PDA

View Full Version : Seattle Ownership raises bid for Kings by $75 MILLION!!



Pages : [1] 2

waveycrockett
05-10-2013, 03:51 PM
http://www.king5.com/news/arena/Chris-Hansen-75-million-to-Kings-offer-206957551.html
****** Wiretap
Basketball news gathered from around the net.

Seattle Group Raises Bid For Kings By $75M
May 10, 2013 3:14 PM EDT


Chris Hansen has increased the bid of his Seattle-based investor group for the Sacramento Kings by $75 million to a valuation of $625 million.

Hansen had already raised the valuation of his bid to $550 million in an attempt to sway NBA owners.

The NBA's relocation committee voted a recommendation that the Kings remain in Sacramento.




RIP Sacramento. HELLLLLLLLOOOOOOOOOOOO SEATTLE

gotoHcarolina52
05-10-2013, 03:54 PM
The Maloofs >>> The Medicis

king4day
05-10-2013, 03:55 PM
I thought the vote meant that was it. I guess I misunderstood it. Sounds like it was just about, based on those values, it's best not to move the Kings.

king4day
05-10-2013, 03:57 PM
If this team does move, the Maloofs will never be able to show their faces in Sacramento again. They will need to move because it will be an uncomfortable situation for them anytime they run into people who recognize them.

NateyB24
05-10-2013, 03:57 PM
BREAKING: The $625 million dollar pricetag for #NBAKings would put franchise on par with Miami Heat, as 6th most valuable in NBA per Forbes.

https://twitter.com/ChrisDaniels5/status/332934179769700352


BREAKING: Hansen's group all agrees to be a revenue sharing payee if #NBAKings team moves to Seattle, including years at KeyArena.

https://twitter.com/ChrisDaniels5/status/332933694316748801

Still think it will go Sac's way but maybe this opens the door for a lawsuit to get a expansion team.

Gators123
05-10-2013, 04:03 PM
Holy **** I thought this was over already.

kingkenny01
05-10-2013, 04:07 PM
I hope the kings move to seattle, so buck's fans don't have to worry about losing the bucks to seattle

justinnum1
05-10-2013, 04:09 PM
Money is not an issue at this point. Sacramento has a viable plan in place and there is no way they move this team.

waveycrockett
05-10-2013, 04:10 PM
If this team does move, the Maloofs will never be able to show their faces in Sacramento again. They will need to move because it will be an uncomfortable situation for them anytime they run into people who recognize them.

How will they ever go on?

TeamSeattle
05-10-2013, 04:11 PM
So at this point the Kings won't move from Sacramento but the Seattle investors will own the team in the long run.

broncofangene
05-10-2013, 04:11 PM
If only they put this much effort into keeping the sonics. Sac town deserves the kings if you ask me.

waveycrockett
05-10-2013, 04:12 PM
Money is not an issue at this point. Sacramento has a viable plan in place and there is no way they move this team.

Of course it is. The Kings valuation increase raises the value of ALLL the other teams.

dopeboy206
05-10-2013, 04:18 PM
Put up or shut up Sacramento. Talk is cheap.
http://www.sonicsrising.com/2013/5/10/4319410/report-sacramento-doesnt-have-the-100-in-cash-to-purchase-kings

justinnum1
05-10-2013, 04:20 PM
Of course it is. The Kings valuation increase raises the value of ALLL the other teams.

Thank you for missing the point.

No matter what the offer is from seattle, the kings are not leaving Sacramento.

justinnum1
05-10-2013, 04:20 PM
Of course it is. The Kings valuation increase raises the value of ALLL the other teams.

Thank you for missing the point.

No matter what the offer is from seattle, the kings are not leaving Sacramento.

TeamSeattle
05-10-2013, 04:21 PM
Thank you for missing the point.

No matter what the offer is from seattle, the kings are not leaving Sacramento.

As of right now that is.



