UPDATE: State meets obligation to NYRA; Legislature OK's advance

[parsixfarms]

Originally Posted by pmacdaddy

I can't imagine who else would loan into this situation.

Assuming they go cash-flow positive once Saratoga starts, we're only talking about a relatively brief period of time (and modest amount of $$) to get to July 23. And the amount we're talking about is chump change for the people sitting on the NYRA Board of Trustees.

[pmacdaddy]

Originally Posted by parsixfarms

Assuming they go cash-flow positive once Saratoga starts, we're only talking about a relatively brief period of time (and modest amount of $$) to get to July 23. And the amount we're talking about is chump change for the people sitting on the NYRA Board of Trustees.

Maybe, but that is a tough precedent to set given that everyone elses long term plan seems to involve screwing NYRA.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by parsixfarms

Assuming they go cash-flow positive once Saratoga starts, we're only talking about a relatively brief period of time (and modest amount of $$) to get to July 23. And the amount we're talking about is chump change for the people sitting on the NYRA Board of Trustees.

I would doubt that they immediately go into a cash flow positive position once Saratoga starts. It is my understanding that the vast amounts of money to be paid to tracks from the various outlets doesn't always come in a timely fashion. Not to mention the cash outlay they must incur in setting up shop there.

As for the Board, it would quite possibly be illegal for Board members to inject that kind of cash into a non-profit and like pmac said a terrible presendent wuld be set. It would be used as "proof" that NYRA is just a bunch of rich guys looking for a state "bailout".

[parsixfarms]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

I would doubt that they immediately go into a cash flow positive position once Saratoga starts. It is my understanding that the vast amounts of money to be paid to tracks from the various outlets doesn't always come in a timely fashion. Not to mention the cash outlay they must incur in setting up shop there.

As for the Board, it would quite possibly be illegal for Board members to inject that kind of cash into a non-profit and like pmac said a terrible presendent wuld be set. It would be used as "proof" that NYRA is just a bunch of rich guys looking for a state "bailout".

With most financially-challenged not-for-profits, if the Board is committed to the mission of the entity, the members of the Board are usually the ones that make the financial commitments necessary to keep the entity afloat. I know that it would bad precedent to look the other way at the State's failure to abide by its commitments, but a shut-down in this environment would be catastrophic. Is that worse than people thinking that those sitting on the NYRA Board are well-off (which they are)?

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by parsixfarms

With most financially-challenged not-for-profits, if the Board is committed to the mission of the entity, the members of the Board are usually the ones that make the financial commitments necessary to keep the entity afloat. I know that it would bad precedent to look the other way at the State's failure to abide by its commitments, but a shut-down in this environment would be catastrophic. Is that worse than people thinking that those sitting on the NYRA Board are well-off (which they are)?

LOL. According to the pols ths mission of NYRA is first and foremost to create revenue for the state. I doubt anyone would be willing to pony up for that.

[parsixfarms]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

LOL. According to the pols ths mission of NYRA is first and foremost to create revenue for the state. I doubt anyone would be willing to pony up for that.

But what do the members of the NYRA Board of Trustees see the mission as being? I doubt Phipps sees the mission of NYRA to create revenue for the state.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by parsixfarms

But what do the members of the NYRA Board of Trustees see the mission as being? I doubt Phipps sees the mission of NYRA to create revenue for the state.

Do you really think it is in the best interests of NYRA for its board to fund it in leiu of money owed to them from the state and OTB? That seems like political suicide.

[parsixfarms]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

Do you really think it is in the best interests of NYRA for its board to fund it in leiu of money owed to them from the state and OTB? That seems like political suicide.

It's a better alternative to shutting down. Admittedly, neither is very attractive, but if they shut down, I'm guessing some genius in state government will be looking at some of those performance metrics that Bruno had placed in the franchise extension, and then try to take the franchise from NYRA. And the litigation that will follow would last forever.

[freddymo]

Originally Posted by parsixfarms

But what do the members of the NYRA Board of Trustees see the mission as being? I doubt Phipps sees the mission of NYRA to create revenue for the state.

Phipp's has a regally bred(arent they all per DRF) MDN going Sunday at MP I guess Shug thought it was a better spot then Belmont..lol

[parsixfarms]

Originally Posted by freddymo

Phipp's has a regally bred(arent they all per DRF) MDN going Sunday at MP I guess Shug thought it was a better spot then Belmont..lol

I wonder if PJ Campo told him not to bring the horse back to Belmont.

[pointman]

Originally Posted by parsixfarms

But what do the members of the NYRA Board of Trustees see the mission as being? I doubt Phipps sees the mission of NYRA to create revenue for the state.

I think that you have a misunderstanding as to the Board of Directors role on a not for profit corporation in NY. I am a member on not for profit board in NY and it is not the role of the Board of Directors to financially support the corporation. Rather, the role is to deal with the State in negotiating and obtaining the necessary funds to operate and then to ensure that the funds are being used in a proper fashion. I am pretty sure that if NYRA were running with excess currency they would add the same to purses as they did at Saratoga the last couple of years. Whether the board members are wealthy or not is irrelevant, it is not their role to fund NYRA and it would likely be a conflict on a not for profit board for a member to have a finacial stake in the corporation.

NYRA is doing nothing more than asking the State to live up to the obligations that the State took on when NYRA deeded more than $1 billion of real estate to NY State. As Steve pointed out, the notices are required by NY State law in advance of any layoffs. NYRA is only fulfilling its requirements by reserving action it will be forced to take if the State continues to fail to fulfill it obligations to NYRA.

[parsixfarms]

Originally Posted by pointman

I think that you have a misunderstanding as to the Board of Directors role on a not for profit corporation in NY. I am a member on not for profit board in NY and it is not the role of the Board of Directors to financially support the corporation. Rather, the role is to deal with the State in negotiating and obtaining the necessary funds to operate and then to ensure that the funds are being used in a proper fashion. I am pretty sure that if NYRA were running with excess currency they would add the same to purses as they did at Saratoga the last couple of years. Whether the board members are wealthy or not is irrelevant, it is not their role to fund NYRA and it would likely be a conflict on a not for profit board for a member to have a finacial stake in the corporation.

NYRA is doing nothing more than asking the State to live up to the obligations that the State took on when NYRA deeded more than $1 billion of real estate to NY State. As Steve pointed out, the notices are required by NY State law in advance of any layoffs. NYRA is only fulfilling its requirements by reserving action it will be forced to take if the State continues to fail to fulfill it obligations to NYRA.

I also sit on the Board of a non-profit, and there are a whole host of tasks fulfilled by Board members. There is nothing legally prohibiting the Board members from financially propping up such an entity. That's why such boards often have so-called "money seats" on them, albeit as it related to the task of fund-raising for the organization. If there were some concerns about how to structure a loan to the organization (that's not the same as having a financial stake in the organization) without running afoul of potential conflict of interest rules, I'm sure that NYRA could run it past Getnick & Getnick, their high-priced "integrity counsel" (if they are looking at places to cut expenses, there'd be a good place to start).

I completely understand that the WARN notices had to go out just in case they do shut down.