Drake Makes Questionable Response To Questionable Ludacris Beef

drake

Posted by on 02/28/2012 at 9:17 AM News

The Popdust Files: Beef, drake, feuds, ludacris

“What Drake/Ludacris beef?” you might ask. You might then not have read enough into the following lines from Luda’s “Bada Boom”:

Counterfeit rappers say I’m stealing their flows,
but I can’t steal what you never made up bitch
Y’all some duplicate rap cloning n—-s
I manufacture you h–s put on your makeup bitch
Let me explain, nothing’s been new since Big Daddy Kane
Flows will get recycled passed around to different names

The flow in question is hashtag rap–the sort Ludacris’s used just like everyone else, particularly on “My Chick Bad,” not particularly well–and the recycling also involved Big Sean, who responded with something rather like “um, OK?” Drake’s response is slightly less measured than that. Not that it isn’t still slight. It is so slight that we waffled for a few minutes as to whether it’s even worth posting, but if Sean got a response article, so does Drake. Now forget the fourth wall and read this Drake quote for the ages, from the Feb./March issue of Vibe:

“That’s a case of someone trying to use my marketing money to get things going again for themselves.

TEAM AFFILIATION: Nope. Not going down that path. We will note two things: Ludacris doesn’t need Drake’s “marketing money” nor did much to target it; hashtag rap is not great and certainly not worth defending at such un-length.

DRAMA RATING: 1/5. Come on. Surely there is better fodder for feuds out there.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EFw9h-L4Az8

Nevada Supreme Court Allows Seizure of Casino’s Assets in Dues Dispute.

Knight Ridder/Tribune Business News April 11, 2002 By Ed Vogel, Las Vegas Review-Journal Knight Ridder/Tribune Business News Apr. 11–CARSON CITY, Nev.–The Supreme Court Wednesday lifted its order blocking the Fremont Street Experience from seizing $1.9 million from the cage of Binion’s Horseshoe. here fremont street experience

In a 3-0 vote, the court said it should not intervene in the case at this time. The justices said the Horseshoe could secure a cash bond to avoid attachment of its assets to cover payments due to the Fremont Street Experience pedestrian mall.

Because adequate remedies exist for the casino, Justices Miriam Shearing, Bob Rose and Nancy Becker denied the Horseshoe’s request to block the attachment of its assets.

Pat Riley, an attorney for the Fremont Street Experience, said it is trying to reach a settlement with the Horseshoe and will not move immediately to attach the money. go to site fremont street experience

“There is a possibility we can work this out amicably,” he said.

The court on Feb. 8 temporarily voided an order by District Judge Gene Porter that allowed the seizure of Horseshoe assets to cover its share of the mall’s dues.

Horseshoe officials had said a seizure would jeopardize the casino’s ability to stay open. Removal of $1.9 million from the cage would have placed the casino below the state-required minimum of $1.2 million cash on hand.

Riley estimated a cash bond to cover the debt could be secured for little more than $20,000 and the Horseshoe could avoid talk of shutting its doors.

A Horseshoe lawyer did not respond to a call for comment Wednesday.

While the court decision allows the Fremont Street Experience to take the due payments, the Horseshoe still has a pending District Court case challenging the Fremont Street Experience’s operating agreement.

Its lawyers claim that the Fremont Street Experience’s actions violate federal antitrust law, state law and city ordinances. They also claim the hotel-casino’s dues are unfairly large compared with those paid by competing downtown properties.

“We haven’t won the case yet,” Riley said. “This is all about security on a debt.” In court filings in February, the Horseshoe said it would lose $260,000 in daily revenues if forced to close.

The company employs more than 1,700 employees and has an annual payroll of $38 million.

YOU MAY ALSO LIKE THIS
  • YOU MAY ALSO LIKE
  •