Maloofs say they're willing to pay the two L.A. teams whatever it takes to relocte

[Larry David]

The different step of the Anaheim TV deal is a huge reason Grant is pounding the panic button every day from 4-7.

He's good a play-by-play. Should he get fired, he'll work again in the NBA. But Grant doesn't work long term in the #2 TV market. He's not that good, and he doesn't fit the market. Even if he goes down there, odds are he's replaced when a more talented person's contract opens up.

The Maloofs are very loyal to him, but they won't make the call. It's Fox's TV deal, so they would pick the talent. The Maloofs have input, but its not their show any more.

Thus, Grant may be in a spot where: (1) he's down there for 1 or 2 years max; and (2) KHTK goes away from a sports format. He wants the Kings to stay for lots of reason, but income is a big part of it.

 

[Section 101]

My recollection of the Kings TV deal is identical to yours. The Maloofs actually buy the air time from Comcast and then have to find sponsers. Which means its money out of their pocket up front that has to be made up by the sponser sales. The hope of course, is that you not only make up all the up front money, but eventually make a profit. If you keep seeing the same commercial over and over again, its a good indication that things aren't going well with sponsership sales.

Thats an entirely different scenario than having someone like Fox give you 10 mil up front and they sell all the commercial time. In sacramento, the only reason the Maloofs broadcast all 82 games is in the hope that it will attract fans to the arena. I doubt they're making much money, if any, this year from TV generated sales. Maybe memories are short, and we do tend to take things that we have for granted, but if memory serves, the Maloofs are the first owners in sacramento to broadcast all 82 games.

It's not rocket science to figure out, that if the TV rights were real money makers, previous owners would have been broadcasting every game as well.

They were locked into a bad TV deal that Thomas signed. Once that deal ended they were able to make a new one with Comcast. Which had 58 games the first year. The rest were on channel 10 and TNT, ESPN etc. Dont forget alot of games were on TNT only as the Kings were on the maximum allowable national games.

 

[Larry David]

101 do you really not get televison ad demographics? Or are you just trying to talk your way around the facts? The Nielson ratings are broken down that way because, in many ways, they count as much as the viewers.

Wiki is lame, but this will help you as a primer: Nielsen Media Research also provides statistics on specific demographics as advertising rates are influenced by such factors as age, gender, race, economic class, and area. Younger viewers are considered more attractive for many products, whereas in some cases older and wealthier audiences are desired, or female audiences are desired over males.

In general, the number of viewers within the 18–49 age range is more important than the total number of viewers.[5][6] According to Advertising Age, during the 2007–08 season, Grey's Anatomy was able to charge $419,000 per commercial, compared to only $248,000 for a commercial during CSI, despite CSI having almost five million more viewers on average.[7] Due to its strength in young demos, Friends was able to charge almost three times as much for a commercial as Murder, She Wrote, even though the two series had similar total viewer numbers during the seasons they were on the air together.[5] Glee and The Office drew fewer total viewers than NCIS during the 2009–10 season, but earned an average of $272,694 and $213,617 respectively, compared to $150,708 for NCIS.[8]


The demos matter a ton. You want to target people who have money and will spend it.

 

[Peter_Gibbons]

$30 million is not the max. It's the standard $1 million to each team and the league. This is where the Lakers and Clippers will ask for more money. So the relocation fee could be say $48 million with the Lakers and Clips getting $10 mil and the rest of the teams and league getting $1 mil.

The Clippers and lakers don't own any territorial rights. We all know that already. For that reason, they don't have the power to ask for more than what the board of governors as a whole agree on. They can complain and stomp their feet but unless they can get a majority vote in their favor, they can't stop anything.

The only way the Clips/lakes can TRY to get more is if they sue the Maloofs. I don't think Stern would allow that to happen.

 

[rainmaker]

Hey we finally have MLS and we're quite excited about it! Should sell out every game at around 20k. The Portland - Seattle - Vancouver rivalry is expected to draw big attention to the league this year.

The Blazers actually actively try to keep other teams out of the market - we lost our AAA baseball team ostensibly because the MLS team displaced it from a shared venue but the Blazers fought tooth and nail to keep a minor league park from being built in the Rose Quarter and so the city lost federal dollars earmarked as "spectator funding" (very curious if Sacramento has/had such a thing available, it doesn't amount to much when it comes to building an NBA level arena but it was still significant).

And Portland could have potentially had an NFL team in the late 60s but the city voted to kill the stadium project. Now I love the NFL but I'm ok with that because it would have killed a lot of our smaller city charm, made a heavily congested area even worse and the park that we have in its place serves a lot of people.

