Natomas could see renewed interest as option for Kings arena

[kennadog]

I think with the pressure of losing their interest in the Palms last year, they really were wanting that loan from Donald Sterling. They no longer have that financial pressure anymore, so they might be willing to wait one more season.

If the Maloofs financial situation is really bad now, I'd really like to see the NBA pressure them to sell the team or at least a large interest in it, but to keep it in Sacramento.

 

[Larry David]

And here we are again - guessing what the Maloofs might want to do and where 29 owners will let them move a team. What a mess.

To me, there are two locations for the Kings. Here and not here. If they aren't here, I could care less if they are in Anaheim or Guam.

We've got about 7 weeks. If the city doesn't vote to lease the parking and put that money to an arena by 3-1-11 and show the NBA a plan where the numbers work (even if there is still some work to close the deal) the team is gone - again.

 

[Larry David]

I think with the pressure of losing their interest in the Palms last year, they really were wanting that loan from Donald Sterling. They no longer have that financial pressure anymore, so they might be willing to wait one more season.

If the Maloofs financial situation is really bad now, I'd really like to see the NBA pressure them to sell the team or at least a large interest in it, but to keep it in Sacramento.

This makes no sense. If we get to the point where, after 10 years of failed plans, and the city of Sacramento failed to use its largest / only asset to get a deal done why would the Maloofs stay? To see the city do what? Why would 16 owners say they couldn't move - at least somewhere. Why would 16 owners force a buyer to agree to stay in a crap arena that Sacramento is never going to replace?

After strike 9,999, we got one year to get an arena funded. Seven weeks away from that deadline, it comes down to how much they can lease the parking for / how many conditions they put on the lease (more "keep the prices and employees" = less $) / and closing the deal.

It still might happen. But if we fail, we aren't getting another year.

It's put up or shut up time.

 

[kennadog]

And here we are again - guessing what the Maloofs might want to do and where 29 owners will let them move a team. What a mess.

To me, there are two locations for the Kings. Here and not here. If they aren't here, I could care less if they are in Anaheim or Guam.

We've got about 7 weeks. If the city doesn't vote to lease the parking and put that money to an arena by 3-1-11 and show the NBA a plan where the numbers work (even if there is still some work to close the deal) the team is gone - again.

They won't even have bids in to accept by that date. The Maloofs have said they are "flexible" about that March 2012 deadline. I would guess it will depend on how viable a plan they have to present and how much funding they can actually get committed by that date.

Ticket sales are definitely up and they did get that extra $10+ million in business sponsorships for the season, although I would guess the actual amount was adjusted for the lock-out, but so were the expenses. I'm thinking that Sacramento doesn't look so bad anymore, if a viable plan can be presented.

 

[Larry David]

The Maloofs have said they are "flexible" about that March 2012 deadline.

Again, its not their deadline to move. And the Maloofs haven't been upfront with Kings fans about their money or what they were going to do for a while.

If Sacramento doesn't have the funding nailed down, the Maloofs options are: (1) wait another year and see if an arena falls out of the sky; or (2) try to move the team somewhere.

 

[Brac-o-matic]

They won't even have bids in to accept by that date. The Maloofs have said they are "flexible" about that March 2012 deadline. I would guess it will depend on how viable a plan they have to present and how much funding they can actually get committed by that date.

Ticket sales are definitely up and they did get that extra $10+ million in business sponsorships for the season, although I would guess the actual amount was adjusted for the lock-out, but so were the expenses. I'm thinking that Sacramento doesn't look so bad anymore, if a viable plan can be presented.

Yeah, it seems to me that in the past several months, there has been more forward movement for the arena than there has been, well, ever. If that forward momentum continues for another month and a half, even if it isn't finalized by 3-1-12, I can't imagine the Maloofs and the NBA would both agree to take the team from us. It seems like we needed to prove to Stern that we are for real this time about getting an arena, and aren't the mamby-pamby city who talks a good game, but doesn't have any sort of vision to get it done. We will see soon enough...but I am optimistic...

