SUMMARY REPORT OF INDEPENDENT INVESTIGATORS CONCERNING
THE LA CLIPPERS AND KAWHI LEONARD
SEPTEMBER 2, 2026
WACHTELL, LIPTON, ROSEN & KATZ
SEPTEMBER 2, 2026
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
On September 3, 2025, the podcast Pablo Torre Finds Out produced the first in a
series of episodes alleging that the LA Clippers (the “Clippers”) and its owner Steve
Ballmer violated the salary cap circumvention rules of the National Basketball
Association (the “NBA” or the “League”) through dealings with Aspiration Partners
(“Aspiration”), a now-bankrupt sustainability services company. Among other things,
the episode: (i) revealed the existence of a four-year, $28 million endorsement agreement
between Aspiration and Clippers player Kawhi Leonard, (ii) asserted that the agreement
was never publicly announced and that Mr. Leonard performed no services under it, and
(iii) aired portions of an audio interview with an anonymous person asserted to be a
former employee of Aspiration who alleged that the agreement’s purpose was “to
circumvent the salary cap.” Shortly after the episode’s release, the League hired
Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz (“Wachtell Lipton”) to investigate the alleged
wrongdoing. In the intervening months, the investigation’s scope expanded to cover
additional endorsement agreements and other potential improprieties.
The investigation finds that the Clippers organization violated the circumvention
rules in numerous independent ways by (i) affirmatively initiating off-court income
opportunities between Mr. Leonard and four different companies doing business with the
team: Aspiration, Boingo Wireless (“Boingo”), Daktronics, and Lockton Insurance
(“Lockton”), (ii) facilitating the consummation of endorsement agreements between each
of these companies and Mr. Leonard, including in some cases by participating in the
WACHTELL, LIPTON, ROSEN & KATZ
SEPTEMBER 2, 2026
development and communication of deal terms, (iii) inducing the companies to enter into
these agreements by offering and providing them with business from the Clippers,
(iv) paying expenses on behalf of Mr. Leonard and his representatives not authorized by
League rules, and (v) failing to report improper solicitations for off-court income
opportunities made by Mr. Leonard’s uncle and business manager, Dennis Robertson.
The pattern of conduct reflected here—involving four separate arrangements sharing
many common characteristics—further demonstrates the clear violations of NBA rules
set forth in this report.
The Clippers’ most senior executives—President of Business Operations Gillian
Zucker and President of Basketball Operations Lawrence Frank—are primarily and
directly culpable for this misconduct. In addition, Steve Ballmer, owner of the Clippers
and its affiliates, knowingly sought to help Mr. Leonard obtain off-court income
opportunities and, in at least one instance, engaged in a significant act of team
facilitation. Mr. Ballmer also failed to create conditions under which his organization
abided by the NBA’s circumvention rules—an especially egregious lapse because the
Clippers are a prior offender of those rules and were previously and specifically
investigated by the NBA with respect to Mr. Leonard.
Mr. Leonard, through the conduct of Mr. Robertson on his behalf, violated the
circumvention rules by pressuring the Clippers to assist him in obtaining off-court
income opportunities, successfully obtaining those opportunities, and failing to reimburse
payments by the Clippers for personal expenses.
WACHTELL, LIPTON, ROSEN & KATZ
SEPTEMBER 2, 2026
THE INVESTIGATIVE PROCESS
As part of its investigation, Wachtell Lipton conducted 73 interviews of 60 people,
including Mr. Ballmer, Ms. Zucker, Mr. Frank, Mr. Leonard, Mr. Robertson, former
Aspiration principals and executives, and others within and outside the Clippers
organization, and attempted to interview many others. The scope of the investigation
expanded over time, and the individuals interviewed (or attempted to be interviewed)
correspondingly expanded to include people connected to other companies, including
Boingo, Daktronics, and Lockton. Investigators also reviewed more than 200,000 pages
of documents obtained from individuals and organizations, including the Clippers,
Mr. Ballmer’s personal business office, Aspiration, and many others. Because the
investigation involved substantial complexity, Wachtell Lipton consulted with the NBA
and numerous subject matter experts to assist in understanding the information it
received.
The NBA imposed no limitations on the scope or timeline of the investigation, and
instructed Wachtell Lipton to do what was necessary to uncover all relevant facts.
Nonetheless, investigators endeavored to conduct their work as expeditiously as possible.
This effort was challenged by, among other things, the approach of the Clippers and their
outside counsel, who at times delayed in responding to requests for information and
operated in an adversarial or obfuscatory manner that slowed investigators’ ability to
gather the facts. From the perspective of due process, however, the Clippers were
zealously represented throughout this investigation by outside counsel seeking to protect
WACHTELL, LIPTON, ROSEN & KATZ
SEPTEMBER 2, 2026
the team’s interests and were provided every opportunity to supply any information or
arguments to investigators. Mr. Leonard was ably represented by counsel from the
National Basketball Players Association.
While Clippers’ personnel, Mr. Leonard, and his representatives were required to
cooperate with the NBA’s investigation, entities and individuals outside of the League
were not—and investigators received varying levels of assistance from such third parties.
Some key parties with relevant information, such as Lockton, refused to cooperate.
Some, such as Boingo, purported initially to cooperate, but then supplied information that
was inconsistent or not credible to investigators and ultimately refused to cooperate
further. By contrast, Aspiration (through its bankruptcy trustee) and Daktronics provided
substantial cooperation to investigators. Certain cooperating individuals and entities
requested confidentiality or non-disclosure commitments as a precondition to providing
information. Where appropriate, this report has been prepared in a manner intended to
protect that confidentiality, which may result in generalized descriptions or lack of
specificity.
In making factual findings, investigators assessed witness credibility in all the
customary ways—by evaluating, among other things, demeanor, potential bias, personal
motivations, and consistency with other evidence. Key witnesses from the Clippers
varied in their levels of credibility. For example, over the course of the investigation,
Ms. Zucker made several statements that proved inconsistent with contemporaneous
documents, other witness statements, and the broader chronology of events, professed a
WACHTELL, LIPTON, ROSEN & KATZ
SEPTEMBER 2, 2026
lack of recollection on important issues, placed responsibility on subordinates, and
offered inconsistent renditions of facts in separate interviews. By contrast, Mr. Frank
openly discussed with investigators his conduct from the relevant time period, recalled
details of key events, took responsibility for the actions of subordinates, and was
generally consistent across his interviews. While the determination of any consequences
for the rules violations described herein lies with the NBA, investigators believe that it
would be appropriate in making such determinations to take cooperation and
credibility—or the lack thereof—into account.
