Marcos Bretón: Owners pulled old switcheroo
- Thread starter G_M
- Start date
It's really odd how people like the Rise Guys keep bashing the city and siding up with the Maloofs and then calling it a crappy deal.
I'm not sure how you negotiate a great deal for the city and voters and then get the Maloofs approval? It's never going to happen. Clearly the Maloofs will get every last dime they can in this deal and there never will be anything that the voters can be happy with.
The only thing you can say is that this never should have gotten to the ballot without a signed MOU. The biggest failure in a series of failures.
I'm not sure how you negotiate a great deal for the city and voters and then get the Maloofs approval? It's never going to happen. Clearly the Maloofs will get every last dime they can in this deal and there never will be anything that the voters can be happy with.
The only thing you can say is that this never should have gotten to the ballot without a signed MOU. The biggest failure in a series of failures.
And in this context, I want to point out that I'm not anti-arena. What galls me about this is the way it was misrepresented; the public disclosure of the "terms" that are now being largely ignored, for example. What would the BOS vote have been had the negotiators settled on the last Maloof counterproposal? 4-1? I doubt it. They would never have approved the additional $45 million, or the ability for the Maloofs to uninaterally lower their own payments.
And now, I hear Sandy Smoley saying that they'll try again in June 2008, and it most likely will, again, include a sales tax component.
Look, I understand that an additional 25 cents per $100 just is not noticable, but you need to understand that, in California, the voters will never approve that idea. That will never fly here. Just get that in your heads, please. If it includes a sales tax, it will fail again.
Simply put, we need politicians who will have better imaginations AND stronger spines... And as part of their negotiation skills, they also need to learn to say, "We don't care that much if you go away." It pains people here to hear that. Oh well. The Maloofs know that if they're "negotiating" with politicians who are HIGHLY MOTIVATED TO KEEP THE KINGS (!!) that they are in the driver's seat. If they're negotiating with politicians who WANT THE BEST POSSIBLE DEAL FOR TAXPAYERS (!!), then the Maloofs know they are NOT in the driver's seat.
They need a tough guy. And I don't know who that'll be. But I think when they started negotiating, they needed someone sitting in the corner who's main job was to be firm, and tell people that the voters need to see certain things. They needed a contract (not a terms sheet); they need more creative funding sources (instead of just a sales tax); they need a set-in-stone parking and lease payment plan; and so on.
They sorely lacked such a person. And now they're paying the price. This is going to fail by huge margins, because the proposed JPA negotiators weren't tough enough.
And now, I hear Sandy Smoley saying that they'll try again in June 2008, and it most likely will, again, include a sales tax component.
Look, I understand that an additional 25 cents per $100 just is not noticable, but you need to understand that, in California, the voters will never approve that idea. That will never fly here. Just get that in your heads, please. If it includes a sales tax, it will fail again.
Simply put, we need politicians who will have better imaginations AND stronger spines... And as part of their negotiation skills, they also need to learn to say, "We don't care that much if you go away." It pains people here to hear that. Oh well. The Maloofs know that if they're "negotiating" with politicians who are HIGHLY MOTIVATED TO KEEP THE KINGS (!!) that they are in the driver's seat. If they're negotiating with politicians who WANT THE BEST POSSIBLE DEAL FOR TAXPAYERS (!!), then the Maloofs know they are NOT in the driver's seat.
They need a tough guy. And I don't know who that'll be. But I think when they started negotiating, they needed someone sitting in the corner who's main job was to be firm, and tell people that the voters need to see certain things. They needed a contract (not a terms sheet); they need more creative funding sources (instead of just a sales tax); they need a set-in-stone parking and lease payment plan; and so on.
They sorely lacked such a person. And now they're paying the price. This is going to fail by huge margins, because the proposed JPA negotiators weren't tough enough.
thanks HJTA
We needed to see what was being offered to vote properly for the arena. Lots of epopel disagree, but it is the truth. If you expect the public to vote for a tax increase, you better let them know what they are getting.
