McCourts.....

The McCourt divorce trial started Monday. LAT has great coverage. Yesterday, there was a sidebar about the finances of the Dodgers. Great work by these writers.

Question: I read a few weeks ago a comment from one of the lawyers. He said there is a media fascination with the McCourts but Dodgers fans don't care.

What do y'all think?



http://www.latimes.com/sports/la-sp-dodger-finances-20100902,0,7260669.story

 

I'd think any celebrity legal hearing, whether it's divorce or criminal, will garner attention. It won't reach OJ status, but it'll be followed by some Dodgers' fans. One interesting side-note to add: Jamie McCourt wanted to use her high-profile status with the LA Dodgers to run for political office, including the President of the United States. Would anyone even consider voting McCourt as President?

 

Ha!

Watching the hated Dodgers self-destruct is the only thing this year I've enjoyed.

 

I think you're in bad shape when a.) you have to ask the guy who invented the infomercial for a loan and b.) he turns you down.

 

I don't think the American public would vote for a candidate who needs a $1,000-a-day clothing allowance (that was in her spousal support claim that came out a few months ago).

You got that right.
I heard a rumor around Christmas time (from my cousin via a friend of his -- yeah, I know) that McCourt had approached Disney about buying a piece of the team.
McCourt had stopped talking at that point and nobody could get any info out of Disney.
Now it's obvious McCourt was looking for financial help.

 

McCourt is the McCaskey/Modell of the MLB, the team is everything he has and he has no alternative source of revenue to infuse into the club.

As a Giants fan I am not disheartened. I only wish this state of flux continued for another decade or so and the Dodgers follow the Pirates plan, get a new stadium, get revenue sharing, field a dog team, make $$$; maybe that was McCourt's game plan all along but those GMs screwed it up by actually winning.

 

Don't forget, though. In 2008, 46% of the public voted for Sarah Palin as vice-president, when she spent nearly $150,000 on clothes.

 

http://www.latimes.com/sports/la-sp-1208-simers-20101208,0,749542,full.column

Simers has been nails on this since the beginning.

 

I'd bet anything that Jamie McCourt is the living embodiment of "crazy in the head, crazy in the bed."

 

I have to ask, because this divorce has become an interest to me as it relates to the Dodgers, can someone walk me through how the McCourts were able to buy the Dodgers, when they didn't have their own money up front to get it?

Did they round up some investors to be part owners, did they get a loan + investors, etc.?

I don't know the complexities of the financials when it comes to buying a team and running it, which is why I'm asking a silly question. Thanks.

 

The purchase was highly leveraged -- even at the time people were amazed he pulled it off, and that he was able to secure so much financing.

 

I looked for a Boston-based article that I read several months ago that pretty much outlined the whole purchase. Couldn't find it.
McCourt paid, like, no money to buy the Dodgers. He took out a loan from News Corp./Murdoch, the people he was buying the team from, and assumed a lot of their debt. I think he put up the Boston parking lots as collateral and Murdoch owns them now.
I do remember reading a comment from Bob Daly, who owned 5% of the Dodgers under Murdoch and was President of the club at the time News Corp. sold it. He said he paid more for his 5% share of the Dodgers than McCourt paid to get the whole franchise.