 

[Section 101]

Again, its not their deadline to move. And the Maloofs haven't been upfront with Kings fans about their money or what they were going to do for a while.

If Sacramento doesn't have the funding nailed down, the Maloofs options are: (1) wait another year and see if an arena falls out of the sky; or (2) try to move the team somewhere.

I think by flexible they mean waiting another year as long as things are progression and not stopped.

 

[Warhawk]

We also don't know exactly what the new revenue-sharing agreement is, do we? I'm wondering if that, combined with the recent influx if local sponsorships raised by KJ and the decent ticket sales so far (not to mention all the Jimmer merchandise they are selling) MSE is not in the financial mess (or at least not as deep) as before. The Anaheim loan situation did not seem like a good deal. I think they knew that but were reaching at anything they could grasp then. As long as things are moving forward, perhaps the outlook has changed somewhat now?

I don't know, just raising the question for those who might know more than I about all this.

 

[Larry David]

I think by flexible they mean waiting another year as long as things are progression and not stopped.

That's saying they are flexible on whether to apply. They appeared to claim and people are saying the March 1, 2011 deadline is flexible.

It might be if Sacramento votes to commit funds, but we don't know that. And it wasn't before last year. And last year, it was a firm deadline an extensions required a formal request and vote by the league.

The funding won't be done, but I think we get more time if; (1) we vote to put the parking money - contingent upon all of the other money showing up; and (2) we can show the NBA a plan where all of the other money shows up.

That way, if the parking falls appart or the other private money comes up short, it might still fail. But we've put our money in the pot with a 90% chance or better to close the deal in the next 3 months. If they do that, they stay.

However, if it's just "we have another good plan that's really close" and Sacramento hasn't formally committed any money - they can leave.

It's been 10 years and the city has never put their wallet on the table. Even if there is a small chance the deal falls appart and the city can pull it back, there has to be a vote to fund this thing before 3-1-12 or I wouldn't expect to have a team.

 

[JB_kings]

That's saying they are flexible on whether to apply. They appeared to claim and people are saying the March 1, 2011 deadline is flexible.

It might be if Sacramento votes to commit funds, but we don't know that. And it wasn't before last year. And last year, it was a firm deadline an extensions required a formal request and vote by the league.

The funding won't be done, but I think we get more time if; (1) we vote to put the parking money - contingent upon all of the other money showing up; and (2) we can show the NBA a plan where all of the other money shows up.

That way, if the parking falls appart or the other private money comes up short, it might still fail. But we've put our money in the pot with a 90% chance or better to close the deal in the next 3 months. If they do that, they stay.

However, if it's just "we have another good plan that's really close" and Sacramento hasn't formally committed any money - they can leave.

It's been 10 years and the city has never put their wallet on the table. Even if there is a small chance the deal falls appart and the city can pull it back, there has to be a vote to fund this thing before 3-1-12 or I wouldn't expect to have a team.

I'm sure there are a thousand different factors that could derail this thing. It's tough because us laymen have no idea what each party thinks is in it's best interest. The parking deal is the most obvious make or break right now. I wish they had went down this road much sooner than just recently. It was nice of them to spend so much time to make sure they got as many ideas as possible, but poking up against a deadline just makes all parties nervous.

Is there enough money coming from the best bid to get this going?
Can they satisfy enough of the council to get the votes needed to pass?
If this passes vote, does that mean the NBA and Kings are committed?

More questions than answers...

 

[kennadog]

I think by flexible they mean waiting another year as long as things are progression and not stopped.

That's what I gathered, too. And I agree with Warhawk, that I think this year is a whole different scenario than last year. The city is astronomically farther along on a possible deal than at any previous time in the Kings existence.

That doesn't mean it will happen for sure and we can't give the NBA/Maloofs a sure-fired guarantee by March 1st.

