Maloofs QUIT arena talks!!

[Jkbiker]

I know this wont be a popular post, but I'm not sure if all the facts are clear. If maloofs were promised a certain amount of acreage and parking, then the city changes the deal , I could see why they are upset with the city. If they were expecting 8,000 parking spaces and now they are being told its only 3000 in the gagage, that is a BIG deal financially. 5.000 spaces @ $15 per for 250 events is about 18 Million a year!

Maloofs are thinking, gee if we push for this passing, we have to wait an additional 2 years to get by the legal challenges on the election, we have to deal with the toxicity problems holding up the project, and now were are going to sit back and agree to 15 to 18 Million less parking than promised.

So:
A: if we hold out for what we want and get the parking, we still have time to support the measure, get the arena, parking and great fans- We Win

B: if we hold out for what we want and get the parking, and we screw up the voters view and loose election, we get permission to move, go to anahiem etc - We Win

C: if we hold out for what we want and don't get it, we screw up the election, with no arena, we get to move - We Win

D: if we hold out for what we want and dont get it, and by some miracle the measure still passes, they dont have to pony up election money for campaign, there will be all sorts of reasons, (delays, problems, that they could get out of having to stay with the project)
It then depends on Sterns to step in and maybe force them to stay?
so maybe - We Win, maybe We loose. Of course if we loose we still may make Sacto Arena work or could sell the team.

I guess what Im saying is if I were the Maloofs, would come to the above conclusions and would probably do the same thing. Sorry Sacramento this is a NBA franchise business not a Redevelopment Project.

Besides I really feel we as fans need more parking than 3,000. These would go to Players, handicap, Big dollar seat holders. and all of us fans in the upper levels would be parking in Raley field and shuttling over? The parking would be needed anyway for the rest of the restaurants, riverwalk, excess daytime parking for down town etc.
So I actually hope they succeed.

Timing of all this yeah it stinks! but not sure it could have been avoided, this was all put together at last minute. If promises were orally made earlier and now City is changing the deal, then I can't fault the Maloofs.

 

[Arena Skeptic]

The parking issue is NOT trivial...

I don't think anyone here has thought through the math on this one. The Maloofs say they're 5,000 parking spots short of an agreement, and everyone at KingsFans.com thinks the arena will pretty much fill up 180-200 nights a year. Parking at this new place will be closer to $15, not the current $10.

So just do the math:

5,000 spots * $15 = $75,000 more revenue per event.

$75,000 * 180 events = $13,500,000.

Now, that assumes a parking sellout at every event, which is a stretch. But realistically, it's not hard to see how this is worth $10,000,000 a year to them.

And let's not forget the "sphere of influence" clauses I derided from day one. That's the really, really stupid thing Rob and Roger agreed to, without thinking about it hard enough. That was dumb. D-U-M-B, dumb. Dumb, because now Rob and Roger are finding out what that means: The Maloofs can mold the current railyard -- the WHOLE thing -- in whatever image they want. Huge error in judgement.

In any event, this is a huge implosion to have 6 weeks before the election. Might as well call it now; this thing goes down 80-20 on Nov 7. The fact that the Maloofs hadn't kicked in a dime yet means to me they've been disingenuous the entire time. I think they bought the team to move it.

Sorry.

It won't be the Las Vegas Kings, either. They'll just call them the King. No more plural, to honor The King. Vegas = Elvis. Las Vegas King.

Get it?

 

[ShatteredVision]

I'm sure there is more to this than just the parking spaces.

Everyone knows downtown parking spaces in any city are generally limited, especially when the city is looking to make downtown a little more "dense" (Capitol Towers).

If the Maloofs want more money from parking, they could just take what parking spaces they have and just charge a King's Ransom for them ($20-25). There will always be people who don't really care for the price of parking and will pay whatever just for the luxury of driving to the arena.

It is also a well known fact that in order to accomodate for a Downtown Arena, the city will have to create a new infrastructure to effectively get people in and out of the area. Staples Center sits on the fringes of Downtown LA and USC territory and people still manage to get through there, even though the 110 is always congested.

