Comments on: Judge Rules: Mets Going To Trial

By: Joey D.

Joey D. — Tue, 06 Mar 2012 16:37:06 +0000

Actually, it doesn’t matter who is technically responsible for the burden of proof since both sides are going to make their arguments regardless and it will be the jury that makes the decision. The “reasonable doubt” will weigh more in favor of the Wilpons than the pantiffs and that is why I feel it will be somewhere in between and not all or nothing at all as far as the $300 Million goes.

By: srt

srt — Tue, 06 Mar 2012 15:12:58 +0000

‘The Wilpons still have to prove that they were not willfully blind to the issue.’

Actually, I believe it’s the other way around. The Wilpons/Katz are defendants in this case. Therefore, the burden of proof is on Picard to prove they were willfully blind.

By: Joey D.

Joey D. — Tue, 06 Mar 2012 15:04:14 +0000

The Wilpons still have to prove that they were not willfully blind to the issue. That’s the heart of Picard’s argument – that the Wilpons were not part of the scheme but that there were enough warnings brought to their attention and with their knowledge of investments, etc. they should have least attempted to pursue the matter further.

It might be the Wilpons defense that they did just that and came up with nothing to prove Madoff was doing something shady hence, they were duped but had not turned a blind eye to the possibilities.

I don’t know if it’s an either all or nothing at all decision or if the Wilpons might be responsible for part of the $300 million that Piccard is seeking – after all, what does one expect for five bucks?

By: Joey D.

Joey D. — Tue, 06 Mar 2012 14:57:09 +0000

Jersey,

We put five bucks in the mail and got our esquires from a little old lady living above a gas station. Got to be valid – came with a certificate of authenticity!

By: theonlymaskman

theonlymaskman — Tue, 06 Mar 2012 14:51:52 +0000

I love the expressions in that photo: Fred – consternation, Saul – smugness, Jeffie – bewilderment.

OK, so much for the Wilpon’s motion for summary judgement. That bit the dust with the judge’s ruling and away went Joe D’s theory of better days ahead into the trash can. Now the Wilpons face an $83 M bill payable within the next 2 weeks and a possible $300 M on top of that. I hope the $20 M investors are happy regarding where their “investment” dollars are going. There are plenty of steep financial hurdles directly ahead in the path of the Wilpons. Best course of action for them? … “Settle and Sell”. Let’s go Fred: Wake up and adopt S&S. Then the Mets can go back about their real business of being an actual ML BB team.

By: jerseymet

jerseymet — Tue, 06 Mar 2012 06:34:37 +0000

Ok…we are all self proclaimed General Managers…so when did we become legal experts?….did I miss that memo?

By: Matt

Matt — Tue, 06 Mar 2012 04:17:05 +0000

Lou gets it.

They cannot keep losing money, no matter what else happens with Madoff. You think it’s a coincidence that St Lucie is seeing the smallest attendance figures in years? NO ONE wants to watch the Mets this year. Sure, if they win, people will come. That is a highly unlikely outcome.

People are quick to forget that its not just Madoff. They owe tremendous debts on both SNY and the ballpark.

Things are bad for them regardless of the trial. But they will stop at nothing to keep the team so expect the penny pinching on the Mets to continue indefinitely.

By: Metfan Lou

Metfan Lou — Tue, 06 Mar 2012 02:51:30 +0000

Can anyone tell me if they met the 20 million investor goal that they set? Let’s analyze what you call a “premier” franchise. Having a MLB franchise in New York doesn’t necessarily make a premier team. For example the quality of the team and its fan base make a premier team. Some examples: Boston Red Sox, NY Yankees, Phillies and Cardinals. Now their are semi premier teams and they are Mets, Cubs, Dodgers, Reds and the Braves. I don’t know if there are a lot of anxious buyers for the Mets but one for sure is David Einhorn. Mark Cuban maybe. I know one thing bleeding money will surely damage the Mets brand and make the future muddled.

By: Joey D.

Joey D. — Mon, 05 Mar 2012 23:15:51 +0000

Of course, the situation regarding the future of the Mets being able to operate as a major league rather than mickey mouse team depends more upon the future of Sterling Equities than anything else.

Nobody is going to buy the Mets from Sterling without the Wilpons including a portion of their SNY holding and yet, if Sterling Equities sells any of it shares, they must first be offered to their current partners. So if Time Warner and Comcast want those shares, that means the Wilpons will have to give up the Mets for literally next to nothing or redo the portion regarding the selling of television rights so it appears as a Met revenue – oh, hell…, let them figure it out.

