2Pac Shakur statute is being replaced after destroyed, by new owner of amphitheater on Stone Mountain. The amphitheater contained old mixing boards used by the rapper when he was alive. Plaques decorated halls or were probably the main attraction of the amphitheater. Jim Burnett, became owner when he noticed the theater was out of shape and abandoned. The statue, costing 500,000 dollars is getting built from scratch by Nigel Binns, same person built statutes for icons, Michael Jackson and Shirley Temple. The new bronze 7 foot clay statute, is going to look like him, as the other one did not. The guy was dressed in a suit, not that Tupac wouldn’t wear a suit. He had no similar features to be an official statue to represent the man. Lol. Did that sound dramatic or over exaggerated? The new offer for the amphitheater was $600,000, which can’t compare to 4 million to launch for the opening of the museum originally capitalized. When I say capitalized, I mean money invested into property with marketing as a whole. Binns understood she had intentions to keep 2pac’s name a legend, at one point, the property spoke differently than those innocent intentions. Something had happened to Afeni’ that she was no longer able meet those responsibilities, before her death which landed coincidentally by movie’s first release date on his death anniversary last year. She bought the amphitheater on his behalf to exhibit his dreams and for some reason couldn’t meet the needs to maintain the property. Money was not being invested properly, or why the museum was not being taken care of when she had it under her ownership, but only the walk in perspective from Binns. The museum was 6 blocks away for her convenience. She smartly put the building right next to her home, but if that was a reason, there should be more reasons behind the mystery on why she couldn’t maintain the building if she was in walking distance. Burnett has taken upon himself to reinstall the statue destroyed on his behalf when he bought the property. The statute costing almost a million dollars, it might have well as met that million dollar mark by being six figured. At least the statute is going to look in a way that he’s remember as oppose to having somebody that does not look like him. Burnett got the ok first in order to replace the statute. I think there would be some copyright infringement if he had not gotten the ok. The statue sends a strong message with the whole cross the put on his back. But that’s a whole another topic. That would open the door to religion continuance and would make this an essay for real. But it’s a strong statute that’s going to mean a lot but will bring more business to the business owner, where the family doesn’t benefit to the more revenue its going to make. Burnett wants to turn property into a theme park with a water park. Having the statute positioned outside is a smart business move. It’s going to bring in double the cost it took to build it, due it’s sentimental meaning. The statute by itself would stand alone in meaning because people would go out of their way, just to come visit, since they will not have the same access to whole amphitheater which was a permanent home with viewing hours. But the whole lawsuit going into play with all items previously were seized by the Moments in Time Auction Company. All items were seized by family, but majority of it was sold by unauthorized sales that happened after the property was sold.
