Seattle group gets Kings

Moderators: ken6199, Dirk, bisme37, KingDavid, bwgood77, zimpy27, cupcakesnake, Domejandro, infinite11285, Harry Garris

User avatar
HotRocks34
RealGM
Posts: 14,787
And1: 17,666
Joined: Jun 23, 2007

Re: Seattle group gets Kings 

Post#281 » by HotRocks34 » Wed Jan 23, 2013 2:41 am

Some people were asking why KJ would do a press conference today if what he had to say didn't seem that great or inspiring.

I think I mentioned earlier in this thread that what seems to be going on now are two competing public relations campaigns. Basically, two marketing campaigns. Marketing Campaign One (MC1) is selling the idea that the deal is done, it's over, team will be in Seattle next year and it's all a formality from here.

Marketing Campaign Two is selling the idea that it's not over, Kings could still stay in Sacramento, etc.

Mayor Kevin Johnson has expended a large amount of political capital on this Kings showdown. He can't just say "yep, we lost!" now. Even if he thinks the Kings are gone. If he did that, he would look like both a quitter and a loser. Not qualities typically associated with persons who may have designs on higher political office.

So, of course, KJ is part of Marketing Campaign Two (MC2) and the "it's not over" camp.

What has happened this week is that MC1 has gotten all the headlines and momentum. "Kings sold," "Phil Jackson may lead Seattle," "relocation committee approval a formality," "Larry Bird or RC Buford may lead Seattle," etc.

MC1 has all of the momentum on its side now. A public relations campaign is all about swaying the masses. Right now, MC1 is kicking MC2's rear end in that department.

So, if you are MC2, you need to try to do something to turn the tide, or at least halt MC1's momentum. And I think that is what KJ's press conference was about today.

It might not have been some amazing news, but it was likely aimed at just trying to let MC2 get some press coverage and take the focus off of MC1's message.
** Embiid is the only MVP in NBA history to never make a conference final
** Philly won multiple playoff games without MVP Embiid
** Luka made the playoffs without Brunson
** LeBron missed the playoffs with Davis
** Steph missed the playoffs without Klay
LLcoleJ
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 24,393
And1: 3,366
Joined: Jan 20, 2005
Location: El Segundo
Contact:
       

Re: Seattle group gets Kings 

Post#282 » by LLcoleJ » Wed Jan 23, 2013 2:42 am

catch22 wrote:
Winsome Gerbil wrote:
ThEMvP wrote:Not sure why KJ would come out with a press conference today just to announce $20 million has been raised. Outsiders would just laugh at this amount. And at 65% of 525mm, that's 340mm, so he needs another 320mm (not including the the funds from his so-called 'mystery' buyer). And even if the funds are raised by KJ, how hard is it for Hansen and Balmer to just increase their offer? They're worth billions of dollars, and if they set their sights on the Kings, with their bottomless pit of money, I'm afraid there really isn't much KJ could do about it...


Unless the equity guy KJ was hinting at is Ellison. Ellison could buy Hansen and Ballmer and most of the city of Seattle all by himself.

But as I've been saying for several days, at a certain point it gets kind of dumb. Hansen/Ballmer can get, I would almost bet on it, an expansion team for less than $525mil. Let alone if they have to keep on increasing that number. Why pay $600mil to try to outbid Sacramento if you can get your own new team for $400mil with no encumbrances?



Because the NBA has said they're not expanding anytime soon? Do you honestly think the Seattle group would rather take a franchise away from another city if they had the option of an expansion team?

I'm sure they would have preferred expansion if possible.


I think his point was if you have business groups throwing around all this cash, it might be time to rethink, well, business.. expansion.
Cheers. :beer: — Mags
catch22
Junior
Posts: 254
And1: 5
Joined: Dec 06, 2005

Re: Seattle group gets Kings 

Post#283 » by catch22 » Wed Jan 23, 2013 2:46 am

Phil XI wrote:
I think his point was if you have business groups throwing around all this cash, it might be time to rethink, well, business.. expansion.




I guess, but the NBA has known about this ownership group for quite some time and Hansen was told expansion wasn't an option right now. It doesn't seem like the NBA wants to budge on expansion for now.
ThEMvP
Veteran
Posts: 2,593
And1: 2
Joined: Jul 30, 2001

Re: Seattle group gets Kings 

Post#284 » by ThEMvP » Wed Jan 23, 2013 2:50 am

HotRocks34 wrote:So, if you are MC2, you need to try to do something to turn the tide, or at least halt MC1's momentum. And I think that is what KJ's press conference was about today.

