Epstein Data Wiki

Next Management, LLC

Properties2
tagsentity, modeling-industry, new-york, private-equity, epstein-correspondence
aliasesNext Management, NEXT, Next Model Management, Next Management LLC, Next Holdings

31 min read

TypeNew York limited liability company; a partnership for federal tax purposes, filing Form 1065 returns as “NEXT MANAGEMENT LLC”1
Address on its own filings15 Watts Street, 6th Floor, New York, NY 10013, given as the notice address in its operating agreement and on both accountants’ transmittals234
Members as scheduled in 2008Claxon, Inc. 42 per cent; The Wilcor Group, Inc. 27 per cent; Partnership Holding Corp. 31 per cent, on a total of 100,000 Units5
Individuals named as partiesAs the unexecuted exhibit form in the release provides: Faith Kates and Joel Wilkenfeld are each bound by the transfer restrictions of Section 9.9 and each holds a right to appoint one of four Managers26
Private-equity holderGolden Gate Capital, through Claxon, Inc.; Neale Attenborough, whose messages carry Golden Gate Capital’s own disclaimer, wrote in August 2017 “we did actu=lly pay $18MM for 42% of this business in 2008”7
Why it is in the releaseThe agency’s operating agreement, Golden Gate Capital’s internal group chart, an eight-year partner summary and two complete client copies of its partnership returns, of 226 and 294 sheets, were in Jeffrey Epstein’s files, and his accountant negotiated Golden Gate’s exit from the company in 2017 and 2018289341011

Next Management, LLC is a New York modelling agency. It appears in the released files not as a name in someone’s address book but as a corporate file: the exhibit form of its operating agreement, the group chart its private-equity holder drew for internal use, a year-by-year summary of that holder’s partner position, and two complete client copies of its partnership tax returns all sat among Jeffrey Epstein’s documents, and in 2017 and 2018 Epstein’s accountant conducted a negotiation with Golden Gate Capital over the sale of Golden Gate’s stake in the company. This page is about the company and the decisions institutions recorded about it.

Faith Kates is named throughout because the instruments name her: she is named as a party to the operating agreement, one of the two individuals whose transfers of interests the exhibit form makes subject to the Golden Gate Majority Member’s consent, and the correspondent on the company side of most of the messages cited here. She is not the subject of this page and nothing on it is a finding of wrongdoing by her or by anyone else. Her one message already carried elsewhere on this wiki, about a book being written about Epstein, is at Filthy Rich and is not repeated here.

The 2008 recapitalisation, as the operating agreement sets it out

The release contains a 52-page instrument headed “EXHIBIT A / NEXT MANAGEMENT, LLC / AMENDED AND RESTATED OPERATING AGREEMENT / Dated as of ________ ___, 2008.”2 The date line is a pair of blank printed rules; only the year is filled. It defines the “Purchase Agreement” as “that certain Securities Purchase Agreement, dated as of October __, 2008, by and among Wilcor, PHC, Faith Kates, Joel Wilkenfeld, the Company and the members of the Golden Gate Group listed on the signatures pages thereto,” and it defines the “Golden Gate Group” as “Golden Gate Private Equity, Inc., its Affiliates and any of their respective managed investment funds and portfolio companies,” and the “Golden Gate Majority Member” in one word: “Claxon.”2

The copy in the release was never executed. Its signature page, read at the image at 600 dpi, carries three corporate blocks for The Wilcor Group, Inc., Partnership Holding Corp. and Claxon, Inc., each with “By:”, “Name:” and “Title:” over blank printed rules, and below them, under the heading “With respect to the obligations set forth in Section 9.9 and not as Members:”, two further blank rules over the printed names JOEL WILKENFELD and FAITH KATES.6 All eleven printed rules on the sheet are blank. There is no ink and there is no redaction bar. What is in Epstein’s files is the exhibit form of the agreement, not a signed copy of it, and this page does not assert that the instrument was executed in these terms.

Schedule A, read at the image, gives the membership the agreement contemplated: Claxon, Inc. 42 per cent and 42,000 Units; The Wilcor Group, Inc. 27 per cent and 27,000 Units; Partnership Holding Corp. 31 per cent and 31,000 Units; total 100 per cent and 100,000 Units.5

Three provisions of the exhibit form define who could decide what.