What I don't get is why the city didn't build a freeway that travels the outer bounds of the city in the north and south direction. They somewhat have that setup in the East/Westbound direction (I-80, Business 80). A real problem is the Interstate traffic travelling on I-5, CA-99 that generally clogs the same roads that serve Business 80 and US 50.

 

[jda1977]

The Maloofs have played it very smart. It does take a bit of evidence and work to move a team. Especially a NBA team with a strong and reliable fan base such as ours. So if they (the Maloofs) position it that they have made every effort to get this deal done (in the eyes of the NBA) and yet have locally placed cracks in the foundation, so that it in turn fails, then they get what they really want. That is an assumption on my part and I truly don't know what the Maloofs want. They have though positioned themselves in between the lines. If the truly wanted this new arena why would they with media and such present vocally tarnish the current plan that they helped create?

 

[Warhawk]

The Maloofs have played it very smart. It does take a bit of evidence and work to move a team. Especially a NBA team with a strong and reliable fan base such as ours. So if they (the Maloofs) position it that they have made every effort to get this deal done (in the eyes of the NBA) and yet have locally placed cracks in the foundation, so that it in turn fails, then they get what they really want. That is an assumption on my part and I truly don't know what the Maloofs want. They have though positioned themselves in between the lines. If the truly wanted this new arena why would they with media and such present vocally tarnish the current plan that they helped create?

I am still trying to figure out where this sentiment is coming from.

What are they tarnishing? They have stated that if the railyards site doesn';t work out they will be forced to look elsewhere in the area to relocate the arena but will keep it here if the proposition passes. This has been in all conversations to date (by city, county, and MSE reps): if the railyards site doesn't work out there are other locations that can be used.

How is that tarnishing the deal or saying they want to move out of Sacramento?

Can someone please explain to me where all this is coming from?

 

[BMiller52]

I don't think anyone here has thought through the math on this one. The Maloofs say they're 5,000 parking spots short of an agreement, and everyone at KingsFans.com thinks the arena will pretty much fill up 180-200 nights a year. Parking at this new place will be closer to $15, not the current $10.

So just do the math:

5,000 spots * $15 = $75,000 more revenue per event.

$75,000 * 180 events = $13,500,000.

Now, that assumes a parking sellout at every event, which is a stretch. But realistically, it's not hard to see how this is worth $10,000,000 a year to them.

And let's not forget the "sphere of influence" clauses I derided from day one. That's the really, really stupid thing Rob and Roger agreed to, without thinking about it hard enough. That was dumb. D-U-M-B, dumb. Dumb, because now Rob and Roger are finding out what that means: The Maloofs can mold the current railyard -- the WHOLE thing -- in whatever image they want. Huge error in judgement.

In any event, this is a huge implosion to have 6 weeks before the election. Might as well call it now; this thing goes down 80-20 on Nov 7. The fact that the Maloofs hadn't kicked in a dime yet means to me they've been disingenuous the entire time. I think they bought the team to move it.

Sorry.

It won't be the Las Vegas Kings, either. They'll just call them the King. No more plural, to honor The King. Vegas = Elvis. Las Vegas King.

Get it?

I hope people vote for this just to spite the Maloofs and they get screwed over hella bad.

 

[Warhawk]

I think they bought the team to move it.

So they bought the team, went over the cap for years, spent millions for local charities, bought houses here and live here part-time, ingrained themselves in the community, encouraged local basketball camps, etc, with the players, say they want to sign a 30-year lease, and openly stump for the passing of these propositions because they always wanted to move the team somewhere else?!?!?!

WHY?

What is with the conspiracies arund here today?

 

[KP]

If it looks like a duck...

I'm sorry but I haven't heard one peep from the Maloofs over the past few months about this arena deal, and I am a obssessed fan who combs the internent and media for anything about the team every day... Where the hell is the backing? Where is the supposed media blitz we were all going to see?? Have they spent one dime in advertising or campaigning for this arena deal that has to happen for the team to have any chance of staying here??? I have seen absolutely nothing, zip, nada... and now this? I'm sorry but I have to come to the conclusion that they want to leave at this point, and I'm a die-hard Kings fan... what do you think the rest of Sacramento that they have to win over is going to think?