It might not have been some amazing news, but it was likely aimed at just trying to let MC2 get some press coverage and take the focus off of MC1's message.


I agree it's good to generate some coverage in the press and try to halt momentum from Seattle's side, but as another poster mentioned earlier today, this could severely backfire on him. $20mm is a laughable amount, considering this saga has dragged on for so long and he's had so much time to put together an ownership group. Seems like the 20 x $1 million raised is from individual investors which isn't going to get it done. He only has two options. 1. Find an ultra rich individual (Larry Ellision as mentioned before), or 2. Find a corporation that is willing to back you up.
LLcoleJ
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 24,393
And1: 3,366
Joined: Jan 20, 2005
Location: El Segundo
Contact:
       

Re: Seattle group gets Kings 

Post#285 » by LLcoleJ » Wed Jan 23, 2013 2:53 am

catch22 wrote:
Phil XI wrote:
I think his point was if you have business groups throwing around all this cash, it might be time to rethink, well, business.. expansion.




I guess, but the NBA has known about this ownership group for quite some time and Hansen was told expansion wasn't an option right now. It doesn't seem like the NBA wants to budge on expansion for now.

Totally. But the idea has to be crossing everyones mind. As a business you have to grow, but it has to be smart. One of the main problems new markets face is purely financial. If there are 2 markets with alot of money to make then you do it. Seattle and Sacramento or both viable and for the most part proven markets.
Cheers. :beer: — Mags
User avatar
HotRocks34
RealGM
Posts: 14,787
And1: 17,666
Joined: Jun 23, 2007

Re: Seattle group gets Kings 

Post#286 » by HotRocks34 » Wed Jan 23, 2013 2:54 am

ThEMvP wrote:
HotRocks34 wrote:So, if you are MC2, you need to try to do something to turn the tide, or at least halt MC1's momentum. And I think that is what KJ's press conference was about today.

It might not have been some amazing news, but it was likely aimed at just trying to let MC2 get some press coverage and take the focus off of MC1's message.


I agree it's good to generate some coverage in the press and try to halt momentum from Seattle's side, but as another poster mentioned earlier today, this could severely backfire on him. $20mm is a laughable amount, considering this saga has dragged on for so long and he's had so much time to put together an ownership group. Seems like the 20 x $1 million raised is from individual investors which isn't going to get it done. He only has two options. 1. Find an ultra rich individual (Larry Ellision as mentioned before), or 2. Find a corporation that is willing to back you up.


I completely agree with this and it could suggest true desperation on the part of KJ and MC2. They may be running out of options.

The strategy is sound, like "call a press conference to push your message and shut down MC1's message," but the execution of the strategy might not be so good here.
** Embiid is the only MVP in NBA history to never make a conference final
** Philly won multiple playoff games without MVP Embiid
** Luka made the playoffs without Brunson
** LeBron missed the playoffs with Davis
** Steph missed the playoffs without Klay
User avatar
~73aLL372~
Sophomore
Posts: 124
And1: 2
Joined: Apr 07, 2007

Re: Seattle group gets Kings 

Post#287 » by ~73aLL372~ » Wed Jan 23, 2013 3:04 am

catch22 wrote:
Phil XI wrote:
I think his point was if you have business groups throwing around all this cash, it might be time to rethink, well, business.. expansion.




I guess, but the NBA has known about this ownership group for quite some time and Hansen was told expansion wasn't an option right now. It doesn't seem like the NBA wants to budge on expansion for now.


Who knows. I think they might. Sacramento and Seattle are both great cities and like Cwebb said yesterday on Inside the NBA, it should not be either/or it should be both cities with a team. I don't understand how you can completely shut out a great city like Sac that has worked their butt off to get this arena deal done, it's really not fair at all, especially considering the fact that the Maloofs had been constantly stressing that the team was NOT for sale. Im pretty certain that Seattle will get an expansion team even if BOG turns the deal down. Meanwhile you have cities like Milwaukee and god knows where else that don't even give a crap about their team.