Having an MLS expansion team should be exciting. It's an up and coming league, and if you're a soccer fan, very entertaining. Quest field in Seattle is almost an EPL enviroment, as all the Sonic fans seem to have switched over.

If the Kings do infact leave, I would hope Sac gets another pro franchise of some kind, and the MLS seems more likely then the NBA, NFL, MLB, or NHL. I still don't see the city council being able to get something done though.

 

[Larry David]

The Clippers and lakers don't own any territorial rights. We all know that already. For that reason, they don't have the power to ask for more than what the board of governors as a whole agree on. They can complain and stomp their feet but unless they can get a majority vote in their favor, they can't stop anything.

The only way the Clips/lakes can TRY to get more is if they sue the Maloofs. I don't think Stern would allow that to happen.

The Lakers and Clippers bargained their suit against the Kings away when the owners agreed moves would be controlled by majority vote of the owners. Thus, they would have to sue the league … which isn’t going to happen.

As for the media rights, compensation for market/media rights assumes, 15 owners: (1) feel the Lakers need something more than the best NBA TV deal ever and total control over the market; and (2) feel the need to help Donald Sterling and give him more money that he won’t spend on his player. I wouldn’t hold my breath.

 

[Arena Skeptic]

Sounds awful, but I'm looking at who advertises on Kings broadcasts. Zoom Imaging, Folsom Lake Ford/Kia/Toyota, some local Lasik company, plus the normal Bud/Jack In The Box-type ads. What else is there? I really doubt the Maloofs are actually making a profit on Kings television broadcasts.

If they get $10M a year down there, that's a ROI of about 10% over 10 years on the $100M. I'd take that in a heartbeat.

I'm just adding it all up, with Taylor-ICON now unable to proceed on their feasibility study due in part to lack of cooperation on the part of the Maloofs, and it's hard for me to see how this team stays now.

That $100M from Samueli is interest-free, by the way. The payoff for the City on the $69M balance should be roughly double that amount (due to the miracle of compounding interest). So, figure in a gain of $10M on the TV rights deal, saving $69M (roughly) on interest payments, and... Well, I speculate that Samueli has decided to "backstop" the Maloofs on the Palms, to keep Harrah's from getting it.

This deal is very lucrative to the Maloofs, ladies and gentlemen. And they'll do great in Anaheim. I can't see us coming close to this. In fact, I think it'd a bad idea for us to try. We just can't give the Kings the same deal Orlando gave the Magic ($1M/year in rent? That's ridiculous!).

And there will be less resistance to this from the other 29 than you think. Why do I say that? Simple: Money.

 

[Peter_Gibbons]

Sounds awful, but I'm looking at who advertises on Kings broadcasts. Zoom Imaging, Folsom Lake Ford/Kia/Toyota, some local Lasik company, plus the normal Bud/Jack In The Box-type ads. What else is there? I really doubt the Maloofs are actually making a profit on Kings television broadcasts.

If they get $10M a year down there, that's a ROI of about 10% over 10 years on the $100M. I'd take that in a heartbeat.

I'm just adding it all up, with Taylor-ICON now unable to proceed on their feasibility study due in part to lack of cooperation on the part of the Maloofs, and it's hard for me to see how this team stays now.

That $100M from Samueli is interest-free, by the way. The payoff for the City on the $69M balance should be roughly double that amount (due to the miracle of compounding interest). So, figure in a gain of $10M on the TV rights deal, saving $69M (roughly) on interest payments, and... Well, I speculate that Samueli has decided to "backstop" the Maloofs on the Palms, to keep Harrah's from getting it.

This deal is very lucrative to the Maloofs, ladies and gentlemen. And they'll do great in Anaheim. I can't see us coming close to this. In fact, I think it'd a bad idea for us to try. We just can't give the Kings the same deal Orlando gave the Magic ($1M/year in rent? That's ridiculous!).

And there will be less resistance to this from the other 29 than you think. Why do I say that? Simple: Money.

Do you have evidence for such claim?

 

[Section 101]

101 do you really not get televison ad demographics? Or are you just trying to talk your way around the facts? The Nielson ratings are broken down that way because, in many ways, they count as much as the viewers.

Wiki is lame, but this will help you as a primer: Nielsen Media Research also provides statistics on specific demographics as advertising rates are influenced by such factors as age, gender, race, economic class, and area. Younger viewers are considered more attractive for many products, whereas in some cases older and wealthier audiences are desired, or female audiences are desired over males.