 

[Arena Skeptic]

Keep dreaming

BMiller52, keep right on dreaming. This thing is a sure-fire loser at the ballot box now. It was a real stretch even before Joe's Sept 6 bombshell, but now?

The atmosphere at Arco will be really, really weird now, with a lame-duck team running around. I'm serious when I say this, I'd cancel my season tickets if I had any. If you haven't made the last payment, don't. That's called "good money after bad."

Also... The Maloofs haven't paid out "millions" to local charities; Maybe $1 million, but not "millions."

They didn't move the team because they couldn't. The original 1997 loan had out clauses for the first 10 years that were just to odious to overcome. That's why they stayed. And note the timing of this; the out-clauses expire at the end up the upcoming season. Now all they need to do is pay off the loan. The penalty phase of the original loan is ending at the end of the coming season.

Coincidence? Maybe. Perhaps. Possible.

Not likely.

As far as just raising parking to $25 per event, um, how well do you think that'd fly? I'd just do the math again: NBA League Pass, $200. Parking at 8 games, $200.

"Hello? Dish Network? I'd like to..."

I personally would hate the thought of leaving my car parked at Florin or Watt or Power Inn, then taking light rail home. It'd take 90 minutes to get from the game to the Pocket, for Pete's sake, if the car hadn't been broken into. I actually think the Maloofs have a fair point here.

 

[jda1977]

I am still trying to figure out where this sentiment is coming from.

What are they tarnishing? They have stated that if the railyards site doesn';t work out they will be forced to look elsewhere in the area to relocate the arena but will keep it here if the proposition passes. This has been in all conversations to date (by city, county, and MSE reps): if the railyards site doesn't work out there are other locations that can be used.

How is that tarnishing the deal or saying they want to move out of Sacramento?

Can someone please explain to me where all this is coming from?

I see it as tarnishing when the info on the rail yard has been known for some time. The Maloofs knew of this when in talks as well. Why would you even mention that the current site might not work out, what benefit does it provide to getting the measure approved? If you are supporting the current plan, why detail a negative, any negative? How does saying that the site may not work out move the argument for approving the measures forward? Beyond that, why would you in this case bring up any potential issues prior to the measures going to vote, site location or parking? Why not get the measures passed and then debate the feasibility of the location or the issue of parking.
In my mind the anti arena group use the site location and problems as one of there reasons to not pass the measures. They use this particular argument for a reason and when you vocalize the same thing as your opposition it can not be a good thing.
You are entitled to your opinion and me to mine but the problem is that it resonates as a negative statement in my eyes and a positive or neutral one in yours and we will both be voting, so why chance it and not say it, what do you lose by never making that statement.

 

[kupman]

It won't be the Las Vegas Kings, either. They'll just call them the King. No more plural, to honor The King. Vegas = Elvis. Las Vegas King.

Get it?

I think I get it....you are giddy with excitement that you have been right all along.

 

[Arena Skeptic]

kupman, whatever. I don't spend money on pro sports events. It's a money pit.

Talking with a coworker, he explained the parking further to me. If the lot has 8,000 slots, that sends people right into the businesses that the Maloofs will set up around the arena. The original MOU allows the Maloofs to dictate which businesses can and cannot be in the vicinity of the arena; that means they'd set up all Maloof-owned restaurants, so if you park in their lot, you're buying a $18 Maloof-burger "across the street from the arena" that the Maloofs own.

On the other hand, if the lot has 3,000 spots at $25 each, people will just park at the Downtown Plaza for $8. That is a huge lot, too. But more to the point, people WILL NOT have the $18 Maloof Burger if they park in the $8 Downtown Plaza parking spot.