Anyways, the lack of competence of this board never ceases to amaze me. Don't try to comment and make up stupid facts about the situation when you really don't know whats going on. I read a lot of people saying that this 20 million dollars is all that the major has going for his campaign right now. LOL STFU, you don't know anything. Who says that KJ needed to reveal everything during this one press conference, that is just idiotic as he still has time. The actual announcement of the MAJOR owners looking to buy a stake in the team will come later this week so calm down. There is something going on behind the scenes so don't count Sactown out. KJ has not been sitting on his ass before this announcement came, it was just a matter of when it was going to come.

And to the idiot that thinks we don't have an arena deal in place. WE DO. The only thing that is missing are the new ownership group that will pay 70 something million as part of the deal with AEG and the NBA. This arena deal has been in place for quite some time the only thing that will change is the Maloofs name being replaced with whatever ownership group willl take their place.

Seattle says they have Ballmer/Hansen on your side? Cool story, we have Mark Mosgov, Larry Ellison, Ron Burkle possibly, Eli Broad, and a few others that will be named shortly on our side. Look up their new worth's and rethink your stance about us having no chance.

Nothing is over.
ThEMvP
Veteran
Posts: 2,593
And1: 2
Joined: Jul 30, 2001

Re: Seattle group gets Kings 

Post#288 » by ThEMvP » Wed Jan 23, 2013 4:03 am

~73aLL372~ wrote:Anyways, the lack of competence of this board never ceases to amaze me. Don't try to comment and make up stupid facts about the situation when you really don't know whats going on. I read a lot of people saying that this 20 million dollars is all that the major has going for his campaign right now. LOL STFU, you don't know anything. Who says that KJ needed to reveal everything during this one press conference, that is just idiotic as he still has time. The actual announcement of the MAJOR owners looking to buy a stake in the team will come later this week so calm down. There is something going on behind the scenes so don't count Sactown out. KJ has not been sitting on his ass before this announcement came, it was just a matter of when it was going to come.


I assume you're talking about me? I'm going to try to respond as respectfully as I can without resorting to personal attacks since that seems rather childish.
First off we're commenting on made up and 'stupid facts' when we don't really know what's going on. Well, aren't you commenting on speculation as well thinking that KJ will pull something off? As of right now, no one knows for sure what's going to happen. His conference today might signal he has something up his sleeve, or that he's out of options and just buying time and creating publicity to find new money. KJ's had years to raise money to buy the Kings, and they were valued at a much lower price back in 2010 than the $525mm today. If he couldn't find enough buyers back then, how else is he going to find buyers now?

The remaining $320mm+ will have to come from a large individual owner (ie. Ellison, or Burkle). Now if there was a private buyer who was willing to purchase the Kings, why hasn't it happened? This whole saga has dragged on for at least two years since the first reported move to Anaheim. And this whole "Kings are not for sale" excuse by the Maloofs is bull. Larry Ellison can afford anything he wants. I'm sure Burkle can too. If you've been in the business world, you should know "NO" is not an answer. Everyone has a price. The Warriors sold for a then-record of $450mm. And the Maloofs price now is $525mm. It just depends on how badly you want something. So why hasn't anyone stepped up to buy them yet? Everyone throw's Ellison's name out there, yes he has the money but if he threw $500-600mm on a Hawaiian island over the basketball franchise that people claim he 'so badly' wants, then you know something's up. He just might not be that interested? You can throw his name out there all you want, but until he comes out publically and says "Yes I'll purchase the Kings", this is all bull. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304898704577479293757609000.html

~73aLL372~ wrote:Seattle says they have Ballmer/Hansen on your side? Cool story, we have Mark Mosgov, Larry Ellison, Ron Burkle possibly, Eli Broad, and a few others that will be named shortly on our side. Look up their new worth's and rethink your stance about us having no chance.

Nothing is over.

It's cool to have names like Mosgov, Ellison, Burkle and Broad thrown out there, but until they fully step up and announce they're committed financially to the project, it's all speculative BS. Before the Sonics moved, the media threw Ballmer's name out there as a potential buyer, and we all know where the Sonics ended up moving to. Before the Grizzlies moved, there was speculation of local buyers ponying up the money to purchase them, when the time came, none of the so called interested owners showed up. These are all names the media has thrown out there as speculation.

Again, in this situation, you know just as much as me of what's going on, which is nothing. Before you come attack anyone for commenting on stupid facts or not knowing what they're talking about, look in the mirror first before you make stupid claims.



