Still Riding The Rollercoaster?

Apart from Aldridge’s report which still isn’t really anything new, there is no news to report until a confirmation of sale is announced .Strap in, the ride continues.

About Xteve

Hi, I'm a musician, producer and songwriter for TV and film in Seattle, WA who's been a Sonic fan since the late 80s-early 90s. My musical adventures can be followed at http://soundcloud.com/xteve. As one of the original "Magnificent 7" authors of Sonicscentral.com, I'm proud to be a part of Sonics Rising. GO SONICS!
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

125 Responses to Still Riding The Rollercoaster?

  1. James says:

    David Aldridge keeps referring to Chris Hansen as Brian Hansen lol.

  2. Gene Hunt says:

    They did mention a few times that Sacramento’s attempts to keep the team were 11th hour attempts. Also they mentioned something along the lines of; that KJ’s only real shot is to get the NBA BoG’s to vote against a possible sale to Hansen.

    • soundersfan84 says:

      And i just don’t see that really working. NBA needs to do whats best interest in the league not just 1 city with no long term plan.

      • AV says:

        Yea the NBAtv people used some motivs that were not very optismistic for the sacramento people like the train has left the station, it is the late innings and thier is not enough money in Sacramento to save the kings and someone from the bay area or los angeles is going the have to buy them and KJ best hope is to convince the BOG to not move the kings

      • MartinH says:

        Neither do I.
        Is Paul Allen on the relocation committee? Because he’d be a “yes” vote like a shot (voted against the relocation to OKC, likely well connected with Ballmer via Micro$oft).
        And you’d have to say it would be in Clay’s best interests to vote “yes” too - it would sweep his own sorry efforts under the historical carpet.

  3. James says:

    Sounds like we just need to be patient and wait this out. Saying that, I feel we’re in a good spot. Same spot as the Seahawks were yesterday with 31 seconds, but I’ll take it.

  4. five says:

    yup, just like the Hawks yesterday with 31 seconds left, except that the officials are deciding who gets possession next

  5. 206er says:

    xteve to answer your question, “still riding the rollercoaster?” …yes. sorry. can’t help it. i’m addicted

  6. coffeestainsheets says:

    This is another reliable source, I remember the seattle times selling a lot of papers on hope! We have a pretty good understanding of what is going on, there is a deal, and sac town has little shot to change the boards mind…..This reminds me of what happen in seattle…I believe seattle meet with the board?

  7. Sofa King says:

    Well until the F1 season starts in March the rollercoaster is the only ride open.

  8. paytontokemp says:

    Still riding. Hoping for some good news this week. We sure need it after yesterday’s heartbreak.

  9. hughc5 says:

    Wow i missed alot today! Still tryin not to ride the rollercoaster till chris announces it.

  10. BarelyAble says:

    Chris Daniels is on 710 right now. Basically repeating the same stuff.

  11. BarelyAble says:

    In other news. 1.5 million people in Seattle area watched the Seahawks game.

    http://seattletimes.com/html/seahawks/2020133519_seahawkstv15.html

  12. hughc5 says:

    What the h3ll is a “non binding sale agreement” or whatever? Sounds like something those flaky @$$ magoofs could back right out of…..

    • BarelyAble says:

      I think it had to do with an initial offer that probably lead to an exclusive negotiation period to iron everything out. But who really knows. It could just be their way to cover their tails should no deal take place and they can say nonbinding was mentioned.

    • SonicsDawg says:

      It was non-binding at the time the Committee was briefed (January 8). Doesn’t mean it’s currently non-binding………

      • Numbers Guy1984 says:

        Non-binding sale agreements are common in the finance and M&A world. In large $$$$, highly complex transactions, parties will agree to a set of principles (e.g., sell price) and agree to an exclusive negotiating period to allow the finer details to be ironed out. Deals in this stage definately meet the definition of highly probable, but it’s non-binding for a reason - the seller can back out or the finer details can derail the whole thing.

  13. bobbywilbury44 says:

    It’s finally settling in that the Seahawks season it over. I’ve enjoyed it like no other, and I attended their first ever game in 1976. This has been my favorite ever Seahawks team. Other teams won more games or advanced further, but this was entertaining, great football. Football will never be what the NBA is to me, but I anticipated every Seahawks game this year like no other season. Great coach, great team, great quarterback.

