whozit
Starter
Anaheim documents incomplete? Something smells funny ...................
Board of Govs Meeting Updates-DAY 2
- Thread starter ReinadelosReys
- Start date
L
LWP777
Guest
Double Overtime.
Yep, let's just hope Kobe doesn't have the ball with the game on the line.
mr. moustache
Bench
And this just gives Steinberg's legislation more time to go through...
Stern said that there were unsolved "issues" with the terms of the Anaheim lease. Just wait until the state doesn't allow a lease at all!
Stern said that there were unsolved "issues" with the terms of the Anaheim lease. Just wait until the state doesn't allow a lease at all!
bozzwell
Starter
L
LWP777
Guest
They are idiots for acting like this because if the team does end up staying in Sac with them still owning the team the fans could turn against them.
ReinadelosReys
Starter
markkreidler
Stern: Maloofs "are not forced to stay in Sacramento at all." He's referring to timetable, that team can still move in time if approved.
The telling comment from Stern is that the NBA committee itself needs more time, not just Maloofs or outside parties.
Says Anaheim proposal "not fully understood" by committee. That, plus the Burkle factor AND renewed local corporate interest, did the trick.
Stern sounds more intrigued by the local economic factors, corporate support, etc., than with Ron Burkle. Says Burkle is down the list.
Stern: Maloofs "are not forced to stay in Sacramento at all." He's referring to timetable, that team can still move in time if approved.
The telling comment from Stern is that the NBA committee itself needs more time, not just Maloofs or outside parties.
Says Anaheim proposal "not fully understood" by committee. That, plus the Burkle factor AND renewed local corporate interest, did the trick.
Stern sounds more intrigued by the local economic factors, corporate support, etc., than with Ron Burkle. Says Burkle is down the list.
RookieOfTheDay
Starter
Oh no. Not Bennett! Geez, anyone but him!
bozzwell
Starter
Agreed, David. What about Kings though?
RookieOfTheDay
Starter
So 45 days wasn't enough time for them to get their fact together and now they get more time? That's just bull****!
ReinadelosReys
Starter
markkreidler
KJ's presentation included the Burkle factor, but also the Taylor/ICON design group, local factors, ticket sales, etc.
And how to make the team financially viable in Sacramento
KJ's presentation included the Burkle factor, but also the Taylor/ICON design group, local factors, ticket sales, etc.
And how to make the team financially viable in Sacramento
Peter_Gibbons
Starter
Well, "grandstanding" is what that member saw it as. And no offense, but your current claims means as much as a twitter rumor unless you are providing us with proof.
The question was never can he AFFORD to buy the Kings and build and arena. Yes, he can if he wants to spend a big chunk of his money. The issue is the Maloofs are not selling. There goes the buying the team plan. For any committee looking at this, it doesn't matter if it Burkle or Slim, if there is no seller then there is no discussion.
Also regarding Burkle group's claim that the team can succeed in Sac, how would they know? The Maloofs never opened their books completely for them to see. Its just pure speculation. If its based on the fact that Burkle has deep pockets and doesn't mind losing money, I'm not sure the NBA would approve of a team staying in a city even knowing they are losing money. The point is there is no way for Burkle's group knows 100% the Kings can thrive financially in Sac and that they can build an arena. Its all speculations at a very late stage in the game.
mr. moustache
Bench
An extension is honestly the best possible thing to happen at this point. The two real options were 1: extension, 2: file for relocation with the blessing of the BOG. The 3rd option is for the Maloofs to go another year in Sac. That ship sailed when they didn't show up for the last game.
Indeed; we're now actually in overtime. If Sacramento can demonstrate a real likelihood of building an arena without a public vote; they likely get to keep the Kings. If not, they probably lose the Kings and the NBA and Maloof's reputation gets a serious kidney punch.
ReinadelosReys
Starter
WojYahooNBA Adrian Wojnarowski
There wasn't an instance of honesty in Bennett's move of the Sonics out of Seattle. Documents proved it. Now he's lording over Kings future.
There wasn't an instance of honesty in Bennett's move of the Sonics out of Seattle. Documents proved it. Now he's lording over Kings future.
chasen4r1
Starter
Who are the Maloofs to say that a team will never come to Sac if they leave? This is the city and these are the fans that have relentlessly supported them for what has it been.. nearly a decade? Why don't they go back to where they came from quit acting as if they're the victims. It must feel great to be up on their throne ripping away one of the few things Sacramento can really, proudly call its own.
Hoovtrain
All-Star
You are welcome to pm me and I will tell you everything I know from people that were at the BOG meeting and who are directly involved in this. I will be headed to the bay are so I will try to respond today.
=LarryLegend=
Starter
The big question......if Maloofs stay how is a new arena built?
On the other hand, Bennett is now a small-market owner lording over a small-market team's request to move into a large market. Not necessarily a bad thing. I'm not going to panic over that. I'll just be happy that as of today, there clearly are not enough votes to move the team - when normally these sorts of things are rubber-stamped.
Peter_Gibbons
Starter
done
ReinadelosReys
Starter
dbienick
Stern says idea of deadline extension was jointly proposed by Maloofs and NBA commitee chairs.
Stern says idea of deadline extension was jointly proposed by Maloofs and NBA commitee chairs.
NewKingsFan916
G-League
Wow......just wow. The Maloofs relationship with Sacramento is pretty much over regardless of the outcome of the extension. If they are denied relocation, they will have to sell the team to Burkle now.
Peter_Gibbons
Starter
ReinadelosReys
Starter
Stern says the Sacramento situation is different when talking about the big market-large market issue because its a building issue.
I'd feel a lot better about this if Clay Bennett wasn't the guy put in charge of the relocation committee. We already know he ignored similar efforts by the people of Seattle to buy the team and keep it. So now we have to hope the Anaheim agreement is as shaky as it's been reported to be in terms of revenue restrictions. This also gives more time for the ICON group to finish their arena study in Sacramento. And there's maybe an outside chance that the petitioners are successful in getting the bonds delayed.
Glenn
Hall of Famer
Scraping aside all the stuff, I think Stern said the arena was the crucial factor. This is what Burkle (his representative) seemed to be saying that group could provide. If you scrape aside the fancy talk, it seems to be that simple and IF Burkle is for real, we have a great chance.
ReinadelosReys
Starter
On 3 teams in SoCal: Its something that the committee will have to look at...My sense is that it is likely it can support it.
ReinadelosReys
Starter
Stern doesn't want to take anymore Sacramento questions. WE CARE ABOUT OUR TEAM!!!!
NewKingsFan916
G-League
Is there any chance at all that they approve relocation even if by May 2nd we have a fully funded plan for an Arena with Burkle partly behind the financing? Obviously we won't be moving dirt by May 2nd, but it may be possible to ICON to come back with a financing plan that includes Burkle.
Similar threads
- Yahoo! Sports - NBA -
- Kings News Links
