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