If you think the media is going to run in place until MLB Spring Training starts, then you are mistaken. The NBA can choose to not announce their approval of the sale of the Kings to Chris Hansen until April if they want, but columnists with nothing better to do will start pressing.
What else are they going to do, in depth interviews with pitchers and catchers. Yikes!
The vetting of the proposed sale will start making its way around to the various owners soon enough. Unless 8 owners can bring themselves to say no to Hansen around the All-Star Game media blitz then we are just waiting for something official later.
We wait.
And now, filler:
About the Kings roster while I watch them choke away the game to the Jazz.
Cousins is heading down the path of Rasheed Wallace. No matter how good he is, his lack of self control could prevent him from leading any group of people with any confidence. World Peace, Danny Fortson, Rasheed Wallace, plenty of nutty players have some productive games and seasons. The Kings will never get a fair exchange in trade, talent for talent, without the crazy discount. All of those other nutty guys did turn out to be useful role players at times, but not until somebody made the mistake of giving them too much money. Don’t be that team.
So, what to do?
A change of scenery, different coaches, and somebody who is assigned to keep Cousins away from the refs. Whatever, he is on the roster next year.
I can’t take another minute of Jimmer.
Evans jogs his way though defensive picks for the 1st half of the Jazz game, um, not on my team you don’t. SAT that dude in the offseason. He is talented, but, I don’t see him getting the most out if it.
What is John Salmons doing handling the ball in any set play?
Lastly, don’t get all upset, and hear me out, but, Jason Thompson reminds me a little bit of young Vin Baker. As long as he doesn’t turn into old, fat, Vin, and has a reasonable contract, I think he could help a team.
I intended to post this tomorrow, but, I’m a little under the weather, and the non-announcement from KJ will be the non-news tomorrow.
Get well soon, Baker! :-)
Hopefully you don’t have that flu that’s going around.
+2
Maybe that’s what Stein meant. If we don’t see a great deal of owners objecting to the sale over ASG weekend, this thing will be approved in April.
I think so.
Owners have giant egos and want attention, if enough had heartburn you’d hear it ASG weekend.
The “state of the league” speech Stern gives will be a weird one.
Problem is, Jimmer is like Tebow. If you traded him, you couldn’t get much value. Releasing him would be a better option.
No, Jimmer now is like Tebow last year- you can still get some asset from the one team where he has built in cachet. He needs to go in a package to Utah, or straight across for a 2, probably.
Agreed, his value is higher now than it otherwise be in the future.
It’s just rough watching him paddle the ball around.
Oh, he’s dogawful. He’s too slow with the ball, his shot has two hitches, he’s the worst defender on a team with a 5’6″ point- that could be Klay Thompson.
I don’t know- at this point, both Cousins and Evans are the proverbial “hot, crazy girl in a bad relationship”. Some GM will think they can save them still, and you should still be able to get relatively high value. As for Thompson, he showed more tonight as the 5 with Hayes/Robinson than playing the 4 opposite Cousins in the games I saw last week.
So, next year he is in a new relationship. We find out.
I had this analogy with Danny Fortson; Danny was the ox, Frodo was the Ox Pecker, and the referees were the blood sucking ticks.
BB made a more obvious point after the game, somebody should have kept him away from the refs at half time. Hire a vet benchwarmer to keep him away from the refs and on the court. It’s surprisingly cheap.
Very true. Like Michael Beasley this time last year. :-)
Bruski’s at it again:
http://probasketballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/02/04/kings-ownership-documents-reveal-major-potential-stumbling-blocks-for-seattle/
Looking at section 5.2 it seems it’s a non-issue. If there is language that the majority partners, if at or above 65% control, have “the sole and unrestricted right to and discretion to determine all matters in connection with any sale of the partnership Property or any part thereof…” I don’t see how he can say “but that doesn’t apply to ROFR because uhhh it doesn’t say that in the ROFR part”.
That straight says the Maloofs can essentially do whatever they want without limitation.
So unrestricted means you’re restricted to follow the RoFr copter? Good one Bruski.
Being unrestricted would be awesome if it weren’t for all these darned restrictions!
The Maloofs own 53%, not 65%. The Hansen-Ballmer group is buying their share and the 12% share of one of the minority owners.
I realize that, but the Maloofs and the minority owner can come together to form that “super majority” of sorts.
They can? Or does that provision only apply to one person or entity that holds 65% or more, not two stakeholders combined?
I mean, it’s no coincidence that the Maloofs bought up shares over their time as owners to get to 65% with their buddy Heinrich, is it?
I think Bruski might be a glue sniffer.
He did just proove your point though. With no football going on the Sacramento writers will at least have some audience and the national media will start writing their own stories off of it.
Yeah, Sacramento. try to hold up NBA business on an ambiguously defined clause in a prior sales contract. I’m sure there will be no repercussions from the league.
That doesn’t seem like one Sacramento can really win- there are just too many differing interpretations, and that’s from THEIR angle.
Way to be a week and a half late Bruski.
Im sure this is something the millionaire lawyers of the nba and hansens both totally whiffed on. Im also sure dragging all this through court is the best way to stay in good graces with the league…..
Keep in mind that James Ham shares the byline with Bruski. James is one of the Here We Stay founders.
Again I just continue to watch this play out and all I can think if is “been there…good luck with that.”
They need to maintain hope. Its the appropriate goal of everything they do and this article headline is no exception.
I think we’ll keep IT though. Just makes too much sense to let him play in his hometown.
I like JT too. He’s not going to ever be confused with Tim Duncan, but near 7 footers with the requisite skill and coordination to play in the league don’t grow on trees.
If I thought Cousins had half the natural talent Rasheed Wallace had, his behavior would be much less troubling.
JT is locked up for awhile and his contract is reasonable.
League lawyers have already supposedly vetted ROFR and say it’s a non-issue.
In theory doesn’t that mean the Maloofs have the right to match whatever the bankrupt percent is sold for?
Yes and they have more of a right to do that than the minority owners have at matching Hansen’s deal.
Yeah I have heard they have vetted that as well. You dont think the NBA had lawyers there just to tell the judge what they already thought they knew do ya. The NBA lawyers are there to protect the owner(s) which in this case is the Maloofs and obviously the NBA itself. The NBA will also protect its future owners in Hansen/Ballmer especially once it is a foregone conclusion.
In reality I thought the wording on the RoFR would be much more open to intepretation which would make it come down too the judge. There are great arguments for Hansen and the Maloofs with the 65% (pretty ironic that this is exactly the number being bought huh?). Its obvious that Hansen has already prepared for this and it may quite possibly the only legal ground that can be used by Sacramento trying to squeeze thre way in.
BTW the minority owners have all of 30 days from notice of sale. Who knows when they were actually notified. (correct me if I am wrong on that interpretation). So essentially its already been 15 days since it went public and they may have been notified some time prior. Maybe just maybe they were notified when the Maloofs were negotiating with a local investor (Ellison) prior to Hansen’s purchase agreement. Quite possibly thats why the non-refundable deposit was made on the 31st because that would be 30 days after the minority owners were notified that the Kings were going to be sold to Hansen. I dont know how strict the notification process has to be or how formal but almost everyone was aware that a deal with Seattle was close a month ago.
SO if the minority owners were notified of a pending sale and who knows if the minority owners’ assumption was a local group lets say in December this whole issue is null and void.
