Benefit Tonight in Duffy's

[Ceetar]

John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: Yeah, they might find a $100 million bill behind the Dairy Barn. Anything could happen. on edit: Jeff could hit Powerball.

I hope he's not playing Powerball. It's not exactly the best of investment strategies. Not that they have the best record in that regard.

[Guest LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr]

Dude.

[Guest The Second Spitter]

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr wrote: Rubin doesn't have a grudge, homes.

I'm with you, esse.

Ceetar wrote: How is any of that different than the Mets situation two years ago? Don't most teams carry debt? How much are the Yankees in debt on their stadium? Don't all reports suggest the Mets are expected to repay that 25million shortly? .

How many teams take out loans of that magnitude to meet current liabilities not fixed to a specific asset?

[batmagadanleadoff]

Ceetar wrote: batmagadanleadoff wrote: LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr wrote: As per all available sources, the Wilpons-- if you include the $25 million, which is ON TOP of the $75 million that MLB had already (inexplicably) lent them-- are dealing with about $500M in debt on the team and associated assets... and that's BEFORE the clawback even comes into account. Rubin doesn't have a grudge, homes; he has a calculator. And we don't know the terms of any of those loans. We don't know when or under what conditions any of those loans can be called in. The Mets might be operating with the sword of Damocles hanging overhead. Beats me. Who knows? But why predict these loans are going to be called in now, of all times? Wouldn't it make sense to wait until the Mets were stabilized, post lawsuit? Or you know, when they have money? Calling them in now could cut the Mets off from the best likelihood of them making money to be able to pay said loans. Whatever happens, the Mets are still going to be here this year, and next year. As will SNY. It brings in revenue. I haven't seen any reports that suggests this might be the case though, besides wild speculation of what could happen. Anything could happen. the Mets could settle and this could be over next week.

Well of course it's possible that the Wilpons will emerge from this mess somewhat victorious, with their majority ownership interest in the Mets preserved. But you seem to be taking the position that they will, instead of that they might. And you don't want to consider anybody's POV that they might not.

A five year old who still believes in Santa Claus is endearing. An adult who still believes in Santa Claus is naive, at the very least.

This reminds me of another thread.

[Ceetar]

batmagadanleadoff wrote: Well of course it's possible that the Wilpons will emerge from this mess somewhat victorious, with their majority ownership interest in the Mets preserved. But you seem to be taking the position that they will, instead of that they might. And you don't want to consider anybody's POV that they might not. A five year old who still believes in Santa Claus is endearing. An adult who still believes in Santa Claus is naive, at the very least.

I'm not taking the position that they will, merely that I don't think anyone knows, including the Wilpons though they don't want to admit it yet, what will happen.

I find Adam Rubin, among others, telling me that the Wilpons will have to sell pretty condescending actually. I'm singling out Adam because I heard an interview with him most recently.

Very very little is clear right now. It seems pretty truthful on the Wilpons part that they _really_ want to retain the Mets and the focus of their financially...juggling...is aimed at that goal. That's the only real position I'm taking. Do you think this is unreasonable? Where It's murky to me is the speculation that them trying to sell 25% of the team is stupid, that there are no buyers and that it wouldn't be enough anyway. I personally find it hard to believe that it wasn't a carefully thought out strategy towards achieving the long term goal of retaining the team. Sure, they don't have a ton of credibility, so maybe this is all a cover towards selling the entire enterprise, but they've been pretty open about wanting the team to remain in the family for generations, even before Madoff was exposed.

They could still get blown away by the lawsuit. But this extra loan coming to light, from three months ago, doesn't really change that landscape.

[metirish]

Anything can happen is right , maybe the Qutari Royal Family will buy the whole shebang, apparently they bid $1.5 billion for Manchester United, they could by out Wilpon for half that.


Can't see them hitting Duffy's though.

[Guest LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr]

The Second Spitter wrote: LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr wrote: Rubin doesn't have a grudge, homes. I'm with you, esse.

Gracias, comrade.

