... in which sactownfan tries to gin up panic...

[sactownfan]

Koz fired? Cal Expo for sale? Eddie Jordan then next coach? (lol I actually dont mind EJ but figured some would find that funny)

These are not encouraging signs that the Kings are here to stay in Sacramento... In fact im sure that the maloofs will sign the papers to allow them to explore other options next year.

Lets get real... Sacramento doesn't want the Kings... sad but true... in my eyes... all that would keep the Kings in town would be a serious effort by Sacramento to financially support the Arena or prove to the Maloofs that this is a rock solid market thats worth it to stay...

However after the embarrassing attendance and turn out by these so called "best fans in the NBA" this market looks like the most pathetic in the NBA... and Sacramento doesn't have the money... or draw that other markets do

The truth is the Maloofs aren't going stand for losing anymore money at this point, and they aren't going to invest anymore money in staying when its so obvious that the Cal Expo is just too complicated and troublesome (it a money pit)

PLUS NO ONES GOING TO BUY THIS TEAM RIGHT NOW... first off. and sec if by some miracle the maloofs could sell it if they wanted to... whoever buys it is moving the team right away.

Why continue to lose money and deal with all the headaches that go along with this "stretch" cal expo plan. when they could just pack it up and move to a situation that would instantly bring sell outs and instantly bring financial relief. not to mention MAKE THE BUSINESS MORE PROFITABLE both short and long term???

Anaheim's owner has been desperately trying to land the Kings or any NBA franchise and would make it more than worth the move dollar wise for the maloofs. But Anaheim is not alone... San Jose and many other sites are actually willing to throw $$$ at the Maloofs....

its just too bad that Sacramento wouldn't when they had the chance and now can't with the economy.

Its game over for the Kings.... Im almost sure of it.

 

[venom_7]

This thread should be at least altered, because the title could potentially incite panic.

Secondly, the Maloofs won't move in this economy, if anything they will sell the team to an interested owner who does have the resources to move them at this point. If MS&E can't afford to hang on to 12 employees, then they won't have the finances to move the team.Hands down. Hopefully we will be decent again by the time they are financially sound enough to do so.

 

[swisshh]

I disagree.

Sacramento wants the Kings. I am not sure they want the Maloofs and the current management anymore. The city is very willing to love the team, but they're just sort of fed up with a two faced organization.

 

[sactownfan]

This thread should be at least altered, because the title could potentially incite panic.

well after last season... it might be nice to get peoples heart rates up... every once in awhile...

The Maloofs would instantly make money if they moved... thats a fact... for how long is a different question... but chances are if they moved to a place like Anaheim they'd be set... Orange county has alot of people with lots of money and time on their hands... the Kings would do very well...

 

[Aenadin]

i know its crazy but why not partner up with bill gates

i dont see the kings not being sacramento kings....

 

[venom_7]

Fact: Last season was the first time the Maloofs LOST a substantial amount of money because of the team.

But you are right. Everybody panics at anything unexpected, so the best thing to do is abandon one of the most loyal fanbases in the NBA strictly because they might make better money elsewhere a few years from now.

psshh.

 

[Spike]

Is the sky falling? Methinks you need to read your tea leaves again, good sir.

 

[Capt. Factorial]

In light of the fact that the Sacramento fanbase is clearly no longer interested and there is little hope of making a return on your considerable investment, I, Commissioner Chicken Little, hereby grant you permission to explore the possibility of relocating your pessimism to the cities of San Jose or Anaheim, where it will be more appreciated.

 

[Haiku30]

Fact: Last season was the first time the Maloofs LOST a substantial amount of money because of the team.

But you are right. Everybody panics at anything unexpected, so the best thing to do is abandon one of the most loyal fanbases in the NBA strictly because they might make better money elsewhere a few years from now.

psshh.

Well, How much exactly is a substantial amount? Have'nt they been losing money for several years now?

I also dont think this is unexpected is it? The Kings have been having difficulties securing a home for the future for awhile?