  • Section 5.4(a) sets a board of four Managers: “One Manager, who shall initially be Joel Wilkenfeld, shall be appointed by Joel Wilkenfeld, provided that upon the death or permanent disability of Joel Wilkenfeld, such Manager shall be appointed by Faith Kates”; “One Manager, who shall initially be Faith Kates, shall be appointed by Faith Kates, provided that upon the death or permanent disability of Faith Kates, such Manager shall be appointed by Joel Wilkenfeld”; and “Two Managers, who shall initially be David Dominik and Stefan Kaluzny, shall be appointed by the Golden Gate Majority Member.”2 The same subsection carries a covenant by the Golden Gate Majority Member not to permit any person it has appointed as a Manager to serve on the board or equivalent governing body of any of the competing businesses listed in Annex 1.2
  • Section 9.9(b) carries a personal covenant by the two individuals: “each of Faith Kates and Joel Wilkenfeld agrees that neither of them shall Transfer to any Person (directly or indirectly) any equity interests of any Member owned or controlled by them (including, without limitation, any equity interest in Wilcor or PHC) without the prior written consent of the Golden Gate Majority Member, which consent may be withheld in the sole discretion of the Golden Gate Majority Member.”12 Section 9.9(c) makes those obligations run “until the first to occur of (i) the consummation of a Sale of the Company and (ii) the consummation of an IPO.”12
  • Section 5.2(c) provides that “the Company may not terminate the employment of either of the Co-Presidents of the Company without the unanimous approval of the Board,” and the notice provision addresses the company at 15 Watts Street “Attention: Co-Presidents,” with a copy to Golden Gate Private Equity, Inc. at One Embarcadero Center, San Francisco, “Attention: Stefan Kaluzny.”2

Section 5.2, headed “Limits on Authority of Board,” provides at subsection (a) that “the Board shall not take any of the following actions without first obtaining the approval of the holders of not less than a majority of the Golden Gate Units,” and then lists sixteen: among them issuing or repurchasing Units, effecting an IPO, effecting any sale or transfer of substantially all the assets, designating or removing any executive officer, and making “any payment with respect to bonuses or other contingent compensation in excess of $50,000 to any employee, officer, Manager or Member … (excluding, for the avoidance of doubt, any amounts paid in respect of bona fide obligations to models and other fashion talent).”13 Subsection (b) runs the other way, barring the board from increasing the compensation payable to GGC Administration, LLC under an advisory agreement of the same date without the approval of a majority of the Units held by the other members.2

Annex 1, headed “Competing Businesses,” lists thirteen agencies, read at the image and complete on the sheet: IMG, Ford Models, Elite New York, Women Model Management, Supreme Management, DNA Models, Marilyn Model Management, Trump Management, 1 Model Management, Major Model Management, New York Model Management, MC2 Model Management and Wilhelmina New York.14 Two of the thirteen have pages here: Elite Model Management and MC2 Model Management. Neither of those pages names Kates, and the list is the agreement’s own commercial definition of the field, not a claim about any company on it.

The group, as Golden Gate Capital drew it

A single sheet in the release carries the NEXT wordmark, the heading “Org Chart,” the Golden Gate Capital logo and the footer “This information is confidential and was prepared by Golden Gate Capital solely for internal use.”8 Read at the image at 400 dpi, it shows three holders across the top: Joel Wilkenfield, who owns 100 per cent of The Wilcor Group, Inc. (New York); Faith Kates, who owns 100 per cent of Partnership Holding Corp. (New York); and “Golden Gate Capital affiliates,” which own 100 per cent of Catalog Holdings LLC, Series G (Delaware). Wilcor is shown at 27 per cent and Partnership Holding Corp. at 31 per cent; Catalog Holdings holds Next Management Acquisition Limited (UK), Claxon Inc. (New York) and NXT Company Limited (Cayman Islands), with 42 per cent shown beneath each of the first two. The lower row names Next Italy S.R.L (Italy), Next Management Paris S.A.R.L (France), Next Management London Limited (UK), Next Milano S.R.L (Italy), marked dormant, and Next Management LLC (New York).

The three percentages on the chart are the three on Schedule A of the operating agreement. The chart spells the surname “Wilkenfield”; the operating agreement and the 2014 immigration letter quoted below both spell it “Wilkenfeld.”8215

What the partnership returns show, and who prepared them

Two complete client copies of Next Management’s partnership returns are in the release, and they were prepared by different firms in consecutive years.