SS wrote: Ceetar wrote: How is any of that different than the Mets situation two years ago? Don't most teams carry debt? How much are the Yankees in debt on their stadium? Don't all reports suggest the Mets are expected to repay that 25million shortly? . How many teams take out loans of that magnitude to meet current liabilities not fixed to a specific asset?

How many teams do so at the lender of last resort... twice? MLB isn't the bank, or any other capital-supplying firm... they're the people you go to when those people won't lend you money.

[Guest The Second Spitter]

Ceetar wrote: I find Adam Rubin, among others, telling me that the Wilpons will have to sell pretty condescending actually. I'm singling out Adam because I heard an interview with him most recently. .

You know, to an impartial observer it would appear that you're harbouring some sort of irrational, hate-filled vendetta against Adam Rubin.

[Ceetar]

The Second Spitter wrote: Ceetar wrote: I find Adam Rubin, among others, telling me that the Wilpons will have to sell pretty condescending actually. I'm singling out Adam because I heard an interview with him most recently. . You know, to an impartial observer it would appear that you're harbouring some sort of irrational, hate-filled vendetta against Adam Rubin.

fair enough. I'm not sure i'd classify it as a vendetta. I started out neutral, I started reading his stuff, followed him on Twitter...and then gradually lost more and more respect for him and saw more and more negative and pessimistic things show up in his opinion pieces and interviews. It's merely my opinion, but it's based on my observations. I don't harbor a grudge or think he did anything wrong, I just find his work distasteful and not worth reading. At least his opinion pieces. when he's reporting news or information he's probably more dedicated and hardworking than many of other guys, but thanks to the information age anything he puts out there gets expanded everywhere in minutes, so I don't have to subject myself to him to get that info.

[ashie62]

To clarify a Ba1 Bond rating on the Queens Ballpark Company infers default. It is now a junk bond. If it gets downgraded again the debt service increases.

[metirish]

Ceetar and Rubin in Duffy's parking lot in ten minutes, fight on.

[Ceetar]

metirish wrote: Ceetar and Rubin in Duffy's parking lot in ten minutes, fight on.

I won't be down there for three weeks. I'll find him though. I'll pretend to be Saul Katz and offer him a job or something.

[Guest Edgy DC]

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr wrote: SS wrote: How many teams take out loans of that magnitude to meet current liabilities not fixed to a specific asset? How many teams do so at the lender of last resort... twice? MLB isn't the bank, or any other capital-supplying firm... they're the people you go to when those people won't lend you money.

Is this an established fact or your informed impression?

[batmagadanleadoff]

How many teams take out loans of that magnitude to meet current liabilities not fixed to a specific asset? How many teams do so at the lender of last resort... twice? MLB isn't the bank, or any other capital-supplying firm... they're the people you go to when those people won't lend you money. Is this an established fact or your informed impression?

From the New York Times:

The direct intervention of Commissioner Bud Selig to help sustain the operations of the [Mets] is perhaps the most striking evidence yet of the financial distress that for many months has plagued the team�s owners, Fred Wilpon and Saul Katz.... The Mets have exhausted baseball�s standard bank line of credit � at least $75 million Selig and the sport�s owners make available to teams for a variety of reasons in the course of any year.... Thus, the additional money provided by Selig � done in secret last November � may well have been crucial in keeping the club functioning.... Selig�s decision to give what amounts to extraordinary assistance to one of the sport�s most prominent and highly valued teams � one owned by Wilpon, a man Selig has long regarded as a close personal friend � could anger other team owners, who might well wonder why their money is being used to rescue a team with a $140 million payroll.... �The fact that the loan is coming from baseball would be a jarring event because, as with the Texas Rangers, the league is effectively a lender of last resort,� said Marc Ganis, a sports industry consultant. �It would indicate the team cannot get loans from normal commercial sources, which could be taken as a sign of very significant problems.�

[batmagadanleadoff]

After reading the latest NYT article on the Mets Madoff mess, I can safely opine that Alderson had to have been well informed about the Mets financial problems when he accepted the GM position. (There was speculation in the press that the Mets may have withheld crucial information about their finances from Alderson).