One of the witnesses whom investigators interviewed was Joe Sanberg, co-founder
of Aspiration, and now a convicted felon for his fraudulent conduct while leading that
company. Investigators approached the prospect of an interview with Mr. Sanberg with
caution and carefully assessed the information he provided to ensure it was consistent
with the documentary record. Still, investigators have remained cautious in relying on
Mr. Sanberg’s information—doing so, wherever possible, when it was corroborated by
other evidence.
This summary report is being issued now at the League’s request because the
investigation has uncovered sufficient evidence to establish multiple violations of NBA
rules. It is not an exhaustive recounting of all the evidence investigators collected in
support of the findings. Nor does it reflect work by Wachtell Lipton to investigate public
allegations or theories of misconduct by the Clippers or Mr. Leonard that were not
ultimately substantiated by the investigative record.
WACHTELL, LIPTON, ROSEN & KATZ
SEPTEMBER 2, 2026
Given the scope of this matter and its complexity, there is always more that could
be done—and, considering the public’s interest in this matter, more information will
likely surface over time. Investigators continue to receive information relevant to the
subjects discussed in this report, including as recently as this week. Investigators will
supplement their findings as appropriate.
WACHTELL, LIPTON, ROSEN & KATZ
SEPTEMBER 2, 2026
RELEVANT RULES AND THE CLIPPERS’ AWARENESS OF THOSE RULES
The NBA’s player compensation system is a set of rules agreed upon by the NBA
and the National Basketball Players Association in the parties’ collective bargaining
agreement (the “CBA”), a central purpose of which is to promote balanced competitive
opportunity among teams by establishing fair limits and minimum guarantees for the
compensation that teams provide to players. The CBA’s circumvention rules are
intended to protect this system by broadly prohibiting arrangements between teams and
players (including their representatives, relatives, and affiliates) that involve
compensation or anything else of value provided to players outside of the Uniform Player
Contracts that the CBA authorizes and regulates.
Among other things, these rules prohibit “any agreements or transactions,” or any
“promises, undertakings, representations, commitments, inducements, assurances of
intent, or understandings,” that are outside of the players’ Uniform Player Contracts,
between teams and players that involve:
“compensation or consideration of any kind or anything else of
value, to be paid, furnished, or made available by, to, or for the
benefit of the player, or any person or entity controlled by,
related to, or acting with authority on behalf of the player”; or
“an investment or business opportunity to be furnished or made
available by, to, or for the benefit of the player, or any person
or entity controlled by, related to, or acting with authority on
behalf of the player.”
In addition to prohibiting such “agreements and transactions,” the CBA’s
circumvention rules prohibit any team or player (or player representative) from
“attempt[ing]” to enter into or “solicit[ing]” any such agreement or transaction.
WACHTELL, LIPTON, ROSEN & KATZ
SEPTEMBER 2, 2026
While the foregoing rules are binding on all teams and players by virtue of their
inclusion in the CBA, the NBA emphasizes their importance and promotes compliance
by frequently republishing them to all teams. Among other places, the circumvention
rules appear in (i) the NBA’s Operations Manual, which is a summary of material League
rules updated and sent annually to all NBA teams, (ii) specific reminder memos sent
annually to all senior team personnel, including team owners, heads of business
operations, and heads of basketball operations, and (iii) NBA Rules Reference Guides
provided directly to all team owners.
In these documents, the NBA not only repeats the prohibitions contained in the
circumvention rules but also provides illustrative examples to teams of how the rules
operate in practice. Specific to the conduct in this matter, these examples of prohibited
conduct include:
“A team representative recommends one of the team’s players
to a team sponsor as a candidate for an endorsement
arrangement. (If teams are approached by business partners or
other third parties regarding a potential business relationship
with a player, teams should respond solely by providing the
third party with contact information for the player and/or his
agent.)”
“A team representative initiates or facilitates an endorsement
relationship between a team sponsor and one of the team’s
players.”
The rules are clear that teams are not permitted to affirmatively make
introductions of players to potential third-party business partners—i.e., teams may not
recommend, initiate, facilitate, induce, or assist in a player’s off-court business
relationships—and certainly not as part of a plan to help generate off-court income for a
WACHTELL, LIPTON, ROSEN & KATZ
SEPTEMBER 2, 2026
player. The only narrow exception is in circumstances where the partner initiates a
request to be introduced to a player, and in that case the rules allow the team solely to
supply contact information for the player and/or his agent in response to the request.
The Clippers were especially aware of the CBA’s circumvention rules in this area
because the NBA had previously found that the team violated them. In 2015, in
circumstances similar to the matter at hand, the Clippers engaged in efforts to facilitate an
endorsement agreement between DeAndre Jordan—a player the Clippers were then
seeking to sign in free agency—and an incoming team sponsor. The League investigated
this matter, determined that the rules had been broken, and fined the Clippers $250,000.
In a public statement following imposition of the League’s penalty, Mr. Ballmer said:
“We believed we were doing this the right way, and any circumvention was inadvertent.
In our effort to support our players in every way possible, we as an organization must be
diligent in complying with the CBA.”
The Clippers were also aware of circumvention concerns specifically related to
Mr. Leonard. In July 2019, Mr. Leonard became a highly sought-after free agent after
winning the NBA championship with the Toronto Raptors. In his dealings with the
Clippers and several other interested teams, Mr. Robertson (on Mr. Leonard’s behalf)
made numerous requests for benefits that were prohibited under the CBA, including
equity in teams, housing, access to private transportation, and off-court income such as
endorsement deals. Mr. Leonard ultimately signed a player contract with the Clippers.
The NBA subsequently questioned the Clippers about these matters, and the team—while
WACHTELL, LIPTON, ROSEN & KATZ
SEPTEMBER 2, 2026
acknowledging Mr. Robertson’s improper requests—denied agreeing to accommodate
them. The NBA’s investigation of the team was left open pending receipt of further
evidence.