In general, the number of viewers within the 18–49 age range is more important than the total number of viewers.[5][6] According to Advertising Age, during the 2007–08 season, Grey's Anatomy was able to charge $419,000 per commercial, compared to only $248,000 for a commercial during CSI, despite CSI having almost five million more viewers on average.[7] Due to its strength in young demos, Friends was able to charge almost three times as much for a commercial as Murder, She Wrote, even though the two series had similar total viewer numbers during the seasons they were on the air together.[5] Glee and The Office drew fewer total viewers than NCIS during the 2009–10 season, but earned an average of $272,694 and $213,617 respectively, compared to $150,708 for NCIS.[8]


The demos matter a ton. You want to target people who have money and will spend it.

did you not read my post? they get that information from a limited market segment. They get it directly off the people watching the programs, but only the commercials matter.

Yes, I've read a ton of information on nielsons rating systems. The tivo community and dbs talk forums have a lot of information about them because popular shows get cancelled all the time because of the flawed ratings system. But that is the system in place and it's not going to change soon. Here's a link for how it works.

http://splitsider.com/2011/01/why-nielsen-ratings-are-inaccurate-and-why-theyll-stay-that-way/

Now once again. OC is part of the the greater los angles TV ratings. The advertisers dont care where in the area people live. They care about who is watching what shows and who is watching the commercials. The Kings would be in the same time slot as the Lakers/Clippers/Hockey Kings. It's almost a guarantee they will be on TV the excate same time as one of those teams and more than likely two would be on at the same time as one will be on the road. The Lakers already have the market cornered. It doesn't matter if time is available on another channel when the Lakers leave Fox for their own network. Fox will be getting the second rate or even lower ads and the Lakers the top ones.

 

[Bricklayer]

Guys, its the New York Daily News. For those of you who do not read that rag regularly, let me just say right now, I GUARANTEE you that's not waht the Maloofs said. I think Bajaden had it closer to right above -- the Daily News/Post won't post a flat out lie...well...probably not, but they are expert, and I do mean expert, sensationalizers. I absolutely guarantee you that their "source" is a) not the Maloofs; and b) is getting paid to say something sensational; and c) probably made a far more mild statement that can be summarized in sensationalistic fashion by adding a few adjectives.

Now there is too much hubbub right now for this little post of mine to possibly get in the way of the freight train of panic and disgust over this statement, but take this from a professional spin doctor, whatever the Maloof's plans, they did not say what this "article implies they said. The Daily News is not a hard news source. They are the sort of paper which would take a story about a coach who screamed at his little league team "f you!" and spin it into "Youth Coach Admits He Is Gay, Lusts After Little Boys".

 

[pdxKingsFan]

Having an MLS expansion team should be exciting. It's an up and coming league, and if you're a soccer fan, very entertaining. Quest field in Seattle is almost an EPL enviroment, as all the Sonic fans seem to have switched over.

If the Kings do infact leave, I would hope Sac gets another pro franchise of some kind, and the MLS seems more likely then the NBA, NFL, MLB, or NHL. I still don't see the city council being able to get something done though.

I know well about Seattle, they aren't looked on kindly here They drew a few thousand to their USL games while we were drawing 15k plus for years and they got the expansion team first and now act like they own the league. Just wait until the Cascadia derby gets into full play at MLS level - unfortunately it looks like it could be a down year for Seattle though as they just lost to the Timbers A side and the Whitecaps B side at their own practice facility this weekend.

I had always hoped that Sacramento could be on the MLS shortlist but it appears that is not in commmisioner Garber's plans. He is a NFL guy through and through and so it looks like adding a second NY team (along with Montreal) will be the final expansion move in the short term and then they will try to tap the South in the future. Unfortunately a Kings-less Sacramento would be looked upon as small potatoes. Also you have to build a soccer specific stadium for serious consideration, good luck selling the community on that one!

 

[Larry David]

Now once again. OC is part of the the greater los angles TV ratings. The advertisers dont care where in the area people live.

Once again, fail.

You either don't understand how demo markets work or the lay of the land down there. If the same show pulled a 5 share in the "LA tv market" ... and one show had a 70% of the ratings in Anaheim and 30% in Compton; and the other show had the same ratings and swapped the percents of the draw... the price of the ads wouldn't be the same for both shows.

Where people live, often is a good bar of what they make. What they make determines what TV charges for ads.

 

[sk4ever]

How does CSN play into this. Wouldn't they want to keep the Kings in their market? Maybe up the ante?

 

[Section 101]

Once again, fail.