I also believe that if it weren't for the Mets $$ problems, it would have been business as usual as far as forming the front office just below the owners -- Minaya would have stayed or would've been replaced by another clown/puppet, instead of by a strong figure.

[Ceetar]

batmagadanleadoff wrote: After reading the latest NYT article on the Mets Madoff mess, I can safely opine that Alderson had to have been well informed about the Mets financial problems when he accepted the GM position. (There was speculation in the press that the Mets may have withheld crucial information about their finances from Alderson).

If you truly believe that, then it's mostly time to put this story behind us. Alderson asserts that has had no affect, won't likely have an affect this year, and he doesn't see it becoming an issue in the future. At least as far as the actual team and signing players goes.

[batmagadanleadoff]

Ceetar wrote: batmagadanleadoff wrote: After reading the latest NYT article on the Mets Madoff mess, I can safely opine that Alderson had to have been well informed about the Mets financial problems when he accepted the GM position. (There was speculation in the press that the Mets may have withheld crucial information about their finances from Alderson). If you truly believe that, then it's mostly time to put this story behind us. Alderson asserts that has had no affect, won't likely have an affect this year, and he doesn't see it becoming an issue in the future. At least as far as the actual team and signing players goes.

Alderson's comment might be true. But I tend to ignore it and give it zero weight because Sandy would've made the same comment even if he knew it to be false. The most credible comments are those made against one's interests.

Why should Alderson being reasonably informed about the Mets finances when he took the GM job serve as grounds to ignore the stories being reported about the Mets finances?

[Ceetar]

batmagadanleadoff wrote: Alderson's comment might be true. But I tend to ignore it and give it zero weight because Sandy would've made the same comment even if he knew it to be false. The most credible comments are those made against one's interests.

Who's making comments against one's own interests? Couldn't it be that comments made against one's own interests are simply comments to which the observer doesn't recognize or know the speakers interests? Doesn't this basically mean no one would be believed if they were speaking honestly in their own favor?

Maybe if Alderson spoke out and said they were cash strapped, he could falsely claim in a trade "Nope, I can't possibly give you any more than that. We're broke." and maybe negotiate down the price.

[batmagadanleadoff]

Ceetar wrote: Alderson's comment might be true. But I tend to ignore it and give it zero weight because Sandy would've made the same comment even if he knew it to be false. The most credible comments are those made against one's interests. Who's making comments against one's own interests?

Nobody. That was my point. A murder suspect who confesses makes a statement against his interests. It's not ordinarily in the suspect's interests to confess because he likely faces harsh criminal penalties. A murder suspect who denies any involvement in the crime is not making a statement against his interests. All things being equal, a confession is more credible than a denial of the crime. But this doesn't mean that the denial can't be an honest one.

Ceetar wrote: Maybe if Alderson spoke out and said they were cash strapped, he could falsely claim in a trade "Nope, I can't possibly give you any more than that. We're broke." and maybe negotiate down the price.

Are you saying that teams might ask the Mets for less because the Mets are tapped out? I don't know. Why wouldn't that work for the Pirates, or the Royals?

[Guest Edgy DC]

I don't think things look good, but

(1) I think it's a good move to bet on rich well connected people to hang in there and maintain their wealth and connections (unless they are in fact somehow parities to the fraud);

(2) If MLB is in fact a major creditor, and it's personnel from MLB who have been sent to (1) find a buyer for part of the team and (2) take over the team's general manager position, they are already operating under terms the creditor has instituted in the interest of getting its money back with appropriate interest;

(3) If the 'Pons can hang in there for a few years, moneys will come --- with the major investments of the last few years behind them, the revenues from those investments to come, salaries coming off the books, a new front office with a history of prudent spending, the recesion in recession, and the neighborhood being Disneyfied.

Back to (1), sometimes, thiings change, but generally betting on things staying the same seems the surest way to get rich.

