IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

5 Pages V   1 2 3 > »   
Reply to this topicStart new topic
Monday, March 5th, Critical Day for Mets fans
younghem
post Mar 3 2012, 05:18 PM
Post #1


Moderator
Group Icon

Group: Mods
Posts: 16,437
Joined: 3-February 04
From: Connecticut
Member No.: 210



http://www.palmbeachdailynews.com/society/...to-2199795.html

The Judge will rule on Monday whether or not there will be a trial. The Judge has already barred two of Picard's witnesses from testifying in a trial. The Wilpons / Katz have been trying to get the case dismissed.....

If there will be a trial (let's hope so) it will begin March 19th.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Cactus
post Mar 5 2012, 11:24 AM
Post #2


Admin
Group Icon

Group: Admin
Posts: 16,061
Joined: 23-January 04
Member No.: 159



The judge automatically awarded the trustee up to $83 million and the trial will begin March 19th.


--------------------
'-|-'

- "Mr. Jeff Wilpon has decided that he’s going to learn how to run a baseball team and take over at the end of the year… Run for the hills, boys. I think probably all those baseball people will bail… Jeff sits there by himself like he’s King Tut waiting for his camel.” - Nelson Doubleday
- "In today's regulatory environment, it's virtually impossible to violate rules." - Bernard Madoff, 10/20/07
The Washington Post decided not to cover Ralph Nader's presidential campaign because he had no chance of winning. Nader's response: "Then why are you covering the Nationals?"
- Asked by the Post about the younger Wilpon's job performance, Fred Wilpon said: "Excellent. Everybody knows ...that."
- "The word 'autonomy' is sometimes misused." - Jeff Wilpon
- "Let’s give Jeff Wilpon the benefit of the doubt here for a moment. Let’s say he is not short-tempered. Tone deaf. A credit seeker. An accountability deflector. A micro-manager. A second-guesser. A less-than-deep thinker. And bad at self-awareness. Fine, he’s none of these things. But here is the problem: This is his perception in the industry." - Joel Sherman
- “Jeff is the problem with the organization, and he is never going to realize that. He cannot help himself. He has to be involved. He will never hire anyone who will not let him have major input. He will not hire anyone who does not run every personnel decision through him.” - Anonymous NL Executive
- "The only person with a worse reputation than Jeff Wilpon in the game is David Samson." - Anonymous AL executive
- "[Mets GM Omar Minaya] isn’t the General Manager. Jeff Wilpon is. Omar’s the one out there to take the heat.” - Peter Gammons
- [Jeff Wilpon's] role in management, according to one official who worked for him, "is to act as president and CEO of second-guessing."
- "I always want Mets fans on my juries," said one noted defense attorney friend, a rabid Yankees fan. "They love losers, even three-time losers like some of my clients. And if Mets fans believe anything the Mets front office says, I can convince them to acquit anybody." - Denis Hamill
- I got a call the other day. They noted I had been a long term season ticket holder and asked if I was interested. I immediately exclaimed "I'm so sorry for the Wilpon Family". He asked what I meant. I told the guy if he looked in my file, he'd see a note to call me after both Fred and Jeff dropped dead, and not a day before. - Meanballer
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Cactus
post Mar 5 2012, 11:29 AM
Post #3


Admin
Group Icon

Group: Admin
Posts: 16,061
Joined: 23-January 04
Member No.: 159



here is the article from espn

http://espn.go.com/new-york/mlb/story/_/id...ial-decide-303m


--------------------
'-|-'

- "Mr. Jeff Wilpon has decided that he’s going to learn how to run a baseball team and take over at the end of the year… Run for the hills, boys. I think probably all those baseball people will bail… Jeff sits there by himself like he’s King Tut waiting for his camel.” - Nelson Doubleday
- "In today's regulatory environment, it's virtually impossible to violate rules." - Bernard Madoff, 10/20/07
The Washington Post decided not to cover Ralph Nader's presidential campaign because he had no chance of winning. Nader's response: "Then why are you covering the Nationals?"
- Asked by the Post about the younger Wilpon's job performance, Fred Wilpon said: "Excellent. Everybody knows ...that."
- "The word 'autonomy' is sometimes misused." - Jeff Wilpon
- "Let’s give Jeff Wilpon the benefit of the doubt here for a moment. Let’s say he is not short-tempered. Tone deaf. A credit seeker. An accountability deflector. A micro-manager. A second-guesser. A less-than-deep thinker. And bad at self-awareness. Fine, he’s none of these things. But here is the problem: This is his perception in the industry." - Joel Sherman
- “Jeff is the problem with the organization, and he is never going to realize that. He cannot help himself. He has to be involved. He will never hire anyone who will not let him have major input. He will not hire anyone who does not run every personnel decision through him.” - Anonymous NL Executive
- "The only person with a worse reputation than Jeff Wilpon in the game is David Samson." - Anonymous AL executive
- "[Mets GM Omar Minaya] isn’t the General Manager. Jeff Wilpon is. Omar’s the one out there to take the heat.” - Peter Gammons
- [Jeff Wilpon's] role in management, according to one official who worked for him, "is to act as president and CEO of second-guessing."
- "I always want Mets fans on my juries," said one noted defense attorney friend, a rabid Yankees fan. "They love losers, even three-time losers like some of my clients. And if Mets fans believe anything the Mets front office says, I can convince them to acquit anybody." - Denis Hamill
- I got a call the other day. They noted I had been a long term season ticket holder and asked if I was interested. I immediately exclaimed "I'm so sorry for the Wilpon Family". He asked what I meant. I told the guy if he looked in my file, he'd see a note to call me after both Fred and Jeff dropped dead, and not a day before. - Meanballer
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
angy
post Mar 5 2012, 11:46 AM
Post #4