By: any

any — Mon, 05 Mar 2012 23:05:22 +0000

oh, the mets/SNY is still a goldmine overall. Plenty of people will be lining up to buy them out.

not many MLB opportunities come up at all, and rarely a “premiere” franchise in a major market like this.

By: Metfan Lou

Metfan Lou — Mon, 05 Mar 2012 22:14:39 +0000

He may have to use his nickname “NAILS” in the big house, if you get my drift. Hope he can back it up!

By: Metfan Lou

Metfan Lou — Mon, 05 Mar 2012 22:10:16 +0000

No business can afford to lost money year after year. Attending a Mets game is discretionary and with gas prices going to 5 bucks a gallon, a 500 team will not draw. That means no extra revenue from playoff games and spending more on promotions to draw fans. Add for certain the 83 million dollars the judge says they have to pay and it keeps adding up. You can intermingle Sterling Partners and the Mets but in the end it is the same pot of money. Don’t be so sure there are rich buyers lined up wanting the Mets. It is not the Yankees and the only thing we have in common with them is New York. Oh by the way, did they ever get all their 20 million dollar investors? When David Einhorn walked, it doomed the Mets.

By: Mr North Jersey

Mr North Jersey — Mon, 05 Mar 2012 21:30:18 +0000

I saw that Bryce Harper is expected to play. It will be good to get a glimpse of this kid.

By: Donal

Donal — Mon, 05 Mar 2012 21:28:57 +0000

Even More Off topic: First Spring Training game is tonight at 6 pm against Nats

By: Mr North Jersey

Mr North Jersey — Mon, 05 Mar 2012 21:26:57 +0000

Off Topic: Former Met Lenny Dykstra sentenced to 3 years in prison.

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2012/03/lenny-dykstra-sentenced-to-three-years-in-prison.html

By: stick

stick — Mon, 05 Mar 2012 21:22:45 +0000

Still hard to believe that this whole mess was not settled a long time ago. And based on this ruling, in a “normal” case you would figure it would be now. So of course, this mess will drag onto trial.

By: jeff

jeff — Mon, 05 Mar 2012 21:17:34 +0000

“judge Rakoff does write: “Court remains skeptical that the Trustee can ultimately rebut the defendants’ showing of good faith.”

right from the judges mouth.

the wilpons arent going anyway and will own the mets for a long time. get used to it

By: Joey D.

Joey D. — Mon, 05 Mar 2012 21:04:11 +0000

The only thing we know that is official - as far as reporting goes as required by the government (?) is concerned - is that “The Metropolitan Baseball Club of New York, Inc” lost $70 million this past year, plus some the year before and year before that. Unofficially, of course, the loss is all boulder-dash (I use that termonology since this is a family oriented group) because the Mets are a slice of the parent company, Sterling Equities, and not a sum all to itself. Everything is tied into together.

Even ignoring that overall pie, The Wilpons assessment was to build a smaller ball park and charge each fan more per capita to compensate for the lower attendance figures (and probably bring in a few extra bucks as well). They stated this goal could be met by averaging 39,000 per game at the ticket prices established in 2009. Something must have been wrong with that projection since the team reprted losing money in 2009 (again, boulder-dash in the real sense) while having actually surpassed the attedance goal by an extra 118 per game (39,118 average).

They would therefore either have to raise their prices even more than they were in 2009 to make ends meet or then simply just stop the boulder-dash about the Mets being broke and say the Mets have to suffer along with all the other Sterling Equitities holdings.

By: Joey D.

Joey D. — Mon, 05 Mar 2012 20:54:01 +0000

No Rich,

The money does not come from anything won that goes back to the victims.

Piccard and his firm are paid from a special Securities Investor Protection Corporation, an industry-financed investor protection organization.

http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2011/09/22/bill-for-madoff-trustee-rises-224-million

By: Hoegy

Hoegy — Mon, 05 Mar 2012 19:24:35 +0000

I just wonder about the sincerity of the WIlpons re: The Mets. I know I will never see the likes of millions we are discussing here. I have been a Met fan since Joan Payson. Love ‘em.

The WIlpons are allowing the team to suffer at the hands of their financial woes. I know they claim love and will never part to what cost?

If you did bring in a Cuban would he preserve the team that we love or would we be the Queens Yankees in bidding wars with Steinbrenner.

Tough to decide! I am excited by the fact that the scenario is inviting to Mets young players getting a chance.

Self preservation amongst the wealthy is not an appealing season opener.