[batmagadanleadoff]

Ceetar wrote: Who's making comments against one's own interests? Couldn't it be that comments made against one's own interests are simply comments to which the observer doesn't recognize or know the speakers interests? Doesn't this basically mean no one would be believed if they were speaking honestly in their own favor?

A certain amount of skepticism is healthy. So is trust. No one should go through life distrusting everybody and everything. Balancing skepticism and confidence is as much art and intuition and hunch and feel as it is science and logic. But you seem to take the extreme position that everybody always tells the truth. Especially everybody in the Mets organization. I'm sure that those fans that purchased obstructed view season tickets, relying on the Mets representations that there are no obstructed view seats at Citi Field were thrilled to be learned that their view of the game was diminished rather than obstructed.

Here's a hypothetical: Let's make believe that Sandy Alderson's wife is murdered and that you're the lead detective in the murder investigation. You have no evidence that Sandy did it, but Sandy has no alibi either. He says he slept through the entire incident. As the husband of the victim, Sandy is automatically considered a suspect. Do you eliminate Sandy as a suspect as soon as he denies his guilt?

[Guest Kong76]

batmagadanleadoff wrote: After reading the latest NYT article on the Mets Madoff mess, I can safely opine that Alderson had to have been well informed about the Mets financial problems when he accepted the GM position. (There was speculation in the press that the Mets may have withheld crucial information about their finances from Alderson). I also believe that if it weren't for the Mets $$ problems, it would have been business as usual as far as forming the front office just below the owners -- Minaya would have stayed or would've been replaced by another clown/puppet, instead of by a strong figure.

I agree. Someone stop the presses!!

[batmagadanleadoff]

More doom, gloom and commentary on "the loan".

From the NYT:

...the tens of millions of dollars in loan and bond payments the Mets have on their books will not go away; and Commissioner Bud Selig, having already lent the Mets $25 million, may be unable to continue quietly backing the team. Moreover, the one potential bright spot � the start of games at Citi Field, the selling of tickets, the sale of hot dogs and beer � appears clouded as well. One person close to the team said that advance ticket sales for the 2011 season were going so poorly that a sense of panic had begun to take hold in the team�s front office. The team has recently initiated a broad shake-up of its ticket operations. Over the last several months, Bill Ianniciello, the longtime head of ticket sales, was replaced by Leigh Castergine, an executive brought in to overhaul the department in the wake of last year�s steep decline in attendance. As the Mets finished in fourth place in the National League East for the second straight season in 2010, the team sold about 600,000 fewer tickets, one of the largest annual declines in club history. Last week, the Mets let go a handful of full-time employees in the ticket office, according to a person with direct knowledge of the staff reductions. The team also did not rehire another dozen or so part-time workers who are typically brought in to answer the phones when tickets go on sale, the person said. Asked about the claim that ticket-office personnel had recently been let go, officials with the Mets would not comment.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/27/sports/baseball/27wilpon.html?src=twrhp

From the NY Post:

