More news of the recent and rather bizarre operation of the Dodgers continues to bleed out of a Los Angeles courtroom this week as Frank and Jamie McCourt wrangle over a divorce settlement.

(A World Series ring will do that)

Bill Shaikin and E. Scott Reckard of the LOS ANGELES TIMES report today that in a deposition for the couple’s legal divorce proceeding, Frank McCourt revealed that last year he solicited $25 million in cash from the founder of a company “best known for marketing the Proactiv acne treatment.”

McCourt said that in exchange for the money from Guthy-Renker founder Bill Guthy, McCourt offered the acne treatment marketing titan “a Championship Ring (when we win World Series).”

As part of the deal, if McCourt was unable to pay Guthy back the $25 million in five years, the loan would convert into a small ownership stake in the team (2.77%). The ownership stake would be based on a $900 million valuation of the team at the time of conversion - which McCourt admitted was a “very high” estimate.

McCourt said that Guthy turned down the offer, saying that Guthy said he preferred “less risky investments.”

When he bought the team with no money down in 2004, McCourt did a similar deal with three other investors. One has since been repaid and the other two loans have not yet matured.

The Times reports Jason Moskowitz, a Palos Verdes entrepreneur and chief executive of SkyBridge Private Air, was one of those three investors.

On May 18, Jon Weinbach of AOL FANHOUSE revealed another of the three investors:

FanHouse has also learned that the Dodgers’ ownership includes two limited partners who provided loans to help the McCourts finalize their purchase of the club in 2004, according to people familiar with the matter. One of the limited partners is Franklin Weigold, a long-time executive with Analog Devices, Inc., a Norwood, Mass.-based maker of electronic equipment. Weigold lives part of the year in Los Angeles and was also part of the McCourts’ failed bid to purchase the Boston Red Sox in 2001.

So why did McCourt go to Guthy to obtain $25 million in cash in 2009 in the first place?

The Times reports the move was in response to the shaky financial state of the Dodgers: Read more…

The haggle for ownership of the Dodgers between Frank and Jamie McCourt began today during their divorce proceeding in a Los Angeles courtroom.

(Funny, had her pegged for Secretary of Grate)

At issue is a document signed by the couple in 2004 that Frank claims gave him full ownership control of the Dodgers and Jamie ownership of the couple’s homes. Meanwhile Jamie claims that she never signed anything that would allow Frank to cut her out of an ownership interest in the team.

The next week a judge will hear arguments from both sides on the subject as Frank’s lawyers claim Jamie knew what she was signing while Jamie’s attorneys claim Frank actually switched out a page in the document to screw her out of the team.

Much more interesting though are some of the bizarro details of the lifestyle and largesse enjoyed by the couple -at the direct expense of Dodger fans. Read more…

TMZ.com reports today the latest divorce sordids between Dodgers Owner Frank McCourt and estranged wife Jamie.

Fired Los Angeles Dodgers CEO Jamie McCourt claims Frank McCourt and his lawyer, Lawrence Silverstein, fraudulently altered documents in an effort to strip her of the ownership of the team.

Frank claims in 2004, when they bought the Dodgers, Jamie signed over complete ownership of the team to him. In their bitter divorce case, Frank has submitted an agreement signed by Jamie, which includes an “Exhibit” that gives him complete ownership of the Dodgers.

But in new legal papers filed today by Dennis Wasser, Jamie’s lawyer … Wasser claims there was another “Exhibit” that was the final word on ownership of the Dodgers, which preserved Jamie’s rights to the team.

Wasser now says, after the document was signed, Frank and his lawyer pulled a switcheroo, by substituting the old “Exhibit” for the new one — thereby cutting Jamie out. Read more…

Eric Stephen of TrueBlueLA.com Twits this priceless quip from Vin Scully about a team that has all but quit:

Vin Scully, on #Dodgers: “Admittedly you have to hold the mirror to the mouth to see the breath, but they’re still mathematically alive.”

Sadly, Los Angeles is one of the last holdouts from baseball’s Brave New World of broadcasting - which features team mouthpieces masquerading as baseball announcers.
Read more…

There’s an interesting stealth sports merchandise trend going on here in Los Angeles that, until now, has been under the radar for most folks outside of SoCal.

For decades, Raiders gear has been the team of choice in L.A. gang culture, but in the past 2-3 years, local sports team affiliation has changed dramatically for those involved in that type of organized criminal activity.

The Dodgers have now clearly gained most-favored status among Los Angeles gang members. Read more…

From Dodger blog Vin Scully Is My Homeboy:

E-mail from Jimmy:

Hey Roberto, thought you would like this. From last Friday. 7-23

Experiment: What would happen if my ticket was 3 by 5 feet. Will they accept it?! If they do, will it scan?!?

Conclusion: Yes!!! Then security took it away. Haha!

Security: you can’t have that. I’m going to have to take it.

Me: but it’s my ticket.

Security: what?

