only not legally binding, but simply was not legal at all. If he really wants to go on record and say the agreement was to finance the early career of a minor, on the premise that their future wages as an adult would be forfeited, well I hope they get absolutely nothing because that is shady as all hell. Im not sure how anyone could condone a highly predatory lending practice, meant to take advantage of those in need 

[MtlJeff]

10 minutes ago, Krt22 said:

Let's be real here, if someone really has 600k to blow on financing junior golfers, they likely are not in need of the money, especially if they made a 600k collateral free loan.

 

Im also mainly interested in the actual legal aspect of it, less so the optics of the whole thing. From the sounds of it, the agreement itself was not only not legally binding, but simply was not legal at all. If he really wants to go on record and say the agreement was to finance the early career of a minor, on the premise that their future wages as an adult would be forfeited, well I hope they get absolutely nothing because that is shady as all hell. Im not sure how anyone could condone a highly predatory lending practice, meant to take advantage of those in need 

 

I agree with you but i don't believe that just because someone has money, it's OK to take advantage of them either. We don't know that this guy is a Dbag (though he very well might be).

 

Or maybe the Finau parents went to him and asked for support and said they'd repay him if he helped...we don't really know anything here. Zach Johnson used private backers to help him early on and sold shares in himself, though he was an adult when he did this

 

I just find the psychology interesting. We immediately go to this financer guy being the loser. What if the Finaus took money from him and are now de-facto using this fact that it was an illegal deal to say they don't have to pay him back? I literally (and unfortunately) know someone who took money and used this same rationale for not paying the person who lent it to them back

 

All of this is hypothetical. I'm interested in seeing how it plays out but i'm not judging anyone right now

Edited September 28, 2020 by MtlJeff

[aenemated]

5 minutes ago, MtlJeff said:

 

I agree with you but i don't believe that just because someone has money, it's OK to take advantage of them either. We don't know that this guy is a Dbag (though he very well might be).

 

Or maybe the Finau parents went to him and asked for support and said they'd repay him if he helped...we don't really know anything here. Zach Johnson used private backers to help him early on and sold shares in himself, though he was an adult when he did this

 

I just find the psychology interesting. We immediately go to this financer guy being the loser. What if the Finaus took money from him and are now de-facto using this fact that it was an illegal deal to say they don't have to pay him back? I literally know someone who has done this to a person that trusted them and made a handshake deal

 

All of this is hypothetical. I'm interested in seeing how it plays out but i'm not judging anyone right now

 

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. 

 

 

[MtlJeff]

1 minute 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. 

 

 

 

If he truly wants 20% of future earnings forever than i agree he's a POS and that's like mob-level lending LOL

 

I'll just not make that assumption until i know it for sure. It may just be a legal tactic to get a settlement

 

If there's more info on this dude maybe i missed it. The article said this was in the early 90's. Was this guy a baller back then? Did he approach the Finau's , how did they know each other etc etc.

 

Look there's a chance this guy's a scumbag, i don't want to be seen as his defender here. I'm just saying let's not rush to assume things

[Fairway14]

15 minutes 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. 

 

 

 

How were Tony and his brother to receive golf technique instruction, develop their games, travel to play junior tournament golf etc... without someone loaning them money ?

[Ferguson]

Finau's attorney:

 

[Dr. Block]

48 minutes 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. 

 

 

Financial backing in exchange for a percentage of future earnings is a fairly common arrangement for aspiring professional golfers.  I know a few guys in that situation, and they are incredibly grateful for it.  It's actually pretty far from predatory lending in that the person extending the backing is doing so with no security and often never sees full repayment.  They do it because they can afford to, and because they want to see someone they believe in succeed 

Edited September 28, 2020 by Dr. Block