HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > General Development


View Poll Results: Which Chicago casino proposal is your favorite?
Ballys at Tribune 28 18.67%
Ballys at McCormick 8 5.33%
Hard Rock at One Central 11 7.33%
Rivers at The 78 82 54.67%
Rivers at McCormick 21 14.00%
Voters: 150. You may not vote on this poll

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #1701  
Old Posted Mar 10, 2024, 12:53 AM
Chi-Sky21 Chi-Sky21 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,286
Kick em out of river north and put this up for bids again.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1702  
Old Posted Mar 10, 2024, 9:35 PM
west-town-brad west-town-brad is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 967
As I’ve said before… the “temporary” Bally’s Casino is the only casino that will ever materialize in the city of Chicago.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1703  
Old Posted Mar 11, 2024, 12:21 PM
dreamy-developer dreamy-developer is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2024
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrickellBased View Post
So close! Only $800M short.
The article quotes the CFO of Bally's

"We have a funding gap that we're solving for of about $800 million, and feel pretty good about those conversations and that being resolved by hopefully summer of this year," Glover told the board."

"I believe our access to financing is different than some other developments because of our familiarity with financing players in our industry," Glover said. "We're continuing to have conversations, ironing out details and we feel confident that we'll have a financing solution soon."

Why does there seem to be some negative derogative towards this? They honestly sound confident that they will and the financing for this project. The article states that they already secured $300m and plan to start demo'ing the Tribune site later this summer.

Would we have assumed that any other site the casino could've gone to would have been any cheaper of a funding gap to fill in this market?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1704  
Old Posted Mar 11, 2024, 2:04 PM
twister244 twister244 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Chicago
Posts: 3,893
Quote:
Originally Posted by dreamy-developer View Post
The article quotes the CFO of Bally's

"We have a funding gap that we're solving for of about $800 million, and feel pretty good about those conversations and that being resolved by hopefully summer of this year," Glover told the board."

"I believe our access to financing is different than some other developments because of our familiarity with financing players in our industry," Glover said. "We're continuing to have conversations, ironing out details and we feel confident that we'll have a financing solution soon."

Why does there seem to be some negative derogative towards this? They honestly sound confident that they will and the financing for this project. The article states that they already secured $300m and plan to start demo'ing the Tribune site later this summer.

Would we have assumed that any other site the casino could've gone to would have been any cheaper of a funding gap to fill in this market?
Well, Maybe the question is - Should there even be a funding gap at this stage in the first place? Given demolition is to commence this Summer with groundbreaking of the main casino shortly thereafter, seems like a pretty big gap in funding at this stage of the game. Especially considering this is a major revenue generator, and not some speculative office building.

Then again, I'm not an expert on casino financing, so maybe I'm off base here.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1705  
Old Posted Mar 11, 2024, 4:30 PM
mh777 mh777 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2022
Location: River North
Posts: 161
Doesn’t seem like the news has been reported here yet but Bally’s received a buyout offer from Standard General (Hedge Fund) this morning. I’d assume they will take it. This could definitely have implications (for better or worse) on the new casino.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1706  
Old Posted Mar 11, 2024, 5:14 PM
BrickellBased BrickellBased is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2023
Location: Miami, FL
Posts: 187
https://www.wsj.com/finance/standard...googlenewsfeed