If this is the smoking gun then I am much happier. Some feel free to disagree because this is really enlightening but at the same time nothing that doesnt already seem dealt with accordingly.
Unless “notice of sale” is specifically defined in the contract, the sale would have to be complete before a notice of sale could be made. So, as of yet no time window would have started. There could be a completed sale, contingent upon any claims of ROFR, but that would be after approval by the NBA of the sale. There is no sale now. Unless it is specifically defined, a lawyer could easily argue in court that there has currently been no “notice of sale” as their is currently no “sale”.
Incorrect, a notice of sale is given before a sale is completed. It’d essentially open the 30 day window and the sale would become complete at its conclusion. A homeowner in foreclosure does not get a notice of sale after the auction, they get it beforehand with the date of the impending sale stated.
Well if they dont have the right to refuse yet because of the BoG approval….doesnt that mean that its really a non-issue because once the NBA approves the sale/relocation (which alot are now saying will essentially happen one after the other) its done. The NBA will have approved and that will be the point of no return and the NBA will flex its muscles on KJ and Sacramento and tell them to back off like a few years ago around here but with a different issue.
BTW if it was an issue with the minority owners they would have raised it by now. I have a sneaking suspicion that they already knew even though they said they werent notified, but they wanted to save face and not deal with the fans backlash for not stepping up. Also its pretty clear cut that unless the minority owners have the cash up front (within 45 days) or within a couple promissory notes that they cannot buy the 65%.
Also in my interpretation of the facts of the document which Im sure is having some key points left out for Bruski’s benefit (spin).
In the end he talks about Hansen/Ballmer may having to buy up all the shares and alludes to them not even blinking at it. Well no duh…… That would also lend to the rumors in Sacramento that the family with the highest stake left out of the minority owners (13% I believe) are already in negotiations to sell.
Nowhere does it say the RoFR would transfer in the bankruptcy case to the winning bid in fact I bet that if they make a fuss about Hansen that it most assuredly will not transfer. Quite frankly it looks good on the surface for Sacramento but once you dig deeper and use legal thinking along with a common sense approach this actually isnt very good. We already knew it was in the contract but now we know the avenues in vetting the issue.
Honestly the NBA probably already vetted this issue a while ago as they probably anticipated it coming up in the media. The NBA is a office full of all sorts of expert ex-attorneys or present attorneys.
If it does not specifically state that the ROFR is not transferrable, then it would go with the percentage purchased. It is part of the property. The whole situation does not look good for Sacramento.
Travern-Correct me if I am misconstruing what you said but wouldnt that lend to the fact it could be used with the 7% then even though the Maloofs could use their own RoFR on the 7% against whomever purchases it.
Theoretically it could get so wishy washy that a court would just say the heck with it if the Maloofs play their own RoFR card against the minority owners or the 7% BK share if the auction winners want to muck it up.
Oh, it could get really wish-washy if the players involved felt like it; but the court would not say the heck with it. As long as the players wished to spend a lot (i mean a lot) on the lawsuit(s) the court would hear the case. The court would decide who was legally correct (not right). Especially if it became billionaire against billionaire. I think the chance of a lawsuit is pretty low. It would take someone, like Ellison, getting obstinate and willing to spend tens of millions of dollars on a lawsuit. It would be a money pit, on top of the cost of a team. It would not seem to be worth it.
So the ROFRcopter will be OFFICIALLY grounded on the 13th?
They are NOT going to save their team through the courts. we know better than that.
Since Hansen bought the 12% minority owner share, the minority owners must have been notified prior to the sale. I don’t see how they couldn’t have been.
I thought that as well. The only person talking about ROFR isn’t even an owner.
Yeah, I think that would be true. Now, there is the mess with the bankruptcy. Who gets the notice . . . the the trustees or the bankrupt owner? I would think that there is provision in the partnership agreement regarding how bankruptcy of any partner works. Again, I think this is something that the Hansen group attorneys would not just let slip.
I doubt any court action will happen, and I doubt Sacramento will come up with investors to attempt to buy the team. I think Hansen will purchase the team. Unless some really huge money comes into the equation (money huge enough to buy a team, and spend tens of millions of dollar on lawsuit/court costs); it does not seem worhwhile for anyone to take this to court.
I agree with trolltossin. I would wager that the minority owners were notified of the sale some time BEFORE the public was notified with the press releases by Hansen, the Maloofs, and the NBA.
Sacramento’s sole ROFR hope lies with the 7% bankruptcy share. I have a hard time believing that the courts will rule that someone who doesn’t currently own a share of the team will have a say in a purchase that was made months before they acquired it
Non issue.
It is only a non-issue if huge money doesn’t show up.
The chances that the court would rule that the new minority owner gets retroactive right of first refusal are ridiculously tiny. So huge money will be irrelevant.
Plus I think the minority owners are saying they werent notified of the sale because they dont want to be considered bad guys for not using their RoFR.
No where does it say an outside entity can partner up with a minority owner. The minority owners would have to come up with huge money on their own IMO.
The only minority owner I’ve heard say they weren’t notified was Cook, and that’s presumably because his share is now held by the bankruptcy court. Have there been others? I do remember a minority owner telling the press he was not allowed to talk with them about the sale.
If the minority owners were notified AFTER the public announcement they would be furious. These are still very rich people who would not appreciate being disrespected and left in the dark.
I agree; they knew and I bet they have known for a while. I believe that the only minority owners with enough equity to come close are the ones with the 13% stake and they barely have 600 million of equity. That wont be enough to purchase the team and help with the arena.
And the Maloofs are such a respected business entity because of the esteem they hold for the feelings of their business partners?
No, Huge money could argue there has been no “sale”, so there is nothing retroactive. The huge money could work through any of the minority owners, not just the percentage in bankruptcy. The lawsuit would be if there really was a ROFR. The lawyers would use other sections/clauses/segments of the contract to claim the ROFR was only applicable under certain conditions (or something like that); and the other side would do the same thing to claim that the ROFR was inviolate. They would end up arguing over definitions of words, and need to dig up cases to prove their definition of the word was correct. I mean each word not specifically defined in the contract. It is even possible to argue over the definition of the words in the definition. Cases like that take huge money, and usually the one willing to commit the most money, wins. Huge money makes a huge difference.
Anyway, it is doubtful that any huge money will show up to keep Hansen from purchasing the Kings.
Then you enter into the “tangling with the NBA” scenario for Sacramento. It ends badly. Not for the NBA. Won’t happen anyway- that 7% will likely change hands after the sale and move are approved.
what leads to your belief that they cannot get huge money? Because they havent announced it yet? Just wondering?
Their biggest potential money man has shown interest in one of a small number of businesses that, given their minority stake in the Lakers, actually CREATES more hurdles toward a Kings purchase.
Mastrov alone is not credible enough to front a small market ownership group to rival Hansen/Ballmer, and even a dalliance with AEG is stopping for water in a 100 yard sprint- by the time Burkle puts his cup down, this race will be over.
Yes, because it has not happened. It should take no long process if there were individuals with the proper amounts of money. The individuals with the money for a team, who want a team, would already have shown up and made their move. They would gain nothing by being quiet, and gain much by announcing. I don’t think that individuals with money to buy a team, who have never wanted a team, can be recruited to spend the money on a team, and all of the headaches that might go with the purchase. So, it is possible that a wealthy enough “whale” may still show up out of the blue; but I doubt it. The “whale” should be in full scale PR mode now. And no “whale” is. The more noise a whale could make right now, the better the chance the whale would be successful in the attempt to buy the team.
