Unanimous vote to block relocation!!!!

[uolj]

Why didn't the other 5 vote? Which way will they vote later on?

The other five didn't vote because they weren't on the relocation committee. The vote was on what to recommend to the full BOG on the question of whether the Kings should move to Seattle. Those 5, plus the 7 who were on the committee, plus the other 18 owners will all vote on relocation at the next BOG meeting (which I think might be May 15th).

If relocation is denied at that meeting (which it almost certainly will be because of the unanimous recommendation of the 7 from the committee), then the next step is to vote on the ownership group. The finance committee handles recommending an ownership group or not. Assuming the Sac investors and Maloofs have a deal by then, the finance committee will make their recommendation on whether to approve the sale to Ranadive and his group around that time (they don't need 7 days according to some reports). So hopefully in the same meeting that the full BOG denies relocation, they will approve the sale to Ranadive and the Sacramento investors.

 

[Warhawk]

The other five didn't vote because they weren't on the relocation committee. The vote was on what to recommend to the full BOG on the question of whether the Kings should move to Seattle. Those 5, plus the 7 who were on the committee, plus the other 18 owners will all vote on relocation at the next BOG meeting (which I think might be May 15th).

If relocation is denied at that meeting (which it almost certainly will be because of the unanimous recommendation of the 7 from the committee), then the next step is to vote on the ownership group. The finance committee handles recommending an ownership group or not. Assuming the Sac investors and Maloofs have a deal by then, the finance committee will make their recommendation on whether to approve the sale to Ranadive and his group around that time (they don't need 7 days according to some reports). So hopefully in the same meeting that the full BOG denies relocation, they will approve the sale to Ranadive and the Sacramento investors.

Actually, as the Hansen bid is contingent on the team moving to Seattle, if the relocation is voted down there is no vote on whether they can buy the team. It is unneccessary.

 

[uolj]

Actually, as the Hansen bid is contingent on the team moving to Seattle, if the relocation is voted down there is no vote on whether they can buy the team. It is unneccessary.

I edited to make it clear I was talking about approving the sale to Ranadive and the Sacramento investors. That's the vote on the sale of the team that should take place just after the official relocation denial.

At least that's what reports are suggesting so far, although it still sounds fluid and depends on the Maloofs agreeing to the backup offer (or being forced to).

 

[Glenn]

Beating a dead horse because for us this is TDOS and topical: if the vote was only going to be on relocation, why was it a joint meeting of the relocation and finance committee? My suspicion is that there were going to be two votes but after the 7-0 vote, the finance committee did not officially vote in order to allow Hansen to gracefully withdraw. They were being polite but Hansen was willing to go to the mattresses. It turned out to be a test of his character.

 

[uolj]

Beating a dead horse because for us this is TDOS and topical: if the vote was only going to be on relocation, why was it a joint meeting of the relocation and finance committee? My suspicion is that there were going to be two votes but after the 7-0 vote, the finance committee did not officially vote in order to allow Hansen to gracefully withdraw. They were being polite but Hansen was willing to go to the mattresses. It turned out to be a test of his character.

I'm not sure they were trying to get Hansen to withdraw. I think the graceful exit has always been for relocation to be denied and no vote to take place on Hansen because his sale is contingent on the move being approved. So he doesn't have to formally withdraw, it's already stipulated that if the move is denied the sale doesn't go through. That's an inference based on known facts, though, I don't recall if that contingency has actually been reported to be true yet.

Also remember that the NBA didn't really know what they would be doing or how to handle it for a long time. They decided to join the committees long before they decided to have the relocation vote first. If they had known all along that they would have simply voted on relocation first I suspect they wouldn't have joined the committees in the first place.

 

[Dreamtiger]

Beating a dead horse because for us this is TDOS and topical: if the vote was only going to be on relocation, why was it a joint meeting of the relocation and finance committee? My suspicion is that there were going to be two votes but after the 7-0 vote, the finance committee did not officially vote in order to allow Hansen to gracefully withdraw. They were being polite but Hansen was willing to go to the mattresses. It turned out to be a test of his character.

Even though the finance commitee technically didn't vote, they participated in the vetting of both ownership groups. They had to first decide if the Sacramento group had a worthy offer and arena plan before the relocation committee could make a recommendation. So even though the finance committee didn't vote on anything, they certainly played a crucial role in this.

 

[Section 101]

Beating a dead horse because for us this is TDOS and topical: if the vote was only going to be on relocation, why was it a joint meeting of the relocation and finance committee? My suspicion is that there were going to be two votes but after the 7-0 vote, the finance committee did not officially vote in order to allow Hansen to gracefully withdraw. They were being polite but Hansen was willing to go to the mattresses. It turned out to be a test of his character.