EDIT: I was just researching around, and guess what I found:
Monday, January 21 2013

Matt Steinmetz: I'm told Maloofs shopped deal to Larry Ellison (of course they did) but Ellison said no to the $525 figure. Twitter @MSteinmetzCSN

http://hoopshype.com/rumors/tag/larry_ellison


Well, there you go, looks like you can cross Ellison off the list now.

Oh, and I forgot to mention, as of Jan 2012, the Kings are valued at $300mm (http://www.forbes.com/teams/sacramento-kings)
The $525mm from Hansen's group reflects a price of 75% over it's valuation.
I'm sorry to say this, but it's a huge hill to climb to beat this figure...
User avatar
~73aLL372~
Sophomore
Posts: 124
And1: 2
Joined: Apr 07, 2007

Re: Seattle group gets Kings 

Post#289 » by ~73aLL372~ » Wed Jan 23, 2013 4:33 am

ThEMvP wrote:
~73aLL372~ wrote:Anyways, the lack of competence of this board never ceases to amaze me. Don't try to comment and make up stupid facts about the situation when you really don't know whats going on. I read a lot of people saying that this 20 million dollars is all that the major has going for his campaign right now. LOL STFU, you don't know anything. Who says that KJ needed to reveal everything during this one press conference, that is just idiotic as he still has time. The actual announcement of the MAJOR owners looking to buy a stake in the team will come later this week so calm down. There is something going on behind the scenes so don't count Sactown out. KJ has not been sitting on his ass before this announcement came, it was just a matter of when it was going to come.


I assume you're talking about me? I'm going to try to respond as respectfully as I can without resorting to personal attacks since that seems rather childish.
First off we're commenting on made up and 'stupid facts' when we don't really know what's going on. Well, aren't you commenting on speculation as well thinking that KJ will pull something off? As of right now, no one knows for sure what's going to happen. His conference today might signal he has something up his sleeve, or that he's out of options and just buying time and creating publicity to find new money. KJ's had years to raise money to buy the Kings, and they were valued at a much lower price back in 2010 than the $525mm today. If he couldn't find enough buyers back then, how else is he going to find buyers now?

The remaining $320mm+ will have to come from a large individual owner (ie. Ellison, or Burkle). Now if there was a private buyer who was willing to purchase the Kings, why hasn't it happened? This whole saga has dragged on for at least two years since the first reported move to Anaheim. And this whole "Kings are not for sale" excuse by the Maloofs is bull. Larry Ellison can afford anything he wants. I'm sure Burkle can too. If you've been in the business world, you should know "NO" is not an answer. Everyone has a price. The Warriors sold for a then-record of $450mm. And the Maloofs price now is $525mm. It just depends on how badly you want something. So why hasn't anyone stepped up to buy them yet? Everyone throw's Ellison's name out there, yes he has the money but if he threw $500-600mm on a Hawaiian island over the basketball franchise that people claim he 'so badly' wants, then you know something's up. He just might not be that interested? You can throw his name out there all you want, but until he comes out publically and says "Yes I'll purchase the Kings", this is all bull. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304898704577479293757609000.html

~73aLL372~ wrote:Seattle says they have Ballmer/Hansen on your side? Cool story, we have Mark Mosgov, Larry Ellison, Ron Burkle possibly, Eli Broad, and a few others that will be named shortly on our side. Look up their new worth's and rethink your stance about us having no chance.

Nothing is over.

It's cool to have names like Mosgov, Ellison, Burkle and Broad thrown out there, but until they fully step up and announce they're committed financially to the project, it's all speculative BS. Before the Sonics moved, the media threw Ballmer's name out there as a potential buyer, and we all know where the Sonics ended up moving to. Before the Grizzlies moved, there was speculation of local buyers ponying up the money to purchase them, when the time came, none of the so called interested owners showed up. These are all names the media has thrown out there as speculation.

Again, in this situation, you know just as much as me of what's going on, which is nothing. Before you come attack anyone for commenting on stupid facts or not knowing what they're talking about, look in the mirror first before you make stupid claims.



EDIT: I was just researching around, and guess what I found:
Monday, January 21 2013

Matt Steinmetz: I'm told Maloofs shopped deal to Larry Ellison (of course they did) but Ellison said no to the $525 figure. Twitter @MSteinmetzCSN

http://hoopshype.com/rumors/tag/larry_ellison


Well, there you go, looks like you can cross Ellison off the list now.