That was the problem with this, the public never knew what they were getting. Everyone has lost on this venture. Including the Maloofs as they refused to even support the very measure that could have given them an new arena.
Personally, I dont think they want to stay in Sac. They can say that they do all they want, but THEIR actions speak different than their words. VF can think what he wants, but a lot of people on here know quite simply that the Maloofs are partialy to blame for this fiasco. So are the politicians. The whole thing should have never mad it to the ballot. The whole thing is laughable.
I dont believe that the Maloofs are losing money with Arco. If you take out the money they make for the kings, I can see that, but you cant do that.
A reasonable subsidy is the way to go. Taxpayers pay a much smaller %, 30% and give them a tax write off for the property tax. I bet that would pass. Let them build it with their money.
Let me also say I am not against a new arena, I am against 100% public financing, then giving the farm away for less than the area gets currently in taxes from the current arena.
We needed to see what was being offered to vote properly for the arena. Lots of epopel disagree, but it is the truth. If you expect the public to vote for a tax increase, you better let them know what they are getting.
That was the problem with this, the public never knew what they were getting. Everyone has lost on this venture. Including the Maloofs as they refused to even support the very measure that could have given them an new arena.
Personally, I dont think they want to stay in Sac. They can say that they do all they want, but THEIR actions speak different than their words. VF can think what he wants, but a lot of people on here know quite simply that the Maloofs are partialy to blame for this fiasco. So are the politicians. The whole thing should have never mad it to the ballot. The whole thing is laughable.
I dont believe that the Maloofs are losing money with Arco. If you take out the money they make for the kings, I can see that, but you cant do that.
A reasonable subsidy is the way to go. Taxpayers pay a much smaller %, 30% and give them a tax write off for the property tax. I bet that would pass. Let them build it with their money.
Let me also say I am not against a new arena, I am against 100% public financing, then giving the farm away for less than the area gets currently in taxes from the current arena.
That question is even relevant. The fact is, they can't possibly borrow that much to fund a marginal business. No lender will touch that with a 30-foot pole. I sincerely doubt they could borrow even 50% of the cost. Well they could maybe cut team payroll down to $20 mil, or something, but then there'd be no point in having the team at all, unless you didn't mind being the permanent 30th place finisher.
Voteno: You don't have to believe the Maloofs on the losses. MSE has opened their financial books to the Bee at least twice since they became the owners of the Kings and the Bee has confirmed the losses.
Voteno: You don't have to believe the Maloofs on the losses. MSE has opened their financial books to the Bee at least twice since they became the owners of the Kings and the Bee has confirmed the losses.
a business can easily show a loss if the owners wish it to
any business can show a loss if it wants to. pay the partners a salary. I would bet that they take a salary of some sort. The maloofs should put money into an arena if they want a new one. People seem to think that just because other venues are building arenas without any owner support than we should also. The NBA is the one pushing all these new arenas. Let them build them with a tax on the players salaries and on the people who actually go to the arenas..
any business can show a loss if it wants to. pay the partners a salary. I would bet that they take a salary of some sort. The maloofs should put money into an arena if they want a new one. People seem to think that just because other venues are building arenas without any owner support than we should also. The NBA is the one pushing all these new arenas. Let them build them with a tax on the players salaries and on the people who actually go to the arenas..
Tax the players? No offense, but some of your ideas really have no base of reality. And just how do sign a player and him knowing that he's going to be taxed and have to give up part of his salary? I'll answer that - you don't. Given that all the Kings players have existing contracts that cannot be taxed - your fantasy tax has to come against new contracts. And only the most desperate players would agree to that. Players that aren't NBA caliber and don't make the big money anyway. So it's of little value.
I hate to say this but after all the talk and opposing opinions I have with Arena Skeptic...This time he is right.
Its pretty obvious to me, take Q&R out of the equation and just look at what the Maloofs have done.