In the summer and fall of 2019, and as a direct result of Mr. Robertson’s conduct
on behalf of Mr. Leonard and the controversy surrounding the player’s signing with the
Clippers, the NBA enacted a “rules enforcement initiative” intended to promote better
awareness, compliance, and enforcement of the circumvention rules. Among other
things, this initiative included the adoption of the following rule:
“Teams are required to report to the league office any
solicitation by a player of compensation or other benefits that
are not authorized under the CBA. This includes any
solicitation made by a player himself, by the player’s agent, or
by any other person acting (or purporting to act) on the player’s
behalf. Reports must be made even if the solicitation is
rejected.”
The NBA’s rules enforcement initiative also included a training session on the
CBA’s circumvention rules conducted with each team and its senior leadership. On
December 4, 2019, in the same time period as the misconduct detailed in this report, the
League provided this training to the Clippers, including Mr. Ballmer, Ms. Zucker,
Mr. Frank, and other team personnel.
In their interviews with investigators, Mr. Ballmer, Ms. Zucker, and Mr. Frank
acknowledged their correct understandings of the circumvention rules. In addition, in a
WACHTELL, LIPTON, ROSEN & KATZ
SEPTEMBER 2, 2026
televised interview he gave about this matter on September 5, 2025, Mr. Ballmer
confirmed the same:
“I can make it really simple. We cannot pay a player anything
beyond what’s in his standard player contract, and we cannot
cause anybody else to pay the player what’s beyond their
standard contract. And that would include, for example,
sponsors, endorsers. That is verboten. We can’t do that.”
“In September [2021], we got the deal done [with Aspiration]
for sponsorship and investment. We announced that, and at
that time we hadn’t even introduced—Aspiration hadn’t asked
or we hadn’t introduced, for sure—Kawhi to Aspiration. We
were done . . . . Then, they did request to be introduced to
Kawhi. Under the rules, we can introduce our sponsors to our
athletes, we just can’t be involved.”
As the investigation progressed through a number of months, however, and as the
evidence mounted that the Clippers had again stepped over the circumvention line by
providing improper assistance to Mr. Leonard, the Clippers advanced a novel theory
addressing one part of the conduct at issue here: that NBA rules permit affirmative (not
responsive) introductions of players to business partners for the purpose of helping them
generate off-court income if such introductions are requested by the player or his
representative. The Clippers offered no persuasive explanation for how this theory
comports with the clear language of the circumvention rules referenced above, the correct
understanding of the rules previously expressed by Mr. Ballmer, Ms. Zucker, and
Mr. Frank, or the fundamental purpose of the CBA’s circumvention rules to prevent
teams from providing outside income opportunities for players. The Clippers’ position is
particularly suspect, as will be described further below, because the team took pains to
WACHTELL, LIPTON, ROSEN & KATZ
SEPTEMBER 2, 2026
ensure that its “introduction” emails to team partners were written to appear to be
“responsive” to requests from those partners.
On August 17, 2026, the Clippers appeared to double down on this theory by
issuing a carefully worded public statement in defense of the team’s actions, asserting
that “[m]aking introductions between players and team partners is both an ordinary
practice by NBA teams and a common request of players and representatives.” To the
extent these independent contentions were intended to imply that NBA rules permit
teams, at the request of players, to initiate off-court income opportunities for players, that
implication is incorrect. In any case, as set forth further below, the Clippers’ misconduct
here extended far beyond simply initiating these opportunities.
WACHTELL, LIPTON, ROSEN & KATZ
SEPTEMBER 2, 2026
FINDINGS
A. MR. ROBERTSON PRESSURED THE CLIPPERS TO INITIATE AND FACILITATE
ENDORSEMENT OPPORTUNITIES FOR KAWHI LEONARD
In July 2019, Mr. Leonard first signed a player contract with the Clippers. As
noted above, it is not disputed that, during free agency negotiations with multiple teams
in 2019, Mr. Robertson requested a variety of impermissible benefits for Mr. Leonard,
including guaranteed off-court income, such as endorsement deals.
Within months of Mr. Leonard signing with the Clippers, Mr. Robertson resumed
his pressure on the team to help Mr. Leonard generate off-court income. Mr. Robertson
communicated a target: he expected the Clippers’ assistance in obtaining approximately
$10 million per year for Mr. Leonard. He communicated these demands primarily to
Mr. Frank, but also to Mr. Ballmer and Ms. Zucker. There is no evidence that any of
these individuals told Mr. Robertson to stop making such improper requests or—as
required by NBA rules—reported them to the NBA.
In March 2020, the COVID-19 pandemic shut down the NBA. In April 2020,
Mr. Robertson spoke with Mr. Ballmer and Mr. Frank to express his frustrations about
what he perceived to be a lack of effort by the Clippers to facilitate off-court business
opportunities for Mr. Leonard. According to contemporaneous notes kept by Mr. Frank:
- Mr. Robertson complained to Mr. Ballmer that Ms. Zucker was
making “introductions” for “bull**** deals,” and that “I
[Mr. Robertson] cant [sic] wait on [Ms. Zucker] – I have to get
paid.”
WACHTELL, LIPTON, ROSEN & KATZ
SEPTEMBER 2, 2026
- Mr. Ballmer responded by telling Mr. Robertson that he and
Clippers’ personnel were all “collective workers to try to help
[Mr. Leonard] achieve his financial goals,” and Ms. Zucker
assured Mr. Robertson that Mr. Ballmer would “follow through on
his promise.”
- Mr. Robertson requested a “3-6 month[] plan” for more lucrative
introductions from the Clippers, a list of “5-6 companies” in the
“pipeline” for “potential introductions,” and more frequent and
consistent communication from Ms. Zucker.