Imagine the public support in Sacramento, and California, if some whale announced he was going to “fight to keep the Kings”. That support would snowball. They would go crazy in Sacramento. The NBA would never approve a relocation. It would basically be over. This has not happened; any savvy NBA owner wannabe with the cash would already be doing it. That is why I think huge money is not forthcoming for Sacramento.
Plus the most talked about whale is Burkle and it seems that he may have looked into all this and decided that it may not be worth his time.
Especially if he was already making a play on AEG when the sale was announced. I think Burkle from a financial stand point would much rather have a 30% stake in the Lakers than a majority owner of the Kings with a highly inflated price especially since a new arena in Sacramento at that purchase price would most likely need two anchor tenants to be viable by his own standards. I think Burkle sees too much risk and not enough reward compared to owning AEG and having a hadn in multiple venues in multiple sports while also having a decent share of the Lakers which in the future if other minority stakes were in play he could buy his way into the majority owner. I admit I know next to nothing about how the Lakers ownership is divided.
Owning 30% of the Lakers and all the other holdings AEG has is much more viable to Burkle personally than a Kings franchise that has an incredibly inflated price tag.
I would be suprised if Burkle would step up now.
So even though the sale will have been completed by the 17-18 before the auction, they’ll argue there was no sale? That won’t work.
And it’s also much more likely that Hansen and the Maloofs could argue that a minority owner cannot bring in an outside party to finance their ROFR bid or if they attempted to borrow the money from a whale it would likely exceed the NBA’s limits on debt to buy a team.
These reasons are strong parts of why a whale would likely not even attempt to go this route, best case scenario, they get a drawn out legal battle that they likely lose, worst case scenario, they get a tiny legal battle they lose very quickly.
There is no “sale” until there is a sale. An outside party would not need to be part of the minority partner bid. An outside interest could form a private contract with the minority owner, and form a shell corporation with the outside owner as CEO, then pay the minority owner the amount needed for the bid for his “work” at the shell corporation. This would give the minority owner the cash for the bid, and it would also not be minority owner debt; so it gets around the debt limit as well. It is doubtful that this would happen; but that is a simplified way to legally get around the rules.
So why wouldnt they pursue this route you have outlined? Essentially you are saying the BoG would have to approve the sale first then this scenario COULD occur. BUT its pretty evident that when the NBA BoG approves the sale its game over
That is my point, if it were going to happen, it would seem that it already would be happening. Too much PR time is being wasted. The whale effort would not have to wait for the BOG approval. That is just when a good lawyer could argue that the “notice of sale” happened for any time limits.
I think it pretty much is game over for Sacramento. They are down to a hail Mary pass.
A hail Mary pass thrown by the 5th string quarterback.
Once the BOG approves it, it’s over. You keep saying there’s no sale until the NBA approves it, but if that’s the case than ROFR is moot because they would get a chance to match a sale that’s already been completed. Hansen would own the team. Done. Game over, man. Game over. So what would they be matching? They’d get a chance to try and convince Hansen to return the team?
There IS a sale. There’s a signed purchase agreement. You can’t say there’s no sale because the NBA hasn’t approved it. That’s like saying you didn’t sell your car because you haven’t transferred the title, even though you have a signed bill of sale.
Hansen/Ballmer/Nordstom’s are not stupid, I am sure they did their homework. The only ones crying foul here is that pinhead Bruski and buffoon Hasler at the Bee. If the minority owners were in a tizzy they would speak up by now
“Any offer received by the General Partners to purchase a portion, or all, of their interest, which was not purchased by the Limited Partners pursuant to their Right of First Refusal, would be considered an offer to purchase that percentage of the total entity.”
Which Im sure the minority owners inevitably will not be so bashful about accepting. They get to not be the “bad guys,” since that is the Maloofs and they get to make a huge amount on their return on investment. Im sure the minority owners are really pissed especially with how vocal they have been! Sending out daily pressers with their upset feelings on not being notified.
I actually,once again, feel even better now that this has been actually shown in at least some form of fact on the RoFR as it is written in the past agreement the Maloofs had.
It said there would need to be a request in writing to invoke the ROFR. I’m sure SOMEONE would have found out about that if it had been filed.
Hansen’s attorneys had to review this agreement during the negotiations with the Maloofs. They would never ignore any part of it. They didn’t use some storefront attorney. They used the best. There is no way that attorney would miss a ROFR. There is no way these matters were not thoroughly researched.
+1
Traven, are you still against the arena deal and convinced that Hansen is stealing public funds, by the way?
I am against the arena deal. I think Hansen should pay for the arena himself. I am not against Seattle having an NBA team. Anyway there are plenty of venues to debate the arena. The people, who operate this site, want a site that is about basketball, and the Sonics, and not about debating an arena. They are right. Not every venue needs to be about debating an arena; and I am not so impolite as to do that on this venue, and I am not interested in doing subtle propaganda, or word trickery if that is your concern.
It just seems that a lot of your posts delve into a variety of scenarios of how this deal could easily fall apart if just the right guy came out with a bag of money in Sac and so on. That would be something you’d prefer, right? If it means no Seattle team and having this arena deal expire? I just want to make sure we understand where you’re coming from.
Frankly, given the seeming hundreds of hours he spent over the last year asserting that we were such morons, for all the reasons we thought that the process would carry through to this degree, I’m shocked that he sees any place as “not the platform for his views”.
The idea that the site administration has decided to give him a level headed airing after he essentially used the main local newspaper to engage in borderline libelous assertions (and make no mistake, commenters who defended the ST line got A LOT more play within the “Terms of Service”.) demonstrates that they’re much more equitable than I would be. But it makes my skin crawl.
Andy, I give back the attitude I am given. It is of much more interest to me to discuss specific details, than to brawl; but when the brawl is brought to me, I fight back. A contention supported by only calling individuals “morons” is not supported. The discussion of the arena, and the MOU, was not about the process; but about the proposal outlined in detail in the MOU. It is not a case of calling people names, and rooting for, or against, a process; it is the MOU, and whether or not one thinks it is good business for Seattle.
Names like “world class chumps”?
Sean, Bring it at me, and you get it back.
I preferred to dicuss the MOU, Seattle City Council presentations, the Arena Review Panel Report, and the related official documents.
The idea is to compare notes on the details, so that the details are hammered out, and those interested in the details can come to a common agreement on fact.
Now, individuals can have different views on a subject based upon personal philosophy, but on the factual details both draw from the same facts. There is no such thing in pro-facts or con-facts. Facts are facts, the details of a contract are written in black and white in the contract.
Discussion of the details of a contract, even when coming from opposing sides, is valuable so that emotion, and inaccuracy are removed from the common agreement on fact.
I am interested in details, when another individual, who is also interested in details takes issue with my understanding of a detail; a discussion of the detail is valuable. That is valuable in order to minimize mistakes, and is educational for both.
So, when doing that, and someone just starts attacking me, they get it back. I do not allow myself to be a punching bag.
Perhaps you should read my posts closer. I do not prefer Seattle not getting an NBA team. I live in Seattle, and am not rooting for Sacramento in this deal. Nor do I think I have promoted the idea of this deal falling apart. A basketball team is separate from an arena. I am also not the type that plays games and wishes for things to expire, there is something sleazy about that. I am interested in the contracts, and machinations of the Kings purchase.
You sure its because you would have no backup really in your assertions and be blasted by about UM everyone?
Yes I am sure.
Oh, be fair now. “Stealing public funds” was one of the more flattering assertions he made about Hansen.
It’s quiet in the home front, That’s the way Chris Hansen likes it to be.
In the other hand, Mayor KJ has to have press conferences to make himself
more visible as he is a politician who is trying to embark on his political survival.
I expect a lot posturing and grandstanding from the Mayor to get some air time ,
and some possible votes in the upcoming election. Good for him.
I love the attitude of our ownership group led by Mr. Hansen /Ballmer/Nordstrom.
The quiet confidence, The business sense of knowing how to bid for a team that is
going to be in Seattle, and not over paying for a franchise that will stay in Sacramento.
In my mind i doubt that anyone would be interested in bidding 525 million to keep it
in Sacramento, If Larry Ellison is one of the big whales that KJ is talking about, Well
he will eventually move the team to his hometown of San Jose, I think that BOG knows that and will not approve it.
At this point the Seattle group is more organize and ready, comparing to Sacramento,
who thinks big like their slogan, but is scrambling for answers and is vying for time.
In my humble opinion I think this is a done deal! Intellectually, financially, Marketability, This team makes sense to be in Seattle to be the Supersonics.
I do believe that the city of Sacramento is a basketball town and is deserving of a team.
Maybe in 2015 they can be awarded a expansion franchise. By that time Sacramento
will have an arena plan with land and financing.
For now let’s bring back the Green and Gold of the Supersonics, back where it belongs, SEATTLE.
The political part of this is pretty big from KJ’s side if you think about it. If he doesnt at least put up a mirage that he is fighting this till the bitter end some people would think that he is an ex-NBA player who watched as an the only professional team in town and being the NBA at the same time would be very bad especially in dirty campaigning.
I could see the other guy running against him now. How do expect KJ to do his job when he couldnt even keep the league that he made his fame in, in town?
No matter what happens, KJ better hope there are more Kings fans in Sac than not because from what I’ve read, anyone who is not a Kings DIE-HARD is pretty pissed that is using all his time and resources on this.
Q for lurking lawyers: could the Maloofs temporarily own the 13% to accumulate a total of 65% before selling all of the 65% to Hansen, making the ROFR and relocation a non-issue?
Would having $30 million help make that possible?
Leverage the $30, put the 13% in some kind if escrow, and transfer the whole thing to Hansen.
Clearly. I am not a lawyer.
I am not an attorney but I spent a huge chunk as a paralegal working with a lot of them. Read hundreds of contracts. I can’t imagine any circumstance that they could not purchase any additional shares (probably with the appropriate notices) at any time. I don’t see a reason that it wouldn’t be allowed.
That is a good one for McCann. It would seem the BOG would have to approve the 13% share purchase by the Maloofs; but I am not clear if the approval requirement applies to current NBA team owners.
BOG doesn’t have to approve any non-majority shares of the team.
Questions if you don’t mind me piggybacking.
1. Would ROFR complicate the bankruptcy auction at all? Wouldn’t the partners need to have the option to buy the 7%?
2. If the sale is approved prior to the auction would it be moot anyway since the Trustee has no way to match?
Just curious if any lawyers are reading.
1. ROFR goes in order of the percentage owned by a party, so once there is a winning bid for the 7%, if ROFR works the way some seem to think, the Maloofs or Hansen (depending on if the NBA has approved the deal) would have the first opportunity to match.
2. It is extremely unlikely that the winner of the auction would be granted retroactive ROFR if the sale has been completed via NBA approval.
Here’s my question….Let’s say that Burkle et al, come up with an offer for the Kings that is larger than the offer that Hansen has proposed, and agreed to. Now lets say that the NBA then says that they will go with the Sac deal to keep the team, and the higher team valuation. Does Hansen now have a chance to come back with an even higher number to beat the new Sac offer, then does Sac get a chance to beat that, and so on and so on…..Would seem only fair, and in the best interest of the NBA as a whole to drive the price of one of it’s lowest valued franchises, into the the top 5-10. If it gets into a bidding war, I don’t see how Hansen/Ballmer could lose…Not only do they have more money, but also have the NHL wanted in Seattle as well, unlike SacTown, and would allow the Hansen/Ballmer group to pay more as they would have more revenue streams to help cover the sales price…..As for Cousins, Seattle has always been a town where elite free agents come to die (in all sports save some exceptions) and where head cases/problems come to and ressurect a carreer (with some exceptions of course)….I’m down for keeping cousins for at least 1 year to see how he responds to new owners/coaches/city…Obviously he has talent, and is putting up numbers without full dedication to his game, and effort…..If this guy put out 100%, and was surrounded by people that he would look up to and listen too, I could see him having a great careeer in Seattle…..If after the first year he doesn’t respond then trade him (keep in mind I have no idea if he’s a free agent after next season, and if he is, there is a big desicion to be made). Even now, with people complaining about his effort he’s still putting up like 17pts, and 10 reb a game, can’t remember a center for Seattle putting up those kind of numbers every game, or close to it, since Sikma (was he our last all star center, ug, if so). If he’s not a free agent after next year, I say give him a chance with the new owners/coaches/team and city……
A random Kevin Johnson factoid that I just learned: his wife is Michelle Rhee, the controversial former superintendent of public schools in Washington DC.
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/03/magazine/michelle-rhee-gets-an-education.html?ref=magazine
Which doesn’t have anything to do with anything, but it was still surprising … Michelle Rhee may be unknown to many NBA fans, but unlike Kevin Johnson she’s been on the cover of Time magazine, and is one of the most controversial educators in the country.
http://www.time.com/time/covers/0,16641,20081208,00.html
It’s kind of like when I discovered that Sherman Alexie was a Sonics fan; lots of people are big Sonics fans but they’re usually not acclaimed Native American writers so it’s a surprise to see someone like that pop up in the context of the Sonics. Alexie’s fandom of course became very much tied in with the fate of the Sonics with both his writings about the and his testimony in the trial. Rhee in contrast seems to stay out of both sports and politics (except insofar as politics touches upon education).
Reading this article is pretty interesting. I always have problems with people only pulling out sections that fit their narrative. Why not provide us the documents. Additionally, we don’t even know if the addendum was signed or not as it just said sources believe it was signed. Either way, the contract says right of first opportunity which I think is different than refusal. Essentially try go to the owners and say can you buy out shares and if they can’t they go somewhere else. Also, the addendum doesn’t even specify which clause it seeks to amend or if it is an entirely new clause, which is why they should provide the documents for us. Also someone says that this stuff might not refer to shares but other property (in the comments). I assume the vague wording works in the maloofs favor.
Most interesting is the last part about Mr Hansen being required to but the minority shares. Maybe that is why we don’t hear from the other owners…they know they get cashed out instantly.
Also, it talks about in section 7.3 that the ROFO would apply only if the agreement is not permitted according to Section 7.2A or 7.2B, yet those sections were not provided. Obviously we cannot determine what Section 7.3 even stipulates without knowing expressly what 7.2A or 7.2B stipulates.
@ChrisDaniels5: Good find. More intrigue: RT @SacBee_JoeD @KingsReport Henderson arena deal failed because Sac Kings went elsewhere http://t.co/IW1I9Ult
Looks like the maloofs and the one minority owner that sold were looking to move to Vegas. Not surprised due to the Maloof connections in LV, but this makes 3 relocation attempts in a year and a half. Plenty of time to start getting ducks in a row for an inevitable sale.
My theory on the “no announcement” from the NBA:
Stern and Co. don’t want to be the bad guy. They had a PR hit last time a team moved. They’re probably willing to take the PR hit, but would just rather not.
If the NBA waits for Sac. to raise the white flag, then there’s minimal PR hit because they “gave Sac. a chance”. They know as well as we do that getting the money and arena lined up is a really tall order. They’re assuming they’ll fail which gives the NBA the ability to save face.
If for some magical reason KJ & Sons is able to find a billionaire and get an arena plan cleared up, then the NBA will come out and say the team is moving anyway. In this case, they’ll suck down the negativity in favor of a stronger league.
It’s the difference between “Stern’s last action was stealing the Kings” vs. “Stern’s last action was helping a struggling franchise find a new home”
forgot to add, if the NBA says anything now, well then “they didn’t give Sac. a chance!” which is a lot of the negativity they received when the Sonics moved”
I disagree with Traven about the big money. I think Burkle/Mastrov WILL declare and I think they will lose.
Football media season is never “over.” Next up in two weeks, the combine.
and free agency, the draft, OTAs, then manditory OTAs, Rookie camp, training camp, preseason, the regular season and the Eagles going 5-11. Wash rinse and repeat.
With the draft in April . . . April could be a big month. Kings sale finalized and relocation approved (I am assuming that the NBA will give approval after the March 1 deadline). MLB starts. NFL draft. Going to be fun.
Football media is still king in Baltimore. Off to the ravens victory parade.
If *I* knew the Kings were being sold to Hansen way back in December how could one of the minority owner not have known? I thought one of them potentially wanted to sell to Hansen as well. ROFR is all they got left in this
Don’t want this guy on the Sonics
http://www.sbnation.com/nba/2013/2/5/3954060/demarcus-cousins-ejected-technical-fouls-kings-vs-jazz-female
I am sure he is really talented, but he really needs to grow up. I would not be surprised to see him being moved on if Phil Jackson actually comes onboard the new Sonics team.
Phil Jax may be be one guy who can get Cousin’s head straight. If he can succeed, Cousin’s is absolutely a keeper. A real dilema for the team is what to do with Cousins and his pending contract. It’s a huge decision that will affect the franchise for years. Similar situation with Tyreke, but he’s not a head case like Cousins.
Tyreke Evans has his own unique set of problems.
I wouldn’t mind unloading Reke and letting Thornton man the 2.
Marcus Thornton has his own unique set of problems.
Don’t we all
I’ve watched parts of the past four Kings games and Thornton has been terrible. As a matter of fact, the entire team is terrible.
There’s nothing an untrained professional can do to help Cousins IMO.
These issues were brought up before the NBA draft and in 3 years its only getting worse.
If you looks at this body language, his mannerisms and how he interacts with other players, coaches and referees he has this attitude that nothing is his fault, it’s the other persons fault.
There’s no accountability on his part and there’s nothing that’s going to change that until he realizes that he needs a trained professional to speak to.
i think calvin booth is a free agent again… just sayin’
Hoopsworld has an interesting take on this:
“There has been a lot of talk lately about whether or not minority owners in the Kings have the ability to block a potential sale and sources close to the process say that while it could end up in court, it’s unlikely that the legal route is going to stop the NBA from approving an eventual deal for Seattle.
What will block a move to Seattle is an ultra-tight, ultra-compelling counter-offer in Sacramento and that appears to be the route the city is taking. …
Every owner in the league wants to see the Kings sold for the reported $525 valuation Seattle’s group is offering, so a Burkle-Mastrov offer would have to be north of that number.
League sources continue to call the solution to this situation an economic one, saying that it will come down to more than just what the Kings are sold for; a Sacramento counter-offer will also have to include a significant increase in team revenues to offset what’s expected to be a major influx of cash from Seattle. A move back to Seattle is expected to yield a significant TV/radio rights package and lots of new corporate advertisers.
When the NBA was attempting to sell the New Orleans Hornets one of the first items they required from the region was a new hefty TV deal, the same appears to be needed from Sacramento.
League sources say Sacramento’s bid to keep the team is not an empty gesture and that the NBA, namely commissioner David Stern, has been extremely forthcoming in what it would take to get a counter-offer taken seriously and dragging this process into court is not viewed as one of the keys; providing a compelling and economically sound counter-proposal is.”
http://www.hoopsworld.com/nba-am-no-trades-coming-for-lakers/
So “fair and competitive” ain’t gonna cut it.
You know, even if we weren’t the ones trying to buy the Kings, the way Stern has coddled that city and given them chance after chance really pisses me off. Where were all our chances?
Our chances went away when the State Legislature laughed in Sterns face and Mayor McNugget was well….Mayor McNugget.
If Stern was treated by those guys as well as KJ has treated him, he would have stepped out a little further with us than he did. I’m not saying he would go all out like he has for KJ.
How did the legislature “laugh in Stern’s face”? A lot of people say that, but I’ve read the new reports of Stern’s 2006 trip to Olympia, and I don’t see anything about that.
From the Times, on Feb. 23, 2006:
Although no vote has been scheduled on the KeyArena proposal, Thursday’s hearing provided the Sonics the most friendly reception yet from state lawmakers. No particularly skeptical questions were asked of Stern or Schultz.
http://community.seattletimes.nwsource.com/archive/?date=20060224&slug=keyarena24m
I mean Feb. 24.
Our chances were in Stern’s vest pocket while he presented this award:
they went out the door when Frank Chopp et all flipped Stern the bird
What’s the latest football analogy for the current situation? A few weeks ago we were 1st and goal at the 1.
I want to say we ran the ball in for a touchdown, but the play is under review.
Well, Sactown Royalty thinks Hansen’s group has been “Maloofed” by the ROFR. I would be SHOCKED if Hansen’s attorneys just ignored that part of the partnership agreement that they had to review during the sale negotiations. That kind of defies logic. If they did, they should be sued for malpractice with $525M involved.
If they think that the ROFR is going to prevent the sale to the Hansen group, they’re banking on a lot of things to happen. For one, an minority investor would have to be interested in purchasing the majority share. If they are, why haven’t we heard anything about that other than from the one minority owner currently involved in bankruptcy proceedings?
Two, they have to hope that time hasn’t already run out on the ROFR option. We don’t know if the minority owners ever received official notice of the sale, but even if they didn’t, at some point they are put on “constructive notice,” i.e. if they weren’t informed officially, they still should have known anyways and attempted to invoke the ROFR right. It’s unlikely that a court would uphold a ROFR that was invoked at the last minute just to block a sale. Usually they are given a reasonable period to indicate their desire to match if the contract does not stipulate otherwise.
Finally, if they’re banking on the share currently in bankruptcy proceedings, good luck. Granted, bankruptcy law is a unique animal (and something I’m not that familiar with), but it is extremely unlikely that any court would allow an outside purchaser to both purchase this share and then invoke an ROFR right against any current member of the ownership group, especially if they attempt to invoke retroactively. It goes entirely against the spirit of a ROFR clause to do so.
Latest from Ziller
http://www.sbnation.com/nba/2013/2/5/3954190/david-stern-sacramento-kings-seattle-lawsuit-hook
The first sentence; “The Maloofs and Chris Hansen chose to ignore Sacramento-based minority owners’ rights to be first in line to buy the Kings. ”
I stopped reading right there.
There is a ZERO chance that the attorneys ignored the right of first refusal. ZERO. On either side. Their attorneys, unless they are just hacks, would let their clients just ignore that right.
“wouldn’t”
calculated risk?
“So there’s this part in here about right of first refusal by the minority owners. But if we don’t say anything, maybe they’ll forget.”
said no lawyer ever.
rambis, that is not a calculated risk that attorneys would allow their clients make. Not with that much on the line. It isn’t just the team. The arena is also involved. That is close to a $1B at risk. Maybe on another business other than an NBA team. Just not going to happen. Attorneys are usually very conservative when it comes to clients’ big bucks.
Given that the 12% minority share from Bob Hernreich was purchased at the same time as the 53% share from the Maloof’s, I have a hard time believing the minority owners were ignored. It probably took 30 days to negotiate the sale of these shares. Hernrieich’s involvement proves at least one minority owner was aware of the sale. I see no evidence the others did not know.
I know it’s not a calculated risk. Just trying to figure out how others may be trying to sort this out in the media etc.
Yes. He’s ASSUMING that they ignored it. For all we know, the non-bankruptcy minority partners WERE informed of the sale and given a chance to match. In fact, I believe that to be the case.
Another thing was when he said “as I posted at sactownroyalry”. What does that tell us? He’s a homer like we are.
I believe the only ROFR issue is whether the bankruptcy share is still eligible for it.
BINGO!
Also, he said that at some point Stern would realize that the Hansen group was either wrong about ROFR or is lying about it. Therefore, the best scenario is to offer expansion to Seattle and keep the Kings in Sactown.
If Stern thinks Hansen is lying, why would he offer expansion to him?
Why aren’t the minority partners screaming right now?!?
Exactly. Read my comments above for more insight on this whole ROFR claim.
Ziller’s a hack. I could care less what he says. Look at his summary / description below Sterns pic. He makes his statement sound as factual evidence but no one knows if it’s true considering that the NBA made the minority owners keep quiet.
In essence, the NBA wants a near guarantee that a team will be viable and financially strong in Sacramento and not just dead weight as a luxury tax recipient. Sure, the NBA would love a Burkle lead consortium to overpay at a $525m+ price tag but what fellow NBA owners really want is to stop giving Sacramento hand-outs through the luxury tax year-in, year-out.
In my mind, this makes the a Sacramento deal significantly more difficult to obtain. KJ might be able to get a charitable Billionaire to buy the team at an ridiculous price, but how can he guarantee TV revenue and Corporate support for the team for the next 5, 10, 15 years? Seems like a very difficult bridge for KJ to cross when Sacramento has no fortune 500 Companies and a TV market in the 20’s.
You also have another issue that I think is not talked about enough. In my opinion, the disparity between income taxes at the state level will start to by noticed by free agent decisions. California just upped its income tax rate on high earners to 13%, while Washington State has no income taxes. If you are a free agent, you might “swallow” the cost of playing in the LA or SF markets for the ancillary benefits on endorsement deals that a big city can bring. Do you want to pay another 13% in income taxes to play in a small market California city? I think not.
In other words, which cities economy looks rosier in 5, 10 plus years?, the city with the broke State of California officials leading the economic engine? Or The Emerald City?
And another thing is that doesn’t Burkle have to decide to either purchase AEG or buy the Kings? I can’t imagine the NBA allowing Burkle to essentially own at least parts of 2 teams. And on top of that own the control of the maintenance of several other NBA arenas. Talk about a boatload of conflict.
I always thought the income tax thing would help lure FAs too. But it never has……….in any sport.
The allure of playing/living in LA or NY or any other big market will always remain the same.
Yes, the allure of NY or LA can overcome the “cost” of playing in those cities because of the ancillary benefits playing in a major media market will bring. My point was around how this will impact a small media market like Sacramento… You don’t have the media market like NY, LA or SF but you still have to pay the taxes. I have to imagine this will impact Sacramento in a negative manner for years to come if the team stayed.
In the end where does the NBA want to be long term? Seattle or Sac. Seattle period. I still can’t believe they are even giving Sac a chance here. It is time to move on NBA and bring the team to Seattle.
Just wanted to remind people some of the stuff Traven posted over on the Times’ comment section.
“No Hansen is attempting to steal hundreds of millions of dollars of public funds. You may think paying Hansen public funds is a great thing, I don’t. So, did Hansen kiss you behind the gym at school? Is that why you love Hansen, and think Seattle should pay for your beloved Hansen’s every want?”
http://goo.gl/uJm54
Again, that’s tame by the standards, but you see the creeping hint of homophobia and bully mentality that makes it uniquely jhande.
A link to his profile on the times http://goo.gl/73zgO
sorry, I just think this guy is a Jerk and shouldn’t be on here.
And that doesn’t include his six other profiles he used to bash Hansen and the Arena deal.
I have been wondering why Travern has been posting here for a while now.
Here is one of his nicer replies regarding the arena deal:
“So, I will lecture you about your wilful ignorance, or possible lying. Read the MOU, read I-91, study the companion documents, review the official materials, and review the presentations at the Councils, before posting here with your unsubstantiated ignorant blather.”
This was a pip, too. Same article:
Hansen is the one attempting to get his greedy parasitic hands into the City of Seattle’s pocketbook. An individual must live in some fantasy land (the land of the sacred Hansen) if they think it is the other way around. Read the MOU. It is Hansen wishing to get Seattle public funds, Hansen wants a lot of Seattle public funds, a whole lot of Seattle public funds. Hansen wants massive amounts of Seattle public funds.
“… I see you, leopard. Think you can put on a fancy suit, fool old Dwight…”
Isn’t he the one people were saying he was from White Mountain, NH?
The same.
Hmmm… WordPress leaves an IP trail of a poster, could easily be confirmed/denied.
So hypothetically, If the roles were reversed and the Maloof’s sold to Burkle instead of Hansen last month. Hansen and Ballmer could bid on the 7% stake at the auction and still swipe the Kings??? Would the good fans at SacTown Royalty be ok with that strategy? Would the Maloofs? Would the NBA? I don’t think so. I think it is much a do about nothing.
That and the fact that Hansen has already purchased one minority owner’s share, pretty much confirms that the minority owners were, in fact, informed of the sale negotiations.
The Hansen group did not depend on stupid attorneys. They most undoubtedly used on of the top 3 law firms in Seattle who have offices in CA. NONE of them would allow the Hansen group or Maloofs to ignore the ROFR if it would harm their purchase. They could filter all of it through WA and CA state law.
The whole ROFR thing is right on par with KJ presenting to the BOG. It fundamentally doesnt make any sense at all.
If one of the remaining minority owners wanted the chance to buy the team via “ROFR”……….then why aren’t they the ones driving this issue? Why is the trustee of the bankrupt guy who cant afford it pushing this. Its a weak loophole.
Realizing that the vast majority of the minority owners are from Sacramento area. They prob wouldn’t go along. But Hansen/Ballmer would just buy them out. It just seems so ridiculous. Obviously, they don’t want to lose the Kings. I think the Shultz lawsuit has way more merit than this and so did Lester Munson FWIW.
*had
All this legal mambo-jambo….blaaahh!
Other than the bankrupt minority owner, I have not heard a peep from any of the ownership parties involved or from their representatives. No ROFR lawsuits filed, no public announcements from the current minority owners to try and save the team, no whales….nothing but hot air from the media.
So, what we do have is an announcement from the Maloofs and Hansen of a sales agreement and a $30 million exchange between the two. A sales agreement that is being reviewed by the NBA. A Seattle investment group being vetted by the NBA. One Key Arena standing by for the go ahead on approvements and another Seattle arena with shovels in hand waiting for the all clear sign.
Hmmmm, yeah, #20 is going to be raised in retirement at Key Arena within the next year.
I’m going back to sleep now.
Night!
Henrich (or whatever) obviously knew, he sold his 12% along with the Maloofs, and I thought one of the other minority owners was considering selling as well? Hansen said he wanted to own 100% of a team so I am assuming he tried to court the others besides Henrich
There is 28% that still has not been purchased outside of the bankrupt share. Maybe they will still remain partners. Why not if the Hansen group is fine with who they are. The Hansen group has the controlling interest.
“I thought one of the other minority owners was considering selling as well?”
Yeah I read that in the article about Cook from the San Jose Mercury when this whole ROFR BS first started.
I so badly want to write on Sactown Royalty that they are assuming that Stern and the Hansen group have stupid attorneys . . . but I won’t. Wish someone would, though.
duh-
bloggers and twitterers > attorneys
lol
This is the one part where I feel bad. Taking the team is a necessary evil, but I forgot all the “last boat out of town” offers we thought might work.
Lawsuits, new arena plans, interested local ownership… all withered because it was all fluff we used to provide us hope. And now the shoe is on the other foot, and it’s much easier to see the fallacy of these hopes.
my SBNation avatar is a Sonics logo, so I’m not doing it.
Yea, I won’t rain on their parade, but Sactown Royalty is quickly marching out the realm of reality.
lol it makes it sound like their blog is being run by the ghost of Timothy Leary
Leave em be. This is their version of the Muckleshoot offer. Desperation is a stinky cologne.
Like I said 2 weeks ago, this is going to get a lot sillier and with greater name calling/venom before it is over.
If you can’t take them calling you a team theif then don’t read their stuff because it will not be flattering.
I agree. I look at it like this they can call me all the names they want but at the end of the day I wasn’t the one who sold the team, I wasn’t the one who bought the team and I wasn’t the one who relocated the team. I’m just the guy cheering for a team called “The Seattle SuperSonics.”
I think it is different. With Bennett, we were still under the impression that if we just had an arena plan, the Sonics would stay. Hope in reality is the worst of all evils because it prolongs the torments of man. As it turned out, there was nothing anyone in Seattle could do to make the team stay.
I’ve seen something written from their side (twitter, maybe) about that but they just think that the Maloofs are sneaky enough and the Hansen/Ballmer group naive enough that this could have slipped through the cracks.
I understand why they would feel that way. That is what they want to believe.
But I know the attorneys that are at Ballmer and the Nordstroms finger tips are some of the best that money can buy.
Also, it would be absolutely unbelievable that the attorneys for the Hansen group would not have access to the Partnership Agreement prior to signing the Purchase and Sale Agreement. Every rock would have been turned over.
esp since they were dealing w the Maloofs
If anyone is interested you can watch the 11:00 a.m. KJ press conference here:
KJ presser
On Facebook the Bring Back Our Sonics guys brought up what was previously brought up on NBA TV after the Jazz vs Kings game and that was what should the new owners do with Cousins? Should they keep him or trade him? Most of the responses were trade him. But I’m wondering what his trade value is. I mean it seems like his value should have taken a hit with him leading the league in technical fouls and his attitude problems.
I think it depends on who the GM and Coach will be. Cousins has great potential to be a productive “big” especially in a triangle offense. My hope is PJ is the GM and brings on board his coaching staff like Rambis and Shaw and starts the Sonics with the triangle offense. I think there is still hope for Cousins, however, the tone at the top is what will keep Cousins under control. I can see him working really well with Boston too — Doc Rivers should be able to rein him in, lots of hot heads on that team.
Another non-issue being made into an issue today.
Apart from the other issues a very notable notable glaze-over is this:
Which minority owner has the liquid cash to match Ballmer’s pockets alone? Ballmer makes more just off his dividends than these guys’ entire net worth.
Moving on …
sofa king, i’d forgotten about the muckleshoot offer! i won’t say it’s a good memory, but i will say i’m glad we’re not in that groove anymore.
when i read (NEVER post) king fans staking their hopes on david stern’s goodwill, i feel a weird sort of sympathy about the tragic side of life. no kidding.
Don’t forget Fred Brown’s spaceship either. They are still nowhere near as crazy in their desperation as we were.
There is Ryan Lillis, two feet from KJ’s face.
Here it is February 7th and KJ hopes to have a full plan of investors who will put up offer for team and finance an arena by March 1st and you haven’t even picked which site yet?!
Whoops Feb 5th. MUCH more time, nevermind, they’re good. Haha
And February is a short month.
That still is a very short time. But what if 3/1 isn’t the date they have to reach? I haven’t heard really from the NBA how long they will give Sac to beat the Hansen purchase price.
Here’s a few tweets from Sac reporters about March 1st:
@kcrabienick: End date to present #Sacramento offer is March 1.
@Rob_McAllister: Mayor would like to have entire plan in the next several weeks. Before March 1st to allow NBA review Sac bid
@ChrisDaniels5
RT @Ryan_Lillis: As expected, no announcement on deep-pocketed investors for #NBAKings from mayor. This week, maybe next.
Thanks for those tweets. It seems like they are cutting it very tight unless they are just not going to announce anything until 2/28. And that is possible, I guess.
So two weeks ago they hoped to announce the “whales” by the end of that week. Then they hoped to announce them by the end of last week. Then they hoped to announce something this week. Now they’re hoping to have something concrete by March 1. I see a lot of “hoping” going on and very little action.
here is a link to the post news conference thread. Some of his comments are highlighted. I like the one about petitioning Mascots at the ASG!
http://www.sacramentopress.com/headline/79194/Mayor_Kevin_Johnson_press_conference_Sacramento_Kings_and_the_state_of_the_city
i watched the kj press conference. In summary:
-Was hoping to announce whales two weeks ago, then last week, then this week, but now hopefully next week.
-Doesn’t feel pressure because of the March 1st deadline.
-Whales are “doing their due diligence” to make sure it makes financial sense.
-Says he’s approached daily by investors wanting to be involved
-City is investigating two locations for a stadium
-continued to use the phrase “fair and competitive” offer
Fair and competitive offer won’t do
“fair and competetive” wont cut it at the BOG. Bigger sale price + bigger TV deal = more money for everyone. These guys run on cash, not smiles
That’s the thing- for a “whale”, it doesn’t make sense to match Hansen’s offer, especially someone like Burkle, who’s m.o. is business opportunities the opposite of this one.
In today’s presser KJ said if a team leaves a smaller market it maybe almost impossible to get a team back in a reasonable period of time or even in his lifetime. Interesting that they’re conceding the market in Sacramento is smaller.
shouldn’t be an issue. He stated that Sacramento is a “superior” market to Seattle fanwise. They should be able to get a team.
Checkmate.