In an effort to further demonstrate the extent of our commitment to bring basketball back to Seattle, we have elected to voluntarily increase our proposed purchase price for the Sacramento Kings NBA Franchise by $75 million — from an enterprise value of $550 million to $625 million. In conjunction with our revised offer, we have also guaranteed to the NBA that the Franchise would be a revenue sharing payer in all years in Seattle.

We would also like to take the opportunity to again point out just how far ahead our Arena project is:

The ownership group has acquired 100% of the property necessary to construct the Arena.

We have 100% of our private financing for the Arena committed and in place.

After being approved by the City and County Councils the Arena MOU/legislation was signed into law by the Seattle Mayor and King County Executive on October 16, 2012. The referendum period expired 30 days later.

We engaged our Arena architects two years ago and have completed our detailed design schematics and costing.

We have filed for our Master Use Permit and are well underway with the Environmental Review Process, which we expect to conclude late this year.

While we appreciate that this is a very difficult decision for the league and owners, we hope it is understood that we really believe the time is now to bring the NBA back to Seattle, and that it is paramount that we do everything we can to put Seattle’s best foot forward in this process.

— Chris Hansen

http://www.sonicsarena.com/

JLynn943
05-10-2013, 04:24 PM
wtf. Isn't a little late in the process to suddenly up the bid by that much? This is the kind of scheming, slimy tactics Seattle fans complained about before (even if different tactics, still slimy). This is ****ing ridiculous.

No respect for Hanson or any fans cheering this.

KingPosey
05-10-2013, 04:26 PM
It's not really just about the bid. They aren't going anywhere.

KingPosey
05-10-2013, 04:29 PM
As of right now that is.

Well when the arena is built and they sign their lease, I guess you're right, thy COULD leave in 20 or 30 years.

PleaseBeNice
05-10-2013, 04:29 PM
How will they ever go on?

You are very, very dense. Please go away.

PleaseBeNice
05-10-2013, 04:30 PM
So many uneducated people in this thread! When the Kings stay you should all be banned for relaying half truths and jumping to conclusions.

KingPosey
05-10-2013, 04:31 PM
wtf. Isn't a little late in the process to suddenly up the bid by that much? This is the kind of scheming, slimy tactics Seattle fans complained about before (even if different tactics, still slimy). This is ****ing ridiculous.

No respect for Hanson or any fans cheering this.the guy just wants a team in Seattle and is DESPERATE at this point. I wouldn't call it slimy. He just has no power or control so he's trying to throw his money at the problem because he's out of moves.

I can't blame him. But we aren't going anywhere.

waveycrockett
05-10-2013, 04:32 PM
Well when the arena is built and they sign their lease, I guess you're right, thy COULD leave in 20 or 30 years.

why would they sign? No gun to their head

TeamSeattle
05-10-2013, 04:32 PM
It's not really just about the bid. They aren't going anywhere.

Yea but who will OWN "your" team?

NateyB24
05-10-2013, 04:38 PM
wtf. Isn't a little late in the process to suddenly up the bid by that much? This is the kind of scheming, slimy tactics Seattle fans complained about before (even if different tactics, still slimy). This is ****ing ridiculous.

No respect for Hanson or any fans cheering this.

It's a very desperate move my take is that expansion isn't going to happen in the near future and Hansen doesn't want to have to deal with a new Mayor.

Sadds The Gr8
05-10-2013, 04:49 PM
Thought this **** was over...still think the team stays anyways

kpak76
05-10-2013, 04:56 PM
Money is not an issue at this point. Sacramento has a viable plan in place and there is no way they move this team.

Thats where you are wrong. The bucks do matter, that is the basis of the anti-trust lawsuite. If the NBA does not allow a sale to the highest bidder when the actual owner of the team wants to sell it to the Seattle group, the lawsuites begin.

Sacramento does not have a plan in place yet. It is still in the discussion phase and there has been groups down in Sacramento who have threatened a law suite to stop any building of a new NBA arena.

