Without anchor tenant, no AEG

kennadog said:
Yes, Burkle and his representative did day that.

Yes Burkle did say he'd buy a team for Sacramento.
Click to expand...

That makes more sense. If one becomes available, I could see Burkle buying a team and relocating it here but to suggest that the league already has a team in mind, as the biscuit guy suggested, seems a little far fetched given that none of the situations are dead in the water....yet.

And then you still have the situation regarding spending parking money on other railyard ventures. If the $250 million is gone, I hope there are backup plans for an arena in the railyards or that Burkle is really willing to step above and beyond the $75 million that was expected from the Maloofs.
 
Trueblood said:
That makes more sense. If one becomes available, I could see Burkle buying a team and relocating it here but to suggest that the league already has a team in mind, as the biscuit guy suggested, seems a little far fetched given that none of the situations are dead in the water....yet.

And then you still have the situation regarding spending parking money on other railyard ventures. If the $250 million is gone, I hope there are backup plans for an arena in the railyards or that Burkle is really willing to step above and beyond the $75 million that was expected from the Maloofs.
Click to expand...

If Burkle could bring another team here that's fine but I am a Kings fan. I guess I would then be the fan of two teams. I can't easily dismiss my fandom for the Kings players. And him bringing a team here is dependent on us having no team and Stern has said the Maloofs are not going to be able to move.

Best for everyone if Burkle buys the Kings as the other option seems unlikely to happen.
 
Last edited:
kennadog said:
Yes, Burkle and his representative did day that.

Yes Burkle did say he'd buy a team for Sacramento.

Pieces from a Bee article

We took the Kings from Kansas City and I really hate to think of taking another team away from some other fan base. As a matter of fact, if the Maloofs want to move, I wouldn't feel as bad, if they moved the team to Kansas City and they have a beautiful relatively new arena. That would almost seem like appropriate karma.
Click to expand...

Thanks. Good to know. I think Ron Burkle bringing an NBA team to Sac if the Kings go to Anaheim/Seattle is easier said than done... but I'm glad to know somebody from his camp did indeed "say it". And I still think buttered biscuit is getting a bad rap but I've always been one of the more compassionate ones on this site. :)
 
John Galt said:
Thanks. Good to know. I think Ron Burkle bringing an NBA team to Sac if the Kings go to Anaheim/Seattle is easier said than done... but I'm glad to know somebody from his camp did indeed "say it". And I still think buttered biscuit is getting a bad rap but I've always been one of the more compassionate ones on this site. :)
Click to expand...

You owe me a keyboard.
 
Glenn said:
If Burkle could bring another team here that's fine but I am a Kings fan. I guess I would then be the fan of two teams. I can't easily dismiss my fandom for the Kings players. And him bringing a team here is dependent on us having no team and Stern has said the Maloofs are not going to be able to move.

Best for everyone if Burkle buys the Kings as the other option seems unlikely to happen.
Click to expand...
No Stern did not say the Maloofs are not going to be able to move. I think Anaheim is extremely unlikely, but he did not rule out the team being moved somewhere else.

I, too, would be very, very sad if the Kings leave. Still, I think the Maloofs are willing to run the team on the cheap, until they can move somewhere else. Which means it likely will continue to be a minimum salary, non-competitive team here in Sac.
 
kennadog said:
No Stern did not say the Maloofs are not going to be able to move. I think Anaheim is extremely unlikely, but he did not rule out the team being moved somewhere else.

I, too, would be very, very sad if the Kings leave. Still, I think the Maloofs are willing to run the team on the cheap, until they can move somewhere else. Which means it likely will continue to be a minimum salary, non-competitive team here in Sac.
Click to expand...

Really?? Is this an old age problem on my part? AFAIC, a ban on moving to Anaheim only is not comforting. I'd have to think about this carefully, but if the Maloofs stay in control, it might not be such a bad idea if they moved. I'm sure I would change my mind but the way things are, it's like boxing with one arm tied behind your back. A cerain part of it is no fun.

