The Astros finally decide to force the Enron issue

Bout damn time

 

Any ideas on who would buy the naming rights now? I know there's a short list of like 6 names or something like that . . .

 

sounds like they've been trying to work this out for a while...i thought you'd hear something about them getting involved in the bankruptcy soon. good for them...they need a new name before April!

 

reds ballpark has a nice ring to it

 

or the ballpark formerly known as enron field

 

treeman, you posted this in another thread:

and I asked this question in response:

Maybe you didn't see the other thread so I'm repeating myself.

Here's a related article:

SHELL AND SRI NEAR COMPLETION OF TEXACO DOWNSTREAM ACQUISITION

(Issued By Shell Oil Company)


HOUSTON (December 12, 2001)-- Shell Oil Company (Shell) and Saudi Refining, Inc. (SRI) announced today that they have signed definitive agreements to acquire Texaco Inc.’s interests in Equilon Enterprises LLC (Equilon) and Motiva Enterprises LLC (Motiva). Under terms of the transactions, initially announced October 9, 2001, SRI will own 50% of Motiva while Shell will own the other 50% of Motiva and 100% of Equilon. The transactions, which are subject to the approval of governmental authorities, are expected to conclude in January 2002.

Motiva operates primarily in the eastern United States and includes nearly 4,800 Shell-branded gasoline stations, almost 8,200 Texaco-branded stations, four refineries and a network of oil products terminals. In July 1998, Shell’s eastern and Gulf Coast refining and marketing businesses were combined with similar operations owned by Star Enterprise, a joint venture between Texaco and Saudi Refining, Inc., through the formation of Motiva.

Equilon operates primarily in the Western United States, and includes approximately 4,500 Shell-branded gasoline stations and nearly 4,500 Texaco-branded gasoline stations, four refineries, a lubricants business and an extensive pipeline and terminal network. Equilon was formed in January 1998, when Shell’s western and midwestern refining, marketing, trading, transportation and lubricants businesses were combined with similar operations of Texaco.

Shell Oil Company, including its consolidated companies and its share in equity companies, is one of America’s leading oil and natural gas producers, natural gas marketers, gasoline marketers and petrochemical manufacturers. Shell Oil is the leading oil and gas producer in the deepwater Gulf of Mexico and is a recognized pioneer in oil and gas exploration and production technology. Shell Oil Company is an affiliate of the Royal Dutch/Shell Group of Companies.

Saudi Refining, Inc. (SRI) is a subsidiary of Aramco Services Company, headquartered in Houston, Texas. In addition to managing its 32.8 percent joint venture investments, SRI sells approximately 525,000 barrels of crude a day to Motiva, which has a refining capacity of approximately 800,000 barrels per day.

 

Why has Enron been wasting time on this?

It seemed just a matter of time for a name change to occur, so cut the best deal possible and then worry about more important things like running Enron in a profitable and legal manner.



Mango

 

My vote goes to calling it The Ballpark at Union Station.

Screw selling naming rights to corporations. Let 'em rot!

 

<B>Why has Enron been wasting time on this?

It seemed just a matter of time for a name change to occur, so cut the best deal possible and then worry about more important things like running Enron in a profitable and legal manner.
</B>

Because Enron believes they can sell the naming rights and turn a profit on it. That's more money for the board of directors to embezzle!

 

I couldn't imagine anyone spending more than Enron already did...

 

<B>I couldn't imagine anyone spending more than Enron already did...</B>

Well, it's not the $3MM per year that Enron is paying, but the RIGHTS to pay the $3MM per year in the future.

For example, Enron could sell those rights to Texaco for $5MM. Texaco, instead of Enron, would then have to pay $3MM/yr to the Astros, but Enron would have gotten a $5MM profit. Basically, they claim they can resell those rights. Now the Astros are saying that since they have to approve any change in names, the Astros control those rights as well.

For Texaco, its beneficial because if Enron just defaults, the Astros could then say "ok, new price is $4MM per year". If Texaco goes through Enron, they could still get the $3MM per year deal.

 

Major

The Astros are obligated to pay roughly 7 million a year to the Harris County-Houston Sports Authority on a lease. When Enron took the naming rights, the Astros signed an energy management contract with Enron.

Without knowing the exact contract language, none of us on the BBS know if the stadium naming rights are transferrable. I doubt that Enron was given the rights to sell/sublease the naming rights to other companies in the orginal contract because that would leave the Astros in a situation in which Enron could impair the good name of the team.
Playboy Stadium?

Enron does not have the stroke/good name/power to dictate the terms to others in its current state. I expect a new name for the stadium this season and Enron won't be able to sell/sublease naming rights to another business for a profit.



Mango

 

Mango: I agree with you in principle that the Astros should get those naming rights back. I was just talking about Enron's likely thought process. They are holding the rights as an asset right now, and the only real way it can be an asset is if it has value to them.

I'm not saying Enron has exclusive rights, certainly, but I bet that if they aren't in default (and as of now, they are not), they can work with the Astros and a 3rd Party to sell the naming rights if everyone agrees. As such, owning those rights has theoretical value to them.

As long as that's the case, they'll argue that the rights are an asset of theirs in bankruptcy hearings. With a criminal investigation also going on, this may not be resolved in time for the Astros to get a new sponsor. I expect Enron will be off the name by August, but you never know.

 

I hate corporate stadiums!

If I had it my way the Astros would play in Houston Field, Texans could battle at The Bayou Stadium and The Rockets would whoop chumps at the Space City Arena.

Oh well, a guy can dream.

BTW I wonder how long it will be before the players wear corporate sponsor logos on their jerseys and every shot is brought to us by some hot dog company.

 

Major,

Lets go with a scenario that they can resell the naming rights to Shell for 4 million to give them a profit over the roughly 3 million a year they pay the Astros.

After the extra legal fees to beat the Astros lawyers, they net less than 1 million in profit. Yes, a profit looks good to a company in bankruptcy, but the company already has enough issues and negativity going before sparring with the Astros in the court system. Will the bankruptcy court want to spend time and attention on quibbling over the contract when its mission/goal is to expedite the turnaround of Enron?

Also, the next payment is due from Enron this summer and the Astros are making inquires if the Banruptcy Court will allow that payment to be made. If the Astros make an offer to return most and/or all of the August 2001 payment to void the long-term contract, do you think the bankruptcy court will take the money or commit to making the next payment this summer? If the court decides to not make the next payment, then Enron is helpless.

Enron lost control of many things when it went into Bankruptcy.

<A HREF="http://news.findlaw.com/legalnews/lit/enron/">Plenty of legal links on Enron</A>



Mango