Betrayal in Maryland

The auction of Laurel and Pimlico and the rest of Magna Entertainment's Maryland properties has been cancelled, and Magna's lawyers went to bankruptcy court today with a revised reorganization plan that would leave Frank Stronach in control of Maryland racing for the foreseeable future.

The auction was to have been held Thursday, March 25th.

According to the Blood-Horse (which posted its story about an hour and a half after mine), Stronach's captive company, MI Developments, will pay $13 million to cover secured claims by the PNC Bank, $6 million for unsecured creditors of the Maryland tracks, and $5 million to the DeFrancis family, as a buyout of their claim to a share of slots revenue. In addition, Stronach's lawyers last week secured agreement from the unsecured creditors committee in the larger Magna entertainment bankruptcy to settle the creditors' pending lawsuit for a payment of $89 million, also to come from MI Developments.

More details are available at the Baltimore Sun site, and in this press release, issued Tuesday afternoon by MI Developments. The press release claims that the plan to hold on to the Maryland properties has the approval of a special committee of the MI Developments Board of Directors, including representatives of the minority shareholders who have been distraught in the past over Stronach's use of their money to fund his unprofitable racetrack empire. The press release also portrays the takeover of the Maryland tracks by MI Developments as principally a real-estate play, saying that "we are excited about the development opportunities" on the 565 acres in Maryland owned by the Maryland Jockey Club. Doesn't bode well for the continuation of lots of race days. The scheme also includes a condition that the Maryland Jockey Club's racing operations return to profitability within three years, and that accumulated losses in that three-year period not exceed $15 million. I have no idea how this will be accomplished.

As I've pointed out earlier, MI developments is a real estate holding company, and its minority shareholders are anything but happy with Stronach's use of their money to support his race track habit. With Frank once again pledging other people's money to settle his debts, I wonder if there'll be a new shareholder revolt, despite the apparent approval of today's plan by the special committee of the MI Developments Board.

The Maryland deal stinks. There were other bidders prepared to offer up to $100 million in cash, and, right up until the close of business yesterday, Stronach's lawyers were lying to them and saying that the auction was going forward. In the class that I teach at Touro Law School, I just yesterday went over the provisions of the Rules of Professional Responsibility about lying to others when you're a lawyer. Maybe I should have my students draft a complaint to the relevant authorities.


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Economics of Owning a Race Horse in New York

I've been wanting for some time to write about the economics of racing from the owners' and trainers' point of view. And the quarterly ritual of preparing financial statements for my Castle Village Farm partnerships has finally provided both the motivation and the data to get started. So, this post will look at racing from an owner's point of view. I'll follow up later with a look at the economics of being a trainer. In both cases, I'll be focusing on the New York racing scene, that is, as an owner or a trainer stabled at Aqueduct or Belmont, and making an annual pilgrimage to Saratoga. New York has the best purses around -- they'll average over $700,000 a day at the upcoming Saratoga meet -- but it also has very high expenses. So, even with the kind of horses that most of us are satisfied to have -- solid, hard-working thoroughbreds -- not a stakes horse, but not a $4,000 Finger Lakes claimer either -- it's not easy to come out ahead -- even when you...
Read more

NEWSPAPER RESTRUCTURING IS PAINFUL, BUT NECESSARY

Financial pages are full of developments and changes at newspaper companies and these are being commented upon anxiously by those in the industry. Unpleasant conditions certainly abound, but these development are not indications that the industry is dead or dying in the near future. What they signal is that things which worked in the past are not working now, that newspaper companies are badly in need of restructuring, refocusing, and renewal, and that the boards of the companies and the company managers are taking badly needed action. The techniques for restructuring are no mystery. First, you need some cash. This can be obtained by attracting new capital through investment or loans. New York Times Co. did this recently by borrowings $250 million from Carlos Slim. Other firms are looking for friendly investors with liquidity. Another way of raising cash is by turning assets into cash. A classic move made by many types of firms is the sell their building and lease back any space that i...
Read more

Is the future of digital journalism an outside job?

Making small digital news providers sustainable has become the holy grail of journalists and the search continues for workable business models and revenue streams. Advertising may produce some revenue, but it will never generate sufficient resources to support digital journalism because so little advertising money is available for sites with small audiences. About three-quarters of all online advertising goes to the top 10 sites and Google, Facebook, Microsoft, and Yahoo account for about 60 percent of all online revenue. This leaves very little advertising expenditures to be contested among all other players--of which news providers are only a small fraction. At the same time, the prices paid for online advertising are falling because there are so many sites offering advertising, the advertising inventory is nearly infinite, and audiences continue fragmenting. This means the majority of funding for start-up digital journalism must come from elsewhere and online news sites—especially s...
Read more