Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 11, 2017 1:31:56 GMT -5
"If Jackie bought a co-op, she can later on sell that co-op, so it would not be a complete loss..." oatmealforme
Case-in-point; Jennifer Rush, one of the top singers in the 80s and 90s, bought a 2500sqft hotel apt. in south Manhattan for $2mil in the 90s. Even had living quarters for a maid. She sold it years later for almost $7mil.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 11, 2017 1:42:01 GMT -5
"...Lisa's comment saying f them to the fans might have been the straw that broke the camels back..." johnnyb I was shocked and angered when I saw that on the video. What a crass, low-class thing to say. Especially when she was talking about the fans who paid for the mansion she's living in. Great point!! I'm beginning to think Jackie and Juliet are making the right move at the right time getting away from Lisa.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 11, 2017 1:43:35 GMT -5
"...Lisa's comment saying f them to the fans might have been the straw that broke the camels back..." johnnyb I was shocked and angered when I saw that on the video. What a crass, low-class thing to say. Especially when she was talking about the fans who paid for the mansion she's living in. Nonsense. The fans paid for the music they heard. They have no claim or say on the money after that. Besides which, Lisa didn't say eff them to fans, she said it to people who say they're not fans anymore because Jackie sang for the inauguration.
|
|
|
Post by mrsg on Sept 11, 2017 2:03:38 GMT -5
I did not see 'said video' , but having meant and visited with Lisa, I can see her saying that to ether. Lisa is wonderful if you don't -edited- her off.
|
|
|
Post by mrsg on Sept 11, 2017 2:05:01 GMT -5
Can I say "pee" ?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 11, 2017 2:11:57 GMT -5
This thread causes me to ask what she might do with her car. If it were me I would leave it with the 'rents and drive it when I came home. NYC is NOT the place to have a personal vehicle.
|
|
|
Post by mrsg on Sept 11, 2017 2:20:13 GMT -5
Aman to the car. Magie , i'm sure will be there. It will be interesting to see how this move turns out.
|
|
|
Post by jrchico on Sept 11, 2017 3:02:33 GMT -5
I find it interesting that everyone seems to think that Jackie and Juliet are moving because they are unhappy at home and want to get away from their parents. Plus some think the parents should be mad at the kids for moving out. A good parent is happy to see their kids become self supporting and move out of the nest to start their own life. I know I was and proud of them too. I only managed to help raise my stepkids which i had 2 boys and a girl. My birth kids were raised by their abusive mother. All of them went into foster care because of an abusive mother. 2 girls and a boy. The boy studied law and worked for the DA's office and one of the girls became a medical office manager until she was ran over by a drunk driver and ended up on disability. That daughter is now living with me and is an Admin. here. The other daughter has been on welfare and drugs her whole life and i don't see that ever changing. Of the stepkids the girl became a travel agent and married a successful commodities broker. One of the boys went into the Air Force and retired as a Senior Master Sergeant.The other boy became a truck driver which he is doing to this day. Kids, you gotta love them but they will grow up and for good or bad, make a life of their own.
|
|
|
Post by ursus on Sept 11, 2017 3:31:17 GMT -5
This thread causes me to ask what she might do with her car. If it were me I would leave it with the 'rents and drive it when I came home. NYC is NOT the place to have a personal vehicle. Assuming that by NYC you mean Manhattan I agree with you. I grew up in eastern Queens and my parents had cars and my first car was bought when I still lived there. My brother still lives there and has a car.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 11, 2017 5:08:47 GMT -5
"...Lisa's comment saying f them to the fans might have been the straw that broke the camels back..." johnnyb I was shocked and angered when I saw that on the video. What a crass, low-class thing to say. It was said in reference to those attacking Jackie for supporting HER SISTER. If anyone attacked me for supporting a family member I would say F THEM, and would say it to their faces if I had the chance to. Why, for the most part, is it admin here is quick to attack anyone defending the Evancho, but have NO issue with those attacking them. Seems very odd for a "fan forum".
|
|
|
Post by trebor on Sept 11, 2017 7:29:39 GMT -5
Watched 'Growing Up Evancho" again and there may be another reason for Jackie moving out with Juliet...Both Zach and Rachel wanted Juliet's room...
I thought all the kids had their own rooms so it did not make much sense...but maybe .. who knows?
Another thing I am wondering about is when did Jackie see the Phantom..Lisa said Jackie was singing Think of Me in her closet at five tears old..I think Jackie's story has always been closer to seven?? Who knows.
