end the curse Posted September 10, 2009 Report Posted September 10, 2009 Didn't we just go through this sh*t with someone else? If you are disputing facts, then dispute the facts and provide evidence to back it up. Don't run off at the lip. It's easy, let me show you: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bankruptcy#United_States "In Chapter 11, the debtor retains ownership and control of its assets and is re-termed a debtor in possession ("DIP"). The debtor in possession runs the day to day operations of the business while creditors and the debtor work with the Bankruptcy Court in order to negotiate and complete a plan. Upon meeting certain requirements (e.g. fairness among creditors, priority of certain creditors) creditors are permitted to vote on the proposed plan. If a plan is confirmed the debtor will continue to operate and pay its debts under the terms of the confirmed plan. If a specified majority of creditors do not vote to confirm a plan, additional requirements may be imposed by the court in order to confirm the plan." Wasn't that easy? Now you know that under Chapter 11, the debtor retains ownership, but the creditors determine the business plan. Perhaps you were not aware that the condition of the "reorganization plan" Moyes filed under Chapter 11 was selling the Coyotes to Balsillie, who in turn would pay off 100% of the secured debt and 95% of the unsecured creditors? As the "debtor in possession" he (Moyes) is the legal trustee who reports to the bankruptcy court. The court than decides if his plan is credible and successfully fulfills the obligations to the creditors. Since this bid is certainly credible, and does offer the clearest long term reorganization plan for creditors and the organization, it is only going to be rejected if the NHL can convince the judge that the court doesn't have the right to rule against their vote to reject the reorganization plan to sell to Balsillie.
shrader Posted September 10, 2009 Report Posted September 10, 2009 At least this back and forth is entertaining and somewhat educational.
... Posted September 10, 2009 Report Posted September 10, 2009 Perhaps you were not aware that the condition of the "reorganization plan" Moyes filed under Chapter 11 was selling the Coyotes to Balsillie, who in turn would pay off 100% of the secured debt and 95% of the unsecured creditors? As the "debtor in possession" he (Moyes) is the legal trustee who reports to the bankruptcy court. The court than decides if his plan is credible and successfully fulfills the obligations to the creditors. Since this bid is certainly credible, and does offer the clearest long term reorganization plan for creditors and the organization, it is only going to be rejected if the NHL can convince the judge that the court doesn't have the right to rule against their vote to reject the reorganization plan to sell to Balsillie. The problems are: can Moyes be a legit creditor since he is the debtor? And Moyes is also not the only creditor listed in the filing, therefore he would not, if allowed in the first place, be the only party to vote on the reorganization plan. The NHL is on the list and could vote it down based on prior agreements and legal precedence.
end the curse Posted September 10, 2009 Report Posted September 10, 2009 It certainly is possible that Moyes will be rejected as a creditor, we'll have to wait and see. If he is, it still doesn't preclude him from being listed as a debtor who would be eligible to receive residual money after the primary creditor obligations are met. Honestly, I'm really not sure what the judge will decide regarding Moyes recovering lost money if he is not accepted as a creditor...someone much smarter than me, who can also read the judge's mind, would have to answer that.
... Posted September 10, 2009 Report Posted September 10, 2009 It certainly is possible that Moyes will be rejected as a creditor, we'll have to wait and see. If he is, it still doesn't preclude him from being listed as a debtor who would be eligible to receive residual money after the primary creditor obligations are met. Honestly, I'm really not sure what the judge will decide regarding Moyes recovering lost money if he is not accepted as a creditor...someone much smarter than me, who can also read the judge's mind, would have to answer that. Well that's just it - and correct me of I'm wrong - one of your arguments seems to be that Moyes will have some say in the business plan that comes out of the proceedings which won't happen if he is not a creditor. And, in light of that, since it's his business that is bankrupt, why should, or how could, he have any vote in the reorganization as dictated by the usual bankruptcy process? The answer is he shouldn't and, with a competent judge, wouldn't.
end the curse Posted September 10, 2009 Report Posted September 10, 2009 Well that's just it - and correct me of I'm wrong - one of your arguments seems to be that Moyes will have some say in the business plan that comes out of the proceedings which won't happen if he is not a creditor. No, because he is the owner who filed Chapter 11, he is the "debtor in possession", and the trustee in charge of the reorganization. The reorganization plan is contingent on selling the team to Balsillie. His dual status as a creditor has nothing to do with his role as DIP. The judge, of course, can rule he is not a valid creditor, we'll have to wait and see, but it does not change the fact that he's the DIP.
... Posted September 10, 2009 Report Posted September 10, 2009 No, because he is the owner who filed Chapter 11, he is the "debtor in possession", and the trustee in charge of the reorganization. The reorganization plan is contingent on selling the team to Balsillie. His dual status as a creditor has nothing to do with his role as DIP. The judge, of course, can rule he is not a valid creditor, we'll have to wait and see, but it does not change the fact that he's the DIP. This is the point you seem to be missing - the contingency has to be agreed upon by the creditors in court. The contingency has to be agreed upon by the creditors in court. Moyes and Balsille can't make this a contingency willy-nilly.
end the curse Posted September 10, 2009 Report Posted September 10, 2009 The creditors make recommendations to the judge on what they prefer, but the final decision is going to come down to the judge either accepting the plan from the debtor and permitting the sale to the highest bidder, who in this case is Balsillie, or reject it and impose the bid of the NHL. I think you're misunderstanding my position.