    If/when the formal “Sonics return” announcement is made, I’ll be looking to party spontaneously with other tears of joy fans.

  14. Sonicsman says:

    Forget the rumors, take some time and watch the Last NBA playoff gamed played at KeyArena in 2005. Our Crowd was loud and proud. Try not to throw up when you see the many camera shots of Howard Schultz courtside with his Sonics shirt on!!

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pCqkEuF8mzs

  15. Heezon-fire says:

    With today’s reports, I choose to believe we’re still on the roller coaster. However I believe we have slowed down and are approaching the end of the ride. I think I might have lost my hat along the way though!

  16. Brian Robinson says:

    Thatsfunny because I get introduced as Brian Hansen a lot. My wife gives me lots of crap when it happens

  17. rambisfan-rmcd says:

    Maybe Aldridge calls Chris “Brian” to avoid the usual redundant “to catch a predator” jokes we often see in the unoriginal comment sections of these articles.

  18. Moose says:

    I realize Bruski is in Cali, but he seems to be the only guy who is saying this thing will fight on for weeks and prospective Sac area owners will have a chance to match

    • soundersfan84 says:

      I don’t think Bruski has any idea of what actually going on as much as we do.

      Aaron Bruski ‏@aaronbruski
      Summary of today — SAC still feels confident about their offer and this story has weeks to go before an outcome is decided.

      • BarelyAble says:

        The best part is there is no Sac offer. I think he is almost making this stuff up to get readers and twitter followers (but I will defer to journalistic integrity on this). Some of his stuff flies in the face of simple fact and most is largely contradictory to other reports.

        • soundersfan84 says:

          Its ridicilous what sometimes i see on twitter regarding the situation.

          Like the local team doesn’t have to pay the 525m cause of relocation fee is part of the 525m. Not its not.

          We aren’t paying relocation fee to maloofs we pay it too NBA. Why are people thinking its part of the cost.

      • rambisfan-rmcd says:

        “SAC still feels confident about their offer and this story has weeks to go before an outcome is decided.” could this guy also be someone who still thinks Kwame Brown is still a great prospect with the right coaching?.

  19. 79 Sonics Forever says:

    We will be riding this roller coaster until the BOGs Vote. I have a strong feeling KJ will put something together and continue to muddy the waters.

  20. SonicBoom says:

    Not to be a wet blanket on Sac’s efforts, but what is up with the “Here We Buy” charade? People can say they’re going to *pledge to buy up to $40,000 worth of imaginary tickets per fake user profile?

    *don’t have any obligation to pay

    Huh? Is this an exercise in (Freudian) catharsis?

    • MartinH says:

      Yes and no.
      I’m sure we were doing things five years ago that the Okies were laughing at the relative pointlessness of.
      In the end, it’s just a sad sign that the real losers in all of this are the fans.

  21. 79 Sonics Forever says:

    I also wonder if the Maloofs put this out for bid already and Chris had the best offer and that is why they are negotiating with him on a final deal. If they did then it takes a lot of leverage away from Sac.

    • soundersfan84 says:

      79 supposedly, it was reported that they between when the initial report came out that the maloofs look around and there was 1 other offer before Hansen upped it to 525m.

  22. Dasonics says:

    At the end of the day, the typical NBA owner will look at what makes them money. In the “new NBA” Sacramento no longer makes sense. Seattle does. It makes me wonder how OKC will survive post-Durant but thats another story. OKC does have valuable oil and gas corporations in their neck of the woods that Sactown does not have. Unless you have an uber rich owner like Paul Allen, your days are numbered IMO. Other oweners don’t want to pay subsidies to the poorly run teams.

  23. Camp Jones says:

    All good news today. (for Seattle)

  24. Groovy says:

    Breaking:
    NBA’s relocation committee was briefed on Kings’ sale to Chris Hansen’s group

    http://seattletimes.com/html/nba/2020133552_kings15.html

  25. Groovy says:

    “The report said Hansen’s group, which also includes Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer, would buy 65 percent of the team, with the team given a value of $525 million, and that discussions have continued in the past week to clear the way “for the franchise to move to Seattle.”"

  26. Groovy says:

    So the Hansen group could ultimately end up with 72% of the share

    53 percent = Maloof family
    12 percent = Bob Hernreich.
    7 percent = to be sold as part of a bankruptcy proceeding
    ———-
    72% (look, I can add :)

  27. Numbers Guy1984 says:

    Per Seattle Times—-”The NBA.com report said that NBA commissioner David Stern and the league “wants certainty the arena will be built” before throwing its full weight behind Hansen’s purchase.”