Personally as former Sonic fan, I think the NBA can go to hell. Just look at the division that putz bag Stern is causing with his shenanigans. Stern has by far been the worst of the 3 current commisioners in the major sports in this country. Thats saying a lot because his competition are Goodell and Selig! :confused:

Basically this entire debaucle started 5 years ago when Stern basically gave the keys to the Sonics (who was supported by Seattle for 40 years) to some Okie cronie. The NBA owners should have let this douche go when they realized they made a big mistake!

kpak76
05-10-2013, 05:00 PM
I hope the kings move to seattle, so buck's fans don't have to worry about losing the bucks to seattle

Unfortunately you would have to contend with a Sacramento group that wants to bring a team back to them then. Either way with the precedence Stern already set, sooner or later the country will realize what the NBA has become.

JLynn943
05-10-2013, 05:03 PM
Such a ridiculous over-valuation of the team (because, monetarily, the Kings are not worth what either group is willing to pay for them) would have interesting consequences. If the NBA allows this deal to Seattle, other owners who have teams that are more valuable than the Kings are going to expect more money when sold, but this over-valuation is only due to an incredibly desperate, incredibly wealthy man trying to steal a team from another city. Other owners will not get the value that the Kings sale would dictate unless this same type of situation happens with every sale - where someone insanely wealthy is just on a mission to move a team. Selling to Hansen would thus just lead to unsaleable franchises or this same mess over again.

kpak76
05-10-2013, 05:03 PM
wtf. Isn't a little late in the process to suddenly up the bid by that much? This is the kind of scheming, slimy tactics Seattle fans complained about before (even if different tactics, still slimy). This is ****ing ridiculous.

No respect for Hanson or any fans cheering this.

Please enlighten us how the Hanson group willinging offering up more money is an underhanded trick? Seems to me if that is the case, then all buisiness done in the US is slimy and underhanded. Hansen never went in with false pretenses to keep the team in Sac town.

It sounds like your just upset more about the possiblity of the Kings leaving than anything else. Seattle fans understand this feeling well.

JLynn943
05-10-2013, 05:04 PM
Unfortunately you would have to contend with a Sacramento group that wants to bring a team back to them then. Either way with the precedence Stern already set, sooner or later the country will realize what the NBA has become.

Exactly. This is just setting the precedent for a continual series of attempted takeovers and moves. If the Kings move to Seattle, someone will try and move the Bucks or Bobcats to Sac, and then someone will try to move another to to Milwaukee or Charlotte, etc.

ccg34
05-10-2013, 05:05 PM
As long as seattle is guaranteed a team, then I will be happy. If not, I will be disappointed. I love basketball too much to say, "Screw the NBA if Seattle doesn't get a team!" We got a state of the art arena deal,passionate owners who love the game, a tv deal coming up, and a fan base hungry for basketball! At least give us an expansion team.

kpak76
05-10-2013, 05:06 PM
the guy just wants a team in Seattle and is DESPERATE at this point. I wouldn't call it slimy. He just has no power or control so he's trying to throw his money at the problem because he's out of moves.

I can't blame him. But we aren't going anywhere.

Here is what Hansen is doing. If the NBA does not allow the sale, then that opens the door for an anti-trust lawsuite. And out of the suite will probably come a expansion team. Thats the card Hansen is playing.

JLynn943
05-10-2013, 05:07 PM
Please enlighten us how the Hanson group willinging offering up more money is an underhanded trick? Seems to me if that is the case, then all buisiness done in the US is slimy and underhanded. Hansen never went in with false pretenses to keep the team in Sac town.

It sounds like your just upset more about the possiblity of the Kings leaving than anything else. Seattle fans understand this feeling well.

This is insanely late in the process and doesn't give anyone time to counter. I think that's slimy and underhanded.

TeamSeattle
05-10-2013, 05:08 PM
As long as seattle is guaranteed a team, then I will be happy. If not, I will be disappointed. I love basketball too much to say, "Screw the NBA if Seattle doesn't get a team!" We got a state of the art arena deal,passionate owners who love the game, a tv deal coming up, and a fan base hungry for basketball! At least give us an expansion team.

We'll own the team through the sale, that's a start. Relocation might take awhile.

