Oh God no. Sold to Seattle owners?
Moderators: KF10, City of Trees, codydaze
Re: Oh God no. Sold to Seattle owners?
- AnDrOiDKing4
- Analyst
- Posts: 3,173
- And1: 57
- Joined: Jan 26, 2005
- Location: Hiding from Kobe's Elbow
Re: Oh God no. Sold to Seattle owners?
If anything the 30 million non refundable was important because, both sides know that some **** could go down and the sale couldn't end up going through.
I am starting to think the Maloofs had this planned all along to jack up the price that only one desperate city would pay (Seattle) then turn around and have Sacramento pay for it. They get a free 30 million and probably the same price that Seattle paid/would have paid for the team.
I am starting to think the Maloofs had this planned all along to jack up the price that only one desperate city would pay (Seattle) then turn around and have Sacramento pay for it. They get a free 30 million and probably the same price that Seattle paid/would have paid for the team.
Lamak wrote:His playstyle is very similar to Derrick Rose, but asian.
Re: Oh God no. Sold to Seattle owners?
-
- Pro Prospect
- Posts: 865
- And1: 42
- Joined: Jun 07, 2012
- Location: Sacramento, CA
Re: Oh God no. Sold to Seattle owners?
There is some interesting stuff from sports law guru Michael McCann coming out now: https://twitter.com/McCannSportsLaw.
Spark notes- minority owners do have the right to match. They can match individually or pool their resources. Potential problems: doesn't look like they would be able to go into debt to match, they probably won't be able to be the face of a larger investment group. Any right to match will probably be a mess that is solved in courts.
Spark notes- minority owners do have the right to match. They can match individually or pool their resources. Potential problems: doesn't look like they would be able to go into debt to match, they probably won't be able to be the face of a larger investment group. Any right to match will probably be a mess that is solved in courts.
Re: Oh God no. Sold to Seattle owners?
- AnDrOiDKing4
- Analyst
- Posts: 3,173
- And1: 57
- Joined: Jan 26, 2005
- Location: Hiding from Kobe's Elbow
Re: Oh God no. Sold to Seattle owners?
Inigo_Montoya wrote:There is some interesting stuff from sports law guru Michael McCann coming out now: https://twitter.com/McCannSportsLaw.
Spark notes- minority owners do have the right to match. They can match individually or pool their resources. Potential problems: doesn't look like they would be able to go into debt to match, they probably won't be able to be the face of a larger investment group. Any right to match will probably be a mess that is solved in courts.
The last series of response's were really interesting.
Q: Let me ask annoying ?: doesn't this mean at a min.Maloof's can't do binding K w/o offer to min,owners?
A: More or less, but it's worded as a Transfer Notice - basically telling other owners we're selling, you can match.
Q: Does it give a time limit for response from minority owners?
A: CarmichaelDave I don't see a time limit, so presumption would be a "reasonable" one.
Q: What is considered the "industry norm?"
A: Court would look at other sales of stakes in NBA/sports teams w/similar contracts.
Lamak wrote:His playstyle is very similar to Derrick Rose, but asian.
Re: Oh God no. Sold to Seattle owners?
-
- Freshman
- Posts: 56
- And1: 21
- Joined: Jan 11, 2013
Re: Oh God no. Sold to Seattle owners?
AnDrOiDKing4 wrote:Inigo_Montoya wrote:There is some interesting stuff from sports law guru Michael McCann coming out now: https://twitter.com/McCannSportsLaw.
Spark notes- minority owners do have the right to match. They can match individually or pool their resources. Potential problems: doesn't look like they would be able to go into debt to match, they probably won't be able to be the face of a larger investment group. Any right to match will probably be a mess that is solved in courts.
The last series of response's were really interesting.
Q: Let me ask annoying ?: doesn't this mean at a min.Maloof's can't do binding K w/o offer to min,owners?
A: More or less, but it's worded as a Transfer Notice - basically telling other owners we're selling, you can match.
Q: Does it give a time limit for response from minority owners?
A: CarmichaelDave I don't see a time limit, so presumption would be a "reasonable" one.
Q: What is considered the "industry norm?"
A: Court would look at other sales of stakes in NBA/sports teams w/similar contracts.
Unfortunately, the "industry norm" consists of not informing any potential local buyer of your intent to sell you majority stake, selling said majority stake to an out-of-town group for way over the value of the franchise, not telling your minority owners, then telling them to screw themselves when they can't match the exorbitant buy-out price. It's called the Howard Schultz Model.
Re: Oh God no. Sold to Seattle owners?
-
- Pro Prospect
- Posts: 865
- And1: 42
- Joined: Jun 07, 2012
- Location: Sacramento, CA
Re: Oh God no. Sold to Seattle owners?
interview with McCann going on right now: http://www.thecdnetworks.com/
Re: Oh God no. Sold to Seattle owners?
-
- Pro Prospect
- Posts: 865
- And1: 42
- Joined: Jun 07, 2012
- Location: Sacramento, CA
Re: Oh God no. Sold to Seattle owners?
