Latest stock exchange news - kabu, Oyakata transfers, etc.

[code_number3 694]

Will we see Kisenosato as Rijicho in future?

[Seiyashi 4,071]

2 hours ago, code_number3 said:

Will we see Kisenosato as Rijicho in future?

Spitballing here, but depends on who wins the popularity/politics contest between him, Kakuryu, and Hakuho. He might have the advantage as being the yokozuna with the largest ichimon (read: voting base), as Kakuryu's Tokitsukaze and Hakuho's Isegahama are much smaller. However, that might also mean that Dewanoumi, without a yokozuna of their own to contest that trio (and even if they do get one, their closest prospect is Hoshoryu, who will be the wrong generation to contest the aforementioned three even if he becomes first a yokozuna and then an elder in the first place), may want to throw its weight behind one of the smaller ichimon to block Nishonoseki from gaining any ascendancy.

It's almost certain that his ichimon are trying to prepare for him to be at least a candidate, though.

Edited December 21, 2021 by Seiyashi

[Muhomatsu 224]

I was a bit shocked to see that Sanoyama is listed among the borrowed shares on the NSK website:  https://www.sumo.or.jp/IrohaKyokai/rijikai/

Chiyoōtori had long been linked to that share, having been linked as the owner since Chiyotaikai's assumption of Kokonoe (http://sumodb.sumogames.de/Kabu.aspx?kabu=74&l=j).  I am a bit curious to know what is happening here.  Is someone else destined for this share?  Chiyotairyū?  

[Asashosakari 18,783]

Huh, indeed. Maybe it's just a mistake that will get fixed on the next update? Puzzling that there's not been any press coverage either way.

(Note for Tamanaogijima: Chiyootori as Sanoyama from Nov 27, not Nov 28.)

[Seiyashi 4,071]

3 hours ago, Muhomatsu said:

I was a bit shocked to see that Sanoyama is listed among the borrowed shares on the NSK website:  https://www.sumo.or.jp/IrohaKyokai/rijikai/

Chiyoōtori had long been linked to that share, having been linked as the owner since Chiyotaikai's assumption of Kokonoe (http://sumodb.sumogames.de/Kabu.aspx?kabu=74&l=j).  I am a bit curious to know what is happening here.  Is someone else destined for this share?  Chiyotairyū?  

TLDR: Either bad reporting, or things have changed since 2016, or technical glitch.

So I dug all the way back in this thread to find out as well:

When Chiyonofuji died, Akinomaki posted that Chiyootori had acquired Sanoyama. If I read it right, though, his Nikkan Sports source only says that "it is said that heyagashira Chiyootori owns Sanoyama" (emphasis mine). Since then, presumably that information was updated on the DB and everyone proceeded to quote it as gospel (which, to be fair, it pretty much is).

However, there is a first-hand source for kabu acquisitions: the NSK's own yearly reports. There is at least one kabu which was directly mentioned as having been acquired in said reports within this thread, and it wasn't Sanoyama. Lack of evidence is not proof of absence, but it does support a conjecture that Chiyootori's "ownership" of Sanoyama was never definitively proven and everyone (mistakenly) took it as a given.

(Side joke: It's lovely how everyone routinely gets things wrong in this thread. No diss intended - I've made several daft predictions too - but just puts things into perspective when you read posts from 2017 with the knowledge of today.)

Now the question is if it's not Chiyootori (who was heyagashira at the time of Chiyonofuji's death - link to intai post debating between him and Chiyotairyu), who controls Sanoyama?

Reading back to the posts at the time of Chiyonofuji's death in 2016, the Akimotos wanted Chiyotaikai to succeed to the Kokonoe name. In the ordinary course of business, if Chiyonofuji had lived to retirement, Chiyotaikai would have swapped names with him, and if Chiyonofuji had died after that, the estate would have had 3/5 years to decide how to dispose of the Sanoyama myoseki he would have held at the point of his death.

But it's less clear what de jure happens to a myoseki that becomes vacant because its user has to succeed to a heya-attached myoseki. I doubt that Sanoyama "attaches" to Chiyonofuji's estate, and in any case we are well over the deadline for its disposal, unless the attachment did in fact happen and the kabu has been quietly disposed of on the QT which we still don't know about. I really doubt this is the case, though, but in any case we are none the wiser who owns the kabu.