JLynn943
05-10-2013, 05:09 PM
Here is what Hansen is doing. If the NBA does not allow the sale, then that opens the door for an anti-trust lawsuite. And out of the suite will probably come a expansion team. Thats the card Hansen is playing.

This is what I'm hoping happens. Seattle deserves a team (and other owners apparently agree reading Arison's DM's on twitter), but they shouldn't be taking a team that is already established and has more than enough support to stay where they are.

JLynn943
05-10-2013, 05:10 PM
We'll own the team through the sale, that's a start. Relocation might take awhile.

Not necessarily. This isn't over yet.

NateyB24
05-10-2013, 05:14 PM
Guys the vote never happened it was a recommendation.

justinnum1
05-10-2013, 05:15 PM
Thats where you are wrong. The bucks do matter, that is the basis of the anti-trust lawsuite. If the NBA does not allow a sale to the highest bidder when the actual owner of the team wants to sell it to the Seattle group, the lawsuites begin.

Sacramento does not have a plan in place yet. It is still in the discussion phase and there has been groups down in Sacramento who have threatened a law suite to stop any building of a new NBA arena.

Personally as former Sonic fan, I think the NBA can go to hell. Just look at the division that putz bag Stern is causing with his shenanigans. Stern has by far been the worst of the 3 current commisioners in the major sports in this country. Thats saying a lot because his competition are Goodell and Selig! :confused:

Basically this entire debaucle started 5 years ago when Stern basically gave the keys to the Sonics (who was supported by Seattle for 40 years) to some Okie cronie. The NBA owners should have let this douche go when they realized they made a big mistake!

Oh, they can sell to the highest bidder, but the team is not leaving Sacramento. The NBA would need to approve the move, and guess who has the vote...the other owners. The relocation committee already voted unanimously that the kings do not move. And there is absolutely no reason to believe the rest of the owners would vote any different.

Like I said, this is meaningless, the kings are not leaving Sacramento.

gotoHcarolina52
05-10-2013, 05:17 PM
Here is what Hansen is doing. If the NBA does not allow the sale, then that opens the door for an anti-trust lawsuite. And out of the suite will probably come a expansion team. Thats the card Hansen is playing.

I don't mean to be a grammar nazi, but it's lawsuit. No "e".

TeamSeattle
05-10-2013, 05:19 PM
The sale of the team and the relocation are TWO SEPARATE issues guys.

Like the other people said Hansen is going for the anti-trust lawsuit regarding the sale if its not sold to the highest bidder at this point NOT the team's subsequent relocation.

Bravo95
05-10-2013, 05:20 PM
Add 2 expansion teams (Seattle and Vegas), move the 'Pelicans' or Grizzlies to the East, go back to 4 divisions, change the Bobcats name to Hornets, and give the Hawks the #1 overall pick in 2014. Boom, everybody's happy. :cool:

Infamous916
05-10-2013, 05:28 PM
This is a desperate attempt to keep the Seattle deal above water by Hansen.

kpak76
05-10-2013, 05:41 PM
This is insanely late in the process and doesn't give anyone time to counter. I think that's slimy and underhanded.

Really? I would actually call that good negotiation practice. Why would you let your opposition counter your proposal?

BKLYNpigeon
05-10-2013, 05:51 PM
Jordan should just sell his Bobcats to Seattle.

waveycrockett
05-10-2013, 05:53 PM
Jordan should just sell his Bobcats to Seattle.

Bobcats actually have had great support from the city

kpak76
05-10-2013, 05:55 PM
I don't mean to be a grammar nazi, but it's lawsuit. No "e".

Then don't. You understood what I was getting at.

kpak76
05-10-2013, 05:56 PM
Oh, they can sell to the highest bidder, but the team is not leaving Sacramento. The NBA would need to approve the move, and guess who has the vote...the other owners. The relocation committee already voted unanimously that the kings do not move. And there is absolutely no reason to believe the rest of the owners would vote any different.

Like I said, this is meaningless, the kings are not leaving Sacramento.

