Plot thickens: Maloofs have consulted anti-trust attourney

[RookieOfTheDay]

“An official close to the situation but unauthorized to discuss it publicly said the Maloofs have consulted a high-powered antitrust attorney to determine how they could proceed if the NBA were to deny their application for relocation -- which would be voted on by the NBA's Board of Governors within 120 days and would require a majority of support from the 30 teams to be approved.”

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/spo...gn=Feed:+LAT_Sports_Blog+(The+Fabulous+Forum)

If the L.A. Times source is accurate, these punks may be poised to take on the NBA.

 

[Gary]

“An official close to the situation but unauthorized to discuss it publicly said the Maloofs have consulted a high-powered antitrust attorney to determine how they could proceed if the NBA were to deny their application for relocation -- which would be voted on by the NBA's Board of Governors within 120 days and would require a majority of support from the 30 teams to be approved.”

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/spo...gn=Feed:+LAT_Sports_Blog+(The+Fabulous+Forum)

If the L.A. Times source is accurate, these punks are taking on the NBA.

They might have been just exploring their options.. I am sure they wanted to cover all the scenarios.. Not sure what to believe but it will be interesting tomorrow.

 

[ParniValjak]

“An official close to the situation but unauthorized to discuss it publicly said the Maloofs have consulted a high-powered antitrust attorney to determine how they could proceed if the NBA were to deny their application for relocation -- which would be voted on by the NBA's Board of Governors within 120 days and would require a majority of support from the 30 teams to be approved.”

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/spo...gn=Feed:+LAT_Sports_Blog+(The+Fabulous+Forum)

If the L.A. Times source is accurate, these punks are taking on the NBA.

They are picking the battle that they cannot win. They know that eventually all signs point to them being forced to sell which is what they don't want to do so they figure they might as well go out swinging.

Just out of curiosity, how much would this anti-trust exercise cost them and if they lose, I assume they would cover both their own and NBAs cost.

 

[Gary]

Might also point to the fact that the article didn't mention that the signatures were there to block the bond issue. Not sure how accurate that article is. Don't think I believe it.

 

[Glenn]

If in fact the ownership of a team is exactly like owning a franchise, as several people have said, I can't see why anti-trust is even an issue. Now if owning a team isn't like owning a franchise, who knows? I think that back when Sterling moved rules were changed that may avoid this as a significant problem. I have nothing definite to point my finger at except that the structure DID change and that all major league sports except baseball will be watching if not contributing to the NBA's defense.

 

[est.1999]

An official close to the situation but unauthorized to discuss it publicly"

This makes it hard to believe.

 

[The Hammer]

Might also point to the fact that the article didn't mention that the signatures were there to block the bond issue. Not sure how accurate that article is. Don't think I believe it.

That issue has become irrelevent as Samueli has stated that he will merely make it a personal loan.

 

[The Hammer]

An official close to the situation but unauthorized to discuss it publicly"

This makes it hard to believe.

This type of language is used all the time in journalism. It's know as "protecting the source".

Journalism really is just all about paying people for inside information.

 

[pdxKingsFan]

Just a reminder of what happens when you "win":
http://articles.latimes.com/1986-07-30/sports/sp-18643_1_jury-finds-nfl-guilty

National Football League was found guilty Tuesday of violating an antitrust law but survived the United States Football League's $1.69-billion suit here when a bothered and bewildered jury of five women and one man awarded damages of just $1 to the failing football league.

Damages in antitrust cases are tripled, so the award given to the USFL will actually amount to $3.

The verdict, coming after about two years of pretrial litigation and 2 1/2 months of trial testimony, shook Courtroom 318 in Manhattan's U.S. District Court. But it will shake the USFL far more, perhaps to the ground. Although the decision certainly discredits the NFL, it probably dooms the USFL which, in its fourth year, had planned to switch to fall play in direct competition with the NFL but without the established league's television revenue sources.

 

[Gary]

That issue has become irrelevent as Samueli has stated that he will merely make it a personal loan.

Oh I know, but the article didn't mention that.. That's why I don't think it's very credible.. Plus what was mentioned above your post.

 

[D13]

They might have been just exploring their options.. I am sure they wanted to cover all the scenarios.. Not sure what to believe but it will be interesting tomorrow.

Exactly... and one of two things came out of it; Fight or Don't... Still, we all know how bad they want out just by looking into it. Whatever, as long as the team stays in Sac, and we get an arena, I don't care what they want. We'll deal with their mutiny later...

 

[Dime Dropper]

This type of language is used all the time in journalism. It's know as "protecting the source".

Journalism really is just all about paying people for inside information.

It's used more predominantly to make things up and resist being questioned. Not saying it's the case here, but when you see words like that, far more often than not it turns out to be BS.