Bondholders battle for Trump casinos

Published: Thursday | October 8, 2009



Trump

Bondholders battling Donald Trump for control of Trump Entertainment Resorts' three Atlantic City casinos have raised their offer to US$225 million - well in excess of what the real estate mogul and reality TV star has offered to regain the gambling company he once ran.

Kris Hansen, an attorney for the bondholders, said yesterday morning they have added another US$50 million to their offer, which had been US$175 million.

It could not immediately be determined if Donald Trump plans to increase his US$100-million offer, which is being made with his daughter Ivanka and Dallas-based Beal Bank.

Hansen said the increased offer from the bondholders addresses concerns that some parties had about the bondholders' plan to finance part of the proposed purchase by selling the struggling Trump Marina Hotel Casino.

A proposed sale of that casino to Richard Fields, a former protégé of Donald Trump, fell through earlier this year.

"Nobody seemed to believe the Marina sale would close," Hansen said. "We believe it would, but we're putting in an extra US$50 million so they don't have an argument."

A bankruptcy court judge will consider both offers yesterday morning, but is not expected to give one or the other final approval.

The bondholders stand to lose their US$1.25-billion investment under the purchase plan being pushed by Trump.

Competing offer

The company chose that plan earlier this year, but bondholders successfully got Judge Judith Wizmur to allow them to present a competing offer.

Trump Entertainment filed for bankruptcy reorganisation protection in February, the third time it or its corporate predecessors had done so.

The company had been struggling with crushing debt that became even more painful when the economy soured and competition from slot parlours in Pennsylvania and New York increased, siphoning off some of Atlantic City's best customers who can now gamble closer to home.

- AP

 
 
 
The opinions on this page do not necessarily reflect the views of The Gleaner. The Gleaner reserves the right not to publish comments that may be deemed libelous, derogatory or indecent. To respond to The Gleaner please use the feedback form.