|
lol
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2017 03:36
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 20:00 |
|
|
Full coverage http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/casino-billionaire-backs-out-of-raiders-stadium-deal-in-las-vegas/ Pretty much totally expected, because Adelson wanted a hunk of ownership for his money and Davis doesn't want to lose any of his ownership stake. Now that the rest of the money is already available, Davis doesn't need Adelson and Adelson can take his ball and go home and pout.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2017 03:42
|
|
|
San Diego Raiders becoming more of a reality!?
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2017 03:45
|
|
|
Ron Jeremy posted:Adelson has pulled out of the Raiders Vegas project. Look, it'll be a hard day. But I guarantee you that a hundred and sixty days' ride that way... there's nothing but salt. [points back] At least that way, we might be able to... together... come across some kind of redemption. https://youtu.be/d1qxTSCPBoM
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2017 03:46
|
|
|
Leperflesh posted:Full coverage This is the first I've heard of aselson wanting a chunk of the team. That's been a non starter on pretty much all the other offers, don't know why he thought he'd be successful. Otoh, if Davis can get funding to build in Vegas, he can get funding to build in Oakland. Or, you know, the NFL could cough up more of the billions they earn every year for stadiums. Crazy talk I know.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2017 03:48
|
|
|
Ron Jeremy posted:This is the first I've heard of aselson wanting a chunk of the team. That's been a non starter on pretty much all the other offers, don't know why he thought he'd be successful. I hadn't heard that either but Davis is one of the weaker owners from a purely financial standpoint, so I can see Adelson thinking he could bully his way into owning a large chunk of the team.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2017 03:51
|
|
|
i am kiss u now posted:San Diego Raiders becoming more of a reality!? A few weeks ago Goldman Sachs they're willing do the full share of the finance even without a 3rd party, so Adelson lost his leverage.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2017 03:53
|
|
|
Adelson openly said that the funding for the Vegas arena, at least on his end, "was not secure" after the public funding vote passed. It was pretty easy to connect the dots that he wanted to get in on the action once the city was on the hook.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2017 03:55
|
|
|
So what does this mean? Is Vegas still likely happening, just without Sheldon?
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2017 05:01
|
|
|
Kevyn posted:So what does this mean? Is Vegas still likely happening, just without Sheldon? Ragnarok the Red posted:A few weeks ago Goldman Sachs they're willing do the full share of the finance even without a 3rd party, so Adelson lost his leverage.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2017 07:42
|
|
|
Kevyn posted:So what does this mean? Is Vegas still likely happening, just without Sheldon? I'd say it's still likely but definitely less likely than it was a week ago. 1. Goldman isn't writing a $650million check and they'll have to market and sell the additional debt issuance. On the margin this is tougher than having one guy fund it but it should be pretty doable. It does make the deal more susceptible to any adverse shocks. 2. Pissing off one of the most powerful people in Vegas can't help
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2017 13:17
|
|
|
This was a good day for the Vegas Golden Knights.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2017 14:47
|
|
|
Nail Rat posted:This was a good day for the Vegas [Placeholder]s.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2017 15:05
|
|
|
Goldman is re-evaluating its relationship with the planned deal: http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/18590188/oakland-raiders-las-vegas-stadium-deal-doubt-goldman-sachs-re-evaluates-involvement
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2017 15:22
|
|
|
Leperflesh posted:Full coverage none of what you posted is supported by the article at all
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2017 15:22
|
|
|
v2vian man posted:none of what you posted is supported by the article at all But he sounded so authoritative when he posted it!
