KFBK: RE Graswich on consultants for the new arena

Graswich :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes: If I could put more rolling eyes, I would. He adds nothing new in this rant. He pontificating on what he thinks will be presented. So he's decided before he hears it that it's BS. What a crock.

He hates the Kings so much and the Maloofs in particular, that he just isn't credible. For one, he'd be absolutely the last person in Sacramento to know anything about what is being proposed on Friday.

Two, what would be the purpose of presenting a plan that is "smoke and mirrors?" Absolutely zero. There would be no benefits to "smoke and mirrors" for the Maloofs or the franchise or the league.

Moag thinks they have a feasible plan to present, although the economy probably has to pick up some for it to work. I'm quite sure that if all these people working together had decided it just was not possible in any way, that's what the report would say. Why lie or pretend otherwise? Just say it can't be done in any way and let the Kings move to a profitable area. That would be the easiest thing to do. The only issue is can the plan work soon enough?

I can see absolutely no reason for the league to present a phony "smoke and mirrors" plan on Friday.
 
Last edited:
It seems like the basis of Graswich's argument is that no arena can be built if nobody is going to foot the bill. In and of itself, that is a sound argument. The question really should be whether or not anybody will foot the bill. And wouldn't financing be a fundamental part of the proposition on the 27th? He assumes that financing does exist and cannot be procured. I'd like to wait at least until hearing the proposal's financing plans before coming to that conclusion.
 
Capt. Factorial said:
It seems like the basis of Graswich's argument is that no arena can be built if nobody is going to foot the bill. In and of itself, that is a sound argument. The question really should be whether or not anybody will foot the bill. And wouldn't financing be a fundamental part of the proposition on the 27th? He assumes that financing does exist and cannot be procured. I'd like to wait at least until hearing the proposal's financing plans before coming to that conclusion.
Click to expand...
Financing is available, because the people involved are rich. Banks have money and need to invest it, and land is still a good investment. Certainly, better than the stock market, the money has to be loaned or the banks don't make any money.

But, the deal is based on the builder being able to sell home & condos & offices & stores. At least enough as to make a profit big enough to pay for building the area.
So, that's the catch. Are there enough people with good enough credit, to buy the homes & businesses that will be built in the area. IF yes, the profit will be planned in so to make the arena affordable. If no, no arena.

Now, to find the developer who thinks the answer is yes. And, then hope his right.
 
HighTopKicks said:
Financing is available, because the people involved are rich. Banks have money and need to invest it, and land is still a good investment. Certainly, better than the stock market, the money has to be loaned or the banks don't make any money.

But, the deal is based on the builder being able to sell home & condos & offices & stores. At least enough as to make a profit big enough to pay for building the area.
So, that's the catch. Are there enough people with good enough credit, to buy the homes & businesses that will be built in the area. IF yes, the profit will be planned in so to make the arena affordable. If no, no arena.

Now, to find the developer who thinks the answer is yes. And, then hope his right.
Click to expand...

In a "normal" economy I would agree with much of what you say. But, the comment about "banks have money and need to invest it" doesn't apply much these days. We (taxpayers) are giving billions to all the major banks and, thus far, that has not freed up money for lending.....not to individuals, business, or other banks. And, it doesn't matter how good ones credit is or not.
 
Capt. Factorial said:
It seems like the basis of Graswich's argument is that no arena can be built if nobody is going to foot the bill. In and of itself, that is a sound argument. The question really should be whether or not anybody will foot the bill. And wouldn't financing be a fundamental part of the proposition on the 27th? He assumes that financing does exist and cannot be procured. I'd like to wait at least until hearing the proposal's financing plans before coming to that conclusion.
Click to expand...
That's why I say RE just made up what he thinks will be presented on Friday and then goes into a rant about it. He has no better idea than us about what will be actually presented as the proposal.

What I liked, is he rants about how the consultants will present essentially a fake, baseless plan (smoke/mirrors) with no financing plan, then say they are working hard so they can get more billable hours.

What he fails to point out is that the Maloofs are paying for this up front consultant work, not the taxpayers. If the deal doesn't go, they lose that money. Of course, that wouldn't give him a reason to hate on the Maloofs, would it? Up front costs are one of the main risks for any developer. You can put a lot of money in upfront, with no guarantee a deal actually pans out.

My understanding is that it is coming with a plan to finance it, although it is dependent on the economy improving. Since any ground-breaking is pretty far away, there is time to see if the economy is going to turn in the next year or two.

The one thing the Cal Expo board has said is, even though there will be a financial feasibility study presented by the NBA, they will have their own financial feasibility study done, once they have the proposal.
 
I quit reading as soon as I saw "R.E. Graswich"... He has zero credibility in this area.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top