Oh, and I forgot to mention, as of Jan 2012, the Kings are valued at $300mm (http://www.forbes.com/teams/sacramento-kings)
The $525mm from Hansen's group reflects a price of 75% over it's valuation.
I'm sorry to say this, but it's a huge hill to climb to beat this figure...


You do realize the sale was for 65% of that 525mm figure right? That figure is including relocation fees among other things which the city of Sacramento obviously doesn't have to pay. About your "business" stance, that's BS because the Kings WERE NOT for sale. I don't know if I can stress this enough. You do realize the Kings were basically all this family had left? It was their prized possession as all of there other assets went down the drain. There actually WERE local buyers that wanted to buy the team but KJ was forced to say no because of the family's stance.

And ok, who said that Ellison had to be the only person buying the majority stake in the team? It's going to be a partnership not a single man doing it all. And lol at you saying that I know nothing. I live in Sacramento and have been following this situation very closely so don't even go around trying to belittle me by saying I know nothing.

Anyways, I guess you'll just have to wait and see until KJ "officially" announces the big name partnership group looking to buy a large stake in the team. Then this "speculation"will become reality.
LLcoleJ
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 24,393
And1: 3,366
Joined: Jan 20, 2005
Location: El Segundo
Contact:
       

Re: Seattle group gets Kings 

Post#290 » by LLcoleJ » Wed Jan 23, 2013 4:38 am

~73aLL372~ wrote:
You do realize the sale was for 65% of that 525mm figure right? That figure is including relocation fees among other things which the city of Sacramento obviously doesn't have to pay. About your "business" stance, that's BS because the Kings WERE NOT for sale. I don't know if I can stress this enough. You do realize the Kings were basically all this family had left? It was their prized possession as all of there other assets went down the drain. There actually WERE local buyers that wanted to buy the team but KJ was forced to say no because of the family's stance.

And ok, who said that Ellison had to be the only person buying the majority stake in the team? It's going to be a partnership not a single man doing it all. And lol at you saying that I know nothing. I live in Sacramento and have been following this situation very closely so don't even go around trying to belittle me by saying I know nothing.

Anyways, I guess you'll just have to wait and see until KJ "officially" announces the big name partnership group looking to buy a large stake in the team. Then this "speculation"will become reality.


KJ does not control who gets to bid on the Kings. Anything KJ is doing towards the Maloofs is done in 'good faith'.

The Kings are private and the Maloofs can sell them to whom they want, given the specs match the league. Technically they might not have been 4 Sale" but that means they could have been ( and have) listened to offers.

As an example: I own a business and it's not 4 sale. But if someone wants to make me an offer, I will listen. If I want that deal it's for sale, if not, it's not.
Cheers. :beer: — Mags
Inigo_Montoya
Pro Prospect
Posts: 865
And1: 42
Joined: Jun 07, 2012
Location: Sacramento, CA

Re: Seattle group gets Kings 

Post#291 » by Inigo_Montoya » Wed Jan 23, 2013 4:40 am

http://blogs.sacbee.com/city-beat/2013/ ... chase.html

Hope they make a public announcement soon.
User avatar
ComboGuardCity
RealGM
Posts: 25,579
And1: 4,546
Joined: Jul 10, 2010

Re: Seattle group gets Kings 

Post#292 » by ComboGuardCity » Wed Jan 23, 2013 4:46 am

And then Hansen will come out and up his bid to 600mill. Maloofs will sell to the highest bidder. The NBA cannot force him to sell to Sacramento. I wish they could, but they can't. It comes down to the deepest pockets and who can bring the most money to the NBA.
User avatar
Winsome Gerbil
RealGM
Posts: 15,021
And1: 13,086
Joined: Feb 07, 2010

Re: Seattle group gets Kings 

Post#293 » by Winsome Gerbil » Wed Jan 23, 2013 4:47 am

Inigo_Montoya wrote:http://blogs.sacbee.com/city-beat/2013/01/billioniare-burkle-fitness-tycoon-mastrov-discussing-kings-purchase.html

Hope they make a public announcement soon.