So they could vet the Sacramento group !

 

[VF21]

Also remember that the NBA didn't really know what they would be doing or how to handle it for a long time. They decided to join the committees long before they decided to have the relocation vote first. If they had known all along that they would have simply voted on relocation first I suspect they wouldn't have joined the committees in the first place.

I think they still would have combined the committees just so the presentations could be done at one time.

 

[uolj]

Even though the finance commitee technically didn't vote, they participated in the vetting of both ownership groups. They had to first decide if the Sacramento group had a worthy offer and arena plan before the relocation committee could make a recommendation. So even though the finance committee didn't vote on anything, they certainly played a crucial role in this.

I think they still would have combined the committees just so the presentations could be done at one time.

Yeah, you both are right. And part of determining if relocation makes sense is vetting the Sac ownership group.

 

[kennadog]

I would like to point out that we don't know for sure whether the finance committee did or didn't vote on a recommendation. The league issued nothing about that one way or the other. For all we know, they did vote on a recommendation and are preparing the report to the BoG as we speak.

 

[Glenn]

I would like to point out that we don't know for sure whether the finance committee did or didn't vote on a recommendation. The league issued nothing about that one way or the other. For all we know, they did vote on a recommendation and our preparing the report to the BoG as we speak.

I suspect the finance committee voted but the results aren't released. This saves the necessity of having another conference call if the vote has to be about who owns the team. That makes sense to me.

 

[kennadog]

I suspect the finance committee voted but the results aren't released. This saves the necessity of having another conference call if the vote has to be about who owns the team. That makes sense to me.

Exactly. They didn't report on it, becasue they may never have to say which way it went. They'd rather not reject the Seattle ownership group, because they'd love to have them as owners in the league. Apparently Hansen can't read between the lines. Maybe because of the two-by-four to the head he didn't see coming.

 

[HereWeBoogie]

maybe because they already knew relocation committee was 7-0 which means no matter what the finance committee votes, its still going in Sac's favor

 

[Bricklayer]

maybe because they already knew relocation committee was 7-0 which means no matter what the finance committee votes, its still going in Sac's favor

That's entirely possible, because remember the NBA is still trying to avoid actually having to vote on the sale itself, likely even in committee. If this whole thing can be disposed of with just a relocation vote, that would be ideal for them.

 

[ParniValjak]

That's entirely possible, because remember the NBA is still trying to avoid actually having to vote on the sale itself, likely even in committee. If this whole thing can be disposed of with just a relocation vote, that would be ideal for them.

I am sure that NBA planned it that way but Hansen is turning into a crying baby here. Maybe its posturing for an expansion team but he is doing it the wrong way. If he continues ahead and defies the NBA process, I think he just might Larry Ellison himself out of the NBA.

I get why he is doing it. I get that he has invested a lot of time and money into this whole thing but he needs to consider his options a bit more carefully. He spent all this money on the land for the arena, if he pisses off the NBA, that money just got pissed down the drain because there will be no Sonics in Seattle for a very long time or even if there is going to be a team, it won't be one owned by Chris Hansen.

NBA is very selective on who they let own the team, especially now days when the body of work from Maloofs is more and more evident to everyone. It's a fine line that Hansen is walking. He has gone all in, and is hoping to win (chances are slimmer than a week ago) but if he loses, he loses for good!

 

[Andriod_KiNg]

It's sinking in and other news, rumors, etc.

http://sportspressnw.com/2150714/2013/thiel-heres-a-solution-for-nba-youre-welcome

The NBA, whose acronym for a long time has been known as “Nothing But Attorneys” by the jaded media pack that covers the league, is hip to the claim. That’s part of why the vote to deny relocation Monday was 7-0 and not 12-0, because the five owners on the finance committee could be cited for conflict if they participated in the relocation vote.

 

[Dime Dropper]

http://sportspressnw.com/2150714/2013/thiel-heres-a-solution-for-nba-youre-welcome

That makes sense, and is actually very reassuring for us.

 

[Darth Divac]

I hate the offseason. ESPECIALLY this one.

 

[beb0p]

If Sacramento is well on its way, Hansen would agree to sell the team to the Sacramento group, led by Vivek Ranadive, for what Hansen paid for it

What a horrible idea. Hansen is not going to sell to Vivek, he'll do everything in his power to sabotage a Sac arena and then move the team north.

