And the countdown begins and other news, rumors, etc.

N

NewKingsFan916

G-League
#91
#91
I honestly do not feel good about the way KJ's team has been handling this and I am really starting to question what these whale's motivations are. Maybe they saw this as a potential opportunity to low ball for the kings in the off chance they BOG denies the move and don't really care if their low ball offer doesn't work (no money wasted on deposits or binding agreements). At least Hansen has shown he is very ready to put is money where his mouth is.

KJ should of really vetted these whales better before he brought them on. Once the details of this comes out I don't think either KJ's or his team is going to look good. They are going to look like they have been wasting the NBA's time.
 
N

NewKingsFan916

G-League
#94
#94
Bibbilicious said:
I understand why they wont make it binding until the maloofs are out with hansen. They want to prevent a bidding war.
Click to expand...
It would still be better to at least have a binding a agreement, even if its lower than Hansen's latest bid. I would be a lot more comfortable if they submitted a binding bid at 525M and left it at that, but for now they don't even have that. What inventive does the BOG have to deny Hansen? If they do, Sac can come in at 300M, Maloofs rejected it, then we are back to square 1. I would suspect the BOG does not want to chance that.
 
Warhawk

Warhawk

Give blood and save a life!
Staff member
#95
#95
Not going to read too much into this yet.

First of all, this source could be a Maloof. :p

While it doesn't sound positive, we don't know what instructions our side has received from the NBA as far as what form the submittal needs to be in. Maybe we didn't include a "deposit" because we included a reimbursement of Hansen and MSE keeps the Seattle deposit. This would jive with earlier direction regarding making Hansen "whole." Maybe our bid is lower because the NBA already said that the "revised" bid is not allowable and the initial bid still is the formal bid by Seattle on the table. And if so, the source may be saying our bid is lower than the revised bid but that really doesn't matter. I don't know if you can submit a binding offer to an entitiy with an already binding and signed contract for something like this.

In other words, who knows, and I'm not going to get too worked up over it now. Until we hear more from a reputable, named source or talking head "in the know"......take it all with a truckload of salt.
 
R

rhythmless

Starter
#96
#96
NewKingsFan916 said:
It would still be better to at least have a binding a agreement, even if its lower than Hansen's latest bid. I would be a lot more comfortable if they submitted a binding bid at 525M and left it at that, but for now they don't even have that. What inventive does the BOG have to deny Hansen? If they do, Sac can come in at 300M, Maloofs rejected it, then we are back to square 1. I would suspect the BOG does not want to chance that.
Click to expand...
This. Binding @ 525 is better than nonbinding @ 550. Bird in the hand and all that.
 
Revrag

Revrag

Father, Husband, KingsFan
Staff member
Administrator
Contributor
#97
#97
WTF? Hopefully they know something we don't.

Chris Daniels ‏@ChrisDaniels5 3m
JUST IN: Source involved in #NBAKings negotiations says Sacramento counter bid, “non-binding”, involves “no earnest money”, & does not match
 
Glenn

Glenn

Hall of Famer
#99
#99
kingjatt said:
if this is true, I think KJ is positive he has the 8 votes, he wants to call the goofs to the table and negotiate on a more realistic Sacramento number.
Click to expand...
This is the way I see it. Certainly this potential ownership group can match a bid if they thought they had to. I suspect they think they don't need to as there are more than 8 votes already online to reject the Hansen bid. Remember CD's video where someone told him that he was sure Sacramento would win but couldn't share anything more. That was weeks ago. The Ranadive group is acting either like they think they are acting from a position of strength or they are broke fools. Guess.
 
Kingsfan23

Kingsfan23

All-Star
#100
#100
NewKingsFan916 said:
It would still be better to at least have a binding a agreement, even if its lower than Hansen's latest bid. I would be a lot more comfortable if they submitted a binding bid at 525M and left it at that, but for now they don't even have that. What inventive does the BOG have to deny Hansen? If they do, Sac can come in at 300M, Maloofs rejected it, then we are back to square 1. I would suspect the BOG does not want to chance that.
Click to expand...

