OT (partly) for LLL, then Stew, MB:
But there's still a romance to the muffled thunder of hooves on the turf and the pack of horses rounding the turn into the final stretch....Tracks are begging for fans. Gambling has moved off-site with simulcasting...and other forms of off-track betting.... NYT 8/12/01
Poignant piece about the devotees who continue to trek to the track, to breathe in the smells, the sounds and The Daily Racing Form irrespective of the more virtual, and convenient, way to put your two bucks down.
Thanks for the (media supplied) confirmation of possible cozy relations between Stronach and NYC. Even without the chance that some extrinsic factor was applied to Magna Entertainment's bid structure to yield a $113 million difference over time, the difference between the baseline amounts of $1.1 million per year vs. $2.0 million per year is striking, and it leads to questions as to whether there are not more fundamental issues that separate the "official" analyses of the two bids. Or, it may be that NYRA and TVG came in as high as they could and it wasn't enough. I suspect that this is not the last that we will hear of this. I've been in meetings with Wilbur Ross. No doubt, he has strong credentials to be hired as NYC's financial adviser and is, shall we say, politically very well connected.
TVG's betting and virtual/simulcast horse racing play is at the fringe of America's leisure-time pursuits and therefore, for being leisure-time oriented, squarely in the middle of Henry's vision for a business segment that is the basis for his financial model. It may be that, however deep a recession the precipice of which we are on, the model may hold up relatively well.
You guys know this, but as to the confusion between financial results reported by Yahoo and Quicken, not to mention the reports of the companies themselves, there is good reason for that, and it has less to do with variations in the application of GAAP (generally accepted accounting principles), which certainly exist, than it does as a result of how companies report results to make them transparent (comparable) to the analysts which follow them. Analysts seek benchmarks for the comparative strength and performance of the basic operating model, which invariably means stripping out amortization and depreciation (if you want to go to an ebitda reporting basis) and one-time charges (such as in-process r&d resulting from an acquisition/expenses incurred in connection with a layoff, impairment of assets--the likes of which will be with us for some time). So, the results that usually lead off a Business Wire release for a company's periodic results have little to do with the actual GAAP results, but the analysts and the companies like to focus on the "recurring" numbers.
By the way, as to GMST's conservative accounting in exactly this context, recall the results of Q1 2000 or thereabouts, when $17 million of a litigation settlement with GIC (now part of MOT) was included in operating income and eps. If I recall correctly, management spent quite a bit of time explaining that sleight of hand.
quid
(PS thanks to LLL in spotting that bit of esoterica from times of yore yet modern sporting life in seeking the golden snitch) |