    If true, this is an interesting tidbit of news with unknown consequences. For a few reasons.
    1) The MOU Between Seattle CC and King County Council clearly states that the deal will not be ratified until after the full EIS has been completed. We all know that this won’t be done until September (at the earliest) and there are risks that the MOU will not be ratified if the EIS indicates that the Mariners/Port fears are not possible to mitigate.
    2) Obtaining a team now only helps validate the lawsuit by Longshore Union which claims that the current MOU places irreversible momentum behind the transaction and arena location. We all know this is a bunch of BS, but if we get a team now, before the EIS is complete, this viewpoint could hold more water in court. A successful lawsuit invalidates the MOU.
    3) You have a clown running for Mayor (Peter Steinbrueck) who is vocal and unequivocally against the arena location. Likewise, SCC has elections in November. Realize that Clay Bennett is the chair of the relocation committee and is someone who doesn’t have a rosy experience with the Seattle political scene. As much as all of us place the blame for this relationship on Bennett, we need to have his support to get a team back. By the time the City and County Counsel are ready to vote on the MOU after the EIS, it is not unreasonable or worry that the composition of the SCC, KCC or Mayor’s office will be unfavorable to the arena deal being fully ratified.

    The downstream impacts of this are interesting to think about. None of us really know what is going on right now with the transaction, or with David Stern/Clay Bennett. That being said, it’s interest to speculate what would hypothetically happen if the arena citing were to indicate that the Arena location happens to something prohibitive (ancient native American burial ground?). This would be a very messy situation for the league as the Arena issue would be back to square one. My guess, is that Hansen will have to make assurances that his group will accept other arena locations (e.g., Bellevue) in this scenario. The ownership group has the cash, to make this promise but your guess is as good as mine if Hansen is willing to make those kinds of assurances when he has nearly $60m invested at above market prices in the SoDo area

    • soundersfan84 says:

      What do you expect its the seattle times they are against the arena and well do anything to smear it.

      • Numbers Guy1984 says:

        This article was by Bob Condotta. The Sports section of the Seattle Times wrote the article and nobody in the Sports section has been against the deal. Only the editorial board. Also, I could have referenced the NBA.com article rather than the Seattletimes. The Times was only reporting the source at NBA.com.

        • soundersfan84 says:

          The judge can’t not tell Hansen that he can’t buy a team and can’t throw out a deal cause hansen bought a team.

          Buying a team has nothing to do with the EIS.

          There is a 2nd vote that will take place regardless of this lawsuit. The EIS will get done regardless of this lawsuit.

          • soundersfan84 says:

            The union is arguing that the agreement is violating environmental laws. How in the world does buying a team have again to do with the lawsuit it doesn’t.

          • Numbers Guy1984 says:

            I think you are missing the point of what I was writing. The factors I listed are items that could leave doubt in the minds of Clay Bennet and David Stern about whether the Seattle Arena deal is “shovel ready.” If Stern wants assurances that the Arena will eventually be built BEFORE he approves the team to relocate, we we would have to wait until 2014-2015 to move or Hansen would have to make promises about what he would do with the team in the event the EIS has an adverse impact on the Arena getting built.

          • soundersfan84 says:

            We been through this discussion before Hansen has to know what the status of the EIS is before actually considering buying the Kings.

            And he also knows what do expect from the EIS.

            He has done this homework.

            If he was THAT worried about the EIS why would he be attempting to buy a team now?

    • Numbers Guy1984 says:

      ***That being said, it’s interest to speculate what would hypothetically happen if the arena EIS were to indicate that the Arena location has something prohibitive (ancient native American burial ground?).

    • soundersfan84 says:

      btw Bellevue is not a option was never an option.

      7-2 city vote 9-0 county vote. By the time the general election is over its gonna be already too late to stop the arena from getting built.

      The judge can’t stop the city/county from voting again post EIS.

    • Myk says:

      The lawsuit is not intended to stop the Arena from getting built only where it gets built. Therefore, buying a team should not validate the lawsuit in any way.

    • Mike Baker says:

      I might buy 1, but not 2 for sure, and 3 involves an opening night Sonics game a week before elections that could involve the only opponent (Peter might as well grab an anvil and jump into Puget Sound at that point).