The 2015 package, 226 sheets, opens with a letter on Berdon LLP letterhead addressed to “Next Management, LLC / 15 Watts Street / 6th Floor / New York, NY 10013” and beginning “Dear Client, Enclosed are the following partnership returns prepared on behalf of Next Management, LLC for the year ended December 31, 2015,” listing federal, California, Florida, New York State and New York City returns and their signature authorisations. It closes “Sincerely, Berdon LLP, Certified Public Accountants” in printed type, with no signature.3

The 2016 package, 294 sheets, is stamped “CLIENT’S COPY” and opens with a letter from SACKS PRESS & LACHER, P.C., dated September 12, 2017: “WE HAVE PREPARED AND ENCLOSED YOUR 2016 LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY RETURNS FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2016.”4 On August 10, 2017 Kates sent Epstein a Sacks Press & Lacher file-sharing link under the subject line “Sacks Press & Lacher PC”; at 10:54 PM UTC Epstein replied, “it needs a sign in and password.”16

The 2016 federal Schedule K-1 for Claxon Inc., read at the image at 400 dpi, records the partner’s share of profit, loss and capital as 42.0000000 per cent at both the beginning and the end of the year, ordinary business income of $1,050,186, interest income of $6,707, distributions of $945,000, a Section 179 deduction of $27,100, partner’s share of liabilities of $402,290 nonrecourse and $7,543,181 recourse, and a capital account moving from $492,058 to $701,380. The partner’s entity type is given as CORPORATION and the partner is marked a general partner or LLC member-manager. Nothing on the sheet is redacted.1 Entity identification numbers printed on these returns are not reproduced here.

A separate one-page summary in the same file, with no letterhead and no author on its face, tabulates eight K-1 years for Claxon Inc.’s position.9 Read at the image at 400 dpi:

K-1 yearOrdinary incomeCash distributionsCash as % of ord incEnding capital accountClaxon Inc. ownershipNext Management LLC total debt
20081,406,4731,428,000102%1,121,68542%9,176,388
2009319,747588,000184%963,55442%9,457,421
2010514,139162,22432%687,10242%13,109,417
2011897,176943,464105%218,75242%13,451,881
2012714,795498,59770%674,31742%12,997,662
2013951,223630,00066%250,22042%15,507,169
2014871,460420,00048%777,66442%17,338,526
20151,014,6781,260,000124%492,05842%16,099,383

The extraction of this sheet is not reliable and the figures above are taken from the image: the text layer renders 162,224 as “162.224”, 943,464 as “943.464” and 9,144,329 as “9 144 329.”9

2011: a $50,000 contribution, and the letter confirming where it went

On October 4, 2011 at 12:03:50 UTC, by the explicit zone on the message’s own Date header, Lesley Groff wrote to Darren Indyke under the subject line “Re: Reminder about faith Kates.” The message she was answering, quoted on the same sheet, is her own: “Did you speak to Jeffrey about faith Kates and the letter she wants written? I just don’t want her to talk to him and have her say she never rec’d anything.” Indyke had replied “I will today,” and Groff closed the exchange with “Ok.”17

On October 13, the day before Indyke’s message quoted below, Kates wrote to Epstein herself, in a message carrying Next Management, LLC’s own confidentiality footer: “Please request that your donation for this year be sent =o dr peter dottino’s lab. That’s who you should send the note =o from your foundation.”18 The header field on that sheet is unlabelled; on sheets in the same export format that also carry a trailer timestamp, the field is coordinated universal time.

On October 14 Indyke wrote to Epstein under the subject line “Privileged and Confidential.” His message is stamped 3:38 PM, with no zone printed on the sheet:

I just left a message for Faith to call me back. Once she does, I can find out to whom I should By hand or Fed Ex this letter. I am assuming that the letter should officially be directed to the Ovarian Cancer Research Fund since that is the entity to whom Enhanced made the check out for the $50,000 contribution. Her email to you seems to indicate that it is to be sent to Dr. Dottino’s lab, so I will confirm that with her and get the address. Is this what you had in mind for the letter?19

The sheet in the release is not that message in isolation. It is Epstein’s forward of it to Faith Kates, and the only zone-labelled time on the sheet is that forward’s own Date header, 19:40:35 +0000.19 Below Indyke’s closing block the sheet also carries Epstein’s own earlier line, stamped 2:49 PM and likewise unlabelled: “did you send faiths letter? re using the money for the lab”19 “Enhanced” is Enhanced Education, Epstein’s Virgin Islands foundation.

The letter itself is in the release, dated the same day. On Enhanced Education letterhead, addressed to the Ovarian Cancer Research Fund in New York, it reads in full:

Ladies & Gentlemen:

On July 14, 2011, Enhanced Education made a charitable donation in the amount of $50,000 to the Ovarian Cancer Research Fund. This letter is to confirm that the $50,000 donation was to be directed to and used to support the research conducted at Dr. Peter Dotinno’s Lab.

