Ownership Changeup (Vivek and Arctos buy more shares)

upinsmoke said:
I remember reading an article where Vivek said if the minority owners aren't happy they can sell. I guess they took him up on his offer.
Click to expand...

Wouldn’t you?

with the news Las Vegas will get the Kings MSL spot hard to be a worse sports town than Sac. Between Pro and FBS college sports Sac could be one of the worst markets in the country.
 
Does anyone know how the ownership group is actually structured?

When you read articles like this, the media typically refers to anyone but Vivek as a minority owner, and sometimes throws out a percentage of the team that they own. I think I have also read that Vivek is not an actual majority owner i.e. he doesn't own 51% of the team but he owns more than anyone else, is the approved chairman by the NBA so he is kind of a de-facto majority owner.

At the time that the Maloofs sold their shares of the team, it was reported that they owned 65% of the team, and sold all 65% to an ownership group headed by Vivek which included Mastrov, Jacobs, Friedman, Jenkins, Miller, Nagle plus possibly more.

So Pre-sale of the team I imagine the ownership structure looked something like this (numbers and percentages of minority owners are just guesses to use as examples of the structure):

Maloofs- 65% -Actual majority owners
Minority owner 1 (Benvenuti?) 10%
Minority owner 2 (Kehriotis?) 10%
Minority owner 3 (Lucchetti?) 10%
Minority owner 4 (Play to Win group?) 5%

So immediately after the sale of the team, I would have assumed the structure would have changed to this:

Viveks group -65%- Actual majority owners
Minority owner 1 (Benvenuti?) 10%
Minority owner 2 (Kehriotis?) 10%
Minority owner 3 (Lucchetti?) 10%
Minority owner 4 (Play to Win group?) 5%

Then Viveks group would have been broken up into the many investors that have been reported, possibly something like this:

Vivek -51% of the group - 33.15% of entire team
Jacobs-13% of the group- 8.45% of entire team
Mastrov- 6.5% of the group- 4.55% of entire team
Friedman-6.5% of the group- 4.55% of entire team
Jenkins-6.5% of the group- 4.55% of entire team
Miller-6.5% of the group- 4.55% of entire team
Nagle- 4% of the group- 2.6% of entire team (plus percentage of the team he owns as part of Play to Win Group)
Shaq- 6% of the group - 3.9% of entire team

Obviously I have no idea how many minority owners there are or what they own and these are just examples to illustrate the structure.

If this is the case, then it would make sense that Vivek is actually the controlling partner while only owning 33% of the entire team. Basically if there was a vote among shareholders, Vivek having 51% control of the Vivek group would vote however he decided and could not be overridden, similar to how electoral votes work. Then the only other people with a vote would be Minority owners 1-4 in this example, but even put together they couldn't outvote Viveks group.

So basically in this scenario, everyone with a stake in the team could vote against Vivek, but he could still do what he wanted as the contolling partner.

Or is this not how it works? Are all these guys who are being reported as selling actual shareholders, not percentage owners of an entity (Viveks group in this example) that is the actual shareholder? In this case the only thing that makes Vivek in charge is the fact that he is the one approved by the NBA. If not for that all the other shareholders could theoretically override him in a vote.

Anyone out there have any idea?
 
I’m going off memory but I believe Vivek owned ~17% of the Kings before these transactions, but he was voted managing partner. I think he was the 2nd largest shareholder. NBA approved him as managing partner for what I assume is his ties to India. It’s really close to impossible to remove someone as managing partner of a team. Look what happened with Donald Sterling.
 
macadocious said:
I’m going off memory but I believe Vivek owned ~17% of the Kings before these transactions, but he was voted managing partner. I think he was the 2nd largest shareholder. NBA approved him as managing partner for what I assume is his ties to India. It’s really close to impossible to remove someone as managing partner of a team. Look what happened with Donald Sterling.
Click to expand...
I dont even believe he was forced out that whole thing was a dog and pony show.
 
the jazz were sold last year around this time, but to an owner certain to keep the franchise in utah.

i had missed that - but found a link to the article at the arctos website, which lists the five "partners, all white, the last one pictured is female.

https://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id...ding-millers-three-decade-run-majority-owners

what i am wondering is why vivek did not use his own money to buy them out (increasing his own percentage). perhaps he is cash-short but was smart enough to include a provision that he gets the first chance to buy the shares back rather than ceding complete control to arctos.

we should not discount the possibility that this is step one in an ownership transfer.
 
vladtheimpaler said:
the jazz were sold last year around this time, but to an owner certain to keep the franchise in utah.

i had missed that - but found a link to the article at the arctos website, which lists the five "partners, all white, the last one pictured is female.