B. THE CLIPPERS ACTED ON MR. ROBERTSON’S DEMAND
During a six-day span in early June 2020—within the timeline demanded by
Mr. Robertson—Ms. Zucker made a series of email “introductions” connecting
Mr. Robertson to executives at three companies with which the Clippers were in active
conversations about potential business relationships: Boingo (a provider of wireless and
other communications networks), Daktronics (a manufacturer of scoreboards and video
displays), and Lockton (an insurance brokerage). In each email, in an apparent effort to
create the appearance of complying with the circumvention rules, Ms. Zucker wrote that
the connection was being made in response to a request from the relevant company for an
introduction to Mr. Leonard. No documentary evidence supports those statements (and
the evidence with respect to one of these companies contradicts it, as set forth below),
and Ms. Zucker told investigators she could not recall with any specificity what caused
WACHTELL, LIPTON, ROSEN & KATZ
SEPTEMBER 2, 2026
her to write the emails. Investigators do not credit the suggestion in the “introduction”
emails that each of these companies in fact requested to be introduced to Mr. Leonard
within six days of each other, in the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic, and while the
NBA season was suspended.
Notably, on June 9, 2020, the very day on which Ms. Zucker sent the second of
these three “introductions,” the articles of organization for a limited liability company
called “KL2 LBS LLC” were filed. This entity—the members of which are Mr. Leonard
and Mr. Robertson—later became the counterparty to Mr. Leonard’s endorsement
agreements with Boingo, Daktronics, and Lockton. It is significant that, within three
days of the Clippers’ first alleged “introduction,” on the same day as the second, and
prior to the third—before there was (or could have been, if these introductions were
genuine) any interaction or negotiations between any of these companies and
Mr. Leonard or his representatives concerning potential endorsement agreements—
Mr. Leonard’s representative was already taking legal steps anticipating that Mr. Leonard
would be paid.
C. THE CLIPPERS INITIATED, FACILITATED, AND INDUCED BOINGO, DAKTRONICS,
AND LOCKTON TO ENTER INTO AGREEMENTS WITH MR. LEONARD
In early July 2020, within a month of Ms. Zucker connecting Mr. Robertson with
Boingo, Daktronics, and Lockton, Mr. Leonard signed (on the same day) multi-year,
multi-million dollar endorsement agreements with two of the companies. By the end of
August 2020, he had signed a similar endorsement agreement with the third company.
WACHTELL, LIPTON, ROSEN & KATZ
SEPTEMBER 2, 2026
By early September 2020, Mr. Leonard had received payments under each of these three
endorsement agreements.
Beyond each endorsement agreement having been negotiated and finalized in an
unusually short amount of time, the three agreements shared several other peculiar and
noteworthy characteristics:
- Each agreement was signed in the depths of the COVID-19
pandemic, when, according to both the NBA and an expert in
athlete endorsement deals, companies were rarely signing such
agreements, particularly with endorsers with whom they did not
have an existing relationship; investigators received no reasonable
explanation why it was necessary for these companies to quickly
finalize and begin paying Mr. Leonard under these agreements at
a time of general economic uncertainty and when activation or
performance by the player would be difficult at best;
- Each agreement was signed by a company that had never before
(and has never since) signed an endorsement agreement of
remotely the same financial magnitude as the one it entered into
with Mr. Leonard; and none of the companies has ever signed any
other athlete endorser of Mr. Leonard’s caliber;
- Each agreement imposed minimal performance obligations on
Mr. Leonard relative to the amount he was paid;
WACHTELL, LIPTON, ROSEN & KATZ
SEPTEMBER 2, 2026
- None of these agreements were publicly announced, defeating the
foundational purpose of an endorsement agreement: to obtain
associational benefits of the company’s relationship with the
endorser; and
- Investigators did not uncover or receive evidence reflecting that
the companies exercised their rights for meaningful player
activation; the record reflects that Mr. Leonard’s only confirmed
activity under any of the agreements was a visit to a military base
on a single occasion under one agreement and signing some
memorabilia under another.
The total due to Mr. Leonard under the Boingo, Daktronics, and Lockton
agreements was $18 million. All $18 million was paid to Mr. Leonard by August 2021.
The highly unusual nature of these three endorsement agreements with
Mr. Leonard caused investigators to question why each company entered into them. The
investigative record supplies the answer: because the Clippers initiated, facilitated, and
induced these companies to enter into agreements with Mr. Leonard through the prospect
of lucrative business arrangements with the Clippers.
In early June 2020, at the time of Ms. Zucker’s “introductions,” none of Boingo,
Daktronics, and Lockton had commercial agreements with the Clippers, but all three
companies were in active discussions to provide business services to the team or its
arena. Within weeks following the “introductions,” either before or on the same day as
WACHTELL, LIPTON, ROSEN & KATZ
SEPTEMBER 2, 2026
the companies signed endorsement agreements with Mr. Leonard, each company entered
into a multi-million dollar consulting agreement with the Clippers. Two of the
companies received almost the entirety of their consulting fees up front—in payments of
$10 million each, delivered prior to these companies entering into endorsement
agreements with Mr. Leonard. The third company received its first annual consulting fee
of $2 million one day after making its first payment to Mr. Leonard under the
endorsement agreement it had entered into with him.
Beyond the Clippers’ relationships with the three companies as potential partners
in lucrative services agreements, Ms. Zucker had personal relationships at two of the
companies. At one, her husband was chair of the board of directors during the relevant
time period, and she also had a 30-year working relationship with that company’s CEO.
At another, Ms. Zucker had a longstanding relationship with the company’s president (the
person who signed the company’s endorsement deal with Mr. Leonard), and she
recommended him as “really good people” in an email to an internal colleague charged
with the process of securing services for the Clippers in this area.
A former executive of one of these companies told investigators that the
consulting agreement entered into by the executive’s company and the Clippers was
highly unusual, for at least the following reasons: (i) the company was not in the business
of providing “consulting” services, (ii) the services contemplated by the consulting
agreement were not worth the money the Clippers were paying for them and, indeed,
were typically supplied by the company to clients for free in connection with other
WACHTELL, LIPTON, ROSEN & KATZ
SEPTEMBER 2, 2026
business, and (iii) it was atypical for the company to receive any portion of its fee in
advance of providing at least some amount of services, and atypical in the extreme (as
occurred here) for the company to receive virtually the entire fee in advance.
