Well, they did say that the JB offer satisfied their needs and they also pointed out that neither of the other two do in their current form so read from that as you will. You are right that they left open the possibility that the Reinsdorf and Ice Edge holdings might be suitable in the future but the future is very short term for them.

—
To the extent that the Court decides to hold a sale hearing on the Glendale Bids on August 5, given the absence of a full cash pay down or an agreement on alternative terms, SOF does not consent to either Glendale Bid as they have been presented. SOF looks forward to greater clarity on the status of the Glendale Bids and would not object to a very short adjournment of the Sale Hearing if the parties require further time to conduct diligence and negotiate terms.

However, SOF reiterates that it is imperative that whatever the outcome of the bifurcated sale process currently in place, and the Court’s decision in response to the requests for adjournment filed by the NHL and City of Glendale, it is necessary that a transaction actually close no later than late September, in time for the Team, with new ownership, to participate in the 2009-2010 professional hockey season.
—

1, Please produce the evidence that the amount is under discussion. As for a fairly short list of things that you can negotiate – are you kidding?

2. Thank you for demonstrating your folly. As noted, I was ranting about your use of the loaded term not because it is or is not a subsidy, but simply because you selected a loaded term to skew the discussion, after which I elaborated further. Using the term “subsidy” in government funding discussions is like opening up an abortion discussion with “So, what is your position on murdering babies?” Do you see the point? I swear, it is like talking to a brick wall.

3. Any one of a dozen or more things. The biggest one – security. They may want a personal guarantee. Terms of default. Step-in rights. Interest. The list goes on and on.

If you had even the slightest clue what you were talking about, you would understand that, with SOF’s position as the second-ranked creditor, they are golden with respect to their amounts owing. They will get their full amount whether one of the Glendale bids is successful or the relo auction proceeds. The chance of any auction raising less than $115 million or so needed to cover the secureds is less than zero. They have no incentive to negotiate their amount. Their position is impregnable. They maintain all of the leverage in respect to amount, and as presumably sophisticated parties with a wit or two in their heads, they know it. In case you are wondering (why, then, would they negotiate at all if they have this leverage?", the answer is of course that the negotiations would revolve around what the terms of a deal now would be, same as any secured lending transaction. IF SOF has $80 mil, they will want to put it to use, so they might as well see what they can do with an actual competent owner/operator like Reinsdorf. Heck, they might parlay it into a larger arrangement, but either way it is worth a spin at the negotiating table

They would be assumed by Reinsdorf’s entitty as part of the court order which would assign all of the team assets to that entity. They are accordingly “guaranteed” to the exact same extent as they were when the debts were incurred, with the same level of assets – a lot more, actually, as Reinsdorf will be injecting operating capital into the company (unlike Moyes, who withdrew from the franchise).

By the way, re-read the thread. You were the only one talking about them being “guaranteed” – not me. I simply stated that they were assumed by the new team owner, who is not bankrupt. This is more than adequate in any bankruptcy. Do you think that bankruptcy sales only happen when a new entity comes in that has personal guarantees of the new owner? Let me answer that for you – they don’t. Ordinary unsecured creditors are more than happy if a solvent company who wants to continue the business comes in and assumes their liabilities.

By the way, according to the court filings, it was 26 voting no, three abstentions and one absent (Moyes, I assume).

About the Reinsdorf leak, that is beyond dispute, as the offending information was set forth in the actual court filings of Moyes themselves. As you correctly state, “very dumb”.

About the money you refer to above, one could make an argument that the consumers in the “special tax district” (i.e., the Westdale development) will be “subsidizing” hockey (although I am sure there are counterarguments that hockey was subsidizing Westdale in the past for a while), but I don’t know if you could say that about the City per se. Consumers who don’t buy stuff in the special tax district won’t pay a thing.

The problem now is that there is a recession and it will be much tougher for a city to come up with money. Again, it stands to reason that this is part of why the Goldwater Institute is now involved.

That’s what I wonder about. There is a lot of debate in a community when the basic needs seem to be met between people who want a team to bring in jobs, or civic pride, or whatever and people who don’t want their tax money to go to someone who is already rich and they think can build his own rink or stadium or ballpark.

Now, cities are squeezed by dropping tax revenues at the same time they have more people who need aid for paying utilities, trying to keep their home, getting enough food or medicine … the stakes are much higher now.