HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > The Business of Hockey
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
The Business of Hockey Discuss the financial and business aspects of the NHL. Topics may include the CBA, work stoppages, broadcast contracts, franchise sales, NHL revenues, relocation and expansion.

Part VIII: Phoenix Coyotes Post-bankruptcy

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
06-07-2010, 01:52 PM
  #1
Confucius
Registered User
 
Confucius's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,370
vCash: 500
Part VIII: Phoenix Coyotes Post-bankruptcy

Someone, anyone, can you explain to me why IE needs exclusivity since the Cof G already has an MOU from JR and they plan on submitting it to the NHL. Doesn't exclusivity mean you will only deal and reccomend me if we come to a deal.



MOD: Continued from thread VII: http://hfboards.com/showthread.php?t=779531


Last edited by Fugu: 06-07-2010 at 03:09 PM. Reason: ...
Confucius is offline  
Old
06-07-2010, 01:53 PM
  #2
Tommy Hawk
Registered User
 
Tommy Hawk's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 3,813
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hockeyhopeful View Post
Someone, anyone, can you explain to me why IE needs exclusivity since the Cof G already has an MOU from JR and they plan on submitting it to the NHL. Doesn't exclusivity mean you will only deal and recommend me if we come to a deal.

I do not think they are submitting the MOU to the NHL, they will be submitting the amended AMULA. And exclusivity is only the negotiation of the AMULA. And JR can continue to negotiate if he is willing to put up $25 mil.

Tommy Hawk is offline  
Old
06-07-2010, 01:58 PM
  #3
Confucius
Registered User
 
Confucius's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,370
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wolvesfan View Post
I do not think they are submitting the MOU to the NHL, they will be submitting the amended AMULA. And exclusivity is only the negotiation of the AMULA. And JR can continue to negotiate if he is willing to put up $25 mil.
He already has an offer on the table, the city has his offer. Why would he want to change it now, what has changed?

Confucius is offline  
Old
06-07-2010, 02:01 PM
  #4
Whileee
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 13,631
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wolvesfan View Post
I do not think they are submitting the MOU to the NHL, they will be submitting the amended AMULA. And exclusivity is only the negotiation of the AMULA. And JR can continue to negotiate if he is willing to put up $25 mil.
What do you think Ed Beasley meant when he said that the City of Glendale was "on track to submit a recommended buyer or buyers to the NHL by June 30"?

Why is June 30 even relevant, given the new agreement and deadline with the NHL and Lynch's statement that any new owner would "replenish" any withdrawals from the $25 million escrow account?

Whileee is offline  
Old
06-07-2010, 02:13 PM
  #5
MarkMM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Delta, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,063
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GHOSTofMAROONSroad View Post
No matter how you do not accept it RR, IEH does not have deep pockets. If you want to pretend otherwise have fun. These guys are looking to get into a franchise on the cheep.

GHOST
Ghost, you never did provide anything to back up your claim that none of the others can be wealthy. As someone pointed out, one of the partners did donate $7 million to his local arena.

Also, I posted this a while back in response to your incessant claim that these guys can't have money just because you don't know how they did it:

http://hfboards.com/showthread.php?p...7#post25724747

In the article, you'll see that $210 million a year is the low-end of what the best hedge-fund managers can make, and some can make as much as $1 billion A YEAR. If you want to pretend that it's not possible for hedge fund managers can't accumulate $100M plus, then have fun.

So Breslow sold his family company for $260 million, and is a big donor.

MuCullough has worked with numerous private equity funds, including the Carlyle Group which is so huge that it's often the subject of conspiracy theories, they manage some $84.5 billion. From all his private equity dealings, Carlyle Group and many others, it's completely unsupportable to claim that he's not worth $100 million plus. Not saying he is, I don't know, but neither do you, and you can't claim with any credibility that it's unlikely that he's worth that much.

Todd Jordan, mehp, no idea what he's worth.

Now, why are they financing the deal then?

As someone already pointed out, there's a difference in net worth and liquidity. It could be a situation where the owners collectively have a high net worth but not a lot of liquid cash to spend, as in they'd need to sell shares in companies they own in order to generate cash. It's like having a Ferrari, it's very valuable, but until you sell it, you can't spend it. Maybe what they're doing is using their net worth to mortgage a loan to buy the team, with plans to sell off shares of their companies gradually over an extended period of time to pay off the loan.