The facts surrounding the Daktronics-Leonard endorsement agreement make the
conclusion explicit: that company’s agreement with Mr. Leonard was not arranged
independently of the Clippers, by virtue of Daktronics’ affirmative interest in
Mr. Leonard’s services as an endorser or as a result of any request it made to Ms. Zucker
for an “introduction.” Rather, investigators conclude, it was procured by the Clippers in
exchange for other business that the team would and did supply to Daktronics.
In the spring of 2020, and in response to a request-for-proposal process initiated
by the Clippers, Daktronics began to compete to obtain a lucrative contract to supply
digital scoreboard and signage technology at the Intuit Dome. In May 2020, the Clippers
informed Daktronics that it was the team’s preferred provider for this project, but that the
team wanted to agree on a “spend back” arrangement whereby Daktronics would provide
some amount of business back to the Clippers—which Daktronics told investigators is
not uncommon in its industry. Ms. Zucker thereafter suggested to a Daktronics senior
executive that this “spend back” could be accomplished through an endorsement
agreement between Daktronics and Mr. Leonard.
Daktronics believed that failing to enter into a commercial relationship with
Mr. Leonard could jeopardize its ability to win the bid for the Intuit Dome. Later in May
2020, in a call with a senior executive of Daktronics, a senior Clippers’ executive
WACHTELL, LIPTON, ROSEN & KATZ
SEPTEMBER 2, 2026
specified the precise financial terms that the Clippers expected Daktronics to provide to
Mr. Leonard in the endorsement agreement: $3 million per year for two years.
In furtherance of its effort to win the business from the Clippers for the Intuit
Dome, and because the amounts requested by the Clippers to be paid to Mr. Leonard
were not outside parameters Daktronics believed to be reasonable for such “spend back”
arrangements, Daktronics agreed to enter into an endorsement agreement with
Mr. Leonard on the terms described by the Clippers’ executive. On July 6, 2020,
Daktronics entered into this agreement with Mr. Leonard.
In February of 2021, before the end of the first year of the Daktronics-Leonard
endorsement agreement, the same senior Clippers’ executive approached Daktronics
again. This time, the Clippers’ executive told Daktronics that, because the team had
decided to increase the amount it would spend on the scoreboard, Daktronics should
correspondingly increase the amount it would pay to Mr. Leonard. After some
negotiation—and again based on its concern that failing to comply could jeopardize its
business with the Clippers—Daktronics ultimately agreed to increase its second-year
payment to Mr. Leonard by $2 million. In return, the amended agreement called for
Mr. Leonard to provide additional services. This arrangement was reflected in an
amendment to the Daktronics-Leonard endorsement agreement executed on May 20,
2021.
WACHTELL, LIPTON, ROSEN & KATZ
SEPTEMBER 2, 2026
To underscore the point: the impetus to provide this additional $2 million payment
to Mr. Leonard did not come from Daktronics. Instead, it originated entirely from the
Clippers.
D. THERE IS EVIDENCE OF THE CLIPPERS FUNDING AN ENDORSEMENT AGREEMENT
The foregoing makes clear that the Clippers violated NBA rules in connection
with the Boingo, Daktronics, and Lockton endorsement agreements with Mr. Leonard.
Investigators note, however, that the Clippers’ misconduct may have been even more
severe. As set forth above, the timing of the three endorsement agreements with
Mr. Leonard coincides with each of the companies receiving multi-million dollar
payments from the Clippers, purportedly in connection with business to be provided by
these companies to the team. But these payments may in fact have been made principally
to fund the endorsement deals with Mr. Leonard. Indeed, a credible witness with direct
knowledge told investigators that the consulting agreement one company signed with the
Clippers was in fact a ruse, designed and intended to be a vehicle for the team to provide
the company with funds to be paid to Mr. Leonard. According to this witness, the
company was willing to enter into such a sham consulting agreement based on the
promise to win a much larger services contract with the Clippers. This confidential
information came to investigators late in the investigation, and additional steps are
ongoing to corroborate it.
WACHTELL, LIPTON, ROSEN & KATZ
SEPTEMBER 2, 2026
E. MS. ZUCKER INITIATED AND FACILITATED MR. LEONARD’S ENDORSEMENT
AGREEMENT WITH ASPIRATION
Mr. Leonard re-signed with the Clippers in August of 2021. A few weeks later, in
September, Aspiration entered into a series of agreements with the Clippers and
Mr. Ballmer, including (i) a 23-year $382.5 million sponsorship agreement for a patch on
the Clippers’ jersey and the title of founding arena partner at the Intuit Dome, (ii) a
23-year $72 million agreement for Aspiration to provide sustainability services to the
Intuit Dome, and (iii) an agreement whereby Mr. Ballmer made a $50 million personal
investment in Aspiration. After these deals were finalized and at Ms. Zucker’s
suggestion, she and Mr. Sanberg, Aspiration’s co-founder and board member, met on
October 25, 2021. During that meeting, two months into Mr. Leonard’s new contract
with the Clippers, Ms. Zucker raised the topic of endorsement agreements between team
sponsors and players, and she used Mr. Leonard and another player as examples of
players with whom Aspiration could partner.
Two days later, on October 27, 2021, Mr. Sanberg told Ms. Zucker he wanted to
explore an endorsement agreement with Mr. Leonard and asked Ms. Zucker for help in
doing so. Ms. Zucker told investigators that she told Mr. Sanberg that NBA rules
prevented her from providing such assistance, but the record establishes that she acted
otherwise. Indeed, in that very same conversation, and rather than simply supplying Mr.
Sanberg with contact information for Mr. Leonard and/or his representatives (which is all
that is permitted by the CBA’s circumvention rules), Ms. Zucker told Mr. Sanberg that
she would enlist a particular business agent to assist Mr. Sanberg in structuring the
WACHTELL, LIPTON, ROSEN & KATZ
SEPTEMBER 2, 2026
agreement—a business agent who was then under a retention agreement with the
Clippers.
One day later, on October 28, 2021, Ms. Zucker reached out to the business agent
to help Mr. Sanberg. Within minutes of speaking with Ms. Zucker, the agent emailed
internal colleagues with the subject line “Aspiration and Kawhi”:
“[Mr. Sanberg] is making an offer to Kawhi to be a
spokesperson for 5 million cash plus 7 million in stock per year
for 4 years as long as he is with the clippers. Can someone
please come up with a wish list [Mr. Sanberg] should ask for
from [Mr. Leonard]? [. . .] [Mr. Sanberg] doesn’t really know
what to ask for.”
