Fresh off a blockbuster deal to acquire Alpha Media, Jeff Warshaw reveals he believed he was in line to become the next CEO of Audacy. Instead, the Connoisseur Media CEO is now suing Soros Fund Management, alleging they cut him out of the deal he helped orchestrate.
A lawsuit filed in Connecticut Superior Court paints a picture of secret meetings, “Defcon” code words, and whispered assurances – all culminating in what Warshaw describes as a calculated betrayal after more than a year of unpaid advisory work for the global investment firm and executive Michael Del Nin.
At the core of Warshaw’s allegations is a verbal agreement he says was made in fall 2023: in exchange for bringing the Audacy deal to SFM and helping secure control of the company’s distressed debt, Warshaw would either be named CEO or receive 5% of SFM’s profits from the transaction. But once Audacy emerged from bankruptcy in late 2024, Warshaw says he was ghosted – and ultimately told the agreement never existed.
According to the complaint, the relationship began in late 2022 when a media banker introduced Warshaw to Del Nin, who was exploring SFM’s expansion into radio. Warshaw initially helped evaluate a deal for Cox Radio, during which he says Del Nin promised he’d lead the company post-acquisition. When that fell through, Warshaw shifted focus to Audacy, uncovering that hedge fund HG Vora had quietly amassed a majority stake in the company’s distressed debt.
Before disclosing the full details, Warshaw claims he sought assurances. Del Nin allegedly agreed: SFM would either put Warshaw at the helm of Audacy or pay him a 5% cut of the profits. Based on that, Warshaw connected Del Nin to HG Vora and spent months advising on deal structure, FCC compliance, and operational strategy—largely from his office in Westport, Connecticut.
The lawsuit alleges that Del Nin repeatedly discouraged Warshaw from documenting the agreement in writing, citing internal compliance concerns. Instead, the two communicated over phone calls and cryptic texts—sometimes using code like “Defcon 1” to indicate urgency.
In one exchange, Warshaw says he sent Del Nin a public industry update via text, only to be asked to “unsend” it. After complying, Warshaw followed up with a series of apologetic messages. Del Nin responded, “All is forgiven.” It was part of what Warshaw now claims was a pattern of trust-based, off-the-record collaboration that ultimately left him exposed.
SFM went on to acquire $400 million in Audacy’s debt and took control of the company as it exited Chapter 11 in September 2024. Warshaw says he remained actively involved in the months leading up to the deal, even recommending board members and planning to divest some of his own media holdings to avoid FCC conflicts. At an April 2024 dinner, Del Nin allegedly reaffirmed that Warshaw would be named CEO.
That never happened. When Audacy announced it would retain CEO David Field, Warshaw emailed Del Nin for clarification. Del Nin, he says, called him the next day and declared that no agreement had ever existed. In March, Kelli Turner was named CEO, with several top executives departing.
Warshaw has not heard from Del Nin since October 2024. He is now seeking compensatory and punitive damages, legal fees, and specific performance of what he claims was a binding agreement.
The complaint cites Warshaw’s history of similar arrangements with firms like Farallon Capital and ABRY Partners, where his expertise in distressed media deals was rewarded with executive roles or a share of profits. Text exchanges, NDA documentation, and references to his “advisor” status on SFM’s internal paperwork are presented as evidence that Warshaw was more than just a helpful industry contact—he was a partner.
A jury trial has been requested.
Thanks for weighing in, Sean.
1. I’m not on any social media, Sean. None. So, it would be inaccurate to categorize me as “another social media poster.”
2. I have as much “insight” as planning, designing, contracting and managing a few hundred million dollars of residential, commercial, medical, municipal, hospitality and sports field construction work over the years has given me. This has often involved a multitude of verbal contracts for changes in the scope of work to be carefully navigated and accounted for–because they are absolutely binding in a court of law. It also involved collecting hundreds of partial and final signed, notarized lien waivers that prevent a contractor from attempting to add more “verbal” charges after being paid what was agreed to in writing. When a contactor signs their name to a lien waiver as part of the payment process, they “waive” thier ability add more verbal charges on top of their current payment after being paid and confirm and agree that the partial or final payment includes all written or verbal agreeements. It’s a very serious legal document that I had to insist contractors provide me with before I handed them any money–because verbal agreements are binding.