I'm not saying this is what's happening, I'm saying that to claim that there's no way they can be worth a lot is laughable, and there are many plausible reasons they may need to borrow the money which does not neccesarily indicate they aren't extremely wealthy.


Last edited by MarkMM: 06-07-2010 at 02:20 PM.
MarkMM is offline  
Old
06-07-2010, 02:20 PM
  #6
GSC2k2*
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Hamilton, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,384
vCash: 500
I am just wondering, for the sake of discussion ...

What makes all you guys think that this $25M/exclusivity clause is at all directed at Reinsdorf?

Is it possible that JR has his deal worked out with the CoG (hence no need to worry about him in terms of exclusivity any more), and the CoG is simply covering its bases by sending two fully negotiated transactions to the NHL? In this scenario, if asked "well, if JR has his deal worked out already, then why does IEH need exclusivity?", the answer of course would be "because bidder #3 is sniffing around, but has not gone far enough along with their due diligence to indicate their seriousness, and until they do by submitting a $25M deposit, IEH wants CoG to ignore them."

Honestly, this idea of connecting JR to the $25M clause seems a little absurd.

GSC2k2* is offline  
Old
06-07-2010, 02:29 PM
  #7
MarkMM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Delta, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,063
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CGG View Post
I'm very interested in finding out just how much of their own money these guys have, but it doesn't seem like anyone wants you to question the supposed wealth of the Ice Edge guys. Even if they have found some rich guys to play with, the question isn't whether they have some guys with net worths of $100 million +, it's how much are these so-called hundred-millionaires willing to put into the team? Unless they're majority investors, it means very little. If a guy with $7 billion in net worth invests $500k in the Coyotes, that does little to help their financial situation, it just gives them a whole $500k more than they would have otherwise had.
Very true.

Do they have the money? No one knows.

Is it possible they have the money? Based on the private equity dealings many of them seem to have spent their lives in, absolutely possible.

Will they spend this money to subsidize losses...?

...?

...?

MarkMM is offline  
Old
06-07-2010, 02:38 PM
  #8
Killion
Global Moderator
 
Killion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Casablanca
Country: Morocco
Posts: 26,154
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GSC2k2 View Post
I am just wondering, for the sake of discussion . What makes all you guys think that this $25M/exclusivity clause is at all directed at Reinsdorf? Honestly, this idea of connecting JR to the $25M clause seems a little absurd.
OK. I'll play !. Your premise makes perfect sense ONLY if you make the leap and assume that JR & the COG have completed an AMULA. Its' not outside the realm of possibility I suppose, but probable?. Is it fair to speculate that some MysteryBuyer has gotten far enough along the rails to be pulling into the station with a serious bid?. Maybe. If so, in light of IEH's abysmal track record in closing a deal with the city why would the COG bend to its' demands, demands its not willing to live by itself in providing $25M, and further handcuff itself to a non-performing entity in IE while alienating a 3rd prospect & option?.

Killion is offline  
Old
06-07-2010, 02:50 PM
  #9
Whileee
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 13,631
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GSC2k2 View Post
I am just wondering, for the sake of discussion ...

What makes all you guys think that this $25M/exclusivity clause is at all directed at Reinsdorf?

Is it possible that JR has his deal worked out with the CoG (hence no need to worry about him in terms of exclusivity any more), and the CoG is simply covering its bases by sending two fully negotiated transactions to the NHL? In this scenario, if asked "well, if JR has his deal worked out already, then why does IEH need exclusivity?", the answer of course would be "because bidder #3 is sniffing around, but has not gone far enough along with their due diligence to indicate their seriousness, and until they do by submitting a $25M deposit, IEH wants CoG to ignore them."

Honestly, this idea of connecting JR to the $25M clause seems a little absurd.
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?

Whileee is offline  
Old
06-07-2010, 03:00 PM
  #10
RR
Moderator
 
RR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Cave Creek, AZ
Country: United States
Posts: 8,299
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  
Old
06-07-2010, 03:06 PM
  #11
Whileee
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 13,631
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RR View Post
Suggested on the Phoenix board as well, as it seems the most logical. And to address another poster's concern about the June 30 date still having relevance in light of new date flexibility, the COG has always maintained its goal was deliver deals to the NHL by June 30. Should indicate COG wants to close this deal sooner rather than later.
Could you explain what you mean by "deliver deals to the NHL" by June 30? What is a "deal" in this context?

