sushi
Master Member
Posts: 767
|
Post by sushi on Mar 17, 2008 15:55:49 GMT -5
Someone on the other board said according to Potluck, BB has asked for and received a 28 day continuance. WTF - we are really in trouble; they should no way close on the Eola site.
|
|
|
Post by gatormom on Mar 17, 2008 16:07:32 GMT -5
Someone on the other board said according to Potluck, BB has asked for and received a 28 day continuance. WTF - we are really in trouble; they should no way close on the Eola site. And again, it is the kids who pay the price for this insanity.
|
|
|
Post by momto4 on Mar 17, 2008 16:19:11 GMT -5
Someone on the other board said according to Potluck, BB has asked for and received a 28 day continuance. WTF - we are really in trouble; they should no way close on the Eola site. And again, it is the kids who pay the price for this insanity. Taxpayers, too. Ka-ching! I would hate to think how much each day costs us.
|
|
|
Post by gandalf on Mar 17, 2008 16:25:57 GMT -5
Someone on the other board said according to Potluck, BB has asked for and received a 28 day continuance. WTF - we are really in trouble; they should no way close on the Eola site. Odds say they will close anyway, even though there is no way they should. With no monies handy from the 25 acres and not knowing about up to $20M in damages - very risky. However could they not still shoot for 2009 at BB with at least as much done at opening as this site ? Just a question, as I don't know if that window has closed or not.
|
|
|
Post by sleeplessinnpvl on Mar 17, 2008 16:26:07 GMT -5
Yeah, so that puts us another month behind and we were tight to begin with in order to get this done by August 2009. Bring out the trailers and add on to the total costs for that as well as construction costs.
ETA: That is a good question. Hate to be forced to buy BB but someone needs to do the math on that. Wouldn't we for sure only have to pay the legal/small damages fee? That's one way to eliminate the uncertainty of this number hanging over our heads.
|
|
|
Post by gandalf on Mar 17, 2008 16:27:19 GMT -5
Yeah, so that puts us another month behind and we were tight to begin with in order to get this done by August 2009. Bring out the trailers and add on to the total costs for that as well as construction costs. don't you subtract all the expedite millions ? Just talking about the financial side now, not arguing about the crowding.
|
|
|
Post by sleeplessinnpvl on Mar 17, 2008 16:33:13 GMT -5
Yeah, so that puts us another month behind and we were tight to begin with in order to get this done by August 2009. Bring out the trailers and add on to the total costs for that as well as construction costs. don't you subtract all the expedite millions ? Just talking about the financial side now, not arguing about the crowding. Yes, I think there was a cost in there for that. I hope someone from the SB is crunching numbers before the Wednesday closing.
|
|
|
Post by sleeplessinnpvl on Mar 17, 2008 16:36:21 GMT -5
Someone on the other board said according to Potluck, BB has asked for and received a 28 day continuance. WTF - we are really in trouble; they should no way close on the Eola site. Odds say they will close anyway, even though there is no way they should. With no monies handy from the 25 acres and not knowing about up to $20M in damages - very risky. This is another insanity I forgot about. When do we know the fate of these 25 acres? We could get stuck with those and not be able to sell them. Can't imagine BB would be nice and take them back from us. Too many uncertainties for me to feel comfortable anymore.
|
|
|
Post by gatordog on Mar 17, 2008 16:48:02 GMT -5
BB land is our Tar Baby. The more the SD fights it, the more entangled we become. I hope Brer Rabbit has some money in his pockets. And maybe he can let us use his burrow for extra classroom space in 2009
|
|
|
Post by gandalf on Mar 17, 2008 16:57:46 GMT -5
don't you subtract all the expedite millions ? Just talking about the financial side now, not arguing about the crowding. Yes, I think there was a cost in there for that. I hope someone from the SB is crunching numbers before the Wednesday closing. You run double shifts at union wages for any period of time and that is a big number too.
|
|
|
Post by gatordog on Mar 17, 2008 17:23:24 GMT -5
You run double shifts at union wages for any period of time and that is a big number too. per the site selection report....expedite/acceleration cost is $5 mil. This applies whether we were hurrying for a 2009 opening at AME or at BB. For 2010 opening....AME had a $9.5 mil exess, while BB had a $3.1 mil deficit. For 2009 opening....AME had a $4.8 mil exess, while BB had a $8.2 mil deficit. Note, AME already had $5 mil legal cost built in to overall project cost. To me, this suggests if AME leads to $5 mil legal costs and then up to $9 mil damages...project still meets budget? If damages are ~$5 mil we can afford expedite costs. If higher, we'd have to slow down and wait until 2010. As long as BB legal and damages are less than $5 + $9 mil....it looks like AME site would still run on budget. I think there has to be a reasonable probablity that this will hold. On the other hand....I cannot see how we can get BB to run on budget without either BB selling land for lower price, or us scaling back the scope of MV. Or rising money through public or private sources (the tooth fairy scenario). If anybody has ideas on that, I would love to hear.
|
|
|
Post by sleeplessinnpvl on Mar 17, 2008 17:42:04 GMT -5
Thanks gatordog. I knew you would come through with the numbers and the analysis!
So to me it seems if we close now, the SB is gambling that our costs to walk away would be less than $9 mil. I hope we get a reasonable judge and not someone that is drinking the same crazy drink as the jury was in the last trial.
Does anyone remember what BB was supposedly down to in negotiations? Was it $400K+/acre?
|
|
|
Post by JWH on Mar 17, 2008 18:56:16 GMT -5
Odds say they will close anyway, even though there is no way they should. With no monies handy from the 25 acres and not knowing about up to $20M in damages - very risky. This is another insanity I forgot about. When do we know the fate of these 25 acres? We could get stuck with those and not be able to sell them. Can't imagine BB would be nice and take them back from us. Too many uncertainties for me to feel comfortable anymore. We can't get "stuck" with the 25 acres. Either we sell them back to BB, or to another party. BB is not going to make out on this like others (including NSFOC) want you to believe. Please, don't give in to the spin!
|
|
|
Post by JWH on Mar 17, 2008 18:58:27 GMT -5
Thanks gatordog. I knew you would come through with the numbers and the analysis! So to me it seems if we close now, the SB is gambling that our costs to walk away would be less than $9 mil. I hope we get a reasonable judge and not someone that is drinking the same crazy drink as the jury was in the last trial. Does anyone remember what BB was supposedly down to in negotiations? Was it $400K+/acre? Don't know the negotiated price, but we have the locked in jury $$ of $500+ per acre to blow away their argument of the district paying damages on "loss of value".
|
|
|
Post by sleeplessinnpvl on Mar 17, 2008 19:55:04 GMT -5
BB is not going to make out on this like others (including NSFOC) want you to believe. Please, don't give in to the spin! OK, thanks for bringing me back from the dark side, jwh. I got a little hysterical there for awhile. I have to keep reminding myself that $20 million is probably pretty unreasonable and hopefully a judge will see that. However, given our track record with trials, I can't help but see the glass as half empty on that one. I never thought the jury would come back at $500K an acre either. It should be an interesting next few days to see how this plays out.
|
|