https://www.reuters.com/markets/deal...ys-2024-03-11/

from ws

Quote:
Standard General offered to buy Bally’s in a deal that values the casino operator around $684 million, less than half of the hedge fund’s prior bid for the company.
Quote:
The offer is significantly discounted from Standard General’s prior bid in January 2022, when the hedge fund offered to buy the remaining stake for $38 a share. That offer valued Bally’s at nearly $2.1 billion.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mh777 View Post
Doesn’t seem like the news has been reported here yet but Bally’s received a buyout offer from Standard General (Hedge Fund) this morning. I’d assume they will take it. This could definitely have implications (for better or worse) on the new casino.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1707  
Old Posted Mar 11, 2024, 5:19 PM
twister244 twister244 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Chicago
Posts: 3,893
I would take this news as bad if Bally's is being bought at a discount, no?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1708  
Old Posted Mar 11, 2024, 5:24 PM
mh777 mh777 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2022
Location: River North
Posts: 161
Quote:
Originally Posted by twister244 View Post
I would take this news as bad if Bally's is being bought at a discount, no?
It’s actually a 40% premium if you’re looking at their current (as of Friday) market cap. I wouldn’t take this a negative, considering you will now have a much larger entity responsible for their debt.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1709  
Old Posted Mar 11, 2024, 5:25 PM
Toasty Joe Toasty Joe is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2020
Location: Wicker Park, Chicago, IL
Posts: 386
It could if the new owners seriously tighten spending to get the company profitable, but could also mean that they're willing to spend more to reinvigorate the brand given they're paying less than half of what they previously offered
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1710  
Old Posted Mar 11, 2024, 6:15 PM
BrickellBased BrickellBased is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2023
Location: Miami, FL
Posts: 187
Yeah - double edged sword. On one hand they are probably in a better situation financially now - but the fund will cut any fat and probably focus on the most profitable projects primarily.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Toasty Joe View Post
It could if the new owners seriously tighten spending to get the company profitable, but could also mean that they're willing to spend more to reinvigorate the brand given they're paying less than half of what they previously offered
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1711  
Old Posted Mar 11, 2024, 8:25 PM
munchymunch's Avatar
munchymunch munchymunch is offline
MPLSXCHI
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Omicron Persei 8
Posts: 1,090
Quote:
Originally Posted by twister244 View Post
I would take this news as bad if Bally's is being bought at a discount, no?
I think Bally’s just became a victim of the current economic climate. Lots of Weed/Casino companies tried to capture the newly legalized market by taking on a bunch of debt around Covid. Now those loans are up and refinancing is tricky these days.

In terms of development? Still think this is probably a negative for the project’s scale unless the city is willing to let this land sit for longer to let the turmoil settle a bit.
__________________
"I don't want to be interesting. I want to be good." -Ludwig Mies van der Rohe
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1712  
Old Posted Mar 18, 2024, 12:58 AM
BVictor1's Avatar
BVictor1 BVictor1 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Chicago
Posts: 10,419
https://www.chicagobusiness.com/comm...x=1710544849-1

Bally's suitor: Buyout wouldn't impact Chicago casino
By Danny Ecker

Quote:
The leader of the hedge fund making a play to take over gambling giant Bally's said a buyout wouldn't impact its commitment to build a new casino in Chicago.

Standard General Managing Partner Soo Kim, whose firm is Bally's largest shareholder and has offered to buy the remaining shares to take the company private, said Bally's remains "contractually committed" to developing the 1 million-square-foot casino and hotel complex as planned along the Chicago River. And that wouldn't change even if its ownership does.
Quote:
Bally's earlier this week disclosed Standard General's bid to buy out the shares it doesn't own for $15 apiece, valuing the company at about $684 million. That buyout offer comes with Bally's just a few months away from its planned demolition of the Chicago Tribune's Freedom Center printing plant, which will clear the way for the casino on the 30-acre River West site.
__________________
titanic1
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1713  
Old Posted Apr 2, 2024, 5:15 PM
Randomguy34's Avatar
Randomguy34 Randomguy34 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Chicago & Philly
Posts: 2,372
Bally's shareholder blasts chairman's 'woeful' takeover bid
Quote:
In a sharply worded letter slamming "moon shot bets" and accusing Chairman Soo Kim of trying to take over the company "at a fraction of its fair value," two investors are calling on Bally's board to reject Kim's "woefully undervalued" bid and reboot its overall strategy — including rethinking its Chicago plans.
....
Fetters and King recommend that committee "reject Standard General's self-serving and undervalued acquisition proposal. It is counter to the best interests of all stakeholders, offering a fraction of the value otherwise attainable," the investors write. "Furthermore, it is reprehensible to use the already overstretched balance sheet of the company as a source of funds: This jeopardizes the completion of the Chicago project, putting at further risk gainful employment and tax generation in Illinois; impairs existing bondholders to the company; and diminishes the company’s capacity to invest across its casino portfolio."