Superstar
Group Icon

Group: Validated Members
Posts: 4,224
Joined: 14-February 07
From: tenafly, NJ
Member No.: 1,147



Sell Now Fred!!!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Truefan79
post Mar 5 2012, 11:51 AM
Post #5


Moderator
Group Icon

Group: Mods
Posts: 7,743
Joined: 14-January 04
From: California
Member No.: 52



Well it's a start! Hopefully the hits keep on coming.


--------------------
People ask me what I do in winter when there’s no baseball. I’ll tell you what I do. I stare out the window and wait for spring.

- Rogers Hornsby

QUOTE
Trading specs for Santana would be a disaster, just ask the Twins.

-mvr 7/2/12
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
sostenitore
post Mar 5 2012, 01:07 PM
Post #6


Little Leaguer
Group Icon

Group: Validated Members
Posts: 36
Joined: 18-January 04
From: North Central CT
Member No.: 110



Do you think MLB will now step in and take the team from Fred, Saul, and Jeff?

Can Mark Cuban step in and buy the team to prevent further embarrassment to NYC and MLB?

Are there any other prospective buyers?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
younghem
post Mar 5 2012, 02:30 PM
Post #7


Moderator
Group Icon

Group: Mods
Posts: 16,437
Joined: 3-February 04
From: Connecticut
Member No.: 210



Interesting quote:

"The Court remains skeptical that the trustee can ultimately rebut the defendants' showing of good faith, let alone impute bad faith to all the defendants," Rakoff wrote in Monday's decision. "Nevertheless, there remains a residue of disputed factual assertions from which a jury could infer either good or bad faith depending on which assertions are credited."

Basically if the Wilpons are going to have to fork over 300 million bucks the jury would have to find that they knew about Madoff and willfully did nothing, something which the Judge doubts to be true.

And there's still no clarification what "up to" 83 million dollars means. Could be 10 million, could be 50 million, who knows.....

Still a long way to go to determine what will happen to the worst owner in MLB, but I have to believe that a hit of 80 million bucks + no one showing up @ Citi Field could be enough to force Wilpon to sell.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
angy
post Mar 5 2012, 04:29 PM
Post #8


Superstar
Group Icon

Group: Validated Members
Posts: 4,224
Joined: 14-February 07
From: tenafly, NJ
Member No.: 1,147



It would take a person with character, pride and compassion to sell a team just because the fans are so angry and are craving for the sale. It would also take an honest person to question the Madof scheme seeing how easy it was to make millions. Do any of you feel the Wilpons or Katz have character, pride, fan compassion or are honest. I have my opinion and I'm not very optimistic.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
younghem
post Mar 5 2012, 04:39 PM
Post #9


Moderator
Group Icon

Group: Mods
Posts: 16,437
Joined: 3-February 04
From: Connecticut
Member No.: 210



QUOTE (angy @ Mar 5 2012, 04:29 PM) *
It would take a person with character, pride and compassion to sell a team just because the fans are so angry and are craving for the sale. It would also take an honest person to question the Madof scheme seeing how easy it was to make millions. Do any of you feel the Wilpons or Katz have character, pride, fan compassion or are honest. I have my opinion and I'm not very optimistic.


Clearly the Wilpons seem like they want to fight to the bitter end to retain ownership of the Mets. It would be Selig's job to say that they were incompetent owners and that they should be forced to sell, and we all know that ain't gonna happen.

Assuming the Wilpon's do take a 150 million dollar bath this season between the lawsuit and a boycott by the fans, can they survive that and maintain ownership ? I'd say probably not. But even if they do, I think they will be forced to sell in 2 - 3 years if the fans continue to withhold their $$$.

Fred Wilpon said it best when he proclaimed that they couldn't make it on TV alone. No fans @ the ballpark means bye bye Wilpon.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Batman Forever
post Mar 5 2012, 08:02 PM
Post #10


Rookie
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 577
Joined: 23-February 12
Member No.: 10,680



QUOTE (younghem @ Mar 5 2012, 03:30 PM) *
Interesting quote:

"The Court remains skeptical that the trustee can ultimately rebut the defendants' showing of good faith, let alone impute bad faith to all the defendants," Rakoff wrote in Monday's decision. "Nevertheless, there remains a residue of disputed factual assertions from which a jury could infer either good or bad faith depending on which assertions are credited."

Basically if the Wilpons are going to have to fork over 300 million bucks the jury would have to find that they knew about Madoff and willfully did nothing, something which the Judge doubts to be true.

And there's still no clarification what "up to" 83 million dollars means. Could be 10 million, could be 50 million, who knows.....

Still a long way to go to determine what will happen to the worst owner in MLB, but I have to believe that a hit of 80 million bucks + no one showing up @ Citi Field could be enough to force Wilpon to sell.


