News from the NBA BOG meeting - April 2012

The Maloofs are going broke. Its just a matter of time. The only thing that can save them is moving to Anaheim. Why the hell do you think they want to move there? I'm not giving up on my team and the city, just to appease your anger over the Maloofs. This is not now, and never has been about the Maloofs for me. Its about the team, which was here before the Maloofs. I'd be content with filling the arena, but having everyone in the arena boo the Maloofs everytime they showed their face there. I'd boo them the entire game without stopping. But I'm not going to give the league a reason to let them move.
So what, do you want the city to continue to deal with the Maloofs who may not be financially solvent, backpedal on their promises, and won't deal with you faithfully to show the NBA you are committed? In the meantime, the Maloofs continue to make outrageous demands and run to the BoG when they don't get what they want.
 
So regarding the emails that Mayor Johnson said he never got.
Who's lying? David Stern says they gave them to the city. Mayor Johnson says he never got them. The Maloofs actually produced them at the meeting. Who the heck is lying? Did the NBA screw us? Did the city misplace them and now he's lying?
It's not hard to fake an email.
 
So whats your suggestion? Give up!!!! Thanks but no thanks. This has nothing to do with having my head in the sand. Its about taking all the positives we have on our side and using them to our advantage. You want to give up, fine. Just stay out of my foxhole.
So your solution is to let them bleed out by selling out games and putting money into their pockets? Sounds effective.
 

bajaden

Hall of Famer
So what, do you want the city to continue to deal with the Maloofs who may not be financially solvent, backpedal on their promises, and won't deal with you faithfully to show the NBA you are committed? In the meantime, the Maloofs continue to make outrageous demands and run to the BoG when they don't get what they want.
Apparently your incapable of understanding what I'm saying, so goodbye!
 
One second:
I must not fear.
Fear is the mind-killer.
Fear is the little-death that brings total obliteration.
I will face my fear.
I will permit it to pass over me and through me.
And when it has gone past I will turn the inner eye to see its path.
Where the fear has gone there will be nothing.
Only I will remain.


Alright...

HERE WE STAY!!!!
Love the Dune reference... do you have a Bene Geserit in the family who could the Voice on the Maloofs?
 
They don't stay! The team does. The league forced Shin out and they can force out the Maloofs under the right circumstances.
That's my point. How does the team remain if there isn't a new arena, and PBP falls apart in 3-4 yrs? Maloofs would have to sell soon in order to get a new arena under way since PBP doesn't have much life left.
 
So regarding the emails that Mayor Johnson said he never got.
Who's lying? David Stern says they gave them to the city. Mayor Johnson says he never got them. The Maloofs actually produced them at the meeting. Who the heck is lying? Did the NBA screw us? Did the city misplace them and now he's lying?
From what I understood from Stern's conference was that all the suggestions that Maloofs emailed were actually brought up during the negotiations. They were most likely brought up verbally in face to face negotiations and the city either listened to them or turned them down.
 
So regarding the emails that Mayor Johnson said he never got.
Who's lying? David Stern says they gave them to the city. Mayor Johnson says he never got them. The Maloofs actually produced them at the meeting. Who the heck is lying? Did the NBA screw us? Did the city misplace them and now he's lying?
Thats the thing.

The Maloofs don't seem to be lying here regarding their complaints about unresolved issues prior to the 3/6/12 vote.

The powerpoint presentation had some solid notes about the communication. I don't think there is a way that they would present fake evidence to the NBA about what the NBA did or did not do in front of Stern and the BoGs.

Also, George did say there was a lot to be ironed out since early on. Stern also stated on an interview with Napear that he knows there is still a lot to be worked out including predevelopment cost. I believe that was on 3/8/12.

So the Maloofs aren't really just making things up.
 