https://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id...ding-millers-three-decade-run-majority-owners

what i am wondering is why vivek did not use his own money to buy them out (increasing his own percentage). perhaps he is cash-short but was smart enough to include a provision that he gets the first chance to buy the shares back rather than ceding complete control to arctos.

we should not discount the possibility that this is step one in an ownership transfer.
Click to expand...
i think it was reported that he bought some of the shares with the rest going to Arctos, who are passive investors (by virtue of them buying shares of multiple franchises they sort of have to be) so it does seem to be the best outcome for Vivek aside from just buying all the shares outright (which, considering the current valuation of an NBA franchise, would be pretty hard to do without him liquidating other assets)
 
kpm308 said:
Does anyone know how the ownership group is actually structured?

When you read articles like this, the media typically refers to anyone but Vivek as a minority owner, and sometimes throws out a percentage of the team that they own. I think I have also read that Vivek is not an actual majority owner i.e. he doesn't own 51% of the team but he owns more than anyone else, is the approved chairman by the NBA so he is kind of a de-facto majority owner.

At the time that the Maloofs sold their shares of the team, it was reported that they owned 65% of the team, and sold all 65% to an ownership group headed by Vivek which included Mastrov, Jacobs, Friedman, Jenkins, Miller, Nagle plus possibly more.

So Pre-sale of the team I imagine the ownership structure looked something like this (numbers and percentages of minority owners are just guesses to use as examples of the structure):

Maloofs- 65% -Actual majority owners
Minority owner 1 (Benvenuti?) 10%
Minority owner 2 (Kehriotis?) 10%
Minority owner 3 (Lucchetti?) 10%
Minority owner 4 (Play to Win group?) 5%

So immediately after the sale of the team, I would have assumed the structure would have changed to this:

Viveks group -65%- Actual majority owners
Minority owner 1 (Benvenuti?) 10%
Minority owner 2 (Kehriotis?) 10%
Minority owner 3 (Lucchetti?) 10%
Minority owner 4 (Play to Win group?) 5%

Then Viveks group would have been broken up into the many investors that have been reported, possibly something like this:

Vivek -51% of the group - 33.15% of entire team
Jacobs-13% of the group- 8.45% of entire team
Mastrov- 6.5% of the group- 4.55% of entire team
Friedman-6.5% of the group- 4.55% of entire team
Jenkins-6.5% of the group- 4.55% of entire team
Miller-6.5% of the group- 4.55% of entire team
Nagle- 4% of the group- 2.6% of entire team (plus percentage of the team he owns as part of Play to Win Group)
Shaq- 6% of the group - 3.9% of entire team

Obviously I have no idea how many minority owners there are or what they own and these are just examples to illustrate the structure.

If this is the case, then it would make sense that Vivek is actually the controlling partner while only owning 33% of the entire team. Basically if there was a vote among shareholders, Vivek having 51% control of the Vivek group would vote however he decided and could not be overridden, similar to how electoral votes work. Then the only other people with a vote would be Minority owners 1-4 in this example, but even put together they couldn't outvote Viveks group.

So basically in this scenario, everyone with a stake in the team could vote against Vivek, but he could still do what he wanted as the contolling partner.

Or is this not how it works? Are all these guys who are being reported as selling actual shareholders, not percentage owners of an entity (Viveks group in this example) that is the actual shareholder? In this case the only thing that makes Vivek in charge is the fact that he is the one approved by the NBA. If not for that all the other shareholders could theoretically override him in a vote.

Anyone out there have any idea?
Click to expand...

Here's the article you're looking for.

A: “You have to keep it a little bit in perspective, Sam, because three years ago (when, according to documents obtained by USA TODAY Sports, he paid $54.5 million to become the lead owner with a 15.08% share; his share has since increased to approximately 17%), it was (Chief Operating Officer) Matina (Kolokotronis) – she gave me the keys to Sleep Train (Arena). I’d never been here before. I walked in, and there was nobody who wanted to be here. There was no coach, no GM, it was a ghost town. (Author's note: in actuality, longtime basketball president Geoff Petrie, vice president Wayne Cooper and their front office staff stayed on through the transition to help with scouting and share intel, with Petrie even taking a three-day trip to Greece to scout Giannis Antetokounmpo leading into the draft; then-coach Keith Smart made it clear he wanted to stay, but was told early on that he would be replaced). Then I went into the arena, and literally the roof was falling down.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/spor...k-ranadive-kings-golden-1-center-nba/91837248

A little side note, I was the source of the 17% information. Warhawk and Capt. Factorial can back me up on this revelation. :cool:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top