maxpower Posted February 2, 2011 Share Posted February 2, 2011 and who's paying them that? do you think Lou, for example, can buy them out? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maxpower Posted February 2, 2011 Share Posted February 2, 2011 let's say the whole thing gets valued out at $400M for easy math sake. and they own, say 25%. the other owners have to scoop up $100M to hand to them to buy out their share and conduct it that way, or find $100M worth of partners. I'm not so sure this is that easy. it's easier for one or two outside people to stagger up with a $400M moneybag and take all the spoils for themselves, then to come in as a quarter partner with no controlling interest. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Triumph Posted February 2, 2011 Share Posted February 2, 2011 (edited) let's say the whole thing gets valued out at $400M for easy math sake. and they own, say 25%. the other owners have to scoop up $100M to hand to them to buy out their share and conduct it that way, or find $100M worth of partners. I'm not so sure this is that easy. it's easier for one or two outside people to stagger up with a $400M moneybag and take all the spoils for themselves, then to come in as a quarter partner with no controlling interest. yeah but again it seems that vanderbeek has no interest in the latter scenario - he wants to retain the controlling interest. i agree that finding partners won't be easy, but he'll have to. i am getting a bud fox gordon gekko vibe from this whole thing - gilfillan's gonna sell brian rolston to mexico, they're the only ones dumb enough to buy him. Edited February 2, 2011 by Triumph Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hurricane1091 Posted February 2, 2011 Share Posted February 2, 2011 (edited) I have a hard time believing that the majority owner could be no longer be the majority owner because the minority owner sold the team. Think about it, that makes no sense. I fail to see how the minority owner wanting out could force the sale of the entire team. You can't force JVB to give up his 50% share, there is no way. And I doubt he has to find partners as well. If Brick City wants to sell their share, it is their job to sell it, not Jeff's. Edited February 2, 2011 by hurricane1091 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewarkDevil5 Posted February 2, 2011 Share Posted February 2, 2011 Do you honestly think it will be that difficult to find a handful of people to buy out a minority interest in the Devils? Owning sports teams is about prestige, not control. Also, the great thing about it is that the sale gives Jeff the opportunity to expand his ownership to 51% giving himself outright control over the ownership if he so chooses and it also means that it doesn't matter if the final 49% is made up of 5 people or 5,000 people because the controlling interest will still remain in the hands of one person (so you won't wind up with some disastrous Secaucus Seven situation). Maybe I'm just being overly optimistic based off of a lack of information, but I'm not nearly as worried as I was earlier today. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Triumph Posted February 2, 2011 Share Posted February 2, 2011 Do you honestly think it will be that difficult to find a handful of people to buy out a minority interest in the Devils? Owning sports teams is about prestige, not control. Also, the great thing about it is that the sale gives Jeff the opportunity to expand his ownership to 51% giving himself outright control over the ownership if he so chooses and it also means that it doesn't matter if the final 49% is made up of 5 people or 5,000 people because the controlling interest will still remain in the hands of one person (so you won't wind up with some disastrous Secaucus Seven situation). Maybe I'm just being overly optimistic based off of a lack of information, but I'm not nearly as worried as I was earlier today. you kind of contradict yourself when you say that sports ownership is about prestige and then note that it should be no trouble finding people to own a minority interest. i don't think those two ideas go together - the prestige is in being front and center, which is vanderbeek's role. there's a famous quote by john mcmullen about owning a piece of the yankees: 'nothing's more limited than being a limited partner of george steinbrenner' you have to wonder why it was set up this way in the first place. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewarkDevil5 Posted February 2, 2011 Share Posted February 2, 2011 (edited) you kind of contradict yourself when you say that sports ownership is about prestige and then note that it should be no trouble finding people to own a minority interest. i don't think those two ideas go together - the prestige is in being front and center, which is vanderbeek's role. there's a famous quote by john mcmullen about owning a piece of the yankees: 'nothing's more limited than being a limited partner of george steinbrenner' you have to wonder why it was set up this way in the first place. I don't think you need to own the controlling interest to get prestige. Dave Gerstein used to be my neighbor when I lived in Long Branch and he was very proud of his minority stake in the Nets even when they were a piss-poor team. Owning a piece of a team means that you can brag about owning the team without the headache of having to manage it. Even as a minority owner you can still get in the spotlight. Look at Jay-Z. He owned less than 1% of the Nets but for a while he was all anyone was talking about (before Prokhorov came into the picture anyway). As far as the McMullen quote, there's obviously a difference for people who actually want to take control and run things day to day. In that situation being the minority owner in a team that's owned by someone as strong-willed as Steinbrenner would make someone like McMullen feel useless. Edited February 2, 2011 by NewarkDevil5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maxpower Posted February 2, 2011 Share Posted February 2, 2011 yeah but again it seems that vanderbeek has no interest in the latter scenario - he wants to retain the controlling interest. i agree that finding partners won't be easy, but he'll have to. i am getting a bud fox gordon gekko vibe from this whole thing - gilfillan's gonna sell brian rolston to mexico, they're the only ones dumb enough to buy him. that's how Chambers rolls. pump and dump. this one is awesome because he takes state money and then turns it into his own. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Triumph Posted February 2, 2011 Share Posted February 2, 2011 I don't think you need to own the controlling interest to get prestige. Dave Gerstein used to be my neighbor when I lived in Long Branch and he was very proud of his minority stake in the Nets even when they were a piss-poor team. Owning a piece of a team means that you can brag about owning the team without the headache of having to manage it. Even as a minority owner you can still get in the spotlight. Look at Jay-Z. He owned less than 1% of the Nets but for a while he was all anyone was talking about (before Prokhorov came into the picture anyway). jay-z is famous for things that aren't owning a basketball team. he's not your random neighbor. anyway, we'll see how this plays out. considering this feud has likely been going on behind the scenes for some time, i don't think it will affect on-ice operations, but we'll see. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
justdo3043 Posted February 2, 2011 Share Posted February 2, 2011 (edited) nevermind Edited February 2, 2011 by justdo3043 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaneykoIsGod Posted February 2, 2011 Share Posted February 2, 2011 From TG: Although Devils majority owner Jeff Vanderbeek said earlier today that he expects to maintain controlling interest of the team when the dust settles in his break-up with the minority co-owners from Brick City Hockey LLC, Brick City President Mike Gilfillan sounds as if he thinks otherwise in the statement he put out this evening.In case you missed it (I posted it on Twitter during tonight’s game), Gilfillan’s statement that Brick City can “cause a sale” of the entire team and the arena rights though Vanderbeek owns 50 percent of the team. Brick City, which is headed by Gillfillan and father-in-law Ray Chambers, owns less than that. Peter Simon also owns a share of the team and, according to a source, has no plans to sell. This is just TG reading into Gilfillan's statement, but until something new comes out that looks like all we'll really be able to do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coldply123 Posted February 2, 2011 Share Posted February 2, 2011 From TG: This is just TG reading into Gilfillan's statement, but until something new comes out that looks like all we'll really be able to do. That's interesting. To me the one thing I've taken out of this is that there clearly has been a feud between ownership and that's never good. Additionally, it's clear that Vanderbeek doesn't have the assets or wherewithal to buy out any additional portion of Gilfillan's share. So that's something to think about. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
overtime98 Posted February 2, 2011 Share Posted February 2, 2011 I do not think this will affect the team or location in any way. Just a business decision for those involved. its obvious things are tight and they need to make sure decisions are made to keep the arena running and successful. No worries here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jerrydevil Posted February 2, 2011 Share Posted February 2, 2011 I do not think this will affect the team or location in any way. I disagree. I think a payroll slash and an exploration of a Parise trade is a reasonable expectation. When a lot of salary comes off the books in the next couple of years, I don't expect the Devils will use all the cap space to buy players. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Devils731 Posted February 2, 2011 Share Posted February 2, 2011 I disagree. I think a payroll slash and an exploration of a Parise trade is a reasonable expectation. When a lot of salary comes off the books in the next couple of years, I don't expect the Devils will use all the cap space to buy players. Why? This is likely the minority owner wanting out after experiencing almost a 100% appreciation in his team equity. It's not likely a new owner will be calling shots in the future, so VBK will keep running the team and he seems willing to spend. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaneykoIsGod Posted February 2, 2011 Share Posted February 2, 2011 Why? This is likely the minority owner wanting out after experiencing almost a 100% appreciation in his team equity. It's not likely a new owner will be calling shots in the future, so VBK will keep running the team and he seems willing to spend. I think we're all hoping this is the case, but Gilfillan saying it's within his rights to "cause a sale of the entire team and arena rights" while Vanderbeek is saying "I anticipate maintaining a controlling interest" instead of "I will maintain a controlling interest" are understandably going to cause a stir. The two statements are really all we have to go on right now, and they appear to have a lot of lines to read between. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Devils731 Posted February 2, 2011 Share Posted February 2, 2011 I think we're all hoping this is the case, but Gilfillan saying it's within his rights to "cause a sale of the entire team and arena rights" while Vanderbeek is saying "I anticipate maintaining a controlling interest" instead of "I will maintain a controlling interest" are understandably going to cause a stir. The two statements are really all we have to go on right now, and they appear to have a lot of lines to read between. I'm definitely not an expert, but having seen a few companies being sold from the outside and one from the inside, this is most likely a way to get a true judge of what Brick City's minority stake is worth. Brick City doesn't really care if the whole team is sold or not, they just want to know they're getting full value for their equity. Once the true value of the team is known the sides will likely work out a buyout of some fashion for Brick City. Is that a 100% sure thing? No, but I would guess that's the most likely scenario as it gets Brick City their money and doesn't tie them up in court. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coldply123 Posted February 2, 2011 Share Posted February 2, 2011 Why? This is likely the minority owner wanting out after experiencing almost a 100% appreciation in his team equity. It's not likely a new owner will be calling shots in the future, so VBK will keep running the team and he seems willing to spend. I don't think that's the entirety of it at all. The rumors out there are that there has been significant feuding between them over Vanderbeek's spending and some of his decisions. And there is now apparently this clause that Gilfillan and Chambers can invoke that allows them to put the entire team for sale in order to accurately assess the value of the team. That doesnt mean Vanderbeek has to sell his share, but it means the team is going to be assessed for true value, so the minority guys can get a better picture at what they are dealing with. This is going to be messy. Any new owner is going to want a sweet deal either in terms of some sweeteners or discounted value. Any owner is going to want input and some sort of control and if he can't get that, he's going to bid low and take into account any debt he would be responsible for (look at the Wilpon/Mets articles in recent days for an explanation-as debt incurred actually reduces the real value of a stake, whatever it may be). Keep in mind that Vanderbeek has seen his personal wealth take hits from the Lehman thing, and that he's got a ton of debt he's responsible for as well, so I don't see where some people get a rosy picture from this. I'm not saying it's going to be bad for the Devils, but this is going to be a drawn out process that's likely going to cause some headaches from a business and operations perspective. I don't see the Devils spending as close to the Cap as some think in the future either. And I don't think that's a bad thing. Lou has gotten very sloppy as he has gotten more power and spending ability and gotten away from some of the things that deliver good value and long-term stability. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Triumph Posted February 2, 2011 Share Posted February 2, 2011 I disagree. I think a payroll slash and an exploration of a Parise trade is a reasonable expectation. When a lot of salary comes off the books in the next couple of years, I don't expect the Devils will use all the cap space to buy players. why is this at all reasonable? this situation isn't happening because one party is out of money. brick city may want to wreck it because it's wreckable, but i don't see that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quinn01 Posted February 2, 2011 Share Posted February 2, 2011 Bergen Record: "New Jersey Devils owner Jeff Vanderbeek does not plan to sell the team, but he is in danger of losing one of his minority partners. "As managing member of the New Jersey Devils, it is not my desire to sell the team," Vanderbeek said in the statement. "My partner, Brick City, and I have different visions for the franchise. While Brick City has a right, under our partnership agreement, to explore a sale and Moag and Co. has been retained to assist in these efforts, I anticipate maintaining a controlling interest." Vanderbeek controls 50 percent of the Devils, so even if they sell their shares, he will still have a firm grasp of the organization." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
njdevs89 Posted February 2, 2011 Share Posted February 2, 2011 This will be the one team that Bettman does allow to re-locate to Canada lol. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
newarkdev01 Posted February 2, 2011 Share Posted February 2, 2011 The only thing we can really take from this is that the ownership group led by Gilfillan wants out and is basically doing price exploration. I don't think anyone can be really sure how it will shake out or what effects it will truly have. Outside of just speculation there isnt a way to know at this point who may be interested in getting all or some of the team so there isn't much of a point to get stressed. I hope whoever comes in is looking to invest more and continue what has been slow progress around the arena. Outside of that, speculation on the status of Parise is just that, speculation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
britoon Posted February 2, 2011 Share Posted February 2, 2011 Devs fans should be given an option to buy the remaining shares of the team, a la Green Bay. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DevsMan84 Posted February 2, 2011 Share Posted February 2, 2011 Devs fans should be given an option to buy the remaining shares of the team, a la Green Bay. They are having trouble getting the fans to buy bricks in the plaza, so I doubt they will have much success with this idea. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
titans04 Posted February 2, 2011 Share Posted February 2, 2011 Why? This is likely the minority owner wanting out after experiencing almost a 100% appreciation in his team equity. It's not likely a new owner will be calling shots in the future, so VBK will keep running the team and he seems willing to spend. Don't you have to take into consideration the 250M in debt as well when looking at the overall financial picture? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.