LabattBlue Posted September 10, 2009 Report Posted September 10, 2009 I'm sick of hearing about Balsillie trying to buy a team and Bettman's relentlessness in keeping teams in markets where hockey isn't working. Keep the teams in LA because of the size of the market, get rid of Phoenix, Atlanta, Florida & Tampa and then do a realignment with just 26 teams.
end the curse Posted September 10, 2009 Report Posted September 10, 2009 Follow the proceedings... http://www.theglobeandmail.com/sports/coyotes-back-in-court/article1281972/ Excerpt: The Globe and Mail: Judge asks NHL lawyer if it 's correct league bid could leave as little as $2-million for creditors. Laywer Greg Milmoe said yes. Judge not impressed.
Bmwolf21 Posted September 10, 2009 Report Posted September 10, 2009 I'm sick of hearing about Balsillie trying to buy a team and Bettman's relentlessness in keeping teams in markets where hockey isn't working. Keep the teams in LA because of the size of the market, get rid of Phoenix, Atlanta, Florida & Tampa and then do a realignment with just 26 teams. I'd leave Tampa alone but have no problem with the other three.
shrader Posted September 10, 2009 Report Posted September 10, 2009 I'd leave Tampa alone but have no problem with the other three. Well, find a new ownership for Tampa first. Those two are clowns.
nobody Posted September 10, 2009 Report Posted September 10, 2009 Follow the proceedings... http://www.theglobeandmail.com/sports/coyotes-back-in-court/article1281972/ Excerpt: The Globe and Mail: Judge asks NHL lawyer if it 's correct league bid could leave as little as $2-million for creditors. Laywer Greg Milmoe said yes. Judge not impressed. But they also get free parking.
Bmwolf21 Posted September 10, 2009 Report Posted September 10, 2009 Well, find a new ownership for Tampa first. Those two are clowns. I'm inclined to let them stick it out for a year or so more before requiring new ownership. They've made some questionable moves, but they've only been in charge for about a year and a half. They haven't yet been given enough rope to hang themselves.
end the curse Posted September 10, 2009 Report Posted September 10, 2009 Bombshell from Judge Baum: The Globe and Mail: Judge Baum just caused a stir when he told one of the lawyers there is a third possibility in this case - no sale. "I would say that's more than a possibility," the judge added.
... Posted September 10, 2009 Report Posted September 10, 2009 Bombshell from Judge Baum: The Globe and Mail: Judge Baum just caused a stir when he told one of the lawyers there is a third possibility in this case - no sale. "I would say that's more than a possibility," the judge added. I was just about to post this from the TSN live blog. "There's third possibility here - no sale," said Baum. "It's more than theoretical. You all ought to keep that in mind." What a crafty dude. This makes sense, too, because neither offer satisfies all of the parameters that need to be satisfied.
shrader Posted September 10, 2009 Report Posted September 10, 2009 Bombshell from Judge Baum: The Globe and Mail: Judge Baum just caused a stir when he told one of the lawyers there is a third possibility in this case - no sale. "I would say that's more than a possibility," the judge added. So then they'd essentially fold, but the NHL would assume the day to day opperations of the team anyway.
Mbossy Posted September 10, 2009 Report Posted September 10, 2009 So then they'd essentially fold, but the NHL would assume the day to day opperations of the team anyway. Which they have been doing since November of last year. Seems a big waste of time, money and fan support either way for the judge to just say under his breath "I'm not willing to set precedent, so...."
Eleven Posted September 10, 2009 Report Posted September 10, 2009 But they also get free parking. But the parking is also cursed.
shrader Posted September 10, 2009 Report Posted September 10, 2009 But the parking is also cursed. But it comes with a free pine tree air freshener.
end the curse Posted September 10, 2009 Report Posted September 10, 2009 I believe if the judge rules against both bids they will then liquidate the assets and fold the franchise.
shrader Posted September 10, 2009 Report Posted September 10, 2009 I believe if the judge rules against both bids they will then liquidate the assets and fold the franchise. And then the union puts up a fight. I don't know how it would play out, but the league would somehow still have a team playing, filling that gap.
nobody Posted September 10, 2009 Report Posted September 10, 2009 And then the union puts up a fight. I don't know how it would play out, but the league would somehow still have a team playing, filling that gap. Probably couldn't use the name. The NHL Arizona Franchise?
nfreeman Posted September 10, 2009 Report Posted September 10, 2009 Two more interesting developments today: 1. the city is backing the NHL's bid, despite Balsillie's offer to pay the city up to $50MM. 2. Balsillie admits that no one has agreed to pay for renovations to Copps.
end the curse Posted September 11, 2009 Report Posted September 11, 2009 Trial resumes today at 11:30am EDT. Two interesting developments: 1. The NHL has decided not to cross-examine Jim Balsillie, while Bettman will be put on the stand for questioning as planned. Not sure why the NHL opted for this, and Bettman himself was very evasive about the reasons. It seems to me that this really hurts the NHL's case, so I don't get it. 2. It was exposed yesterday that the NHL's own internal study revealed a Hamilton franchise would be among the five most valuable in the NHL. This certainly won't help convince the judge that relocation to Hamilton would be harmful to the organization's future. 3. Biz of Hockey Reports: The Mayor of Hamilton, Fred Eisenberger, wrote in a letter referenced in Thursday’s hearing, "I would like to assure the National Hockey League that the planning process for the renovation of Copps Coliseum is currently in progress and we are confident that a financing commitment for the project will be made by the appropriate levels of government in Canada in partnership with the City of Hamilton," adding, "We believe the Copps renovation plan is … well within the scope of available government funding programs." I'm really looking forward to Bettman taking the stand today. Part of me believes he is secretly rooting for the team to be liquidated by Judge Baum because otherwise he's stuck between a rock (Balsillie) and a hard place (MLSE) in a dispute that's pointing toward a massive antitrust war in which he'd be planted firmly in the crossfire.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.