“We’re all going to an evidentiary hearing and I’m going to figure out exactly what happened,” the judge, Christopher Lopez, said in an emergency hearing on Thursday afternoon. “No one should feel comfortable with the results of this auction.”
Oh bullshit.
Are there laws in the US or courts just act based on how they feel?
The claim I’m hearing is that the rules of the auction were changed at the last minute; it went from a regular auction to an anonymous “sealed bid” auction, where bids had to be placed the week prior. The sealed bids were put before the judge, and there were higher bids than Onion (a laughable $200K), but the people running the auction choose The Onion as the winning bid, anyway. The higher bids were by conservative groups, to buy InfoWars & keep it running. The Onion was chosen to assume ownership for purposes of humiliation & brand destruction, even though they only bid $200K.
This court case is a reaction to people running an auction based on how they feel, allegedly. Liquidation auction efforts, logically, should pursue the option that pays out the most money.
How about you review my fuckin’ nuts, your honor.
“No one should feel comfortable with the results of this auction.”
What did he mean by that?
The way I read it: The judge sees InfoWars as a beacon of hope and truth, and Onion as an anarchist, absurdist fake news site. To him it is like giving away the Federal Reserve to Friedrich Engels as a gift. It just feels wrong. Endlessly funny.
There are going to be a ton of people getting upset now that their source of fake boner pills is getting disrupted.
If there is anything that could trigger a bloody uprising and revolution, it’s that.
Is this not the capitalist dystopia they wanted? It was an auction, The Onion was the highest bidder, and the discussion should stop there, right?
“The Onion was the highest bidder[…]”
Literally the point of the suit is that The Onion was not the highest bidder. From the article:
The exact bid amount offered by the Onion for InfoWars remains unknown, but it has been reported it was lower than First United American’s bid of $3.5m.
The victims of Jones decided it was better to get less money and not allow the brand to go to one of his allies to continue the usual operations. They are saying that even though they effectively own the brand, that they don’t have the right to choose who it’s sold to.
There is only one way this should go, but…
But you see, the judge agrees politically with the former content of Info Wars. You should learn to be more sensitive of the feelings of egoist judges! Their job is soooo hard being he backbone of American democracy.
The Onions winning bid was lower than the other bid.
Not after 8 families opted to take a smaller cut of the sale.
The other bid wouldn’t be an arm’s-length transaction because that entity does business with Alex Jones
So what?
Auctions are contracts, most of them are beholden to the highest bidder. I am guessing thr lawyers are either being paid to make media waves, or they didn’t read the terms of the auction.
The auction house specified that they will not necessarily accept only the highest bid
So that’s why the judge is taking a closer look at it.
The trustee and auction house are allowed to accept lower bids. Especially ones that make the creditors more whole, which this one does. So no that’s not why
Ok. Well, feel free to tell everyone why since you seem to know so much.
Jones is raising a stink because he feels like the bidding process was cut short and the rules were changed once his bid was the clear winner. He’s a moron and he’s wrong and he’s also not allowed to bid, so his bid by proxy will hopefully be caught and punished
Im glad you were there. But you should have told the New York Times, the AP, and the Guardian instead of us.
Sellers have a right to accept lower bids, or to accept non-monetary “value” and it happens literally every day in real estate.
What I don’t know is whether the nature of the auction actually changes things.
Guardian’s slow on the news. This was known yesterday.
There were only two bidders, the Onion and a backup bidder. The judge is looking into how the bidding process was run, because the Onion won with a lower bid than the back up bidder.
The Onion’s offer was seen as a better deal because some of the related Sandy Hook families agreed to forgo a portion of the sale proceeds to help pay off Jones’s other creditors.
Both article explains that. They used a “credit” given by the Sandy Hooks survivors so that their money from this sale would go to Alex’s other debts first. So it was less money but allocated more beneficially for jones.
That is interesting.
I’m comfortable with The Onion owning infowars.
The quality and integrity of the journalism will only improve.
The dishonorable judge Griftopher Lopez
He seems to be pretty uncomfortable with the results of this auction himself.
