To move Kings need pony up $100 M due/fees
- Thread starter PurpleHaze
- Start date
Yet the point made by PurpleHaze is still valid - packed in among the talk about tax money and arena costs, Breton points out that the Kings owe the city of Sacramento $70M and that NBA relocation fees are $30M, which adds up to a $100M upfront cost to relocate from the city. (This presumes that the Kings could be legally forced to repay their loan before relocating, but Breton doesn't provide any evidence that they couldn't simply repay the loan after moving.)
That's an interesting little tidbit that might make some of those who are worried that the Kings are going to up and bolt if there's no arena deal yesterday sleep a bit more comfortably. A $100M price tag on moving is a pretty good incentive for the Maloofs to keep up hope that an arena deal will get done here.
That's an interesting little tidbit that might make some of those who are worried that the Kings are going to up and bolt if there's no arena deal yesterday sleep a bit more comfortably. A $100M price tag on moving is a pretty good incentive for the Maloofs to keep up hope that an arena deal will get done here.
MSE will sell the land/arena/practice facility, so that's probably a good chunk of the money they'll need, if not all. It won't happen quickly, but it's some prime land when development picks up. Bottom line is, if they really want out, they could just deed the land over to the city as payment in full. I'm not sure they do that, as the land is probably worth more, but it's an quick and easy way to pay off the city.
Also, They don't owe the full $70 million. I don't know what the princiapl balance is now, but when things were going well, financially, MSE actaully was ahead in payments on the loan. After paying for 10 years, the principal has to have come down a decent amount.
Breton mentions none of that, of course.
Also, They don't owe the full $70 million. I don't know what the princiapl balance is now, but when things were going well, financially, MSE actaully was ahead in payments on the loan. After paying for 10 years, the principal has to have come down a decent amount.
Breton mentions none of that, of course.
I think the city will want the cash, not the land. Land is relatively worthless if you can't get financing to build commercial property on it, which nobody can. Unless there is an explicit provision in the contract that the Maloofs can deed the land to the city in lieu of cash (very doubtful), then the Maloofs have to come up with the cash. I'd like to know if they even have that cash available? I doubt it. They'd probably have to get their new city to pay off Sacto, which could be a difficult negotiation point.
This is pretty much how I read it as well and why I was not too impressed by the article. The Maloofs will sale the land to either the city or a developer. Ironically, a developer could level Arco, put in a new strip mall or two on the site and use the existing parking lot. It would be poetic justice and just terrible for the city.
Here is the silliness of the throwaway line in this article that has now become its focus -- Maloofs have to pay $100mil to move. Big bleeping whoop from their perspective. I mean really. If they move, it is almost certainly to a city with a arena just sitting there waiting for them. So they basically end up paying $100 mil for a new arena, very likley under better terms than they have here, with an excited fanbase that will be coming to the early games, and while able to sell the land here to recoup even some of that money. $100mil is not nothing, but for the package they would essentially be getting for that expense, it may be just about the best deal they have seen offered.
This throwaway line amusingly inserted by a writer who for years argued the Maloofs should be ponying up $250mil for a new arean here in town (until an abrupt change of heart about 2 years ago when I think he suddenly realized they might actually leave and his job possibly along with them).
This throwaway line amusingly inserted by a writer who for years argued the Maloofs should be ponying up $250mil for a new arean here in town (until an abrupt change of heart about 2 years ago when I think he suddenly realized they might actually leave and his job possibly along with them).
The land was used as a big chunk of the collateral for the loan. The city won't necessarily have much choice re: land versus cash.
I agree with Brick's logic. $100 million is nothing to get an brand new, NBA-ready arena in another city, where they are likely to sell a lot more tickets and other merchandise.
Sacramento has become gusher of red ink with a crappy arena (that was never great); a fan base that clearly doesn't care much any more and no sign of anyone really giving a damn if they leave, or certainly not near enough people.
What is the incentive for the Maloofs to stay and bleed cash here for a city and media that's basically kicked them in teeth multiple times and an apathetic fan base? $100 million is not much to pay to get the Sacramento albatross off their necks.
I agree with Brick's logic. $100 million is nothing to get an brand new, NBA-ready arena in another city, where they are likely to sell a lot more tickets and other merchandise.