So all we know now is that the case goes to trial. Personally I would be shocked if the court granted the trustee 83 million, probably less. That will not break up their real estate empire or force them to sell this team or their ownership in sny.

And let us not forget the wilpons are suing to try and get back some of the 500 million they claim they lost with madoff.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Truefan79
post Mar 6 2012, 09:47 AM
Post #11


Moderator
Group Icon

Group: Mods
Posts: 7,743
Joined: 14-January 04
From: California
Member No.: 52



QUOTE (Batman Forever @ Mar 5 2012, 10:02 PM) *
So all we know now is that the case goes to trial. Personally I would be shocked if the court granted the trustee 83 million, probably less. That will not break up their real estate empire or force them to sell this team or their ownership in sny.

And let us not forget the wilpons are suing to try and get back some of the 500 million they claim they lost with madoff.



You think a jury is going to feel bad for the Wilpons? They will owe at minimum the 83 mil.

Who are the Wilpons suing? They are net winners and have been defined as such. They didn't lose 500 million. They had 500 million in various accounts with Madoff but they withdrew more than they invested from those accounts. They have nobody to sue.



--------------------
People ask me what I do in winter when there’s no baseball. I’ll tell you what I do. I stare out the window and wait for spring.

- Rogers Hornsby

QUOTE
Trading specs for Santana would be a disaster, just ask the Twins.

-mvr 7/2/12
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
angy
post Mar 6 2012, 10:08 AM
Post #12


Superstar
Group Icon

Group: Validated Members
Posts: 4,224
Joined: 14-February 07
From: tenafly, NJ
Member No.: 1,147



I wish they lose everything! For what they have done to the fans they deserve to get raked over the coals. And I wish Bud Selig would stop demonstrating his favoritism for the Wilpons and do the right thing.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
MeanBaller
post Mar 6 2012, 10:39 AM
Post #13


Superstar
Group Icon

Group: Validated Members
Posts: 3,548
Joined: 20-February 06
Member No.: 684



QUOTE (younghem @ Mar 5 2012, 02:30 PM) *
Interesting quote:

"The Court remains skeptical that the trustee can ultimately rebut the defendants' showing of good faith, let alone impute bad faith to all the defendants," Rakoff wrote in Monday's decision. "Nevertheless, there remains a residue of disputed factual assertions from which a jury could infer either good or bad faith depending on which assertions are credited."

Basically if the Wilpons are going to have to fork over 300 million bucks the jury would have to find that they knew about Madoff and willfully did nothing, something which the Judge doubts to be true.

And there's still no clarification what "up to" 83 million dollars means. Could be 10 million, could be 50 million, who knows.....

Still a long way to go to determine what will happen to the worst owner in MLB, but I have to believe that a hit of 80 million bucks + no one showing up @ Citi Field could be enough to force Wilpon to sell.


A couple of things about the quote and Judge Rakoff.

Rakoff is an activist Judge who is frequently reversed on appeal. He's known for opinions that are at or beyond the edge of what the law supports. For example, he issued a ruling that capital punishment is unconstitutional. He was soundly reversed.

The $83 million is the upper limit of the clawback profits is also based upon a novel perspective. The rule has always been that clawbacks can go back as far as 6 years. In the Madoff case, other judges, with more sober and less activist reputations have followed the six year period. Rakoff, on the other hand, took the unusual step of yanking the case out of bankruptcy court where it was being heard and which would normally be expected to handle the case and then took the even more unusual step of disagreeing with his collegues that 6 year applies because of a securities law rule that limits certain awards to two years. The $83 million is based upon only two years and that ruling is being appealed.

The standard that Rakoff set for clawback of principal may also be a bit too Wilpon-friendly from the standpoint of the law. And in any event, this is a civil case, so the standard of proof is not nearly so high as in a criminal case. That said, I find Rakoff's comments regarding his expressed skepticism odd, particularly in light of Wilpon's past experience with the Bayou Ponzi scheme where it was found that he knowingly took money out of the scheme in an effort to get himself ahead of other Ponzi victims.

At the end of the day, Rakoff's decisions will be appealed and I think that there is a substantial chance that his ruling limiting the clawback period from 6 years to 2 may be overruled meaning that even if Fred could get off the hook on principal clawbacks, the blow would be murderously devasting to him and his ability to hold on to much of his wealth let alone the Mets.

Here's hoping for his total economic destruction. It's only with that which can ensure his disappearance from the NY baseball scene, something that can't happen too soon.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
MeanBaller
post Mar 6 2012, 10:42 AM
Post #14


Superstar
Group Icon

Group: Validated Members
Posts: 3,548
Joined: 20-February 06
Member No.: 684



QUOTE (younghem @ Mar 5 2012, 04:39 PM) *
Clearly the Wilpons seem like they want to fight to the bitter end to retain ownership of the Mets. It would be Selig's job to say that they were incompetent owners and that they should be forced to sell, and we all know that ain't gonna happen.

Assuming the Wilpon's do take a 150 million dollar bath this season between the lawsuit and a boycott by the fans, can they survive that and maintain ownership ? I'd say probably not. But even if they do, I think they will be forced to sell in 2 - 3 years if the fans continue to withhold their $$$.

