IBJNews

Financier in botched deal sues Emmis over loan to Smulyan

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrint

The financier that once backed Emmis Communications Corp. CEO Jeff Smulyan’s attempt to take Emmis private is making good on its promise to sue the company and its board of directors for using company money to fund Smulyan’s lawsuit against the financier.

In uncommonly sharp language, attorneys for New York-based Alden Global Capital accused the Emmis board of “a blatantly self-dealing transaction” that allows Smulyan to “pursue a personal litigation vendetta” against Alden. The lawsuit, filed on behalf of all shareholders, accuses the Emmis board of breaching its duties to shareholders and also of violating the Sarbanes-Oxley Act.

Alden’s lawsuit, filed Wednesday in a state court in New York, concerns a loan of up to $200,000 that Emmis’ board approved in December to help Smulyan pay legal expenses in a separate lawsuit pending against Alden in federal court in Indianapolis.

That lawsuit, filed in September by a Smulyan-controlled entity called JS Acquisition LLC, accuses Alden of breach of contract for backing out of its agreement to finance JS Acquisition’s $90 million buyout of all Emmis’ publicly traded shares. Alden cited a “precipitous” drop in the value of radio assets.

Kate Snedeker, a spokeswoman for Indianapolis-based Emmis, wrote Friday in an e-mail that the company believes Alden’s lawsuit is without merit. In response to Alden’s Feb. 3 letter, she wrote, “We’re confident with the board’s position on the issue, and we have equal confidence in the outcome.”

Alden threatened to sue Emmis over the $200,000 loan in a Feb. 3 letter unless the Emmis board rescinded the loan and immediately took steps to recover any funds already paid out and spent. Alden demanded a response by Feb. 11 or else said it would sue.

Alden, in its lawsuit, says it reiterated its demands in another letter on Feb. 9. In response to both letters, Emmis General Counsel Scott Enright replied by saying the matters would be considered by the Emmis board at its next scheduled meeting.

Now Alden is asking a judge to satisfy its demands, including issuing injunctions to prevent the Emmis board from transferring any funds to Smulyan and to prevent Smulyan’s JS Acquisition from spending any of the money.

“It is almost certainly because Smulyan could not obtain traditional funding for this extraordinarily risky venture that he elected to raid the coffers of Emmis—a company that is currently so cash-strapped that it has publicly disclosed that it may not be able to meet its upcoming financial covenants and debt obligations,” wrote Alden attorneys Judith Archer and Michael Swartzendruber in the lawsuit.

They added, “The directors’ decision to illegally funnel money to Emmis’s CEO in the midst of a liquidity crisis represents the sine qua non of irresponsibility and disloyalty.”

Emmis' liquidity crisis stems from looming debt obligations. On Jan. 11, the company disclosed in a securities filing that it has enough cash to get through the end of February, but made no promises for after that. It also disclosed that on Sept. 1, Emmis' debt obligations will be more restrictive, further pinching company finances.

If Emmis fails to meet those more restrictive terms, it would default on its $345 million in senior bank debt, causing it to come due more rapidly.

Emmis has said it is pursuing sales of radio stations in New York and Chicago to raise cash to meet the stricter debt terms.

Founded by Smulyan in 1981, Emmis owns more than 20 radio stations in the United States and publishes regional magazines in several cities, including Indianapolis Monthly.

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. If a television station wants to improve viewership, get rid of the local blackout. I was born by the brickyard, and have attended 15 or more races. I have children now, I won't attend unless circumstances are perfect. As those with growing families know, they never are. I'm always impressed that upwards of 250,000 people attend the 500. However, as a growing, or, more apt, sprawling city, Indianapolis and its immediate suburbs count almost 2.2 million. Show the race live, let the venue get a kick-back on revenues, and open-wheel racing might have a fighting chance to be relevant again. Just in time for those tax-payer lights to make sense.

  2. John Moore, I too have had the same issue recently. A property next to my house was on the Land Bank and I was interested in purchasing. When I tried to contact Reggie, I got back emails that had nothing to do with what I asked about. Actually my latest response from him was on this past Friday. I had asked about how to buy the property and if it was still available. His response to me was to contact the mayor's office to get the schedule of his appearances. (???) Hopefully the city is able to do something to fix what this guy has done, it would be nice if they would take the properties back and sell them properly so land owners like me and you mother would have a fair chance.

  3. I too work in the industry, with over 25 years of experience and your political spin has probably nothing to do with any rebranding. "Let's dress it up" would have nothing to do with the government "telling us how and what to eat." Give it a political rest. And being a producer for a radio show doesn't mean you've been involved in advertising and branding for 30 years.

  4. Ms. Morris did not understand the ways of the business world, otherwise, like the IMS, she could have petitioned the State Legislature for a handout of State Funds for her charity work. Ms. Morris should consider becoming a state lobbyist for Lemonade Stand Operators.

  5. David Copperfield!

ADVERTISEMENT