Cablevision Chairman To Use Cash, Stock To Fund Voom

Funding in place or funding not in place?

Does the lack of a Press Release about Funding being in place negates the probability that funding could be in place? No.

Does a Press Release needs to be made public at this point to ensure that funding is in place? No.

The lack of public information about Funding does not guaranteed or preclude the probabilities that it may or it may not be in placed?

We just do not know yet as there are still negotiations being done and yet we can't certainly say with 100% certainty (other than speculating) what is really going on. However, the fact that they are still talking and haven't pulled the plug and negotiated time until 3/31/05 does say that there is mutual agreement between the two entities to work something out. Whether it will happen, it is anybody's guess right now.
 
GadgetRick said:
Before I address other statments in your post I wanted to address this. You HAVE been reading the same things the rest of us have been haven't you? In fact, in one of those, "internal memos," they even made mention of working on funding. So actually, yes, they have said it more than one and have insinuated this was the case more than once.

No. No. No. No. No. No. No. I have seen the internal memos. They have NEVER mentioned working on funding... Keep making things up Rick...

GadgetRick said:
The letter of intent was signed and, if I remember correctly, it said something about a deal needing to be in place by the end of February. They then extended that date. None of us knows exactly why but it has been hinted at (yes, it has been) that it has everything to do with funding.

Keep making things up Rick... Show me ONE --- JUST ONE statement by the Dolans or CVC saying it had anything to do with funding. I've furnished a memo signed by Chuck and Tom saying funding is in place... Show me some EVIDENCE to back up your claim.

GadgetRick said:
They have NEVER hinted at logistics being the holdup. In many other sales/transfers of other companies they have been happy to tell the public this is what's holding things up.

The Dolans have said privately this has everything to do with lawyering and legalistic details. And in the case of corporate legal disputes, seldom do they disclose any details while negotiations are ongoing.

GadgetRick said:
You have provided very little in the way of facts. It is my opinion (never claimed it is a fact) that Voom does NOT have funding in place as of this minute. I have based that opinion on the FACT the deal has NOT been completed and the FACT that they have hinted at not having funding in place.

I may have offered LITTLE, because there is little to offer. You have not offered ANYTHING that is a fact... In fact, you have misstated the truth. You have said now about a hundred times about the FACT that they have hinted the funding is not in place...

Go on Rick, let's see it... I call you out here and now... If it is a fact, show your source... Back it up with a quote... Let's see it!

Otherwise, you just making up things doesn't make something a fact. You speculating about things you know little about doesn't make it a fact.
 
BTW... Unless you come back with evidence or a direct quote of some sort, I am done with this argument.
 
niceprophet said:
You have no experience dealing with the FCC, the SEC, mergers, aquisitions, etc.
I have some experience with the first of that list ... but that is why I work with lawyers that have PLENTY of experience when dealing with the more important issues. I'm sure Cablevision can buy all the experience they need to get it done ...

JL
 
niceprophet said:
BTW... Unless you come back with evidence or a direct quote of some sort, I am done with this argument.

Just be done with gadgetrick...the ignore is a great feature but it should work both ways so they can't see your post either.
 
Hmm...

Keep making things up Rick... Show me ONE --- JUST ONE statement by the Dolans or CVC saying it had anything to do with funding. I've furnished a memo signed by Chuck and Tom saying funding is in place... Show me some EVIDENCE to back up your claim.
Hmm, I have said, and I'll say it again, everything they've said has indicated it has to do with funding. Read this SEC filing:
On March 8, 2005, Charles F. Dolan and Thomas C. Dolan entered
into an agreement with the Issuer pursuant to which Charles F.
Dolan will fund costs of the Issuer's Rainbow DBS business
above those that would have been incurred under a shutdown
budget (the "DBS Agreement"). Pursuant to the DBS Agreement,
Charles F. Dolan will deposit with the Issuer cash and/or
shares of Class A Common Stock or Class B Common Stock to fund
such costs. The Issuer shall make withdrawals from the cash
and/or shares so deposited to fund the additional costs. These
withdrawals shall be made first from cash amounts, then from
any shares of Class A Common Stock and then from any shares of
Class B Common Stock that may have been deposited. The DBS
Agreement will terminate on March 31, 2005 or may be
terminated by Charles F. Dolan at any earlier time. Upon the
termination of the DBS Agreement, all cash, Class A Common
Shares and Class B Common Shares deposited by Charles F. Dolan
but not used to fund costs of the Rainbow DBS business shall
be returned to Charles F. Dolan."