Sacramento has become gusher of red ink with a crappy arena (that was never great); a fan base that clearly doesn't care much any more and no sign of anyone really giving a damn if they leave, or certainly not near enough people.
What is the incentive for the Maloofs to stay and bleed cash here for a city and media that's basically kicked them in teeth multiple times and an apathetic fan base? $100 million is not much to pay to get the Sacramento albatross off their necks.
As much as I hate to, I have to agree. It saddens me to do it, but the truth is the truth. If I were still living in sacramento and working there, I would still be going to games. Unfortunately too many people only pay lip service to the Kings. Sometimes I'm amazed when I look at this very fourm and see how many of our most prolific writers and fiercist fans don't live in sacramento. If only most of the fans in sacramento had the same dedication and loyality that most on this fourm do.
I will say this. If this team can make it through this particular period in time, then there's nowhere to go but up. I doubt it can get any worse than it is now. Low attendance, down economy, and a bad team with an aging arena. A local newspaper that does little to support the idea of a new arena except point out the negatives in poorly writen articles by smug elitists like Breton. Nope! I don't think it can get any worse. So I hope and pray the the Maloof's and Stern and company will come up with an answer. At least enough of an answer to keep the Maloof's interested in keeping the team here.
I will say this. If this team can make it through this particular period in time, then there's nowhere to go but up. I doubt it can get any worse than it is now. Low attendance, down economy, and a bad team with an aging arena. A local newspaper that does little to support the idea of a new arena except point out the negatives in poorly writen articles by smug elitists like Breton. Nope! I don't think it can get any worse. So I hope and pray the the Maloof's and Stern and company will come up with an answer. At least enough of an answer to keep the Maloof's interested in keeping the team here.
I've been holding on to the barest of hopes for a new arena and I still am trying to hang onto that hope. I couldn't afford games when I was a single mother. Over that last few years, I've had some extra money and go to games when I can and have bought merchandise (Kings and Monarchs). But my hope is sort of at the last gasp here.
What makes me sad, as a long time Sacramentan, is the arena hosts a lot more other events than basketball. It'll all be gone with no venue to host any of those things anymore. Defintely a huge step backward for the city. This city didn't pay anything for either Arco I or Arco II. This city couldn't build a baseball stadium, so West Sacramento upstaged them.
People and the media are going to blame the Maloofs, but I know they wanted to stay here. We're just slamming the door in their face. No one to blame, but Sacramentans. And I guess the majority of them will be happy about it.
The only thing holding me to the Sacramento region is my son and his family, which is everything. If that changes, though, I'd rather move to a state with lower living costs and a city that actually has people who appreciate civic amentities a little more.
What makes me sad, as a long time Sacramentan, is the arena hosts a lot more other events than basketball. It'll all be gone with no venue to host any of those things anymore. Defintely a huge step backward for the city. This city didn't pay anything for either Arco I or Arco II. This city couldn't build a baseball stadium, so West Sacramento upstaged them.
People and the media are going to blame the Maloofs, but I know they wanted to stay here. We're just slamming the door in their face. No one to blame, but Sacramentans. And I guess the majority of them will be happy about it.
The only thing holding me to the Sacramento region is my son and his family, which is everything. If that changes, though, I'd rather move to a state with lower living costs and a city that actually has people who appreciate civic amentities a little more.
Last edited:
Forever? Who knows at this rate. But we are just starting to see the commercial property owners hit the forclosures due to lack of tenants (see the Jack in the Box guy). Hope people are prepared for round 2 of the banking crash.
If Sacramento does recover it will still take years to fill all the current vacancies before needing more retail space. I would take the over of 10 years.
If Sacramento does recover it will still take years to fill all the current vacancies before needing more retail space. I would take the over of 10 years.
I will say this. If this team can make it through this particular period in time, then there's nowhere to go but up. I doubt it can get any worse than it is now. Low attendance, down economy, and a bad team with an aging arena. A local newspaper that does little to support the idea of a new arena except point out the negatives in poorly writen articles by smug elitists like Breton. Nope! I don't think it can get any worse. So I hope and pray the the Maloof's and Stern and company will come up with an answer. At least enough of an answer to keep the Maloof's interested in keeping the team here.
