IBJNews

Shelbyville racino operator settles with ex-manager Cordish

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The operator of Indiana Grand Casino and Indiana Downs horseracing track in Shelbyville has reached a $3.5 million settlement with the property’s former manager, The Cordish Co.

The settlement simplifies the process of Indianapolis Downs LLC's winning approval of a reorganization plan at an Aug. 22 confirmation hearing.

The track and Cordish were in multiple disputes over a license agreement and the contract where Cordish assisted in constructing, developing and managing the project. Cordish was making an unsecured claim of $17 million and a separate claim for $33 million allegedly representing an expense of the Chapter 11 case that must be paid in full for Indianapolis Downs to emerge from bankruptcy.

Under the settlement filed last week with the bankruptcy court in Delaware, Baltimore-based Cordish will be paid $3.5 million cash not later than Aug. 22. In addition, Cordish will have an approved unsecured claim for $12 million. Cordish waives all other claims.

The racetrack is asking the bankruptcy judge to hold a hearing on July 17 for approval of the settlement.

The Chapter 11 plan was negotiated with second-lien creditors and Fortress Investment Group LLC. The facility will be sold if the price is acceptable to the second-lien creditors. There will be a July 31 auction if there are acceptable bids. Otherwise, the plan will give ownership mostly to second-lien lenders.

The bankruptcy judge has approved the disclosure statement, allowing creditors to vote on the plan.

The casino, formerly known as Indiana Live Casino, began operations in 2008. The permanent facility opened in March 2009, with 2,000 slot machines and electronic table games. Revenue in 2010 was $270 million.

The petition stated that assets are more than $500 million while debt is less than $500 million.
 

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. How can any company that has the cash and other assets be allowed to simply foreclose and not pay the debt? Simon, pay the debt and sell the property yourself. Don't just stiff the bank with the loan and require them to find a buyer.

  2. If you only knew....

  3. The proposal is structured in such a way that a private company (who has competitors in the marketplace) has struck a deal to get "financing" through utility ratepayers via IPL. Competitors to BlueIndy are at disadvantage now. The story isn't "how green can we be" but how creative "financing" through captive ratepayers benefits a company whose proposal should sink or float in the competitive marketplace without customer funding. If it was a great idea there would be financing available. IBJ needs to be doing a story on the utility ratemaking piece of this (which is pretty complicated) but instead it suggests that folks are whining about paying for being green.

  4. The facts contained in your post make your position so much more credible than those based on sheer emotion. Thanks for enlightening us.

  5. Please consider a couple of economic realities: First, retail is more consolidated now than it was when malls like this were built. There used to be many department stores. Now, in essence, there is one--Macy's. Right off, you've eliminated the need for multiple anchor stores in malls. And in-line retailers have consolidated or folded or have stopped building new stores because so much of their business is now online. The Limited, for example, Next, malls are closing all over the country, even some of the former gems are now derelict.Times change. And finally, as the income level of any particular area declines, so do the retail offerings. Sad, but true.

ADVERTISEMENT