Fred Wilpon said it best when he proclaimed that they couldn't make it on TV alone. No fans @ the ballpark means bye bye Wilpon.


Selig rewards his friends and punishes his enemies. He's been the guy who has been fundamental to the successful bidders who have been able to buy franchises, so those guys are in his pocket. Play ball with Bud, and he takes care of you. Fred has played ball with Bud better than most people who preceded his commissionership because Bud has been all about squeezing the edge out of big market franchises in favor of smaller markets which suits Fred fine in terms of money.

There is a reason why Bud has a nice $20 million contract and a free Gulfstream to fly around to all the major league parks in the country....he has seeded ownership with lots of support by doing ingratiating himself to ownership.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
MeanBaller
post Mar 6 2012, 10:45 AM
Post #15


Superstar
Group Icon

Group: Validated Members
Posts: 3,548
Joined: 20-February 06
Member No.: 684



QUOTE (Batman Forever @ Mar 5 2012, 08:02 PM) *
So all we know now is that the case goes to trial. Personally I would be shocked if the court granted the trustee 83 million, probably less. That will not break up their real estate empire or force them to sell this team or their ownership in sny.

And let us not forget the wilpons are suing to try and get back some of the 500 million they claim they lost with madoff.


Why would you be shocked if the court granted the trustee $83 million, other than the fact that you like and/or support Fred?

The $83 million is clearly the lower end of what he ought to be liable for in terms of clawback profits in that it's based upon only 2 years of profits when the law up to now was 6 years. And the trustee is appealing that.

As to suing to get the $500 million back, he has as much chance of succeeding as you do in being in the starting lineup come Opening Day. It ain't gonna happen. Period. No serious legal observer gives him even single digit percentage chances of that.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ohm9115
post Mar 6 2012, 06:20 PM
Post #16


Little Leaguer
Group Icon

Group: Validated Members
Posts: 65
Joined: 11-November 11
Member No.: 9,455



QUOTE (MeanBaller @ Mar 6 2012, 10:45 AM) *
Why would you be shocked if the court granted the trustee $83 million, other than the fact that you like and/or support Fred?

The $83 million is clearly the lower end of what he ought to be liable for in terms of clawback profits in that it's based upon only 2 years of profits when the law up to now was 6 years. And the trustee is appealing that.

As to suing to get the $500 million back, he has as much chance of succeeding as you do in being in the starting lineup come Opening Day. It ain't gonna happen. Period. No serious legal observer gives him even single digit percentage chances of that.

Only met fans think fred is guilty anyone that knows fred on a personal level or is impartial to the team beleives he did not know that maddof was a crook. Even that government didn't know about maddof for 30 years. There really is no chance the the wilpons will have to pay more then the 83 million and an even better chance that they will get THAT money back in their own lawsuit they have filled so really there prob gonna break even and continue running the team at status quo. Really all we caqn hope fror is that it ends quickly.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Batman Forever
post Mar 6 2012, 07:08 PM
Post #17


Rookie
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 577
Joined: 23-February 12
Member No.: 10,680



QUOTE (MeanBaller @ Mar 6 2012, 11:39 AM) *
A couple of things about the quote and Judge Rakoff.

Rakoff is an activist Judge who is frequently reversed on appeal. He's known for opinions that are at or beyond the edge of what the law supports. For example, he issued a ruling that capital punishment is unconstitutional. He was soundly reversed.

The $83 million is the upper limit of the clawback profits is also based upon a novel perspective. The rule has always been that clawbacks can go back as far as 6 years. In the Madoff case, other judges, with more sober and less activist reputations have followed the six year period. Rakoff, on the other hand, took the unusual step of yanking the case out of bankruptcy court where it was being heard and which would normally be expected to handle the case and then took the even more unusual step of disagreeing with his collegues that 6 year applies because of a securities law rule that limits certain awards to two years. The $83 million is based upon only two years and that ruling is being appealed.

The standard that Rakoff set for clawback of principal may also be a bit too Wilpon-friendly from the standpoint of the law. And in any event, this is a civil case, so the standard of proof is not nearly so high as in a criminal case. That said, I find Rakoff's comments regarding his expressed skepticism odd, particularly in light of Wilpon's past experience with the Bayou Ponzi scheme where it was found that he knowingly took money out of the scheme in an effort to get himself ahead of other Ponzi victims.

At the end of the day, Rakoff's decisions will be appealed and I think that there is a substantial chance that his ruling limiting the clawback period from 6 years to 2 may be overruled meaning that even if Fred could get off the hook on principal clawbacks, the blow would be murderously devasting to him and his ability to hold on to much of his wealth let alone the Mets.

Here's hoping for his total economic destruction. It's only with that which can ensure his disappearance from the NY baseball scene, something that can't happen too soon.


Everyone has the opportunity to form their own opinion. On Wikipedia sometimes opinions are presented as facts. Rakoff is a highly respected legal expert who will form his opinion based on prevailing law. It is clear based on the facts Wilpon will win this case. To believe otherwise ones opinion would have to be clouded by being a mets fan rooting for a new owner.


Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Cactus
post Mar 6 2012, 11:20 PM
Post #18


Admin
Group Icon

Group: Admin
Posts: 16,061
Joined: 23-January 04
Member No.: 159



QUOTE (ohm9115 @ Mar 6 2012, 06:20 PM) *
Only met fans think fred is guilty anyone that knows fred on a personal level or is impartial to the team beleives he did not know that maddof was a crook. Even that government didn't know about maddof for 30 years. There really is no chance the the wilpons will have to pay more then the 83 million and an even better chance that they will get THAT money back in their own lawsuit they have filled so really there prob gonna break even and continue running the team at status quo. Really all we caqn hope fror is that it ends quickly.


people in the industry knew his returns weren't legit and that something was going on. everyone knew.

and that 83 million is gone, goodbye. too much precedent, and only two years when the standard is 6.

and it is no slam dunk that the wilpons will not have to pay the 300 million, either. the noreen harrington testimony, where katz specifically disregarded a warning about madoff, certainly puts that into play.


--------------------
'-|-'

- "Mr. Jeff Wilpon has decided that he’s going to learn how to run a baseball team and take over at the end of the year… Run for the hills, boys. I think probably all those baseball people will bail… Jeff sits there by himself like he’s King Tut waiting for his camel.” - Nelson Doubleday
- "In today's regulatory environment, it's virtually impossible to violate rules." - Bernard Madoff, 10/20/07
The Washington Post decided not to cover Ralph Nader's presidential campaign because he had no chance of winning. Nader's response: "Then why are you covering the Nationals?"
- Asked by the Post about the younger Wilpon's job performance, Fred Wilpon said: "Excellent. Everybody knows ...that."
- "The word 'autonomy' is sometimes misused." - Jeff Wilpon
- "Let’s give Jeff Wilpon the benefit of the doubt here for a moment. Let’s say he is not short-tempered. Tone deaf. A credit seeker. An accountability deflector. A micro-manager. A second-guesser. A less-than-deep thinker. And bad at self-awareness. Fine, he’s none of these things. But here is the problem: This is his perception in the industry." - Joel Sherman
- “Jeff is the problem with the organization, and he is never going to realize that. He cannot help himself. He has to be involved. He will never hire anyone who will not let him have major input. He will not hire anyone who does not run every personnel decision through him.” - Anonymous NL Executive
- "The only person with a worse reputation than Jeff Wilpon in the game is David Samson." - Anonymous AL executive
- "[Mets GM Omar Minaya] isn’t the General Manager. Jeff Wilpon is. Omar’s the one out there to take the heat.” - Peter Gammons
- [Jeff Wilpon's] role in management, according to one official who worked for him, "is to act as president and CEO of second-guessing."
- "I always want Mets fans on my juries," said one noted defense attorney friend, a rabid Yankees fan. "They love losers, even three-time losers like some of my clients. And if Mets fans believe anything the Mets front office says, I can convince them to acquit anybody." - Denis Hamill
- I got a call the other day. They noted I had been a long term season ticket holder and asked if I was interested. I immediately exclaimed "I'm so sorry for the Wilpon Family". He asked what I meant. I told the guy if he looked in my file, he'd see a note to call me after both Fred and Jeff dropped dead, and not a day before. - Meanballer
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Truefan79
post Mar 7 2012, 10:03 AM
Post #19


Moderator
Group Icon

Group: Mods
Posts: 7,743
Joined: 14-January 04
From: California
Member No.: 52



QUOTE (ohm9115 @ Mar 6 2012, 08:20 PM) *
Only met fans think fred is guilty anyone that knows fred on a personal level or is impartial to the team beleives he did not know that maddof was a crook.



Ummmm what? That is so far from the truth. I work in CA so most of the people I know are not Mets fans and they all believe that the Wilpons knew or had some idea and just turned a blind eye.



--------------------
People ask me what I do in winter when there’s no baseball. I’ll tell you what I do. I stare out the window and wait for spring.

- Rogers Hornsby

QUOTE
Trading specs for Santana would be a disaster, just ask the Twins.

-mvr 7/2/12
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
MeanBaller
post Mar 7 2012, 10:37 AM
Post #20


Superstar
Group Icon

Group: Validated Members
Posts: 3,548
Joined: 20-February 06
Member No.: 684



QUOTE (ohm9115 @ Mar 6 2012, 07:20 PM) *
Only met fans think fred is guilty anyone that knows fred on a personal level or is impartial to the team beleives he did not know that maddof was a crook. Even that government didn't know about maddof for 30 years. There really is no chance the the wilpons will have to pay more then the 83 million and an even better chance that they will get THAT money back in their own lawsuit they have filled so really there prob gonna break even and continue running the team at status quo. Really all we caqn hope fror is that it ends quickly.


I disagree. I know people who know him who think he's a dope and that he's greedy. What you see in the papers are self-serving scrap fed by PR people. And by real estate guys who can't wait to feast on his bones.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
MeanBaller
post Mar 7 2012, 11:05 AM
Post #21


Superstar
Group Icon

Group: Validated Members
Posts: 3,548
Joined: 20-February 06
Member No.: 684



QUOTE (Truefan79 @ Mar 7 2012, 11:03 AM) *
Ummmm what? That is so far from the truth. I work in CA so most of the people I know are not Mets fans and they all believe that the Wilpons knew or had some idea and just turned a blind eye.


