Multiple news Sources including Reuters, Fox Business News, Forbes, etc is Reporting CET Has Reached Agreement On their Bankruptcy Plan and an end to the bankruptcy appears to be very close.
In the end CET and Apollo had to pony up more than they originally wanted to, however, with all of the shenanigans they tried to pull in the last few years shuffling assets around I think they are very lucky to not have wound up in jail.
I've been reading the various articles. It is not a "done deal" yet and there are holdouts. It ain't over till it's over.
Personally, I hope that whatever the resolution is, players will not be damaged. We are all concerned about Total Rewards being downgraded, comps being cut, games being made less favorable, etc.
Jail? That's not the American way. Spend until you are in deep shit and then hit them all with a BK and screw the remorse. Bankruptcy is just another example of our cowardly "take no responsibility" society. I have more respect for crack whores.Quote:
Originally Posted by mrstealth
Now you have given me a bad internal struggle. I have filed bankruptcies for several crack whores (my friend runs an "adult playground".)Quote:
Originally Posted by james40
Isn't America great?Quote:
Originally Posted by regnis
It's not officially a done deal, but it looks like it's over.
Caesars bankruptcy is likely finished, and the only lawsuit remaining is a mostly inconsequential $160 million one.
Long live Caesar!
I would like to be as optimistic as you are. But we don't know what operational changes will result. There could be a change in management. There could still be a sale of assets (casinos).Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Druff
As far as players are concerned, I am hoping for the best.
It's definitely a done deal. CET has utilized the absolute best tools that we've seen our two presidential candidates use over the years: professional and justice-Dept. sanctioned corruption....and taking complete advantage of legally using Chapter 11 as a tool of the wealthy. If anyone ever thought CET was going to be allowed to fail---think again. As for any effect on players, no one cares. Not anyone who counts, anyway.
I am sure management doesn't care. How do I know? Because they haven't cared up till now.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
Why should they care? Bankruptcy for individuals covers up poor decision making and a lack of personal responsibility. Corporations are no different.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
Bankruptcy is also punishment for those that made stupid decisions to lend the money in the first place.Quote:
Originally Posted by james40
Unfortunately, bankruptcy doesn't just punish foolish lenders.Quote:
Originally Posted by RoeIncarnate
It punishes anyone to whom the debtor owes money, including workers, contractors, landlords, etc.
I've always hated the concept of bankruptcy -- that there's a legal way you can "discharge" correct and legal debts. It just screws over innocent parties.
But I suppose that's another debate for another time.
The legal concept of bankruptcy is that businesses are "living things" and have a right to live. It is a biblical concept that allows people to wipe away their debts. It is not meant to punish anyone but could be considered "right to life" for businesses.
Uh oh -- our next prez is lower than a crack whore. Is what you're saying?Quote:
Originally Posted by james40
Not that there's anything wrong with that....
For most of our politicians, crack whore would be a step up in stature.Quote:
Originally Posted by redietz
True dat.Quote:
Originally Posted by james40
When I attended a Newt Gingrich speech in the summer, I was the only guy I could see who didn't give the dude a standing ovation when he took the stage for a "Civility" presentation. I tend to wait until after I hear what someone says before giving them a standing ovation. But that's just me.
Good old Newt, another draft dodging, womanizing, twice divorced, self serving politician. These degenerates drape themselves in the flag while holding a bible and don't believe in either.Quote:
Originally Posted by redietz
I respect Newt a lot as a politician. A lot of what he says simply makes sense, and he has never been a party stooge. Often he has gone against the grain and taken positions which are unpopular (at the time, at least) within the Republican Party.
His personal life is a mess. For that reason alone, he really isn't one who is a viable politician beyond where he already got. He's also a lot better "ideas" man than he is at actually governing. This is why he did a mostly poor job as Speaker of the House from 1995-1999, despite doing an amazingly good job uniting the Republican Party for the 1994 election, as well as an amazing job relaying to the average voter that year why they should vote Repubilcan.
