Cubs sale delayed? / Trib may own Cubs on Opening Day

[Banedon]

Comcast Sports Net mentioned that the Cubs may not be sold until after Opening Day because they haven't yet decided whether or not to package the team and Wrigley in the same deal. That's what Cuban implied on the radio that he was waiting for too...for them to decide exactly what they're selling.

 

 

Here's an article expressing a similar opinion:

 

http://www.chicagobusiness.com/cgi-bin/news.pl?id=26641&seenIt=1

 

Honestly I don't see how this can be a good thing...the team in limbo. It means Hendry is likely going nowhere for this next season, and I have no idea where that leaves Hendry in terms of his ability to spend money.

 

EDIT: Wow are there some unflattering photos in that article.

[soapy]

ugh. exactly the kind of thing i was afraid of. my fear of course being that this will prohibit Hendry from spending, not to mention the fact that he'll still be the one doing any spending.

[C.C.]

I don't know. I still think he'll get a budget and have money to spend. I mean being in limbo didn't stop them from signing Zambrano.

[CuseCubFan69]

I don't know. I still think he'll get a budget and have money to spend. I mean being in limbo didn't stop them from signing Zambrano.

 

Did Banedon mean Hendrys ability (able) to spend money or his ability (poor choices) to spend money? I thought the second.

[Banedon]

I don't know. I still think he'll get a budget and have money to spend. I mean being in limbo didn't stop them from signing Zambrano.

 

Did Banedon mean Hendrys ability (able) to spend money or his ability (poor choices) to spend money? I thought the second.

 

I meant that Hendry may not be given the go ahead to spend money.

[CuseCubFan69]

I don't know. I still think he'll get a budget and have money to spend. I mean being in limbo didn't stop them from signing Zambrano.

 

Did Banedon mean Hendrys ability (able) to spend money or his ability (poor choices) to spend money? I thought the second.

 

I meant that Hendry may not be given the go ahead to spend money.

 

I like the factthat he wouldn't be able to spend money, maybe it was wishful thinking!

[Derwood]

i don't see why any potential owner would buy the team without Wrigley. you'd have to think they go hand in hand

[minnesotacubsfan]

i don't see why any potential owner would buy the team without Wrigley. you'd have to think they go hand in hand

 

yes. Selling the Cubs w/o Wrigley wouldnt maximize the bids. Besides, if that were to happen, how long before the Cubs new owner decided to build a new stadium and ditch Wrigley all together?

[jersey cubs fan]

i don't see why any potential owner would buy the team without Wrigley. you'd have to think they go hand in hand

 

yes. Selling the Cubs w/o Wrigley wouldnt maximize the bids. Besides, if that were to happen, how long before the Cubs new owner decided to build a new stadium and ditch Wrigley all together?

 

It's just a negotiating ploy to get bidders to start high.

[Sammy Sofa]

i don't see why any potential owner would buy the team without Wrigley. you'd have to think they go hand in hand

 

yes. Selling the Cubs w/o Wrigley wouldnt maximize the bids. Besides, if that were to happen, how long before the Cubs new owner decided to build a new stadium and ditch Wrigley all together?

 

It's just a negotiating ploy to get bidders to start high.

 

Exactly. These kind of statements, to me, seem to exist to ideally drive up the bids.

[CuseCubFan69]

i don't see why any potential owner would buy the team without Wrigley. you'd have to think they go hand in hand

 

yes. Selling the Cubs w/o Wrigley wouldnt maximize the bids. Besides, if that were to happen, how long before the Cubs new owner decided to build a new stadium and ditch Wrigley all together?

 

It's just a negotiating ploy to get bidders to start high.

 

Maybe the Trib should hire Boras.

[daske17]

i don't see why any potential owner would buy the team without Wrigley. you'd have to think they go hand in hand

 

yes. Selling the Cubs w/o Wrigley wouldnt maximize the bids. Besides, if that were to happen, how long before the Cubs new owner decided to build a new stadium and ditch Wrigley all together?

 

It's just a negotiating ploy to get bidders to start high.

 

Maybe the Trib should hire Boras.

 

In that case, Tom Hicks or Steinbrenner would overpay for the entire team.

[Irrelevant Dude]

It means Hendry is likely going nowhere for this next season, and I have no idea where that leaves Hendry in terms of his ability to spend money.

I'm all for the team being sold as quickly as possible, but regardless of whether the sale is completed over the winter I expect Hendry will still be here next season in order to ease the transition into new management. The big question will be his available budget.

[Banedon]

It means Hendry is likely going nowhere for this next season, and I have no idea where that leaves Hendry in terms of his ability to spend money.

I'm all for the team being sold as quickly as possible, but regardless of whether the sale is completed over the winter I expect Hendry will still be here next season in order to ease the transition into new management. The big question will be his available budget.

 

You're probably right, but I was holding out hope that a new owner would bring in his own GM.

[jersey cubs fan]

It means Hendry is likely going nowhere for this next season, and I have no idea where that leaves Hendry in terms of his ability to spend money.

I'm all for the team being sold as quickly as possible, but regardless of whether the sale is completed over the winter I expect Hendry will still be here next season in order to ease the transition into new management. The big question will be his available budget.

 

You're probably right, but I was holding out hope that a new owner would bring in his own GM.

 

If the deal took place before November, I would suspect that would be the case. But if it doesn't happen before the winter meetings, I'm not sure they'd get in on-time to make the necessary changes. Anybody wanting a job is probably going to take one before then. I think the new owner lets 2008 get off to a start, and will operate under the "we're evaluating everybody" story until, or unless, the team falls apart early.

[Banedon]

It means Hendry is likely going nowhere for this next season, and I have no idea where that leaves Hendry in terms of his ability to spend money.