While they continually invest minimally in the team to turn a profit? Even if their profit margin is small, they still have an NBA team and all the glory associated with it. I'm not ant-arena. I just don't have my head in the sand regarding scenarios (bleeding out owners) that have never come to fruition nor proven to be effective.
you've got the economics right, but you're neglecting the politics. the nba does not want to further alienate their smaller market franchises by allowing ownership groups to continually force their way out of town to pursue bigger markets. its why david stern refused to sell the hornets to owners who would not commit to keeping the team in new orleans. there is exactly one way out for the maloofs: anaheim. that's it. they can temporarily function with their minimal profit margin in sacramento, but, one way or the other, the kings need a new arena to play in very soon, in either sacramento or in some other city. this fact hasn't changed. sac had an nba-approved arena deal on the table. the maloofs passed, after agreeing with a handshake, and after it was made clear that the nba was going to loan the maloofs every dollar of their share of the arena costs. that doesn't look good, no matter how impressive the maloofs powerpoint presentation may have been (eric musselman, anyone?)...

so, where else are the maloofs gonna go? i think the league would regrettably approve of a move to a place like kansas city, because its been an nba city, its got a nice new arena, and there's a viable market there. but its not gonna be enough to put the maloofs in the financial position they desire. it'd make more sense to sell now, otherwise they would have already attempted to get out to kansas city. the nba would probably also approve of a move to seattle, but its not like seattle has made even the tiniest fraction of progress on on a new arena, compared to what the city of sacramento accomplished in constructing its "handshake deal." so, where else is there? there's anaheim, but the relocation committee shot that down after kevin johnson secured $10 million dollars in local business sponsorship. that's it. $10 million, and solidarity in the form of billionaire ron burkle. now he's got an nba-approved deal that the maloofs have rejected on the table, and ron burkle is undoubtedly still #1 on kj's speed dial. who's got the leverage? its certainly not the maloofs, and how is a relocation committee going to approve of a move to anaheim now when they didn't do so before? the nba actually would force the maloofs out, a la george shinn, long before they approved of a move to anaheim...

giving up now is like folding with four-of-a-kind. you better believe the maloofs are holding a straight-flush if you do that, and we already know the maloofs ain't got ****...
 

gunks

Hall of Famer
you've got the economics right, but you're neglecting the politics. the nba does not want to further alienate their smaller market franchises by allowing ownership groups to continually force their way out of town to pursue bigger markets. its why david stern refused to sell the hornets to owners who would not commit to keeping the team in new orleans. there is exactly one way out for the maloofs: anaheim. that's it. they can temporarily function with their minimal profit margin in sacramento, but, one way or the other, the kings need a new arena to play in very soon, in either sacramento or in some other city. this fact hasn't changed. sac had an nba-approved arena deal on the table. the maloofs passed, after agreeing with a handshake, and after it was made clear that the nba was going to loan the maloofs every dollar of their share of the arena costs. that doesn't look good, no matter how impressive the maloofs powerpoint presentation may have been (eric musselman, anyone?)...

so, where else are the maloofs gonna go? i think the league would regrettably approve of a move to a place like kansas city, because its been an nba city, its got a nice new arena, and there's a viable market there. but its not gonna be enough to put the maloofs in the financial position they desire. it'd make more sense to sell now, otherwise they would have already attempted to get out to kansas city. the nba would probably also approve of a move to seattle, but its not like seattle has made even the tiniest fraction of progress on on a new arena, compared to what the city of sacramento accomplished in constructing its "handshake deal." so, where else is there? there's anaheim, but the relocation committee shot that down after kevin johnson secured $10 million dollars in local business sponsorship. that's it. $10 million, and solidarity in the form of billionaire ron burkle. now he's got an nba-approved deal that the maloofs have rejected on the table, and ron burkle is undoubtedly still #1 on kj's speed dial. who's got the leverage? its certainly not the maloofs, and how is a relocation committee going to approve of a move to anaheim now when they didn't do so before? the nba actually would force the maloofs out, a la george shinn, long before they approved of a move to anaheim...

giving up now is like folding with four-of-a-kind. you better believe the maloofs are holding a straight-flush if you do that, and we already know the maloofs ain't got ****...
This is how I feel too.

