Wilpons to sell controlling interest in Mets (or maybe not)

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
8,972
Is that true? How do the gains not get clawed back? I’m guessing the law doesn’t work that way, but it seems like a bs way to handle a Ponzi scheme fallout.
The scummy Wilpons fought in court for the right to treat their unrealized gains as losses. As bad as Cohen is, he is 1897% less scummy than the Wilpons. I mean including a clause that says that they get to remain in charge after selling the team to someone else screams fraud.
 

johnmd20

figuratively like ebola
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 30, 2003
44,869
New York City
Is that true? How do the gains not get clawed back? I’m guessing the law doesn’t work that way, but it seems like a bs way to handle a Ponzi scheme fallout.
A lot of it was too long ago. The more recent gains were clawed back, but, even then, the Wilpon's were net winners, not losers, even with the settlement they had to pay.
 

Average Reds

Dope
Staff member
Dope
V&N Mod
SoSH Member
Sep 24, 2007
28,980
Southwestern CT
I admittedly don’t know the story of the Wilpons that well but I feel comfortable saying that this isn’t true.
The Wilpons were not just beneficiaries of Madoff's scam, they were fund promoters. Which is just one of many reasons I'm not as comfortable saying it isn't true.

It may be. I'm just saying it's not clear-cut to me.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
12,434
If there's one thing I regret with Cohen not taking over the Mets, it's that an MLB owner with decent taste in art would run a team. They could get a much more avant garde home run sculpture for CF.
Wasn't that Jeffrey Loria's thing? That didn't work out so well.
 

OCD SS

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Wasn't that Jeffrey Loria's thing? That didn't work out so well.
Because Loria has crappy taste. OTOH the number of artists who would take on such a commission is probably limited to someone engaged with over the top kitsch like Red Grooms. Maybe you could get Richard Serra to do the outfield walls, but I doubt Martin Puryear takes this on. Maybe you could get Isa Genzken to do something interesting with integrated advertising...
 

Marciano490

Urological Expert
SoSH Member
Nov 4, 2007
47,307
Because Loria has crappy taste. OTOH the number of artists who would take on such a commission is probably limited to someone engaged with over the top kitsch like Red Grooms. Maybe you could get Richard Serra to do the outfield walls, but I doubt Martin Puryear takes this on. Maybe you could get Isa Genzken to do something interesting with integrated advertising...
Not a Koons fan?

That Wilpon/Madoff story is wild. Can’t believe Rakoff signed off on all that. He’s supposed to be the smartest dude on the Southern District.
 

Marciano490

Urological Expert
SoSH Member
Nov 4, 2007
47,307
Definitely not.
Maybe they can throw a Damien Hirst out there. A bloated, dissected whale just screams Mets to me.

Side note - if you haven’t already, check out The Price of Everything documentary on HBO. It does a nice job making Koons look like a silly jumped up wolf of Wall St. cum artist.

Cum in the Latin sense, not an artist whose medium is semen.
 

OCD SS

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Hirst has always struck me more as a natural promoter who came out of art school, so he made art. I think Koons’ early work were strange objects that tapped into something that aligned with their time in a way that people didn’t see coming; I guess the best art is like that (even if I don’t like it). His later work just slid into easy commodification. People will argue that that is kind of what the work is about, but it’s devoid of any such critique that might give it bite; he’s producing generic pablum to print money just like Disney has done with Star Wars movies.
 

DourDoerr

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Oct 15, 2004
2,106
Berkeley, CA
Ha - I like the idea of Serra doing the outfield walls which would give Wrigley's bricks a run for their money. Fred Lynn wouldn't have lasted a month.

I'm kind of beaten down regarding art and sports. I never like what they create. It's always garish and ugly. I don't mind garish and ugly, but they can't even do garish and ugly right.
 

jon abbey

Shanghai Warrior
Dope
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
51,856
Serra in this context makes me think of the hill they had in CF in Houston for a few years, I imagine some Serras in dead center field, with the CF having to find his way among them. This is obviously a ridiculous idea but would be very entertaining if no one cared about the outcome of games.
 

Marciano490

Urological Expert
SoSH Member
Nov 4, 2007
47,307
Hirst has always struck me more as a natural promoter who came out of art school, so he made art. I think Koons’ early work were strange objects that tapped into something that aligned with their time in a way that people didn’t see coming; I guess the best art is like that (even if I don’t like it). His later work just slid into easy commodification. People will argue that that is kind of what the work is about, but it’s devoid of any such critique that might give it bite; he’s producing generic pablum to print money just like Disney has done with Star Wars movies.
It’d be cool to have those Koons works where the viewer sees himself looking at the piece. Imagine a fielder going back for a fly ball only to find himself lost in something like a hall of mirrors.
 

shaggydog2000

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 5, 2007
7,612
It’d be cool to have those Koons works where the viewer sees himself looking at the piece. Imagine a fielder going back for a fly ball only to find himself lost in something like a hall of mirrors.
The gazing balls? I think that may result in some protests from batters. But I'd allow it if the gazing ball was placed on a giant painting of new owner A-rod as a centaur in centerfield. Or maybe a painting of A-rod kissing himself in a mirror, but the mirror was also partially a mirror. It would be captivating, and a true home team advantage.
 

shaggydog2000

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 5, 2007
7,612
The Gazing Ball sculptures are just terrible.
It's the epitome of shallow work turned out for commercial purposes by a name artist. Bland copies of existing art made by a nameless studio grunt with a shiny ball and Koons' name attached to them selling for millions.
 