But thats where it gets murkey. Hansen will not buy the team unless it is primed for a move. Thus you have a hairy sticky situation all caused by letting the original Sonics head to a dust bowl.

JerseyPalahniuk
05-10-2013, 06:02 PM
Prokhorov bought 80% the Nets for $220 million in 2010. He also owns 45% of the Arena. Imagine what the value of those two combined are now. There's a reason he doesn't care too much about player/coach salaries.

justinnum1
05-10-2013, 06:10 PM
But thats where it gets murkey. Hansen will not buy the team unless it is primed for a move. Thus you have a hairy sticky situation all caused by letting the original Sonics head to a dust bowl.

Stop bringing up the original sonics. You are starting to sound like an upset old sonics fan.

KingPosey
05-10-2013, 06:14 PM
Here is what Hansen is doing. If the NBA does not allow the sale, then that opens the door for an anti-trust lawsuite. And out of the suite will probably come a expansion team. Thats the card Hansen is playing.

No that's the contingency plan, he wants the Kings now, without a zillion dollar court case.

JLynn943
05-10-2013, 06:15 PM
Really? I would actually call that good negotiation practice. Why would you let your opposition counter your proposal?

of course it's good for him. I don't know what you want from me. I obviously find the practice slimy. I don't care if it's normal capitalistic procedure to screw over one party, it's wrong imo. :shrug:

Randy West
05-10-2013, 06:16 PM
The NBA just needs to expand to the Seattle market. Both groups have shown they have the support and the ability to get arenas. It would be kind of silly for the NBA to overlook either group at this point as it has become obvious money isn't an issue.

Hold an expansion draft for Seattle just like the one for the Bobcats add in a couple additional draft picks and let the Supersonics fans and Seattle basketball fans have a team and spend their money on NBA product.

You just can't keep stomping your foot down and screaming NO EXPANSION NO EXPANSION when it has become so obvious the NBA as a whole would make money having a teams in both places.

KingPosey
05-10-2013, 06:18 PM
I hate the Maloofs. They absolutely destroyed the franchise and it's value all while being deceitful *** holes. Now they get to sit back and watch two cities full of heartbreak MASSIVELY overpay and line their pockets.

What undeserving pieces of ****. It's absolutely unbelievable that they stripped the franchise of any value and are now sitting back and laughing at these two cities that just want what's owed to them.

I don't want to give them credit for any sort of intelligence but I'm starting to believe they set this up years ago.

I guess if someone told me I'd make a half a billion dollars cold profit and all I had to do was make everyone in Detroit and Wisconsin hate me, I'd do it.

Randy West
05-10-2013, 06:26 PM
I hate the Maloof's and think it's just a shame what they have done. They stripped the organization down to almost nothing, back out of deals left and right, won't fix leaky ceiling's or anything else in the building they already occupy and they are going to have the highest selling price for any NBA franchise in history when this is all said and done.

They have done nothing at all to deserve this type of deal they are about to get and yet they will still get it all just from buying a pro sports team with daddys money.


Hope they all o'd on cocaine or speedballs with all the cash they get from this deal.

kpak76
05-10-2013, 06:26 PM
Stop bringing up the original sonics. You are starting to sound like an upset old sonics fan.

Why would I? It's not like the 2 stories aren't related now!!!

There are plenty of upset old Sonics fan out there.

kpak76
05-10-2013, 06:27 PM
of course it's good for him. I don't know what you want from me. I obviously find the practice slimy. I don't care if it's normal capitalistic procedure to screw over one party, it's wrong imo. :shrug:

I dont want anything from you, well other than your team. I am just countering your opinion.

NateyB24
05-10-2013, 06:30 PM
of course it's good for him. I don't know what you want from me. I obviously find the practice slimy. I don't care if it's normal capitalistic procedure to screw over one party, it's wrong imo. :shrug:

Dude calm down it is still likely to go Sacramento's way Chris Hansen wasn't just going to give up though he quoted Ali after the recommendation didn't go his way.