I guess a lot of you didn't even read the artilcle which for once contained facts from the Bee. This has nothing to do with an agenda by either side. It shows what is going on behind the scences. No way to sugar coat the above like some want to... Do I think the Maloofs should roll over and let the city take it to them? NO...Do I think the City should roll over and let the Maloofs take it to them? NO
This as I said was doomed from the start. But this behind the scenes backhanded stuff by the Maloofs concerns me. Who knows if they are leaving but it's pretty obvious by the events of the last 3 months they do not want this measure to pass.
Its pretty obvious to me, take Q&R out of the equation and just look at what the Maloofs have done.
I guess a lot of you didn't even read the artilcle which for once contained facts from the Bee. This has nothing to do with an agenda by either side. It shows what is going on behind the scences. No way to sugar coat the above like some want to... Do I think the Maloofs should roll over and let the city take it to them? NO...Do I think the City should roll over and let the Maloofs take it to them? NO
This as I said was doomed from the start. But this behind the scenes backhanded stuff by the Maloofs concerns me. Who knows if they are leaving but it's pretty obvious by the events of the last 3 months they do not want this measure to pass.
I did read it Waxer. And your feelings are exactly what the opponents wanted.
Do I like what the Maloofs want? No. Do I think they were negotiating to get the best deal they possibly could? Yes. What makes anyone think the City was going to agree to any of this? My impression from Roger Dickinson's comments was that the Maloofs counter proposal was dead on arrival, altho he didn't straight out say that.
Negotiations at this level of financial dealing is brutal. No one looks good during the process. Both sides are going to make impossible proposals to the other side. And there are so many possible variations and details, it really takes a long time to finally come to a proposal that everyone is more or less satisfied with.
This is why no deal should be presented until the parties have actually worked the details out and signed on the dotted line. Agreement contingent upon a public vote, altho not necessarily an election vote, depending on the financing. If people are going to get in an uproar over every little detail of every counter proposal, of which their could be scores, this will be utterly hopeless.
I had already pretty much decided that if I were voting, I would regretfully have to vote no at this point, because no agreement could be arrived at and it was clear they were not even close. If they could take Q and R off the ballot, I'm sure they would.
As to the design issue, as someone here pointed out, why should MSE cede total control, be tied to a 30 year lease and lease payments, if the city went ahead and designed/built an arena that was totally inadequate to give them sufficient revenue to go anywhere, but into bankruptcy? Personally, I think the city/county was trying to cram the downtown location down the Maloofs' throats, whether it made financial sense for MSE or not.
EDIT: Mark Kriedler on the Rise Guys Thursday AM, said he felt the fact that MSE was still making strong demands and negotiating hard, was an indicator that they feel they still have time to negotiate for the best deal. An indicator that they don't feel they have to leave Arco right NOW. Maybe we should take it with a bit of that optimism too. That there is still time to negotiate, still time to work something better out for everyone.
Do I like what the Maloofs want? No. Do I think they were negotiating to get the best deal they possibly could? Yes. What makes anyone think the City was going to agree to any of this? My impression from Roger Dickinson's comments was that the Maloofs counter proposal was dead on arrival, altho he didn't straight out say that.
Negotiations at this level of financial dealing is brutal. No one looks good during the process. Both sides are going to make impossible proposals to the other side. And there are so many possible variations and details, it really takes a long time to finally come to a proposal that everyone is more or less satisfied with.
This is why no deal should be presented until the parties have actually worked the details out and signed on the dotted line. Agreement contingent upon a public vote, altho not necessarily an election vote, depending on the financing. If people are going to get in an uproar over every little detail of every counter proposal, of which their could be scores, this will be utterly hopeless.
I had already pretty much decided that if I were voting, I would regretfully have to vote no at this point, because no agreement could be arrived at and it was clear they were not even close. If they could take Q and R off the ballot, I'm sure they would.
