Russian Billionaire To Bail Out Ratner?
There are mixed reports concerning the details, but it seems like Russia’s richest man, self-made billionaire Mikhail Prokhorov, may be partly funding the Barclays arena, a part of Bruce Ratner’s Atlantic Yards development that just received final state approval. Reuters reports that Prokhorov is considering issuing bonds to raise $700 million for the arena, in…
There are mixed reports concerning the details, but it seems like Russia’s richest man, self-made billionaire Mikhail Prokhorov, may be partly funding the Barclays arena, a part of Bruce Ratner’s Atlantic Yards development that just received final state approval. Reuters reports that Prokhorov is considering issuing bonds to raise $700 million for the arena, in exchange for a share of the New Jersey Nets, which will move there once complete. This report has raised several eyebrows; NBC New York points out that the Nets have been hemorrhaging money for the past few years, and it’s possible that Ratner is using Prokhorov simply to attract other investors. NBC New York writes: “All Prokhorov’s company spokesman would say is that he’s considering an investment, which is probably true and isn’t indicative of all that much.” The New York Times also takes the conservative approach, reporting simply that “Mikhail Prokhorov is the leading contender to buy a majority stake in the team and in the planned arena.” Bruce Ratner bought the New Jersey Nets for $300 million in 2004, and the Barclays Center is currently projected to cost about $800 million, so it is unclear how much of Ratner’s pie $700 million will buy Prokhorov. In other Atlantic Yards news, Develop Don’t Destroy Brooklyn and the Atlantic Yards Report revisit the issue of the project’s timetable, questioning how Ratner could possibly complete the entire development in ten years. Click the links for details.
Russia’s Richest Man Eyes Nets Deal [Reuters]
Russia’s Richest Man to Pave Nets Path to Brooklyn [NBC]
Ratner Said to Be Closer to Selling Majority Stake in Nets [NY Times]
Russian Rescue for Ratner’s Nets Arena? [Field of Schemes]
MTA Agreement Allows 22 Years for Atlantic Yards [DDDB]
ESDC Defends 10-year Timetable [AYR]
Photo from Wikimedia Commons
I think the people who support this kind of development are the ones who should move out to the suburbs, rather than trying to turn Brooklyn into one. House on LI are going for cheap, and the Nassau Coliseum is out there.
Oh, DDDB – so cute in their self-righteousness. Won’t you please buy a house in White Plains and just go away??? PLEASE! Or you and ACORN can unite forces. Something. Anything. Just go away.
Bxgrl – please read my post I never said that ONLY unemployed trustfunders are against it – I said that such people (alal Goldstein) have stolen the agenda, from a more (approriate) nuanced approach.
And no Ratner should not have “planned for this in the first place” – since he didnt plan for anything like this at all – he planned for a Frank Gehery designed development that should have been completed by now.
Further, while Ratner isnt the devil, he is a businessman and given his current investment (considerable) and potential loss (huge) he may not see the benefit of NOT using his acres of abandoned lots for (paid) parking, especially since the frivolous lawsuits and the follow-on credit market crash probably ensures that the land will not be developed for years – this is PRECISELY the time for community groups to voice their concerns – not to vilify the guy, or destroy everything (cause they wont be able to anyway) but to reasonable demand that the project (or whats left of it) retain the spirit of AY as proposed – a PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION based development.
To FSRQ:
While obviously we disagree that THIS arena will be an asset for the Borough, DDDB and many others have been trying for years to get the ESDC and Forest City Ratner to take a realistic look at what the arena and the rest of the project would do to exacerbate the traffic problem. To come up with a mitigation plan.
They have not.
As of yesterday the ESDC, yet again, approved a project with no traffic plan, even while they admit the project would add at least 23,000 new vehicular trips per day.
We’ve explained, as have many others including transportation experts, that the subway hub is at capacity already. ESDC has said that is not a problem.
So we have tried for years to do exactly as you suggest. As have other groups and coalitions.
It has fallen on deaf ears.
We do not have an all or nothing plan. we want to see the rail yards developed in a rational way. This current plan is irrational and not feasible and the best way to ensure that the rail yards remain undeveloped for decades.
As for who we represent:
We have over 4,500 individual donors. By way of comparison. Mayoral candidate Bill Thompson was bragging about how he has 2,000 donors in a citywide race.
So who do we represent? We represent those who support our efforts, those who oppose AY. And those numbers are far bigger than those who support Forest City.
Insomuch as you say we represent personal agendas, that is just false and easily refuted.
Also, you should note that the leading political opponent just handily trounced her rival, who happens to be the chair of the AY CBA. 12 of the 15 candidates in the 33rd and 39th did not support AY. And the two winners of the 33rd and 39th primary do not support AY. And the three assembly members in and around the site, do not support AY. and the three senators in and around the site do not support AY. and the three community boards in and around the site do not support AY.
Surely those are not all personal agendas. Surely all of those representatives want what is best for the Borough.
Finally, the AY plan calls for 3,800 parking spots and long term, interim surface parking. That is precisely what DDDB is trying to stop from happening.
Perhaps you can suggest your strategy for fixing those traffic and parking problems.
Ours is to stop the degraded AY project from happening and move forward through a public process toward a UNITY Plan-like development over the rail yards. That’s our long term, very out in the open agenda.
Comrade Mikhail needs to buy it and move it to Little Odessa.
Now it’s DDDB’s fault that all of those things Ratner should have planned for in the first place will not happen? Wow- that’s the most pretzel like argument I’ve heard in a long time. DDDB was protesting that very lack of good planning in the first place.
And you totally wrong that only “unemployed trust funders” are against it. All you ever had to do was go to a community meeting to realize it.
I tried to find candidate who seemed least likely to be anti-arena (and also anti parking permits) to vote for. Wasn’t sure who that was if any of them. THey all sounded the same.
Rookie it should be our politicians – but basically unemployed trust funders like Goldstein have sucked all the air out of the room because they have endless time to muckrake – so now the sheep (I mean pols) generally are either against it or try to run from the issue entirely.
@fsrg
Agreed. I would love to be part of a group advocating for those very things, but as you say, who is representing those of us who are pro-arena but anti-blank check?