The Magoofs most recent Magoofery reeks of desperation. Stern seemed pissed as **** during that press conference, KJ isnt going to fold. Its pretty obvious that the Magoofs are broke and unfit to be NBA owners.

We're probably in for another rough 6-12 months, but I think we come out of this with Burkle. Anahiem just isnt going to happen for those ****s.
 
If it were me, i wouldn't be able to live with myself knowing what i did to a fanbase who has loved and supported a team like no other. I would sell or keep the team where it was until there was no support even if i was penniless. At least i would be able to sleep at night.
 
What kind of basis for anti-trust litigation can there be when they AGREED TO THE TERM SHEET? The "we changed our minds" approach might cause more trouble for the Maloofs than anyone else if they do intend to seek litigation.
 
you've got the economics right, but you're neglecting the politics. the nba does not want to further alienate their smaller market franchises by allowing ownership groups to continually force their way out of town to pursue bigger markets. its why david stern refused to sell the hornets to owners who would not commit to keeping the team in new orleans. there is exactly one way out for the maloofs: anaheim. that's it. they can temporarily function with their minimal profit margin in sacramento, but, one way or the other, the kings need a new arena to play in very soon, in either sacramento or in some other city. this fact hasn't changed. sac had an nba-approved arena deal on the table. the maloofs passed, after agreeing with a handshake, and after it was made clear that the nba was going to loan the maloofs every dollar of their share of the arena costs. that doesn't look good, no matter how impressive the maloofs powerpoint presentation may have been (eric musselman, anyone?)...

so, where else are the maloofs gonna go? i think the league would regrettably approve of a move to a place like kansas city, because its been an nba city, its got a nice new arena, and there's a viable market there. but its not gonna be enough to put the maloofs in the financial position they desire. it'd make more sense to sell now, otherwise they would have already attempted to get out to kansas city. the nba would probably also approve of a move to seattle, but its not like seattle has made even the tiniest fraction of progress on on a new arena, compared to what the city of sacramento accomplished in constructing its "handshake deal." so, where else is there? there's anaheim, but the relocation committee shot that down after kevin johnson secured $10 million dollars in local business sponsorship. that's it. $10 million, and solidarity in the form of billionaire ron burkle. now he's got an nba-approved deal that the maloofs have rejected on the table, and ron burkle is undoubtedly still #1 on kj's speed dial. who's got the leverage? its certainly not the maloofs, and how is a relocation committee going to approve of a move to anaheim now when they didn't do so before? the nba actually would force the maloofs out, a la george shinn, long before they approved of a move to anaheim...

giving up now is like folding with four-of-a-kind. you better believe the maloofs are holding a straight-flush if you do that, and we already know the maloofs ain't got ****...
I'm just confused about which side the BoG is on considering they allowed the Maloofs to back out of the deal. I would intimate that the Maloofs were given permission to re-negotiate the deal. He Maloofs can't be trusted. Where does the city go from here?
 
Thats the thing.

The Maloofs don't seem to be lying here regarding their complaints about unresolved issues prior to the 3/6/12 vote.

The powerpoint presentation had some solid notes about the communication. I don't think there is a way that they would present fake evidence to the NBA about what the NBA did or did not do in front of Stern and the BoGs.

Also, George did say there was a lot to be ironed out since early on. Stern also stated on an interview with Napear that he knows there is still a lot to be worked out including predevelopment cost. I believe that was on 3/8/12.

So the Maloofs aren't really just making things up.
What the maloofs did not answer at their press conference was why did they agree to the deal if they considered it to be so bad. The mayor said the maloofs "explicitly" agreed to the deal. This whole thing doesn't make any sense. Then you have George calling the mayor a liar and Stern saying the city did "everything they were asked to do". Channel 13 even said that in Orlando the comish went as far as to say that "this was a done deal."
 
kind of relevant question: could the Maloofs just sell to Samueli, if they were forced to sell? as a kind of last and lasting "**** you!" to Sacramento and the rest of us?
 