The duo also say they believe the casino operator's Chicago project will yield a return on investment well below Bally's cost of capital and recommend that Bally's seek partners with a better casino operating track record.
https://www.chicagobusiness.com/poli...l-takeover-bid
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1714  
Old Posted Apr 2, 2024, 6:06 PM
twister244 twister244 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Chicago
Posts: 3,893
Quote:
Originally Posted by Randomguy34 View Post
Bally's shareholder blasts chairman's 'woeful' takeover bid

https://www.chicagobusiness.com/poli...l-takeover-bid
What a mess......

I say the city hold their feet to the fire and threaten to revoke their license. Go back to the drawing board and rethink the 78 site plan. Let the Bears build their new stadium on the south parking lot, and have Related pair up Rivers to build out 78 with a full casino/ballpark entertainment district.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1715  
Old Posted Apr 2, 2024, 8:37 PM
CaptainJilliams CaptainJilliams is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2020
Posts: 138
If any of this means the Walmart-looking casino on the river doesn’t get built, I’m all for it.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1716  
Old Posted Apr 2, 2024, 9:32 PM
Toasty Joe Toasty Joe is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2020
Location: Wicker Park, Chicago, IL
Posts: 386
Let them keep Medinah Temple (with a plan to renovate into a nicer, permanent facility down the line) and bid out for a spot at the 78. Surely with a ballpark and a new Bears stadium down the road (in addition to Soldier Field & McCormick Place) there will be sufficient demand for two casinos at those locations.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1717  
Old Posted Apr 2, 2024, 10:01 PM
psxvz psxvz is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2019
Posts: 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by Randomguy34 View Post
Bally's shareholder blasts chairman's 'woeful' takeover bid

https://www.chicagobusiness.com/poli...l-takeover-bid
These guys don’t care about the Chicago casino. They’ve taken a huge loss on their investment and don’t like getting bought out at a depressed value. I’d bet if SC raises their offer they would change their tune pretty quickly.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1718  
Old Posted Apr 2, 2024, 10:18 PM
twister244 twister244 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Chicago
Posts: 3,893
Quote:
Originally Posted by Toasty Joe View Post
Let them keep Medinah Temple (with a plan to renovate into a nicer, permanent facility down the line) and bid out for a spot at the 78. Surely with a ballpark and a new Bears stadium down the road (in addition to Soldier Field & McCormick Place) there will be sufficient demand for two casinos at those locations.
Why should we give Bally's a second more of our time when they have completely dropped the ball on this? Again - The city should go to them and hold their feet to the fire. If they can't deliver what they promised, then restart this process with Rivers leading the charge.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1719  
Old Posted Apr 3, 2024, 1:01 AM
lakeshoredrive lakeshoredrive is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2018
Posts: 395
I blame Lightfoot for this mess too. SMH
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1720  
Old Posted Apr 3, 2024, 4:50 AM
Toasty Joe Toasty Joe is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2020
Location: Wicker Park, Chicago, IL
Posts: 386
Quote:
Originally Posted by twister244 View Post
Why should we give Bally's a second more of our time when they have completely dropped the ball on this? Again - The city should go to them and hold their feet to the fire. If they can't deliver what they promised, then restart this process with Rivers leading the charge.
I'm cool with that, but why not let Bally's keep Medinah Temple? If they invested in turning it into a destination (compared to its current state as a temporary revenue stream) it could be a nice addition to River North. A South Loop casino run by Rivers or whoever should do just fine with all of the sports games, concerts, and conventions if Sox (+ Bears) get their way.
Reply With Quote
     
     
End
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > General Development
Forum Jump



Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 11:33 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.