The Sac group officially notified the NBA that they matched Hansen's original 525 in intention. it would make the Sac group and the NBA look bad if this group didnt intend to come through with that offer. there must be some reason they don't want it binded just yet IMHO
 
N

NewKingsFan916

G-League
#101
#101
Kingsfan23 said:
The Sac group officially notified the NBA that they matched Hansen's original 525 in intention. it would make the Sac group and the NBA look bad if this group didnt intend to come through with that offer. there must be some reason they don't want it binded just yet IMHO
Click to expand...
Then why not submit a binding agreement?

I'm telling you guys right now, you have blinders on, this is nothing but bad, nearly catastrophic.

I was worried before but at least was a bit confidence. This latest news makes me think the sac group was dicking around the NBA the whole time. Yes it's obvious this group CAN spend 525M on an NBA team.... but will they? So far, they don't seem anywhere near as serious as Hansen.
 
T

theclash4u5

Starter
#102
#102
Click to expand...
hmmmmmm
 
kingjatt

kingjatt

Starter
#103
#103
Kingsfan23 said:
The Sac group officially notified the NBA that they matched Hansen's original 525 in intention. it would make the Sac group and the NBA look bad if this group didnt intend to come through with that offer. there must be some reason they don't want it binded just yet IMHO
Click to expand...
well it technically cant be binding as the maloofs are already in a binding agreement with seattle, so its just an offer as there is no other to party to "bind" it with. These guys arent the magoofs, whatever number they put on that offer is what they intend to and have the money to pay.
 
kingjatt

kingjatt

Starter
#104
#104
This "source" seems to be bashing the sac offer quite abit, considering the NBA is still actively meeting, and the KJ group wouldnt go out and embarass themselves like this, I think its safe to say this "source" is from the Magoof camp.
 
C

curitibagarrett

G-League
#105
#105
kingjatt said:
well it technically cant be binding as the maloofs are already in a binding agreement with seattle, so its just an offer as there is no other to party to "bind" it with. These guys arent the magoofs, whatever number they put on that offer is what they intend to and have the money to pay.
Click to expand...
Can't be binding w/o signatures.....of course it would be non-binding right now.
 
N

NewKingsFan916

G-League
#106
#106
This is really horse****. After this deal falls through KJ will have **ALOT** of explaining to do.

This will definitely not end up being a "we tried our absolute best and the BOG still chose seattle". KJ will not be able to play the victim card here. I am so pissed.
 
L

Livinthedream

All-Star
#108
#108
If you believe KJ when he says the bid was done the way the league asked, then you have to wait this out and try not to read too much into it.

The source is definitely from the Maloof camp and I suspect that submitting a "binding" nbid would somehow hamstring the Sac groups efforts.
 
L

Livinthedream

All-Star
#109
#109
kingjatt said:
well it technically cant be binding as the maloofs are already in a binding agreement with seattle, so its just an offer as there is no other to party to "bind" it with. These guys arent the magoofs, whatever number they put on that offer is what they intend to and have the money to pay.
Click to expand...
Thank you for the logic.
 
Glenn

Glenn

Hall of Famer
#112
#112
I am going to add that it seems most people are focused money and I understand that. Money is not the only issue and in fact may not be the primary issue. Stern said in so many words that money wasn't the primary issue. I believe him. It hasn't been the primary factor in other deals unless I have read a few things wrong. There is a point where fair market value is enough and not simply who has the most money and is willing to spend it in a bidding war. The BOG wants a competitive team, they want their image untarnished, and they want to make money off of attendance with many more factors that I haven't added. The BOG isn't getting the money no matter how much is bid. Their concern, I hope, is more long term.

I have decided to have faith.
 
T

The Hammer

All-Star
#113
#113
NewKingsFan916 said:
They already have.
Click to expand...
You're embarrassing yourself.


