Latest on MJJC

ALERT ALERT MJ Neverland News [check post #1 for updates]

MJJC MOD 1 said:
I can't answer that because I am not in the deeds. I'm going off the confirmed information that was presented on various forums and the Santa Barbara site. I pulled up the definitions of the titles of the filings.

Sycamore is a registered company and Troubleman posted a link showing the Sycamore Valley Ranch, LLC but it doesn't show who's within the LLC. That is why I'm telling members to use caution before saying that it is a fact that Michael is in a joint partnership.
Click to expand...

ok thanks for that so u can see the title of whats on the paper work re the deed but u cant see whats actually written in the deed itself interms of names.so how do ppl know it was transfered to sycamore

thanks mod/vic the thing that makes this board great is the inteligent discussion when it comes to things like this. there seems to me so many possible senarios maybe there should be a prize at the end for who gets it right lol
 
elusive moonwalker said:
ok thanks for that so u can see the title of whats on the paper work re the deed but u cant see whats actually written in the deed itself interms of names.so how do ppl know it was transfered to sycamore

thanks mod/vic the thing that makes this board great is the inteligent discussion when it comes to things like this. there seems to me so many possible senarios maybe there should be a prize at the end for who gets it right lol
Click to expand...

There is a legend on the Santa Barbara site with definitions. O, E ,I, R, and A. etc: http://www.sb-democracy.com/opis/ just click the drop down box by Name Type and you will see the definitions.

Check your private message too!
 
elusive moonwalker said:
ok thanks for that so u can see the title of whats on the paper work re the deed but u cant see whats actually written in the deed itself interms of names.so how do ppl know it was transfered to sycamore

thanks mod/vic the thing that makes this board great is the inteligent discussion when it comes to things like this. there seems to me so many possible senarios maybe there should be a prize at the end for who gets it right lol
Click to expand...

Well, it's just logic, isn't it?

There are sweeping statements made on here, i.e.: "Michael is in a joint-venture to develop the property and this is a money-making opportunity, or, of COURSE Michael still owns the ranch. etc." Fact is, there was a transfer of deed that suggests it is no longer his, although he may retain some interest in it. At this point, that is ALL we know.

Vic
 
elusive moonwalker said:
also some are talking like this is the same as the ATV deal with sony. now that could only be possible if sycamore is a joint company. they think the the 2 companies have joined together and colony paid mj x amount because mj is bringing the ranch into the business which is obviously the the thing that will create the money is this believable?
Click to expand...

just my theory
So If sycamore is a joint venture like sony atv it means that mj bring 100 % of neverland to sycamore and colony to be able to have in theory 50% of sycamore, colony erase the mj debt of 24M$ if this is right it's means that neverland value at 50M$, if the deal is at 35$M€ it's mean that the neverland value is at 70M$. SO now neverland will turn to something that will make sone profit so mj cut with a big charge line
 
lol..i ain't gunna be fighting myself over 'freudian slips' if i call Neverland Neverland. i'll just call it that. lol. i have no reason to call it otherwise...
 
bubbles said:
just my theory
So If sycamore is a joint venture like sony atv it means that mj bring 100 % of neverland to sycamore and colony to be able to have in theory 50% of sycamore, colony erase the mj debt of 24M$ if this is right it's means that neverland value at 50M$, if the deal is at 35$M€ it's mean that the neverland value is at 70M$. SO now neverland will turn to something that will make sone profit so mj cut with a big charge line
Click to expand...

That seems very plausible since Emjay is a shrewd business man! Though still waiting for what comes out of Michael's mouth.
 
the company is sycamore doesnt mean the ranch is called that. if i remember right before mj bought it was called jsut sycamore ranch i dont remember the valley bit so IF its a joint biz deal maybe mj added the valley bit to it from neverland valley. ok im grasping here lol
 
queen g said:
Ape, how do you look leaning back on sandy beach holding a Mai Tai with a little umbrella sticking into it?
Click to expand...
kinda like this
LazyApe.com-beach.jpg
 
MJJC MOD 1 said:
I can't answer that because I am not in the deeds. I'm going off the confirmed information that was presented on various forums and the Santa Barbara site. I pulled up the definitions of the titles of the filings.