I did lose a bit of respect for Newt this year with his support for Trump. Newt is one of the smartest people in the Republican Party (even his opponents concede that), so his support for a clearly unfit and unstable Republican candidate just seems odd to me. Normally Newt is his own man, and is the last to fall in line with something just because his party wants him to.
Sorry Dan. I agree more with James40 on this one. I still remember his contract with America which was a joke and his turning his back on his wife who was dying of cancer which was a huge statement on the type of person he really is.
There's no question that Newt had failings in his personal life. I stated that myself in my other post above.Quote:
Originally Posted by seemoreroyals
The Contract With America was actually a good idea, especially at the time when the country was frustrated with high taxes, high crime, and poor progress with reforming broken entitlements such as welfare. Remember that violent crime was at its very worst point in the early 90s, taxes were higher, and in general the average American was tiring of left-wing politicians and their out-of-touch nature. People wanted solutions, and they wanted them quickly.
Newt saw this, and he invented the Contract With America, which was a genius political move. It was basically telling the average American, "The Democrats don't understand your daily frustrations, but we do. And we are going to fix them now."
Republicans won in landslides all over the country that year. It actually forced Bill Clinton to move to the right for his final two years of Presidency, which ironically helped him win reelection in 1996.
But this was all Newt's dong. He was the last one to bring the Republican Party completely together under a united front, and the last one to really convince the average American that Republicans represented their needs more than the Democrats did. Even in some successful Republican elections in years since (such as 2010), the votes were more against Democrats than for Republicans. In 1994, people were voting FOR Republicans.
Newt was not a good Speaker. He wasn't good at governing. He was great at conceptualizing, speaking, and writing, but not good at implementing. As you mentioned, his personal life was also a mess, which also caused him trouble when attempting to govern.
Try reading some of Newt's opinion pieces of the past few years, and you will have a hard time disagreeing with him, even if you start off on the opposite side.
The only reason Newt is supporting Trump is because he knows how an already proven corrupt, incompetent, habitually lying, and weak/dishonest politician (aka, Hillary) would hurt this country and the Supreme Court if she wins the presidency.
As far as your belief that Trump is "unfit & unstable" then you've apparently lost sight of the tactics of the self-centered moron we have in office now. This is not the day and age of putting "gentlemen" in the White House who'll take the high road over personal brand-building or looking bad. Obama was the most unqualified candidate ever....until Trump. The difference is, Trump is a business genius, non-racist, a great family man (Obama's only admirable trait) a fabulous & diverse employer, a decent human being, and a very clear thinker (even if speaking his mind a bit too often shows otherwise).
People all too readily dismiss a brilliant politician like Newt, and they forget what they're criticizing. They say Trump has "no experience". So, would these same people want Hillary-type experience leading us, with nothing but failures and death from top to bottom? Think about it. If Trump somehow wins, he's not gonna be a typical president---and he doesn't have to be. He'll run the show like a CEO, and you'll see a very qualified VP actually work for a living for the first time in history. He'll surround himself with great minds like Newt. Our country will finally change for the better, and racism will finally start to disappear.
Amazingly, Hillary will likely win however, which will go to show how stupid and weak a country we've become overall. And we'll deserve every bit of what we get, with no one to blame but ourselves.
But wouldn't it be GREAT to wake up every day looking at the Internet and TV to see what Trump's hyper-active mind has come up with or what he's doing today!? Soooo refreshing. Or would you prefer seeing a different colored fugly pantsuit every freaking day with a witch's scratchy voice and a very creepy "husband" standing nearby....
The hypocritical aspect of the Republican party is that, had a Democrat bailed on a dying wife to be with his assistant, that would have been the featured story in every policy debate and election involving that person, front and center. But because it was Newt Gingrich, Republicans let it slide. Since when does the Republican party separate personal life from political life when it comes to evaluating public figures?
Rob, I am stunned that you would tout Newt, considering your family values. He abandoned a dying wife. You don't have a "character issue" with that?
When Gingrich showed for his "Civility Week" lecture, the student organizations that hit up ETSU for the money to pay him greeted Newt at the airport wearing hundreds of "Newt 2016" shirts, which I thought was really inappropriate. They wore them to the speech, and I found that oddly disrespectful to Trump, who was winning the delegate race at the time. Why would Republican student organizations be so disrespectful towards their party's likely nominee?