I'm all for the team being sold as quickly as possible, but regardless of whether the sale is completed over the winter I expect Hendry will still be here next season in order to ease the transition into new management. The big question will be his available budget.

 

You're probably right, but I was holding out hope that a new owner would bring in his own GM.

 

If the deal took place before November, I would suspect that would be the case. But if it doesn't happen before the winter meetings, I'm not sure they'd get in on-time to make the necessary changes. Anybody wanting a job is probably going to take one before then. I think the new owner lets 2008 get off to a start, and will operate under the "we're evaluating everybody" story until, or unless, the team falls apart early.

 

Which was why I was disappointed to hear of the delay.

[seanimal]

from BP

 

The Cubs are quiet, but they’ll be one of the big stories of the off-season. There’s more groups than have been acknowledged looking at bidding, but with “the book” - the financial documents necessary for a group to formulate their bid - not yet delivered to the bidders from JPMorgan Chase, the sale is on hold. Information that the book was “imminent” came to me last week, but there’s been no movement. There’s zero chance that the sale will be complete by Opening Day. One possible delay is whether or not the team and Wrigley Field will be sold together.

[anabiono]

christ!!!

 

friggin bollocks

 

 

theriot at SS

 

Dempster to the rotation

 

delayed sale

 

i am no longer enjoying the possibilities of being a better squad next year

 

 

[-(

[daske17]

I just don't see how they could expect top dollar for the Cubs without including Wrigley Field.

 

Since the stadium was granted local landmark status in 2004, no developer would purchase the land separately with any hopes of building a new structure.

 

And any purchase of the team without a stadium doesn't make fiscal sense. Why would an investor buy a team with no place to put it?

 

This entire situation is so frustrating. ](*,)

[Derwood]

I just don't see how they could expect top dollar for the Cubs without including Wrigley Field.

 

Since the stadium was granted local landmark status in 2004, no developer would purchase the land separately with any hopes of building a new structure.

 

And any purchase of the team without a stadium doesn't make fiscal sense. Why would an investor buy a team with no place to put it?

 

This entire situation is so frustrating. ](*,)

 

maybe they think they can make more by selling the team and leasing the stadium to the new owner than by selling it outright

[seanimal]

I just don't see how they could expect top dollar for the Cubs without including Wrigley Field.

 

Since the stadium was granted local landmark status in 2004, no developer would purchase the land separately with any hopes of building a new structure.

 

And any purchase of the team without a stadium doesn't make fiscal sense. Why would an investor buy a team with no place to put it?

 

This entire situation is so frustrating. ](*,)

 

maybe they think they can make more by selling the team and leasing the stadium to the new owner than by selling it outright

 

That would backfire, big time. I've yet to see any evidence or explanation as to why the Tribune company would consider splitting the two. It's always speculation, and it's never quite added up for me.

 

The delay is because of the books. Something tells me there was some funny accounting going on in the Tribune Tower, and JP Morgan is busy cleaning it up, thus the delay.

[Yanksfan1523]

There is ONE big thing that you guys are missing. If the Trib sells the team and then the leases the stadium to the new owner, that leaves the possibility of the new owner moving the Cubs out of Wrigley!! Ala Steinbrenner threatening to move the Yankees to NJ in order to get a new stadium in Manhattan!! Thank god for 1996 and the resurrgence of the Bronx or my BELOVED Yankees wiould be playing elsewhere. So, just imagine the Cubs in a 50,000 seet stadium right off the lake?!? Good or Bad? Definately the Death of Wrigleyville!

 

The delay was a farce to get the bidding started after the post season, because if the Cubs ever got to the series and won, the price would DOUBLE!!!! The Trib was praying for a miricle. They don't care about delaying the sale and screwing the free agent market. They will give Hendry a Budget and he will go get some mediocre talent, to fill out the roster.

[Mephistopheles]

That's not going to happen.

[E.J.]

Phil Rogers[/url]"]

Since it was announced in early April that Tribune Co. was being sold, it was believed that incoming Chairman Sam Zell would spin off Wrigley Field and the team occupying it at some point in the final quarter of 2007. But two highly placed MLB sources confirmed Thursday that Commissioner Bud Selig had been unable to keep the process moving at that timetable, ruling out a sale before the end of the year and making one before the Cubs go to training camp next spring highly unlikely.

 

"I'm afraid that is right," a source said. "I can't say for sure why this is moving at the pace it is, but the pace of it has been frustrating. We had hoped it would pick up some steam, but it hasn't."

 

According to the source, MLB has not even closed out the application process for prospective buyers. The bidding for the team is still expected to be robust, but only five groups have been cleared to look at Tribune Co.'s baseball records, according to the MLB source.

 

One effect of the sale lagging is that McDonough, Hendry and their associates should not have to worry about job security in 2008. But there have been few if any signs of insecurity among the team's decision-makers. They know that a new owner may want to make changes, but they also know that those changes are rarely immediate, especially with a first-time owner. They also feel confident because of the team's turnaround under manager Lou Piniella last season.

 

While Selig wanted the sale executed and approved before the end of 2007, he does not appear overly concerned about the slow pace. He was reached Thursday at his Milwaukee office but declined to comment.

 

"This is not an alarming development," one MLB source said. "It's a speed bump, a slowdown, not anything else. We'd like it to move faster, but these things move at their own pace, and the pace of this is, well, a little on the slow side—slower than everyone would like it, anyway."

[daske17]

Seriously? A speed bump? That's what they're calling it.

 

I'd call it a stalled engine or a flat tire, but definitely not a speed bump.

 

That would imply forward progress, of which there has been none since the announcement the team was for sale.