OCD SS

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
In fairness those works are made by either high-end fabrication shops or contracted to master craftspeople (usually in Europe). But they’re aesthetically bankrupt and the work (like a lot of the top of the art market) is just the super-rich collecting the same accepted brand names as trophies, rather than engaging with them he work.
 

Marciano490

Urological Expert
SoSH Member
Nov 4, 2007
47,307
It's the epitome of shallow work turned out for commercial purposes by a name artist. Bland copies of existing art made by a nameless studio grunt with a shiny ball and Koons' name attached to them selling for millions.
I think a gazing ball over a reproduction of some Dürer apocalyptic work painted on the outfield wall would be perfect for the Mets stadium. Position the gazing ball so fans, players and owners alike could watch themselves watching the scenes of destruction and devastation.
 

Marciano490

Urological Expert
SoSH Member
Nov 4, 2007
47,307
Are you saying the 6 should be afraid of the 7? Because 7 8 9-figures of the Wilpons' net worth?
It’s an E6, JLo “On the Six” combo joke.

Damnit, I guess working in E5 for the Yankee days would’ve been better. Damn Jeter.
 

jon abbey

Shanghai Warrior
Dope
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
51,856
This whole story is all smoke and no fire, no one is backing A-Rod for that much money (and it's unclear that MLB would even approve him given his past) and no one has any idea how much the Mets are worth right now. Their asking price was $2.6B before but unless someone actually paid that (which of course they didn't), it doesn't mean they were really worth it.
 

Papelbon's Poutine

Homeland Security
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2005
19,505
Portsmouth, NH
Well, $2.6B - $1.5B = ????


And sure, they aren't literally bankrupt but if you read to the end of that Variety article, it mentions anyone buying the club is assuming $50M in losses annually. How long can the Wilpon’s house of cards last at that number before they just take $1.5B?
 
Last edited:

InstaFace

MDLzera
Silver Supporter
SoSH Member
Sep 27, 2016
14,367
Pittsburgh, PA
Maybe A-Rod finds a financier who's the actual power in the room, but is willing to let A-Rod be the #2 partner and public face of the team.
 

Average Reds

Dope
Staff member
Dope
V&N Mod
SoSH Member
Sep 24, 2007
28,980
Southwestern CT
Well, $2.6B - $1.5B = ????


And sure, they aren't literally bankrupt but if you read to the end of that Variety article, it mentions anyone buying the club is assuming $50M in losses annually. How long can the Wilpon’s house of cards last at that number before they just take $1.5B?
I have an incredibly hard time believing that the Mets are losing $50 million a year. I have less difficulty believing that Variety uncritically repeated a figure that was given to them.
 

OurF'ingCity

Well-Known Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Apr 22, 2016
4,859
New York City

nattysez

Well-Known Member
Silver Supporter
SoSH Member
Sep 30, 2010
4,696
This sounds more to me like Cohen negotiating hard by "walking away." I bet the Wilpons will come crawling back to the negotiating table with some concessions unless some other Mets-loving hedge-fund manager gets a bid together.
Not gonna say I told you so, but I told you so...

 

soxhop411

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2009
36,738
Steve Cohen willing to pay 2 billion for Mets and 2 billion for SNY. So a 4 billion dollar bid.
View: https://twitter.com/CGasparino/status/1281415795159990275
BREAKING: After weeks of negotiations, hedge fund billionaire Steve Cohen has told Wilpons he would pay $2 billion for @Mets & would pay $2 billion for @SNYtv. Other bids for the team so far are lower meaning he is (as reported by @FoxBusiness) the lead bid. Timing unclear
 

nattysez

Well-Known Member
Silver Supporter
SoSH Member
Sep 30, 2010
4,696
This was some fine work by the Wilpons.

On Friday night, David Farber of CNBC tweeted the words that (almost) every Mets fan was waiting to hear since the bidding process began: “Steve Cohen has entered exclusive negotiations to buy the NY Mets and is expected to reach a deal to purchase the team within days.”

Since the dust has settled, more information has been leaked regarding Cohen’s winning bid. Scott Soshnick of Sportico revealed early this morning that Cohen valued the team at $2.35 billion (Forbes valued the franchise at $2.4 billion).

This is a drop from the $2.6 billion valuation that he offered on the Mets back in December but given the current climate and the original news reports about the bids being weak, it could have been a lot worse for the Mets. At the end of the day though, Cohen got the Mets for $250 million less than he originally planned on and got the Wilpons out of the building five years before than the original deal was supposed to.