I'm sure he is your special wrecking ball, broke back.
Maybe 30 percent?
I know in 2008 he owned less than 30 percent and I doubt that has changed significantly. The ownership group is a mix of individuals and corporations, and he serves as the chairman of the group. Unless, he's been buying people out like crazy, he owns much less than half of the franchise.
I'm sure he is your special wrecking ball, broke back.
I'm not saying anything about what Kori said. She's usually right and can certainly speak for herself.
I said that for YOUR sake. Holt may well own the biggest piece of the Spurs, but that would not make him majority owner. It's possible that 25 percent is literally the plurality share.
Dont bet on that, Kori. He is easily the Spurs majority owner...by far.
I'm starting to feel more and more that people need to go through an application process to start threads in here.
Grey trying to bring enough bads to trick us into thinking they're goods. Gotta admire the effort on some level.
OK, here's a link saying he likely isn't a majority owner.
http://www.expressnews.com/sports/co...rs-4566517.php
Where is your link saying he is the majority owner by far?
I believe that he owns the biggest percentage of anyone, but you are acting like he owns 100 percent of the team. He doesn't.
I know that he originally had 13 percent of it when he bought in. I know that at one point he owned 40 percent of it, but I also know a few years back he only owned 30 percent of it.
Well, it remains to be seen how much risk there really is, after all:
San Antonio Spurs: North America's Best Run Professional Sports Franchise
http://www.forbes.com/sites/prishe/2...rts-franchise/
But hey, I'm sure Forbes magazine doesn't understand economics nearly as well as you do.
I tried explaining plurality ownership to him. But he didn't get it.
That link is over a month old! What good is that?
So...are gonna finally back me up and say he owns the majority or not?
Tooo many truth bombs being drop on OP.
Men lie. Women lie. NUMBERS DONT!
![]()
No, she explicitly is not.
Where is your proof he is a majority owner "by far"?
She has the knowledge unlike you. She knows he owns the majority.
Prove he is a majority owner.
prove he isnt.
Still no proof.![]()
One link. One goddamn link to an article stating that Holt owns more than 50% of the Spurs.
Is that too much to ing ask?
I just did.
Did you miss it?
One link to prove who owns more stock in the Spurs than Peter Holt...is that to much to ask?
I guess I did...show me who the majority owner of the Spurs is.
That isn't what you are arguing.
Seriously, do you know what "majority shareholder" means?
Please post your definition.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)