Stadium Discussion

What Will Be The Name Of The New Home?

  • Etihad Stadium

    Votes: 4 16.7%
  • Etihad Park

    Votes: 11 45.8%
  • Etihad Field

    Votes: 8 33.3%
  • Etihad Arena

    Votes: 1 4.2%
  • Etihad Bowl

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    24
Anyone have a Bloomberg terminal want to tell us who is in those bonds now?

The bond are in default, so I don't believe they trade normally.

There was a large block that traded in June at 37 cents on the dollar.

It was the largest trade in nearly 2 years.

The last trade I see is on 12/3 of 1,425 bonds at $67. A couple of trades a month in the thousands of shares all over the place, but that's peanuts.

They file financial statements -- in the quarter ending June 30, they had $6.2mm in revenues, $1.8mm of operating expenses and $9.5mm of "other expenses". $2mm of leasehold improvement amortization, about $5mm in interest, $1mm in rent and $1.5mm of PILOT.

Quarterly loss: $5mm
Cumulative losses: $118mm

There was an annual Financial statement filed in May, for which the auditors issued an adverse opinion, believing that the statements do not fairly present the financial position of the entity.

They believe the entity carries long-lived assets on their balance sheet that are worthless and should be written down to zero. They raised some uncertainty that the every should be considered a going concern.

If you're not financially fluent, the TL: DR is that it's all very bad.
 
Last edited:
Bid 66.25 but as I said I'm not distressed debt trader, I don't know if there is real size behind that or its just a dummy quote. I don't see it as having any trade volume for a while. As far as pro-level access, bbg doesn't do much more then what you can research. Esoteric stuff is handled on dealer runs, and not being in this industry I am not privy to real markets.

View attachment 9392
That's still helpful as it confirm that Muni Bonds site info is accurate, and the quote my broker served up is not. The latter might be pulling a quote from the last time the bonds were liquid, which could be around the time of the default.

The bond are in default, so I don't believe they trade normally.

There was a large block that traded in June at 37 cents on the dollar.

It was the largest trade in nearly 2 years.

The last trade I see is on 12/3 of 1,425 bonds at $67. A couple of trades a month in the thousands of shares all over the place, but that's peanuts.

They file financial statements -- in the quarter ending June 30, they had $6.2mm in revenues, $1.8mm of operating expenses and $9.5mm of "other expenses". $2mm of leasehold improvement amortization, about $5mm in interest, $1mm in rent and $1.5mm of PILOT.

Quarterly loss: $5mm
Cumulative losses: $118mm

There was an annual Financial statement thread in May, for which the auditors issued an adverse opinion, believing that the statements do not fairly present the financial position of the entity.

They believe the entity carries long-lived assets on their balance sheet that are worthless and should be written down to zero. They raised some uncertainty that the every should be considered a going given l concern.

If you're not financially fluent, the TL:DR is that it's all very bad.

That makes sense to me. I doubt the auditors would agree to consider a potential deal as an asset, especially when the deal requires city approval and possibly accommodations like closing a street, and the anticipated purchase prices is likely in excess of the fair market value of the land as currently configured and zoned. If the deal happens, Maddd and NYCFC will overpay relative to FMV.
The few trades that happen are probably private sales. I suppose someone could be manipulating the price for a pump and dump, but with an issue that is so thinly traded, and of moderate public concern, that's criminally risky. My best guess is that trades are sales to buyers of distressed debt.

My further guess is that the sticking point in the negotiations is that the debt owed to the city is subordinate to the bondholders, and BdB is insisting that the city get a piece anyway.
https://www.crainsnewyork.com/artic...holders-but-not-taxpayers-for-bad-garage-deal
 
That's still helpful as it confirm that Muni Bonds site info is accurate, and the quote my broker served up is not. The latter might be pulling a quote from the last time the bonds were liquid, which could be around the time of the default.



That makes sense to me. I doubt the auditors would agree to consider a potential deal as an asset, especially when the deal requires city approval and possibly accommodations like closing a street, and the anticipated purchase prices is likely in excess of the fair market value of the land as currently configured and zoned. If the deal happens, Maddd and NYCFC will overpay relative to FMV.
The few trades that happen are probably private sales. I suppose someone could be manipulating the price for a pump and dump, but with an issue that is so thinly traded, and of moderate public concern, that's criminally risky. My best guess is that trades are sales to buyers of distressed debt.

My further guess is that the sticking point in the negotiations is that the debt owed to the city is subordinate to the bondholders, and BdB is insisting that the city get a piece anyway.
https://www.crainsnewyork.com/artic...holders-but-not-taxpayers-for-bad-garage-deal

Still see smoke?
giphy.gif
 
I doubt the auditors would agree to consider a potential deal as an asset, especially when the deal requires city approval and possibly accommodations

If a transaction happens, the last place you’re gonna see it reported is in an SEC filing. GAAP will prevent considering a transaction closed until execution and any real transaction will leak to the press prior to something substantial being disclosed in the MD&A. Only thing we’ll get from the filings is in the opinion that tells us that the company is trash and it’s cooking the books to appear more solvent than it is.
 