 

[VF21]

NOTE: Aluminum foil hats are now on sale in the lobby.

 

[VF21]

Just a general note for any/all concerned which might or might not mean anything at all: sactownfan is from Southern California, according to his IP, so you have to wonder if he's jsut a llittle out of touch or ...

 

[fnordius]

i know its crazy but why not partner up with bill gates

i dont see the kings not being sacramento kings....

Ladies and gentlemen, please welcome the Seattle-Redmond Kingsonics!

 

[Arco Arena]

I don't see it ever happening. If the Kings ever moved from a loyal small market city like Sacramento.. to become one of three NBA franchises in the Los Angeles area it would be a huge embarrassment/public relations nightmare for David Stern/the NBA.

If the Kings move it will be anywhere but Orange County/Anaheim.

 

[Kings Faithful]

I don't see it ever happening. If the Kings ever moved from a loyal small market city like Sacramento.. to become one of three NBA franchises in the Los Angeles area it would be a huge embarrassment/public relations nightmare for David Stern/the NBA.

If the Kings move it will be anywhere but Orange County/Anaheim.

Yeah... as much money as there is to be had in Southern Cal... I don't see it going anywhere else but the Lakers. I don't think it would be any better financially to move down there than it would be to stay in Sacramento. Even if the Kings were a good team LAL will always be first priority. I sure hope it doesn't happen. Even thinking about it gets me nervous. Tell me it won't happen VF!

 

[sactownfan]

I don't see it ever happening. If the Kings ever moved from a loyal small market city like Sacramento.. to become one of three NBA franchises in the Los Angeles area it would be a huge embarrassment/public relations nightmare for David Stern/the NBA.

If the Kings move it will be anywhere but Orange County/Anaheim.

Why would it be a huge embarrassment???... Is California not the biggest state?... and southern California is the most populated part... So is it really crazy to imagine one of the strongest markets and most populated places in the U.S. having 3 teams???

Southern California is a solid... extremely Solid market... the Angels, Dodgers, Ducks, LA Kings, Lakers, even the freakn sorry clippers have great support and great T.V. contracts.

I think it would be a shame if the Kings moved but seriously How many of you really think this super elaborate and complicated Cal Expo thing will workout?? Face the facts the fall in the Economy was the nail in the coffin.

 

[VF21]

Since this is apparently going to become yet another discussion about the Kings moving, I'm transferring it to the "New Arena" forum...

yawn...

 

[Section 101]

Why would it be a huge embarrassment???... Is California not the biggest state?... and southern California is the most populated part... So is it really crazy to imagine one of the strongest markets and most populated places in the U.S. having 3 teams???

Southern California is a solid... extremely Solid market... the Angels, Dodgers, Ducks, LA Kings, Lakers, even the freakn sorry clippers have great support and great T.V. contracts.

I think it would be a shame if the Kings moved but seriously How many of you really think this super elaborate and complicated Cal Expo thing will workout?? Face the facts the fall in the Economy was the nail in the coffin.

It's so solid they have how many football teams? How long has it been now?

 

[sactownfan]

It's so solid they have how many football teams? How long has it been now?

The old Rams and Raiders were not just terrible but the ownership was as bad as it gets.... the Maloofs are not the best owners ever but their not Al freak'n Davis or that Ram chick.

 

[Bricklayer]

Anaheim has never been the biggest threat -- neither the league nor the local owners (Lakers/Clips) are eager for a third team there. Kansas City is the biggest threat.

But regardless, does not matter the who and where, if Cal Expo falls thorugh without an instant workable plan in place...

However Cal Expo hasn't fallen through yet.

 

[Trueblood]

This thread should be at least altered, because the title could potentially incite panic.

Secondly, the Maloofs won't move in this economy, if anything they will sell the team to an interested owner who does have the resources to move them at this point. If MS&E can't afford to hang on to 12 employees, then they won't have the finances to move the team.Hands down. Hopefully we will be decent again by the time they are financially sound enough to do so.

But they will just say that if they were in a more profitable market, there would've been no need to layoff 12 employees.