Cablevision and Charles F. Dolan ("Dolan") intend to
work together in an open and cooperative manner to
finalize the separation of Rainbow DBS from
Cablevision. Cablevision has begun the shutdown of
the business of Rainbow DBS. No new shutdown actions
will be undertaken. The business will continue to be
operated in accordance with the budget of Required
Costs for March agreed to by Cablevision and Dolan
(the "Baseline Plan"), subject to modification as
provided below. Cablevision and Dolan agree not to
take any actions, directly or indirectly, that are
inconsistent with the Baseline Plan, except that
Dolan may cause actions inconsistent with the
Baseline Plan to be taken as provided below under
"Expenditures" and "Commitments and Changes".

Expenditures: The Rainbow DBS business shall continue to make the
expenditures that would have been incurred under the
Baseline Plan. Expenditures above such amounts
("Additional Expenditures") shall be made only if
authorized by the Chief Financial Officer of
Cablevision or his designee (the "CFO"), which
authorization shall be provided if the CFO is
satisfied that cash or Funding Shares are on deposit
with Cablevision (excluding Segregated Shares)
Now, does it say, "We don't have the funding yet,"? No it doesn't. However, and let's try and use our heads here, if he HAD the funding when this SEC filing (yes, it's an SEC filing meaning it's about as official as it can get for a public company), then why is he throwing in $10m of his money to float them until the end of the month? If he has funding or had planned (when this was filed) to fund it out of his own pocket, why hasn't he done so? Why has there been NO press release indicating as such???

Please, show ME some evidence (other than some stupid memo) showing me it is just logistics at this point and I'll HAPPILY admit my OPINION was incorrect.

The Dolans have said privately this has everything to do with lawyering and legalistic details. And in the case of corporate legal disputes, seldom do they disclose any details while negotiations are ongoing
:::"YAWN::: Again, more of your, "I KNOW someone," garbage. Where's the proof they have said this PRIVATELY. I'll say it again since you don't seem to understand this, PRIVATE conversations mean nothing to people like me who are, by definition, the public. Everything you say may just be true. However, and I'll say it AGAIN, I'm basing my OPINION on what's available to the PUBLIC, not to someone on the, "inside".

I may have offered LITTLE, because there is little to offer. You have not offered ANYTHING that is a fact... In fact, you have misstated the truth. You have said now about a hundred times about the FACT that they have hinted the funding is not in place...
Please reread YOUR OWN STATEMENT here. You have offered LITTLE because you have LITTLE to offer. I have never misstated the truth. Show me where I have. You are on your soapbox screaming how much you know because you have information none of us have. I have interrpreted--either correctly or incorrectly--what is available to me. It is my belief--and the belief of most people in the industry I might add--that funding is an issue for them. It makes total sense this is a major issue knowing the state of the industry and how badly Voom has failed so far.

Now, had Voom been able to muster more than the handful of subs they have so far I'd say people wouldn't mind pumping some BADLY needed cash into the company. Heck, CVC probably wouldn't be trying to get rid of them.

Otherwise, you just making up things doesn't make something a fact. You speculating about things you know little about doesn't make it a fact.
I'm guessing you CAN actually read since you've been bantering with me for so long so how about going back and reading (actually READING) some of my posts. I am not stating anything as fact. You are the one claiming to know so much as far as the facts go. I am stating my OPINION and not claiming it's a fact. I have claimed there have been no public statements saying they have funding in place as a fact--because it is. I have claimed they have also NOT said the logistics are the only problem as a fact--because it is. Please, if you know so much then show me where they're saying the only problem is logistics.