Please feel free to contact the undersigned if you have any questions regarding the foregoing.20

The copy produced is a word-processed original rather than a scan of a signed page: below “Sincerely,” the sheet carries the printed name “Darren K. Indyke” and the printed title “President,” with no rule, no ink and no redaction bar.20 It therefore records what the letter said and who was to send it, and not whether it was sent. The doctor’s surname, spelled “Dottino” in Indyke’s message and in Kates’s own, is spelled “Dotinno” on the face of the letter.201918

2015 to 2018: Epstein’s accountant on the buy side of Golden Gate’s exit

On October 22, 2015 Epstein wrote to Kates: “lets make a better record of their results on the market..=C2 whats happening with golden gate. =A0 will they let you buy them out.”21 The sheet is completely unredacted; the “=C2” and “=A0” strings are printed on its face and are discussed under The ”=” on these sheets below. The header time on this sheet is coordinated universal time, which the sheet proves against itself: it prints “2:41 PM” and carries a trailer field “date-received 1445524854,” which is 14:40:54 UTC.21

By August 2017 the process the message asks about was under way, and it was Epstein’s accountant Richard Kahn of HBRK Associates who ran it.

On August 24, 2017 Kahn wrote to Neale Attenborough, whose messages in this thread carry Golden Gate Capital’s own disclaimer, with a valuation of the business that is also a description of it:

Faith and Joel make up the business, nothing more.&nb=p; We calculate the Ebidta, which we think is an odd way of measuring=value of a personal service biz with lots of competition and small growth o=portuinties if any. … We are finding it difficult to get t= more than a 15 million total value for Next ( not including liabilities). … You have not factored in the liabilities,&nbs=; both reputationally and fiscal yet. I think the 5 million cash off=r or 6m over time is fair.7

The same message reported a view of Kates’s to Attenborough: “The 18 million dollar bid that you mentioned Faith said was h=rdly legitimate.”7 Attenborough answered the same afternoon, and took that up: “For the record, we did actu=lly pay $18MM for 42% of this business in 2008. At the time that repr=sented an ~8x multiple of EBITDA. That is not a fictitious number. In addition we did receive a bid for about the same amount fr=m Open Gate Capital, a reputable private equity firm. I do not unders=and why you say that ii is ‘hardly legitimate’. While=I did say we didn’t expect to receive what we paid, I did not say it was immaterial.”7 On August 29 he sent a numbered set of premises. The first of them is damaged on the sheet: it prints “TTM EBITDA is $=.7Million”, the artefact standing where the leading digit would be, and the figure is recoverable not from the premise but from his own arithmetic further down the same message, which gives it as “$6.7 million of EBITDA x 5 multiple” and again as “$6.7 x 0.58”. The second gives its figure undamaged: “The current cas= balance for the company is $13.1 Million.” He premised also that “We invested $18=million for a 42% stake in the business”; that “We received a b=na fide offer from OpenGate Capital which would have resulted in $18 millio= in proceeds for us (and in fact a $17 million distribution to Faith and Joel)”; and that “when Elite Models in Europe contacted us with=an interest in buying the company, Faith told me to relay to them that they would not contemplate selling to Elite for less than $100=million (which at the time was a +10x synergy-adjusted EBITDA value). =Ultimately they walked based on that value requirement.”7 His own arithmetic on the same sheet: “a very mod=st calculation of value would be $6.7 million of EBITDA x 5 multiple (a 50%=discount to the market) or an enterprise value of $33.5 million and if we took a conservative view of what excess cash is at the mo=ent of $8 million, would result in a total equity value of $41.5 million.”7 That sentence does not end there. It runs off the foot of the sheet at “&n=sp; Our 42% would equate to”, and the next sheet opens “$17.4 million of proceeds to us.” In the following paragraph on that sheet Attenborough put a qualification on the calculation: “We are, however, willing to=take much less than this very discounted value calculation, as I have menti=ned to you before.” He then priced Kahn’s offer against it: “However, your proposal of $5 million of proceeds to us represents an equity value of $11.9 million ($5/.42), an e=terprise value of $3.9 million ($11.9 million - $8 million of excess cash) o= an EBITDA multiple of 0.58x ($6.7 x 0.58 = $3.9 enterprise value), a lev=l that is far too low for us to accept.”7 Kahn’s own answer to the $18 million figure sits on the same sheet, in his message stamped “Friday, August 25, 2017 11:51 AM”, with no zone printed on it: “Regarding the 18 million, we have distributio=s from Next directly to the former shareholders of the claxon offshore enti=y of approx 3.”7 Kahn forwarded the whole exchange to Epstein.7

On September 7, 2017, at 10:11:47 AM EDT as labelled on its own header, Attenborough set out what Golden Gate proposed to sell:

Attached is the entity org chart for our Next Holdings.

