morningsong said:

EnDoRpHn said:

No. It could be placed into a non-profit entity, but that would have no bearing on the estate's current tax liability.

I realize not it's current status but making it easier to manage in the future.

That depends on whether it's feasible to run it for a profit. If so, it will take care of itself. If not, it will require public (i.e., charitable) assistance, so a non-profit would make sense. However, that would be fairly complicated if the heirs expect some sort of life income from Paisley Park itself.

Many museums are non-profits. The distinction is pretty simple: non-profits operate to benefit the public, not private shareholders. They are not allowed to return any significant part of their earnings to the benefit of a private corporation or individual(s). If they are set up as a 501c3, donors can deduct donations as a charitable contribution on the donor's private income tax returns. They are also allowed to seek public assistance and charitable contributions from foundations, corporations and other entities, but they have to use those resources to benefit the public.

EnDoRpHn said:

morningsong said:

EnDoRpHn said:

Many museums are non-profits. The distinction is pretty simple: non-profits operate to benefit the public, not private shareholders. They are not allowed to return any significant part of their earnings to the benefit of a private corporation or individual(s). If they are set up as a 501c3, donors can deduct donations as a charitable contribution on the donor's private income tax returns. They are also allowed to seek public assistance and charitable contributions from foundations, corporations and other entities, but they have to use those resources to benefit the public.

That's interesting. Maybe non-profit is the way they're trying to go, I'm sure the State would be for it. The family would get profit from his music, his name and image, so I don't see their need for PP profits.

There would have to be a real and true public benefit, in my opinion. Personally, I wouldn't have any interest in donating to a tax-dodge shrine for Prince fans just so the heirs can hang on to every last cent of revenue from a potential one-half to one-billion dollar estate.

Yes, the family would profit from his music, name, and image, and some of that should then be diverted to supporting whatever is made of Paisley Park. If Prince's life's work (music) can't support his vision (Paisley Park) then what was the point

And to be honest, I don't see them (the heirs) as taking such a greedy attitude either. Unless and until there is evidence to the contrary, I'll presume they have better values and ethics than, for instance, the Walton family. And hope that banker-sharks and lawyer-sharks don't talk them too far away from what's real.

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_PRINCE_ESTATE?SITE=WNYC&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT

The Associated Press has summarized the most relevant points regarding tomorrow's (Monday's) hearing about "discussing issues related to the protocols for determining who is an heir."

bilbolives said:

While we wait..... Just a small tidbit: On Friday 6/24/2016, The Administrator of Prince's Estate had to file to request permission for Prince's music and photo to be used for the BET Awards.

See: http://www.mncourts.gov/I...elson.aspx

Patience.... oh Purple Army.....

Judge says no hurry in determining Prince claims:

http://kstp.com/news/prince-estate-carver-county-hearing/4181555/?cat=1

farnorth said:

mailaccount63 said:

farnorth said:

Judge says no hurry in determining Prince claims:

http://kstp.com/news/prince-estate-carver-county-hearing/4181555/?cat=1

Do you want it done fast? OR Do you want it done right?

I would also imagine, not saying I know the family, they want it done right. I can only speculate that Bremer Trust is trying with due care to complete the inventory process and handle the estate in the best manner possible.

I also get the feeling the judge is trying to minimize any appeals and make sure rulings are done in the best manner according to law.

Eileen said:

nelcp777 said:

mailaccount63 said:

farnorth said: Do you want it done fast? OR Do you want it done right?

I would also imagine, not saying I know the family, they want it done right. I can only speculate that Bremer Trust is trying with due care to complete the inventory process and handle the estate in the best manner possible.

I also get the feeling the judge is trying to minimize any appeals and make sure rulings are done in the best manner according to law.

Honestly, I don't see what the fuss is about. To me it's simple. Prince's 3 known siblings from his mother don't need to take DNA tests, birth certificates are sufficient. Everyone else has to take a DNA test. If some siblings are claiming that Duane was adopted by John, the judge should follow the law on whether or not adopted siblings can inherit. End of story.

morningsong said:

Eileen said:

There would have to be a real and true public benefit, in my opinion. Personally, I wouldn't have any interest in donating to a tax-dodge shrine for Prince fans just so the heirs can hang on to every last cent of revenue from a potential one-half to one-billion dollar estate.

Yes, the family would profit from his music, name, and image, and some of that should then be diverted to supporting whatever is made of Paisley Park. If Prince's life's work (music) can't support his vision (Paisley Park) then what was the point

And to be honest, I don't see them (the heirs) as taking such a greedy attitude either. Unless and until there is evidence to the contrary, I'll presume they have better values and ethics than, for instance, the Walton family. And hope that banker-sharks and lawyer-sharks don't talk them too far away from what's real.

A half to a billion you say Curious why it would be greedy and not just plain smart? You and I definitely are viewing this from different intentions.

Is Graceland a non-profit?

tmo1965 said:

tmo1965 said:

morningsong said:

Eileen said: A half to a billion you say Curious why it would be greedy and not just plain smart? You and I definitely are viewing this from different intentions.

Is Graceland a non-profit?

No, it is not. Graceland has always been a for-profit operation.

https://www.graceland.com/about/

Paisley has an advantage in that there are usable facilities that can serve many purposes, as well as private quarters. Music education should be a focus and the concert space/studios are in great shape.

In fact, P* had just redecorated the public spaces prior to the first P&M concert at PP. All new carpet, plants, etc. https://www.facebook.com/...22R0%22%7D

[Edited 6/27/16 11:38am]

tmo1965 said:

nelcp777 said:

I would also imagine, not saying I know the family, they want it done right. I can only speculate that Bremer Trust is trying with due care to complete the inventory process and handle the estate in the best manner possible.