Go on Rick, let's see it... I call you out here and now... If it is a fact, show your source... Back it up with a quote... Le
Funny, the person who is claiming to know so much because you know so many people inside is asking ME to back up stuff with a quote and to show my sources. How about you doing this? Oh, you don't actually know anything more than what we do? Or wait, you're talking to a CSR or an adminstrator there? Again, I find it VERY hard to believe anyone with any power is telling you anything. Prove me wrong.

And, until YOU step up and show us your cards, I'm done with you.

The Rickster
 
GadgetRick said:
Hmm, I have said, and I'll say it again, everything they've said has indicated it has to do with funding. Read this SEC filing:

Now, does it say, "We don't have the funding yet,"? No it doesn't. However, and let's try and use our heads here, if he HAD the funding when this SEC filing (yes, it's an SEC filing meaning it's about as official as it can get for a public company), then why is he throwing in $10m of his money to float them until the end of the month? If he has funding or had planned (when this was filed) to fund it out of his own pocket, why hasn't he done so? Why has there been NO press release indicating as such???

Please, show ME some evidence (other than some stupid memo) showing me it is just logistics at this point and I'll HAPPILY admit my OPINION was incorrect.


:::"YAWN::: Again, more of your, "I KNOW someone," garbage. Where's the proof they have said this PRIVATELY. I'll say it again since you don't seem to understand this, PRIVATE conversations mean nothing to people like me who are, by definition, the public. Everything you say may just be true. However, and I'll say it AGAIN, I'm basing my OPINION on what's available to the PUBLIC, not to someone on the, "inside".


Please reread YOUR OWN STATEMENT here. You have offered LITTLE because you have LITTLE to offer. I have never misstated the truth. Show me where I have. You are on your soapbox screaming how much you know because you have information none of us have. I have interrpreted--either correctly or incorrectly--what is available to me. It is my belief--and the belief of most people in the industry I might add--that funding is an issue for them. It makes total sense this is a major issue knowing the state of the industry and how badly Voom has failed so far.

Now, had Voom been able to muster more than the handful of subs they have so far I'd say people wouldn't mind pumping some BADLY needed cash into the company. Heck, CVC probably wouldn't be trying to get rid of them.


I'm guessing you CAN actually read since you've been bantering with me for so long so how about going back and reading (actually READING) some of my posts. I am not stating anything as fact. You are the one claiming to know so much as far as the facts go. I am stating my OPINION and not claiming it's a fact. I have claimed there have been no public statements saying they have funding in place as a fact--because it is. I have claimed they have also NOT said the logistics are the only problem as a fact--because it is. Please, if you know so much then show me where they're saying the only problem is logistics.


Funny, the person who is claiming to know so much because you know so many people inside is asking ME to back up stuff with a quote and to show my sources. How about you doing this? Oh, you don't actually know anything more than what we do? Or wait, you're talking to a CSR or an adminstrator there? Again, I find it VERY hard to believe anyone with any power is telling you anything. Prove me wrong.

And, until YOU step up and show us your cards, I'm done with you.

The Rickster


Isn't this just childish? I'm sorry but let me give you a thought.

Let's say that niceprophet works for bin-laden and you rick work for some newspaper. Now niceprophet says that he has info that will blow everyone away but he can not yet reveal his info until somethings have been settled and you rick keep acting like niceprophet is insane and don't know sh*t. So instead of waiting niceprophet indeed reveals his hand to you and in return gets his head blown off from bin-laden.

What are you going to do rick? Are you going to go to his funeral and apologize and probably walk away laughing because niceprophet got his had blown off giving you the info that you wanted? Think about it. It's not that much different in the corporate world.