REMEMBER:

1. Sellers of franchises do NOT decide where the franchise is located.


I can't stress this enough. If the MOVE is rejected, there is no Hansen. All these latest developments tell me is that Sac has demonstrated enough to convince the BOG that there will be no move. If that's the case, then Sac's bargaining position is MUCH stronger, and they're showing they won't be extorted to pay a Seattle valuation for a Sacramento team. Basically, this is the beginning of the Maloof "jack up the price" backfiring.

Any owner intent on moving the team will not be considered for a purchase.

If everybody would just understand my #1 up there... it would save a lot of freak out.
 
HndsmCelt

HndsmCelt

Hall of Famer
#114
#114
Kids chill out. 1. You can't have binding agreement unless BOTH parties sign it. The Maloofs are ALREADY bound. 2. It makes no sense to offer a deposit while the Maloofs are bound to he Sea deal. 3. The offer would only be 16-17 mill short of the RAISED offer by the hedge fund pirate. Randive and KY have been following NBA recommendations form day one. 4. The Sac offer never had any chance of ever being MORE than a "Back UP" offer to the Sea deal. Last Friday it was announced that the Maloofs did agree to accept the Sac offer as back up. So we are sill where we have always been, looking for 8 votes. Nothing has changed.
 
N

NewKingsFan916

G-League
#115
#115
kingjatt said:
would you care to elaborate? or are you just instigating?
Click to expand...
Despite all of KJ's claims, every indication that is that all of their bids keep falling short and they didn't get even Bob Cook's 7% as they said they wood. So far the group as been all talk no action. Based of KJ's performance in Anaheim I expected a lot more. Boy am I beginning to be VERY disappointed.
 
Bibbilicious

Bibbilicious

Bench
#116
#116
NewKingsFan916 said:
Then why not submit a binding agreement?

I'm telling you guys right now, you have blinders on, this is nothing but bad, nearly catastrophic.

I was worried before but at least was a bit confidence. This latest news makes me think the sac group was dicking around the NBA the whole time. Yes it's obvious this group CAN spend 525M on an NBA team.... but will they? So far, they don't seem anywhere near as serious as Hansen.
Click to expand...
You dont know what youre talking about man. The 525 is the VALUATION of the team. The actual bid is 341 million because the Maloofs own 65 percent. Hansen group upped their bid by 16 million the other day but we still have yet to see whether the NBA will allow a bid that has already been submitted to change this late in the game.
 
Glenn

Glenn

Hall of Famer
#117
#117
HndsmCelt said:
Kids chill out. 1. You can't have binding agreement unless BOTH parties sign it. The Maloofs are ALREADY bound. 2. It makes no sense to offer a deposit while the Maloofs are bound to he Sea deal. 3. The offer would only be 16-17 mill short of the RAISED offer by the hedge fund pirate. Randive and KY have been following NBA recommendations form day one. 4. The Sac offer never had any chance of ever being MORE than a "Back UP" offer to the Sea deal. Last Friday it was announced that the Maloofs did agree to accept the Sac offer as back up. So we are sill where we have always been, looking for 8 votes. Nothing has changed.
Click to expand...
Yesssss!!!!
 
T

The Hammer

All-Star
#118
#118
NewKingsFan916 said:
Would you consider that perhaps this wasn't done as you assume? Just like all of these tweets, nothing has confirmed that the Sac group was crafting the bid exactly as the NBA wanted it.
Click to expand...
Sounds like you think the only truth comes through twitter. If it's not tweeted, it didn't happen.

More logical people will remember that KJ has repeatedly said that every step of the Sacramento process has been done the way the NBA wanted it. Maybe he should tweet it so you'll believe him.
 
Kingsfan23

Kingsfan23

All-Star
#120
#120
theclash4u5 said:
hmmmmmm
Click to expand...

There is nothing there. Our bid was the equivalent to Seattle's 525 bid taking into account the deposit (so 30M less). We have already said that we were going to cover the deposit in our bid. We are not going to match Seattle's recent 550, nor should we, 525 is already 75 above record. Again, all of this is smoke and mirrors, nothing concerns me yet. KJ and whales are taking cues from people who know more than the media or posters here
 
You must log in or register to reply here.