The thing that is most people partial to Fred don't seem to appreciate is the large numbers of people who blacklisted Madoff from their business affairs. Major players in the financial industry, many investors - I personally know of a guy who took a look and ran away. Add to the fact that the Wilpons had the rare distinction of having already been big losers in another Ponzi scheme and it's amazing to think that anyone would doubt that there is a serious case to be made.

Stop and think about it this way....

They were in Bayou AND Madoff AT THE SAME TIME. They learned from Bayou that if they had knowledge that something was fishy and acted on it, they not only lost their winnings, but they'd lose some principal too because it's not nice to jump ahead of the line when you know there's a fraud going on. What you are doing there is prioritizing yourself over other similarly situated victims instead of blowing the whistle so that everyone recovers or loses at the same rate.

So having realized that there was an issue with Madoff, especially after the warnings they got from their own people and friends who had gotten fraud insurance, they were in a tough spot.

Perhaps what they did as a result was to act carefully with respect to Madoff to avoid the Bayou result. People say "why would Fred leave all his money in Madoff if he thought the guy was a crook?" The answer is pretty obvious in light of what happened in Bayou where he took all his money out at once in the immediate aftermath of an event that imputed knowledge to him of the fraud.

There seems to be plenty of evidence that Fred and Saul began a process whereby they were trying to develop outside investment vehicles apart from Madoff. Perhaps they were just simple business decisions. But perhaps not. There was talk about how they did what they did to provide a more balanced investment profile. Their best interests were served by appearing nonchalant with regard to Madoff which was on a far larger scale than Bayou. One can surely understand Katz' explosive reaction to the woman who worked for him who said with conviction that Madoff was a crook. That she felt the need to quit says a lot about the environment that existed thereafter. Either way, it tends to indicate it was hostile which would tend to indicate that the issue of Madoff as a crook was taken very seriously by Katz and thus by Fred. The woman didn't leave because she was looking for a better job - she left because of the blowback of the issue of Madoff as a crook and how her principals reacted to her POV.

That to me is a basis upon which a winning case could be built as to what the Wilpons/Katzes knew or should have known.

And that is separate and apart from the obvious ridiculousness of a man with a black box who turns out returns unmatched by investors from time immemorial to today.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Batman Forever
post Mar 15 2012, 05:38 AM
Post #22


Rookie
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 577
Joined: 23-February 12
Member No.: 10,680



QUOTE (MeanBaller @ Mar 7 2012, 11:05 AM) *
The thing that is most people partial to Fred don't seem to appreciate is the large numbers of people who blacklisted Madoff from their business affairs. Major players in the financial industry, many investors - I personally know of a guy who took a look and ran away. Add to the fact that the Wilpons had the rare distinction of having already been big losers in another Ponzi scheme and it's amazing to think that anyone would doubt that there is a serious case to be made.

Stop and think about it this way....

They were in Bayou AND Madoff AT THE SAME TIME. They learned from Bayou that if they had knowledge that something was fishy and acted on it, they not only lost their winnings, but they'd lose some principal too because it's not nice to jump ahead of the line when you know there's a fraud going on. What you are doing there is prioritizing yourself over other similarly situated victims instead of blowing the whistle so that everyone recovers or loses at the same rate.

So having realized that there was an issue with Madoff, especially after the warnings they got from their own people and friends who had gotten fraud insurance, they were in a tough spot.

Perhaps what they did as a result was to act carefully with respect to Madoff to avoid the Bayou result. People say "why would Fred leave all his money in Madoff if he thought the guy was a crook?" The answer is pretty obvious in light of what happened in Bayou where he took all his money out at once in the immediate aftermath of an event that imputed knowledge to him of the fraud.

There seems to be plenty of evidence that Fred and Saul began a process whereby they were trying to develop outside investment vehicles apart from Madoff. Perhaps they were just simple business decisions. But perhaps not. There was talk about how they did what they did to provide a more balanced investment profile. Their best interests were served by appearing nonchalant with regard to Madoff which was on a far larger scale than Bayou. One can surely understand Katz' explosive reaction to the woman who worked for him who said with conviction that Madoff was a crook. That she felt the need to quit says a lot about the environment that existed thereafter. Either way, it tends to indicate it was hostile which would tend to indicate that the issue of Madoff as a crook was taken very seriously by Katz and thus by Fred. The woman didn't leave because she was looking for a better job - she left because of the blowback of the issue of Madoff as a crook and how her principals reacted to her POV.

That to me is a basis upon which a winning case could be built as to what the Wilpons/Katzes knew or should have known.

And that is separate and apart from the obvious ridiculousness of a man with a black box who turns out returns unmatched by investors from time immemorial to today.


So if you take money out you lose it or if you keep it in you lose it. If you diversify your portfolio, which is prudent business it must be because you knew madoff was a crook. And if a woman quits an executive position, it must be because she thought madoff was a crook, not that she was powerless in her position to drive decisions and decided to move on.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
younghem
post Mar 15 2012, 12:24 PM
Post #23


Moderator
Group Icon

Group: Mods
Posts: 16,437
Joined: 3-February 04
From: Connecticut
Member No.: 210



QUOTE (MeanBaller @ Mar 7 2012, 10:37 AM) *
I disagree. I know people who know him who think he's a dope and that he's greedy. What you see in the papers are self-serving scrap fed by PR people. And by real estate guys who can't wait to feast on his bones.


