View Single Post
Old
06-07-2010, 04:00 PM
  #10
RR
Registered User
 
RR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Cave Creek, AZ
Country: United States
Posts: 8,619
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whileee View Post
Interesting thought, indeed.

But then, if you are Glendale why not make it explicit so that Reinsdorf doesn't have to wait around until the end of summer to find out if the IEH deal works out? Couldn't they just put language in the IEH agreement that excludes any parties other than those that already have an approved MOU with the city (i.e. JR and IEH) from further negotiations? That would fend off any third party for IEH, but would also seem to be in the best interests of the CoG; negotiate AMULAs with both JR and IEH simultaneously and try to get the deal done as soon as possible to minimize your liability with the $25 million escrow. The current exclusivity agreement appears to keep both JR and any other bidder out for the term.

Also, if a third bidder comes in with $25 million and negates IEH's exclusivity, does the new group then get exclusive negotiating rights, or can Reinsdorf and IEH both continue with negotiations as well?
Seeing as IEH has agreed to the "$25M deposit" clause, my radar tells me they want protection from lookie-loos. It's very possible IEH, JR and maybe a 3rd or even a 4th group all recognize this is now a competition, and may the best bid win.

RR is offline