I also get the feeling the judge is trying to minimize any appeals and make sure rulings are done in the best manner according to law.

Honestly, I don't see what the fuss is about. To me it's simple. Prince's 3 known siblings from his mother don't need to take DNA tests, birth certificates are sufficient. Everyone else has to take a DNA test. If some siblings are claiming that Duane was adopted by John, the judge should follow the law on whether or not adopted siblings can inherit. End of story.

Completely with you on this.

Mumio said:

tmo1965 said:

Honestly, I don't see what the fuss is about. To me it's simple. Prince's 3 known siblings from his mother don't need to take DNA tests, birth certificates are sufficient. Everyone else has to take a DNA test. If some siblings are claiming that Duane was adopted by John, the judge should follow the law on whether or not adopted siblings can inherit. End of story.

Completely with you on this.

It does seem that simple. I think the Judge may use the upper courts for guidance on Duane's situation (?).

Once the DNA excludes those with out birth certificates, the potential heir list should get rather small and more managable.

I tell you one thing. When the Minnesota authorities said they would protect Prince's privacy and dignity they were not kidding. No cameras, sound recording or even sketches allowed.

If this was LA or NY it would be a big circus already. The judge would not even hear arguments in open court from any media.

Seems like they really loved our Prince and are determined to protect him. I wasn't sure that such people still existed.

babynoz said:

I tell you one thing. When the Minnesota authorities said they would protect Prince's privacy and dignity they were not kidding. No cameras, sound recording or even sketches allowed.

If this was LA or NY it would be a big circus already. The judge would not even hear arguments in open court from any media.

Seems like they really loved our Prince and are determined to protect him. I wasn't sure that such people still existed.

Every Court/Judge is different. Every County is different. Every State is different. Every Country is different.

I agree with you babynoz: It seems like they are determined to protect him. <I have been praying for this. I, for one, really appreciate it that the Judge does not want to turn this into a circus, just so he can have his "15 minutes" of fame. If the State of Minnesota, and Carver County, and the next of kin, etc. are really careful with how they handle this, Prince will still be giving to them/us for a long time even though he has passed.

Don't try to reinvent the wheel. Look at, and call those that run successful museums, etc. like Graceland. I know I have said this before: We can't do anything to bring Prince back (even though we all would love to be able to turn back the clock), but we can oversee his estate. Continue to keep your eyes/ears open Oh Purple Army!

Another point of view regarding today's events:
"Judge: With No Will, Prince Estate Case Heads into 'Uncharted Waters'" * by: Julie Kramer, John Croman, and Chris Francescani * dated June 27, 2016
http://www.nbcnews.com/po...rs-n599741

By the way, Rodney Dixon has not given up......

To view the Pleadings (documents filed with the Court) for today:
http://www.mncourts.gov/I...elson.aspx

The Honorable Judge Kevin W. Eide, who presides over Probate Court, Carver County, First Judicial District, Minnesota:
http://www.mncourts.gov/A...spx?id=160

The judge went to college in St. Olaf?

You cannot make this stuff up.

laytonian said:

tmo1965 said:

Is Graceland a non-profit?

No, it is not. Graceland has always been a for-profit operation.

https://www.graceland.com/about/

Paisley has an advantage in that there are usable facilities that can serve many purposes, as well as private quarters. Music education should be a focus and the concert space/studios are in great shape.

In fact, P* had just redecorated the public spaces prior to the first P&M concert at PP. All new carpet, plants, etc. https://www.facebook.com/...22R0%22%7D

[Edited 6/27/16 11:38am]

Ok, I guess that's what I was wondering.

mailaccount63 said:

<I have been praying for this. I, for one, really appreciate it that the Judge does not want to turn this into a circus, just so he can have his "15 minutes" of fame. If the State of Minnesota, and Carver County, and the next of kin, etc. are really careful with how they handle this, Prince will still be giving to them/us for a long time even though he has passed.

Remember the Dancing Itos?

So someone alleged today that John L. Nelson is not Prince's father?

http://kstp.com/news/prin...555/?cat=1

Dixon (the guy from California who claims he had a billion dollar contract with Prince) and/or his attorney is certifiable -- this pleading sounds like something written by Oswald Bates from In Living Color:

http://www.mncourts.gov/m...owance.pdf

EnDoRpHn said:

mailaccount63 said:

<I have been praying for this. I, for one, really appreciate it that the Judge does not want to turn this into a circus, just so he can have his "15 minutes" of fame. If the State of Minnesota, and Carver County, and the next of kin, etc. are really careful with how they handle this, Prince will still be giving to them/us for a long time even though he has passed.

Remember the Dancing Itos?

EnDoRpHn said:

So someone alleged today that John L. Nelson is not Prince's father?

http://kstp.com/news/prin...555/?cat=1

I don't want to step on any toes here, but actually that is old news.....

morningsong said:

laytonian said:

No, it is not. Graceland has always been a for-profit operation.

https://www.graceland.com/about/

Paisley has an advantage in that there are usable facilities that can serve many purposes, as well as private quarters. Music education should be a focus and the concert space/studios are in great shape.

In fact, P* had just redecorated the public spaces prior to the first P&M concert at PP. All new carpet, plants, etc. https://www.facebook.com/...22R0%22%7D <<<<<THANK YOU for the FaceBook link - that was cool to check out.

Ok, I guess that's what I was wondering.

There are a LOT of variables with this^^^^^
-AND-

Just so we are not reinventing the wheel, and doubling the work effort, have you checked out the thread>>> http://prince.org/msg/7/427567
"If Paisley Park is put up for sale, should WE buy it?"
-AND-
this STICKY thread>>> http://prince.org/msg/7/423853
"Paisley Park's future"

[Edited 6/27/16 18:53pm]