So it appears it is game on now.
User avatar
~73aLL372~
Sophomore
Posts: 124
And1: 2
Joined: Apr 07, 2007

Re: Seattle group gets Kings 

Post#294 » by ~73aLL372~ » Wed Jan 23, 2013 4:49 am

Phil XI wrote:
~73aLL372~ wrote:
You do realize the sale was for 65% of that 525mm figure right? That figure is including relocation fees among other things which the city of Sacramento obviously doesn't have to pay. About your "business" stance, that's BS because the Kings WERE NOT for sale. I don't know if I can stress this enough. You do realize the Kings were basically all this family had left? It was their prized possession as all of there other assets went down the drain. There actually WERE local buyers that wanted to buy the team but KJ was forced to say no because of the family's stance.

And ok, who said that Ellison had to be the only person buying the majority stake in the team? It's going to be a partnership not a single man doing it all. And lol at you saying that I know nothing. I live in Sacramento and have been following this situation very closely so don't even go around trying to belittle me by saying I know nothing.

Anyways, I guess you'll just have to wait and see until KJ "officially" announces the big name partnership group looking to buy a large stake in the team. Then this "speculation"will become reality.


KJ does not control who gets to bid on the Kings. Anything KJ is doing towards the Maloofs is done in 'good faith'.

The Kings are private and the Maloofs can sell them to whom they want, given the specs match the league. Technically they might not have been 4 Sale" but that means they could have been ( and have) listened to offers.

As an example: I own a business and it's not 4 sale. But if someone wants to make me an offer, I will listen. If I want that deal it's for sale, if not, it's not.



Thats fine. Another reason why I think the We Are Not For Sale stand is valid is the fact that the Maloofs had animosity towards the city of Sac after ruining their perfect plans of escaping to Anaheim. That combined with the fact that the Kings were all they had are very valid points supporting the notion that the local buyers never really had a chance to step in.

But like I said, you guys will all see the truth in the next few weeks. I strongly believe in KJ and the probability of us saving the team. We've done it before and we'll do it again.
WhamBamSlamm
Freshman
Posts: 92
And1: 1
Joined: Jun 18, 2012

Re: Seattle group gets Kings 

Post#295 » by WhamBamSlamm » Wed Jan 23, 2013 4:51 am

Haha told you all Sacramento will keep the team. No chance Stern lets Maloofs turn down 3 billion dollar man Burkle.

Better luck next time Seattle fans, if there will be a next time :)
ThEMvP
Veteran
Posts: 2,593
And1: 2
Joined: Jul 30, 2001

Re: Seattle group gets Kings 

Post#296 » by ThEMvP » Wed Jan 23, 2013 4:52 am

~73aLL372~ wrote:You do realize the sale was for 65% of that 525mm figure right? That figure is including relocation fees among other things which the city of Sacramento obviously doesn't have to pay. About your "business" stance, that's BS because the Kings WERE NOT for sale. I don't know if I can stress this enough. You do realize the Kings were basically all this family had left? It was their prized possession as all of there other assets went down the drain. There actually WERE local buyers that wanted to buy the team but KJ was forced to say no because of the family's stance.

And ok, who said that Ellison had to be the only person buying the majority stake in the team? It's going to be a partnership not a single man doing it all. And lol at you saying that I know nothing. I live in Sacramento and have been following this situation very closely so don't even go around trying to belittle me by saying I know nothing.

Anyways, I guess you'll just have to wait and see until KJ "officially" announces the big name partnership group looking to buy a large stake in the team. Then this "speculation"will become reality.


Yes, I do realise that it is 65% of 525mm, which is 340mm which I've mentioned in a previous post. As for relocation fees, fair enough, I didn't factor that in.

As for this thing that the Kings "weren't for sale" which is complete bull. Like I mentioned, everyone has a price. The Kings were valued at $300mm last year when the Maloofs said they weren't for sale. Well, money talks, and like I said, everyone has a price. If you had a home worth $300k, and some guy came over and offered to pay you $525k (75% ABOVE valuation), would that motivate you to sell? Maybe last year when KJ and the local buyers approached the Maloofs, they offered something near market valuation plus maybe a little goodwill, but that wasn't enough to motivate the Maloofs? In the end, the Seattle guys wanted it more, and didn't take "no" as an answer even if they were rebuffed by the Maloofs the first time. They wanted it more and were willing to pay more, and value the team at $225mm above its valuation. It's not too hard to understand. Money talks. If someone came up to me and offered to pay 75% more for my car, my home, my laptop, I'd sell it in a heartbeat.

