Um, to say your title is a bit of a spin on that article is an understatement.
The main point of that article is that in almost all cases if you anything other than a strip mall in your city, it costs money. Specifically tax money. The good people of Sacramento don't want to hear that.
Um, to say your title is a bit of a spin on that article is an understatement.
The main point of that article is that in almost all cases if you anything other than a strip mall in your city, it costs money. Specifically tax money. The good people of Sacramento don't want to hear that.
MSE will sell the land/arena/practice facility, so that's probably a good chunk of the money they'll need, if not all. It won't happen quickly, but it's some prime land when development picks up. Bottom line is, if they really want out, they could just deed the land over to the city as payment in full. I'm not sure they do that, as the land is probably worth more, but it's an quick and easy way to pay off the city.
Also, They don't owe the full $70 million. I don't know what the princiapl balance is now, but when things were going well, financially, MSE actaully was ahead in payments on the loan. After paying for 10 years, the principal has to have come down a decent amount.
Breton mentions none of that, of course.
MSE will sell the land/arena/practice facility, so that's probably a good chunk of the money they'll need, if not all. It won't happen quickly, but it's some prime land when development picks up. Bottom line is, if they really want out, they could just deed the land over to the city as payment in full. I'm not sure they do that, as the land is probably worth more, but it's an quick and easy way to pay off the city.
Also, They don't owe the full $70 million. I don't know what the princiapl balance is now, but when things were going well, financially, MSE actaully was ahead in payments on the loan. After paying for 10 years, the principal has to have come down a decent amount.
Breton mentions none of that, of course.
The land was used as a big chunk of the collateral for the loan. The city won't necessarily have much choice re: land versus cash.I think the city will want the cash, not the land. Land is relatively worthless if you can't get financing to build commercial property on it, which nobody can. Unless there is an explicit provision in the contract that the Maloofs can deed the land to the city in lieu of cash (very doubtful), then the Maloofs have to come up with the cash. I'd like to know if they even have that cash available? I doubt it. They'd probably have to get their new city to pay off Sacto, which could be a difficult negotiation point.
The land was used as a big chunk of the collateral for the loan. The city won't necessarily have much choice re: land versus cash.
I agree with Brick's logic. $100 million is nothing to get an brand new, NBA-ready arena in another city, where they are likely to sell a lot more tickets and other merchandise.
Sacramento has become gusher of red ink with a crappy arena (that was never great); a fan base that clearly doesn't care much any more and no sign of anyone really giving a damn if they leave, or certainly not near enough people.
What is the incentive for the Maloofs to stay and bleed cash here for a city and media that's basically kicked them in teeth multiple times and an apathetic fan base? $100 million is not much to pay to get the Sacramento albatross off their necks.
This is pretty much how I read it as well and why I was not too impressed by the article. The Maloofs will sale the land to either the city or a developer. Ironically, a developer could level Arco, put in a new strip mall or two on the site and use the existing parking lot. It would be poetic justice and just terrible for the city.
Things won't be stopped forever.You realize the mall next to 80 and truxel was stopped. Most of the tenants in the buildings that were built are gone now. There's tons of empty space there now. How is someone going to build a new mall a mile away?
Things won't be stopped forever.
I will say this. If this team can make it through this particular period in time, then there's nowhere to go but up. I doubt it can get any worse than it is now. Low attendance, down economy, and a bad team with an aging arena. A local newspaper that does little to support the idea of a new arena except point out the negatives in poorly writen articles by smug elitists like Breton. Nope! I don't think it can get any worse. So I hope and pray the the Maloof's and Stern and company will come up with an answer. At least enough of an answer to keep the Maloof's interested in keeping the team here.![]()
Kreidler's take this morning on KHTK is that this is not a significant deterrent to the Kings moving. As, I pointed out, he said part of the $70 million is paid off. He said the $30 million is discretionary on the part of the NBA owners. It's more to prevent teams from just moving around, because they feel like it. A team that's losing money, has little local support and no chance at getting a new arena may not be asked to pay that much.
No, we're talking about one part of the article, the costs, that he did not think would be a much of a deterrent to the team moving.So basically he is saying the Breton does not know what he is talking about?
Don't forget the other option, the Maloofs sell the team and rake in some nice cash and walk away. Not bad for the brothers who have some financial problems. There are usually no shortage of willing buyers. Although one of them, Henry Samueli got suspended as owner of the Anaheim Ducks for lying to securities regulators. I doubt the NBA would welcome him. That doesn't prevent his wife from buying a team though. But again, no new buyer is going to want to stay in this current situtation. So it still boils down to a new arena or the team leaves... only a matter of time.