Relocation usually costs $30 million. That's the relocation fee that the Maloofs would have to kick back to the league. But the benefits and amount of revenue provided by the new market make the move more than financially justifiable as they will more than recoup the $30 million.

Let's just hope it doesn't get to that point. But if it does, the economy won't stop these guys from moving. The economy will just all the more justify their need for a revenue generating building.

 

[Section 101]

But they will just say that if they were in a more profitable market, there would've been no need to layoff 12 employees.

Relocation usually costs $30 million. That's the relocation fee that the Maloofs would have to kick back to the league. But the benefits and amount of revenue provided by the new market make the move more than financially justifiable as they will more than recoup the $30 million.

Let's just hope it doesn't get to that point. But if it does, the economy won't stop these guys from moving. The economy will just all the more justify their need for a revenue generating building.

You assume they would make a profit at a new location. The heat just layed off workers too.

The $30 mil is just the league fee. Then there is the actual moving costs and other things. So say the price tag of just the move is $40 mil. If they make $10 mil profit a year it would take 4 years to recoup that money. If they only make $5 mil a year its 8 years. It's not like NBA teams are making tons of money. Most hope to just break even.

 

[Section 101]

The old Rams and Raiders were not just terrible but the ownership was as bad as it gets.... the Maloofs are not the best owners ever but their not Al freak'n Davis or that Ram chick.

What does bad owners have to do with making money? Both owners saw they could make more money by moving. If Davis thought he would make more money by moving back he would do it in a heart beat.

 

[Trueblood]

What does bad owners have to do with making money? Both owners saw they could make more money by moving. If Davis thought he would make more money by moving back he would do it in a heart beat.

He actually wants to move back but the lease makes it very tough. Huge penalty if he tries to break it. He blew it when Oakland guaranteed sellouts and he didn't get it in writing.

 

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

I'm moderately surprised that Capt. Factorial has not yet intervened to point out that California is not the biggest state...

 

[Trueblood]

You assume they would make a profit at a new location. The heat just layed off workers too.

The $30 mil is just the league fee. Then there is the actual moving costs and other things. So say the price tag of just the move is $40 mil. If they make $10 mil profit a year it would take 4 years to recoup that money. If they only make $5 mil a year its 8 years. It's not like NBA teams are making tons of money. Most hope to just break even.

That's what they want you to believe and what the media reports but it's not necessarily true.

Forbes is in bed with the owners so you would think that they would fudge the numbers a bit but this site shows that lots of these owners make a nice profit...http://www.forbes.com/lists/2008/32/nba08_NBA-Team-Valuations_Rank.html

7 teams profited at least 27 million.

Another 6 were in double figures. That's almost half the league.

Another 7 were profitable.

10 were in the red but again, this is Forbes, their ally, reporting the numbers. And of those 10, 4 or 5 of them were above the luxury tax proving that if you stay below the tax, you have a good shot at profiting and are guaranteed a profit if you get below the cap.

The lowest revenue number was Seattle and not surprisingly, they relocated.

Now this is what I don't get. Sacramento's revenue was $117 million. Well above the league average. Where does this come from? Do they have a big time tv contract? Sponsorships?

 

[Section 101]

That's what they want you to believe and what the media reports but it's not necessarily true.

Forbes is in bed with the owners so you would think that they would fudge the numbers a bit but this site shows that lots of these owners make a nice profit...http://www.forbes.com/lists/2008/32/nba08_NBA-Team-Valuations_Rank.html

7 teams profited at least 27 million.

Another 6 were in double figures. That's almost half the league.

Another 7 were profitable.

10 were in the red but again, this is Forbes, their ally, reporting the numbers. And of those 10, 4 or 5 of them were above the luxury tax proving that if you stay below the tax, you have a good shot at profiting and are guaranteed a profit if you get below the cap.

The lowest revenue number was Seattle and not surprisingly, they relocated.

Now this is what I don't get. Sacramento's revenue was $117 million. Well above the league average. Where does this come from? Do they have a big time tv contract? Sponsorships?