So really, it turns out that this is about way, waaaay, waaaaaaay more than the $13.5 million/year from my original calcs. It may be more like double that amount. Simply put, the Maloofs make more with 8,000 $15 spots that channel people to Maloof-owned restaurants than they do with 3,000 spots, which "forces" most people to park in the Downtown Plaza and stop at the Food Court for $6 burgers.

Make sense yet?

 

[BMiller52]

kupman, whatever. I don't spend money on pro sports events. It's a money pit.

Talking with a coworker, he explained the parking further to me. If the lot has 8,000 slots, that sends people right into the businesses that the Maloofs will set up around the arena. The original MOU allows the Maloofs to dictate which businesses can and cannot be in the vicinity of the arena; that means they'd set up all Maloof-owned restaurants, so if you park in their lot, you're buying a $18 Maloof-burger "across the street from the arena" that the Maloofs own.

On the other hand, if the lot has 3,000 spots at $25 each, people will just park at the Downtown Plaza for $8. That is a huge lot, too. But more to the point, people WILL NOT have the $18 Maloof Burger if they park in the $8 Downtown Plaza parking spot.

So really, it turns out that this is about way, waaaay, waaaaaaay more than the $13.5 million/year from my original calcs. It may be more like double that amount. Simply put, the Maloofs make more with 8,000 $15 spots that channel people to Maloof-owned restaurants than they do with 3,000 spots, which "forces" most people to park in the Downtown Plaza and stop at the Food Court for $6 burgers.

Make sense yet?

Yeah they're trying to get everything they can out of this market. Basically they're greedy people who don't care about the actual city/team/fans at all, they just want our money.

 

[kupman]

Make sense yet?

Yes, it makes sense so you don't have to dumb it down any further. It would also be nice if you were not quite so patronizing here.

That being said, the logic you use is why I am not happy with the Maloofs. We are allowing them to control what goes on inside the walls of the new arena and enjoy any profits that they may reap. However, when they start trying to control what goes on outside the walls of the arena and try to dictate the way this portion of downtown is built, I have a problem.

I am sure that they would love to have a monopoly in their corner of downtown, but I don't think that is a good idea for the rest of Sacramento.

 

[Warhawk]

I see it as tarnishing when the info on the rail yard has been known for some time. The Maloofs knew of this when in talks as well. Why would you even mention that the current site might not work out, what benefit does it provide to getting the measure approved? If you are supporting the current plan, why detail a negative, any negative? How does saying that the site may not work out move the argument for approving the measures forward? Beyond that, why would you in this case bring up any potential issues prior to the measures going to vote, site location or parking? Why not get the measures passed and then debate the feasibility of the location or the issue of parking.

A. It shows forethought, and was brought up by the county in their discussions before voting on the issue. I can hear it now: "MSE lied to us because it isn't located in the railyards after the property owner backed out of the sale and they built it in Natomas."

B. The negatives have been brought up by the County, not MSE. They were simply responding to the questions put to them after the information was leaked.

C. Why not get the measure passed first? Do you know anything about the level of detail required in these negotiations before an agreement can be reached? They are not going to let major financial considerations go unresolved prior to signing off on a deal. That's just stupid by MSE.

 

[Arena Skeptic]

JDA1977, you said it perfectly. At that Sept 6 press conference, the sound you heard was fence-sitters jumping OFF the Q&R bandwagon, not onto it.

Case in point: Michael Ault, executive director for the Sacramento Downtown Partnership, who said in part, "If we can't get clarification about the railyard plans, it will definitely impact our decision to be supportive."

And this guy endorsed Q&R.

 

[Warhawk]

We are allowing them to control what goes on inside the walls of the new arena and enjoy any profits that they may reap. However, when they start trying to control what goes on outside the walls of the arena and try to dictate the way this portion of downtown is built, I have a problem.

I am sure that they would love to have a monopoly in their corner of downtown, but I don't think that is a good idea for the rest of Sacramento.

If you were about to enter into an agreement with the county to manage a half-billion dollar facility and found out they were cutting the available parking available for your operations by over 1/2 and potentially removing $10 million per year of revenue after you had come to an agreement, how would you feel?