As for Ellison, it's true that there can be a partnership, but he was the single individual with the most money that could make things happen. He was the home run that the Sacramento fans needed. Now they'll have to settle for doubles and hope that smaller investors would chip in (which again I stress, isn't impossible, but Ellison was obviously the best hope they had). We'll have to wait and see what other investors KJ has backing him up, but from the facts that have gone public right now, it doesn't look good.

And as for you living in Sacramento and have followed this situation? Well guess what? I follow it too since I was a huge Bibby and Abdur-Rahim fan back in the day, and we have this thing called the internet which miraculously makes it a lot easier for people living outside of your city to follow the same news.
ThEMvP
Veteran
Posts: 2,593
And1: 2
Joined: Jul 30, 2001

Re: Seattle group gets Kings 

Post#297 » by ThEMvP » Wed Jan 23, 2013 4:54 am

WhamBamSlamm wrote:Haha told you all Sacramento will keep the team. No chance Stern lets Maloofs turn down 3 billion dollar man Burkle.

Better luck next time Seattle fans, if there will be a next time :)

Looks like preliminary news is that Burkle and Mastrov are in, time to wait for more information
LLcoleJ
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 24,393
And1: 3,366
Joined: Jan 20, 2005
Location: El Segundo
Contact:
       

Re: Seattle group gets Kings 

Post#298 » by LLcoleJ » Wed Jan 23, 2013 4:57 am

~73aLL372~ wrote:

Thats fine. Another reason why I think the We Are Not For Sale stand is valid is the fact that the Maloofs had animosity towards the city of Sac after ruining their perfect plans of escaping to Anaheim. That combined with the fact that the Kings were all they had are very valid points supporting the notion that the local buyers never really had a chance to step in.


I agree with you on their motives. They are rats. But legally and from what we know about them, they can hide behind the fact that they " its not for sale" to in fact drum up the price tag. Look what took place,Anaheim, New Arena, Virginia Beach, Seattle. It's all a very obvious attempt to raise the value of their franchise.

But like I said, you guys will all see the truth in the next few weeks. I strongly believe in KJ and the probability of us saving the team. We've done it before and we'll do it again.


As per the quote above. If the end game is most money and stay in Sacramento that would be great for Sac. I just don't think and or trust the Maloofs are looking out for any other interests but them.

And that point is the worst for Sac Fan because the Maloofs don't seem to care about them.
Cheers. :beer: — Mags
ThEMvP
Veteran
Posts: 2,593
And1: 2
Joined: Jul 30, 2001

Re: Seattle group gets Kings 

Post#299 » by ThEMvP » Wed Jan 23, 2013 4:59 am

Phil XI wrote:KJ does not control who gets to bid on the Kings. Anything KJ is doing towards the Maloofs is done in 'good faith'.

The Kings are private and the Maloofs can sell them to whom they want, given the specs match the league. Technically they might not have been 4 Sale" but that means they could have been ( and have) listened to offers.

As an example: I own a business and it's not 4 sale. But if someone wants to make me an offer, I will listen. If I want that deal it's for sale, if not, it's not.

This is exactly what I'm trying to point out. The Kings are a private enteprrise. Maloofs can sell to whomever they like, and everything can be sold at a certain price. If someone came and threw free money at the Maloofs, they would accept it. This will just end up as a bidding war, and in the end the real winner are the Maloofs.

Edit: It just depends on who's willing to pay the higher price, Hansen's group, or the Sacramento buyers.
catch22
Junior
Posts: 254
And1: 5
Joined: Dec 06, 2005

Re: Seattle group gets Kings 

Post#300 » by catch22 » Wed Jan 23, 2013 4:59 am

WhamBamSlamm wrote:Haha told you all Sacramento will keep the team. No chance Stern lets Maloofs turn down 3 billion dollar man Burkle.

Better luck next time Seattle fans, if there will be a next time :)



Stop acting like anything is decided either way, it's getting old.

I don't know what stops the Seattle group from just upping the offer again if the Sacramento group matches the current offer.


Also, I think some people are downplaying that there's a signed agreement in place to sell the team to the Seattle group. Yes, the BOG has to approve it, but they also need a valid reason to reject it. Is another group matching the offer a good enough reason? I don't know.

The NBA dictating who owners can and cannot sell to(unless they're not financially able) is asking for trouble in my eyes.

Return to The General Board