Kings comparison with NETS. from a time long ago......

CruzDude

CruzDude

Senior Member sharing a brew with bajaden
#1
#1
Daniel Massey wrote an article "Nuts for the Nets" in CrainsNewYorkbusiness.com that included a Sacramento deja vu to better times:

"The Nets were the Sacramento Kings of the East Coast," said Marc Ganis, president of SportsCorp Ltd. "They had no reputation, they had no credibility, they had no brand. What Prokhorov is doing along with Jay-Z is building a brand. That brand is going to have significant value as time goes on. They're now on a very steep trajectory upwards."

Sad but true, kinda "deja vu all over again" for our Kings. Are our owners just holding on to the Kings as the last remnant of a lost empire? Or is there a viable plan in there somewhere for the franchise, the team and us fans? I think we have a vested right to know.

Read more: http://www.crainsnewyork.com/article/20120805/MEDIA_ENTERTAINMENT/308059985#ixzz22h01CQlg
 
Glenn

Glenn

Hall of Famer
#3
#3
CruzDude, the only way we can rebrand the Kings is with new ownership. Then add an arena and whatever else to upgrade our reputation and we could have a different reputation. Bring Tesla back. Whatever. As it stands, the Maloofs have to overcome several years of stupidity and even at that, the brief period of success didn't totally erase the bad taste in people's mouths "earned" from 1985 to 1999. Success had to be maintained and was not.

It's more fun following a team that gets national attention for good things than the way it is, isn't it? There are times when I think the Maloofs don't deserve fans like they have. Sigh.
 
CruzDude

CruzDude

Senior Member sharing a brew with bajaden
#4
#4
Ah yes, how sweet it was. Unfortunately there sre too few Mark Cubans or Prokhorov's in the sports world. Perhaps George Maloof IS holding on to the last remnant of any value, the Kings, in their financially troubled empire, such as it is. How adamant they are not to sell under any apparent condition is worrisome to say the least. But it is hard to fault them considering what the financial meltdown did to them.

We fans don't like it one bit but in the world of business you always hold on to your liquid assets no matter what. But 52% of the Kings minus the $70M loan is not all that much but it does include Arco Arena (I know, but I'm nostalgic), the practice facility and all the land around the arena on which the parking lots sit. The downtown arena would have left them with only the team and little or none of the land and facilities (my own assessment). Then would have become tenants renting their house but not owning it any more.

Yep I want a sugar daddy to come bail out our Kings and start over, just like 1998.
 
Last edited:
K

Kingsguy881

Guest
#7
#7
NowImLost said:
People act like we were good.
We had like, 4-6 good years in the history of the franchise.

Now we suck again.
Click to expand...
Your signature says Sam Cassell, you have a picture of Nick Van Exel as your avatar, and your handle is 'NowImLost'. 4-6 good years in the HISTORY OF THE FRANCHISE? People act like we were good? Sit down before you hurt yourself.
 
bajaden

bajaden

Hall of Famer
#9
#9
NowImLost said:
People act like we were good.
We had like, 4-6 good years in the history of the franchise.

Now we suck again.
Click to expand...
Actually, we were good, very good, and back to good for a 7 year span. And I'm assuming that your talking about the history of the franchise in sacramento, and not Kansas City, Cincinnati, or Syracuse. And excuse us, for being proud of the good moments. By the way, you have the wrong picture up there. Also, only 61 posts since 2004. Thats an average of 7.6 posts a year. Judging from this post, maybe thats a good thing.
 
Emma

Emma

Starter
#10
#10
The Maloof family has given up a team before (the Rockets), and I recall an article stating the emotional void from that loss being their main reason for clinging onto a franchise no matter what.
 
CruzDude

CruzDude

Senior Member sharing a brew with bajaden
#11
#11
I believe they "gave" up the Rockets after their father died. The current Maloofs were not owners of that Rockets team.
 
Emma

Emma

Starter
#12
#12
CruzDude said:
I believe they "gave" up the Rockets after their father died. The current Maloofs were not owners of that Rockets team.
Click to expand...
"After George Sr. died, Joe took over the beer business and the 24-year-old Gavin installed himself as
president of the Rockets; six months later, the team lost in the N.B.A. finals to a Boston Celtics team led
by the young Larry Bird." The aunts had them sell the team, essentially.
http://www.nba.com/media/kings/The_Flying_Maloof_Brothers.pdf

Sorry about the PDF business.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.