Bring Your Own Burkle and other latest stuff
- Thread starter macadocious
- Start date
- Status
I don't mean to be rude, but it is not about what you want. Burkle has been trying to buy the team straight up for over 2 years and really can make the best case to the BOG to PREFER his offer to keep the Kings in Sac over Hanson. BUT Ellison sees an opportunity to get the team out from under the Maloofs. However I seriously doubt the Minority owners would work with a guy who would move the team. My guess is that any deal he makes to buy the team will include a long term commitment to build a new areana nad keep the team in Sacramento. Otherwise why bother to help him if you are one of the minority owners? As many other posters have said, I seriously doubt Ellison would buy the team with plans to move it.
Another possible scenario, is that Stern told Burkle he'll entertain his bid along with Seattle's, but that he'll also listen to Ellison and his group. KJ seems to be married to Burkle at the moment, and I think its difficult to get Burkle, Mastrov, and a bunch of local investors all on the same page, and come to an agreement on who the managing partner will be. You then add in Ellison and the current shareholders, and it gets very complicated. Personally, I don't care which group of Ellison, or Burkle/Mastrov wins, as long as its one of them.
I agree. I think Ellison knows he won't get permission to move the Kings to San Jose, so at this point, his next best compromise, would be to settle for having the team he owns in Sacramento. I don't think the other minority owners would get involved with Ellison unless he has agreed to keeping the team here.
I don't think there will be separate whales making bids. It is up to KJ to keep them from going at each other. The way I envision it is that one guy (Burkle) would be the managing partner and the others would have very little power. Somehow that doesn't seem like a position Ellison would like but I don't know the guy at all. He is on the outside looking in if Burkle and Malov can get along. The more the number of whales, the more chance there would be of it getting very messy.
One thing about Larry Ellison; the mega billionaire might be seeking personal revenge against a certain rival in the Kings ownership bidding war. Ellison absolutely can't stand billionaire Steve Ballmer. It's well known in Silicon Valley that Ellison never respected either Bill Gates or Ballmer as they were building Microsoft - ruthlessly. Oracle Corp. was in constant conflict with Microsoft Corp. with the later waging huge PR war against all its rivals in late 1990s. Ellison (unlike Microsoft) steered clear of conflict with Apple, often praising the late Steve Jobs for his remarkable genius and unique product line. Maybe Larry Ellison is now interested in checkmating the "outsider" Hansen/Ballmer group, keeping NBA asset in Sacramento, CA and not have it land in Seattle, WA where Microsoft has nearby world headquarters.
Last edited:
I don't care who ends up buying the team, as long as they stay in Sac. I have no doubt Ellison would be in it to win titles, period. I am curious as to what type of managing style Burkle would have if he wanted to be the managing partner. I can see Mastrov being aggressive and wanting to win titles and being deeply involved. I'm sure Burkle would want to be successful on the court, but is he willing to do it at all costs? I wonder if Mastrov would be the better managing partner and Burkle more involved in the arena part. I have no insight into Burkle's personality, so it's all conjecture.
Thoughts about managing style?
Thoughts about managing style?
Out of all these prospects, BURKLE is the guy with a championship track record. He's the one I'd prefer to have calling the shots - by a long stride. This guy is a winner, who does not waste his time, and generally gets what he wants. He's a stronger partner in this situation than Ellison imo.
As long as the Maloofs' extreme personal contempt for Ron Burkle doesn't come into play, he's the guy I want. He might even have the vision to put up even MORE capital toward an arena at Downtown Plaza.. knowing it will make him a hell of a lot of money before long.
As long as the Maloofs' extreme personal contempt for Ron Burkle doesn't come into play, he's the guy I want. He might even have the vision to put up even MORE capital toward an arena at Downtown Plaza.. knowing it will make him a hell of a lot of money before long.
I'm suprised Ellison would be interested in working in a minority ownership capacity. He has always came off as wanting full control in his pursuit of the Hornets and other teams that were for sale. Who knows though. The one thing we would never have to worry about with Ellison would be his pockets, which would be a miraculous change from the penny pinching Maloofs.