It's also possible that Chiyootori was the original intended owner of the myoseki, at least at the time of Chiyonofuji's death, but ran into the Toyonoshima situation where, because of his fall into the unsalaried ranks, meant he couldn't keep up payments on the myoseki. In which case the next natural successor would be Chiyotairyu, who, having been in makuuchi much more regularly compared to Chiyootori, would almost certainly be in a better position to pay for the kabu. Again, such a scenario isn't unprecedented; Toyonoshima also had the opportunity to make payments towards Nishikijima in the first place because a senpai at his stable was forced out of sumo early. But if Chiyotairyu is indeed the true owner of Sanoyama, then we are very unlikely to find out in a hurry who is the true owner because intra-heya dealings can all the more be done under the table and with a lot less formality. 

There is also the last, profane/prosaic possibility: technical glitch, and some new intern or summat didn't appreciate the significance of accidentally stuffing the names in the wrong order. It's not a "pretty" answer, but it has happened before.

(Sotto voce: In any case, reading the old posts seems to suggest that the "reforms" in the wake of 2011 have been rolled back. Loans which were supposedly banned are now allowed, and money is still changing hands for kabu.)

Edited December 21, 2021 by Seiyashi

[Reonito 1,335]

3 hours ago, Seiyashi said:

However, that might also mean that Dewanoumi, without a yokozuna of their own to contest that trio (and even if they do get one, their closest prospect is Hoshoryu

Not feeling yokozuna Mitakeumi? 

[Seiyashi 4,071]

1 minute ago, Reonito said:

Not feeling yokozuna Mitakeumi? 

I'll think about it....

....

.....

Nope. 

Or at least, I'll think about feeling it if he actually finally makes good on that much-promised ozeki run next basho. I don't know if it's a good thing that his language to the press has shifted more to the usual "do my own sumo" blather; I used to diss him quite badly at one point for talking a big game and failing to deliver.

[Asashosakari 18,783]

14 minutes ago, Seiyashi said:

However, there is a first-hand source for kabu acquisitions: the NSK's own yearly reports. There is at least one kabu which was directly mentioned as having been acquired in said reports within this thread, and it wasn't Sanoyama. Lack of evidence is not proof of absence, but it does support a conjecture that Chiyootori's "ownership" of Sanoyama was never definitively proven and everyone (mistakenly) took it as a given.

The problem is that this particular source only mentions kabu in a roundabout way - the specific section of the report is simply a listing of the dates for rijikai meetings with very brief notes about the topics discussed and decisions made at each one. The Hamanishiki/Ikioi/Kasugayama transfer in 2017 that you're referring to was likely an immediate board matter only because Hamanishiki had been shown the door and the kabu was in an acknowledged state of limbo. Generally the kabu in question aren't even named, e.g. the 2018 report simply lists 年寄名跡継承及び襲名の件 (toshiyori myoseki succession and assumption of name) as a board topic for both January 13 and April 20, and from that alone you wouldn't know anything what it was actually about. The first one was three different events in one - ex-Kobo retiring and leaving ("owned") Otowayama-kabu, ex-Daido changing from (on loan) Onogawa to (owned) Otowayama, and Kitataiki retiring to become (owned) Onogawa - while the second involved two existing oyakata both changing from old loaned to new owned names. None of the seven kabu involved were mentioned.

[Seiyashi 4,071]

Hmm. So is there any avenue where the NSK routinely and officially confirms who owns which kabu, or is it done on an ad-hoc and incidental basis only?

[Asashosakari 18,783]

At the risk of being too flippant - if we knew of one we'd be using it, y'know? 

[Seiyashi 4,071]

2 minutes ago, Asashosakari said:

At the risk of being too flippant - if we knew of one we'd be using it, y'know? 

Right, ask a stupid question... So just to see if I got it right from the last 20 pages of posts or so, basically we're guessing from the order of the toshiyori on the NSK website and from known borrowers.

[Tsuchinoninjin 1,244]

Kind of a similar question, but the sumodb ichimon affiliations are waaay out of date (maybe gave up during the whole takanohana episode), there's some sites with an up to date list, but are those just guesses too?

[Gurowake 3,915]

3 hours ago, Tsuchinoninjin said:

Kind of a similar question, but the sumodb ichimon affiliations are waaay out of date (maybe gave up during the whole takanohana episode), there's some sites with an up to date list, but are those just guesses too?

Other than the name of the ichimon that features Isegahama, how is it wrong?  (I honestly don't know if there's more wrong, or if you're just talking about the obvious ichimon name problem)

[Seiyashi 4,071]

6 hours ago, Gurowake said:

10 hours ago, Tsuchinoninjin said:

Kind of a similar question, but the sumodb ichimon affiliations are waaay out of date (maybe gave up during the whole takanohana episode), there's some sites with an up to date list, but are those just guesses too?