It sounds like at this particular point in time, at least Stern and Burkle are on our side but, man, I'd hate to root for a team without Cousins. Nobody on the team attracts my allegiance like Cousins although I have a suspicion TRob may win my heart also.
 
Last edited:
kennadog said:
No Stern did not say the Maloofs are not going to be able to move. I think Anaheim is extremely unlikely, but he did not rule out the team being moved somewhere else.

I, too, would be very, very sad if the Kings leave. Still, I think the Maloofs are willing to run the team on the cheap, until they can move somewhere else. Which means it likely will continue to be a minimum salary, non-competitive team here in Sac.
Click to expand...

Look, Stern isn't going to let the Maloofs move period, be it to Anaheim, Seattle, the Bahamas, anywhere. He hates their guts.
 
Tetsujin said:
Look, Stern isn't going to let the Maloofs move period, be it to Anaheim, Seattle, the Bahamas, anywhere. He hates their guts.
Click to expand...

I think the fact that stern hasnt come out and specifically denied it has people being weary, as well as they should i mean when the goofs celebrated at center court and orlando we thought we were getting an arena for sure and we saw how quickly that turned. All stern has said is Anaheim is out of the question, and although the evidence is strong that he will not let them move anywhere ever, he has not, and can not, come out and say it. this is one of those that could truely go either way for us kings fans.
regardless of everything going against the goofs they still have a chance to make it outta here and they will go down swinging to try to make it happen. PBP will not hold up forever.
 
Tetsujin said:
Look, Stern isn't going to let the Maloofs move period, be it to Anaheim, Seattle, the Bahamas, anywhere. He hates their guts.
Click to expand...

You might be right that Stern hates Maloofs guts but he's not who decides if an NBA franchise can relocate. It's BoG and Stern only consults with them, is their employee with no actual vote in the matter. Maloofs need 15 votes plus their own for majority 16 of the 30 member board to move. Not likely anytime soon, but things change and unless new Kings ownership materializes the team won't be here anymore. At some point down the line with continuing to degrade arena that NCAA will no longer will allow its athletes to use - the clock is ticking towards doom in Sac-town.
 
kingjatt said:
I think the fact that stern hasnt come out and specifically denied it has people being weary, as well as they should i mean when the goofs celebrated at center court and orlando we thought we were getting an arena for sure and we saw how quickly that turned. All stern has said is Anaheim is out of the question, and although the evidence is strong that he will not let them move anywhere ever, he has not, and can not, come out and say it. this is one of those that could truely go either way for us kings fans.
regardless of everything going against the goofs they still have a chance to make it outta here and they will go down swinging to try to make it happen. PBP will not hold up forever.
Click to expand...

He has to be very careful on what he says publicly about the Maloofs options with moving the team. There's implied threats by the Maloofs of litigation when it comes to relocation. Stern wants the Maloofs to sell the team. They are a big problem for the league as much as they are to Sacramento. For Stern to speak up on a vote to move to Anaheim was pretty big. He could risk that statement being used against him in court.

As for a move to another city, there is always that option. But the Maloofs are looking for a huge fix. Meaning LA, NY, Chicago sized fix. Just moving to KC or some other city is not going to fix their debt issues.

People keep bringing up Seattle like it's their answer. But lets get clear about a few huge issues:

1- The Maloofs will not finance the arena in Seattle. Dead end right there.
2- Chris Hansen will not finance the arena in Seattle unless he owns an NBA team.
3- There is not enough revenue from an NBA team playing in Seattle to pay off a partnership between the city, Hansen and the Maloofs. City needs bonds to be repaid, Hansen is not in the business of gifting the arena to the Maloofs. If the Maloofs couldn't work with AEG and their wanting a slice of the revenue pie, then there is no chance that there is enough for Hansen. Seattle only works if Hansen and his ownership group can buy the team. See #2...
4- Any sale of the team will go through a long process with David Stern deeply involved. Preference will be given to competitive bids from ownership groups that intend to keep the team in Sacramento and participate in a new arena deal.
 