All these guys (Burkle, Mastrov, Ellison) exhibit openly huge ego - but also extremely smart. Their management styles may differ a bit but it's definitely all about winning - meaning championships (notice, plural) or getting to the top in business. Ron Burkle is known to play key role in everything going on with his NHL franchise and gets lots of credit for winning the Stanley Cup with Pittsburgh Penguins in 2009. Back around the time Ellison was ranked richest man in U.S. (late 1990s early 2000s) there was revealing book about him entitled, "The Difference Between God and Larry Ellison (but God Doesn't Think He's Larry Ellison)" documenting founder of Oracle Corps. life and times. I don't know as much about Mastrov except he's said to be extremely driven and competitive - not unlike Burkle and Ellison. In some ways Ellison reminds me of billionaire Ted Turner when he was on top of the world with his MLB Atlanta Braves all through the 1990s into the mid-2000s. "The mouth of the South" did everything in his power, opening up his fat wallet wide to make the formerly mundane franchise baseballs most profitable, winning five NL pennants and a World Series title.
Last edited:
I don't know how to answer this except to say Burkle owns the Pittsburgh Penguins and they won the Stanley Cup. Apparently he is very quiet and keeps in the background. That might work well with Mastrov who apparently is more outgoing.
I care who owns the Kings but only in being super careful. Luckenbill bought them when they were in Kansas City and apparently told the Kansas City folks his intention was to keep the team in Kansas City. There may have been contingencies under which he could move the team. Three years later he moved them to Sacramento. I would want to be very careful about their intentions and I think the multi-whale plus 20+ guppies and the present minority owners seems to be as safe as we could have it. This may be a partial explanation why so many "whales" are discussed. I think you could be pretty sure that winning championships is the goal and nothing else. Luckenbill's goal was to get a pro team to Sacramento and he barely had enough money to pull it off. I am grateful for what he did.
I get the impression that the ownership as we know it not only has the means but has the desire to win. That would be novel.
If they are willing to lose money on this venture, we might be able to compete with the big market teams. With the new arena, the whole changeover from the the hell-that-is-Maloofs could be very exciting.
I care who owns the Kings but only in being super careful. Luckenbill bought them when they were in Kansas City and apparently told the Kansas City folks his intention was to keep the team in Kansas City. There may have been contingencies under which he could move the team. Three years later he moved them to Sacramento. I would want to be very careful about their intentions and I think the multi-whale plus 20+ guppies and the present minority owners seems to be as safe as we could have it. This may be a partial explanation why so many "whales" are discussed. I think you could be pretty sure that winning championships is the goal and nothing else. Luckenbill's goal was to get a pro team to Sacramento and he barely had enough money to pull it off. I am grateful for what he did.
I get the impression that the ownership as we know it not only has the means but has the desire to win. That would be novel.
If they are willing to lose money on this venture, we might be able to compete with the big market teams. With the new arena, the whole changeover from the the hell-that-is-Maloofs could be very exciting.
Equivalent argument? We're talking about opinions and feelings here. Your friend obviously cannot find a way to put himself into our shoes, which is what I was trying to get him to see. I've said this before and I'll say it again...the name of the board is KINGSFANS. We're in enough of a funk already and the emotional roller coaster ride we've been on FOR YEARS is much worse than anything people not from Sacramento could possibly imagine.
Is it that hard for you to understand? If we wanted to debate this with Seattle folks, we'd be participating in some of the Seattle forums.
Is it that hard for you to understand? If we wanted to debate this with Seattle folks, we'd be participating in some of the Seattle forums.
It isnt too hard for me to understand. I just did what you asked me to do. You asked me to ask him and so I did. Then I posted it. Maybe I should have messaged you with it maybe. But I completely understand.
As a person who used to be in sports radio with connections, that is how most seattle people feel like. A lot do feel that the Kings shouldnt be leaving Sacramento. But a lot of people feel that that they should get any team possible. They just feel that they have been wronged and that someone else should pay for it including the fans. But the general consensus is many want the Kings to stay. I have talked to many people in the sports radio business on this subject and they have told me if they had a chance to have expansion, they would rather take the expansion instead of the Kings. But there are many who say we have to get whatever team we can because we want a team. So that is why they act like jerks to Sacramento people.
I dont feel the Kings should leave Sacramento either. But what I hear is that they arent and I am glad for that. But I would be planning for new owners though.. But I do support expansion if the NBA BOG decide that the agreement is valid and no other person can break the agreement. But Hansen is going to hold off paying the $30 million non refundable unless he finds out he can get an expansion team. Then he won't pay!