I don't when they plan to actually request bids on the parking (an RFP). They will have to vote to approve the request for bids. Once they commit to sending out the a request for bids, that means they are committed to leasing out the parking. Otherwise, no vendor will bid, becasue it will cost them $1-2 million to put together a bid package. (Yes,you can spend that much and end up not being selected.)

My guess is, when they vote to send out the request for bids, they will commit the funding to the arena at the same time, hopefully, or we're really screwed. They are not likely to get actual bids and go through the selection process for several months yet.

Remember the city is negotiating with the Maloofs/NBA right now on their contribution. We should know that deal, before the deadline. We should also have commitments from other parties by then. That's in negotiations right now. To me the real question is whether any other regional governments are going to step up to the plate before the deadline. That part isn't looking so good. Absolutley no peeop about that.

West Sacramento and Yolo County should, simply because they city of Sacramento helped with Raley's Field under a joint authorities entity that was formed for the public financing. Certainly I think at least Sacramento County should.

 

[PurpleHaze]

Almost back to square one? Make that back to nowheres-ville! Sacramento County Supervisor Serna among others getting VERY nervous as March 1 deadline approaches fast. Floating renovation of existing arena as STILL a possibility if unable to fund $387 million railyards project. It looks like it could be back to "thinking small" as once again sad Sac politics slides into usual abyss of dysfunction, delay, pessimism, desperation - an inability to make anything of major league proportions happen in this seemingly hopeless pit.
http://www.sacbee.com/2012/01/13/4184432/serna-floats-backup-option-for.html#storylink=omni_popular

 

[Brac-o-matic]

Almost back to square one? Make that back to nowheres-ville! Sacramento County Supervisor Serna among others getting VERY nervous as March 1 deadline approaches fast. Floating renovation of existing arena as STILL a possibility if unable to fund $387 million railyards project. It looks like it could be back to "thinking small" as once again sad Sac politics slides into usual abyss of dysfunction, delay, pessimism, desperation - an inability to make anything of major league proportions happen in this seemingly hopeless pit.
http://www.sacbee.com/2012/01/13/4184432/serna-floats-backup-option-for.html#storylink=omni_popular

Yay. Way to excite the CAVE people with a stupid, dated, pointless option that has no chance of keeping the Kings in town.

 

[kennadog]

Yay. Way to excite the CAVE people with a stupid, dated, pointless option that has no chance of keeping the Kings in town.

I can't believe I let myself read some of those stupid comments.

There's an agenda here folks. It's the developer who keeps pitching a remodel of the old arena. If approved that developer would make big bucks. I'm sure Serna is bringing this up more on behalf of the developer, than anything else. Neither arena site is within the county jurisdiction. He should be psuhing his fellow supervisors to commit real financial support to the new arena. That would help significantly more.

The City is having experts analyze all the financials and costs, which have been publicly presented, and so far it points to it being more expensive to remodel the old arena, instead of building a new one. It's a terrible idea. To make it accepatable you'd basically have to demolish the current arena, including the foundation. They foundation has been the basic problem with the current arena and trying to remodel it. So you add demolition to the building costs. Anything less than that is a waste of money, because it would only be a temporary solution, at best.

Ideally you'd locate the arena on the site differently, too. It is completely cut off from anything around it, including businesses, by acres of asphalt.

And where do events go, until the "remodeling" is done?

We're all nervous about March 1st, but this is a stupid idea. We have zero time for a Plan B, if March 1st is a rigid deadline.

 

[JB_kings]

Yeah ask Seattle how that remodel of Key Arena worked out keeping the Sonics.

 

[Mike0476]

Yeah ask Seattle how that remodel of Key Arena worked out keeping the Sonics.

CAVE people won't care if Kings stay or go. They'd rather remodel the arena to their own speficiations although chances are they will rarely attend any event.

That is why we have been voicing our theme of "Bigger Than Basketball" at City Hall with Fund Arena Now Sacramento (FANS).

The Kings are a piece of the puzzle but they are not the only piece. Take off the Kings tunnel vision and you will see it's also about keeping and creating new jobs, regional and local money being spent here, revitlization of our downtown, event can still be here for our quality of life, etc.

