IBJNews

State auctioning 'lost' Indianapolis Indians stock

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Want a piece of the Indianapolis Indians? It will cost you, to the tune of at least $25,000.

Shares of the minor-league baseball team are difficult to come by—only 755 are outstanding, with nearly 40 percent owned by team Chairman Max Schumacher.  

And until late last year, the team's board of directors had been snapping up the stock and retiring it in a buy-back offer to give stockholders a larger piece of ownership.

Now, eight shares have become available through an unconventional outlet—the Indiana Attorney General’s Unclaimed Property Division.

Indians management turned the shares over to the state to sell after spending years trying to locate the rightful owners. According to state law, property is considered unclaimed when the owner of an asset cannot be found.

“That’s what became difficult for us,” said Bruce Schumacher, the team’s director of special projects. “There was just no way to find them, and we had tried.”

The state is selling the shares at a minimum price of $25,000 each, and sealed bids must be received by 1:30 p.m. on May 31. The Unclaimed Property Division will review offers on June 2 and notify successful bidders within the following two days. Payment is due by end of day June 9.

Owners of any shares sold by the state who ultimately might be located will receive the amount for which the shares sell. In the meantime, the money will be held in the state’s unclaimed property fund.  

“We don’t hold securities,” said Molly Butters, spokeswoman for the Attorney General’s office. “We liquidate them and hold it in the name of the claimant.”

Indians shares sell so infrequently that it’s difficult to put a proper value on them, said Robert Briles, a vice president at the Indianapolis office of Chicago-based David A. Noyes & Co. The investment firm has brokered the stock.

Only one share has changed hands in the past six months, and that sale occurred in December, for exactly $25,000.

“In that sense,” Briles said, “the state is proper in willing to sell the shares for what they last traded at.”

The $25,000 price, however, is higher than what the team had been willing to give.

The Indians had been offering $21,328 per share, using a formula based on annual earnings to value the team. That formula was supplied by National City Bank. The shares bought back by the team are retired, giving the remaining stockholders a bigger piece of the ownership pie.

But a swooning stock market and declines in ticket sales, concession revenue, suite rental and advertising income prompted the team to indefinitely discontinue its traditional buy-back offer on Dec. 31.

Indians profits declined from $1.23 million in 2008 to $459,603 last year. Despite the drop, the team’s board voted unanimously to give a $250 dividend for each of the outstanding shares. That’s down from $350 last year.

The team began selling shares to the public in 1956, when 6,672 people paid $10 per share and bought 24,488 shares of stock in the city's struggling minor-league baseball team. The move was designed to take the money-losing team off the hands of its owner, the Cleveland Indians, and keep it in Indianapolis.

The Indians, now the Class AAA affiliate for the Pittsburgh Pirates, are valued at about $20 million by Baseball America magazine.

The listed owners of the unclaimed shares can be found here.
 

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. Of what value is selling alcoholic beverages to State Fair patrons when there are many families with children attending. Is this the message we want to give children attending and participating in the Fair, another venue with alooholic consumption onsite. Is this to promote beer and wine production in the state which are great for the breweries and wineries, but where does this end up 10-15 years from now, lots more drinkers for the alcoholic contents. If these drinks are so important, why not remove the alcohol content and the flavor and drink itself similar to soft drinks would be the novelty, not the alcoholic content and its affects on the drinker. There is no social or material benefit from drinking alcoholic beverages, mostly people want to get slightly or highly drunk.

  2. I did;nt know anyone in Indiana could count- WHY did they NOT SAY just HOW this would be enforced? Because it WON;T! NOW- with that said- BIG BROTHER is ALIVE in this Article-why take any comment if it won't appease YOU PEOPLE- that's NOT American- with EVERYTHING you indicated is NOT said-I can see WHY it say's o Comments- YOU are COMMIES- BIG BROTHER and most likely- voted for Obama!

  3. In Europe there are schools for hairdressing but you don't get a license afterwards but you are required to assist in turkey and Italy its 7 years in japan it's 10 years England 2 so these people who assist know how to do hair their not just anybody and if your an owner and you hire someone with no experience then ur an idiot I've known stylist from different countries with no license but they are professional clean and safe they have no license but they have experience a license doesn't mean anything look at all the bad hairdressers in the world that have fried peoples hair okay but they have a license doesn't make them a professional at their job I think they should get rid of it because stateboard robs stylist and owners and they fine you for the dumbest f***ing things oh ur license isn't displayed 100$ oh ur wearing open toe shoes fine, oh there's ONE HAIR IN UR BRUSH that's a fine it's like really? So I think they need to go or ease up on their regulations because their too strict

  4. Exciting times in Carmel.

  5. Twenty years ago when we moved to Indy I was a stay at home mom and knew not very many people.WIBC was my family and friends for the most part. It was informative, civil, and humerous with Dave the KING. Terri, Jeff, Stever, Big Joe, Matt, Pat and Crumie. I loved them all, and they seemed to love each other. I didn't mind Greg Garrison, but I was not a Rush fan. NOW I can't stand Chicks and all their giggly opinions. Tony Katz is to abrasive that early in the morning(or really any time). I will tune in on Saturday morning for the usual fun and priceless information from Pat and Crumie, mornings it will be 90.1

ADVERTISEMENT