Tetsujin said:
Look, Stern isn't going to let the Maloofs move period, be it to Anaheim, Seattle, the Bahamas, anywhere. He hates their guts.
Click to expand...
Well, too bad Stern is only an employee of the owners. The other owners will ultimately decide the fate of any request to come from the Maloofs. I suspect they probably don't care for the Maloofs either, as the Maloofs are making the league look bad. But I also believe owners are more likely to stick together, because of none of them knows when they might need a favorable vote from the other owners.

Personally, I doubt the other owners care that much about Sacramento fans, They'll think first about how any decision they make might affect them now and in the future. I'd love to think they can force the Maloofs to sell, but I'm not going to hold my breathe.
 
Last edited:
JB_kings said:
People keep bringing up Seattle like it's their answer. But lets get clear about a few huge issues:

1- The Maloofs will not finance the arena in Seattle. Dead end right there.
2- Chris Hansen will not finance the arena in Seattle unless he owns an NBA team.
3- There is not enough revenue from an NBA team playing in Seattle to pay off a partnership between the city, Hansen and the Maloofs. City needs bonds to be repaid, Hansen is not in the business of gifting the arena to the Maloofs. If the Maloofs couldn't work with AEG and their wanting a slice of the revenue pie, then there is no chance that there is enough for Hansen. Seattle only works if Hansen and his ownership group can buy the team. See #2...
4- Any sale of the team will go through a long process with David Stern deeply involved. Preference will be given to competitive bids from ownership groups that intend to keep the team in Sacramento and participate in a new arena deal.
Click to expand...

Bingo.

I understand why on the surface people latch onto this idea and why a simplistic view shows Seattle to be a good landing place for the Kings.

But no one is building an arena FOR the Maloofs in Seattle using private funding. If they build an arena it is with the goal of purchasing a team. If the Maloofs really don't want to sell then I don't see how that would possibly work. It would mean a relocation fee that they can't afford (and would likely be bigger than their proposed contribution in the now dead Sacramento arena deal) AND would come with tenant terms pretty much exactly like what they would have had in Sacramento.

So where's the benefit to them?

And if they do agree to sell the team, JB is spot on in that bidders looking to keep the team in Sacramento would get the first shot. The NBA has shown several times in the last few years that the highest bidder is NOT the one that gets awarded a franchise.

The Maloofs seem to want a pot of gold at the end of their rainbow which is to say they want a larger market where they are showered with money and elevated back to celebrity status while not having to spend a dime themselves.

Seattle is a non starter. Relocating to Kansas City doesn't give them what they want.

I really think this ends in another bid to move to Anaheim and an anti-trust suit if (when?) they lose out on that bid.
 
Circa_1985_Fan said:
So...when will the Maloofs come to reality and realize they REALLY need to sell to Burkle?? Or MVP even...or the Savage family?!
Click to expand...

they wont, their giant ego and thirst for being relevent will not let it happen, the franchise will have to be forced out of their hands, just like every other asset theyve lost thru the years.
 
I am not sure if it is going to forced out. Hansen's group is trying to force the Seattle Council to hurry up and Seattle is taking too much time in deciding about his proposal. If the arena vote meeting in August is turned down, they would have to start again and the possibilities of the Kings going to Seattle could be in jeopardy. Meaning the City of Sacramento not having a new arena deal and possibility a "no" arena in Seattle forces the KINGS to have to work with the City of Sacramento on refurbishing Arco Arena. with Seattle not accepting the Maloofs as owners, Either the KINGS sell to Hansen/ or someone else and move them out of Sacramento or if they held onto the team, they would have to work with the city. Will be interesting to see what happens!


Well it looks like there was some major problems at the Seattle Council meeting last week. Looks like many council people are against the proposal. So are some people...

http://www.seattlechannel.org/videos/video.asp?ID=2361222

Thank you everyone for your kind comments...
 
The city will never agree to refurbishing PBP. It would be a complete waste of taxpayer money and engineers have pretty much ruled that out as any real solution. The foundation won't support the kind of expansion really needed. A new arena could be built in Natomas, maybe, although that is definitely not where the city wants it. Of all the proposals submitted to the city, building a new arena in Natomas was bottom of the list.