3. I’ve obviously not seen any written documentation or spoken to any of the parties. This was a private matter that only came to light publically with the law suit being filed.
Sean, I admire and respect your intention here to call out someone pretending to know more than they do. I’m no expert. I’m barely an amatuer. In my amatuer opinion, from the details of this article, I think Jeff has a very strong case to be compensated. If I’m wrong, I’m wrong–and it wouldn’t be the first time.
Cameron, thanks for your excellent reporting. This is a huge story.
Many aspects needed for a contract to be binding. It’s not simply the words. This is why people get too confused and carry over facts from one scenario to another.
Barry,
You’re totally right. There’s no question that people get confused about the details of any agreement, which is why attorneys and clearly written documents are always preferable. However, and I’m not an attorney nor am I pretending to be an attorney. I’m just a guy who’s created, signed and paid out a few hundred million dollars in construction contracts over the years without a single dispute over the amounts–because I tracked all the verbal elements very, very, very carefully. Why? Because verbal contracts are enforceable in all 50 states and they simply require an offer, acceptance of the offer, consideration (something of value), and mutual intent to create an agreement. There are exceptions, like real estate transactions, which require written documentation, but the take away here is, “be very careful what you say.” If there is a verbal contract suggested and both parties “act” as if it’s agreed upon, the enforeability of that contract becomes even stronger.
I would always suggest consulting an attorney when trying to form an agreement with anyone, but in Jeff’s specific case (which I very truly know very little about) it appears that discretion was paramount and formal documents were intentionally avoided. However, in my extremely amatuer opinion, that does not diminish Jeff’s case to be compensated. It was verbal, they acted on it and there are witnesses and text messages to support it.
From the outside looking in, with very little knowledge of the facts, it appears that Jeff has a very, very strong case. I think he’ll get a sizable check and a nondisclosure agreement. Or, maybe it’s much more complex that what I’m privy to and he won’t. Who knows? I sure don’t know for sure, but I hope in the end, fairness and justice prevail. Nobody likes to be used.
Maybe the focus should be on why we’re even talking about this awkward situation in the first place. This all circles back to the quality of leadership in the industry. By that I mean, why are so many major radio groups out there struggling to succeed financially and replacing key personnel abruptly on their leadership teams in the first place? Some highly rergarded people have been sent packing recently and there were plenty before them.
Why is it so hard for the companies that own the most powerful and effective marketing tools on planet earth–with a 100 year track record of successfuly building the largest brands in the world…to make a single dollar of profit today? I’ve worked for local radio station owners who grew EXTREMELY wealthy and I’ve worked for some of the largest radio groups in the industry who struggled financially and I watched my stock options become worthless.
Why is there so much financial carnage in such a powerful, useful, important industry that started out so incredibly profitable? I have my theories. I’m sure you do too.
That’s the real story here. This situation is just a subplot to that story.
Soros is the biggest slimy liberal dirtbag known to human kind. Not sure how or why any of this is a surprise to anyone. Jeff is an OG in the industry and shouldn’t be underestimated as the prior comment stated. Soros is all that is wrong in our industry. I hope Warshaw takes him to the cleaners and rights this wrong. Soros and his empire is slowly crumbling and I cant wait to see Jeff start taking bricks out of his foundation.
It’s foolish to underestimate Jeff Warshaw.
Michael Del Nin (according to LinkedIn) has a law degree, so he understands the binding strength of a verbal agreement. He also understands the additional binding strength of a verbal agreement supported by written communication.
A jury would be prepped to understand that too. The extensive time, effort and energy that Jeff provided in expert due diligence and expert strategic advice given in good faith was clearly not a gift and the agreed upon payment was never provided.
I believe the expression is, “Checkmate.” I doubt this sees the inside of a courtroom, but I’d wager that Jeff will be paid very, very handsomely at some point to settle the matter.
David Dillon has zero insight on this specific matter and has obviously relied on general “google” law’isms for this post. He has not seen any written documentation between the parties, nor has he even spoken to the parties. Another social media “poster” with zero credible knowledge, just opinions.
Comments are closed.