As far as the community being the reason or a big reason why the Kings stayed here, tell that to Seattle fans. They had far more support from their community and yet they still lost their team.

It all comes down to our political leadership and Seattle's lacked it (although I will admit they did spent a lot already on a new baseball and football stadiums).

We are lucky to have Mayor Kevin Johnson represent us, the people, when he went to New York City to meet with the NBA and got us another year. Imagine if we had Heather Fargo instead. The Kings would be gone.

 

[kennadog]

Actually in Seattle there were too many people who thought paying for a baseball stadium and football stadium was enough, already. Sacramaneto hasn't built any arenas or stadiums so far.

There was absolutely no political will to do an arena in Seattle. The city and citizens in general weren't just apathetic, they were openly hostile to Stern/NBA. That's what got Stern's ire up with them. They actually passed a temporary block on providing any taxpayer money to any sports facilities.

The poor Sonics fans just had the misfortune to be the last in line after the Seahawks and Mariners.

Sacramento has no similar, alternate facilites anywhere in a huge region. And it is about much more than basketball.

 

[pdxKingsFan]

It wasn't even Seattle, much as I love to bag on my neighbors to the North and taunt them about it It was Eastern Washington and other rural areas that outvoted the metro in a statewide measure to ban public funding.

 

[kupman]

Between Sandy Sheedy's questions and comments during city council meetings and now Serna's comments I am shaking my head in disbelief.

 

[kennadog]

Between Sandy Sheedy's questions and comments during city council meetings and now Serna's comments I am shaking my head in disbelief.

McCarty asked some eye-rolling questions, too.

 

[fansinceday1]

Sernas comments strike me as a politician who sees the writing on the wall and he's just trying to get a head start on the other councilmembers on his "it's not my fault" tour of sacramento. KJ has also released comments that have made me nervous. He knows we're out of time.

 

[Larry David]

It should be noted that, at the same time KJ and Serna were sending up some red flags, Marcos wrote two "the Maloofs are out of money and should move on" stories.

It could mean anything or nothing, but it seems to imply that the numbers are coming up short.

 

[Trueblood]

It should be noted that, at the same time KJ and Serna were sending up some red flags, Marcos wrote two "the Maloofs are out of money and should move on" stories.

It could mean anything or nothing, but it seems to imply that the numbers are coming up short.

When you say "move on", what was he implying? That they should relocate or did he mean they should sell the team to someone wealthy enough to privately invest in the arena with a stake in it's future profits?

 

[RookieOfTheDay]

When you say "move on", what was he implying? That they should relocate or did he mean they should sell the team to someone wealthy enough to privately invest in the arena with a stake in it's future profits?

I would assume it must be the latter. Moving on, as in relocating, would make no sense if they're broke, as they probably can't afford the relocation fees and even if they could they'd just be moving their inept franchise to another zip code where they would still be broke and still be one of the primary problems of the team.

 

[BMiller52]

It should be noted that, at the same time KJ and Serna were sending up some red flags, Marcos wrote two "the Maloofs are out of money and should move on" stories.

It could mean anything or nothing, but it seems to imply that the numbers are coming up short.

move on as in sell the team? because they probably can't afford a relocation fee.

 

[Hoovtrain]

http://blogs.sacbee.com/city-beat/2012/01/sf-giants-owner-to-sacramento-arena-worth-the-fight.html

 

[nebs]

http://blogs.sacbee.com/city-beat/2012/01/sf-giants-owner-to-sacramento-arena-worth-the-fight.html

Why do I torture myself by reading the comments? WHY?

 

[kennadog]

Why do I torture myself by reading the comments? WHY?

I'm better at not reading them, but I stupidly did this time. Masochism?

 

[Brac-o-matic]

Why do I torture myself by reading the comments? WHY?

Heh, it's just 5 or 6 angry and completely uneducated people who have an axe to grind with the world. No one takes then seriously except each other. Good for a laugh?