A better idea is to sell the team to Vivek and then consider other options only if somehow Sacramento is unable to build an arena.

 

[VF21]

[/FONT][/COLOR]What a horrible idea. Hansen is not going to sell to Vivek, he'll do everything in his power to sabotage a Sac arena and then move the team north.

A better idea is to sell the team to Vivek and then consider other options only if somehow Sacramento is unable to build an arena.

Guys, the Kings are not going to be sold to Hansen. Period.

ALL the stuff you read that says Hansen still has a chance to buy OUR TEAM is coming out of Seattle. Kings minority owners are receiving messages of congratulations from team owners who weren't involved in the relocation/finance committee meetings, which ensures that IF it came to a vote on the sale (which it won't), we would have no trouble whatsoever getting the necessary 8 votes to block the sale.

Hansen is done with the Kings and if he doesn't watch his step, he'll be done with the NBA. He's close to making a fool of himself over this right now, and if you notice, Steve Ballmer (the deep pocket guy in the Hansen/Ballmer group) has been very quiet during all of this. In addition, Adam Silver and David Stern BOTH praised Steve Ballmer AND NOT CHRIS HANSEN as someone they thought would be an excellent addition to the NBA ownership club.

There's a lot of posturing going on right now, but the die is cast. The Kings will be sold to the Sacramento group, either by the Maloofs directly or by the NBA acting as conservators for the Maloofs. All we have to do is wait for it all to come to fruition.

 

[Bricklayer]

That makes sense, and is actually very reassuring for us.

Er really?

Its an idiotic suggestion. Yes, the NBA wants Chris Hansen to own the Kings in Sacramento, because that will end this nightmare for them.

 

[jalfa]

Guys, the Kings are not going to be sold to Hansen. Period.

ALL the stuff you read that says Hansen still has a chance to buy OUR TEAM is coming out of Seattle. Kings minority owners are receiving messages of congratulations from team owners who weren't involved in the relocation/finance committee meetings, which ensures that IF it came to a vote on the sale (which it won't), we would have no trouble whatsoever getting the necessary 8 votes to block the sale.

Hansen is done with the Kings and if he doesn't watch his step, he'll be done with the NBA. He's close to making a fool of himself over this right now, and if you notice, Steve Ballmer (the deep pocket guy in the Hansen/Ballmer group) has been very quiet during all of this. In addition, Adam Silver and David Stern BOTH praised Steve Ballmer AND NOT CHRIS HANSEN as someone they thought would be an excellent addition to the NBA ownership club.

There's a lot of posturing going on right now, but the die is cast. The Kings will be sold to the Sacramento group, either by the Maloofs directly or by the NBA acting as conservators for the Maloofs. All we have to do is wait for it all to come to fruition.

not disagreeing with anything you say (vehemently agreeing, to be precise), but a minor nit to pick: if you watch the interview this quote was taken from (which everybody should, because it's brilliant), Rosen asked Stern and Silver specifically after Ballmer. the two then didn't go out of their way to compliment Hansen as well, but I wouldn't read a slight into that. though it might yet come to that very soon, if Hansen can't find the off button.

 

[upinsmoke]

I hate the offseason. ESPECIALLY this one.

Really? So far its been my favorite

 

[Glenn]

Guys, the Kings are not going to be sold to Hansen. Period.

ALL the stuff you read that says Hansen still has a chance to buy OUR TEAM is coming out of Seattle. Kings minority owners are receiving messages of congratulations from team owners who weren't involved in the relocation/finance committee meetings, which ensures that IF it came to a vote on the sale (which it won't), we would have no trouble whatsoever getting the necessary 8 votes to block the sale.

Hansen is done with the Kings and if he doesn't watch his step, he'll be done with the NBA. He's close to making a fool of himself over this right now, and if you notice, Steve Ballmer (the deep pocket guy in the Hansen/Ballmer group) has been very quiet during all of this. In addition, Adam Silver and David Stern BOTH praised Steve Ballmer AND NOT CHRIS HANSEN as someone they thought would be an excellent addition to the NBA ownership club.

There's a lot of posturing going on right now, but the die is cast. The Kings will be sold to the Sacramento group, either by the Maloofs directly or by the NBA acting as conservators for the Maloofs. All we have to do is wait for it all to come to fruition.

http://www.sacbee.com/2013/05/01/5387810/questions-remain-about-kings-fate.html

Although I agree with you, a SacBee article today says it is possible that Hansen could buy the team and says specifically that the Maloofs do not have to sell to Ranadive although they are tired of the NBA and vice versa so the Maloofs probably will sell to Ranadive. In other words, the SacBee presents the Seattle argument. Furthermore, it says the Maloofs will have to OK the Ranadive offer before May 15 or, even if the BoG rejects Hansen, they will have no other deal to address.