First, this is last years numbers. They are way down this year.

Second, revenue is great that means your selling something, but it's not taking costs into consideration. If say NY, LA and Sac all had the same revenue then Sac would have the best profits cause it costs more to do business in NY and LA. On this page its the net income you want to look at. The Kings were at +$7 mil. They already said they were around -$20 mil under before they made the trades.

Seattle lost just under $1 mil last year. It will be interesting to see what the number is this year at Ok. City.

Another point to look at is the franchise value. Kings are at $350 mil here. Clippers are at $297. If the Kings moved to Anehiem the Kings value would drop due to competition and also increase costs of LA over Sac.

As for 7 teams that made over $27 mil well ya, they are the major markets except for the Suns and raptors. They are also winning teams. Once again look at the Clips they are a better comparison at this point. They will be lucky to break even this year.

 

[Capt. Factorial]

I'm moderately surprised that Capt. Factorial has not yet intervened to point out that California is not the biggest state...

Sorry, I was tuning it out after a while. Guess I have a reputation to uphold.

But in fairness, California is the biggest state in terms of population...

 

[Trueblood]

First, this is last years numbers. They are way down this year.

Again, that's what anti NBA, talk radio pundits want you to believe. Truth is, the numbers were pretty much equal to or slightly less than last year. The proof is when the cap and lux tax numbers come out and based on what Stern said last week, it will remain the same or go down slightly.

Next is year is when there may be problems. Things were equal this year because season ticket renewals went out before the economy hit the fan. They will have a tough time next year but with so many ridiculous contracts coming off the books (Marbury, Iverson, Wallace; etc.), smart owners will make up for lost revenue by not paying the players as much. You won't see many tears from me.

Second, revenue is great that means your selling something, but it's not taking costs into consideration. If say NY, LA and Sac all had the same revenue then Sac would have the best profits cause it costs more to do business in NY and LA. On this page its the net income you want to look at. The Kings were at +$7 mil. They already said they were around -$20 mil under before they made the trades.

Correct. Net income is where I got the profit numbers from. Revenue is irrelevant if the cost of operations is high and vice versa. Net income is all that matters and as the numbers show, teams aren't lucky to just break even like the media and owners want us to believe, hence why I posted the link.

As for the Kings losing $20 million even though they didn't pay the tax, I don't buy it. You mean they went from +7 to a negative 20 in one year even though attendance was only 1,000 or 2,000 a game off from the previous year and the payroll was roughly the same. Did they lose all their suite holders? Did all the corporate sponsorships expire? Did their broadcast deals expire?

Again, I'm not saying that those things didn't necessarily happen. Maybe they did but if so, you would think that the Maloofs would want to prove it by opening the books. These owners never open the books because they know that they will be proven to be liars.

Losing $20 million? I'd be posting my book numbers all over the place. They aren't so I'm not buying it.

Seattle lost just under $1 mil last year. It will be interesting to see what the number is this year at Ok. City.

Excellent point. This is another reason, along with New Orleans' numbers going up this year, why the cap and lux tax is flat. They went from losing money to having a huge year of mostly sellouts in OKC.

It's too bad that it had to come down to this, meaning Seattle losing the team. I think the Clippers playing in Staples Center is the stupidest thing around. Admittedly, I once interviewed for their inside sales position and the employees doing the interviewing used profanity and ripped the team at every opportunity as a way to create incentive for us to be creative when selling tickets. Just shows what a joke Sterling is when his own employees have to sell their business in that manner. How cool would it be had Sterling sold to Bennett and Seattle had an extra 2 years with Ballmer at the controls to come up with an arena solution?

Another point to look at is the franchise value. Kings are at $350 mil here. Clippers are at $297. If the Kings moved to Anehiem the Kings value would drop due to competition and also increase costs of LA over Sac.