  28. Paul Rogers says:

    Stern has been in the loop on the arena since before it was proposed. I’m not worried about that aspect at all. Do you think Hansen would’ve signed off on MOU language that didn’t meet NBA concerns?

    • Numbers Guy1984 says:

      I totally agree that Hansen has done his homework and Stern has been kept in the loop every step of the way. All I am attempting to say, is that there are a couple potential roadblocks that would prevent the final MOU from being signed. One roadblock is that if the EIS has findings that validate the Port concerns about traffic/congestion brought by an Arena. The other is if sweeping changes occur in the November elections, before the EIS is fully completed.

      Again, I’m not trying to indicate that these outcomes are likely. Chris is a smart businessman and wouldn’t be chasing the Kings if he didn’t think final approval was overwhelmingly likely. Rather, the NBA.com article sparked my interest as it really isn’t possible for Chris to give Stern 100% assurances that the final arena will be built. There are still potential roadblocks, even if they are unlikely.

      Again, i’m not trying to indicate that these are likely. Chris is a smart businessman and wouldn’t be chasing the Kings if he didn’t think final approval was overwhelmingly likely. Rather, the NBA.com article perk my interest as it really isn’t possible for Chris to give Stern 100% assurances that the final arena will be built. There are still potential roadblocks, even if they are unlikely.

      • Numbers Guy1984 says:

        Apologies for the double post on that 2nd paragraph….

      • Paul Rogers says:

        There are definitely things that can go wrong.

        • Numbers Guy1984 says:

          The NBA.com report said that NBA commissioner David Stern and the league “wants certainty the arena will be built” before throwing its full weight behind Hansen’s purchase.

          My entire premise of my last few posts was trying to understand how Chris Hansen was going to provide David Stern with “certainty” that the SoDo arena will be built. There are things that can go wrong, even if they are not likely… So how does Chris give Stern “certainty” about the eventual construction of the new arena? If I’m the only person worried about this, i’ll stop posting about it. Just seems like a valid question if there are still roadblocks. The last thing Stern & Co. would want is to move the team to Seattle, only to have issues with the EIS in November.

          • soundersfan84 says:

            Hansen has done his homework with his own experts on what to expect with the EIS. If there are going to be problems with the EIS and uncertainty with the 2nd vote why would he be aiming for the kings and trying to move them for next season.

            Looking at the alternative wouldn’t that satement apply for the kings with a local buyer wanting to keep them there? How would the NBA know that the arena will be built in sac in order to keep the team there?

        • soundersfan84 says:

          If the team is relocated in seattle and playing next season how exactly can the city/county vote no on the final vote if the team is already there.

          • Numbers Guy1984 says:

            1) EIS validates concerns that freight mobility and/or Port jobs would be put at risk by an Arena. 2) November election weakens support at the SCC and/or Mayor level.

            You are absolutely right that having a team in Seattle would put pressure on elected leaders to ratify the MOU but the elected officials have already made very clear that they need to see an EIS that shows freight mobility/ port jobs are not at risk with an Arena being built.

          • soundersfan84 says:

            By and 18k arena in an area that has a 48k baseball stadium and a 67k soccer/football stadium.

            If the EIS is going show serious problems then why is the port union suing instead of letting the EIS do the talking.

          • SpeedCat says:

            The lawsuit has been fast tracked. I think it’s highly unlikely they win, but if they do, it merely forces City/County to re-vote. This vote would happen right after the results of the lawsuit are known next year, prior to the changes to City/County leadership. So there’s one risk I think we can write off.

            David Stern is probably paranoid about Seattle politics, that is something we can probably assume. “…it really isn’t possible for Chris to give Stern 100% assurances that the final arena will be built. There are still potential roadblocks, even if they are unlikely…” I agree, it isn’t possible. But it may not be necessary. BOG will vote for Seattle deal over Sactown in their own interests, without the need for the full weight of Stern’s support.

            Additionally, Stern’s support could be layered in via some kind of contract, just like the MOU is. When X1 happens, Y1 level of support from Stern is obtained. Y2 level is not obtained until X2 happens. Y3 support comes when substantially all of the risks have been mitigated.

            I suppose there could be some kind of risk where NBA support is contingent upon City/County support, which is contingent upon NBA support, kind of a chicken/egg dilemma. But I think Hansen and Ballmer’s lawyers are really freakin smart, and they’ll be able to figure out a way to make everyone whole and happy.