Finally, even if it Natomas arena was feasible, there can be no expansion or even a ncompletely new arena there, until the flood issue moratorium in building there is lifted.
 
kennadog said:
The city will never agree to refurbishing PBP. It would be a complete waste of taxpayer money and engineers have pretty much ruled that out as any real solution. The foundation won't support the kind of expansion really needed. A new arena could be built in Natomas, maybe, although that is definitely not where the city wants it. Of all the proposals submitted to the city, building a new arena in Natomas was bottom of the list.

Finally, even if it Natomas arena was feasible, there can be no expansion or even a ncompletely new arena there, until the flood issue moratorium in building there is lifted.
Click to expand...


Looks like to me, there is a stalemate.

To you, How would rank them?

Railyard
Natomas
Cal Expo
South of where the Rivercats play
 
butteredbiscuit said:
I am not sure if it is going to forced out. Hansen's group is trying to force the Seattle Council to hurry up and Seattle is taking too much time in deciding about his proposal. If the arena vote meeting in August is turned down, they would have to start again and the possibilities of the Kings going to Seattle could be in jeopardy. Meaning the City of Sacramento not having a new arena deal and possibility a "no" arena in Seattle forces the KINGS to have to work with the City of Sacramento on refurbishing Arco Arena. with Seattle not accepting the Maloofs as owners, Either the KINGS sell to Hansen/ or someone else and move them out of Sacramento or if they held onto the team, they would have to work with the city. Will be interesting to see what happens!
Click to expand...

(1) Just having the money to buy an NBA team doesn't get you an NBA team. Just ask Larry Ellison.
(2) Several potential buyers have inquired about buying the team and keeping it in Sacramento (the NBA's preference) and have all been turned down.
(3) If the Maloofs were to move the team to Seattle they'd want a sweetheart deal to do so. Their history shows that they just want to be showered with money for showing up. Why would the city AND private investors put $500 million into an arena in Seattle and then agree to a deal that lines the Maloof family coffers? The answer is that they wouldn't
(4) The City will NOT renovate Arco/Power Balance Pavilion for the reasons kennadog mentioned
 
funkykingston said:
(1) Just having the money to buy an NBA team doesn't get you an NBA team. Just ask Larry Ellison.
(2) Several potential buyers have inquired about buying the team and keeping it in Sacramento (the NBA's preference) and have all been turned down.
(3) If the Maloofs were to move the team to Seattle they'd want a sweetheart deal to do so. Their history shows that they just want to be showered with money for showing up. Why would the city AND private investors put $500 million into an arena in Seattle and then agree to a deal that lines the Maloof family coffers? The answer is that they wouldn't
(4) The City will NOT renovate Arco/Power Balance Pavilion for the reasons kennadog mentioned
Click to expand...

So that sounds like the Kings are stuck right where they are unless Maloofs sell. It makes sense. I am looking forward to the Kings staying.

Which struggling NBA teams could be next on Seattle's target list?
By Bob Condotta
Seattle Times staff reporter
March 11, 2012

...Nothing has ever really come all that quickly or easily for Seattle's major pro sports teams.

So why should landing another NBA franchise be any different?

The news Tuesday that Sacramento's City Council had approved a plan to build a new arena in that city that could keep the NBA Kings there appears to have all but shot down the best and most immediate option for getting a new team here.

"An NBA team returning to Seattle is a lot further away than it was," said Paul Swangard, the managing director at the University of Oregon's Sports Marketing Center, who attended the recent NBA All-Star Game and gauged the temperature of the league's financial health.

"And that's just a reality based on the success of the overall NBA business right now, the health of most markets and a dwindling number of viable relocation candidates."...