Agree again. Even though I'm here in socal, I would hate for the Kings to oversaturate the market. Again, Sterling is the villain. Had he moved to Anaheim or just sold the team to Samueli, the Ducks and Honda Center owner, Anaheim would just be one less option for the Maloofs. That being said, that's why I still worry about Vegas. If that arena gets off the ground and Sac is still dragging it's feet, you're looking at potential problems. I say potential because you still have the gambling issue. If they get rid of that, it's a lot worse than "potentially" being a problem.

As for 7 teams that made over $27 mil well ya, they are the major markets except for the Suns and raptors. They are also winning teams. Once again look at the Clips they are a better comparison at this point. They will be lucky to break even this year.

Again, with Sterling at the helm, it's a miracle that he's profitted as much as he has. He deserves to just break even. If it meant selling the team, I hope he loses his ***. Unfortunately, their player payroll went down this year as the Maggette and Brand defections cut cost a lot more than the addition of Baron. Unfortunately, he made money again. But if I had my way and the league could contract teams and get it down to 28, I would get rid of the Nets and Clips. Big market teams who rank in the bottom 6 of the Forbes list. You don't abandon a market due to the presence of the Knicks and Lakers and don't even abandon a building. The Clips play in an arena already being taken by an NHL and NBA team while the Nets current crib is obsolete. How they would go about the financing of contraction is a whole other problem though.

 

[VF21]

As for the Kings losing $20 million even though they didn't pay the tax, I don't buy it. You mean they went from +7 to a negative 20 in one year even though attendance was only 1,000 or 2,000 a game off from the previous year and the payroll was roughly the same. Did they lose all their suite holders? Did all the corporate sponsorships expire? Did their broadcast deals expire?

They did, in fact, lose some corporate sponsorships and they took a big hit in lower level season ticket holder renewals LAST YEAR.

And remember, they were on the hook for both Musselman's and Theus' contracts.

Your comment about the attendance figures is also misleading. While the reported ticket sales may not have declined that much, the actual butts in the seats - you know, the butts who get up and spend good money buying beer, snacks, etc. during half-time - were obvious.

The idea that the owners have to open their books to the public is ludicrous. If you want to believe they're liars, fine. That's your choice to make. I find it more than a little disconcerting, however, that you're making these allegations so cavalierly...

 

[Trueblood]

They did, in fact, lose some corporate sponsorships and they took a big hit in lower level season ticket holder renewals LAST YEAR.

And remember, they were on the hook for both Musselman's and Theus' contracts.

Your comment about the attendance figures is also misleading. While the reported ticket sales may not have declined that much, the actual butts in the seats - you know, the butts who get up and spend good money buying beer, snacks, etc. during half-time - were obvious.

The idea that the owners have to open their books to the public is ludicrous. If you want to believe they're liars, fine. That's your choice to make. I find it more than a little disconcerting, however, that you're making these allegations so cavalierly...

Touching on the attendance and revenue issue, I mentioned in my post that I didn't doubt that there were some losses but no way to the tune of $20 million or a difference of $27 million in just one year unless you are a big tax payer. It's almost impossible. And they were on the hook for Theus and Musselman in both seasons. Last year and the Forbes year.

I wouldn't even be making the allegations if they weren't trying to bs the public in the first place. They are creating an illusion of ridiculous losses in order to justify their cause, a cause that COULD turn to relocation if they don't get their way. If they are going to take away a civic treasure like that, I would think they should be accountable to some extent and show some proof. If they throw out ridiculous numbers like that, people besides myself will call them out on it.

I just wouldn't call it ludicrous. I'm merely asking them to prove their case. This always happens in sports. Billy Hunter is asking for a review of the books in order justify changing the collective bargaining agreement for his players.

The media, union and fans en masse asked for a review of the books when the cancellation of the World Series happened in '94. It's not that far fetched. If you're going to make a claim then you should at least show us something that backs up that claim. To the extent of opening up the books? Maybe not but give us a spread sheet that refutes the Forbes numbers. Simple addition and subtraction. Give us something instead of just throwing out $20 million and expecting us to be like a bunch of sheep and just taking their word for it.