It would take a greedy dope to continue to invest in Madoff after they knew he was a crook. Greedy to want the obscene profits and dopey to think he wouldn't get caught.

Now its up to the defense to prove Wilpon wasn't a greedy dope.

But seriously, if your in business for as long as the Wilpons, dealing in large sums of cash and major investments, you have to know on some level that something isn't right when one guy is getting you abnormal returns on your investments.....

Let's hope he's a GUILTY greedy dope.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Batman Forever
post Mar 19 2012, 09:14 AM
Post #24


Rookie
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 577
Joined: 23-February 12
Member No.: 10,680



Back to baseball friends. Wilpons settle for pennies on the dollar and have three years to pay.

Lets play ball.....
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Cactus
post Mar 19 2012, 09:24 AM
Post #25


Admin
Group Icon

Group: Admin
Posts: 16,061
Joined: 23-January 04
Member No.: 159



QUOTE (Batman Forever @ Mar 19 2012, 09:14 AM) *
Back to baseball friends. Wilpons settle for pennies on the dollar and have three years to pay.

Lets play ball.....



as much as it would be nice to only focus on baseball, the wilpons financial problems are far from over. i strongly doubt they would have settled for an amount ($162 million) where they couldn't see the light at the end of the tunnel, but they still have massive debt obligations coming due in short time, and let's not forget how much they relied on those madoff returns to run their operations. any fan should remain extremely skeptical about their ability (let alone their desire) to run this team like a baseball franchise in NY should be run.


--------------------
'-|-'

- "Mr. Jeff Wilpon has decided that he’s going to learn how to run a baseball team and take over at the end of the year… Run for the hills, boys. I think probably all those baseball people will bail… Jeff sits there by himself like he’s King Tut waiting for his camel.” - Nelson Doubleday
- "In today's regulatory environment, it's virtually impossible to violate rules." - Bernard Madoff, 10/20/07
The Washington Post decided not to cover Ralph Nader's presidential campaign because he had no chance of winning. Nader's response: "Then why are you covering the Nationals?"
- Asked by the Post about the younger Wilpon's job performance, Fred Wilpon said: "Excellent. Everybody knows ...that."
- "The word 'autonomy' is sometimes misused." - Jeff Wilpon
- "Let’s give Jeff Wilpon the benefit of the doubt here for a moment. Let’s say he is not short-tempered. Tone deaf. A credit seeker. An accountability deflector. A micro-manager. A second-guesser. A less-than-deep thinker. And bad at self-awareness. Fine, he’s none of these things. But here is the problem: This is his perception in the industry." - Joel Sherman
- “Jeff is the problem with the organization, and he is never going to realize that. He cannot help himself. He has to be involved. He will never hire anyone who will not let him have major input. He will not hire anyone who does not run every personnel decision through him.” - Anonymous NL Executive
- "The only person with a worse reputation than Jeff Wilpon in the game is David Samson." - Anonymous AL executive
- "[Mets GM Omar Minaya] isn’t the General Manager. Jeff Wilpon is. Omar’s the one out there to take the heat.” - Peter Gammons
- [Jeff Wilpon's] role in management, according to one official who worked for him, "is to act as president and CEO of second-guessing."
- "I always want Mets fans on my juries," said one noted defense attorney friend, a rabid Yankees fan. "They love losers, even three-time losers like some of my clients. And if Mets fans believe anything the Mets front office says, I can convince them to acquit anybody." - Denis Hamill
- I got a call the other day. They noted I had been a long term season ticket holder and asked if I was interested. I immediately exclaimed "I'm so sorry for the Wilpon Family". He asked what I meant. I told the guy if he looked in my file, he'd see a note to call me after both Fred and Jeff dropped dead, and not a day before. - Meanballer
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Truefan79
post Mar 19 2012, 09:38 AM
Post #26


Moderator
Group Icon

Group: Mods
Posts: 7,743
Joined: 14-January 04
From: California
Member No.: 52



QUOTE (Cactus @ Mar 19 2012, 11:24 AM) *
as much as it would be nice to only focus on baseball, the wilpons financial problems are far from over. i strongly doubt they would have settled for an amount ($162 million) where they couldn't see the light at the end of the tunnel, but they still have massive debt obligations coming due in short time, and let's not forget how much they relied on those madoff returns to run their operations. any fan should remain extremely skeptical about their ability (let alone their desire) to run this team like a baseball franchise in NY should be run.


At this point they are going to rely on their "lifeblood". That's people showing up to the park. Hopefully people are smart and stay far away. It would only take 1 year to put the nail in this coffin. Then we could get a new owner that has the resources to run a NY franchise.


--------------------
People ask me what I do in winter when there’s no baseball. I’ll tell you what I do. I stare out the window and wait for spring.

- Rogers Hornsby

QUOTE
Trading specs for Santana would be a disaster, just ask the Twins.