Sycamore is a registered company and Troubleman posted a link showing the Sycamore Valley Ranch, LLC but it doesn't show who's within the LLC. That is why I'm telling members to use caution before saying that it is a fact that Michael is in a joint partnership.
Click to expand...

And by the same token, the fans should ALSO use caution before saying that it is a FACT that Michael has sold his ranch outright and no longer owns it. If we didn't have the SB website documents at all and only had the article, then what would we be believing? That Michael has formed a joint venture with Colony.

Truth, is these documents don't confirm either way. Why? Because just because you deed property over to someone else does not mean you don't own it anymore. The details are not clear. And if we are to believe the article that says that a JOINT VENTURE between Michael and Colony has been formed, then it is more likely than not that Michael still has considerable financial interest in his ranch. He is not 100% finished with Neverland. He may still own it to some degree.

Also, just because the ranch is sold to Sycamore Valley Ranch, LLC, does not mean that the name has to change. Truth is, NEVERLAND RANCH is now an asset of Sycamore Valley Ranch, LLC. Don't expect the magnificent Neverland gates to come down anytime soon! :wild:

And I wish ANTI-Neverland fans would stop attacking PRO-Neverland fans as if something is wrong with us because we want to see Michael keep his ranch. Neverland is not cursed. If you see it as a curse, then that's your problem. But I happen to believe that if Michael Jackson saw it as a curse, he would have chosen to sell it outright rather than forming a joint venture and remaining attached to the place.

I'm just sayin.
 
Ape said:
kinda like this
LazyApe.com-beach.jpg
Click to expand...

*laughs* Silly! Hey, where's your little bikini, Ape? Did you lose it in the water? Well, you have your priorities right...I see you've got the hat on. That is what is important. Bikinis are secondary.
 
heres the statement mj made around april? time for those who wanted it thanks to startrader

LAS VEGAS--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Michael Jackson today announced that the foreclosure sale of his Neverland Ranch property scheduled for this week has been cancelled by Colony Capital, LLC, which just acquired the existing loan on Neverland Ranch from an affiliate of Fortress Investment Group. Mr. Jackson said, “I am pleased with recent developments involving Neverland Ranch and I am in discussions with Colony and Tom Barrack with regard to the Ranch and other matters that would allow me to focus on the future.”
Click to expand...
 
And by the same token, the fans should ALSO use caution before saying that it is a FACT that Michael has sold his ranch outright and no longer owns it. If we didn't have the SB website documents at all and only had the article, then what would we be believing? That Michael has formed a joint venture with Colony.
Click to expand...

But we DO have the title of the documents that were filed and one quick search regarding their definitions can plainly tell you what's going on!!


Truth, is these documents don't confirm either way. Why? Because just because you deed property over to someone else does not mean you don't own it anymore. The details are not clear. And if we are to believe the article that says that a JOINT VENTURE between Michael and Colony has been formed, then it is more likely than not that Michael still has considerable financial interest in his ranch. He is not 100% finished with Neverland. He may still own it to some degree.
Click to expand...

The documents titles DO CONFIRM A SELL because UCC's were filed. UCC's can only be filed when a property is sold or there is a financial transaction. OMG!! It was more than just a property being transferred!

2008-0063427 UCC ASSIGNMENT
2008-0063428 UCC TERMINATION
2008-0063429 ASSIGNMENT DEED OF TRUST
2008-0063430 SUBSTITUTION TRUSTEE
2008-0063431 GRANT DEED

Definition of UCC: http://www.allbusiness.com/glossaries/uniform-commercial-code-ucc/4941970-1.html

So there is a clear financial transaction.

Also, just because the ranch is sold to Sycamore Valley Ranch, LLC, does not mean that the name has to change. Truth is, NEVERLAND RANCH is now an asset of Sycamore Valley Ranch, LLC. Don't expect the magnificent Neverland gates to come down anytime soon! :wild:
Click to expand...

I really don't know what to say.

And I wish ANTI-Neverland fans would stop attacking PRO-Neverland fans as if something is wrong with us because we want to see Michael keep his ranch. Neverland is not cursed. If you see it as a curse, then that's your problem. But I happen to believe that if Michael Jackson saw it as a curse, he would have chosen to sell it outright rather than forming a joint venture and remaining attached to the place.

I'm just sayin.
Click to expand...

