• booly@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 day ago

    There was some future payments promised

    It’s not future payments promised. Just a division of who to split the proceeds with. And so for the typical creditor who didn’t credit bid, The Onion’s bid was worth the equivalent of a $7 million cash bid, and therefore was more valuable than the Jones affiliates’ $3.5 million cash bid.

    It’s just math. The Onion bid was higher, and the judge said that the losing bid should’ve been given an opportunity to improve the bid to get a chance to win, and maybe raise even more money.

    • Railcar8095@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      Murray valued it at that amount, it didn’t have that real value. Even future payments were a percentage of profits and but not guaranteed.

      That equivalence is only theoretical, not real. If you think they can write "it’s 7 million but I let you hav 5.75, then we can have the bid at 99 trillions! Why not? They can just say they only Want 1.25.

      • booly@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        16 hours ago

        Even future payments were a percentage of profits and but not guaranteed.

        That’s not part of the bid. The bid only had two components: a cash portion and a commitment to reduce claims by certain creditors. For non-participating creditors, it’s the exact same equivalent as a $7 million cash payment to the estate.

        Future promises were made to families to incentivize them to reduce their claims (and therefore bring more money to the estate), but that’s not part of the bid itself.

        I think you’re struggling to understand what’s happening here because you’re so anchored on your initial incorrect perceptions.

        • Railcar8095@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          12 hours ago

          I’m only struggling with keeping with your mental gymnastics.

          I get it, you want the onion to win. Me too. That shouldn’t mean we make up the facts.

          • booly@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            7 hours ago

            That shouldn’t mean we make up the facts.

            You’re the one getting facts wrong!

            You’ve said that the Jones-affiliated bid was higher, which is incorrect. The Onion’s $7 million bid was higher, which is why the bankruptcy judge said that the other bidder should’ve been given an opportunity to improve its bid.

            You’ve said that the $7 million valuation wasn’t based on anything. It’s a straightforward formula for determining the value when to reduce the claims of the creditors who wanted to credit bid.

            You’ve said that the $7 million valuation was made up based on estimates of future cash flows. Future payments have nothing to do with the bid, and weren’t used in the formula to calculate the value at $7 million. That value is how much this bid brings to the estate immediately.