I know that this is a little over the top but in all reality there really isn't all that much difference. Past shows us that both Sean & Scott has had info handed to them and they have hinted to us what this info is without actually telling us whether we're right or wrong. This info has also come to pass as well. Sean & Scott do not work for VOOM or Cablevision or Rainbow Media or Rainbow DBS but yet we believe them and not someone who claims to work for Cablevision and works for Mr. Dolan in one fashion or another. This is what I call BS. I don't recall Sean or Scott confronting him the way you have been bickering with him over the funding for VOOM HD, LLC, so they must know something right? Also, let him have the freedom to gather the info that he can show us and he will do it in due time. We just have to wait and watch and I for one know how nervous we all are considering my install is scheduled for the morning of March 31st. Let's just all wait and see. I remember someone saying that because we don't have any info all we can do is speculate, and someone else saying that all we do is speculate and that we should just stop.
We'll I agree that we should just stop speculating. I mean we are currently receiving from rainbow1 right? You guys are enjoying the service no matter what package you have right? Most of you guys have an HDTV set whether it's big or small at least you guys have one. I'm on a 27" SD tv. But with all of this you guys are here on the computer speculating and complaining about whether or not VOOM will continue after March 31st.

Here is my advice TO ALL of U. If you are worried that VOOM will cease transmission on Midnight April 1st and close up shop then I suggest that you call DirecTV or Dish Network or cable tomorrow morning and arrange an installer to be at your house on the morning of April 1st so that you don't loose any programming since we all know how important it is to keep your tv happy.

As for me, If VOOM should decide to shut down, and my installer shows up and gets me hooked up before they cease then so be it. I'll just watch UPN & The WB for the next month or so and see what's going on with Dish & DirecTV and then make a decision. The reason I said dish or direct is because I absolutely can't stand cable. I really don't care where it's at. It's over-priced for what they offer and they're way behind in technology.

I can live without tv, and I've been doing it for the past 5.5 months now. If I can survive then so can you. Just a thought, if you need the HD content so bad then maybe you can go pick up an HD DVD Player and go buy some HD DVDs. Awww, second thought I wonder if the dvd players are out yet? I know that warner bros. has already started releasing the dvds. Oh well?

GOOD Luck in all your future indevers,
 
danielle_s said:
...Let's say that niceprophet works for bin-laden and you rick work for some newspaper. Now niceprophet says that he has info that will blow everyone away but he can not yet reveal his info until somethings have been settled and you rick keep acting like niceprophet is insane and don't know sh*t. So instead of waiting niceprophet indeed reveals his hand to you and in return gets his head blown off from bin-laden.

What are you going to do rick? Are you going to go to his funeral and apologize and probably walk away laughing because niceprophet got his had blown off giving you the info that you wanted? ...
As far as I'm concerned, if niceprophet works for BinLaden, he deserves to have his head blown off, and I WILL walk away laughing. :D

OK, back to topic.
 
for once i agree with danielle, all this speculation is just that speculation. it doesn't matter what you think or say, what is coming down the pike with voom is going to happen, if you like it or not. it is going to be a business decision, plain and simple.

it doesn't matter what scott, vicki, lurker, vurbano, rick, me and a thousand others think or do, what will happen will happen.

jmho dragon
 
danielle_s said:
Let's say that niceprophet works for bin-laden and you rick work for some newspaper. Now niceprophet says that he has info that will blow everyone away but he can not yet reveal his info until somethings have been settled and you rick keep acting like niceprophet is insane and don't know sh*t. So instead of waiting niceprophet indeed reveals his hand to you and in return gets his head blown off from bin-laden.
Does niceprophet work for Voom or is this entirely hypothetical?

JL
 
Ok... The argument with Rick is over... The idea that he floated that SEC filing as proof of funding or lack of funding just proves to me he has no idea of what is going on and never will.