As to the design issue, as someone here pointed out, why should MSE cede total control, be tied to a 30 year lease and lease payments, if the city went ahead and designed/built an arena that was totally inadequate to give them sufficient revenue to go anywhere, but into bankruptcy? Personally, I think the city/county was trying to cram the downtown location down the Maloofs' throats, whether it made financial sense for MSE or not.
EDIT: Mark Kriedler on the Rise Guys Thursday AM, said he felt the fact that MSE was still making strong demands and negotiating hard, was an indicator that they feel they still have time to negotiate for the best deal. An indicator that they don't feel they have to leave Arco right NOW. Maybe we should take it with a bit of that optimism too. That there is still time to negotiate, still time to work something better out for everyone.
Last edited:
Thanks Waxer. I think the short time frame really doomed this one from the start. This was the very first time that MSE and the city or county actually sat down together to negotiate. And it was way too short a timeframe to negotiate all the details of a major deal like this.
We are hardly the first city to try a deal and fail. And the examples show there can be many failures before success.
It was nice to hope that it could've happened and I'm disappointed. Two things that give me hope:
They have at least entered into a negotiation process and a lot was learned. Its not effort down the drain, because at least they aren't starting at square one anymore.
Second, I really believe the Maloofs want to stay and think there is still time.
We are hardly the first city to try a deal and fail. And the examples show there can be many failures before success.
It was nice to hope that it could've happened and I'm disappointed. Two things that give me hope:
They have at least entered into a negotiation process and a lot was learned. Its not effort down the drain, because at least they aren't starting at square one anymore.
Second, I really believe the Maloofs want to stay and think there is still time.
I think and again agree... if we look at past arena deals in cities it went pretty much the same way for any sport... Example look at the Giants, they were all but moved to Tampa before a last second deal kept them here.
Not saying its the exact same but I do and think others should understand this is not that easy of a process.
Not saying its the exact same but I do and think others should understand this is not that easy of a process.
Thank whatever supreme deity you believe in, if any, for the few people like Mark Kreidler who will put the truth out there without an agenda.
The Maloofs have, all along, said they don't want to leave. They've actively contributed to the Sacramento community, both publicly and behind the scenes. From what I've heard from multiple sources they are excellent employers to work for.
The ONLY reason some people have grown to distrust them is because of R.E. Graswich and his ilk, who have done everything they could to destroy the Maloofs by innuendo, rumor and - if the retraction in the Bee last week is to be believed - unsubstantiated and likely FALSE information.
I may not agree with how they do some things, and I may hate the decisions that come from some of their people - Gold Standard ring any bells? - BUT I cannot in good conscience complain about the types of owners the Maloofs are and have been for my beloved Kings. We're lucky to have them.
I firmly believe they are going to continue to work with the city/county and whomever else is necessary to get a new arena built for Sacramento - and for the Kings/Monarchs.
The Maloofs have, all along, said they don't want to leave. They've actively contributed to the Sacramento community, both publicly and behind the scenes. From what I've heard from multiple sources they are excellent employers to work for.
The ONLY reason some people have grown to distrust them is because of R.E. Graswich and his ilk, who have done everything they could to destroy the Maloofs by innuendo, rumor and - if the retraction in the Bee last week is to be believed - unsubstantiated and likely FALSE information.
I may not agree with how they do some things, and I may hate the decisions that come from some of their people - Gold Standard ring any bells? - BUT I cannot in good conscience complain about the types of owners the Maloofs are and have been for my beloved Kings. We're lucky to have them.
I firmly believe they are going to continue to work with the city/county and whomever else is necessary to get a new arena built for Sacramento - and for the Kings/Monarchs.