In the transaction we are contemplating, we will be selling Claxon Inc., NEXT Management Acquisition Limited, and NXT Company Limited.

To be clear, at the end of the transaction we would no longer own any interests in Next.

As soon as we receive your list of known actions against the company we will get you a proposed term sheet.10

Kahn forwarded that message to Epstein at 14:22:10 UTC the same day, and the forward’s attachment line reads “Next_-_Org_Chart.pdf.”10 The chart produced in the release carries Golden Gate Capital’s internal-use footer and shows the same three entities in Catalog Holdings’ column; the release does not establish that the sheet produced is that attachment.810

The negotiation that followed is preserved as a single thread.11 Kahn sent “attached are known lawsuits against next. still waiting on 2 things: 1 from paris 1 from Milan” on September 18; Attenborough answered the same morning, “Let me know when you have the information on Paris and Milan and then we’ll send over our proposed LOI”; and on September 29 Kahn wrote, “neale the last remaining issue is the antitrust in milan. should be in 2018..”11 Attenborough asked to be put in touch with the company’s attorneys so that Golden Gate’s inside counsel, Rachel Masory, could speak to them, and said on November 14 that Golden Gate was “still awaiting feedback from the attorney on the current litigation.”11 Masory sent a proposed term sheet on November 30, 2017, her message stamped 5:47 PM with no zone on the sheet; on December 1 Kahn asked “can you tell me why the promissiory note for 6 million paid a week later..?”; and Masory answered the same day, at 12:56:44 PM EST as labelled on the sheet, that “Regarding the promissory note being paid a week later, my understanding is that NEXT needs some time to move the money to the U.S. from overseas and that this structure may be advisable from a tax perspective as well.”11 Kahn forwarded the thread to Epstein, whose entire reply, on December 4, 2017 at 14:57:53 UTC by the explicit zone on the Date header, was: “call in number? you and I should be on it.”11

The process was still running in May 2018. On May 1, 2018 at 21:05:56 UTC, Epstein wrote to Faith Kates and Richard Kahn together, on a sheet that carries no redaction at all:

tried to call, rich has a call tomorw with nea=e and group. you must be careful. !! =C2 your books make no sense and they are your partners. =A0 !!!!22

On May 2, 2018 Kahn forwarded to Epstein a Golden Gate message headed “RE: Call to =iscuss NEXT Process ~ 4:00 pm ET/1:00 pm PT,” sent by Attenborough, stamped 12:33:49 PM with its zone label itself damaged by the same artefact, and copied to Tyler Shean and Chris Lawler.23 The page does not supply the character the export dropped from the word “nea=e,” and does not assert whom it names.

The ”=” on these sheets

Several of the messages above print an isolated ”=” in the middle of ordinary words, and one prints “=C2” and “=A0” as text. These are an artefact of the export from which the release was made, not a redaction, and the sheets prove it against themselves: the same substitution appears in words whose spelling is not in doubt, including “privileg=d”, “disc=osure”, “communicati=n” and “g=ail.com” on the May 2018 sheet, and, on a different message in the same release, the name “Faith =ates” in one quoted attribution line on a sheet that prints the same name in full three times.2224 The substitution also reaches HTML spacing entities that the export left standing in the text: the entity “ ” prints on the August 2017 valuation sheets, read at the image at 600 dpi, in several damaged forms, among them “&nb=p;”, “&nbs=;” and “&n=sp;”.7 Quotations on this page reproduce the artefact where it falls rather than repairing it, because repairing it would mean supplying characters the sheet does not carry, and eliding it would make an encoding fault look like a withheld word.

A 2014 immigration letter’s account of the agency’s origin, and where that account comes from

An 11-page letter dated July 25, 2014 from MC2 Models Miami, LLC to the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services Vermont Service Center, filed in support of an O-1 petition for Jean-Luc Brunel as its beneficiary, states:

Although Mr. Brunel later sold his rights to Next Management to Faith Kates in 1989, who partnered with Joel Wilkenfeld a couple of years later; NEXT represents some of the most prestigious women and men in the fashion world today.15

The sentence immediately above that one is the letter’s actual origin claim, and it is the harder of the two: “Mr. Brunel’s success was so great with Karin Paris that in the next ten years, he founded Next Model Management in Los Angeles, California in 1980, Next Model Management in Miami, Florida in 1982, Model Management Group also in Miami, Florida in 1986, and Rebecca Commercial Casting in New York City, in 1988.”15

Both are assertions made on Brunel’s behalf in a petition to a federal agency, not a documented founding and not a documented sale. They carry two further limits that matter. The letter is written in the third person about Mr. Brunel by the petitioning company; and its last page, read at the image, ends “Truly Yours,” with the space beneath it blank. There is no name, no title and no signature, and there is no redaction bar there either.25 The same text appears within the Miami-Dade case file for Brunel v. Epstein, where the letter is an exhibit.15 See Jean-Luc Brunel for that litigation.