Investigators conclude that Ms. Zucker improperly conveyed to the business agent
the proposed financial terms contained in this email. The agent told investigators that
neither the agent nor the agent’s internal team came up with those terms. And all
relevant witnesses (including Ms. Zucker) agree that Mr. Sanberg could not have
supplied them because he did not have any prior experience with structuring player
endorsement deals.
As requested, the agent’s colleagues drafted a term sheet for a Leonard-Aspiration
endorsement agreement. On November 3, 2021, the agent emailed the term sheet to
Ms. Zucker, writing, “Let me know your thoughts on this.” The very next day, on
November 4, 2021, immediately after Ms. Zucker and the agent spoke on the phone, the
agent emailed internal colleagues: “I reviewed with club to get input,” and requested
three revisions to the term sheet. The substance and timing of the agent’s internal email
WACHTELL, LIPTON, ROSEN & KATZ
SEPTEMBER 2, 2026
demonstrates that Ms. Zucker conveyed deal term information and otherwise provided
her “input” on the Leonard-Aspiration term sheet.
On November 4, 2021, approximately 30 minutes after passing along the Clippers’
“input,” the business agent received back a revised term sheet from the agent’s internal
team and emailed it to Mr. Sanberg. The agent wrote:
“Gillian shared with me that you guys spoke. She asked me to
help you draft thoughts for the Kawhi offer. Please review and
let me know if this is how you were looking at this.”
Later that same day, Ms. Zucker requested a 15-30 minute call with Mr. Robertson
and Mitch Frankel, Mr. Leonard’s certified player agent, to discuss Aspiration and her
plan to “introduce” Mr. Leonard’s representatives to Mr. Sanberg. Ms. Zucker told
investigators it was her typical practice to “preview” email introductions with phone
calls.
One day later, on November 5, 2021, Ms. Zucker sent a formal “introduction”
email to Mr. Robertson and Mr. Sanberg. As with Boingo, Daktronics, and Lockton, this
email was written to appear to be responsive to “[Aspiration’s] interest in exploring a
personal services opportunity with Kawhi.” But this “introduction” came nine days after
Ms. Zucker told Mr. Sanberg that she would call a business agent to help him structure an
agreement with Mr. Leonard; eight days after Ms. Zucker conveyed to the agent financial
terms for the deal; and one day after Ms. Zucker gave “input” on the deal’s term sheet.
Based on this series of events, and based on the record related to Boingo, Daktronics, and
Lockton, investigators find that the November 5 “introduction” email from Ms. Zucker
WACHTELL, LIPTON, ROSEN & KATZ
SEPTEMBER 2, 2026
was drafted solely for record-making purposes and was not a genuine communication
intended to kick off a dealmaking process for Mr. Leonard that was by this time already
well underway.
At various points over the next several months, both Mr. Robertson and
Mr. Sanberg updated Ms. Zucker regarding the status of the Leonard-Aspiration
negotiations. For example, on January 20, 2022, following a series of communications
between Mr. Robertson and executives at Aspiration over the terms of the
Leonard-Aspiration endorsement contract, Mr. Robertson texted Ms. Zucker to ask if she
could speak so he could “bring [her] in the loop with Aspiration[.]” In February 2022,
Mr. Frank received a text from Mr. Frankel—who was also involved in the Leonard
Aspiration contract negotiations—complaining that Aspiration was not being responsive
to Mr. Frankel’s inquiries and asking for Mr. Frank’s assistance. Mr. Frank told
investigators that he asked Ms. Zucker to get involved. Mr. Frankel texted Mr. Frank
thereafter to thank him for the intervention: “I got a response from Aspiration since we
spoke so we are engaged again. Thank you.”
Over the course of the negotiations for the Leonard-Aspiration endorsement
agreement, the amounts of the cash and equity components were swapped at
Mr. Leonard’s request, so the final agreement required Aspiration to pay Mr. Leonard
$7 million in cash and $5 million in equity per year for four years—a total of $48 million.
Experts on athlete endorsement agreements informed investigators that this compensation
was extraordinarily high, especially in view of the limited obligations required of
WACHTELL, LIPTON, ROSEN & KATZ
SEPTEMBER 2, 2026
Mr. Leonard under the agreement and Mr. Leonard’s relatively insubstantial endorsement
profile.
These same experts told investigators that the deal was highly unusual for
additional reasons, including: (i) it was never publicly announced, (ii) it was never
publicly activated by Aspiration or Mr. Leonard, (iii) it was set to expire on March 30, in
the middle of the NBA season, (iv) it did not contain any provisions protecting Aspiration
against Mr. Leonard’s then-existing health status (he was out for the 2021-22 season with
a torn ACL in his right knee), and (v) in general, its terms were insufficiently detailed.
In the September 5, 2025 television interview referenced above, Mr. Ballmer said
this in defending the Clippers’ conduct related to Aspiration:
“[W]e even found the email that makes the first introduction.
It was early November, I won’t remember the exact date. So
where, where could any of this circumvention have happened?
It didn’t. It couldn’t have. The introduction got made and then
they were off to the races on their own. We weren’t involved.”
Mr. Ballmer and Ms. Zucker told investigators the same: that the Clippers’ sole
involvement in Mr. Leonard’s relationship with Aspiration was an introductory email.
Based on the foregoing evidence, investigators find these statements to be
inaccurate (at best) with respect to Mr. Ballmer and clearly false with respect to
Ms. Zucker. The Clippers suggested to Aspiration that they enter into an endorsement
agreement with Mr. Leonard, asked a business agent to help structure the agreement,
conveyed proposed deal terms to that agent, provided input on the proposed deal, and
WACHTELL, LIPTON, ROSEN & KATZ
SEPTEMBER 2, 2026
remained in communication about the agreement thereafter with both Aspiration and Mr.
Leonard’s representatives.