Again, MSE has been losing millions over the years at ARCO while putting a good to very good product on the floor - where is the hatred of them coming from?

Why are they so maligned for looking out for MSE financially when the county has been jerking their chain for YEARS trying to get a deal put together? And based on recent events, is still jerking them around and bad-mouthing them in public instead of negotiating in good faith?

 

[Padrino]

this really should speak volumes about the maloofs' intentions. i'm gonna be a little cryptic here, but let's face the facts. the maloofs are outstanding businessmen. they know how to get **** done when they want it done. if they were really fully behind the arena deal, we'd know it. everything the maloofs have done with the sacramento kings franchise has been deliberate and obvious. there was a time when they were always courtside, right in the public eye. they cheered, they booed the refs, they mingled with fans. hell, when they re-signed chris webber, there were billboards saying that joe would mow chris' lawn if he stayed. the ron artest trade had the maloofs' handprints all over it. the adelman firing was publicly addressed by the maloofs as a family decision, as was the musselman hiring. all of this stuff has been right in the public eye, yet i can't help but feel that the maloofs have withheld that same intentionality and fervor when concerning the arena deal. i'm not gonna go so far as to say that they straight up want to move the kings out of sacramento, but i will say that i think they're more than considering other options at this point. i have not fully educated myself on the arena discussions, so i can't add much other than this gut feeling as a kings fan.

 

[Arena Skeptic]

I found this at the end of KXTV's article:

The chairwoman of the "Yes on Q and R" campaign told News10 she believes the Maloofs are withholding money from the campaign as a negotiating tool to get themselves a better deal.

"I feel certain they'll come around before the election," Sandy Smoley said.

Umm... Any of you want to bet on that?

In my universe, we call that "blackmail." This will never play well with the fence-sitters, ever.

It's like they just don't know when to stop twisting the knife.

The stupid! It burns!

 

[kupman]

If you were about to enter into an agreement with the county to manage a half-billion dollar facility and found out they were cutting the available parking available for your operations by over 1/2 and potentially removing $10 million per year of revenue after you had come to an agreement, how would you feel?

Again, MSE has been losing millions over the years at ARCO while putting a good to very good product on the floor - where is the hatred of them coming from?

Why are they so maligned for looking out for MSE financially when the county has been jerking their chain for YEARS trying to get a deal put together? And based on recent events, is still jerking them around and bad-mouthing them in public instead of negotiating in good faith?

I see and appreciate your points. I just draw a different line in the sand. Where do you draw the line? How much of Sacramento do you want to give away to Maloofville?

 

[jda1977]

A. It shows forethought, and was brought up by the county in their discussions before voting on the issue. I can hear it now: "MSE lied to us because it isn't located in the railyards after the property owner backed out of the sale and they built it in Natomas."

B. The negatives have been brought up by the County, not MSE. They were simply responding to the questions put to them after the information was leaked.

C. Why not get the measure passed first? Do you know anything about the level of detail required in these negotiations before an agreement can be reached? They are not going to let major financial considerations go unresolved prior to signing off on a deal. That's just stupid by MSE.

What does this have anything to do with getting the measure passed? You are trying to get voters to approve the measures. If you dont do that then all the detailed negotiations are not worth much. Your right I dont have any idea about the level of detailed negotiations that have gone into this but thats not really my point (nor do I ever claim to have that knowledge) or the one you asked to have clarified for you. You can simply say this and that but the fact remains, his statements have been precieved negatively and that has a real impact on the potential passing of the measure at hand. Once again, just look at the posts in this thread and the main one, your perception is not everyones. You asked why. I gave you my answer. I still dont see what the location or the parking statements adds to getting the measures passed by the public. So you explain to me how distancing yourself from the group that is selling the new arena deal is a good thing for keeping the Kings in Sacramento. I understand, to a degree of what you are saying but once again there are those who will not see MSE protecting themselves but instead walking away. And if the Maloofs walk away from this deal so to does our hopes for any new arena.

