Solyndra, the bankrupt solar company that received a $535 million loan guarantee from the Obama administration, is set to sell off some of its remaining assets at auction in a little over a week. If you happen to be in the market for a “12-inch Variable Speed Drill with Laser” or a “2 Ton Folding Hydraulic Shop Crane,” you’re in luck. If, on the other hand, you are simply an American taxpayer hoping for some kind of return on the administration’s ill-advised “investment” in Solyndra, prepare to be disappointed.
As I’ve reported previously, perhaps the most controversial aspect of the Solyndra loan scandal is the Department of Energy’s unprecedented decision to restructure the company’s loan agreement in way that granted priority to private investors over taxpayers with respect to the first $75 million recovered from Solyndra liquidation.
Well, Lachlan Markay of the Hertiage Foundation reports that Heritage Global Partners (no relation), the firm overseeing the Solyndra auction, has told him that the money they expect to raise “will not be anywhere near” $75 million. In effect, that means taxpayers will not see a single dime of their money back from this sale. Not to worry, though, because private investors like Argonaut Ventures, the investment arm of the Kaiser Family Foundation operated by Oklahoma billionaire and major Obama fundraiser George Kaiser, ought to do just fine.
Note: Post has been revised.
I think you mean $(535) million return. I would be happy if they had $0 return.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThe Kaiser foundation with ties to the Occupy Wall Street crowd? The Kaiser foundation that hasn't paid income taxes in several years? The Kaiser foundation that has distributed less than $250 million of it's $4 billion in recent years? That one?
Seems the 99% has their bullseye in the wrong place...
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseRelax guys, that's FOB Fremont, California.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThe MSM have done their best to completely bury this scandal. They are completely corrupt.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseIt is interesting, kinda. They're so "in the can" for liberalism I'm surprised that news organizations haven't found a way to automate that level of ineptitude. How hard can it be to program a news aggregator to ignore news?
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseHow many dollars will taxpayers recoup from the $6 to $8 BILLION that the Bush Administration lost IN CASH in Iraq? Money that likely went to opposition forces? Is the media 'completely corrupt' for ignoring this scandal? Or are we just blowing the Solyndra "scandal" way, way out of proportion?
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThis link is a bit more on point than your comment.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseExternal Link
Has anyone seen a complete list of the individual and entity investors and the entity members? Would be interesting.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseYes one of the Solyndra investors, Argonaut Venture Capital, is funded by George Kaiser -- a man who donated money to the Obama campaign.
One of the earliest and largest investors, Madrone Capital Partners, is funded by the family that started Walmart, the Waltons. The Waltons have donated millions of dollars to Republican candidates over the years.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseHow many dollars will taxpayers recoup from the $6 to $8 BILLION that the Bush Administration lost IN CASH in Iraq? Money that likely went to opposition forces? Is the media 'completely corrupt' for ignoring this scandal? Or are we just blowing the Solyndra "scandal" way, way out of proportion?
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseWhy should we, the taxpayers, get any money back? We didn't invest in Solyndra. Our proxies in Washington, DC simply guaranteed Solyndra's loans on our behalf; they didn't buy any ownership in the company.
Here's how it works: External Link
Now, what we should be doing is getting a couple of baseball bats and going after the crooks who signed our names to the loan guarantees. Since they're all in DC, they should be pretty easy to round up.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseObviously if the bondholders whose loans we guaranteed were getting anything back we wouldn't have to make good on their loans.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThe laws regarding federal loan guarantees and co-signing your nephews loans are vastly different. If you want to read the enabling legislation that authorized this loan here is a link
External Link
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThanks. The .PDF is 551 pages long; the table of contents alone is almost twelve pages. Could you direct us to the relevant section that illuminates the significant difference between Uncle Sam guaranteeing Solyndra's loans and a private citizen cosigning a loan? 'Cuz I don't have time to read 551 pages.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseWrong. In the case of Solyndra, even with the Federal Government's backing, no competent banking interest would loan the money without charging rates that Solyndra considered too high. The funds for Solyndra did come from the US Treasury.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThis is funny!
Didn't they screw private creditors during the GM bailout?!
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI really appreciated Stiles in-depth expose of the billions in cash "lost" in Iraq during the Bush years. Did NR care to see if we made our money back in that fiasco?
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseHang in there, we're almost done with the time machine to get you out of 2003.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseYou mean that fiasco supported by both houses of Congress controlled by Democrats? That fiasco that the current Democratic President only now, three years into his reign, has decided to end? That fiasco that every democratic leader was for before they were against? That fiasco that was fully vetted and approved in a bipartisan manner, not signed into being by a bureaucrat exercising power granted to him by a Congress too lazy to do it's own job and much more comfortable delegating it to yet another over priced, extrajurisdictional bureaucracy that lacks any constitutional basis for existance?
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseYeah, that one.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse