Of all the obstacles we have heard I really think that the potential for this right of first refusal is the most credible. I don’t blame people for hanging their hats on it and I know damn well that we had found this when my team sold I would have been doing cartwheels.
The reason we have trouble taking it seriously here is that Chris has been so far ahead of the game since day one. We all know his level of preparation and people simply don’t believe that he could stumble with something so obvious as a clear term in the partnership contract.
Also he has lawyers. Lots of them and good ones.
Also I will say that the path being considered, one in which these guys go toe to toe legally suing the NBA to try to block their right to sell a franchise while at the same time threatening the private business of a proposed owner is SUICIDE.
Be warned: The legal might of the NBA is fierce. They are nothing if not vengeful and they take the right to bestow team ownership on whoever they invite to their club very personally.
I have heard from day one that a big part of the reason there is hope in Sacramento is that the league is genuinely on their side. The relationship has been strong and the two have been well aligned with their good intentions. That will all change the moment the lawyers start telling David Stern what he can and cannot do. When you threaten legal action against someone it instantly changes the relationship.
So go ahead. Be the guy who tells the NBA they can’t do what they want and then asks them to approve your ownership. I have a good idea of what they would say:
“To match this offer please send your $30M non-refundable check and then have your lawyers contact our lawyers who will inform you of the ownership vetting process. Be prepared for another $8 million in expenses relating to your ownership application which will be a little bit tricky due to the counter suit we intend to file. Also please sign this contract stipulating that in the event of legal conflict with the league the loser may be asked to reimburse legal expenses along with damages to be determined.”
Its the beginning of the end. You can’t ever take it back after you threaten to sue somebody.
It’s getting a little out of hand with their Limited Partner scenarios -
“Can an LP just add a whale to their group and maker a ROFRCopter?”
“Can the LP do a quick sell to a whale so the whale will have a ROFRCopter?”
“Can a whale can by the 7% in auction and then they will have ROFRCopter rights?”
If this was a viable option you would think the KJ would say that they are discussing all of their options with the LP and we will go from there, instead he’s distancing himself from the ROFRCopter and is pursuing his ‘In it to win it’ plan.
I mentioned this in the last thread: kj specifically said the lps are doing their own thing. If this was the way to go he would be discussing it
Thanks Brian, always the calming voice of reason. Sonics fans should let Sac grasp at the straws they need to grasp at without disputing them. I don’t think twitter wars with Charmichael Dave serve any purpose. Let them preach to each other in the echo chamber; it won’t change the outcome.
What the NBA wants, it will get. And all signs point to it’s wanting this ownership group and with it Seattle. That’s why it will happen. Legal obstacles will be surmounted in this case, just as they were 5 years ago, if that is what the league desires.
If they want to go the legal route, they may want to take the advise that Schultz took from the NBA when he dropped his lawsuit to rewind the sale.
“Given the recent city settlement, we have received feedback that a continuing adversarial relationship with the NBA was not politically useful to the city’s ongoing efforts to secure a future franchise,” Schultz wrote. “Thus, the prevailing wisdom … is that Seattle’s best chance for a professional basketball franchise is to end this litigation and allow the city, state Legislature and other parties to begin the necessary fence mending with the NBA.”
http://seattletimes.com/html/nba/2008147943_schultz30.html
Funny, as much as I hated Schultz, Nickels, the city’s attorneys and all others who caved that summer, these words are now comforting when applied to our current situation. All a matter of perspective.
The hammer they dropped on Schultz was substantial enough to get his attention. Also people are all rightfully very upset with Nickels but one thing that is always really underplayed is that our friend Ballmer was also very involved in the decision to back down and settle. Lots of lawyers in the NBA and they have a huge business model at stake that is much larger than just this one franchise or situation.
I agree this is the first legitimate cause for concern on our part, but I’m not jumping off any bridges because there’s ZERO chance that Chris didn’t foresee this obstacle and prepare for it.
That said, Mitch Levy is supposed to do a segment on this in the 7:00 hour. Last night he said he’d been working on it, which means one thing. He’s been talking to Ballmer. In other words, the official unofficial leak from the Hansen group regarding ROFR will be made on KJRAM this morning some time between 7am and 8am.
Could someone do me a favor? I will be unable to listen and Mitch tends not to podcast segments like this. Could someone listen and post summaries?
what the league cherishes most (every league) is the ability to do what it wants with its cartel. they will never countenance anything that restricts their options, no matter how much they ‘like’ a certain market.
Its what every business wants. Giving third parties the ability to control your outcome is the surest way to go out of business.
My guess is that Mitch says something along the lines that “An NBA franchise agreement likely contains language stating that under no circumstances shall the partnership of a franchise violate the terms of the governing franchise agreement with the NBA or the rules imposed by its board of directors. In the event that their is a conflict between governing documents then the bylaws of the NBA shall be binding and enforceable over all other documents.”
And do the bylaws of the NBA prohibit such a ROFR clause? I wouldn’t think so because wasn’t one of those invoked in the Bobcats sale to Jordan?
That was an option that MJ specifically purchased. Kind of like when Paul Allen bought an option to buy the Seahawks back in the day.
True. The agreement would be long and include things like arbitration clauses and all those other fun things lawyers usually put in these to avoid lawsuits.
Also, it sounds like they are hoping the Trustee starts filing to block the sale. Which would bring multiple interested parties into the bankruptcy, making the attorney fees go up a lot. For part of a team that just went way up in value compared to last week so it is in the best interest of the creditors for the sale to go through.
Anyone have a link to the history of when the minority owners purchased in? Are any of the others part of the original group that moved from KC? Or is it just Cook with an old agreement?
Don’t forget that we haven’t heard a single mention of this ROFR clause from an ACTUAL minority owner. Plus Hansen has already purchased shares from one minority owner, doesn’t that tend to make one think that they know what’s going on?
The reality of this situation set in for me when McCann got the copy of the contract and 20 minutes later verified that the clause was present. Presumably, Chris Hansen employs a group of highly capable attorneys that took a month to finalize the agreement. I would think they would be able to decipher the same thing.
Mitch is about to talk about the FROR..
ROFR. Blah
Maloofs might also have ROFR for Cook’s share and plan on executing on that at the bankruptcy.
They do have $30 million to spend on being a minority owner and owning 7% would keep them involved with no say in the management of the team. Which has been rumored.
Did Mitch say that?
No, but they will have $30 million and we really don’t know the full reason why that was put in the contract.
We do know that they are getting $30 million on Feb 1st and we do know that there were rumors that they are going to be a minority owner.
Just speculation since ownership changes take forever and I had nothing else to do when I wrote it.
Mitch is basically saying the Bee story is not substantial..Chris is aware of the clause and has been since the process started and don’t believe the minority owners can match and at actually believe they can’t match if the clause could be enforced.
I meant to say cant afford to match if the minority owners clause is enforced.
Which goes back us looking at Sac with a sideways face thinking that they really don’t want to go the legal route. Bad idea.
Do you really believe that taking that legal route is really what would keep a team there?
I’m pretty much with Brian on this one, as the League does not like being taken to court and certainly would tell them what they shouldn’t expect back after the team’s gone. And that’s a possibility for a new team.
I really think all this legal stuff and suing others is just a sideshow to hide the real facts.
Those are:
They still don’t have a guy with enough $ on board, are still scrambling on how to finance a new arena and are just trying to buy time.
At the end of the day, the only chance they’ve got is Burkle coming in and putting down at least as much as our guys, while also having a plan(not just vision, but financing and everything) for an arena as well.
BTW: Why do people bring up Ellison all the time.
Do they really think that he wouldn’t already own a team if it would be that easy(buy minority share, vote against sale and then buy for yourself) to get one?
And do they really believe that he’d buy a team to keep it in Sacramento?
Nope, I agree with you.
I think this is a side show from that Dave guy, the Trustee, and an original owner who is watching his legacy slip away from him.
Mitch mention it was vague.
Seattle SuperSonics @BringBackSonics
The $20 million payment to the Kings is due to the new CBA rules. If they’re in Seattle, the owners don’t have to pay that money.
What?
I thought they’ll pay $30 mil to the Maloofs next Friday, no matter what.
this has to do with revenue sharing in the NBA. 20m is a separate thing.
OK, thanks.
Thus is some new development Mitch brought up this morning. Struggling franchises receive $20M in support, and Sac is on the list.
Yes, but if the team is owned by a local owner in Sac, the league wouldn’t have to pay it either would they?
As long as the team is loosing money and not paying luxury amount they will continue to be paid by the NBA.
I dont really think the new “local” sacto owners are gonna be breakin the bank on the team either imo…..
Mitch said they’re going to talk about the Sonics again during the 9 o’clock hour
And I’m sure he won’t podcast either discussion. Please join us in the 21st century Mitch?
Yeah no kidding
From how I understand it, reading Michael McCann’s twitter and listening to radio pundits, the minority owners have ROFR to match Hansen’s offer. But the Maloofs are under no obligation to accept their offer. So they could come up with $340 million or whatever the price point is and the Maloofs could just say no and take Hansen’s offer.
The problem lies in if they weren’t given the chance to match. Then the Maloofs could be found committing breach of contract, which could potentially void the agreement with Hansen.
Mitch paints a different picture from what he said.
The issue is as per what brian said. NBA hates being told what to do so a lawsuit would not help sac case nevermind there is a local state senator making threats a private business of a potential owner.
That WILL NOT get their local group offer approved and will imo guarantee loose the team.
Its vague if they try to challenge it in court on vague language it’ll be hard to enforce.
Exactly, we don’t even know what it says yet. I am assuming they have a plan on what to do assuming anything were to happen with this. We know that Hansen’s team has known about it from the beginning so we are certain they have vetted the process and have contingencies if need be.
I doubt Hansen skipped a step.
He may have “Skipped a Step” al a Fred Astaire.
I don’t think Hansen has overlooked anything in this sale. Like KJ said yesterday they are going to try and muck it up for Seattle. At the end of the day KJ, the minority owners will be fighting 2 separate battles which will be futile for both of them. The NBA wants this deal, they want to wash their hands of the Maloof’s once and for all, and hope they can set up Sacramento to be the new Seattle. As long as the NBA has a former NBA city waiting in the wings with an ownership group and an arena plan, they are in a good place to be.
Why does everyone insist that if the ROFR goes to litigation that some how the league would be involved? If the limited partners seek litigation to enforce their rights to purchase the team, their suite will be solely against the Maloof’s and not the NBA. The NBA will just sit back and wait for a resolution like everyone else.
I don’t see how the NBA could or would want to make themselves a party in the lawsuit.
This is not at all like Howard Shmucks lawsuit that tried to unwind a sale that had already take place against owners that had already taken control of the franchise more then a year earlier. That lawsuit had serious implications that could have affect any future franchise sales going forward.
Cean,
Lawsuit against a NBA owner and essentially it’ll be telling the NBA what they can and can’t do. So yes NBA would be involved.
I don’t know if the NBA has any recourse or not, but i do know they have had lawyers looking into this bankruptcy hearing since last year. So the NBA is at least interested in what is going on and does have skin in the game as they like to say.
I just don’t see it as telling the NBA what it can and can’t do. This would be a lawsuit against an owner not the NBA. Nobody is telling the NBA whom they can and cannot sell the team too … the NBA doesn’t sell teams (Hornets/Pelicans excluded). It can only approve or not approve an application to purchase a team.
The ROFR is not unprecedented. Jordan did it not that long ago. In this case, the NBA would still have its right to deny the sale of the team to who ever steps forwards from the limited partners & their “group”. But it has no recourse in stopping the limited partners exercising it’s ROFR to basically jump to the head of the line for BOG approval.
MJ’s right was negotiated after it was known a sale was going to happen. It wasn’t a part of his ownership agreement.
Also, the Seattle lawsuits didn’t include the NBA. And we saw what the NBA thought of those.
A lawsuit is still a lawsuit. The NBA weren’t happy when with our 2 lawsuits against Bennett.
It also depends on how the ROFR is written in agreement. If its very vague then there is no chance it’s enforced.
Btw NBA was involved in the negotiations of the deal between Hansen and maloofs so if there is lawsuit NBA would be involved.
If they sue to get the deal thrown out then try to ask NBA to approve the sale of the kings to them. NBA will most likely tell them NO.
Well I’d like to think you guys are right .. but i wouldn’t hang my hat on it. :)
To me the best case senario is that ROFR was already sent to the minority owners they already declined with the notable exception of the %7 currently in bankruptcy court. Which is where this all started.
I’m cautiously optimistic. But i don’t expect the NBA to step in and force a sale to Chris if it comes down to that. (Perhaps I’m just jaded :) )
One thing the NBA wants is their private business rules, contracts, agreements, between the owners, being exposed in any court case.
That is a big no-no.
Cean,
The NBA has to approve every franchise sale, so if the minority owners assert their right to purchase the Kings at Hansen’s price the NBA would be involved in vetting and approving/denying the sales, as they are currently doing for Hansen’s purchase agreement.
Also, it’s clear by most of the available evidence that the NBA wants the sale to go through and the move to go down. If the legal tactics of the minority owners are attempting to circumvent that desire, you can guarantee the NBA will be involved. It may be indirect and in the form of veiled threats such as, “don’t expect a sale to be approved even if you are successful in this ROFR suit, and then once you get denied, don’t expect to ever get a franchise again,” but you can be certain they will be involved.
Remember, those indirect threats are what ultimately made up the city’s mind to settle and Schultz’s mind to drop his suit 5 years ago.
pardon my ignorance but i have to ask, what is redarded as “giving the minority owners a chance to make an offer?” how much time? i looked back on the blog and the daina falk thing happened on january 9th. it’s now january 25th. it would seem that the maloofs business partners would be aware of their desire to sell before us bloggers.
my point is, the owners have had at least two and a half weeks to voice their desire to make an offer for the team and have not. this ROFR idea is coming out now from a lawyer that doesn’t even represent any of the current owners.
my question is, at what point can the maloofs, hansen, and the nba argue that the minority owners were well aware of the situation and chose not to voice an intent to buy within a reasonable timeframe?
206er, i’ll argue at least a month or so cause one of the minority owners is selling his share to hansen.
Good question 206er. I mean what are they waiting for? The league to approve the sale before speaking out? I really think that if indeed there is langue in the contract between the Maloof’s and the minority owners about ROFR they would have spoken up by now. Were they just made aware of that language yesterday? I highly doubt it. They just don’t have the funds as minority owners to make such a large purchase. Even if they did, there’s no way the league would approve such a sale.
The other minority owners are not speaking out because they like the fact that their shares increased in value 75% overnight. They will get well over 100% return for what they invested (assuming they have been for years they will be adding many multiples on their initial purchase price). Additionally, the Maloofs will be making capital calls for them after the season so it may be in their best interest to let the purchase go through and then sell to the Hansen group and not have to pay their portion of those calls. Now maybe the minority partners really love Sacramento, but they also love their investments and probably would like to see the highest valuation on those. I think they know what the best business decision is.
Just my thoughts.
Mitch is talking Sonics again
When doing contract agreements every word every detail has to be crystal clear in order for everything to be enforceable.
I really don’t want to get into the contract speculation that I see down south because we really don’t know.
I wonder if perhaps this is the reason why the maloofs are staying in to a small degree. Perhaps if Maloof Sports and entertainment sells their 65% of the company to a third party then ROFR is a factor but if instead they sell 95% of MS&E to someone without transferring ownership then it is not.
I just have no doubt that the lawyers have heavily vetted it. I also am fairly confident that the first letter a minority owner is going to get will read something like:
Dear Minority Partners.
We are happy to announce big plans for the next season! As part of our operations we will be making an initial $100M deposit towards the construction of a world class arena and event center. We will also be significantly increasing the ownership investment in franchise management and payroll.
All partners will be asked to contribute to these actions via a pro-rata capital call. The obligation of your 13% minority share to these operations will total $16 Million which we ask that you send immediately to our account. If you do not wish to contribute your share please contact our representation who may alternatively arrange to purchase your shares at the recently established market value of the franchise.
Regards, Steve and Chris
That’s awesome Brian !
Totally spot on
Russell Wilson is on Mitch’s show right now
I cannot imagine that Hansen/Ballmer/Nordstrom group did not know about the ROFR. All of them have been involved in huge asset purchases. They all have attorneys who make big bucks to not overlook every detail.
And I do believe that the NBA does not want any additional owners who come with come with a boatload of debt. Anyone who would purchase as a minority owner will probably have to come with a lot of cash out of their own pockets. This is all going to be very interesting.
Mitch says that they are aware of the clause, but the verbiage is so vague that they had it vetted by lawyers who say it’s not an issue.
I am not an attorney but I worked as a paralegal in law firms for over 20 years. I worked in some very influential firms in Seattle. I know what attorneys do. They wouldn’t have let this slide. Every scenario would have been considered. Nothing is assumed.
Russell Wilson played NBA Jam played as both the Bulls and The SuperSonics. He said he’s excited for the return of the Sonics.
Currently Mitch is playing Don’t Worry Be Happy
which we all knew he was gonna play
Mitch is talking about the Sonics now
@ChrisDaniels5: Fmr KJ advisor: @REGraswich: Before this is over, Seattle may regret stumbling down stairs into messy basement of Chateau Maloof.
This guy is the definition of tool
I’m guessing he is the same guy who advised “I left a voicemail asking if the team was for sale and they didn’t reply so I guess we have some time to see what happens.”
I’m thinking he is the same guy and KJ must have really pissed off the Maloofs.
Sacramento journalist R.E. Graswich is not sad to leave his 37-year journalism career for a new job as special assistant to Mayor Kevin Johnson.
“I figure I got one last shot in life here to do something worthwhile as opposed to what you guys do,” he joked while addressing reporters Tuesday.
When I lived in Sac, most people hated this guy. Can’t imagine why.
Mitch says he doesn’t think there is anything to worry about and that there is vague language. Hansen’s group is aware of the clause. Mitch says he’s been told there is nothing to worry about.
This article brings up a really good point. If the NBA doesnt approve the deal. The team remains owned by the Maloofs. Nobody wants that.
http://thesunbreak.com/2013/01/25/what-makes-everyone-so-sure-the-sonics-really-are-coming-back/
That was a really concise discussion. Good read.
Now he’s talking about a fund set up by the new CBA to help struggling teams. He says Sac would be due $20million if they stay in Sac. If the Kings are moved then the NBA owners don’t have to pay the $20 million
And would this be an annual revenue sharing payment? If so - it isn’t just a one-time payment but year after year welfare payment to Sacto. An annual payment that these owners wouldn’t have to pay if they approve the sale and relo.
It sounds like its an annual payment as long as your team absolutely sucks and you don’t pay the luxury tax.
I’m guessing the number of owners who actually PAY this amount is fewer than half (probably considerably fewer). So let’s say it’s 10 owners. That means each of them will pay $2 million to Sacto PER year going forward.
These guys absolutely vote with their pocketbooks. And this is a big one in Seattle’s favor (not to mention a mil each in the relocation fee…) Plus there is the slight improvement in the national TV contract that comes with Seattle being involved in the NBA again.
Finally, having Ballmer has ALREADY increased franchise values significantly according to Forbes. Financially this is a no-brainer across the board…
Now he’s talking about our reasons to be optimistic. He’s reading an article from Oct. 20th from Yahoo. From the article “Stern has become a strong ally to Ballmer and bringing NBA back to Seattle…” Also the article Mitch’s reading says that Stern has been involved with pressuring the Maloofs to sell to Hansen/Ballmer group. Source said “Stern has enough time between now(oct 20th) and retirement to get a team back to Seattle.” Mitch says David Stern’s most important thing to wrap up before the end of his tenure is to get a team back to Seattle.
But the news of the Kings possibly being sold to Hansen caught Kevin Johnson by surprise! Come on KJ, you knew all along that this was going to be a possibility, you just waited until it was public knowledge before you started your #intowin campaign!
Come on KJ, EVERYONE IN SEATTLE AND SACTOWN KNEW HANSEN WAS A SERIOUS THREAT. In contrast, who in Seattle other than Shultz thought Clay Bennett was a threat to buy the Sonics until it happened, most casual fans had never even heard of The Bennett.
Now Mitch is talking about some “eye brow raising” things about Burkle and that the NBA aren’t too high on him as opposed Stern liking Ballmer.
Brian posted some info on Burkle a few posts back
I totally missed that post.
Found it!
Brian Robinson says:
January 23, 2026 at 9:16 am
Here’s what I was told about Burkle from a really knowledgeable guy:
Burkle has burned a lot of bridges in his quest for both the Kings and an NFL franchise for LA.
He’s expressed interest in both and been a big guy for calling meetings, asking questions, and doing a bunch of due diligence. In those conversations he makes a lot of spreadsheets, works with a lot of numbers and has a lot of opinions on valuation and creative ideas on how to make a viable financial model.
After all the work he is never willing to cut the big check. Questions always lead to followup questions and interest is never matched by commitment. People no longer have any patience to talk with him at the NBA and do not consider him a credible buyer, especially in this short timeline.
Thanks John_S :)
Elise Woodward is filling in for Softy today.
Dang. I was waiting for Softy.
Softy will be on 3pm - 7pm.
Worst case scenario. If the BOG rejects the sale (which they have no logical reason to do). Its not like the Maloofs have to sell to this up and coming/being put together group. The team stays in their hands, and then it just opens up a bidding war.
$340 mm is chump change to Larry Ellison. If I am him, I offer the same deal, or more, to the Maloofs. Then this all starts over.
Putting the ball back in the hands of the Maloofs is something the NBA and Sacramento doesnt want.
Wouldn’t the Maloofs just give the NBA one last middle finger if the BOG rejects the sale. NBA wouldn’t want that hassle. IMHO
Agreed. The last thing they want to do is put this back up to the Maloofs
I doubt NBA would approve Ellison though. Due to his wanting a team in San jose.
Just throwing out Ellisons name. It could be anyone.
But why would they not approve him? By that rationale they shouldnt approve Hansen because he wants to move to Seattle.
Maybe because he would presumably bid under the pretense of keeping the team in Sacramento when everyone in the league knows he wants a team in San Jose.
Seattle isn’t right next to a major metropolitan area like San Jose is.
Moving a team there is moving into the Golden State Warriors’ turf.
I should say, Seattle isn’t right next to a major metropolitan area that already houses a pretty successful NBA franchise.
There are no territory rules in the NBA. See Los Angeles
“Risk Management”
You don’t become a very successful Hedge Fund Manager without excellent risk management.
The silence from the actual players in this entire transaction is DEAFENING and should speak volumes to those optimistic folks in Sacramento.
#20 will be retired in 2013 at Key Arena….PERIOD!!!
Chris Hansen and George Costanza…both experts at risk management. :)
+1
What time is today’s press conference in SacTown?
Who here is going to watch the thunder vs Kings game tonight?
I have never watched a Thunder game. The next time I watch a Thunder game hopefully will be when they are playing the Seattle Supersonics.
I personally can’t wait to talk seriously about Sonics basketball again. I miss the great debates like we used to have. (‘Elden Campbell’ comes to mind)
But who can watch *these* kings. Holy cow thats an ugly team. I’ll love them when they put on the green and gold the first time, but man, that roster is a mess. It would be especially difficult to watch them against a team as good as that other team from somewhere in the mid-west there … i forget their names.
I wouldn’t worry about it. 95% or more of this team will never put on the green and gold.
95%? No way. How are they going to drop get rid of all those players/contracts? I think its more likely that 95% of this team WILL put on green and gold.
http://hoopshype.com/salaries/sacramento.htm
I’m going to watch what pieces to keep
Who ever the co host with Elise is (I think its Jerry Brewer) says that the ROFR sounds a lot like Sacramento’s version of the Key Arena lease.
Art Thiel weighs in on the whales.
http://sportspressnw.com/2013/01/thiel-dont-dismiss-the-sac-town-whale-pen/
I’m so sick of hearing about whales and bids and offers. THERE IS A LEGALLY BINDING CONTRACT. I don’t care what they offer. They can offer a billion dollars, the Maloofs can’t take it. Of course, the league would prefer to take a billion dollars, but a “fair and competitive” offer won’t be enough.
I would think that if someone wants to supercede the present PA they will have to buy out the rights from the Hansen group. I am sure that isn’t cheap.
And I just don’t think it will be Ellison. I could be wrong, but if he really wanted to purchase the Kings and leave it in Sacramento, he would have done it a long time ago.
The deafening silence makes me even more confident than I already am. I am super stoked to buy SuperSonics gear for opening night! Can’t wait til it’s official in April!
Even if the sale is subject to litigation, the Maloofs can still file the relocation themselves which should be approved. At that point there are no legs left to stand on for the “19 investors” and the “whale”. After that, the sale can be finalized.
I’m tired of the cockiness of the kings fans and media, saying Hansen got Maloofed, seems to be all of you are the ones who got Maloofed! Yet, I still have taken the high road and not said a word back.
I know what you mean about kings fans and sac media. I haven’t said anything back either there is no point to answering back to them anyway.
Chris Daniels @ChrisDaniels5
I continue to hear from folks associated with #NBAKings deal this ROFR is a “non-issue” and has been vetted by #NBA, league lawyers.
Chris Daniels @ChrisDaniels5
So I got an email from #NBAKings minority bankruptcy trustee David Flemmer…on ROFR.. ”I respectfully decline to make further comments.”
Declining comment now huh? Looks like it was a media charade like we figured
Well, there you have it. Hopefully now we can put an end to ROFRgate.
But hopefully not to the amusing ROFRcopter ;)
Stern has sent in the Sapranos.
Christopher and Paulie Walnuts.
With Sacramento as Lauren Bacall.
Michael McCann @McCannSportsLaw
@scripted_only Yes, that’s right, good point - Maloofs getting $30 mil would help them match any offer minority owner accepts to sell share.
Michael McCann @McCannSportsLaw
@JoshPheterson That’s right, good point - minority owners must have had notice of transfer to Maloofs in1998 and declined to match.
I love the fact that this guy actually responds to so many questions and points.
As I sometimes read about the league not approving the sale because of KJ’s attempt to keep the team.
That’s what I see here:
We know that there’s a binding sale agreement between the Maloofs(current owners) and Hansen/Ballmer(hopefully future owners). That’s why both groups issued their statements, as well as the league.
As we all know, they want to relocate the franchise and will have to apply for relocation by March 1st.
Therefore, the League will have to agree to the sale sometime between today and March 1st. I’m guessing ASG(Feb. 15th - 17th) will be that date, as they meet that weekend.
In April, they’ll meet again and would decide on relocating the team.
That’s also the day KJ’s said to be allowed to speak to them and hopes convince them to not approve Hansen/Ballmers attempt to relocate.
It’s also the date that 7% minority part of the Franchise will be auctioned.
So KJ’s and that lawsuit/try to buy that minority of the Franchise and block the move will only appear after the sale to Hansen/Ballmer’s been completed.
So all things combined, what KJ or that lawsuit shall do for them is to block the move(not the sale) and pressure Hansen/Ballmer into selling the franchise to keep it in Sacramento.
KJ/lawsuit can not block Hansen/balmer from moving the team there is no lease.
NBA will approve both the sale and relocation the same day thus kings are good as gone.
I don’t think so.
They’ll first have to approve the sale.
Then Hansen/Ballmer can file for relocation, which has to happen till March 1st.
In April they’ll vote on it during the big BOG meeting.
but when will they vote on the sale? All Star break? I think once the sale approved it’s game set match.
Yes, I expect them to vote on it at the ASG, when they all meet.
I doubt they’ll have enough time to review the deal by ASG.
My guess is that the Maloofs file for relocation before 3/1, then the league votes on both at their mid-April meeting.
Of course, that meeting takes place a couple of weeks after the bankruptcy auction, so there would still be time for the courts to “muck up the works” for Seattle one last time.
Actually the auction takes place the day after the BOG meeting. Nothing will muck this up.
Tweet from Chris Daniels:
Chris Daniels @ChrisDaniels5
I continue to hear from folks associated with #NBAKings deal this ROFR is a “non-issue” and has been vetted by #NBA, league lawyers.
This is my favorite paragraph from the article:
“The Kings may represent the last lease-free team that will be for sale in the next few years, which would drive up the price. While the binding purchase and sale agreement between Hansen and the Maloofs means they can only sell to him, it does not necessarily follow that the NBA owners will vote to allow a relocation if Johnson raises the capital to propose a counteroffer for purchase, as well as a concrete plan to build a downtown arena.”
I will state this again…anyone who thinks that the NBA would (or could) block Hansen from moving a team is an idiot. Al Davis has already shown (TWICE!) that if you want to move a team and are willing to spend the money to do so…they cannot stop you. Hansen has already paid a significant premium to buy a team…I am sure that he is willing to do what is necessary to move the team.
Art is a fool. The NBA can’t force Hansen to keep team in Sacramento.
The NBA wants a team in Seattle. They are the one that broker the deal with Hansen and Maloofs. This was always the plan. Have the Maloofs sell the team to Hansen and Hansen to move it to Seattle. THE DEAL IS DONE.
Art, why approve a sale to someone that has told the NBA he will move the team this season. Is he an idiot or just trolling for readership? Why would the owners do this?
Man it sure seems like Art always brings a full bladder to our Sonics parade. ;)
Full bladder and empty head
Could the NBA owners vote against relocation? Yes. It is possible. But its very very very very unlikely. Voting no is voting against money in their pocket and voting against their wink wink “vote for me now and I will vote for you later if we move” agreement.
Hasnt there only been two “no” votes in the history of relocation? Allen and Cuban.
Chris Daniels @ChrisDaniels5
Seattle City Attorney Pete Holmes files motion to dismiss #SeattleArena @ILWU lawsuit, claims it has “no merit”.
Another step down….
I wonder when we will find out for sure if the lawsuit will be dismissed?
In feburary.
That’s true..haha
Wonder if there is any possible way this thing can get taken care of sooner than that.
Ellison has always been a sideshow — nothing more — and Art is flat out wrong.
Sorry Art, but you simply don’t have a clue what you’re talking about here.
Think of Ellison as the equivalent to Ballmer’s/Gorton’s 11th hour proposal. It’s setting up for the aftermath of the inevitable. The team will move, and Sacramento moves to the top of the list of next destinations. That’s what’s going on here.
The league has only denied one relocation request, and that was due to the ownerships financial state. That is a non-issue here! If Hansen wants to move the team, the NBA isn’t going to stop him. I’ll say it again, the Kings are coming to Seattle!
They did not deny the relocation request. They denied the sale of the team. That is a different thing. It is plausible that the BOG could deny Hansen buying the team. It is not plausible that the BOG could truly stop Hansen from moving a team once he is the owner.
Theoretically, the BOG couldn’t stop the Maloofs from moving to Anaheim…they just don’t have the juice to participate in that fight.
You’re right, it was the sale, not relocation. My bad.
art thiel is a troll masquerading as a journalist. zero credibility. ignore this man.
I swear, if it’s not Art Thiel, it’s Steve Kelly or Geoff Baker. I get so frustrated reading those guys articles.
Its crazy what people think one twitter (sac kings fan) is saying opinions differ on ROFR thus litigation.
I’m sure that fan doesn’t mind seeing the NBA going ahead with the approval/reloc of the team cause that will happen if there is a lawsuit against this sale/move.
While I too think it’s crazy the things they say, I do remember being just as, if not crazier during the Sonics departure.
Publicola setting itself up as the new anti-arena mouthpiece for PoS and Peter Steinbrueck. Looks like Mountlake Terrace’s finest ILWU mouthpiece jhande is back there. Hansen paid all of us to be at the “Astro-Turf” rally? Dude, where’s my check?
http://www.seattlemet.com/news-and-profiles/publicola/articles/one-question-for-peter-steinbrueck
No kidding. The article is crazy as well as the comments.
If I’m remembering correctly wasn’t Jhande the one everyone was saying was actually from New Hampshire?
Yes gene
I enjoy that it isn’t “up to the Port to prove a negative” AND it isn’t up to the port to prove why it would need significant mitigation…
Publicola and Crosscut, with Seattle Times, but not The Stranger. The Stranger doesn’t want an obstructionist mayor on the arena and called out Steinbrueck.
Chris Daniels @ChrisDaniels5
The @sacbee and journalists @dakasler @Ryan_Lillis and @TonyBizjak report source says ROFR protests are “nonissue”: http://m.sacbee.com/sacramento/db_99761/contentdetail.htm?contentguid=1CkEyyDU …
Chris Daniels @ChrisDaniels5
The @sacbee and journalists @dakasler @Ryan_Lillis and @TonyBizjak report source says ROFR protests are “nonissue”
Good grief. So let me guess their source is a non lawyer.
Isn’t “ROFR Protests” actually referring to that trustee who is trying to protest the sale to Hansen through a shaky ROFR reasoning?
New thread is up.
When is the ASG weekend? Didn’t someone say Feb 17-18? I agree, if they approve the sale then, it’s over. ballgame.