Page 1 of 1
Moving to Nevada
Posted: Thu Apr 26, 2012 6:44 pm
by kevin44
I haven't heard anyone talk about this, but it sounds like trouble to me. Here are the facts:
A $650 million construction loan to build a stadium — 17,500 seat enclosed arena that would host events and possibly a professional basketball franchise
With financing in place, a proposed indoor arena in Henderson is gaining momentum, and construction could begin as early as October.
If the land sale goes smoothly and financing is fully secured, Milam said he hopes to start construction in October, with the arena targeted to open in September 2014.
The project is not contingent on an NBA team relocating to Las Vegas.
Whole article
http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2012/ap ... g-hurdles/This is where the Maloofs want to be, plus they won't have to pay the LA teams any fees. Money-wise this makes the most sense for the Maloofs.
Re: Moving to Nevada
Posted: Fri Apr 27, 2012 9:02 am
by pillwenney
Still seems like Stern would never allow a move to Vegas.
Re: Moving to Nevada
Posted: Sat Apr 28, 2012 10:33 am
by deadenddude
Why is it they can build an arena in two years but it was going to take Sacramento three. Anyway, I'm not too worried about this as far as the Kings go for several reasons.
1: The Kings would be a tenant there. We’ve all seen how impossible they are to negotiate and make happy so what are the odds of the owners of the LV arena bending over backwards and rolling out the red carpet for he Maloofs in the very city where they’re lost all but 2% of their casino? I’d say not very likely.
Remember these clowns want to control parking, don’t want to sign any long term leases, don’t want to put up collateral, etc. Sacramento didn’t play that game with them and I doubt LV will either.
2: Size wise LV is in the same realm as Sacramento. It doesn’t have the huge population base, big corporate base, T.V. dollars, etc. that makes Anaheim so attractive to them.
3: It’s not at all a proven NBA market, or any other sport for that matter. LV is a tourist town. I have serious doubts about how an NBA team would do there and even if it did OK, it’s not likely it’d ever match the level of support Sacramento has shown the Kings for almost 30 years.
4: I have doubts whether the Maloofs will even still be owners in 2014. I think they’ll either sell or try a last ditch relocation to Anaheim next March and then sell if they don’t get approval.
Re: Moving to Nevada
Posted: Sat Apr 28, 2012 9:51 pm
by kevin44
It looks like the Kings are gone. Stern & the Mayor have given up working with the Maloofs. The Kings are stuck here 1 more year then I have to believe they are gone. No way Arco gets remodeled. I hope no one goes to any more games next season. I won't give the Maloofs a penny more.
Re: Moving to Nevada
Posted: Mon Apr 30, 2012 1:53 am
by ICMTM
The Kings have to get approval to move. I don't know if they will get that. There is a reason they didn't file for relocation. It's either because they were not going to get the majority vote or because they wanted to stay in Sacramento all along. I think the majority vote is the key.
Re: Moving to Nevada
Posted: Mon Apr 30, 2012 4:35 pm
by kevin44
Reading the stories on Seattle moving to Oklahoma it wasn't very hard to get the votes. "NBA owners overwhelmingly approved the Sonics' relocation bid to Oklahoma City today by a 28-2." The owners are in it together, especially with the new deal. The Sonics had 2 more years on the Seattle lease when they moved. The new CBA that shares the money wants all the teams do well. The more tickets you sell, the more money an owner has to spend on improving their team. The Kings are in the worst arena, have low attendance, & are one of the worst teams in the NBA.
Re: Moving to Nevada
Posted: Mon Apr 30, 2012 5:09 pm
by Wolfay
kevin44 wrote:Reading the stories on Seattle moving to Oklahoma it wasn't very hard to get the votes. "NBA owners overwhelmingly approved the Sonics' relocation bid to Oklahoma City today by a 28-2." The owners are in it together, especially with the new deal. The Sonics had 2 more years on the Seattle lease when they moved. The new CBA that shares the money wants all the teams do well. The more tickets you sell, the more money an owner has to spend on improving their team. The Kings are in the worst arena, have low attendance, & are one of the worst teams in the NBA.
OKC isn't in the backyard of anybody to piss off, unlike Anaheim.
Re: Moving to Nevada
Posted: Mon Apr 30, 2012 8:13 pm
by kevin44
That's true, but the Maloofs don't care who they piss off. No one can force them to stay here or sell the team. The more I look at Anaheim the less likely I think they can afford to move there. Seattle, Las Vegas, or remodel Arco without Sacramento is all that's left for them. No way they put over 120 million into Arco an arena they have been saying for years can't be remodeled. The owners won't stop them from moving, except the LA teams won't be happy if they go to Anaheim. They want a brand new arena without putting any money into it.
Re: Moving to Nevada
Posted: Mon Apr 30, 2012 8:47 pm
by pillwenney
Didn't Seattle eventually get a new arena anyway?
Re: Moving to Nevada
Posted: Tue May 1, 2012 4:26 pm
by kevin44
They are still working on a new arena.
http://www.sacbee.com/2012/02/06/424183 ... tball.html The Bee had another article about this mess saying that if Sac does build a new arena without the Maloofs they could walk away from the 77 million it owes the city.