  29. Omar says:

    To think we could have had Durant and Russell Wilson at the same time…

  30. Taylor Made says:

    sigh…

    Grant Napear ‏@GrantNapearshow
    New Kings ownership group will be announced shortly…may not be the only one. This thing isn’t over by a long shot!

  31. 79 Sonics Forever says:

    I am sure Chris understand that there is a risk of Sac putting together a competitive bid. He has been one step ahead in the process from day one. Given this it will be a interesting chess game.

    I think either way we get a team out of this

    • soundersfan84 says:

      well so far there hasn’t been a competitive bid even with the rumors. All the suppose local bidder amounts are less than the 525m this the team would be worth less in total value if the NBA decided to keep the team there. It would have to be a much higher price than 525m.

  32. MartinH says:

    DeMarcus Cousins ejected again tonight… yeesh.

  33. Gene Hunt says:

    Sam Shane ‏@SamShanecbs13
    Time appears to running out for KJ, momentum in Seattle’s court, NBA reviewing that proposal, nothing firm from Sac.

    Sam Shane is a reporter for the CBS affiliate in Sacramento

  34. Omar says:

    The tweet I’m waiting for is:

    @blah
    Breaking: Maloof-Hansen press conference tomorrow at City Hall

  35. Paul Rogers says:

    Just posted a link that is stuck in moderation. Interesting article about KJ and BOG.

  36. SonicsDawg says:

    Thomas Robinson had 12 and 7 tonight. That’s a good sign. That’s a guy who needs to develop the next couple years. Had a slow start to his career for a top-5 pick..

    • Ty says:

      He hasn’t had much of a chance yet. Hard to figure out why you’d spend a top 5 pick on a guy who looked ready to contribute right away, and not give him any minutes.

  37. Paul Rogers says:

    Here is article on KJ and BOG.

    http://on.nba.com/RTh8pg

  38. SpeedCat says:

    new from Seattle Times’ Ken Armstrong:

    http://seattletimes.com/html/sports/2020134163_maloofs15m.html

    interesting read, so far

  39. Gene Hunt says:

    Just in case people missed it here’s links to Chris Daniels on 710 and KJR earlier.

    http://bit.ly/11w6lpb

    http://bit.ly/10vGKxn

  40. Laporbo says:

    I can’t remember which article but a few days ago one said something like the Hansen group would annually be paying luxury tax.

    I hope that means they are going to pay to win instead of just be mediocre for years (like the M’s).

    I wonder what makes the article writer think that. Those of you with the inside info, has CH hinted that?

  41. SpeedCat says:

    hoopshype carried a story, I think mostly lifted from the recent hit yahoo sports article, that surmised we’d be paying luxury tax and not be on the receiving end of revenue sharing.

  42. SpeedCat says:

    OK my comment got buried above… here’s responding to a few posts ***way*** above

    The lawsuit has been fast tracked. I think it’s highly unlikely they win, but if they do, it merely forces City/County to re-vote. This vote would happen right after the results of the lawsuit are known next year, prior to the changes to City/County leadership. So there’s one risk I think we can write off.

    David Stern is probably paranoid about Seattle politics, that is something we can probably assume. “…it really isn’t possible for Chris to give Stern 100% assurances that the final arena will be built. There are still potential roadblocks, even if they are unlikely…” I agree, it isn’t possible. But it may not be necessary. BOG will vote for Seattle deal over Sactown in their own interests, without the need for the full weight of Stern’s support.

    Additionally, Stern’s support could be layered in via some kind of contract, just like the MOU is. When X1 happens, Y1 level of support from Stern is obtained. Y2 level is not obtained until X2 happens. Y3 support comes when substantially all of the risks have been mitigated.

    I suppose there could be some kind of risk where NBA support is contingent upon City/County support, which is contingent upon NBA support, kind of a chicken/egg dilemma. But I think Hansen and Ballmer’s lawyers are really freakin smart, and they’ll be able to figure out a way to make everyone whole and happy.

  43. SwimmingBird says:

    Not news but I’ll just leave this here….

    http://vimeo.com/32645040

  44. Laporbo says:

    Dennis Bounds on King5 just reported that the deal is that CH buys 65% and that Maloofs keep a portion. This is incorrect as far we’ve been reading, right?

Leave a Reply