Kick em out of river north and put this up for bids again.

As I’ve said before… the “temporary” Bally’s Casino is the only casino that will ever materialize in the city of Chicago.

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.

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.

https://www.wsj.com/finance/standard...googlenewsfeed

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

from ws

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.

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

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.

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.

https://www.chicagobusiness.com/comm...x=1710544849-1

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

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.

If any of this means the Walmart-looking casino on the river doesn’t get built, I’m all for it.

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.

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.

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 blame Lightfoot for this mess too. SMH ������

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.