People have said that the league will invoke the "in the interests of the league" rule but then that is really just a Sacto view and is not based on fact. Now if it IS based on fact, I'd like to see an NBA source saying that preferably Stern. Hopefully the BoG will do this or the whole issue could drag on forever. I don't think that serves anyone's interests including the Maloofs.

These questions will persist as long as the only newspaper in town brings them up. This will continue to be discussed with the same questions asked over and over until it is all over. Thanks, Bee. Perhaps I did not represent the Bee article but it can be read through the link above. Nothing is cast in stone.

 

[Gilles]

I think leverage against Maloofs is that at some point expansion team may be given to Seattle so HBN group goes away forever. If you don't sell now, you will never relocate, and only sell to the people pledging to keep Kings in Sacramento. Good luck with getting anywhere above $350 million valuation then. They will sell and do it pretty quickly after first signs of Seattle group of backing out. Now if expansion is not in the discussion at all, and HBN group stays in the process for the long haul, this can be pretty painful process.

 

[HndsmCelt]

http://www.sacbee.com/2013/05/01/5387810/questions-remain-about-kings-fate.html

Although I agree with you, a SacBee article today says it is possible that Hansen could buy the team and says specifically that the Maloofs do not have to sell to Ranadive although they are tired of the NBA and vice versa so the Maloofs probably will sell to Ranadive. In other words, the SacBee presents the Seattle argument. Furthermore, it says the Maloofs will have to OK the Ranadive offer before May 15 or, even if the BoG rejects Hansen, they will have no other deal to address.

People have said that the league will invoke the "in the interests of the league" rule but then that is really just a Sacto view and is not based on fact. Now if it IS based on fact, I'd like to see an NBA source saying that preferably Stern. Hopefully the BoG will do this or the whole issue could drag on forever. I don't think that serves anyone's interests including the Maloofs.

These questions will persist as long as the only newspaper in town brings them up. This will continue to be discussed with the same questions asked over and over until it is all over. Thanks, Bee. Perhaps I did not represent the Bee article but it can be read through the link above. Nothing is cast in stone.

William of Occam would slash that story to pieces with his razor.

 

[Warhawk]

http://www.sacbee.com/2013/05/01/5387810/questions-remain-about-kings-fate.html

Although I agree with you, a SacBee article today says it is possible that Hansen could buy the team and says specifically that the Maloofs do not have to sell to Ranadive although they are tired of the NBA and vice versa so the Maloofs probably will sell to Ranadive. In other words, the SacBee presents the Seattle argument. Furthermore, it says the Maloofs will have to OK the Ranadive offer before May 15 or, even if the BoG rejects Hansen, they will have no other deal to address.

People have said that the league will invoke the "in the interests of the league" rule but then that is really just a Sacto view and is not based on fact. Now if it IS based on fact, I'd like to see an NBA source saying that preferably Stern. Hopefully the BoG will do this or the whole issue could drag on forever. I don't think that serves anyone's interests including the Maloofs.

These questions will persist as long as the only newspaper in town brings them up. This will continue to be discussed with the same questions asked over and over until it is all over. Thanks, Bee. Perhaps I did not represent the Bee article but it can be read through the link above. Nothing is cast in stone.

I trust Stern and his "Sacramento's deal is binding" comment more than hypothesis by the Bee.

 

[Glenn]

I trust Stern and his "Sacramento's deal is binding" comment more than hypothesis by the Bee.

If he said that, that's great. I don't remember it with the deluge of truths, half-truths, and lies being posted here.

 

[whozit]

If he said that, that's great. I don't remember it with the deluge of truths, half-truths, and lies being posted here.

I don't remember what Stern interview it was, but he did say it. I think and I get in trouble when I think that it was in response to the fact that the Maloofs had not signed the offer. Part of my interpretation of that was that Stern/NBA was not going to allow the Sacramento purchase group to turn around and lowball (not inferring they would but the Seattle proponents use that argument) them after Hansen is turned down.

 

[HndsmCelt]

If he said that, that's great. I don't remember it with the deluge of truths, half-truths, and lies being posted here.

The BM may have forced it by accident. When they were demanding a written back up matching offer, with deposit Stern muscled them into a binding back up offer,that they agreed to accept IF the Seattle deal fell through. This was immediately followed by Hansen upping his offer. At least that was my understanding that long weekend