Do I think the BOG is going to turn down the deal? YES! That is why Stern is telling KJ to keep going. You want to know why? He wants to expand. He wants to expand into the Vancouver market again and into England. He also likes Louisville and Kansas City. He doesnt like Vegas though. Too many temptations for NBA players there to do what Tim Donahy did. Stern is setting up a showdown to open up a bidding war among Sacramento bidders. There are only 2 main bidders in this and one has a truck load of dough and was told that he has no chance of moving the team to San Jose. Even though he is a Laker fans, he wont be able to get the Lakers even though the Buss Family are currently having family issues and is quietly dividing the family in half. Let's just say that Jeanie and Jim Buss havent talked since Mike Brown was fired. I have a feeling (not confirmed or anything) that the NBA is going to grant Burkle to choose another site for the arena instead just sticking with one site at the railyards. Dont be surprised about that!
Loser gets an expansion team! But if things change and they often do due to people changing their minds, then I would chose the alternative of expansion.
As a person who used to be in sports radio with connections, that is how most seattle people feel like. A lot do feel that the Kings shouldnt be leaving Sacramento. But a lot of people feel that that they should get any team possible. They just feel that they have been wronged and that someone else should pay for it including the fans. But the general consensus is many want the Kings to stay. I have talked to many people in the sports radio business on this subject and they have told me if they had a chance to have expansion, they would rather take the expansion instead of the Kings. But there are many who say we have to get whatever team we can because we want a team. So that is why they act like jerks to Sacramento people.
I dont feel the Kings should leave Sacramento either. But what I hear is that they arent and I am glad for that. But I would be planning for new owners though.. But I do support expansion if the NBA BOG decide that the agreement is valid and no other person can break the agreement. But Hansen is going to hold off paying the $30 million non refundable unless he finds out he can get an expansion team. Then he won't pay!
Do I think the BOG is going to turn down the deal? YES! That is why Stern is telling KJ to keep going. You want to know why? He wants to expand. He wants to expand into the Vancouver market again and into England. He also likes Louisville and Kansas City. He doesnt like Vegas though. Too many temptations for NBA players there to do what Tim Donahy did. Stern is setting up a showdown to open up a bidding war among Sacramento bidders. There are only 2 main bidders in this and one has a truck load of dough and was told that he has no chance of moving the team to San Jose. Even though he is a Laker fans, he wont be able to get the Lakers even though the Buss Family are currently having family issues and is quietly dividing the family in half. Let's just say that Jeanie and Jim Buss havent talked since Mike Brown was fired. I have a feeling (not confirmed or anything) that the NBA is going to grant Burkle to choose another site for the arena instead just sticking with one site at the railyards. Dont be surprised about that!
Loser gets an expansion team! But if things change and they often do due to people changing their minds, then I would chose the alternative of expansion.
Seattle given an expansion team is fine, actually preferred in my biased opinion. However, taking the current Kings team and replacing them with an expansion team runs the risk of a poisoned market. Even with a messed up unbalanced roster the fans have the love hate relationship with these players. Severing that connection and trying simply to replace it doesn't always work, it just wouldn't be the same.
Great read on Seattle. Basically, it says it will be tough for Seattle to support an NBA team and be able to pay off the debt. It will be tough for them to compete for sponsors and suite money against the Mariners, Seahawks and MLS. Also, a good review of why they lost the Sonics in the first place.
http://sportspressnw.com/2013/01/thiel-1-billion-question-nba-will-ask-about-seattle/
http://sportspressnw.com/2013/01/thiel-1-billion-question-nba-will-ask-about-seattle/
I think they only way their investment pays off is if they can start a regional sports network with a partner like the Mariners. The arena revenue will not cover what they are spending. I know Ballmer is loaded, but so is Paul Allen and he got to a point where losing money on the Blazers and their arena was a burden to him.
Even RSN's need good content. The Mariners and reincarnated Sonics are not exactly hot products on the field and court. The Mariners were 26th in attendance last season.
Even RSN's need good content. The Mariners and reincarnated Sonics are not exactly hot products on the field and court. The Mariners were 26th in attendance last season.
- Status