I am not personally concerned with the June 30th date since I don't know the status of the negotiations. I was simply pointing out how adamant the city manager was that they would "submit recommended buyer(s)" to the NHL by June 30 in the context of avoiding any payments out of the escrow account. I hope that it was clear that this wasn't my emphasis, but that of the city officials who were quoted.

Whileee is offline  
Old
06-07-2010, 03:08 PM
  #12
RR
Moderator
 
RR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Cave Creek, AZ
Country: United States
Posts: 8,299
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Killion View Post
OK. I'll play !. Your premise makes perfect sense ONLY if you make the leap and assume that JR & the COG have completed an AMULA. Its' not outside the realm of possibility I suppose, but probable?. Is it fair to speculate that some MysteryBuyer has gotten far enough along the rails to be pulling into the station with a serious bid?. Maybe. If so, in light of IEH's abysmal track record in closing a deal with the city why would the COG bend to its' demands, demands its not willing to live by itself in providing $25M, and further handcuff itself to a non-performing entity in IE while alienating a 3rd prospect & option?.
You sure that's true? A lot of debate and speculation here these last months that IEH was played by the COG to buy JR time to get back in the game. Is that IEH's fault? Makes sense why they insisted on exclusivity this time around.

RR is offline  
Old
06-07-2010, 03:10 PM
  #13
Fugu
Guest
 
Country:
Posts: n/a
vCash:
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkMM View Post
Ghost, you never did provide anything to back up your claim that none of the others can be wealthy. As someone pointed out, one of the partners did donate $7 million to his local arena.

Also, I posted this a while back in response to your incessant claim that these guys can't have money just because you don't know how they did it:

http://hfboards.com/showthread.php?p...7#post25724747

In the article, you'll see that $210 million a year is the low-end of what the best hedge-fund managers can make, and some can make as much as $1 billion A YEAR. If you want to pretend that it's not possible for hedge fund managers can't accumulate $100M plus, then have fun.

So Breslow sold his family company for $260 million, and is a big donor.

MuCullough has worked with numerous private equity funds, including the Carlyle Group which is so huge that it's often the subject of conspiracy theories, they manage some $84.5 billion. From all his private equity dealings, Carlyle Group and many others, it's completely unsupportable to claim that he's not worth $100 million plus. Not saying he is, I don't know, but neither do you, and you can't claim with any credibility that it's unlikely that he's worth that much.

Todd Jordan, mehp, no idea what he's worth.

Now, why are they financing the deal then?

As someone already pointed out, there's a difference in net worth and liquidity. It could be a situation where the owners collectively have a high net worth but not a lot of liquid cash to spend, as in they'd need to sell shares in companies they own in order to generate cash. It's like having a Ferrari, it's very valuable, but until you sell it, you can't spend it. Maybe what they're doing is using their net worth to mortgage a loan to buy the team, with plans to sell off shares of their companies gradually over an extended period of time to pay off the loan.

I'm not saying this is what's happening, I'm saying that to claim that there's no way they can be worth a lot is laughable, and there are many plausible reasons they may need to borrow the money which does not neccesarily indicate they aren't extremely wealthy.

I think it's far easier to question a significant amount of wealth than to assume it's there.

I'd prefer if someone did come up with some indication that these guys have 'hundreds of millions of dollars' in net worth.

People assumed Boots had a lot of money too. I guess he did, but it wasn't his own.



The greater point is that without something that does show there's a substantial net worth, it's rather pointless to write up paragraphs about what it can be. I'd like proof that it is, not for someone to prove the hypothesis is indeed false. There's nothing to back up the hypothesis much either.

 
Old
06-07-2010, 03:11 PM
  #14
RR
Moderator
 
RR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Cave Creek, AZ
Country: United States
Posts: 8,299
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whileee View Post
Could you explain what you mean by "deliver deals to the NHL" by June 30? What is a "deal" in this context?