You either don't understand how demo markets work or the lay of the land down there. If the same show pulled a 5 share in the "LA tv market" ... and one show had a 70% of the ratings in Anaheim and 30% in Compton; and the other show had the same ratings and swapped the percents of the draw... the price of the ads wouldn't be the same for both shows.

Where people live, often is a good bar of what they make. What they make determines what TV charges for ads.

No, your missing the big picture. Your trying to break down demographics within a particular show. Were talking about one show vs another one. If the Lakers get 3 or 4 times of the market share than the Kings it doesnt matter about demographics. The advertisers wont spend the money on the Kings.

 

[Superman]

How do they go from supposedly wanting to stay in Sacramento to wanting out at any cost? http://www.cbssports.com/mcc/blogs/entry/22748484/27784843

This doesn't really seem like news to me. I remember this question being raised a couple of weeks ago, and the answer being the same.

 

[UKRAINE]

I had always hoped that Sacramento could be on the MLS shortlist but it appears that is not in commmisioner Garber's plans. He is a NFL guy through and through and so it looks like adding a second NY team (along with Montreal) will be the final expansion move in the short term and then they will try to tap the South in the future. Unfortunately a Kings-less Sacramento would be looked upon as small potatoes. Also you have to build a soccer specific stadium for serious consideration, good luck selling the community on that one!

I think MLS will look differently at Sacramento now. They can finally be the guy in a big market. Plus, Sacramento has A LOT of Mexican and Russian people and they love soccer with passion.

 

[MassachusettsKingsFan]

The MLS is good stuff. I know it gets hated on by a lot by hardcore soccer guys .. but its really not that bad in terms of talent. I've been to around 50 New England Revolution games and I've never been dissapointed. Cheap tickets, great seats, great atmosphere (In "The Fort' The section of the stadium blocked off for people to stand/sing/chant/drums and all that) gets very loud .. you can hear everything clearly on the TV too when they are on. The players really acknowledge the fans like no other sporting event I've been too... Coming over to the fort after victories to thank the fans right after the game ends .. very cool stuff.

Its not the NBA, but If Sacramento landed an MLS team I do think people would get into it.

 

[bajaden]

The different step of the Anaheim TV deal is a huge reason Grant is pounding the panic button every day from 4-7.

He's good a play-by-play. Should he get fired, he'll work again in the NBA. But Grant doesn't work long term in the #2 TV market. He's not that good, and he doesn't fit the market. Even if he goes down there, odds are he's replaced when a more talented person's contract opens up.

The Maloofs are very loyal to him, but they won't make the call. It's Fox's TV deal, so they would pick the talent. The Maloofs have input, but its not their show any more.

Thus, Grant may be in a spot where: (1) he's down there for 1 or 2 years max; and (2) KHTK goes away from a sports format. He wants the Kings to stay for lots of reason, but income is a big part of it.

I agree with a lot of what you say. The one thing I disagree on is Grant not being talented enough. When I lived in Mulege, I hardly ever got the chance to listen to Kings broadcast. So I fell victim to whomever was announcing for the other team. I would put Grant and Jerry in the top ten, compared to the rest of the teams. There are some very bad announcing teams out there. Some are almost unbearable to listen to.

I do agree though that the LA market is a different animal, and there's always politics involved. I remember when Tim Roye landed the Warrior gig. There was a lot of anger over his getting the job instead of some of the local guys. I know Fitzgerald lobbied long and hard for the gig. As a result, Roye has essentially been blacklisted from any other radio gig like he had in sacramento. I'm sure that if the Kings do move to Anaheim, there will be a long line of pretenders for the broadcasting job.

 

[bajaden]

Having an MLS expansion team should be exciting. It's an up and coming league, and if you're a soccer fan, very entertaining. Quest field in Seattle is almost an EPL enviroment, as all the Sonic fans seem to have switched over.

If the Kings do infact leave, I would hope Sac gets another pro franchise of some kind, and the MLS seems more likely then the NBA, NFL, MLB, or NHL. I still don't see the city council being able to get something done though.

I hate to say this, because I played soccer in grade school and highschool. It was a big sport in St. Louis. Its fun to play. But as for watching it on television, or going to a game, I'd rather sit naked with a hose up my butt and watch paint dry. Now hockey, thats a different animal.

 

[rainmaker]

I hate to say this, because I played soccer in grade school and highschool. It was a big sport in St. Louis. Its fun to play. But as for watching it on television, or going to a game, I'd rather sit naked with a hose up my butt and watch paint dry. Now hockey, thats a different animal.

Well, I guess we'll have to agree to disagree.