That filing was basically a security deposit from Chuck of up to $10M to pay for the costs of operating Voom over and beyond what the costs would have been to CVC had it shut Voom down. The entire purpose of that deposit - and the board's extension was to allow Chuck and Tom the ***TIME*** to work out the details for the purchase of Voom.

Now in theory, could those "details" be the funding of Voom? Yes. But more likely, as I've pointed out ad nauseum, both Dolans have EXPRESSLY stated the funding is in place, and it is the "3 L's:" logistics, liabilities and the legalities that have caused the delays. Could the Dolans be lying? Yes.

But think of this: A huge part of Voom's future depends on whether they can continue operating on Rainbow 1, or moreover whether they can take over the FCC licenses that Cablevision owns the rights to.

It is far more likely that the deal is being delayed due to all these issues being sorted out than because of a funding issue. Also, I have it from a good source that the board on March 3 would not have extended the deadline AT ALL unless the Dolan's demonstrated that the funding was in place.

Rick, if you choose to not believe me, fine. But it's your own ignorance at stake, not mine. I'm just trying to provide information on this forum - using insight and information that I *KNOW* you don't have at your disposal. I try to do this because most of the people coming to this forum do so for one reason: to try to get at the truth as to what has happened and what will happen with Voom.

I don't have all the answers, but I pass along appropriate information as I get it.
 
niceprophet said:
But think of this: A huge part of Voom's future depends on whether they can continue operating on Rainbow 1, or moreover whether they can take over the FCC licenses that Cablevision owns the rights to.

So then, how is this affected then, since Charlie Ergen has said he plans on the sale going thru, and he has "plans" for Rainbow-1 and the transponder licenses there, the only other licenses Cablevision owns are those other slots they have birds on order for and the MVDDS licenses in certain areas of the U.S.
 
Bingo... That is why a letter of intent was signed more than a month ago, but alas here we are on March 20 without a deal.
 
Bingo... That is one very plausible reason why a letter of intent was signed more than a month ago, but alas here we are on March 20 without a deal.
 
niceprophet said:
Bingo... That is one very plausible reason why a letter of intent was signed more than a month ago, but alas here we are on March 20 without a deal.

So that story was true then about Dolan flying to go see Ergan to try and get the bird back, I thought the agreement was that Dolan could not interfere in that sale?
 
bruce said:
So that story was true then about Dolan flying to go see Ergan to try and get the bird back, I thought the agreement was that Dolan could not interfere in that sale?
If amc6 is big enough to hold all of the channels voom had and now has easily then it's possible that Charles went to echostar to try and create a lease agreement instead of trying to get the bird back. I mean the FCC decision is finale correct? And since there's a good chance that FCC will approve the sale, which is what we're speculation, Dolan has to know this as well. If he's friends with Ergen then he knows Ergen is not just going to give him the bird back unless Dolan is willing to pay an arm & leg for it. That doesn't make sense in my opinion and I'm sure your willing to agree with me. I see this more as a lease agreement than a buy back.

just my $0.02,

P.S. Dolan interfering, I think he did that before he agreed not to interfere.
 
niceprophet said:
justalurker said:
Does niceprophet work for Voom or is this entirely hypothetical?
Unfortunately I cannot confirm nor deny that.
Then giving extra credence based on your 'sources' seems to be out of line. It doesn't seem like you've quoted anything 'internal' that wasn't already in the groups. (Not saying that's a bad thing.)
danielle_s said:
If amc6 is big enough to hold all of the channels voom had and now has easily then it's possible that Charles went to echostar to try and create a lease agreement instead of trying to get the bird back.
AMC-6 is big enough to double the channels Voom has (and eventually tripple - even before MPEG-4). If C Dolan has the funding and plans to move to AMC-6 the lease agreement to stay on Rainbow1 would not be a factor unless he plans on stretching out the transfer of customers over more than two or three months. The transfer to Echostar won't happen for the next couple of months anyways. Time is of the essence - get it done!

JL
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 0, Members: 0, Guests: 0)

Who Read This Thread (Total Members: 1)

Latest posts