The agency’s own product, reaching Epstein

On June 30, 2017 at 18:09:09 UTC, by the explicit zone on the Date header, Kates forwarded Epstein a message under the subject line “Fwd: JOSIE,” with two attachments, one of them “Video.mov.” Above the agency’s public profile URL for the model she wrote “She’s stunning,” and below it the message reproduces the agency’s own model-card copy, which opens “20yrs old from California, daughter of famed baseball player Jose Canseco” and lists her editorial credits, her interests and her Instagram following.26 The model is Josie Canseco, then a professional model represented by the agency and profiled on its public website, and the age on the face of the sheet is 20. Body measurements reproduced from the model card on that sheet are not carried here, and nothing on this page is an allegation about her. Kates’s own e-mail address is barred on the sheet; nothing else on it is.26

MC2 Model Management; Elite Model Management; HBRK Associates; Enhanced Education; Richard Kahn; Darren Indyke; Lesley Groff; Jean-Luc Brunel; Filthy Rich.

Footnotes

  1. Schedule K-1 (Form 1065) 2016 for partner Claxon Inc., in the same client copy. Read at the image at 400 dpi. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00806113 p.144. Identification-number fields printed on this sheet are not reproduced here. ↩ ↩2

  2. “EXHIBIT A / NEXT MANAGEMENT, LLC / AMENDED AND RESTATED OPERATING AGREEMENT / Dated as of ________ ___, 2008,” 52 sheets. Every sheet cited on this page was read at the image: the cover sheet, date line and legend at 300 dpi on p.1; the definitions of “Golden Gate Group” and “Golden Gate Majority Member” at 400 dpi on p.8 and of “Purchase Agreement” at 300 dpi on p.10; Sections 5.2(c), 5.3 and 5.4(a)(i)-(ii) at 300 dpi on p.23, and Section 5.4(a)(iii) with the competing-business restriction on p.24; the notice provision at 300 dpi on p.47, where two telecopy values are barred and everything else is in the clear. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA01076944 pp.1, 8, 10, 23-24, 47. ↩ ↩2 ↩3 ↩4 ↩5 ↩6 ↩7 ↩8 ↩9 ↩10

  3. Berdon LLP transmittal letter to Next Management, LLC for the year ended December 31, 2015, first sheet of a 226-sheet client copy of the partnership returns. Read at the image at 300 dpi; the closing is printed type with no signature and nothing on the sheet is redacted. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00806407 p.1. Entity identification numbers printed in this run are not reproduced here. ↩ ↩2 ↩3

  4. Sacks Press & Lacher, P.C. cover letter of September 12, 2017 enclosing the 2016 limited liability company returns, at PDF sheet 2 of a 294-sheet client copy; the run’s first sheet is stamped “CLIENT’S COPY.” Read at the image at 300 dpi; nothing on the sheet is redacted. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00806113 p.2. Entity identification numbers and a bank-account fragment printed in this run are not reproduced here. ↩ ↩2 ↩3

  5. Schedule A of the same instrument, PDF sheet 51, read at the image at 400 dpi. The text layer renders “Claxon, Inc.” as “Chown, Inc.” and 27% as “2rA”; the figures above are from the image. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA01076944 p.51. ↩ ↩2

  6. Signature page of the same instrument, PDF sheet 50, read at the image at 600 dpi. All eleven printed rules on the sheet are blank: no ink, no printed name on any rule, and no redaction bar. Sheet numbers cited on this page are the 1-indexed PDF sheet, which is what the pins in these URLs address, and not a document’s own printed pagination: this sheet prints its own page number as 46. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA01076944 p.50. ↩ ↩2

