Ask a Hipster — Advice you didn't know you needed
Big Screen — Movie commentary
Blurt — Music's inside track
Booze News — San Diego spirits
Classical Music — Immortal beauty
Classifieds — Free and easy
Close to Home — What it’s like on the street where you live
Cover Stories — Front-page features
Drinks All Around — Bartenders' drink recipes
Excerpts — Literary and spiritual excerpts
Feast! — Food & drink reviews
Feature Stories — Local news & stories
Fishing Report — What’s getting hooked from ship and shore
From the Archives — Spotlight on the past
Golden Dreams — Talk of the town
The Gonzo Report — Making the musical scene, or at least reporting from it
Letters — Our inbox
Movies@Home — Local movie buffs share favorites
Movie Reviews — Our critics' picks and pans
Musician Interviews — Up close with local artists
Neighborhood News from Stringers — Hyperlocal news
News Ticker — News & politics
Obermeyer — San Diego politics illustrated
Outdoors — Weekly changes in flora and fauna
Overheard in San Diego — Eavesdropping illustrated
Poetry — The old and the new
Reader Travel — Travel section built by travelers
Reading — The hunt for intellectuals
Roam-O-Rama — SoCal's best hiking/biking trails
San Diego Beer — Inside San Diego suds
SD on the QT — Almost factual news
Sheep and Goats — Places of worship
Special Issues — The best of
Street Style — San Diego streets have style
Surf Diego — Real stories from those braving the waves
Theater — On stage in San Diego this week
Tin Fork — Silver spoon alternative
Under the Radar — Matt Potter's undercover work
Unforgettable — Long-ago San Diego
Unreal Estate — San Diego's priciest pads
Your Week — Daily event picks
Major League Baseball Will Run Dodgers
refriedgringo, MLB actually did have control of the Rangers in a manner of speaking. Selig took the team out of the hands of the owner who had defaulted on bank loans and was out of compliance with baseball’s debt rule. Then mlb lent the team about $40 million and helped broker the deal with Nolan Ryan's group. And don't forget about mlb taking over the ownership the Expos about 10 yrs ago. They even put Frank Robinson in place as the manager.— April 21, 2011 12:35 a.m.
Major League Baseball Will Run Dodgers
surfpuppy619, It falls under the “best interest of baseball” clause from the league constitution, under Article II, Section 3 of the commissioner's powers: In the case of conduct by Major League Clubs, owners, officers, employees or players that is deemed by the Commissioner not to be in the best interests of Baseball, punitive action by the Commissioner for each offense may include any one or more of the following: (a) a reprimand; (b) deprivation of a Major League Club of representation in Major League Meetings; (c) suspension or removal of any owner, officer or employee of a Major League Club; (d) temporary or permanent ineligibility of a player; (e) a fine, not to exceed $2,000,000 in the case of a Major League Club, not to exceed $500,000 in the case of an owner, officer or employee, and in an amount consistent with the then-current Basic Agreement with the Major League Baseball Players Association, in the case of a player; (f) loss of the benefit of any or all of the Major League Rules, including but not limited to the denial or transfer of player selection rights provided by Major League Rules 4 and 5; and (g) such other actions as the Commissioner may deem appropriate. Selig has tremendous latitude under the best interest" clause. McCourt is saying he is going to file a lawsuit challenging baseball's decision to take control of the Dodgers, but he doesn't have a prayer of winning.— April 21, 2011 12:23 a.m.
Some Copley Retirees May -- Repeat, MAY -- Get Refunds
I just reread the Pepper Hamilton publication and I was accurate in my interpretation. Their publication is dated March of LAST year and the United States v. Quality Stores, Inc. (In re Quality Stores, Inc.) decision was renderd last February. This is where I am confused. In your story you say "This is based on a legal decision in Quality Stores vs. United States earlier this year." So I guess the questions I have would be have you actually read this letter or did you get your information on it second hand, when did Copley actually send out this letter and if it was just sent recently, why did they wait so long to send it out, did someone misinform you of the Quality Stores case decision or was that just a typo, was there any mention by Copley of any other pending court case regarding the same issue is this or did they even bother to mention that those employees who recived these early retirement packages might want to consult an attorney. Because this decision was over a year ago, if Copley only recently, as in the past few days, informed the recipients of the retirement packages, I would have to say that unless they notified them of another ongoing lawsuit that is prtinent, then the chances are slim and none theat any of these people had the opportunity to get a lawyer,file a lawsuit and then file for a protective claim with the IRS.— April 19, 2011 2:51 p.m.
