ImageImageImageImageImage

Ron Burkle

Moderators: KF10, codydaze

Sacballer916
Freshman
Posts: 56
And1: 0
Joined: Feb 26, 2012

Ron Burkle 

Post#1 » by Sacballer916 » Fri Mar 1, 2013 7:35 pm

Wouln't it make more sense if he was the owner of the Kings instead of Mastrov? Forbes has him estimated at $3.1 Billion. Does this mean Burkle will only own the new arena?
User avatar
RIPskaterdude
RealGM
Posts: 92,818
And1: 37,039
Joined: Jul 10, 2003
Location: #MakeAmericaGreatAgain
   

Re: Ron Burkle 

Post#2 » by RIPskaterdude » Fri Mar 1, 2013 8:47 pm

He'll be part owner, but Mastrov will be the face behind the franchise. Why would he just put up $$$ for the arena and have no stake in the team?
Image
User avatar
wiff
Head Coach
Posts: 6,887
And1: 21
Joined: Jul 22, 2006
Location: Gettin da boot!

Re: Ron Burkle 

Post#3 » by wiff » Fri Mar 1, 2013 9:05 pm

I didn't realize the Maloofs were in a contract with Burkle and Mastrov? Last I knew the Maloofs and Hansen had a signed agreement the BOG was voting on.
User avatar
RIPskaterdude
RealGM
Posts: 92,818
And1: 37,039
Joined: Jul 10, 2003
Location: #MakeAmericaGreatAgain
   

Re: Ron Burkle 

Post#4 » by RIPskaterdude » Fri Mar 1, 2013 9:32 pm

Go away
Image
User avatar
tru6playa
Pro Prospect
Posts: 905
And1: 103
Joined: Aug 09, 2008
Location: San Francisco, CA
     

Re: Ron Burkle 

Post#5 » by tru6playa » Fri Mar 1, 2013 10:16 pm

I read an article about burkles bid for AEG, which owns a percentage of the Lakers (30% I believe?), would be a reason why he couldn't own the Kings. You can't own percentage in different teams.
bennith13 wrote:We are going to win. Sac can not compete with our offer our or owners or our arena plan. They just don't have their act together like we do at this point in time.


Supersonics41 wrote:This thing is over for Sacramento! Well they might get the return of the Monarch's.
Sacballer916
Freshman
Posts: 56
And1: 0
Joined: Feb 26, 2012

Re: Ron Burkle 

Post#6 » by Sacballer916 » Fri Mar 1, 2013 10:37 pm

RIPskaterdude wrote:He'll be part owner, but Mastrov will be the face behind the franchise. Why would he just put up $$$ for the arena and have no stake in the team?

So we'll have two owners? Why not just one like most others?
User avatar
longfellow44
Head Coach
Posts: 6,034
And1: 243
Joined: May 04, 2007
Location: Washinton DC

Re: Ron Burkle 

Post#7 » by longfellow44 » Fri Mar 1, 2013 11:50 pm

^^most teams have minority owners, the person who owns the largest pieces of the pie is generally viewed as the face of the ownership group. Currently the maloofs only own something like 65% of the kings franchise but it's the controlling interest so they are the face of the owners.
kevin44
Pro Prospect
Posts: 760
And1: 25
Joined: Dec 17, 2003

Re: Ron Burkle 

Post#8 » by kevin44 » Fri Mar 1, 2013 11:59 pm

Will the Maloofs sell to this group? They said they wouldn't & with a smaller offer than Seattle I see trouble brewing. The damn Maloofs might just keep the team. Will find out in April, but I have a feeling the Kings are gone.
User avatar
Wolfay
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 7,656
And1: 649
Joined: Aug 13, 2005
Location: Sacramento, CA
       

Re: Ron Burkle 

Post#9 » by Wolfay » Sat Mar 2, 2013 2:34 am

kevin44 wrote:Will the Maloofs sell to this group? They said they wouldn't & with a smaller offer than Seattle I see trouble brewing. The damn Maloofs might just keep the team. Will find out in April, but I have a feeling the Kings are gone.


The Maloofs have said that they would entertain "backup" offers.

Anyway, I have a feeling that there'll be a lot of Sonics fans crying that Stern screwed them again come April.
Image
User avatar
blind prophet
RealGM
Posts: 10,574
And1: 3,306
Joined: Dec 08, 2011
 

Re: Ron Burkle 

Post#10 » by blind prophet » Sat Mar 2, 2013 2:59 am

No matter what role Burkle ends up having, glad he is still part of this process.
Sacballer916
Freshman
Posts: 56
And1: 0
Joined: Feb 26, 2012

Re: Ron Burkle 

Post#11 » by Sacballer916 » Sat Mar 2, 2013 6:50 pm

Burkle should have a bigger role
Inigo_Montoya
Pro Prospect
Posts: 865
And1: 42
Joined: Jun 07, 2012
Location: Sacramento, CA

Re: Ron Burkle 

Post#12 » by Inigo_Montoya » Sat Mar 2, 2013 6:52 pm

Sacballer916 wrote:Burkle should have a bigger role

I don't know, considering how much the Maloofs reportedly hate Burkle, keeping him in the background is probably a good thing.
User avatar
tru6playa
Pro Prospect
Posts: 905
And1: 103
Joined: Aug 09, 2008
Location: San Francisco, CA
     

Re: Ron Burkle 

Post#13 » by tru6playa » Sat Mar 2, 2013 7:39 pm

Inigo_Montoya wrote:
Sacballer916 wrote:Burkle should have a bigger role

I don't know, considering how much the Maloofs reportedly hate Burkle, keeping him in the background is probably a good thing.



Plus, Burkle seems to be a behind-the-scenes type of owner. Mastrov has the ultimate basketball fan personality that all fans hope for in their owner (Mark Cuban).
bennith13 wrote:We are going to win. Sac can not compete with our offer our or owners or our arena plan. They just don't have their act together like we do at this point in time.


Supersonics41 wrote:This thing is over for Sacramento! Well they might get the return of the Monarch's.
User avatar
Cruel_Ruin
Head Coach
Posts: 6,091
And1: 767
Joined: Nov 05, 2006
Location: The intersection of intellect, imagination and insanity
   

Re: Ron Burkle 

Post#14 » by Cruel_Ruin » Sun Mar 3, 2013 12:37 am

It doesn't really matter who has the bigger share in the team, they are both contributing to both ownership and the arena.
ICMTM
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 16,347
And1: 176
Joined: Jun 20, 2004
Location: Sacramento, Ca
     

Re: Ron Burkle 

Post#15 » by ICMTM » Sun Mar 3, 2013 12:54 am

I like that they are split and am just as much interested in the downtown plan as I am keeping the Kings. Lets face it. Downtown sucks!
KANGZZZZZ!
User avatar
boogie-reke
Head Coach
Posts: 6,919
And1: 244
Joined: Nov 05, 2010
   

Re: Ron Burkle 

Post#16 » by boogie-reke » Sun Mar 3, 2013 11:46 pm

Burkle to Mastrov is like Ballmer is to Hansen.
becorz
Veteran
Posts: 2,654
And1: 507
Joined: Feb 15, 2008
       

Re: Ron Burkle 

Post#17 » by becorz » Thu Mar 21, 2013 7:51 pm

I think that the reason Burkle is heading up the arena charge is because he sees the arena as his most likely place to make money. We won't know for sure until details come out, but I bet Burkle is going to be in charge of running the arena on a day to day basis and will make money from that. I don't think he sees any profit to be made from buying the Kings at the price they are going to have to pay. Burkle is a smart business man and I think taking charge on the arena is a business decision.

Return to Sacramento Kings