Not that it makes a whole lot of difference, but inquiring minds want to know...
|
|
|
Post by johnnyb on Sept 11, 2017 7:34:15 GMT -5
"...Lisa's comment saying f them to the fans might have been the straw that broke the camels back..." johnnyb I was shocked and angered when I saw that on the video. What a crass, low-class thing to say. It was said in reference to those attacking Jackie for supporting HER SISTER. If anyone attacked me for supporting a family member I would say F THEM, and would say it to their faces if I had the chance to. Why, for the most part, is it admin here is quick to attack anyone defending the Evancho, but have NO issue with those attacking them. Seems very odd for a "fan forum". There's an old saying "Loose lips sink ships". It also relates to careers, "Loose lips sink careers". 😧
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 11, 2017 10:20:45 GMT -5
Watched 'Growing Up Evancho" again and there may be another reason for Jackie moving out with Juliet...Both Zach and Rachel wanted Juliet's room... I thought all the kids had their own rooms so it did not make much sense...but maybe .. who knows? Another thing I am wondering about is when did Jackie see the Phantom..Lisa said Jackie was singing Think of Me in her closet at five tears old..I think Jackie's story has always been closer to seven?? Who knows. Not that it makes a whole lot of difference, but inquiring minds want to know... I read on Juliet's Twitter once where she said her room was "basically the attic". You can see a garret room on their house. It probably would be the most desired room for a teenager. Juliet probably leveraged her status as oldest kid and got that room when they moved in.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 11, 2017 15:21:07 GMT -5
I concur with your 4 point "food for thought", however I'm not so sure that #3 would be as simple as you make it sound. To declare Jackie an emancipated minor may very well render current contracts void and I cannot see Sony, Jackie's agent and any others having contracts/agreements with the Jackie Evancho business simply accepting a judges ruling and walking away. I would imagine that an appeal would be immediately be launched if not law suits for breach of contract. Of course a judge considering emancipation of a minor might view that Jackie could not earn a living without the current contracts therefore she would be obliged to see them through until she is 18. It is not as hard as you seem to think. One of my Grand sons had himself declared an emancipated minor at 16 and his mother did before him at 17. I am unfamiliar with the process for a court decision that emancipates a minor and therefore accept your statement of being not overly difficult as demonstrated by your family members. I am a little more familiar with tort and contract law from an accountants perspective. From what I understand of the emancipation process as it pertains to Jackie is that it may be more complex because of her income and ability to generate financial self sufficiency is based upon existing contracts and their interdependency. For a judge to render a decision in favour of emancipating Jackie could put the judge in the position of committing tort in that he/she could be harming parties under contract. The possibility of a judge committing tort in order to render a favourable decision to Jackie may make the entire process legally impossible.....a real Catch 22. I really believe that in Jackie's case, it is much more complex than your example of family members. Currently all of Jackie's income is accomplished through agreements/contracts drawn up long in advance of an actual performance. In addition, I think there would be real reluctance on the part of venues entering into an agreement/contract with a minor regardless of some NYC judge rendering an emancipated minor decision. I'm pretty sure that the ruling would not compel another if they felt uncomfortable. Jackie's current ability to be financially self sufficient depends upon her travelling across the country to perform at a variety of venues. Every state has own laws governing Emancipation of a minor and they are most often quite different. Therefore it is quite possible that she would need to be an Emancipated minor in every state where she wished to perform. I really see the entire process of seeking emancipation status would be set aside and simply let her age clock tick down to age 18. Besides it might take a few months to get her case to court, be heard and finally reach a decision.
|
|
|
Post by jrchico on Sept 11, 2017 15:43:39 GMT -5
It is not as hard as you seem to think. One of my Grand sons had himself declared an emancipated minor at 16 and his mother did before him at 17. I am unfamiliar with the process for a court decision that emancipates a minor and therefore accept your statement of being not overly difficult as demonstrated by your family members. I am a little more familiar with tort and contract law from an accountants perspective. From what I understand of the emancipation process as it pertains to Jackie is that it may be more complex because of her income and ability to generate financial self sufficiency is based upon existing contracts and their interdependency. For a judge to render a decision in favour of emancipating Jackie could put the judge in the position of committing tort in that he/she could be harming parties under contract. The possibility of a judge committing tort in order to render a favourable decision to Jackie may make the entire process legally impossible.....a real Catch 22. I really believe that in Jackie's case, it is much more complex than your example of family members. Currently all of Jackie's income is accomplished through agreements/contracts drawn up long in advance of an actual performance. In addition, I think there would be real reluctance on the part of venues entering into an agreement/contract with a minor regardless of some NYC judge rendering an emancipated minor decision. I'm pretty sure that the ruling would not compel another if they felt uncomfortable. Jackie's current ability to be financially self sufficient depends upon her travelling across the country to perform at a variety of venues. Every state has own laws governing Emancipation of a minor and they are most often quite different. Therefore it is quite possible that she would need to be an Emancipated minor in every state where she wished to perform. I really see the entire process of seeking emancipation status would be set aside and simply let her age clock tick down to age 18. Besides it might take a few months to get her case to court, be heard and finally reach a decision. You could be absolutely right. I am only familiar with what goes on in CA. Jackie of course could always move to CA. and make a great living here.
|
|