Kreidler's take this morning on KHTK is that this is not a significant deterrent to the Kings moving. As, I pointed out, he said part of the $70 million is paid off. He said the $30 million is discretionary on the part of the NBA owners. It's more to prevent teams from just moving around, because they feel like it. A team that's losing money, has little local support and no chance at getting a new arena may not be asked to pay that much.
No, we're talking about one part of the article, the costs, that he did not think would be a much of a deterrent to the team moving.
Kreidler didn't feel that was the point of Breton's article, anyway. He felt the main point of the article was to say that any amenities in a city cost money and if Sacramento wants to have an arena for the events that come to Arco, it always costs some amount of public money. That is the gist of the closing sentence of the article.
Kreidler didn't feel that was the point of Breton's article, anyway. He felt the main point of the article was to say that any amenities in a city cost money and if Sacramento wants to have an arena for the events that come to Arco, it always costs some amount of public money. That is the gist of the closing sentence of the article.
Don't forget the other option, the Maloofs sell the team and rake in some nice cash and walk away. Not bad for the brothers who have some financial problems. There are usually no shortage of willing buyers. Although one of them, Henry Samueli got suspended as owner of the Anaheim Ducks for lying to securities regulators. I doubt the NBA would welcome him. That doesn't prevent his wife from buying a team though. But again, no new buyer is going to want to stay in this current situtation. So it still boils down to a new arena or the team leaves... only a matter of time.
It is a tough situation for Sacramento. I am very negative about our chances.
Let's look at 3 main factors:
Market - Sacramento is a small-market city; without (almost) any corp-support.
Economy - economy is bad everywhere. Just a terrible time for any investment project and building arena in Sacramento is not a great one even during the good times.
Owners - The brothers are rich people but not very rich; not even medium rich. They just do not have enough money or resources.
IMO we have only two ways to solve this rebus:
- move the team to Anaheim, Kansas or Vegas, or any other place.
- the Maloof family sell the team to someone who is going to invest money in the project; at least 80%. I do not think that it is possible to find an investor in the US who would do it. You need someone who is extremely rich (billionaire) and a huge fan, and ready to lose money. Foreign buyers? The Arabs do not like basketball and Russia has one fan and he just bought a team in NJ.
Even moving the Kings is not easy (fortunately).
There are some rumors that NYI is willing to move to Kansas. Two winter leagues in one place - too much.
Vegas is a question mark for any pro team.
Ambitious owners from Oklahoma bought a toy already and Oklahoma City is occupied.
Let's look at 3 main factors:
Market - Sacramento is a small-market city; without (almost) any corp-support.
Economy - economy is bad everywhere. Just a terrible time for any investment project and building arena in Sacramento is not a great one even during the good times.
Owners - The brothers are rich people but not very rich; not even medium rich. They just do not have enough money or resources.
IMO we have only two ways to solve this rebus:
- move the team to Anaheim, Kansas or Vegas, or any other place.
- the Maloof family sell the team to someone who is going to invest money in the project; at least 80%. I do not think that it is possible to find an investor in the US who would do it. You need someone who is extremely rich (billionaire) and a huge fan, and ready to lose money. Foreign buyers? The Arabs do not like basketball and Russia has one fan and he just bought a team in NJ.
Even moving the Kings is not easy (fortunately).
There are some rumors that NYI is willing to move to Kansas. Two winter leagues in one place - too much.
Vegas is a question mark for any pro team.
Ambitious owners from Oklahoma bought a toy already and Oklahoma City is occupied.
Yup...pointed this out in another thread awhile back...it's a really pathetic almost reality, actually. It says alot for the molassas that we have for city council people. Hopefully our former NBA All Star Mayor can get it done. And just think, the capital city of the world's 9th largest economy with a metro population of 1.5 million might be destined for minor league mediocraty...Anne Rudin and Heather Fargo are smiling somewhere.
Atlanta is bidding for WrestleMania
The article I am linking us to may not seem like it has anything to do with the topic at hand, but it does. I do realize that Atlanta and Miami along with previous host cities such as Orlando have football stadiums that can occupy thousands and thousands of fans in attendance, but cities with arenas like Anaheim, Boston, Philadelphia and Los Angeles have hosted WrestleMania in the past.