Its easy to look like you lose money
You don't have to believe the Maloofs on the losses. MSE has opened their financial books to the Bee at least twice since they became the owners of the Kings and the Bee has confirmed the losses.[/quote]
Just because the Bee confimed the losses doesnt really mean a thing. The bottom line is revenue. I can show ANY business is losing money legally. All I have to do is make donations, reinvest in my company as I determine, take a huge salary, ( it may be deserved, it may not - what do the Maloofs actually do?) and countless other legal but unnecessary expenditures, The simple question is do the Maloofs take a salary and given what they do, is it reasonable? My bet is that they do draw a salary ( for what?) and that it is substantial. If they are then claiming to be losing money, that statement is ridiculous. A business owner who wants people to know that their business is a sucess would never have their company in the red. Its bad for business. However in this situation, its good for business as they can play the "we lose money on this venture" year after year. I dont believe it. Anyone who does really doesnt know anything about business.
The Maloofs should invest a substantial amount in THEIR business. They should pay a substantial part of tany new arena. Their contribution to this has been laughable. If they had came out and said that they will put 150 million, even 100 million into the arena, they would have had many more supporters.. including me.
Someone asked why should they. ITS THEIR BUSINESS THEY ARE ASKING US TO SUPPORT!
You don't have to believe the Maloofs on the losses. MSE has opened their financial books to the Bee at least twice since they became the owners of the Kings and the Bee has confirmed the losses.[/quote]
Just because the Bee confimed the losses doesnt really mean a thing. The bottom line is revenue. I can show ANY business is losing money legally. All I have to do is make donations, reinvest in my company as I determine, take a huge salary, ( it may be deserved, it may not - what do the Maloofs actually do?) and countless other legal but unnecessary expenditures, The simple question is do the Maloofs take a salary and given what they do, is it reasonable? My bet is that they do draw a salary ( for what?) and that it is substantial. If they are then claiming to be losing money, that statement is ridiculous. A business owner who wants people to know that their business is a sucess would never have their company in the red. Its bad for business. However in this situation, its good for business as they can play the "we lose money on this venture" year after year. I dont believe it. Anyone who does really doesnt know anything about business.
The Maloofs should invest a substantial amount in THEIR business. They should pay a substantial part of tany new arena. Their contribution to this has been laughable. If they had came out and said that they will put 150 million, even 100 million into the arena, they would have had many more supporters.. including me.
Someone asked why should they. ITS THEIR BUSINESS THEY ARE ASKING US TO SUPPORT!
voteno, it is not okay to attack people who disagree with you. I don't know where you get your information about business operations, but how do you know that anything you are surmising is true? And, how do you know that the Maloofs conduct their business in the manner suggested by you?
Just because you have some kind of grudge against successfull businessmen, does not give you the right to come here and throw out barbs at our members. To say that the people here know nothing about the way business operates is pure stupidity and shortsightedness.
I don't comment in the forum very often, but I will not stand by and watch a newbie show up here and spew crap about our very intelligent, learned members. Cut it out!!!!!
Just because you have some kind of grudge against successfull businessmen, does not give you the right to come here and throw out barbs at our members. To say that the people here know nothing about the way business operates is pure stupidity and shortsightedness.
I don't comment in the forum very often, but I will not stand by and watch a newbie show up here and spew crap about our very intelligent, learned members. Cut it out!!!!!
WOW! Ugly thread.
The level of misconception is boggling to me that exists around these simple concepts of negotiations and businesses making $$. Kennadog and VF you are more patient than I!
IMO the Maloofs will have to make at least a couple of legitimate attempts to keep the Kings in Sac before Stearn lets them leave. I feel that they are simply protecting their interests rather than that they want to leave.
The level of misconception is boggling to me that exists around these simple concepts of negotiations and businesses making $$. Kennadog and VF you are more patient than I!
IMO the Maloofs will have to make at least a couple of legitimate attempts to keep the Kings in Sac before Stearn lets them leave. I feel that they are simply protecting their interests rather than that they want to leave.