I am not personally concerned with the June 30th date since I don't know the status of the negotiations. I was simply pointing out how adamant the city manager was that they would "submit recommended buyer(s)" to the NHL by June 30 in the context of avoiding any payments out of the escrow account. I hope that it was clear that this wasn't my emphasis, but that of the city officials who were quoted.
Referring to the lease deals. A new lease deal needs to be agreed to between the city and any potential buyer before the city would submit a "recommended buyer" to the NHL. The city has always maintained it hopes to present more than one option to the NHL.

RR is offline  
Old
06-07-2010, 03:15 PM
  #15
Whileee
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 13,631
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RR View Post
Referring to the lease deals. A new lease deal needs to be agreed to between the city and any potential buyer before the city would submit a "recommended buyer" to the NHL. The city has always maintained it hopes to present more than one option to the NHL.
Thanks for the clarification.

Do you have any insights or opinions as to why city officials are so focused on the June 30th date for completing this, and why they have linked this timeline to the $25 million escrow account?

Whileee is offline  
Old
06-07-2010, 03:28 PM
  #17
ps241
It's closing time.
 
ps241's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 14,192
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by GSC2k2 View Post
I am just wondering, for the sake of discussion ...

What makes all you guys think that this $25M/exclusivity clause is at all directed at Reinsdorf?

Is it possible that JR has his deal worked out with the CoG (hence no need to worry about him in terms of exclusivity any more), and the CoG is simply covering its bases by sending two fully negotiated transactions to the NHL? In this scenario, if asked "well, if JR has his deal worked out already, then why does IEH need exclusivity?", the answer of course would be "because bidder #3 is sniffing around, but has not gone far enough along with their due diligence to indicate their seriousness, and until they do by submitting a $25M deposit, IEH wants CoG to ignore them."

Honestly, this idea of connecting JR to the $25M clause seems a little absurd.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Killion View Post
OK. I'll play !. Your premise makes perfect sense ONLY if you make the leap and assume that JR & the COG have completed an AMULA. Its' not outside the realm of possibility I suppose, but probable?. Is it fair to speculate that some MysteryBuyer has gotten far enough along the rails to be pulling into the station with a serious bid?. Maybe. If so, in light of IEH's abysmal track record in closing a deal with the city why would the COG bend to its' demands, demands its not willing to live by itself in providing $25M, and further handcuff itself to a non-performing entity in IE while alienating a 3rd prospect & option?.
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?
ok this is a bit of fun and i for one don't mind a round of spin the speculation bottle while we wait on the next news

although i love the ideas floated if i was a betting man i would place my money on the idea that somewhere between JR's MOU and the AMULA there has been a disconnect. Maybe team Reinsdorf came in for the kill and attempted to apply pressure once they were the only buyer in play. perhaps the city lost patience in either the time delays, or adjustments to one or more of the major terms of the deal. This then led the CoG to reverse their error and get IEH back in the game for either leverage, a plan B fallback, or legitimately to get a deal done with them......IEH have been brought back in for a reason and my money goes on a leverage play to force JR's hand.... and....i believe the CoG is losing patience and if they can't get their preferred buyer's (JR) deal done on reasonable terms then they get a solid AMULA done with IEH, pitch it to the NHL, move forward and take their chances

in saying all of that i would not be a bit surprised if a mystery 3rd buyer dropped out of the sky because that would be a fitting last act to this crazy reality show that is unfolding before our eyes

ps241 is online now  
Old
06-07-2010, 03:37 PM
  #18
Whileee
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 13,631
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by supahdupah View Post
Getting a buyer before June 30th eliminates the possibility, or greatly reduces the chances the $25 million in escrow gets touched.
There seems little chance of finalizing a buyer prior to June 30, especially since they have now signed an exclusivity agreement with one of the bidders that would extend until August.

Besides, Art Lynch indicated that in any case the new owner would "replenish" the escrow account, so why worry about touching the escrow account?

Whileee is offline  
Old
06-07-2010, 03:38 PM
  #19
cbcwpg
Registered User
 
cbcwpg's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Between the Pipes
Country: United Nations
Posts: 7,577
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whileee View Post
Thanks for the clarification.

