Comments on: Sunday Morning Grind: The Future Has Arrived

By: TruthsaboutMurphy

TruthsaboutMurphy — Mon, 19 Nov 2012 02:15:41 +0000

I didn’t miss the point. Everyone knew who bought shares. Aside from Jeff, Saul, and Sny, bill Mauer and Steve Cohen did as well. His point was that somehow Sandy worked all this out so the Wilpons could get their shares back through Clauses. That the clauses stipulate that they could demand the shares back which isn’t true. We all know that they bought the shares themselves, but the only reason that clause was put in was to entice outside buyers by basically saying, ” give us 20 mill, will give you 4% of the Mets and if in three yrs you want out, we’ll give you your money back plus interest”.

Do you think Jeff Wilpon needed to hear that to buy a share? No, that was for the investors who weren’t tied to the Wilpon family.

By: Seligman

Seligman — Sun, 18 Nov 2012 21:51:06 +0000

Incidentally, if there was any one site that was accurately reporting the circumstances since Madoff was first arrested and everything that happened after, it was this one. That was how I came to follow this site in the first place. Even Sandomir, Couthino and Costa were re-tweeting this site’s reports and analysis, which is how I first wound up here.

By: Seligman

Seligman — Sun, 18 Nov 2012 21:47:04 +0000

I think you missed his point. The point is that about seven of those ten shares, were purchased by family, friends, or partners of Wilpon. Sure they will get paid their dividends and interest, but essentially Wilpon can get 90% of the team again. They used a loophole to raise $200 million but they were really taking money from their left pocket and saving it in the right. Only 2 1/2 stakes went to actual owners that were not tied to the Wilpons, thereby at the very least the Wilpons regain 90% ownership. In fact Howard Megdal reported this over and over again. They manipulated the system because they couldn’t go over the MLB debt threshold so they got fresh money injected into the organization, but it was all contrived and within the family or his other partnerships like SNY, Time Warner and Comcast. Each share was worth 4% of the team, the 2 1/2 they cant buy back account for 10%, the remaining shares Wilpon can get back with just a call whenever he wants. In three years from when those stakes closed, you will see breaking news that the Wilpons have bought back at least 5-6 of those shares, and the rest will follow soon after.

By: TruthsaboutMurphy

TruthsaboutMurphy — Sun, 18 Nov 2012 21:01:45 +0000

Those clauses, to me, read like the buyers could sell back the shares if they wanted to get at money back with interest. As in, if the team was still crappy and turned out to be a bum investment and the Wilpons would have to buy it back.

Joe, you make it sound as if the buyers HAVE to sell it back, which I don’t think is the case. Those clauses were put in to entice potential buyers.

Also, after the Dodgers sold for 2 billion, those 4% stakes quadrupled in price, I would assume. 4% at 20 million is only a 500 million valuation. This team is worth almost 4 times that I would think. Plus, any deal might include SNY. You could probably tack on another 1.5 billion, but that wouldn’t effect those minority stake values.

Anyway, I don’t really think the Wilpons can get those stakes back unless the new owners want to sell it back after 3 years.

By: Hey Now

Hey Now — Sun, 18 Nov 2012 17:47:49 +0000

Yeesh. An entire article just to (yet again) take shots at Alderson for things other teams did. SMH

By: hotstreak

hotstreak — Sun, 18 Nov 2012 17:42:30 +0000

There is a business risk that the fans will be so alienated and stay away. The losses each you will contineu and go back up to and over 70M per. Bud Selig wont be commissioner forever. Yes the are resigning Weight to make sure that does not happen i.e. alientation of fans. The Mets are in the tough NL East. It will be along time before we even see the 2nd w/c. You forget the chatter about the Mets will be forced to sell in 2 years. That is when the capital gain tax will be higher. You mention buy back of minority owners instead of having 135M payroll which has to be evenly distributed. The after tax profits from their sale is at its highest point.Their farm system on everyday players is still very pedestrain at best. How many 4th place furnishes will the Mets tolerate? From a business point they should sell now.

By: srt

srt — Sun, 18 Nov 2012 17:00:41 +0000

‘Now, I’m not saying they could, or should make the kind of trade the Jays did ..’

Glad you qualified that. You know there is no way on this green earth the Mets have the funds for 2013 that the Blue Jays just took on with that trade.

It’s the middle of November. I get the impression some are reading all these trades and signings and are bent out of shape that the Mets haven’t done anything yet. I think we need to wait a few more months to see how the off season plays out. I have to believe much of what they probably plan on doing is either from Column A or Column B – depending on which of the the 2 – or both – (Dickey/Wright) is extended. Extending both has to mean going down a different road in the off season then if we’re going to trade 1 or both.