Possible that a minority owner could sue Maloofs for breach of contract for making sale without notification of minority owners.
Re: Oh God no. Sold to Seattle owners?
- ADoaN17
- Lead Assistant
- Posts: 5,044
- And1: 312
- Joined: Feb 11, 2010
Re: Oh God no. Sold to Seattle owners?
The Ellison news is great.
Re: Oh God no. Sold to Seattle owners?
-
- Analyst
- Posts: 3,031
- And1: 135
- Joined: Jan 11, 2007
Re: Oh God no. Sold to Seattle owners?
KINGS FANS : Read below some good news !
Updated: January 25, 2013, 6:30 pm
Billionaire meets with Stern about Kings
by Sam Amick, USA TODAY Sports
Los Angeles-based billionaire and prospective owner of the Sacramento Kings, Ron Burkle, met with NBA Commissioner David Stern on Thursday in New York City, according to two people with knowledge of the situation.
The people spoke to USA TODAY Sports on the condition of anonymity because it was a private meeting. While the Maloof family that currently owns the team has an agreement with the Seattle-based group led by hedge fund manager Chris Hansen and Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer to sell 65% of the team for approximately $341 million, the deal must still be approved by the NBA’s Board of Governors.
Burkle — the supermarket mogul who is part owner of the NHL’s Pittsburgh Penguins — has been planning to make a competing bid with fellow money man Mark Mastrov, the Northern California-based founder of 24-Hour Fitness, in an attempt to convince the NBA to keep the team in Sacramento. The goal all along from the Sacramento side has been to force the NBA into a tough decision by putting together an arena plan and a bid that’s competitive with the Hansen-Ballmer group.
Stern has had consistent communication with Sacramento mayor and former NBA point guard Kevin Johnson during this situation, but his decision to grant Burkle a meeting is seen by Johnson’s camp as the latest sign that — despite the widely held belief the team will wind up in Seattle — their effort is being legitimized by the league. Stern has already indicated publicly that he will allow Johnson to make his case to the Board of Governors before they decide on the Seattle bid.
In that regard, it’s a similar situation to two years ago, when Johnson made his case at an April Board of Governors meeting to keep the team in Sacramento and the Maloofs’ attempts to move the team to Anaheim were thwarted. Burkle first entered this scene at that time, as Johnson spoke publicly about his interest in buying the team, and he was seen as a possible savior of sorts for Kings fans who wanted to keep their franchise.
Read more at http://www.hoopsworld.com/billionaire-m ... JQkEget.99
Updated: January 25, 2013, 6:30 pm
Billionaire meets with Stern about Kings
by Sam Amick, USA TODAY Sports
Los Angeles-based billionaire and prospective owner of the Sacramento Kings, Ron Burkle, met with NBA Commissioner David Stern on Thursday in New York City, according to two people with knowledge of the situation.
The people spoke to USA TODAY Sports on the condition of anonymity because it was a private meeting. While the Maloof family that currently owns the team has an agreement with the Seattle-based group led by hedge fund manager Chris Hansen and Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer to sell 65% of the team for approximately $341 million, the deal must still be approved by the NBA’s Board of Governors.
Burkle — the supermarket mogul who is part owner of the NHL’s Pittsburgh Penguins — has been planning to make a competing bid with fellow money man Mark Mastrov, the Northern California-based founder of 24-Hour Fitness, in an attempt to convince the NBA to keep the team in Sacramento. The goal all along from the Sacramento side has been to force the NBA into a tough decision by putting together an arena plan and a bid that’s competitive with the Hansen-Ballmer group.
Stern has had consistent communication with Sacramento mayor and former NBA point guard Kevin Johnson during this situation, but his decision to grant Burkle a meeting is seen by Johnson’s camp as the latest sign that — despite the widely held belief the team will wind up in Seattle — their effort is being legitimized by the league. Stern has already indicated publicly that he will allow Johnson to make his case to the Board of Governors before they decide on the Seattle bid.
In that regard, it’s a similar situation to two years ago, when Johnson made his case at an April Board of Governors meeting to keep the team in Sacramento and the Maloofs’ attempts to move the team to Anaheim were thwarted. Burkle first entered this scene at that time, as Johnson spoke publicly about his interest in buying the team, and he was seen as a possible savior of sorts for Kings fans who wanted to keep their franchise.
Read more at http://www.hoopsworld.com/billionaire-m ... JQkEget.99
Re: Oh God no. Sold to Seattle owners?
- boogie-reke
- Head Coach
- Posts: 6,919
- And1: 244
- Joined: Nov 05, 2010
Re: Oh God no. Sold to Seattle owners?
That's awesome. Burkle bomb
Re: Oh God no. Sold to Seattle owners?
-
- Pro Prospect
- Posts: 865
- And1: 42
- Joined: Jun 07, 2012
- Location: Sacramento, CA
Re: Oh God no. Sold to Seattle owners?
That's good news. I do wonder if the talks were about an expansion to Sacramento though?