Other than the name of the ichimon that features Isegahama, how is it wrong?  (I honestly don't know if there's more wrong, or if you're just talking about the obvious ichimon name problem)

Oitekaze is where it should be in Tokitsukaze rather than Tatsunami, and Shikoroyama is in Nishonoseki rather than Tokitsukaze alongside Izutsu. I'd say the obvious examples are correct.

[Seiyashi 4,071]

Implications from the news that Shimanoumi is engaged to ex-Izutsu's daughter: how unusual is it for rikishi to put in dibs on a kabu before they have the requisite amount of makuuchi basho?

[themistyseas 226]

9 hours ago, Seiyashi said:

Implications from the news that Shimanoumi is engaged to ex-Izutsu's daughter: how unusual is it for rikishi to put in dibs on a kabu before they have the requisite amount of makuuchi basho?

Putting makuuchi aside given that he'll likely never make it to the level required to branch out (which would be necessary to ever re-establish Izutsu, if that is in fact the intention of taking the name), it's certainly a weird one. He won't even have the sekitori basho numbers for another year! Wasn't Sakahoko's wife digging in her heels here that the name was only going to someone who married the daughter (to whatever degree she can influence that)?

Given that the Izutsu name has been connected to its ichimon since the war (apart from Kitanofuji's spell), one must wonder if he gets it on condition of changing ichimon after he retires (like Kotonishiki bringing Asahiyama back to the Isegahama group - although that was a few months after his branch out), or if the intention is simply to pick up the myoseki and then flip it eventually for an expiring Dewanoumi name so that he can stay put.

Higonoumi/Kise still has a while until his retirement (unless the history of scandal catches up), but I also wonder whether he sees Shimanoumi - one of his own recruits - as his successor given that Inagawa/Futeno isn't his own guy.

[Kamitsuumi 384]

Izutsu's widow was building a stable (+ apartments above it), which will be completed this coming March, at least according to reports from May. So how is that building going to be used, if, hypothetically, the Izutsu myoseki goes to Shimanoumi?

[Seiyashi 4,071]

9 hours ago, Kamitsuumi said:

Izutsu's widow was building a stable (+ apartments above it), which will be completed this coming March, at least according to reports from May. So how is that building going to be used, if, hypothetically, the Izutsu myoseki goes to Shimanoumi?

The stable part of the building was quietly dropped from the construction notice a while ago, so I dunno. 

[Asashosakari 18,783]

The Kyokai made the various Nishonoseki-involving changes official today, stating that the approval was made at a board meeting on December 2nd, so that's probably also the date as of which everything officially happened. The duties list page should be able to confirm via its revision date - eventually anyway, at this moment it's not updated yet.

The rest of the Kyokai site does have the new names and stable affiliations already, so Ichiyamamoto, Shohozan et al. will be competing as Hanaregoma-beya members under ex-Tamanoshima from Hatsu, while ex-Kisenosato's place is now Nishonoseki-beya (and he himself is now Nishonoseki-oyakata, of course). Ex-Wakashimazu will be known as Araiso-oyakata until his forthcoming retirement on January 12; it remains to be seen if he's going for the five re-employment years afterwards.

Somewhat unusually for a simple change-of-ownership transfer, one erstwhile Nishonoseki-beya member will not be in Hanaregoma-beya now; first-class tokoyama Tokohira has moved to Kataonami-beya.

Edited December 24, 2021 by Asashosakari

[Akinomaki 39,755]

Oguruma-beya closes after the Hatsu-basho, the riji-kai after the Hatsu basho is expected to acknowledge it officially. It was planned for after Haru, the oyakata reached retirement age in April, but the lodgings for Osaka can't be used and there are other reasons as well. In April Oshiogawa (Takekaze) plans to go independent, Nakamura (Yoshikaze) is preparing for that as well. https://hochi.news/articles/20211224-OHT1T51219.html

No word about what happens exactly to the rikishi after Hatsu

[Seiyashi 4,071]

2 hours ago, Akinomaki said:

Oguruma-beya closes after the Hatsu-basho, the riji-kai after the Hatsu basho is expected to acknowledge it officially. It was planned for after Haru, the oyakata reached retirement age in April, but the lodgings for Osaka can't be used and there are other reasons as well. In April Oshiogawa (Takekaze) plans to go independent, Nakamura (Yoshikaze) is preparing for that as well. https://hochi.news/articles/20211224-OHT1T51219.html

No word about what happens exactly to the rikishi after Hatsu

Is it technically a closure if, say, Oshiogawa temporarily takes over as shisho of Oshiogawa beya and Nakamura branches out a basho or two later? Or is it possible that, for the first time as far as I know, two oyakata decide to branch out at the same time and essentially dismember the heya between them? 

[Seiyashi 4,071]

2 hours ago, Asashosakari said:

Somewhat unusually for a simple change-of-ownership transfer, one erstwhile Nishonoseki-beya member will not be in Hanaregoma-beya now; first-class tokoyama Tokohira has moved to Kataonami-beya.

Might it have anything to do with geographic location of the heya, since Hanaregoma seems to be planning a heya move? 

[Asashosakari 18,783]

35 minutes ago, Seiyashi said:

Is it technically a closure if, say, Oshiogawa temporarily takes over as shisho of Oshiogawa beya and Nakamura branches out a basho or two later? Or is it possible that, for the first time as far as I know, two oyakata decide to branch out at the same time and essentially dismember the heya between them? 

The verbiage around these situations is always a bit confusing, case in point being the Nishonoseki->Hanaregoma case where Nikkan Sports was simultaneously describing it today as "Hanaregoma is succeeding as the head of the Nishonoseki stable" and "members are transferring to the Hanaregoma stable". The aforelinked Hochi article is saying that it's Oguruma's wish that his two prized students set out on their own rather than take over, but at this point I wouldn't rule out that this will simply mean that the stable isn't going to continue under the Oguruma name, but rather one of theirs. As Akinomaki's closing remark insinuated the rikishi and other stable members will have to go somewhere in any case.

Anyway, I believe we assumed a few months ago that Oshiogawa will be the one to branch out properly (the article reiterates April as the target date) since his heya building is already under construction while Nakamura seemingly isn't that far along yet.

 

(Edit: Hanaregoma-beya can't be treated as a true newly founded heya anyway, ex-Tamanoshima doesn't have the basho numbers for it.)

Edited December 24, 2021 by Asashosakari

[Gurowake 3,915]

1 hour ago, Asashosakari said:

The verbiage around these situations is always a bit confusing, case in point being the Nishonoseki->Hanaregoma case where Nikkan Sports was simultaneously describing it today as "Hanaregoma is succeeding as the head of the Nishonoseki stable" and "members are transferring to the Hanaregoma stable".

 

2 hours ago, Seiyashi said:

Might it have anything to do with geographic location of the heya, since Hanaregoma seems to be planning a heya move? 

So I take it from this information that while Hanaregoma is going to be the new shisho of what was Nishonosseki-beya, it's going to be moving to a different location?  That would be a reason why it would be described as having the rikishi transfer from one heya to the other - physically transferring where they live, not transferring their allegiance or whatever you want to call it.

[Asashosakari 18,783]

2 hours ago, Gurowake said:

So I take it from this information that while Hanaregoma is going to be the new shisho of what was Nishonosseki-beya, it's going to be moving to a different location?  That would be a reason why it would be described as having the rikishi transfer from one heya to the other - physically transferring where they live, not transferring their allegiance or whatever you want to call it.

No, "transfer" was also used in reference to the Araiso->Nishonoseki rikishi, and they're obviously staying put (for now at least, temporary heya and all that).

I don't think Hanaregoma's new place (assuming it's legitimately happening) is anywhere near ready anyway. Outside of a handful of Twitter comments during the last few days that were all very sparse on details, the earliest mention whatsoever that I've been able to dig up was a very brief "I heard some good news today, there's a third sumo beya coming to Adachi-ku" off-hand comment on the (mostly non-sumo) blog of a Tokyo local, less than two months ago. If there's more tangible evidence out there, e.g. along the lines of the named construction site image plus target date for opening that we got for Oshiogawa's new one, I have yet to see it. The sports papers didn't say anything about it in covering the Nishonoseki realignment.

Edit: Although I see now that WWWJDIC's sole provided translation for 転属 tenzoku is "changing assignments", which I guess is treated as not idiomatic enough and thus ends up as "transfer" in all the fulltext translation engines. That sounds somewhat less like a truly physical move, but it's arguably still implying that there's one entity to come from and a separate one to go to, not what it truly is here, a simple name change. (And notably, tenzoku was used all the same for the tokoyama who's going to Kataonami which actually is someplace else entirely.)

Edited December 25, 2021 by Asashosakari