Trump's a spoiled brat. Nobody even brings up that his wife has an, ahem, checkered past. I thought the bluster was an on-air act, but it's not. Mark Cuban has the best close take on Trump, namely that he never got up to speed on anything. He doesn't like to learn.
Clinton I pretty much despise. I'd prefer her husband. She's the ultimate politician. Trump's the ultimate American businessman.
The United States has gotten to the point where these are our choices. Obviously, our vetting process has gone completely to hell, and has everything to do with who has managed to be on television most. We deserve what we get.
Newt was Trump lite, he appealed to the angry white guy (AWG), he just could not relate to them. After failing, Newt went on the the traditional "consultant/think tank, speaking scam" that most of our former politicians revert to and raked in millions doing it. Who said public service doesn't pay?Quote:
Originally Posted by seemoreroyals
Trump appeals to the old angry white guy (OAWG), the same group, they're just older and angrier now. I feel sorry for these guys, old, angry and bitter is a sad way to go through life. The fact that trump gives two shits about these guys is the capper, he's not one of them.
What saddens me is the lack of talk about policy issues. Trump's antics take away from any sort of serious discussion of, well anything. We're focused on failed marriages, Bill Clinton and tax returns. He's giving Hillary a free pass and I don't like that.
The Wall Street Journal did a survey of the CEOs of the top 100 companies. None of them contributed to the Trump campaign.
Hard to believe, but these people know Trump best.
These guys are only going to back the winner. The Washington beltway is the ultimate pay for play. If they though Trump had a real chance, they'd be shelling out the money. The CEO's don't care who gets in, as long as they own them.Quote:
Originally Posted by redietz
Correct. And they can't own Trump. Hillary represents the richest of the rich. Just like Obama.Quote:
Originally Posted by james40
Hillary and Obama represent Trump?Quote:
Originally Posted by quahaug
Regarding the idea that Trump is a "business genius":
USA Today's business writer just did an analysis of Trump's current actual worth versus what he'd be worth if he had taken what his father left him and invested it with simple compounded interest.
I don't think of Trump as a business person, more along the lines of a self promoter with a large line of credit. The true empire builders tend to stay out of the limelight. Trump came along during the reality TV era and caught the bug hard. When the Kardashians (SP?) are somehow celebrities, is it any wonder that Trump is also? The Presidential race is just an extension of his reality TV show.Quote:
Originally Posted by redietz
That is the main theme of the USA Today writer, Michael Wolff. The idea is that Trump is a performer playing a businessman, and Trump is exceptionally good at it. The top CEOs don't donate to his campaign because they instantly grasp this.Quote:
Originally Posted by james40
Absolutely. If Trump is a one percenter they do.Quote:
Originally Posted by james40
Ridiculous. Trump was a big name long before reality TV shows.Quote:
Originally Posted by james40
Trump used his father's existing real estate empire to his advantage. He did well in his Manhattan real estate ventures, again thanks to dad. Once he branched out on his own, away from the real estate market and his father, failure followed. He finally decided to become a brand, realizing the American public buys the sizzle and not the steak. Talk like a success and you must be a success, never mind the man behind the curtain.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
Take away the Apprentice and Trump is not running for office.
I find it stunning that none of the CEOs of the top 100 would admit to contributing to Trump's campaign. Usually, you back both candidates to a degree with your pocketbook to keep avenues open regardless of result. But nobody wants to report they are funding Trump.
It's not like the guy can't win. He's about a +180.
Do CEOs usually contribute?Quote:
Originally Posted by redietz
I know that many corporations usually contribute to ALL major candidates... because that's what corporations do. I don't recall that CEOs are known to be individual major contributors to anybody.
Mark Cuban is jealous of Trump because he's worth more, gets more attention, and has a far more attractive wife than he does. Cuban is nothing but a sniveling weasel trying to look important when he's not.
All I care about Newt is his political genius. He's never attacked me so I won't humiliate and mock him and his wife like the constant & righteous punishment I responded to arci with.