F. ASPIRATION CONDITIONED ITS ENTRY INTO THE ENDORSEMENT AGREEMENT
WITH MR. LEONARD ON OBTAINING BUSINESS BACK FROM THE CLIPPERS,
WHICH THE CLIPPERS KNOWINGLY PROVIDED
In December 2021, Mr. Sanberg discussed with senior Aspiration executives his
desire for the company to enter into an endorsement agreement with Mr. Leonard on the
terms described above. Mr. Sanberg did not have the authority to sign such an agreement
on Aspiration’s behalf and, according to internal Aspiration emails, the reaction among
its C-suite executives who did have this signing authority was swift and uniformly
negative: “I have no idea why we’d do this,” wrote one senior executive; “this is not a
good investment of our capital [. . . .] It’s $48M over 4 years for Kawhi, who is not a big
name [. . . .] Not sure why we would make such a commitment considering we are
already paying a huge sponsorship fee to Clippers,” wrote another.
When these concerns were conveyed to Mr. Sanberg, he told the Aspiration
executives that “the Clippers are asking us to do this with Kawhi Leonard” and that the
team would provide additional business back to Aspiration to help offset the financial
impact on Aspiration. In an email exchange among Aspiration’s CEO, CFO, and general
counsel, one wrote, “[Mr. Sanberg said] that the Clippers are promising to increase the
amount they pay us per quarter in line with what we pay this guy [i.e., Mr. Leonard].”
Another responded: “Thanks for verifying. . . . We should be fine if it’s cashflow
neutral.”
WACHTELL, LIPTON, ROSEN & KATZ
SEPTEMBER 2, 2026
In January 2022, Mr. Sanberg and Ms. Zucker texted and spoke about a potential
sustainability services deal between Aspiration and the Forum, an Inglewood arena
Mr. Ballmer had acquired in May 2020 and which Ms. Zucker oversaw—a stated purpose
of which would be to “zero out” the Forum’s historical carbon emissions. According to
Mr. Sanberg, these conversations followed his informing Ms. Zucker that Aspiration
would not sign an endorsement agreement with Mr. Leonard unless it received business
back from the Clippers.
Over the next several months, Aspiration and the Clippers negotiated the terms of
a sustainability services agreement for the Forum (the “Forum Agreement”). These
negotiations included a number of highly unusual developments that raised concerns
among Clippers’ executives and established for investigators that there was more to the
transaction than a mere sustainability-related deal. As Scott Sonnenberg, Clippers’ Chief
Commercial Officer, wrote in a March 2022 text exchange with Eric Chan, then
Clippers’ Chief Financial Officer, “I never wanted this Forum deal. Always knew it was
super shady.” Similarly, Mr. Sonnenberg wrote in another text exchange, “I cannot begin
to tell you all the red flags with these deals. Just doing what I’m told at this point.”
A notable example: while the deal was described by the Clippers to investigators
as an effort to “zero out” the historical carbon emissions of the Forum, it did not start
with any meaningful analysis or calculation of those emissions. Instead, the initial draft
of the deal’s term sheet from January 2022 contained a heading entitled “Business Back
Opporutnities [sic]” and added “[t]o be filled in by Eric Chan ($7M back in business).”
WACHTELL, LIPTON, ROSEN & KATZ
SEPTEMBER 2, 2026
Thus, at the deal’s inception, it was contemplated that the Clippers would spend $7
million annually with Aspiration—the same amount as the cash portion of the Leonard
Aspiration endorsement agreement. In his interview with investigators, Mr. Sanberg
confirmed that the $7 million annual figure was tied to Aspiration’s contemplated
payments to Mr. Leonard. This statement is corroborated by a February 2022 email
Mr. Sanberg wrote to an Aspiration employee: “[the Forum is] going to purchase $7mm
of reforestation capacity each year from Aspiration to make the ticket experience carbon
neutral and potentially carbon negative. To be clear, the $7mm figure per year is set so
what’s variable is how they choose to use it.”
No Clippers witness could provide a credible alternative explanation for the initial
appearance of the $7 million annual payment from the team to Aspiration in the Forum
Agreement. Mr. Ballmer and Ms. Zucker both claimed that it was based on a study done
by a team consultant who had determined that the Forum needed $28 million to offset its
carbon emissions and that the team would pay Aspiration for these offsets over four
years. But investigators spoke directly with this consultant, who said that the Clippers
had given him a $28 million budget with which to address the Forum’s emissions—not
the other way around.
The linkage between the Forum Agreement and the Leonard-Aspiration
endorsement agreement became explicit in late March 2022. It was important to
Mr. Sanberg that the Forum Agreement be executed prior to the end of Q1 2022. When
negotiations appeared in jeopardy of not concluding within that timeframe, Mr. Sanberg
WACHTELL, LIPTON, ROSEN & KATZ
SEPTEMBER 2, 2026
expressed his displeasure to the Clippers and others and threatened not to execute the
Leonard-Aspiration endorsement agreement.
On March 30, 2022, Mr. Sanberg texted the following to the business agent who—
at Ms. Zucker’s suggestion—had worked on the Leonard-Aspiration endorsement
agreement:
“[I]f [the Forum Agreement] isn’t fixed, I will tear up the
Clippers contract, we will do nothing with Kawhi and we will
go into litigation . . . . Should I call Dennis and Kawhi and tell
them that deal is off because we got f**ked . . . . If [the Forum
Agreement] isn’t signed tomorrow, that’s happening next.
And I swear to God I will be totally honest with Dennis and
Kawhi about why we aren’t doing a deal with them.”
In this same text chain, Mr. Sanberg made clear that he had communicated this
message to Clippers’ executive personnel:
“I told Scott Sonnenberg that I’ll need to break the deal with
Kawhi and explain why, which is that we got f**ked by the
Clippers. Scott asked me not to do that. But if this isn’t signed
by tomorrow, there will be no choice but to do that. Kawhi
deal is not happening without this Forum deal.”
“Spoke again just now with Alex [Winsberg, then-Clippers’
General Counsel] and Eric [Chan] and they have no solution.
If this isn’t fixed, we are burning this whole relationship to the
ground.”
“[D]o you understand how serious this is? This is the ball
game. If this isn’t fixed, the Clippers / Ballmer / Sanberg /
Aspiration relationship is being burned to the ground and so is
the Clippers / Kawhi relationship. ZERO CHANCE there is a
Kawhi deal if this isn’t fixed. You know that right?”
