04-09-2010, 11:57 AM
<!--quoteo(post=87391:date=Apr 9 2010, 10:44 AM:name=1060Ivy)-->QUOTE (1060Ivy @ Apr 9 2010, 10:44 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=87390:date=Apr 9 2010, 10:23 AM:name=rok)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (rok @ Apr 9 2010, 10:23 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=87389:date=Apr 9 2010, 10:21 AM:name=1060Ivy)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (1060Ivy @ Apr 9 2010, 10:21 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=87379:date=Apr 9 2010, 10:02 AM:name=rok)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (rok @ Apr 9 2010, 10:02 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=87373:date=Apr 9 2010, 09:57 AM:name=1060Ivy)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (1060Ivy @ Apr 9 2010, 09:57 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->A couple of items:
- The Cubs were just sold to Ricketts for $845 MM last year. Forbes should have at least included an asterisk to say that the market value is another $119 MM. In addition that would change the Debt/Value ratio to 69% rather than 80%
- Why assume that debt cannot be paid down from Operating Income? Ricketts will find new revenue streams but I don't believe that he has to create these streams in order to service the debt.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The purchase price was agreed upon almost 2 years ago. I have a hunch that the overall value has gone down during that time, with the recession and all. If the Rickettses tried to sell the team right now, they couldn't get over $800 mil for it IMO.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The purchase price may have been agreed to years ago but the market price occurs at the time of ownership transfer. Have a hard time believing that there was a 16% decrease in value in a matter of months.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Tell that to someone who bought a home 2 years ago or a any stock and then get back to me. Sorry, but you are wrong. The time lag is critical.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
So in 2007 if you signed a contract to purchase a home in 2009 but the home was worth significantly less in 2009a, you still take title to the property?
You might consider walking away from the deal or offering a lower price for the property.
If your brokers did their job, the contract should have been written so you could walk away without losing more than earnest money.
The sale of the Cubs was more complex but have a difficult time believing that Ricketts just said thought, "It's just $119 MM, I'm OK with it. Where are the keys?"
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
In retrospect he overpaid, but at the time it was the market price. This is oversimplifying the issue.
I deal with private equity every day. Private company valuations are marked to "market" every quarter (this is what Forbes is doing). It doesn't mean the valuations are accurate or reflect debt and equity fully. The process of closing on the sale of a baseball franchise has a time lag embedded into it. Ricketts isn't a fool for paying $800 mil for a team that many thought was worth $900 mil to $1 bil at the time. Then the economy collapsed. If you recall, he even tried to renegotiate and got some terms changed, but it was already a signed <b>contract</b>.
What is your point?
- The Cubs were just sold to Ricketts for $845 MM last year. Forbes should have at least included an asterisk to say that the market value is another $119 MM. In addition that would change the Debt/Value ratio to 69% rather than 80%
- Why assume that debt cannot be paid down from Operating Income? Ricketts will find new revenue streams but I don't believe that he has to create these streams in order to service the debt.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The purchase price was agreed upon almost 2 years ago. I have a hunch that the overall value has gone down during that time, with the recession and all. If the Rickettses tried to sell the team right now, they couldn't get over $800 mil for it IMO.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The purchase price may have been agreed to years ago but the market price occurs at the time of ownership transfer. Have a hard time believing that there was a 16% decrease in value in a matter of months.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Tell that to someone who bought a home 2 years ago or a any stock and then get back to me. Sorry, but you are wrong. The time lag is critical.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
So in 2007 if you signed a contract to purchase a home in 2009 but the home was worth significantly less in 2009a, you still take title to the property?
You might consider walking away from the deal or offering a lower price for the property.
If your brokers did their job, the contract should have been written so you could walk away without losing more than earnest money.
The sale of the Cubs was more complex but have a difficult time believing that Ricketts just said thought, "It's just $119 MM, I'm OK with it. Where are the keys?"
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
In retrospect he overpaid, but at the time it was the market price. This is oversimplifying the issue.
I deal with private equity every day. Private company valuations are marked to "market" every quarter (this is what Forbes is doing). It doesn't mean the valuations are accurate or reflect debt and equity fully. The process of closing on the sale of a baseball franchise has a time lag embedded into it. Ricketts isn't a fool for paying $800 mil for a team that many thought was worth $900 mil to $1 bil at the time. Then the economy collapsed. If you recall, he even tried to renegotiate and got some terms changed, but it was already a signed <b>contract</b>.
What is your point?