🍪 Our Cookies

This website uses cookies, pixel tags, and similar technologies (“Cookies”) for the purpose of enabling site operations and for performance, personalisation, and marketing purposes. We use our own Cookies and some from third parties. Only essential Cookies are used by default. By clicking “Accept All” you consent to the use of non-essential Cookies (i.e., functional, analytics, and marketing Cookies) and the related processing of personal data. You can manage your consent preferences by clicking Manage Preferences. You may withdraw a consent at any time by using the link “Cookie Preferences” in the footer of our website.

Our Privacy Notice is accessible here. To learn more about the use of Cookies on our website, please view our Cookie Notice.

Is Bally’s calling everyone’s bluff?

Share

News and Analysis

Is Bally’s calling everyone’s bluff?

  1. Misha Ross
6 min read

Bally’s and its “corporate fireman” chairman Soo Kim have made a number of moves over the last several months that have left creditors and casual observers alike scratching their heads about its future and longer-term strategy. 

Fitch Rating's downgrade of Bally's Issuer Default Rating to B- from B and the alteration of the rating outlook to "negative" initially raised eyebrows. Add to that the company's high leverage, an uncertain future for its Chicago ventures, a surprising investment in a beleaguered Australian casino followed by another surprising investment in a Bronx school, and those around Bally’s have begun to wonder whether the company may have over played its hand and may soon explore avenues to decrease its high leverage or increase liquidity for all of its promised investments. To make matters worse, its most recent earnings release for the first quarter of 2025 reported a total revenue of $589.2m, a 4.7% decrease YoY. 

Adding to Bally’s potential strain, in December, the company announced the launch of Bally’s Chicago, of which it owns a 75% interest and requires approximately $450m in an investment from Bally’s. The company’s annual report notes that it intends to commence construction on the project in “early 2025”, but the company’s attempted IPO to fund approximately $250m of the project has faced a number of regulatory and litigation snags, which the company continues to contend with.

What are you waiting for?

Try it out
  • We're trusted by the top 10 Investment Banks