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2017 15:44
|
|
|
Hmm no surprise president McMullin voided NATO and freed Mumia. Pretty basic really
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2017 16:08
|
|
|
v2vian man posted:none of what you posted is supported by the article at all Besides the ownership stake, it absolutely is, but its all contingent on Goldman being willing to piss of Adelson and that ESPN article suggests they're going wobbly. My guess is the team involved in this didn't think that particular issue through and Adelson has called up their bosses and started issuing threats. Now, Goldman is stuck between pissing off a wealthy and powerful client or hurting their ability to have whatever non-binding "we'll totally do this" assurances they gave Davis be trusted in the future.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2017 17:01
|
|
|
The question is will Davis be able to pay on that amount of money. He has no collateral other than the team and if conditions occurred that he couldn't pay, would the team be worth it. Could GS even take a portion of the team in collateral within the ownership rules of the NFL. They might have to turn around and find a single buyer to take it as a distressed asset. Not a great position for them to be in. They'll probably look for league guarantees of some sort.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2017 17:28
|
|
|
Marklar posted:Goldman is re-evaluating its relationship with the planned deal: I'm guessing Goldmacn Sachs was Mark's ace in the hole. He doesn't need a billionaire who wants a piece of the pie because the banks will cover the rest and he can pay it back with PSLs, naming rights, and stadium revenue. They're positively hosed on moving to Vegas is Goldman backs out. Ron Jeremy posted:The question is will Davis be able to pay on that amount of money. He has no collateral other than the team and if conditions occurred that he couldn't pay, would the team be worth it. Could GS even take a portion of the team in collateral within the ownership rules of the NFL. They might have to turn around and find a single buyer to take it as a distressed asset. Not a great position for them to be in. They'll probably look for league guarantees of some sort. Goldman potentially backs out makes me think that they don't think the team is worth enough for them to fund 1.2 billion dollars or however much Sheldon Anderson was kicking in. Akileese fucked around with this message at 18:16 on Jan 31, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2017 17:32
|
|
|
Ron Jeremy posted:The question is will Davis be able to pay on that amount of money. He has no collateral other than the team and if conditions occurred that he couldn't pay, would the team be worth it. Could GS even take a portion of the team in collateral within the ownership rules of the NFL. They might have to turn around and find a single buyer to take it as a distressed asset. Not a great position for them to be in. They'll probably look for league guarantees of some sort. One day there's gonna be this old guy with a funny haircut who comes into the same PF Changs every day, at the same time, and orders the same thing. After a few weeks of this, a new waitress innocuously asks him why he does that, and with a wistful smile and a far-off look he will reply with "Well, when I used to own the Oakland Raiders..."
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2017 18:11
|
|
|
"My office got a call from someone that wanted an estimate to do some work. Mark Davis was the name on the paperwork, but I didn't think twice about it. It was when Al was still alive. Appt. was for 9am. I show up, gated community, security, etc. I get to the front door (which are glass, with a HUGE Raiders logo etched into the glass) at around 8:57 and ring the doorbell. No answer. Ring. 5 minutes. Ring. 5 minutes. Call, no answer. 5 minutes later, call again, no answer. I loving hate when this happens. I bang on the door as hard as I can, which doesn't make as much sound being glass. It's like 9:20, I say gently caress it and turn around to leave. Door opens and this chubby, pasty dude wearing nothing but boxers answers the door. FANTASTIC. He says "Yeah?" I said I'm here for the estimate for the xxxxx. Blank stare for about 4 seconds, then he says "ok, c'mon" As he's leading me through the front entry and dining room, I notice that all the marble and granite in this house has a theme; black and silver, or gray and white. I see Raider logos on the backs of the chairs at the bar and I realize where I am. He's leading me from the front door, across the foyer, across the dining room and into the master bedroom. As we are walking, I see clothing items on the floor. He must have been loving hammered the night before (speculation) because the clothes were in a perfect trail, like he took them off as he was walking to his room. 90's Raiders Starter jacket (not kidding), shoes, shirt, socks, pants, luckily he kept his boxers on. Anyway, as we get into the room, he grunts, points towards the bathroom and says "in there" as he falls face-first back on his bed and goes back to sleep. WHAT THE gently caress DUDE. Right as this is happening, two more guys show up. One is a competitor, the other is the Raiders' "official" contractor that oversees all the construction of all the Raiders' players' and staff houses across the country. So I am bidding against two other contractors, which is fine, but he scheduled them all at the same time. So we are awkwardly trying to measure the same area at the same time. After about 10 minutes, I was like "Gentlemen, I have somewhere to be. Pleasure to meet you and good luck." I left, with Mark Davis face down on his bed and two contractors in his bathroom trying to figure out what the gently caress exactly what it was he wanted done." 