  7. Richard Kahn forwarding to Jeffrey Epstein the thread “Fwd: Next,” six sheets, running August 24 to August 30, 2017. All six sheets were read at the image: pp.2, 3 and 5 at 600 dpi, pp.1 and 6 at 400 dpi, and p.4 at 400 dpi. The two ends of the date range are read at the image and neither carries a zone: the outer forward’s field on p.1 reads “Wednesday, August 30, 2017 2:51 AM,” and the attribution line on p.5 reads “On Aug 24, 2017, at 3:28 PM, Neale Attenborough … wrote:”. The one inner header on p.1 that is zone-labelled reads “August 29, 2017 at 10:48:17 PM EDT”. Attenborough’s “$18MM … ~8x multiple of EBITDA” is on p.4 and is taken from the image: the text layer renders it “$ismm” and “-.3x”. The numbered premises and the $33.5 million and $41.5 million calculations are on p.2, and the sentence that runs off the foot of p.2 at “Our 42% would equate to” finishes at the head of p.3 with “$17.4 million of proceeds to us”; the concession, the arithmetic on the $5 million proposal and Kahn’s message of August 25 are all on p.3. Kahn’s valuation message is on p.5. On pp.1, 3, 4 and 5 e-mail addresses are barred, and contact lines are barred on p.1 as well; nothing else is barred on those sheets, and pp.2 and 6 carry no bar. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA02380050 pp.1-6. ↩ ↩2 ↩3 ↩4 ↩5 ↩6 ↩7 ↩8 ↩9 ↩10

  8. NEXT “Org Chart,” one sheet, footed “This information is confidential and was prepared by Golden Gate Capital solely for internal use” and carrying the Golden Gate Capital logo. Read at the image at 400 dpi; nothing on the sheet is redacted. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00806111 p.1. ↩ ↩2 ↩3 ↩4

  9. Untitled one-page partner summary, “Claxon Inc.” and “Total for Next Management LLC,” eight K-1 years 2008 to 2015. Read at the image at 400 dpi; no letterhead, no author and no redaction on the sheet. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00806112 p.1. ↩ ↩2 ↩3

  10. Richard Kahn to Jeffrey Epstein, “Fwd: Next Entities,” Date header “Thu, 07 Sep 2017 14:22:10 +0000,” attachment line “Next_-_Org_Chart.pdf,” forwarding Neale Attenborough’s message of “September 7, 2017 at 10:11:47 AM EDT.” Read at the image at 300 dpi. Eight values on the sheet are barred: five e-mail addresses and three contact lines. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA01032143 p.1. ↩ ↩2 ↩3 ↩4

  11. Jeffrey Epstein to Richard Kahn, “Re: Next Entities,” Date header “Mon, 04 Dec 2017 14:57:53 +0000,” nine sheets carrying the thread from September 7 to December 4, 2017. Read at the image at 300 dpi on pp.1, 2 and 4 to 7; pp.3, 8 and 9 were not opened, and the cost is that this citation cannot report what those three sheets withhold. On every sheet opened, each e-mail address is barred and several closing blocks are barred whole, which the extraction shows as simply absent. Some inner times are labelled EST or Pacific on the sheets themselves; others carry no zone. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00939116 pp.1-2, 4-7. ↩ ↩2 ↩3 ↩4 ↩5 ↩6

  12. Section 9.9, “Indirect Transfers,” subsections (a), (b) and (c), PDF sheet 38, read at the image at 300 dpi. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA01076944 p.38. ↩ ↩2

  13. Section 5.2, “Limits on Authority of Board,” subsection (a) and items (i) to (xi), PDF sheet 22, read at the image at 300 dpi; items (xii) to (xvi) and subsection (b) at PDF sheet 23. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA01076944 pp.22-23. ↩

  14. “ANNEX 1 / Competing Businesses,” PDF sheet 52, read at the image at 400 dpi. Thirteen entries, no bar and no closed gap on the sheet. The text layer renders “Wilhelmina New York” as “Wilbelmina New York.” https://epstein-data.com/EFTA01076944 p.52. ↩

  15. Letter of July 25, 2014 from MC2 Models Miami, LLC to United States Citizenship and Immigration Services, Vermont Service Center, “RE: I-129, Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker O-1 Extraordinary Ability as an Art Director and Talent Coordinator. Petitioner: MC2 Models Miami, LLC. Beneficiary: Jean-Luc Didier Henri-Rene BRUNEL,” 11 printed pages plus an exhibit list. Quoted passage read at the image at 300 dpi; the text layer renders “Wilkenfeld” as “Wilkenfelcl.” Nothing on the sheet is redacted. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA01113657 p.4. The same letter is in the Miami-Dade case file for Brunel v. Epstein at https://epstein-data.com/HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_011982 and, within a copy of that file, at https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00599855 p.75. ↩ ↩2 ↩3 ↩4