Somehow over the last two decades the Republican and Democratic parties turned into gangs like the Crypts and Bloods.
It’s no longer about which party at the time would be best for the country.
This country has been reduced to forcing the people to vote for one candidate only because they can’t picture it being run by the other.
Big business and the biased media made sure we had these choices, the true leaders of this country.
Somehow when I read Rob Singer's posts I feel like I am getting an inner glimpse of the inside of Donald Trumps mind. Both of you are entertaining as hell, probably nice people if you talked to them one on one, but for some reason live in their own separate reality and oftentimes build themselves up by demeaning others. Donald Trump had a legitimate chance to win this thing had he been able to cage the inner Donald Trump. Granted we don't have much of a choice thus year but we need someone in the white house who has the proper temperament so that whenever one of these "very clear thoughts" overcome him or her, has the ability to keep it to themselves if it involves putting down of making fun of others.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
As far as Trump's business judgement goes I can see him trying to talk Congress into putting the entire country in BK to avoid going further into debt or if he gets mad at the Chinese as they hold most of our debt. The only way a Trump presidency could possibly work is as a dictatorship and I for one do not want a dictator for president. He has offended far too many people on both sides of the aisle. There is nobody left that he has not offended to help him get stuff done.
If you pay attention to party gang member posts, they all start out making sensible and reasonable debate. Suddenly, they go into a nose dive and expose their loyalty to the gang throwing any chance of future reasonable debate out the window
The country that invented McDonalds and nuclear weapons is getting about it deserves.
Trumps wife looks like a dude in drag, i.e. a transvestite. Or transtesticle as Andrew Dice Clay would call them.
They can't all be beauties like Barbara Bush.
Now I understand why you and I see things so differently.Quote:
Originally Posted by jbjb
You mean Jimmy Hoffa in a wig?Quote:
Originally Posted by regnis
jbjb, I suggest you look at one or two pics of Trump's wife w/o her clothing. I guess some people take a little more convincing.
Trump's no dictator, and his supposed poor temperament is a brainwashing tactic by Hillary. The craziest people in America somehow have talked themselves into Hillary knowing how to run a Government without her rampant and habitual greed, dishonesty, or legendary incompetence getting in the way. And even more astonishing---they completely overlook the leadership genius of a man who's one of the most successful, RESPECTED, AND LIKED businessmen in our country's history. Obviously, there's a hell of a lot more to this man than the negatives we hear spun by a Democratic campaign or what some people disagree with him about. All this nonsense about him being racist, a homophone, anti-women, against Muslims etc.....only stupid people could believe that. Just check his comments about the gay nightclub massacre vs. Hillary's. Check out how many female execs he employs vs. male execs. Look at the numbers of blacks & Hispanics he employs. On & on. His entire life looks like he's ready for sainthood compared to Hillary's. And people can't see these things.
Like I said, when Hillary gets elected it won't be much of a surprise. All it'll do is prove how weak a nation we've become, and how moronic and foolish the majority of Americans really are. The country will go further into debt, racism will be even more rampant, the country's infrastructure and it's inner cities will continue to deteriorate, terrorism will be even more of a problem, illegal immigrants will be everywhere and sucking the life out of our hospitals, schools, labor force and social services, and our Veterans will inexplicably continue to suffer.We really do deserve what we're gonna get with this witch of a woman..
What worries me is not who wins the election. What worries me is how much the Federal Reserve raises interest rates.
Trump was right about one thing in the first debate in a very big way. He said we are in a bubble. And when the Fed raises rates the bubble will burst: stocks, housing, jobs -- watch them all wither.
Frankly, who ever gets elected president will inherit another big recession.
That bubble is just waiting to burst, correct. When virtually the only good thing about an economy is a fat stock market and we have a president who completely ignores economics and instead toots his fading horn over a few artificially trumped-up politically-motivated points (such as the manipulated unemployment rate) -- you know trouble is ahead.
Almost for certain we will have an interest rate increase in December. They need to so something as interest rates are way too low. The question is how will the economy and the stock and band market respond when this happens. Regardless of who wins the election there is almost certain to be some volatility ahead.