-mvr 7/2/12
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Cactus
post Mar 19 2012, 09:56 AM
Post #27


Admin
Group Icon

Group: Admin
Posts: 16,061
Joined: 23-January 04
Member No.: 159



QUOTE (Truefan79 @ Mar 19 2012, 09:38 AM) *
At this point they are going to rely on their "lifeblood". That's people showing up to the park. Hopefully people are smart and stay far away. It would only take 1 year to put the nail in this coffin. Then we could get a new owner that has the resources to run a NY franchise.


agreed...it's still a game of the wilpons trying to get fans into the park to they can scrape up just enough to hold onto the team and meet their debt obligations while cutting corners and putting together patchwork rosters that are long shots to compete. that's nowhere near a "we can forget about this" and "let's play ball" situation. in fact, continued wilpon ownership with continued financial impairment is probably the worst possible outcome for the fans, and that's what looks like has been set up with today's events.


--------------------
'-|-'

- "Mr. Jeff Wilpon has decided that he’s going to learn how to run a baseball team and take over at the end of the year… Run for the hills, boys. I think probably all those baseball people will bail… Jeff sits there by himself like he’s King Tut waiting for his camel.” - Nelson Doubleday
- "In today's regulatory environment, it's virtually impossible to violate rules." - Bernard Madoff, 10/20/07
The Washington Post decided not to cover Ralph Nader's presidential campaign because he had no chance of winning. Nader's response: "Then why are you covering the Nationals?"
- Asked by the Post about the younger Wilpon's job performance, Fred Wilpon said: "Excellent. Everybody knows ...that."
- "The word 'autonomy' is sometimes misused." - Jeff Wilpon
- "Let’s give Jeff Wilpon the benefit of the doubt here for a moment. Let’s say he is not short-tempered. Tone deaf. A credit seeker. An accountability deflector. A micro-manager. A second-guesser. A less-than-deep thinker. And bad at self-awareness. Fine, he’s none of these things. But here is the problem: This is his perception in the industry." - Joel Sherman
- “Jeff is the problem with the organization, and he is never going to realize that. He cannot help himself. He has to be involved. He will never hire anyone who will not let him have major input. He will not hire anyone who does not run every personnel decision through him.” - Anonymous NL Executive
- "The only person with a worse reputation than Jeff Wilpon in the game is David Samson." - Anonymous AL executive
- "[Mets GM Omar Minaya] isn’t the General Manager. Jeff Wilpon is. Omar’s the one out there to take the heat.” - Peter Gammons
- [Jeff Wilpon's] role in management, according to one official who worked for him, "is to act as president and CEO of second-guessing."
- "I always want Mets fans on my juries," said one noted defense attorney friend, a rabid Yankees fan. "They love losers, even three-time losers like some of my clients. And if Mets fans believe anything the Mets front office says, I can convince them to acquit anybody." - Denis Hamill
- I got a call the other day. They noted I had been a long term season ticket holder and asked if I was interested. I immediately exclaimed "I'm so sorry for the Wilpon Family". He asked what I meant. I told the guy if he looked in my file, he'd see a note to call me after both Fred and Jeff dropped dead, and not a day before. - Meanballer
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Batman Forever
post Mar 19 2012, 11:38 AM
Post #28


Rookie
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 577
Joined: 23-February 12
Member No.: 10,680



The amount they actually pay is due 3 years from now, and it is netted against what they recover from the fund for investors who lost from madoff. Estimated amount wilpons owe is $29 million in 2015.

Big win for the mets owners. Lets focus on basball. Play ball!!!!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Truefan79
post Mar 19 2012, 11:54 AM
Post #29


Moderator
Group Icon

Group: Mods
Posts: 7,743
Joined: 14-January 04
From: California
Member No.: 52



QUOTE (Batman Forever @ Mar 19 2012, 01:38 PM) *
The amount they actually pay is due 3 years from now, and it is netted against what they recover from the fund for investors who lost from madoff. Estimated amount wilpons owe is $29 million in 2015.

Big win for the mets owners. Lets focus on basball. Play ball!!!!


29 Million is Fred and Saul's personal portion not an estimate of anything. They will seek recovery but who knows how much that will actually be. The best guess is .50 cents on the dollar which means they will owe around 73 million but again we wont know for sure for a while. In 2014 the Mets have a $430 mil principal payment for a loan they took against the Mets. In 2015 they owe $450 mil in principal payments to SNY for a loan they took against them. Not to mention the $25 mil they owe every 6 months for Citifield.


--------------------
People ask me what I do in winter when there’s no baseball. I’ll tell you what I do. I stare out the window and wait for spring.

- Rogers Hornsby

QUOTE
Trading specs for Santana would be a disaster, just ask the Twins.

-mvr 7/2/12
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Batman Forever
post Mar 19 2012, 12:53 PM
Post #30


Rookie
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 577
Joined: 23-February 12
Member No.: 10,680



QUOTE (Truefan79 @ Mar 19 2012, 11:54 AM) *
29 Million is Fred and Saul's personal portion not an estimate of anything. They will seek recovery but who knows how much that will actually be. The best guess is .50 cents on the dollar which means they will owe around 73 million but again we wont know for sure for a while. In 2014 the Mets have a $430 mil principal payment for a loan they took against the Mets. In 2015 they owe $450 mil in principal payments to SNY for a loan they took against them. Not to mention the $25 mil they owe every 6 months for Citifield.


So they can finance those principal payments over 10-20 years against the revenue stream they control for those two businesses which is substantial.

Wilpons will own this team for generations if they choose to now.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

5 Pages V   1 2 3 > » 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 

Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 1st November 2014 - 08:44 AM