Soccer in my favorite sport next to the NBA and NFL. Could give the NFL ar un for its money, given as a Raider fan, I never get to see the home games on tv.

 

[Bricklayer]

I hate to say this, because I played soccer in grade school and highschool. It was a big sport in St. Louis. Its fun to play. But as for watching it on television, or going to a game, I'd rather sit naked with a hose up my butt and watch paint dry. Now hockey, thats a different animal.

This is about where I come down on it. I played it for 10 years, was considerably accomplished, and come from a family who had had some REALLY accomplished players (my cousin had an invite ot the U.S. Olympic team trials until he destroyed his knee in a motorcycle accident). Blast to play, and I understand the game very well thx. But watching soccer...can I skip the hose up my butt part? Still snoozeworthy.

However, I'm not really willing to go down the grown men ice skating and punching each other in the face like a group of stupid barroom brawlers route either. It basically is soccer on skates, and with the huge advantage of being played in a small space to force there to actually be some action. But I can't respect the entire mentality.

 

[Entity]

This whole thing is just stupid. Long-term, it's in the best interest of the NBA to get a world-class arena in Sacramento. Even if you double-up the top media market (NY, LA, Chi, Bay Area) you still want a team in Sacramento, given its size and dedicated fan base. The NBA should put more time and money into getting a new arena here, not alienating one good market while cannibalizing another.

is this the same dedicated fan base that voted no on a tax increase to get a new arena and the same dedicated fan base that have been dressed as empty seats since 2004-2005?

 

[ParniValjak]

$30 million is not the max. It's the standard $1 million to each team and the league. This is where the Lakers and Clippers will ask for more money. So the relocation fee could be say $48 million with the Lakers and Clips getting $10 mil and the rest of the teams and league getting $1 mil.

But its also NOT mandatory. Relocation fee is ad the disgression of the NBA Board and can be waived and has been waived in the past.

 

[Section 101]

But its also NOT mandatory. Relocation fee is ad the disgression of the NBA Board and can be waived and has been waived in the past.

You realize the board is the majority owners of the 29 (NO owned by league) teams? It isnt some sub group that makes a bunch of decisons on it's own. Show some proof that it has been waived in the past.

 

[Section 101]

Nope. Sac sold out the arena until 2007. And the Maloofs have done nothing to help either the promotion of that bill you brought up, nor the effort to put a decent product on the floor which would have helped us sell out the arena still.

False. They fired Thomas their vice president because he sucked at marketing. They started offering ticket packages and have a better marketing plan.

 

[Superman]

You realize the board is the majority owners of the 29 (NO owned by league) teams? It isnt some sub group that makes a bunch of decisons on it's own. Show some proof that it has been waived in the past.

I don't know that it's ever been waived, but the NBA did forgive a portion of the Hornets relocation fee, and deferred another portion of it. That was before they assumed control from Shinn. Not really an ideal test case.

Point remains, the relocation fee can technically be waived. No evidence that it ever has been.

 

[pdxKingsFan]

Re: Soccer games - check out this vid from the Timbers Army - keep in mind this is all footage from the team that was in US Second Division as we have yet to play a MLS match. 90 minutes of not stop cheering and singing from a packed GA end of the stadium. Rivals any event I've ever been to except perhaps the Canada vs. Russia and Sweden/Finland hockey games at last year's Olympics.

The problem I see for Sacramento trying to get a MLS team is that there is no USL or NASL team currently in Sacramento so there is no way to prove to the league that you'd support it. MLS bombed in Miami and Tampa for example. But I do agree, in theory at least, that Sac would be a great destination.

 

[Section 101]

I don't know that it's ever been waived, but the NBA did forgive a portion of the Hornets relocation fee, and deferred another portion of it. That was before they assumed control from Shinn. Not really an ideal test case.

Point remains, the relocation fee can technically be waived. No evidence that it ever has been.

But that's also a precident I dont think they want to start either.

 

[whozit]

Nope. Sac sold out the arena until 2007. And the Maloofs have done nothing to help either the promotion of that bill you brought up, nor the effort to put a decent product on the floor which would have helped us sell out the arena still.

Wrong. I left North Highlands in 1996 and they were selling ticket packages that covered a dozen or so games at a time. The games were anything but sellouts.

The sellout was only officially over then, but it had unofficially ended sooner. If I remember right, the team was paying the league their part so they could claim that the games were a sellout.

 

[ArcoKings]

The Maloofs are bluffing. They want to stay in Sacramento. They are saying things to light a fire under certain people's arses in the arena situation. If they were that serious in relocating to Anaheim they would have applied for the move instead of asking for more time to move.