The strategy, from the start, has been a simple one: If you act as if everything's OK, then everything will be OK. Close your eyes, plug your ears, and drink in the merry sunshine of a perfect Florida morning, the healing tonic of all time, and everything that ails the Mets will disappear in a wishful flash. "We are very confident," owner Fred Wilpon said a week ago, "that we will run the New York Mets for many years to come." Now comes another revelation, that without the kindness of strangers the Wilpon family might have had a hard time running the team through Christmas. Yesterday it was revealed that Major League Baseball lent the Mets $25 million last November. The last time baseball made such a loan, to the Texas Rangers, the team had to declare bankruptcy and was soon sold. "We did receive a loan from Major League Baseball in November," the Mets admitted in a statement yesterday, when it was clear they would have no choice but to acknowledge the assistance. "Beyond that, we will not discuss the matter any further." It's just as well, because the longer this goes on, the deeper the Mets careen into debt, the more sad and delusional the proclamations of the Wilpons and Saul Katz become. Forget for a second the billion-dollar anvil hanging over their heads in the form of the complaint Irving Picard has brought representing the victims of Bernie Madoff's fraud; this is about something even greater than that. This is about the viability and the credibility of men who own the Mets. And how can you possibly believe either right now? For two years, the Mets insisted that their financial issues wouldn't have a shred of influence on the baseball team, despite overwhelming pieces of anecdotal evidence to the contrary, always citing their bloated payroll as evidence that they were no cheapskates. And now it turns out they needed to essentially turn commissioner Bud Selig into a loan shark because they are -- in a word -- broke? The Mets continually have patted themselves on the back the past few months, acting like the only honest folk in New York, talking about how they have been upfront and honest about all of their financial issues. Oh, really? Did this loan just slip their minds as they were trying to sell their preposterous propaganda? Did they think that sort of thing would stay underground forever, that major league baseball works under the Sicilian code of omerta? Last week, Fred Wilpon himself shook an angry finger of accusation at a crowd of media, accusing all but the family's fiercest media apologists of trying to bury him and his family. He was speaking, as he does, with a humble, patrician tone but wanting the world to know how angry -- how hurt -- he is to have his honor questioned. If he's that angry, I have a useful suggestion. It's time he started actually acting the part. It's time to be completely forthright, completely forthcoming, to admit once and for all that he has been less than truthful these last two years, ever since Bernie Madoff's fraud was revealed to the world. It's time to admit that the Mets are a financial calamity, that they have been irresponsible to the millions of fans who support the team -- with their hearts and with their wallets. It's time to stop acting as if they are the victim of some complicated conspiracy that involves just about everyone except the other tabloid in town, which continues to serve as their personal town crier. Wilpon wants us to believe that he is an honorable man wronged by dishonest associates, and that would be a lot easier to buy if he only had been upfront about all of this from the beginning. The Wilpons continue to insist that they will be able to keep the team, that dozens of fat cats are dying for the chance to buy a non-controlling interest in the team. Maybe that really is so. We will see. But here's something I want to know: Why would anyone who has the brains and savvy to build a big enough bankroll to write a $250 million check possibly want to simply hand that over to the men who run the Mets? Their defense the whole time has been reduced to this: We're not crooked, just stupid. Yeah. Where do you sign up for that kind of bargain?

http://www.nypost.com/p/sports/mets/wilpons_must_fess_up_FKwciaOXxBxYoq1nfuo2kL

From Mike Silva's NY Baseball Digest:

One consistent theme throughout the Madoff mess has been Fred and Jeff reacting to reported news, downplaying the reports, only to have more damaging news surface shortly thereafter. When they held their press conference in January not a word was said about an MLB loan for $25 million dollars. You would think the Wilpon�s have learned the value of transparency during the ownership, clearly they have not. They seem to enjoy playing semantics with words than just give everyone the truth. Perhaps that is a result of the litigation process. Considering transparency has never been ownerships strength I have reason to believe the worst. Today�s statement was brief and cryptic. It had a feel the �check is in the mail� when it said the loan �will be repaid in months.� Is that assuming the Wilpon�s, to quote Fred, are vindicated by defeating Picard? The history of these claw back lawsuits indicates it�s highly unlikely the Mets will go unscathed. In that case where is this money coming from? A fans worse fear would be it comes in the form of a midseason fire sale. Jose Reyes and Carlos Beltran�s salary should just about cover it. I don�t know where this story is going to lead. Honestly, I rather talk about baseball, but that�s been difficult the last four years of Wilpon ownership. What I do know is that I don�t believe very much of what Fred, Jeff, and Saul Katz say publicly. I don�t believe David Howard, who has been doing PR spin for ownership the last two years. Do I have facts to back that up? No, but this whole thing just smells really bad. That�s a shame because there are some nice vibes coming from Port St. Lucie. The Wilpon�s could be enjoying the beginning of a new era. Instead, they are in a fight for their baseball lives. One that appears to have the deck stacked against them.

http://nybaseballdigest.com/?p=34284&cpage=1

[Willets Point]

Looks like the Wilpons have few options but to Sell the Team NOW!!!