I'm just confused about which side the BoG is on considering they allowed the Maloofs to back out of the deal. I would intimate that the Maloofs were given permission to re-negotiate the deal. He Maloofs can't be trusted. Where does the city go from here?
the board of governors acknowledged the maloofs' right to back out of a handshake deal. that does not mean they were happy about it, nor does it mean they are on the maloofs side. sacramento still has all the leverage. my question is this: why would the board of governors approve a move to anaheim, which is the only financially viable option left for the maloofs? would the BoG do it just to shut everybody up and move on? i'm not sure that's the case. david stern is very concerned about his legacy as he winds down in his tenure as commissioner. after watching the sonics leave for oklahoma city, and fighting so hard for the hornets to remain in new orleans, he's just gonna let the kings up and leave for anaheim, a market in earshot of two other nba franchises? what's he gonna say? "well, one outta three ain't bad"? david stern may have acted like pontius pilate at the board of governor's meeting, but his tone struck me as seething below the surface at the maloofs' actions. as this continues to play out, i expect his involvement will increase, and if the maloofs cannot justify their actions beyond dire financial need, i expect stern will eventually exercise his muscle as commish rather than approve of a move that's neither good for the nba or the city of sacramento...
 
Boycott one game - opening night next year. Break a record for lowest attendance in an NBA game. Make the statement. Get the press. Then support the team as usual. That's the way to embarrass the Maloofs and make a statement to the NBA but not give the relocation committee reason to believe the region does not support the team
 
kind of relevant question: could the Maloofs just sell to Samueli, if they were forced to sell? as a kind of last and lasting "**** you!" to Sacramento and the rest of us?
Sure but Samueli would be the owner of the Sacramento Kings - then trying to get 16 votes of the owners to move.
 
Anyone up for another press conference?

David Bienick ‏ @kcrabienick

News conference with city manager John Shirey begins at city hall. Council members Cohn, R. Fong also present.

Shirey: "We're profoundly disappointed" that the arena deal is not going forward.

Shirey: Says arena deal collapse will be a setback for downtown economic development.

Shirey: "We got the job, so what we delivered was a proposal that we thought was fair to all the parties."

Shirey says arena planning has come to a stop. #nbakings #herewestay

Shirey not sure where city goes from here.

Steve Cohn says work on intermodal and downtown railyards can proceed forward without delay.

Shirey says city only dealth with NBA, not Maloofs in talks. "We had addressed every issue."

Shirey says "somewhat encouraged" that Maloofs "are not calling for the moving vans."

Cohn calls renovating Power Balance Pavilion a "red herring."

Cohn and Shirey says city cannot call in the Maloofs' outstanding loan.

Cohn: "I find it a little ironic that the Maloofs', given their financial situation, are concerned about ours."

Cohn says he does not find the Maloofs' credible at this point.

Shirey says it's not the city's role to search for new owners, but Cohn says he would like to see new owners.
 
Last edited:

Kingster

Hall of Famer
I agree with Baja. We wait it out. We let the Maloofs twist in the wind. They have nowhere to go. The NBA isn't going to allow them to move. So, they continue being a weak injured animal until they finally expire and sell. In the meantime, however, we're going to have to live with the consequences - no spending on free agents and the trading of younger players so they don't have to give up the $ for the big contracts. We will continue to be the lowest payroll in the league. Until they finally do give up.
 
Boycott one game - opening night next year. Break a record for lowest attendance in an NBA game. Make the statement. Get the press. Then support the team as usual. That's the way to embarrass the Maloofs and make a statement to the NBA but not give the relocation committee reason to believe the region does not support the team
+1.
 

Bricklayer

Don't Make Me Use The Bat
Sure but Samueli would be the owner of the Sacramento Kings - then trying to get 16 votes of the owners to move.
I'm pretty sure the NBA clause giving them the right to approve any new owners -- was why the whole backdoor attempt by Samueli to get the right to take control of the Kings when the Maloofs bankrupted went over like a ton of bricks.