Just a small sample of what kind of money can be brought in thanks to an event like this. I'm sure with a new arena Sacramento could one day host WrestleMania or perhaps SummerSlam, which is their second biggest event and money maker.
http://albany.bizjournals.com/albany/othercities/atlanta/stories/2009/09/28/story6.html?b=1254110400^2154361&s=industry&i=sports_business
“This has the potential to be a huge economic impact,” said Gary Stokan, president of the Atlanta Sports Council, which promotes college and pro sports in metro Atlanta.
“The business of WrestleMania is big business,” said John Saboor, senior vice president of special events for WWE.
Orlando hosted WrestleMania XXIV in 2008 and realized a $51.5 million economic impact and Detroit hosted the event in 2007 and saw a $29.7 million economic impact, he said.
Houston hosted WrestleMania XXV this year with an attendance of 72,744, and although final figures are not in, “we believe we will have produced a significant windfall for our host community,” Saboor said.
Those attending the event in Houston represented all 50 states, 24 countries and seven Canadian provinces."
The article I am linking us to may not seem like it has anything to do with the topic at hand, but it does. I do realize that Atlanta and Miami along with previous host cities such as Orlando have football stadiums that can occupy thousands and thousands of fans in attendance, but cities with arenas like Anaheim, Boston, Philadelphia and Los Angeles have hosted WrestleMania in the past.
Just a small sample of what kind of money can be brought in thanks to an event like this. I'm sure with a new arena Sacramento could one day host WrestleMania or perhaps SummerSlam, which is their second biggest event and money maker.
http://albany.bizjournals.com/albany/othercities/atlanta/stories/2009/09/28/story6.html?b=1254110400^2154361&s=industry&i=sports_business
“This has the potential to be a huge economic impact,” said Gary Stokan, president of the Atlanta Sports Council, which promotes college and pro sports in metro Atlanta.
“The business of WrestleMania is big business,” said John Saboor, senior vice president of special events for WWE.
Orlando hosted WrestleMania XXIV in 2008 and realized a $51.5 million economic impact and Detroit hosted the event in 2007 and saw a $29.7 million economic impact, he said.
Houston hosted WrestleMania XXV this year with an attendance of 72,744, and although final figures are not in, “we believe we will have produced a significant windfall for our host community,” Saboor said.
Those attending the event in Houston represented all 50 states, 24 countries and seven Canadian provinces."
Top 21 to 400 richest Americans (Forbes list)
only one owns a major sports franchise - #17 Paul Allen of NBA Portland Trailblazers. I'm not sure how many more franchise owners are in the 22-400 class but I think it basically shows sports teams are little hobbies not major investments for the super rich.
http://finance.yahoo.com/career-work/article/107844/the-forbes-400.html?mod=career-leadership
only one owns a major sports franchise - #17 Paul Allen of NBA Portland Trailblazers. I'm not sure how many more franchise owners are in the 22-400 class but I think it basically shows sports teams are little hobbies not major investments for the super rich.
http://finance.yahoo.com/career-work/article/107844/the-forbes-400.html?mod=career-leadership
He did pay his debt to society though.
Anything beats some of the owners we have in the NBA. The league needs less of the Shinns, Cohans, Ratners and Sterlings of the world. They need more Vanderbeek, Ellison and Chouest. I would hope that if Sterling were willing to sell and Samueli were willing to buy the Clips to move them to Anaheim, Stern would be able to look past that one transgression, hold it him to a tight leash but at least be in position to finally get rid of Sterling.
Not only that but it would make for one less relocation option for the Maloofs.
Anything beats some of the owners we have in the NBA. The league needs less of the Shinns, Cohans, Ratners and Sterlings of the world. They need more Vanderbeek, Ellison and Chouest. I would hope that if Sterling were willing to sell and Samueli were willing to buy the Clips to move them to Anaheim, Stern would be able to look past that one transgression, hold it him to a tight leash but at least be in position to finally get rid of Sterling.
Not only that but it would make for one less relocation option for the Maloofs.