Me: it’s my ticket how will I get to my seat.

Then he started to laugh after he realized what it was.

Dude next time “might go bigger.” Read more…

While the McCourt divorce may seem mind-numbingly complicated as it pertains to the future of the Dodgers, it really isn’t. To understand why, you must go back to how the McCourts were somehow allowed to *buy* the team in the first place.

In 2004, the Dodgers were sold to the McCourts. Excerpt from the press release:

McCourt said he invested in excess of $200 million cash into the $430 million purchase, the most ever paid for a Major League franchise.

Where did Frank McCourt get the $200 million “cash“? From a Bank of America loan.

The rest of the purchase price came from a loan from Fox, which owned the very team McCourt was buying.

Those loans were largely collateralized by future club revenue, parking lots owned by McCourt and - most importantly  - the good faith and credit of Major League Baseball.

In other words, McCourt bought the Dodgers without a dime of his own money. (Not that he had any in his checking account anyway.)

So why would MLB foster such an insane arrangement?

Because it wanted to keep the payroll of the team in MLB’s second-largest market artificially low. With the Dodgers’ payroll currently hovering at around $85 million, less than half of what the Yankees pay their players, I’d say Bud Selig and hatchet man Jerry Reinsdorf succeeded rather infamously in that endeavor.

B & J most recently pulled off the same scam in tapping hyper-leveraged Tom Ricketts to take over the Chicago Cubs. Meanwhile Cubs bidder Mark Cuban, swimming in liquidity and ownership experience compared to Ricketts, never received serious consideration.

So what does all that have to do with the McCourt divorce and the Dodgers?

Everything.

Read more…

In an interview with Jon Weisman of ESPN’s Dodger Thoughts Molly Knight, who recently published a lengthy piece in ESPN The Magazine about the McCourts divorce, reported why the Dodgers allegedly hired Ned Colletti as GM and how Jeff Kent landed a “shocking” two-year contract extension with the Dodgers in 2006 worth over $22 million at age 38.

(”You want me to teach women to play baseball? That’ll be $22 million”)

Weisman: “What was her (Jamie McCourt) biggest impact on the organization?”

Knight: “I still have no idea. Oh, maybe the hiring of Ned Colletti. I’ve heard stories that she became close friends with Jeff Kent after he volunteered to help domestic violence victims as part of her WIN Initiative.

“Both she and Frank respected Kent’s willingness to serve the community. Jeff mentioned Ned Colletti to Jamie because he knew they were looking for a GM. Jamie suggested it to Frank.

“Ned killed in his interview because he didn’t ask how much money he’d have to play with. A few former execs told me all this, so take it with a grain of salt. But it starts to make sense that Kent was responsible for Colletti when you see the contract extension he was rewarded with after Colletti got there.”

So because Kent showed up for Jamie McCourt’s community projects, he was able to get Colletti’s foot in the door. The same Colletti who later handed the 38-year-old Kent an outrageous, two-year, $22 million contract.

But at least Kent was injury prone and hated by his teammates!

In a post titled, “Didn’t See That Coming: Dodgers Extend Kent’s Contract,” Weisman wrote of the deal at the time: Read more…

Several SbB readers emailed me Tweets from an L.A.-based adult film performer last night named “Lexi Belle” in which she claims to have a “boyfriend” on the Dodgers.

(Whoops, dunno how that last Tweet slipped in there)

The woman’s real name is Jessica McCumber, and after crosschecking several more of her boyfriend-related Tweets against the Dodger transaction wire and game logs, it appears she’s telling the truth.

Read more…

Recently Jon Weinbach of AOL FANHOUSE took a well-deserved whack at the pinata that is the McCourt’s ownership of the Dodgers.

(Speaking of money for nothing …) 

Weinbach, bless his heart, further unraveled the McCourt’s dubious financial dealings with the Dodgers by exposing money-for-nothing schemes involving the McCourt’s two sons and various shell companies designed to funnel money to a “slush fund” set up for Frank’s personal use.

Over the past 18 months, the Los Angeles Dodgers paid nearly $4 million in “consulting services” to an entity that has done virtually nothing for the club, even as the team has made a concerted effort to raise ticket prices, trim payroll and acquire players on the cheap.

Moreover, the club paid two of Frank and Jamie McCourt’s adult sons large salaries — $400,000 and $200,000 per year, respectively — for services that are undefined and could not be described by either Frank or Jamie McCourt, according to court documents filed in the couple’s divorce case.

The official club duties of Drew and Travis McCourt couldn’t be described by their parents because, from what I’ve been told by anonymous Dodger staffers, they have no formal duties with the franchise. As noted by Weinbach, “neither of the McCourts’ sons is listed on the team’s staff directory.”

I have a sneaking feeling that Drew attending business school at Stanford and Travis working at Goldman Sachs in New York might have something to do with that.

Weinbach also notes Frank’s creative way of getting around his supposedly-capped $5 million per year club salary. Read more…