Some Copley Retirees May -- Repeat, MAY -- Get Refunds
I think no shot, actually, Apparently, too little, too late, as it were.— April 19, 2011 1:18 p.m.
Some Copley Retirees May -- Repeat, MAY -- Get Refunds
Yeah, but you only have have 3 years from the date of your return or 2 years from the date you paid the tax, whichever is later, to file an amended tax return.Otherwise, you have to protective claim while a court case regarding the same issue is pending and I think it has to be a case in your district, but I'm not sure about that. So any UT emplyees who received payments that this case MAY apply to, are already out of luck. In order to preserve their claim, they would have had to file their protctive claims no later than April of 15th of 2010 and yesterday, respectively, unless they filed their return but haven't made a payment if taxes were due.— April 19, 2011 1:15 p.m.
Some Copley Retirees May -- Repeat, MAY -- Get Refunds
"That's from the Pepper Hamilton site" Yeah, I think pepperlaw.com was a dead giveaway.lol— April 19, 2011 1:01 p.m.
Gores Brothers Finalists in Bidding for Warner Music
Basically, EMI's main businesses are the music content and publishing divisions. They don't have a large share in content sales, but their biggest asset, their most lucritive property, is The Beatles catalog. After EMI and Apple Corps Ltd worked out their differences and licensed the other Apple to sell the catalog, well lets just say the coffers have gotten a little fuller. ITunes started selling The Beatles in mid Nov last year and by the end of the year, all 60 of the individual songs were in Itunes top 200 sold and all 17 albums were in the top 50 sold. In other words, there is still a lot of money to be made and whoever is partnered with Apple/Itunes has a leg up. But the problem is that Citi to sell the record label as a whole rather than break up its music and publishing divisions. Their publishing business is the weeker of the 2,but imagine owning the catalog of a group, who forty years after breaking up,sold 450,000 albums and 2 million songs worldwide in one week. That's over $10 million in 1 week. I think someoe will see $$$$ and thinks it's worth the price and if there happens to be 2 such someone's, well who knows. The allure of The Beatles can be pretty strong. Remember, in the mid 80's, Michael Jackson paid $47 million to buy ATV's publishing catalog,which contained the publishing rights to most of The Beatles songs; ATV had gained control of Northern Songs some years earlier. That was $47 million for just 50% of the royalties. And then when he needed to generate some cash in the mid 90's, he sold 1/2 of his share to Sony for almost $100 million.$100 million for 1/2 of something he paid $47 million for. A pretty good investment as it turns out. I was considering making a bid myself, but our bank account is just a few zeros short. HaHaHa!!— April 19, 2011 12:54 p.m.
Gores Brothers Finalists in Bidding for Warner Music
Not sure what you mean by that.— April 19, 2011 9:32 a.m.
Gores Brothers Finalists in Bidding for Warner Music
Several entities would like to own EMI Citigroup has had control of EMI since they took it back in February and have said they are oly interested in selling EMI as a whole; they have no interest in seperating content from publishing.However, I think it's safe to say Citi has no interest in holding on to it in the long term. Supposedly, there is also a $16 billion investment fund backed by the Abu Dhabi government that is interested in obtaining EMI. A future bidding war perhaps?— April 19, 2011 8:39 a.m.
Gores Brothers Finalists in Bidding for Warner Music
An article I read last nite in the NYT, datd April 10, indicated that the bid for WMG was issued by Platinum Equity.— April 19, 2011 8:22 a.m.