No Deal Between Einhorn, Mets

The Mets announced that they were unable to reach a deal with David Eihhorn, who had agreed to buy a minority share of the club from the Wilpon family. The Mets say they decided to explore other options instead of extending Einhorn's exclusive negotiating period.

The team announced that they have the capital to cover losses in 2011 and are "under no financial pressure to do a deal on any particular schedule." Chairman and CEO Fred Wilpon says the Mets will engage with other possible buyers, including some who have already been approved by MLB.

Eihnorn issued a statement in which he says the Mets wanted to change their initial agreement substantially, according to Adam Rubin of ESPNNewYork"The extensive nature of changes that were proposed to me at the last minute has made a successful transaction impossible," Einhorn said. 

The Mets agreed to sell a minority share of the team to Einhorn in May. They would have obtained $200MM for 30-35% of the team.


Full Story | 19 Comments | Categories: New York Mets

Leave a Reply

19 Comments on "No Deal Between Einhorn, Mets"


4 years 1 day ago

No no no no no no no no no no no no no no.

Even if I weren’t a Mets fan, this would just be bad news for baseball. Dammit.

Neil Guzman
4 years 1 day ago

Einhorn, Finkle; Finkle, Einhorn…

FillyPhan
4 years 1 day ago

Wow is this guy is considered a journalist? Eihhorn, Eihnorn. Who proof reads these.
At this point, who is the article even talking about, they mentioned 3 different people.

the_dude_abides
4 years 1 day ago

Three different spellings in the article! That’s awesome. Not many reporters can do that.

DeManiac
4 years 1 day ago

HE’S NOT DAVID EINHORN! He’s Ray Finkle. He’s a man.

Isaac
4 years 1 day ago

Wow Ben your spelling teacher called and said she passed you by mistake and needs you back

remybklyn
4 years 1 day ago

I’m sure this will give Donald Trump a reason to feel relevant again.  

johnsilver
4 years 1 day ago

One would have to seriously question his judgement for a minority ownership in that cluster**** situation the Wilpon’s brought upon themselves.

Looks like the Wilpons are just hanging on and hoping the situation will go away, meanwhile taking on working capital only if people will dole it out for little in return?

They seem to be living in fantasy land.

4 years 1 day ago

There was a clause stating Einhorn could receive majority control of the team if not paid back in a few years.  Not exactly a fantasy land deal for either side.

NWDC
4 years 1 day ago

They’ll end up keeping the team — no way the clawback will be successful unless they prove they knew about the fraud.

TheFreak2011
4 years 1 day ago

Say goodbye to Jose Reyes, Mets fans.

Isaac
4 years 1 day ago

And Angels fans say hello to Jose Reyes

4 years 1 day ago

Vernon Wells

oleosmirf
4 years 1 day ago

not at all. in fact, quite the opposite…

andrewmets9
4 years 1 day ago

exactly, all this means is that the lawsuit turned IN the Wilpons favor, so they felt that they didn’t need as much financial help anymore, which means that they have more money than they thought they would’ve at this point, which pretty much means, Reyes should be a Met next season.

MB923
4 years 1 day ago

Looks like Finkle came out on top after all.

oleosmirf
4 years 1 day ago

The Mets were looking for a minority partner due to a 1 billion dollar lawsuit hanging over their heads. Since the deal was tentatively agreed in May, Picard’s lawsuit has shrunk to around 300 mil so the need for Einhorn became less. The Mets clearly didnt want to make a deal with him once the lawsuit was changed so the money problems are not as big as they were before.

Sandy Alderson has re-stated the Mets will have a payroll from 100-110 mil next season which is more than required to sign Reyes. Remember, the Mets have more than 60 mil coming off their 145 mil payroll and with an extremely weak free agent class and young players at many positions, Reyes is almost assured to be returning.

greggofboken
4 years 1 day ago

I think your take on why they have pulled out w/Einhorn is correct, however the suit has not been dismissed.  They feel strongly that the judge (Rakoff) will not view the $700M in the “should have known” damages as something they’ll be held liable for, but that’s not certain.

Your point about the payroll is spot on.  Einhorn’s money (and now the money that they are reportedly raising through smaller chunks of friends/family investments) was slated to go towards debt payoffs to MLB and the banks and to stabilize finances due to this season’s losses.  The Einhorn money and the money from his more friendly replacements was not EVER going towards financing the 2012 payroll.

4 years 1 day ago

Thank you. The Einhorn deal was great news for the long term, not the short term