 

[Packt]

If you were about to enter into an agreement with the county to manage a half-billion dollar facility and found out they were cutting the available parking available for your operations by over 1/2 and potentially removing $10 million per year of revenue after you had come to an agreement, how would you feel?

Again, MSE has been losing millions over the years at ARCO while putting a good to very good product on the floor - where is the hatred of them coming from?

Why are they so maligned for looking out for MSE financially when the county has been jerking their chain for YEARS trying to get a deal put together? And based on recent events, is still jerking them around and bad-mouthing them in public instead of negotiating in good faith?

The city has to look out for itself, also. And with these recent comments, i have to wonder who's been jerking who around. You're being way too kind to MS&E

"Dangberg said the Maloofs wanted to eliminate the housing, hotels and retail planned for the railyard's 20-acre sports and entertainment district and fill it with "an arena and parking garages and nothing else".

If that is true, I would never vote for the measure. We wouldn't be leasing out a property, we'd be giving away what could be prime real estate. If city officials agreed to that, they are foolish.

 

[kupman]

"Dangberg said the Maloofs wanted to eliminate the housing, hotels and retail planned for the railyard's 20-acre sports and entertainment district and fill it with "an arena and parking garages and nothing else".

If that is true, I would never vote for the measure. We wouldn't be leasing out a property, we'd be giving away what could be prime real estate. If city officials agreed to that, they are foolish.

BINGO!

 

[Warhawk]

You're being way too kind to MS&E

Again, I never said MSE is right and the County is wrong, I'm just saying everyone is jumping on the anti-MSE bandwagon today on the basis of exactly what? Tough negotiations that both sides don't want to back down from? Accusations from both sides that sound a bit far-fetched?

You always ask for more than you need and back down a bit to get what's reasonable. It's happening on both sides. Doom and gloom isn't warranted yet.

As far as statements being percieved negatively - you are absolutely right. But it your perception, not the truth, that you are reacting to.

Truth is, nobody has a deal yet to develop the railyards. The deal is for funds, not a guaranteed project at that location. They are working on the aspects of the arena location in order to sign off on a project if the railyards site is ultimately available.

I also don't see why MSE would kick in $$$ for promoting the "pro" campaign if the side MSE is trying to help "win" is stabbing them in the back (essentially reducing agreed-upon parking revenues by over 50% ) behind closed doors and then bad-mouthing MSE in public. Again, this is a hypothetical, but that is all we have to go on right now....

 

[hoopsfan]

This is going to sound really stupid but in my dream world Snoop Dogg buys the Kings from the Maloofs, and we trade for KG. It's unrealistic but dang it would be cool.

If you didn't know..Snoop is a Laker fan.

 

[BMiller52]

If you didn't know..Snoop is a Laker fan.

I know it sucks. Maybe we could get E-40? I am just dreamin though obviously it's not going to happen. I wish though.

 

[Padrino]

I know it sucks. Maybe we could get E-40? I am just dreamin though obviously it's not going to happen. I wish though.

why? what's the point of having a mainstream hip hop icon as the owner of a basketball franchise? i don't see the benefit...

 

[BMiller52]

why? what's the point of having a mainstream hip hop icon as the owner of a basketball franchise? i don't see the benefit...

Cuz I like their music... The Nets have Jay Z...

 

[whozit]

On a positive note, if there is one, this could ve viewed as being an end-around hail-mary pass. Whether or not there is a completion at the end will be decided in Nov. And the lack of time may be a reason it was needed, intentional or not.

One thing it does do is show the arena being about Sacramento and not about the Maloofs. Much of the perception has seemed to be that this is being done for the benefit of the Maloofs and all the benefits for the area largely seen as lip service. This little spat has brought out or is bringing out what this deal could mean for the area and why it is important for the area with or without the Maloofs.

 

[whozit]

Cuz I like their music... The Nets have Jay Z...

Yes, but when their popularity dries up like most entertainment acts do, so does the cash flow needed to compete. Not many individuals can withstand a negative cash flow, especially in the millions, for long.