Re: Oh God no. Sold to Seattle owners?
-
- Banned User
- Posts: 4,942
- And1: 30
- Joined: Jul 18, 2006
Re: Oh God no. Sold to Seattle owners?
Here is a question (99.9999999999999999999999999% hypothetical)...but if you could choose between
a) keep the same roster, but new management/ownership
b) start fresh as an expansion team (every team protects top 8) and Sacramento given a top 4 pick in 2013...which do you choose?
a) keep the same roster, but new management/ownership
b) start fresh as an expansion team (every team protects top 8) and Sacramento given a top 4 pick in 2013...which do you choose?
Re: Oh God no. Sold to Seattle owners?
- ADoaN17
- Lead Assistant
- Posts: 5,044
- And1: 312
- Joined: Feb 11, 2010
Re: Oh God no. Sold to Seattle owners?
I'd choose A. We have yet to see what these core players can do with good management. Cousins would be better than anyone they could get in the expansion/2013 draft.
Re: Oh God no. Sold to Seattle owners?
-
- Pro Prospect
- Posts: 865
- And1: 42
- Joined: Jun 07, 2012
- Location: Sacramento, CA
Re: Oh God no. Sold to Seattle owners?
option A by far
Re: Oh God no. Sold to Seattle owners?
- AnDrOiDKing4
- Analyst
- Posts: 3,173
- And1: 57
- Joined: Jan 26, 2005
- Location: Hiding from Kobe's Elbow
Re: Oh God no. Sold to Seattle owners?
Dialogue is good. Even if its for a couple of days to make some of those **** Sonics fan quit posting stupid ****.
Lamak wrote:His playstyle is very similar to Derrick Rose, but asian.
Re: Oh God no. Sold to Seattle owners?
-
- RealGM
- Posts: 24,079
- And1: 1,082
- Joined: Feb 19, 2005
- Location: "Look at me, Dave, look. Come and touch it, Dave."
Re: Oh God no. Sold to Seattle owners?
F no to expansion. I don't see a Cousins level talent coming out in the next 2-3 years at least. This town is already invested in this team and players, no way should the NBA strip it back down. Although with a new GM, new ownership, etc. that may happen anyway.
Re: Oh God no. Sold to Seattle owners?
- RIPskaterdude
- RealGM
- Posts: 91,762
- And1: 36,477
- Joined: Jul 10, 2003
- Location: #MakeAmericaGreatAgain
Re: Oh God no. Sold to Seattle owners?
All I want is to keep the NBA in Sacramento and to get a new damn coach.
Re: Oh God no. Sold to Seattle owners?
- Wolfay
- Retired Mod
- Posts: 7,656
- And1: 649
- Joined: Aug 13, 2005
- Location: Sacramento, CA
Re: Oh God no. Sold to Seattle owners?
xx_skaterdude_xx wrote:All I want is to keep the NBA in Sacramento and to get a new damn coach.
This. Hell, Smart can stay on if it means the NBA remains in Sacramento. I ain't greedy, but if we really did have a choice...
Option A. I'd like to see what Cousins and the gang can do under sane and competent ownership/management/coaching. After the top 8 are protected on each team, the talent gets thin or they're major projects. Pretty much the only asset you'll have to get better is that top 4 pick.
Re: Oh God no. Sold to Seattle owners?
-
- Forum Mod - Kings
- Posts: 25,268
- And1: 5,446
- Joined: Jul 28, 2006
Re: Oh God no. Sold to Seattle owners?
Remove current management and coaching staff and keep same roster?
Yes please!
Most likely, Burkle and co will have ACTUAL brains to run and manage this team.
Yes please!
Most likely, Burkle and co will have ACTUAL brains to run and manage this team.
Re: Oh God no. Sold to Seattle owners?
- KingInExile
- Retired Mod
- Posts: 14,416
- And1: 4
- Joined: May 25, 2004
- Location: RIP Wayman Tisdale...You left us way too early.
Re: Oh God no. Sold to Seattle owners?
So, there's a recent article in the Seattle Times that really should highlight why a Kings move to Seattle should not be considered a done-deal..and why the NBA might not want it. The article looked at how popular different sports are to fans in the market. The NBA finished a dismal 10th...behind such attractions as figure skating, the PGA and gymnastics. Granted, the ranking might be skewed some by the lack of a team in this market, but it is also a good indication of how fans feel about the game.
http://blogs.seattletimes.com/fyi-guy/2 ... n-seattle/
http://blogs.seattletimes.com/fyi-guy/2 ... n-seattle/
This space needs to be filled with a new sig...but I'm too lazy to make one.
Re: Oh God no. Sold to Seattle owners?
- pillwenney
- Retired Mod
- Posts: 48,796
- And1: 2,496
- Joined: Sep 19, 2004
- Location: Avidly reading pstyousuck.blogspot.com/
- Contact:
Re: Oh God no. Sold to Seattle owners?
Yeah, it definitely isn't fair to compare it given what Seattle has been through, but it being THAT low is pretty alarming.