Mapping a celebrity business group from public filings, with a worked Agassi example

Drawing a group structure from public records is the most satisfying part of this work and the easiest place to overreach. The records will show you that entities exist and that some of them share things. They will not show you that one owns another, and the gap between those two statements is where most published group maps go wrong.

This page is about drawing the map of a celebrity business group honestly: what to collect, how to connect it, and which lines you are not entitled to draw. It ends with a worked map of one celebrity's holding entities, drawn only from what an SEC filing states.

What to take away

What to collect

The right-hand column is the discipline. Every one of those records is precise about a narrow thing and silent about everything else.

The three connection types, and how strong each is

Stated. A filing says one entity is the parent, member or manager of another. This is the only connection that supports a solid line. Assignments of marks are similar: the statutory assignment provision provides for recording, so a recorded assignment names both parties and a date.

Structural. Two entities were formed days apart, in the same jurisdiction, with the same agent, and one is named in the other's filings. This supports a dotted line and a sentence explaining what it rests on.

Circumstantial. A shared address, a shared officer name, a shared phone number on a website. This supports nothing on its own. Business managers, accountants and agent services produce these coincidences by the thousand, and common names produce more.

A joint venture between two unrelated groups will look, from the register, exactly like a subsidiary of either one. Nothing public distinguishes them.

Why entity separation is real and also tested

Groups keep entities separate on purpose: to ring-fence financing, to isolate liability, and to make individual pieces sellable. Courts will sometimes look past that separation where the entities were not genuinely run as distinct businesses, a doctrine known as piercing the corporate veil.

For a case study, that cuts both ways. The separations are not decoration, so treating a group as one business is wrong by default. And they are not absolute, so treating each entity as unrelated is also wrong. Say which entity did what, and let the reader see the structure.

The portfolio case studies guide covers following the entity rather than the person, the habit this map depends on. The franchises and licensing portfolio page shows a case where a single mark is divided among parties.

Rules for the map itself

Rule three is the one that keeps this category safe. A person listed as a manager on a filing is a person listed as a manager on a filing. They may own none of it.

A worked map: the Agassi entities

A Schedule 13D is one of the few public documents that states ownership and control in words, which makes it the best raw material for a solid line. Amendment No. 6 to the Schedule 13D filed for former tennis player Andre Agassi's holding in Agassi Sports Entertainment Corp. reports an event dated July 28, 2026, and computes its ownership figures on the shares outstanding as of August 12, 2026. Both dates fall before this page's last update on 2 October 2026. To check the source, search the SEC's EDGAR database for the issuer, Agassi Sports Entertainment Corp., and open the Schedule 13D/A filings; the amendment number and event date identify the document. As at that date, it lets a researcher draw this map:

This map records a jurisdiction only where the filing gives one. For the issuer, for AKA Four, LLC, and for every entity's current registration status, the next step is a check of the relevant state register, which this page does not claim to have done.

Every line on that map is stated, so every line is solid. Note what the map does not need: none of the boxes is linked by a shared address or a surname, and the two entities that actually hold the stock do not carry the Agassi name at all. A map built from a name search would have drawn the wrong boxes. The filing also states Agassi's principal occupation as Chairman of the Andre Agassi Foundation for Education and of Agassi Graf Holdings, LLC; those are further boxes, but nothing in this filing connects them to the share chain, so on the map they stay unconnected. The filing also lists Stefanie Graf as a reporting person, with 1,000,000 shares issuable under warrants; she sits outside the entity chain, so the map leaves her off.

What the map is for

A finished map lets you say which entity holds a mark, which one signed a lease, which one has lapsed, and in what order things were formed. That supports careful writing about structure, and nothing about money or motive.

The celebrity companies portfolio page lists what to check across such groups. The acquisitions and exits portfolio page describes what happens to one of these structures after a sale, the point at which most existing maps become wrong.

Common questions

Two companies share an address. Is that enough to link them?

No. Registered agents and business managers serve hundreds of clients from one address. It is a lead, not a finding.

Can I infer ownership from a common surname?

No, and this is where the worst errors in this category happen. Names repeat, and a coincidence written as a family connection is a claim about a person you cannot support.

What if the register shows nothing at all?

Then the entity may be formed elsewhere, dissolved, or never have existed under that name. Record the search and say so.

How often should a published map be rechecked?

Before it is relied on, and at least annually. Status changes, agent changes and assignments all happen without announcement.