So all they need to do by March 1 is:
1) Find an ownership group
2) Agree on a site for an arena
3) Agree on a funding mechanism for this yet-to-be-determined site
4) Convince the NBA that this arrangement increases franchise valuation as much or more as moving the team to Seattle
Second verse, same as the first.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GisCRxREDkY
Great post Xteve. Nice choice on Herman’s Hermits “I’m Henry VIII” Now I’m wishing I had one of those Gibson ES-335′s from the video :)
The Gibson Thunderbird bass played upside down is pretty cool as well. I hadn’t noticed that until this morning.
I had one of those Reverse Gibson Thunderbird’s about 5 years ago. I ended up trading it for a Fender American Strat and Telecaster. With that said if I ever had the chance to get another one I probably would. They’re really good basses right up there with the Gibson EB-0.
That’s a lot to do in 3 half weeks.
I dont think they have to do any of the arena stuff.
When has it ever been a requirement that they get a new Arena?
When we did.
Precisely.
According to one tweet I saw Kj said he was going to the ASG to lobby anyone who would listen on Sac’s behalf? Was this actually said???
Yes he did and he joked about getting the mascots to listen
You sure he was joking?
LOL sounds like a scene from Don’t be a Menace…
So KJ gave himself a dealine of March 1st which is probably the NBA’s deadline for them to do anything. Essentially they have 24 days to get equity investors in, they have to have an arena deal expedited to match where we are (GOOD LUCK!), plus they need to hammer out the financing and what the equity investors will cover. I honestly wouldnt be suprised to see the whales hold out for more money from the city because of the desperation they are in; likewise the city might say that you have much more money than the Maloofs so we want you to pay more. 24 days till all that has to be on lockdown.
I still think he better announce the equity partners before the ASG. I really doubt the owners are going to listen to KJ at all without some money men in the bag.
Yeah, this is the pickle I considered. The approved arena at least had a Maloof share, even if it was a front by the NBA. I don’t think the NBA is going to cover Burkle the same way.
Honestly, if Sac wants to do this, the idea that Burkle would want anything that isn’t publically funded, and requires a larger financial outlay from him than the Maloofs, is choosing not to exploit the leverage he has. Sacramento needs Burkle, not the other way around, and he should be able to extract lots of concessions.
Either Johnson has a well positioned group of investors who are far along the planning process right now or he’s got nothing at all. It’s getting increasingly unlikely that he has anything in between.
Based on the above, it seems like Kevin Johnson received some sort of assurance from the League that they are leaving the door open for Sacramento to come up with something by March 1. I can’t imagine his (Kevin Johnson) pulling that date out of his head arbitrarily so there is some discussion taking place behind the scenes that tells me the NBA is leaving a door open for Sacramento. I wonder if the application for relocation is going to be submitted to the NBA before March 1 and the NBA wants both proposals in hand.
I’m stymied on what the League is doing here.
I think it is KJ buying more time and using the concrete date of March 1st (i.e. relocation deadline) that many Sac fans know from the past few years. Basically takes the pressure off of himself to actually produce anything for a while and sort of propagandizes the whole relocation deadline.
I agree Barely Able
i don’t see that he’s received assurance on anything, except that they’ll listen, nod sympathetically, and then do whatever they want to do. i still think he’s playing for the day after the team moves, to keep sacramento viable so that the king legacy can go into the freezer for a few years while he uses the nba’s mournfully sympathetic vibes to solidify sacramento’s position for a return.
i’m sticking to that until i see otherwise. i just can’t see what the nba would gain by tossing hansen, the offer, the new arena, and so forth into the dumpster.
So it seems that KJ is thinking the NBA will just tear up the Hansen/Maloof Sales Agreement out of the goodness of his heart. There are no other options. Either the ROFR has some weird clause that impedes the sale, or the NBA tears up the binding sales agreement. I’m confused as to what KJ is thinking.
Chris Daniels ‏@ChrisDaniels5
KJ says on ROFR - It’s a little premature on how that will factor in is as this plays out. #NBAKings #NBASeattle
Chris Daniels ‏@ChrisDaniels5
KJ on #Kings-to-#Seattle deal: “I’m sure the NBA has seen it.” #NBASeattle #NBAKings
….. Of course the NBA has seen it what in the world does he think they been doing in the past few weeks.
@ChrisDaniels5
KJ on #Kings-to-#Seattle deal: “I’m sure the NBA has seen it.” #NBASeattle #NBAKings
Yeah? You think so, Kevin? Since they SAID they have?
Just seems such a long shot for them. By March 1 they need to:
-negotiate a new TV deal
-finalize partnership agreement between investors
-Settle on a location and cost or a new arena
-lock in a funding mechanism for a new arena
-Create a compelling offer & presentation for the NBA
Does that cover everything?
They dont need to do any of the Arena stuff or a TV deal.
They have to have an arena deal in place pretty much as ar along as ours. The NBA isnt going to listen without an arena deal since the old one is literally falling apart.
Dont know where you are getting your info but Sacramento needs to have to be where we are at essentially just without a purchase agreement because that is obviously not going to happen since Hansen has one
Near the end of the presser KJ said he’d received calls from people in Seattle who told him they hoped SacTown could keep their team and Seattle could get a team too whether that be another town’s team or through expansion but he didn’t know if the NBA had any expansion plans. He said he thought Seattle deserved a team just not their team.
BS vague political talk.
Yep
For anyone that watched the presser, was their any news unrelated to the Kings? I know this was billed as resumption of weekly press conferences. Maybe that is a good strategy to have pressers scheduled so it doesn’t look like the few from a couple weeks ago? Just my two cents.
none that I heard. Apparently, the rest of the city doesn’t matter or something.
So what was the “bigger” news on OUR end that was supposed to be revealed LAST week? Did I miss it?
I was wondering about that too
That was something Brian mentioned. Said it could have been last week or sometime this week. Haven’t heard anything as of yet.
If the April 18th date is legit, then this all seems like show. KJ gets to put up a good fight and improve his standing in Sac. The Kings will probably sell more tickets than usual as fans come out to try to rally support. The NBA doesn’t have to deal with two months of ANTI-NBA/STERN signs and chants and avoid a true lame duck situation in Sac. Im extremely confident in Hansen/Balmer at least until we hear anything more than what ifs and crack pot theories from sac-bee writers.
‏@ChrisDaniels5
Both sides on #NBAKings deal continue to reiterate to me they think ROFR is ‘non-issue’. But..that’s ultimately up to lawyers to decide.
And if this issue ends up in courts its essentially game over.
for Sacramento.
@kj_mayorjohnson: ..shared my plans for AS Weekend in Houston.Gonna be pumping up Sac to anyone & everyone owners, players, even mascots!
If I was a Kings fan, this would not instill confidence to me. I just picture KJ standing outside the Toyota Center with a cardboard sign reading “will petition for team.”
So something like this…?
http://bit.ly/11QZiTL
Johnson was asked “did the league reassure you that you woukd be able to present a deal” and he answered saying something like, if I remember correctly we’ll get a chance.
the other thing, no one has gears from the other minority owners besides Bob Cook so I think they’re probably on board with Hansen.
NEW THREAD UP
Burkle is an attention seeker, who tried bidding for the Golden
State Warriors and failed, because he didn’t like to overpay for
a team.
So he got out bid.
Burkle is also rumored to be buying a percentage from AEG, owners of the Staples Center and the Lakers.
If true, that would be a conflict of interest, An owner can’t be a part of 2 different ownership group.
That really explains why Kevin Johnson is vying for more time ?
KJ is still searching for the Whale with billions, So far you have Mastros,
and the 20 local citizens donating a Million apiece.
No wonder they needed more time?