  • Like
Reactions: adam
https://queenseagle.com/all/2018/12/19/queens-community-coalition-condemns-proposed-soccer-stadium

At issue for the coalition is whether the city would honor its commitment to ensure Willets Point is redeveloped with affordable housing for local low-income residents. The city got the Queens Development Group to commit to building 1,100 affordable housing units, but that commitment was reportedly in jeopardy as the developer considered turning the land into a parking lot for LaGuardia Airport travelers.

In 2008, the City Council approved a plan to construct 5,500 units of housing in Willets Point, including 1,925 units for affordable or middle income housing.

“The development at Willets Point has been in complete disarray since it was first proposed. We have seen small businesses forced to close and community members wage battle in court to prevent the loss of public parkland, something that still hasn't been returned,” said Bertha Lewis, founder and president of The Black Institute. “It's time for the city to return to its original plan that includes affordable housing, schools and a community center, and we will fight until that happens.”
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kjbert
Quite possibly the best stadium in MLS.

https://www.instagram.com/p/Brnhd5fgpZC/

Du3-7ukUUAECxEE.jpg



Its also cool that NYCFC will be the opening game here too. Should be a great show.
NYCFC is opening a stadium!!!! awww darn, got clickbaited........ Damn you clever marketers....... oh, use this trick to lower your mortgage bill......... damnit! Halp me I can't discern real articles anymore, its all clickbait!
 
NYCFC really need to get something done on the stadium ASAP.

As great as New York is as a city, the club is at risk of becoming a forgotten part of MLS if it doesnt.
As much as we all want stadium news, this just isn't true.

There were 191 national broadcasts during the MLS regular season in 2018 (albeit many far from what we usually consider mainstream). That makes slots for 382 teams. NYCFC occupied 22 of those slots. That is 5.8%. Proportionately (out of 23 teams in the league) NYCFC should have had 4.3%. MLS views us as an above the norm draw.

By comparison:
  • Atlanta - 24
  • LAFC - 24
  • NJ - 23
  • NYCFC - 22
  • LAG - 21
  • DC - 21
  • Orlando - 20
  • Dallas - 17
  • Seattle - 17
  • Portland - 16
  • Houston - 14
  • RSL - 7
And if you want just ESPN and Fox, here are the top 9 teams:
  • Seattle: 13
  • Atlanta: 12
  • LAFC: 12
  • NYCFC: 11
  • Orlando: 11
  • Portland: 11
  • NYRB: 10
  • LAG: 9
  • DCU: 8
On both lists we are top 5. We're not getting forgotten by MLS or otherwise. We're just getting crankier.
 
NYCFC really need to get something done on the stadium ASAP.

As great as New York is as a city, the club is at risk of becoming a forgotten part of MLS if it doesnt.

forgotten part of nyc...yes....forgotten part of MLS? i dont think so, everyone will remember us even if we a failure because of the CFG connection. "that team with all that money and is not doing shit"
 
As much as we all want stadium news, this just isn't true.

There were 191 national broadcasts during the MLS regular season in 2018 (albeit many far from what we usually consider mainstream). That makes slots for 382 teams. NYCFC occupied 22 of those slots. That is 5.8%. Proportionately (out of 23 teams in the league) NYCFC should have had 4.3%. MLS views us as an above the norm draw.

By comparison:
  • Atlanta - 24
  • LAFC - 24
  • NJ - 23
  • NYCFC - 22
  • LAG - 21
  • DC - 21
  • Orlando - 20
  • Dallas - 17
  • Seattle - 17
  • Portland - 16
  • Houston - 14
  • RSL - 7
And if you want just ESPN and Fox, here are the top 9 teams:
  • Seattle: 13
  • Atlanta: 12
  • LAFC: 12
  • NYCFC: 11
  • Orlando: 11
  • Portland: 11
  • NYRB: 10
  • LAG: 9
  • DCU: 8
On both lists we are top 5. We're not getting forgotten by MLS or otherwise. We're just getting crankier.

this year will be telling, no villa no pirlo, no lampard. unless a huge name is picked up ( i doubt it) then we may keep same visibility. if we get same amount of games nationally then you would be correct id say.
 
I understand why people are annoyed when we open other team's stadiums, but the fact the league schedules us for these games also undercuts the idea that we aren't rated. I know a lot of Cincinnati fans wanted us for their home opener as well.
Battle of the Blue & Orange would have been fun :3 (except, you know, Cincinnati does blue & orange correctly- like the mets and islanders and... not NYCFC)
 
I understand why people are annoyed when we open other team's stadiums, but the fact the league schedules us for these games also undercuts the idea that we aren't rated. I know a lot of Cincinnati fans wanted us for their home opener as well.

fuck that....sounds like another orlando type internet "rivalry"
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kjbert