Do you have any insights or opinions as to why city officials are so focused on the June 30th date for completing this, and why they have linked this timeline to the $25 million escrow account?
Wasn't June 30 just the original deadline the NHL had, which is now moved to Dec 31?

cbcwpg is offline  
Old
06-07-2010, 03:40 PM
  #20
RR
Moderator
 
RR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Cave Creek, AZ
Country: United States
Posts: 8,299
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whileee View Post
Thanks for the clarification.

Do you have any insights or opinions as to why city officials are so focused on the June 30th date for completing this, and why they have linked this timeline to the $25 million escrow account?
It was always their goal to get it done no later than June 30; certainly it mitigates the need to tap into the escrow (always thought that was more about getting the COGs butts in gear than an expectation the league would have to touch it); and the June 30 date gives the NHL 60 days to close its end of the deal with the new buyer.

RR is offline  
Old
06-07-2010, 03:41 PM
  #21
TheLegend
Home Sweet Home!
 
TheLegend's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Orbiting HFBoards
Country: United States
Posts: 4,819
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whileee View Post
Thanks for the clarification.

Do you have any insights or opinions as to why city officials are so focused on the June 30th date for completing this, and why they have linked this timeline to the $25 million escrow account?
June 30th is when the NHL's current sub-lease of the AMULA ends.

TheLegend is offline  
Old
06-07-2010, 03:41 PM
  #22
cheswick
Non-registered User
 
cheswick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Peg City
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,694
vCash: 232
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whileee View Post
There seems little chance of finalizing a buyer prior to June 30, especially since they have now signed an exclusivity agreement with one of the bidders that would extend until August.

Besides, Art Lynch indicated that in any case the new owner would "replenish" the escrow account, so why worry about touching the escrow account?
I'm confused by how a new owner would be replenishing the excrow. The NHL owns the team not the COG. A new buyer would be paying money to the NHL not the COG. Would a new lease then stipulate they pay the COG money (to the tune of losses upto that point) for the privaledge of playing at jobing?

cheswick is offline  
Old
06-07-2010, 03:42 PM
  #23
Whileee
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 13,631
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by cbcwpg View Post
Wasn't June 30 just the original deadline the NHL had, which is now moved to Dec 31?
Yes, as I understand it June 30 was the original deadline. The comments from Glendale city officials about recommending buyers by June 30 and thereby avoiding any payments from the escrow account came after the NHL's deadline had already been extended until December 31. That is what is curious about this. It seems that the June 30 date was no longer an issue for the NHL, but remained an issue because of the escrow account activation. At least that is my interpretation of the comments by Glendale city officials reported in the Arizona Republic article.

Let me reiterate; I am not saying that June 30 is an issue, but pointing out that city officials remain focused on that date according to public comments. I expect it is not a big deal in the overall scheme of things. Just another curious observation.

Whileee is offline  
Old
06-07-2010, 03:43 PM
  #24
RR
Moderator
 
RR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Cave Creek, AZ
Country: United States
Posts: 8,299
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whileee View Post
There seems little chance of finalizing a buyer prior to June 30, especially since they have now signed an exclusivity agreement with one of the bidders that would extend until August.

Besides, Art Lynch indicated that in any case the new owner would "replenish" the escrow account, so why worry about touching the escrow account?
Why "touch it" if you don't need to? This deal is already complicated enough, so if you can eliminate one of the steps, you do it.

RR is offline  
Old
06-07-2010, 03:44 PM
  #25
Killion
Global Moderator
 
Killion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Casablanca
Country: Morocco
Posts: 26,154
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RR View Post
You sure that's true? A lot of debate and speculation here these last months that IEH was played by the COG to buy JR time to get back in the game. Is that IEH's fault? Makes sense why they insisted on exclusivity this time around.
I dont think the COG was "playing" IE, I hold to a completely reverse opinion on that one RR. Does it not strike you as "odd" that JR is not excluded from the $25M blanket exclusivity clause in IEH's MOU?. As fantastically "nefarious" a theory that is (that JR/COG have an agreed upon AMULA) the lack of his exclusion would suggest otherwise. As for the clause being included to "protect" IE from MysteryBuyer 3/4/5, even I, Mr. Smoking Gun, have a hard time grasping that concept, certainly not when their are less distressed franchises available with greater upside potentialities.

Killion is offline  
Closed Thread

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:44 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2015 All Rights Reserved.