And I'm just sayin that you are speculating and there is nothing wrong with that. Remain hopeful and I do hope what you are sayin comes true.
 
Shoot, ya'll don't even get the Peter Pan thing, lol. It's about ideals and perception. Neverland was just a physical manifestation of what's in Michael's heart. That's real. You don't develope a place like Neverland purely for image. That's really a part of who he is.
 
Peter Pan was also an arrogant, pompous person who got angry if people decided to "grow up" and leave Neverland and at the end of the story, he lived alone in Neverland. I think one of the posters at Maximum Jackson pointed that out, lol.

Who wants to be like that? :lol:

I rather MJ be Pinocchio. :lol:

And no I'm not talking about the Disney versions, lol.
 
Talking about what the character represents, meaning the retention of innocense. Same thing as the word "innocense" gets misconstrued. What that means is seeing things as they are, seeing things purely, not being sin free or in some way virginal. There's nothing wrong with wanting to retain those qualities.
 
Last edited:
AllTheLovelyFlowers said:
And by the same token, the fans should ALSO use caution before saying that it is a FACT that Michael has sold his ranch outright and no longer owns it. If we didn't have the SB website documents at all and only had the article, then what would we be believing? That Michael has formed a joint venture with Colony.

Truth, is these documents don't confirm either way. Why? Because just because you deed property over to someone else does not mean you don't own it anymore. The details are not clear. And if we are to believe the article that says that a JOINT VENTURE between Michael and Colony has been formed, then it is more likely than not that Michael still has considerable financial interest in his ranch. He is not 100% finished with Neverland. He may still own it to some degree.

Also, just because the ranch is sold to Sycamore Valley Ranch, LLC, does not mean that the name has to change. Truth is, NEVERLAND RANCH is now an asset of Sycamore Valley Ranch, LLC. Don't expect the magnificent Neverland gates to come down anytime soon! :wild:

And I wish ANTI-Neverland fans would stop attacking PRO-Neverland fans as if something is wrong with us because we want to see Michael keep his ranch. Neverland is not cursed. If you see it as a curse, then that's your problem. But I happen to believe that if Michael Jackson saw it as a curse, he would have chosen to sell it outright rather than forming a joint venture and remaining attached to the place.

I'm just sayin.
Click to expand...

Bloody yeah! Because if he outright sold the property, he would've walked away with hundreds of millions of dollers! But the fact remains, he only sold the deed according to a ULL via California's Secretary of State. Everything else is up in the air until we hear from Michael's people.
 
Last edited:
wannabestartinsomthin21 said:
Talking about what the character represents, meaning the retention of innocense. Same thing as the word "innocense" gets misconstrued. What that means is seeing things as they are, seeing things purely, not being sin free or in some way virginal. There's nothing wrong with wanting to retain those qualities.
Click to expand...

That ain't necessary Peter Pan-ish. There's some folks who wanna retain some innocence despite things that happened to them that affected them negatively.
 
That's what Peter Pan represents though. Its why Michael called the ranch Neverland. Obviously, that particular story holds a lot of meaning for him. If you ever listen to Michael speak about this, that's the quality in the character which he admires and tries to emulate.
 
MJJC MOD 1 said:
But we DO have the title of the documents that were filed and one quick search regarding their definitions can plainly tell you what's going on!!




The documents titles DO CONFIRM A SELL because UCC's were filed. UCC's can only be filed when a property is sold or there is a financial transaction. OMG!! It was more than just a property being transferred!

2008-0063427 UCC ASSIGNMENT
2008-0063428 UCC TERMINATION
2008-0063429 ASSIGNMENT DEED OF TRUST
2008-0063430 SUBSTITUTION TRUSTEE
2008-0063431 GRANT DEED

Definition of UCC: http://www.allbusiness.com/glossaries/uniform-commercial-code-ucc/4941970-1.html

So there is a clear financial transaction.
Click to expand...

Who said there was not a financial transaction? What I am saying is you still don't know the full story.


I really don't know what to say.
Click to expand...

Simple. Neverland Valley Ranch is now partly owned by Sycamore Valley Ranch, LLC.



And I'm just sayin that you are speculating and there is nothing wrong with that. Remain hopeful and I do hope what you are sayin comes true.
Click to expand...

And you are not SPECULATING? Oh, ok!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top