JB Kings: Yes I was suggesting that the Kings put up the rest or find a funding source for the rest. If they are such successful businessmen they should be able to do that. I understand the problems with taxing players salaries. However it seems that arenas keep getting more fancy and of course more expensive. What would be wrng with the league placing a tax to be paid either by the owners or the players according to their salaries. This money could be used to help fund new arens, ie new business locations just like any other business. In my opinion the vast majority of people in sacand across the nation would think this was a reasonable proposal. Add to this a surcharge for tickets and a modest cinty contribution for new arenas and you have a revenue source for new arenas..
SDo obviously you have attended and vociferously opposed the public meetings where it was approved to give major public subsidies to Hyatt, Sheraton and Embassy Suites downtown. And you are preparing to let it be known to the powers to be, not to provide any public subsidy to Westfield's downtown project or the the dveloper of the new twin tower hotel/condos.
Cities, counties, states everywhere, all the time provide public funds to private businesses. Why pick out the Maloofs for such criticism. I'd be willing to bet that the $11 million in charitable contributions the Maloofs have provided the community are more than any of those businesses, not to mention the worldwide name recognition having the Kings has brought Sacramento. (You'd be hard pressed to buy that kind of advertising success.)
Cities, counties, states everywhere, all the time provide public funds to private businesses. Why pick out the Maloofs for such criticism. I'd be willing to bet that the $11 million in charitable contributions the Maloofs have provided the community are more than any of those businesses, not to mention the worldwide name recognition having the Kings has brought Sacramento. (You'd be hard pressed to buy that kind of advertising success.)
We should give the Maloofs credit just on that. I bet David Stern was not crazy about J&G doing that.
From this post its obvious that you dont know business very well.
First, you can't make up numbers to look profitable or unprofitable. That type of logic is the reason why Enron, MCI, Tyco and other companies who used "creative accounting" are bankrupt and their executives are in jail. Two things prevent that: audits and the Internal Revenue Service. Along with the annual audit that MSE performs, the NBA probably exercises annual audits on all its teams to maintain integrity.
Second, you can increase expenses all you want to make it look like you're "losing" money, but there's this thing that the IRS made up called the Alternative Minimum Tax. The AMT was designed to prevent high income earners from making too many deductions in an attempt to decrease tax obligation. So, if you generate a certain amount of revenue, you will pay a certain level of tax no matter how many deductions you claim.
Third, why would the Maloofs buy a team & not draw a salary? Joe & Gavin do more than just sit courtside. They're an active part in running the operations of the business. They make the executive decisions. They have meetings with the staff. They help draw sponsors. They sign the paychecks. Only "passive" (another IRS term) investors dont draw salary.
Fourth, businesses run in the red all the time. 95% of all small businesses lose money in the first 3 years. Operating in the red doesn't means your business will fail. The airlines have been operating in the red for the past 20 years, but they're still in the air.
From this post its obvious that you dont know business very well.
First, you can't make up numbers to look profitable or unprofitable. That type of logic is the reason why Enron, MCI, Tyco and other companies who used "creative accounting" are bankrupt and their executives are in jail. Two things prevent that: audits and the Internal Revenue Service. Along with the annual audit that MSE performs, the NBA probably exercises annual audits on all its teams to maintain integrity.
Second, you can increase expenses all you want to make it look like you're "losing" money, but there's this thing that the IRS made up called the Alternative Minimum Tax. The AMT was designed to prevent high income earners from making too many deductions in an attempt to decrease tax obligation. So, if you generate a certain amount of revenue, you will pay a certain level of tax no matter how many deductions you claim.
Third, why would the Maloofs buy a team & not draw a salary? Joe & Gavin do more than just sit courtside. They're an active part in running the operations of the business. They make the executive decisions. They have meetings with the staff. They help draw sponsors. They sign the paychecks. Only "passive" (another IRS term) investors dont draw salary.
Fourth, businesses run in the red all the time. 95% of all small businesses lose money in the first 3 years. Operating in the red doesn't means your business will fail. The airlines have been operating in the red for the past 20 years, but they're still in the air.
This was a great post LadyJay. Very well articulated without being overly condesending. Nicely done.