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nba/2017720140_nbarelocation11.html

rest of article
 
Last edited:
Date: Tue July 10, 2012
Show: Bob and Groz Show
Bob and Steve Sandmeyer talk about Sacramento mayor Kevin Johnson announcing that he has given up trying to keep the Kings, and how this affects the Seattle arena proposal. The guys also take listener phone calls in which they share their thoughts on how Chris Hansen has been treated throughout this arena proposal process.

http://mynorthwest.com/category/pod_player_sports/?a=9943747&p=1014&n=Bob and Groz Show

Date: Tue July 10, 2012
Show: Bob and Groz Show
Bob and Steve Sandmeyer talk to Howard Beck of the New York Times to discuss the Orlando Magic's proposed deals to send Dwight Howard to Brooklyn, Houston or Los Angeles. The guys also talk more about Chris Hansen's efforts to bring the Sonics back to Seattle following the news that Sacramento mayor Kevin Johnson has given up on trying to keep the Kings.

http://mynorthwest.com/category/pod_player_sports/?a=9943751&p=1014&n=Bob and Groz Show
 
butteredbiscuit said:
Bob and Steve Sandmeyer talk about Sacramento mayor Kevin Johnson announcing that he has given up trying to keep the Kings
Click to expand...

When did THAT happen? Hmm?

The recent announcement was that the city would be unable to build an arena without an anchor tenant. Big difference. Frickin' irresponsible "journalists".
 
butteredbiscuit said:
Date: Tue July 10, 2012
Show: Bob and Groz Show
Bob and Steve Sandmeyer talk about Sacramento mayor Kevin Johnson announcing that he has given up trying to keep the Kings, and how this affects the Seattle arena proposal. The guys also take listener phone calls in which they share their thoughts on how Chris Hansen has been treated throughout this arena proposal process.

http://mynorthwest.com/category/pod_player_sports/?a=9943747&p=1014&n=Bob and Groz Show

Date: Tue July 10, 2012
Show: Bob and Groz Show
Bob and Steve Sandmeyer talk to Howard Beck of the New York Times to discuss the Orlando Magic's proposed deals to send Dwight Howard to Brooklyn, Houston or Los Angeles. The guys also talk more about Chris Hansen's efforts to bring the Sonics back to Seattle following the news that Sacramento mayor Kevin Johnson has given up on trying to keep the Kings.

http://mynorthwest.com/category/pod_player_sports/?a=9943751&p=1014&n=Bob and Groz Show
Click to expand...

Looks like Bob and Steve Sandmeyer are idiots who fabricate talking points. They should have a beer with Napear.
 
butteredbiscuit said:
Looks like to me, there is a stalemate.

To you, How would rank them?

Railyard
Natomas
Cal Expo
South of where the Rivercats play
Click to expand...
Well you'd have to go back to the sites considered after the Cal Expo deal fell through. Too late for me to look them up at the moment. Cal Expo and the other side of the river in West Sacramento are not any of those sites. As for me, I still vote for the rail yards, becasue of the potential to spark the revitalization, speed it up and the proximately to the planned inter-modal transportation hub.
 
kennadog said:
Well you'd have to go back to the sites considered after the Cal Expo deal fell through. Too late for me to look them up at the moment. Cal Expo and the other side of the river in West Sacramento are not any of those sites. As for me, I still vote for the rail yards, becasue of the potential to spark the revitalization, speed it up and the proximately to the planned inter-modal transportation hub.
Click to expand...
OK, the four proposals by rank

1) Taylor/ICON downtown rail yards
2) A group that wanted to do an arena where the Westfield mall is downtown
3) Kamilos group wanted to finance a rail yards arena using funds from developments on part of the CAl Expo site and the on the Natomas arena site
4) A group that wanted to build an arena next to the old arena

The city went with Taylor/ICON. I think that was the city's best shot among the four, if only because of the people on the team.
 
kennadog said:
OK, the four proposals by rank

1) Taylor/ICON downtown rail yards
2) A group that wanted to do an arena where the Westfield mall is downtown
3) Kamilos group wanted to finance a rail yards arena using funds from developments on part of the CAl Expo site and the on the Natomas arena site
4) A group that wanted to build an arena next to the old arena

The city went with Taylor/ICON. I think that was the city's best shot among the four, if only because of the people on the team.
Click to expand...

David Stern wanted the Cal Expo site. I wonder why he didn't get his wish?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top