Internal communications among Clippers’ executives confirm that they were
aware of the linkage between the Forum Agreement and the Leonard-Aspiration
WACHTELL, LIPTON, ROSEN & KATZ
SEPTEMBER 2, 2026
endorsement agreement being asserted by Aspiration. In a March 30, 2022 message sent
to Brandt Vaughan, then-Chief Investment Officer of Mr. Ballmer’s personal business
office, Mr. Chan stated:
“[Sanberg’s] last comment was if we don’t sign this deal he
will sue Steve, the Clippers, and burn everything down. But
let’s chat when you can. He will also call Kawhi and tell them
how the Clippers screwed everything.”
And, in a March 31, 2022 email exchange between these same parties, Mr. Chan stated:
“Steve knows that when this deal blows up, Joe is calling
Kawhi and telling him his $12M deal is no longer because of
Clippers management, right? I think so, but just double
checking.”
Mr. Ballmer told investigators that he was aware of Mr. Sanberg’s threat not to
move forward with the Leonard-Aspiration endorsement agreement if the Clippers did
not timely execute the Forum Agreement. Nevertheless, the record reflects that Mr.
Ballmer personally approved the Clippers’ execution of the Forum Agreement in April
- 2022. Given the precondition established by Mr. Sanberg, the Clippers’ entry into the
Forum Agreement constitutes an act of facilitation that violates the NBA’s circumvention
rules.
G. THE CLIPPERS MADE IMPROPER PAYMENTS TO MR. LEONARD AND HIS
AFFILIATES
Subject to specific exceptions set forth in the CBA, teams are generally not
permitted to pay personal expenses on behalf of players, their representatives, or their
family members.
WACHTELL, LIPTON, ROSEN & KATZ
SEPTEMBER 2, 2026
During the investigation, it was discovered that the Clippers had made such
payments on behalf of Mr. Leonard, his family, and Mr. Robertson during Mr. Leonard’s
tenure with the team. A detailed analysis then followed, substantiating hundreds of
instances in which the team paid for personal air and ground travel, accommodations,
gifts, and tickets without then properly deducting the amounts of these expenditures from
Mr. Leonard’s pay (as it was required to do by CBA rules). While the aggregate financial
value of these expense payments was only a fraction of the amounts received by
Mr. Leonard under the endorsement agreements discussed above, it was nonetheless
substantial.
Mr. Frank was responsible for authorizing these payments by the Clippers on
Mr. Leonard’s behalf.
H. THE CLIPPERS FAILED TO REPORT MR. ROBERTSON’S IMPROPER DEMANDS
As detailed in this report, Mr. Robertson, on behalf of Mr. Leonard, made repeated
demands for benefits from the Clippers that were not authorized by the CBA. League
rules—created as a result of the League’s 2019 investigation into Mr. Robertson’s
conduct on behalf of Mr. Leonard—required the team to report these improper
solicitations. The investigative record contains no evidence that the Clippers ever made
such a report.
WACHTELL, LIPTON, ROSEN & KATZ
SEPTEMBER 2, 2026
CONCLUSION
As summarized above, the investigation finds that the Clippers violated the CBA’s
circumvention rules by (i) affirmatively initiating off-court income opportunities between
Mr. Leonard and four companies doing business with the team: Aspiration, Boingo,
Daktronics, and Lockton, (ii) facilitating the consummation of endorsement agreements
between these companies and Mr. Leonard in a variety of ways, (iii) inducing the
companies to enter into these agreements by offering and providing them with business
from the Clippers, (iv) paying expenses on behalf of Mr. Leonard and his representatives
not authorized by League rules, and (v) failing to report improper solicitations for off
court income opportunities made by Mr. Robertson on behalf of Mr. Leonard.
With respect to the four separate endorsement agreements entered into by
Mr. Leonard and the companies listed above, the pattern of conduct engaged in by the
Clippers also demonstrates the clear violations of NBA rules set forth here.
The evidence supporting these findings is substantial. While it is possible that
even more evidence will be uncovered as investigators continue to follow up on
information that was recently received, the record as developed is more than sufficient to
establish the rules violations described in this summary report.
The three individuals most responsible for the Clippers’ rule-breaking are
Mr. Ballmer, Ms. Zucker, and Mr. Frank.
Mr. Ballmer knowingly sought to help Mr. Leonard obtain off-court income
opportunities and engaged in a significant act of facilitation through the Forum
WACHTELL, LIPTON, ROSEN & KATZ
SEPTEMBER 2, 2026
Agreement. Mr. Ballmer also failed to supervise his most senior businessperson while
she systematically violated NBA rules, and more generally permitted a culture in his
organization that allowed for the initiation, facilitation, inducement, and potential funding
of multiple endorsement agreements between Mr. Leonard and team partners.
Ms. Zucker was the point person on all four deals between these companies and
the Clippers, and directly initiated, facilitated, and induced each of Mr. Leonard’s
endorsement agreements with those companies. Ms. Zucker acted on Mr. Robertson’s
demands to help Mr. Leonard achieve lucrative endorsement opportunities, and when
interviewed, she made misleading and false statements to investigators about her and the
Clippers’ role in doing so.
Mr. Frank was Mr. Robertson’s primary team contact, and Mr. Frank conveyed
Mr. Robertson’s various improper demands on behalf of Mr. Leonard to both
Mr. Ballmer and Ms. Zucker. Mr. Frank was also ultimately responsible for approving
payments made by the Clippers for impermissible expenses incurred by Mr. Leonard and
his family.
All three of these individuals failed to report to the NBA Mr. Robertson’s
improper solicitations as required by NBA rules.
Mr. Leonard, through the conduct of Mr. Robertson, violated the CBA’s
circumvention rules by successfully pressuring the Clippers over many years to assist him
in obtaining off-court income opportunities. Mr. Leonard also violated the CBA by
WACHTELL, LIPTON, ROSEN & KATZ
SEPTEMBER 2, 2026
failing to reimburse payments by the Clippers for personal expenses not authorized by the
CBA, many of which were requested by Mr. Robertson.