To address a point that I see often.... the whole "why should we invest in MSE's business by providing an arena for them." This is a rediculous argument. Most business don't build and own their own arena. Like most other businesses, MSE will pay "rent" for their space. The amount of this "rent" is what is on the negotiating table. The county will fund the arena and MSE will be the major tennant. I sure would rather have that major tennant paying monthly rent than haveing a "space available" sign hanging from the rafters of "ARCO 2" where the World Champions Sign should go.
To address a point that I see often.... the whole "why should we invest in MSE's business by providing an arena for them." This is a rediculous argument. Most business don't build and own their own arena. Like most other businesses, MSE will pay "rent" for their space. The amount of this "rent" is what is on the negotiating table. The county will fund the arena and MSE will be the major tennant. I sure would rather have that major tennant paying monthly rent than haveing a "space available" sign hanging from the rafters of "ARCO 2" where the World Champions Sign should go.
Well, its too late tonight to try and tell eveybody details here. However, Harvey Bennett (?) was interviewd by Mike Lamb before the game tonight. That was the guy that Stern sent to oversee the negotiations between the city/county and the Maloofs.
He and Stern are exceptionally angry over the bashing of the Maloofs and the total misrepresentation of what was negotiated.
The bottom line...the Maloofs stuck 100% by the agreement that was made. The developer was willing to negotiate. It was the City/county that reneged on promises that were made in the negotiations.
The NBA talked to the developer about 3 weeks ago to find out what the problem was and were shocked to find out the city/county did not perform as promised.
Not only did the NBA and everybody else know this for at least 3 weeks, but a reporter has had the explanation in their lap for the last 3 days and has yet to publish the story.
In other words, you can debate the deal and the financing, but the Maloofs were totally smeared locally and in no way deserved it. They qwere 100% honest about the deal and it has benn the city/county and our wonderful local media who have been less than truthful.
Let me tell you, Bennett was pi**ed at how unfairly the Mallofs have been portrayed in this deal.
And I'm extremely angry that our local media has had this story for 3 days and has been sitting on it. Probably trying to find a way to not look like completely crappy reporters.
All I know, is the Bee and some other media folk owe the Maloofs a huge apology. If the paper doesn't report this info tomorrow, they will just compound the diservice they have done. Hopefully thety will have the interview up on KHTK.
He and Stern are exceptionally angry over the bashing of the Maloofs and the total misrepresentation of what was negotiated.
The bottom line...the Maloofs stuck 100% by the agreement that was made. The developer was willing to negotiate. It was the City/county that reneged on promises that were made in the negotiations.
The NBA talked to the developer about 3 weeks ago to find out what the problem was and were shocked to find out the city/county did not perform as promised.
Not only did the NBA and everybody else know this for at least 3 weeks, but a reporter has had the explanation in their lap for the last 3 days and has yet to publish the story.
In other words, you can debate the deal and the financing, but the Maloofs were totally smeared locally and in no way deserved it. They qwere 100% honest about the deal and it has benn the city/county and our wonderful local media who have been less than truthful.
Let me tell you, Bennett was pi**ed at how unfairly the Mallofs have been portrayed in this deal.
And I'm extremely angry that our local media has had this story for 3 days and has been sitting on it. Probably trying to find a way to not look like completely crappy reporters.
All I know, is the Bee and some other media folk owe the Maloofs a huge apology. If the paper doesn't report this info tomorrow, they will just compound the diservice they have done. Hopefully thety will have the interview up on KHTK.
Last edited:
I listened to that interview. Not only do I think the railyard arena is completely dead, I think the railyard development won't happen for maybe another decade. The deal between the developer and the city is that the city is supposed to initially pay for 500 million in infrastructure for the entire railyards. The city has no idea how they are going to come up with these funds. This has nothing to do with the Maloofs or the arena. This would lead one to think that maybe they were planning on grabbing more of the sales tax than we were led to believe.