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2017 18:31
|
|
|
Adelson was widely reported as wanting a stake in the Raiders in exchange for his funding: http://www.mercurynews.com/2016/09/21/report-mark-davis-wont-sell-stake-in-raiders-to-sheldon-adelson/ Later, Davis was reportedly looking for an alternative specifically because he did not want to sell a stake to Adelson: http://www.mercurynews.com/2016/12/20/could-raiders-move-to-las-vegas-even-without-sheldon-adelson/ After LV came up with some public funding, Davis reportedly secured financing from Goldman Sachs sufficient to not need Adelson's money at all. And then last night we heard Adelson had pulled out entirely. I didn't make any of this stuff up, guys.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2017 18:35
|
|
|
Ron Jeremy posted:The question is will Davis be able to pay on that amount of money. He has no collateral other than the team and if conditions occurred that he couldn't pay, would the team be worth it. Could GS even take a portion of the team in collateral within the ownership rules of the NFL. They might have to turn around and find a single buyer to take it as a distressed asset. Not a great position for them to be in. They'll probably look for league guarantees of some sort. The stadium itself is collateral as well.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2017 18:52
|
|
|
Leperflesh posted:Adelson was widely reported as wanting a stake in the Raiders in exchange for his funding: Yes but we don't know the terms of the Goldman funding is the thing. Goldman could, like Adelson, back out entirely if they feel that the team isn't good enough collateral (I find that hard to believe personally). Goldman could just get cold feet because if Adelson backs out, that's one less source of income for them to get their money from.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2017 18:55
|
|
|
San Diego Super Raiders
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2017 19:17
|
|
|
Blitz7x posted:stuff So I take it the reason he doesn't drink is because he's a non-functioning alcoholic.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2017 19:23
|
|
|
Nail Rat posted:So I take it the reason he doesn't drink is because he's a non-functioning alcoholic.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2017 19:26
|
|
|
a neat cape posted:San Diego Super Raiders Goldman Sachs Corporate Raiders
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2017 19:29
|
|
|
Just have the Raiders be not based in any city and drop from a giant helicopter for their games like Dethklok. Pirates don't put down roots anyhow.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2017 19:30
|
|
|
a neat cape posted:San Diego Super Raiders we dont need an NFL team ross let it go
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2017 20:07
|
|
|
Chinatown posted:we dont need an NFL team ross let it go I wouldn't root for them anyway. But it would make Spanos extra mad.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2017 20:26
|
|
|
Ron Jeremy posted:Goldman Sachs Corporate Raiders Will LV lead the league in Sachs?
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2017 20:37
|
|
C-Bangin' it 
|
That's an awful pun & you should be ashamed
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2017 20:40
|
|
|
Colostomy Bag posted:Will LV lead the league in Sachs? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SHoNWwhzh3M
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2017 20:54
|
|
|
It's dead. Thank god.quote:Just got off the phone with Goldman Sachs reps, who say GS had deal to finance LV stadium with Adelson AND Raiders. With no Adelson, no deal
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2017 21:00
|
|
|
Either he or the RJ are wrong because they reported the financing was happening regardless.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2017 21:04
|
|
|
Grittybeard posted:I hadn't heard that either but Davis is one of the weaker owners from a purely financial standpoint, so I can see Adelson thinking he could bully his way into owning a large chunk of the team. I mean... bullying and scheming is pretty much how the Davis's ended up with the Raiders.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2017 21:08
|
|
|
raiders 500 million. lv's 750. that's 1.25 billion. just build a fuckin stadium.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2017 21:09
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 20:00 |
|
|
Ragnarok the Red posted:Either he or the RJ are wrong because they reported the financing was happening regardless. As far as I know they simply forwarded the reassuring smoke-and-mirrors Davis was making that everything is under control (while also beginning their first wave of attack pieces on the NFL for being "hypocrites" this morning, not surprising since Adelson bought paper to be his dirt-diggers and hitmen). This guy, a TV affiliate sports anchor, actually went and called Goldman people. Volkerball posted:raiders 500 million. lv's 750. that's 1.25 billion. just build a fuckin stadium. Pardon me for not sharing your enthusiasm for this project, but this was a project of undemocratic cronyism and I hope they don't just build a fuckin stadium. Especially if the Raiders want to continue to keep full control of the place, make all the profits, stick the public with upkeep, pay no rent, charge UNLV to use it, etc. Craptacular! fucked around with this message at 21:14 on Jan 31, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2017 21:11
|
|