  16. Jeffrey Epstein to Faith Kates, “Re: Sacks Press & Lacher PC,” August 10, 2017, which reproduces Kates’s message of the same evening in full. Read at the image at 300 dpi; two barred values on the sheet, both e-mail addresses, and nothing else. Header time 10:54 PM against the sheet’s own trailer field “date-received 1502405654,” 22:54:14 UTC, so the header field is coordinated universal time. The file-sharing URL printed on the sheet is not reproduced here. Kates’s own copy of her message is at https://epstein-data.com/EFTA02642333 p.1. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA02642363 p.1. ↩

  17. Lesley Groff to Darren Indyke, “Re: Reminder about faith Kates,” Date header “Tue, 04 Oct 2011 12:03:50 +0000.” Read at the image at 300 dpi. Four e-mail addresses on the sheet are barred; nothing else is. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00426632 p.1. ↩

  18. Faith Kates to Jeffrey Epstein, October 13, 2011. Read at the image at 300 dpi. Two values on the sheet are barred, the sender’s e-mail address and one block below the message; nothing else is. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA01772661 p.1. ↩ ↩2

  19. Jeffrey Epstein forwarding Darren Indyke’s message to Faith Kates, “Fwd: Privileged and Confidential,” Date header “Fri, 14 Oct 2011 19:40:35 +0000”; the forwarded message is stamped “Fri, Oct 14, 2011 at 3:38 PM” and Epstein’s quoted line “On Oct 14, 2011, at 2:49 PM,” neither of them carrying a zone on the sheet; the Date header is the only labelled time on it. Read at the image at 400 dpi. Six values on the sheet are barred: two e-mail addresses and four contact lines. Address and telephone values printed on this page are not reproduced here. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00921942 p.1. ↩ ↩2 ↩3 ↩4

  20. Letter on Enhanced Education letterhead to the Ovarian Cancer Research Fund, dated October 14, 2011. Read at the image at 400 dpi; nothing on the sheet is redacted, and the closing carries a printed name and title with no rule and no signature. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA01110732 p.1. ↩ ↩2 ↩3

  21. Jeffrey Epstein to Faith Kates, October 22, 2015. Read at the image at 300 dpi; the sheet carries no redaction. Header time 2:41 PM against the sheet’s own trailer field “date-received 1445524854,” which is 14:40:54 UTC, so the header field is coordinated universal time. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA02483776 p.1. ↩ ↩2

  22. Jeffrey Epstein to Faith Kates and Richard Kahn, May 1, 2018. Read at the image at 400 dpi; the sheet carries no redaction anywhere. Header time 9:06 PM against the sheet’s own trailer field “date-received 1525208756,” which is 21:05:56 UTC, so the header field is coordinated universal time. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA02454014 p.1. ↩ ↩2

  23. Richard Kahn to Jeffrey Epstein, “Fwd: Call to discuss NEXT Process ~ 4:00 pm ET/1:00 pm PT,” May 2, 2018, forwarding Neale Attenborough’s message of “May 2, 2018 at 12:33:49 PM =DT.” Read at the image at 300 dpi; every e-mail address on the sheet is barred, along with five contact lines, and nothing else is. The conference dial-in and passcode printed on the sheet are not reproduced here. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA02453089 p.1. ↩

  24. Jeffrey Epstein to Faith Kates, November 23, 2017, PDF sheet 1 of a four-sheet run, cited here only for the export artefact: one quoted attribution line reads “Faith =ates” while the same name prints in full three times on the same sheet, and the sender’s address appears on the sheet both intact and with the same single-character substitution. Read at the image at 300 dpi. The run’s trailer field “date-received 1511444204,” 13:36:44 UTC, sits on PDF sheet 4, from the text layer, and matches the 1:37 PM header read at the image on p.1. No content of this message is used. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA02583415 p.1. ↩

  25. Last sheet of the same letter. Read at the image at 300 dpi: the text ends “Truly Yours,” and the remainder of the sheet is blank. There is no printed name, no title, no rule and no redaction bar. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA01113657 p.12. ↩

  26. Faith Kates to Jeffrey Epstein, “Fwd: JOSIE,” Date header “Fri, 30 Jun 2017 18:09:09 +0000,” attachments “Video.mov; ATT00001.htm.” Read at the image at 300 dpi. The sender’s e-mail address is barred; nothing else on the sheet is. Sheets 2 to 7 of the run were not opened and are not described here. Measurement lines printed on this page are not reproduced here. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00665571 p.1. ↩ ↩2

Backlinks