By: Joe D

Joe D — Sun, 18 Nov 2012 16:39:06 +0000

They want to win as well as make money. If it was all about profit, they wouldn’t have spent more than any other team in the NL from 1990-2010.

Unfortunately, we’ve had some rotten luck combined with some unwise signings.

By: Nathan

Nathan — Sun, 18 Nov 2012 16:36:21 +0000

Yeah that sounds about right. I wonder though, what do the Wilpons see as a successful franchise? I s at just a matter of turning a buck? If so there has to be better investments. If it is winning and profits, then why do they gravitate towards boom and bust strategies? I have watched this team for around 30 years and could never understand the lack of consistency on the field and in the FO. Boom and Bust or Loria strategies do not make for consistent growth. I don’t get what they have been doing since the buyout. Oh well I’m rambling. lol

By: Joe D

Joe D — Sun, 18 Nov 2012 16:27:30 +0000

I just left a comment to Hotstreak below this one that mirrors the situation as I see it. And it’s not all that different than yours.

By: Joe D

Joe D — Sun, 18 Nov 2012 16:26:06 +0000

Why would they sell now? They own a team that is worth $1.5 billion. Alderson is rebuilding their equity, the more Alderson does business his way the larger share of the team the Wilpons own. As the debt goes down, their equity and majority stake increases.

Why do you think that part of that deal with those ownership stakes they sold had a 5-year buyback clause? When Alderson is done the Wilpons will own 80% of the team again.

By: 86mets

86mets — Sun, 18 Nov 2012 16:20:28 +0000

Amazing isn’t it, that the GM in Toronto, in the span of a week has A) pulled off a major blockbuster trade, B) signed two free agents, and is C) on the verge of hiring a new manager. While in Flushing, the dynamic duo of Alderson & Ricciardi have, well, A) released Jason Bay (a big win for the Mets I will admit) and B) also signed two free agents, ahem, Brian Bixler & Greg Burke!

Now, I’m not saying they could, or should make the kind of trade the Jays did or should have given Melky Cabrera $16 million (too much baggage for that kind of money). My point is that this front office over analyzes everything and is slow to act. While I don’t want to see money thrown away frivolously as has been done in the past (K-Rod, Bay anyone?) you would think that the “Masters of Bargain Hunting” could find something, anything, that would improve this team without taking days or weeks to analyze the pros and cons, cost vs reward. It’s as though Alderson & Ricciardi can’t walk and chew chewing gum at the same time. LOL

By: Nathan

Nathan — Sun, 18 Nov 2012 16:18:57 +0000

Thanks Joe. I wonder if it would be detrimental for SA to go up there and say, I hate this losing I can’t stand it for my team and the fans but my hands are tied. I have a plan and as soon as Santana’s contract is up I will have the flexibility needed to fill the remaining holes. Or tell us, Hey I’m here to get this team pointed in the right direction financially, once the Wilpons are square I am going to step aside and let someone else take the helm. I’ll try and develop talent as best as I can but not if it means a financial loss or a risky investment. This would sting but man I really tire of the BS.

By: hotstreak

hotstreak — Sun, 18 Nov 2012 16:09:16 +0000

The original investment cost to the Wilpons I guess was less than 200M which includes the 2002, 50% purchhase from Doubleday for $135 million. The estimated value today is 1.5 M. The capital gain tax is going up and soon. The future is now and the Mets owners should clearly sell for their own financial interest. Oh yes for the Mets fans interest too.

By: Joe D

Joe D — Sun, 18 Nov 2012 15:58:39 +0000

Hi Nathan,

I tried to see if I could find a full transcript for you, but the best I could was find this which had other quotes from Alderson:

http://newyork.mets.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20121116&content_id=40329844&vkey=news_nym&c_id=nym

Thanks for commenting.

By: Joe D

Joe D — Sun, 18 Nov 2012 15:57:10 +0000

You got a deal.

By: Matt M

Matt M — Sun, 18 Nov 2012 15:51:33 +0000

Why anyone would buy tickets to watch this team is beyond me.

By: Nathan

Nathan — Sun, 18 Nov 2012 15:50:18 +0000

LOL I hate his double talk. I guess I’d have to read a transcript to get the context but the way it is framed here it seems as though SA is having a hard time restraining himself and not spending money. It appears that he is using this forum to possibly vent about ownership yet I doubt any of this. I assume that he is talking out of the side of his face and has no intentions to make this team a winner and has conspired with ownership to run the team into the ground. At least that seems to be the opinion of some posters.

By: srt

srt — Sun, 18 Nov 2012 15:46:36 +0000

‘When Alderson says “sometimes you have to do something dramatic and make every attempt to win today”, is he talking about the Mets? Because it certainly doesn’t look like he’s doing or has done anything dramatic with the Mets to win today.’

It’s 18 November. Let’s reevaluate come March.