Infamous916
05-10-2013, 06:31 PM
I hate the Maloof's and think it's just a shame what they have done. They stripped the organization down to almost nothing, back out of deals left and right, won't fix leaky ceiling's or anything else in the building they already occupy and they are going to have the highest selling price for any NBA franchise in history when this is all said and done.

They have done nothing at all to deserve this type of deal they are about to get and yet they will still get it all just from buying a pro sports team with daddys money.


Hope they all o'd on cocaine or speedballs with all the cash they get from this deal.
It'll be a matter of time before they fade out, they aren't innovative & have no idea how to invest.

Not to mention losing the beer distributorship was the nail in the coffin.

kpak76
05-10-2013, 06:31 PM
No that's the contingency plan, he wants the Kings now, without a zillion dollar court case.

Yup, everything you said is correct, but then again, what I said is correct too. He is prepared for a zillion dollars for a court case. Balmer himself probably has enough money to buy out the entire NBA. It's a battle the NBA will probably lose in court.

hyphy king 88
05-10-2013, 06:35 PM
Even if there were a lawsuit it would take years. Vivek Ranadive was already told by the nba to put 50% escrow which he did. Stern said there wont be no bidding war. Kevin Johnson and you company knew this was going to happen and was prepared for it. Theres no reason why the Kings shouldn't stay. KJ, Vivek, has done everything the NBA wanted them to do. No need to move them.

Boozerguy47
05-10-2013, 06:46 PM
wtf. Isn't a little late in the process to suddenly up the bid by that much? This is the kind of scheming, slimy tactics Seattle fans complained about before (even if different tactics, still slimy). This is ****ing ridiculous.

No respect for Hanson or any fans cheering this.

You're telling me you would concede? He has dedicated the last 20 months of his life to bring the NBA back to Seattle. He acquired the land to build the stadium. Seattle approved the arena proposal. He attracted the Nordstrom brothers and Steve Ballmer (CEO of Microsoft) to form the majority of his ownership group. You don't call it quits until it is over.

The Sacramento group is yet to acquire the necessary funds.


...Numerous reports have said the Sacramento group, led by software tycoon Vivek Ranadive, has continued seeking investors and has been having trouble raising the money to match Hansen's earlier bid.

"If the Sacramento group has been having trouble putting the money together before, it may be tougher for them to get an extra $40 or $50 million as it breaks down in the valuation to match this bid," said KING 5's Chris Daniels on KIRO Radio's Dori Monson Show...

http://mynorthwest.com/11/2271684/Take-That

The team will likely stay put in Sacramento, but I commend Hansen and his team for their effort.

KingPosey
05-10-2013, 06:48 PM
Yup, everything you said is correct, but then again, what I said is correct too. He is prepared for a zillion dollars for a court case. Balmer himself probably has enough money to buy out the entire NBA. It's a battle the NBA will probably lose in court.

I just don't see how the NBA would just assuredly lose if there is a legal battle. They obviously have a great reason or two to keep the team In Sac. They wouldn't do if if it wasn't In The best interest of the business arc.

PleaseBeNice
05-10-2013, 06:50 PM
You're a butthurt crybaby. Why do you always get so defensive? It's embarrassing.

Ok, Let me wallow in my embarrassment. And I'm not butthurt. How can I if my team is still here? I don't like uneducated people and this thread has some.

Sandman
05-10-2013, 06:58 PM
No that's the contingency plan, he wants the Kings now, without a zillion dollar court case.
What is the cost of an expansion team?

I don't expect it to be free, but I doubt it would be 600M

Vinylman
05-10-2013, 07:10 PM
Even if there were a lawsuit it would take years. Vivek Ranadive was already told by the nba to put 50% escrow which he did. Stern said there wont be no bidding war. Kevin Johnson and you company knew this was going to happen and was prepared for it. Theres no reason why the Kings shouldn't stay. KJ, Vivek, has done everything the NBA wanted them to do. No need to move them.

He did? Isn't that dick rick bucher running his mouth saying it hasn't happened yet?

just wondering... no skin in the outcome at all...

cvietti23
05-10-2013, 07:11 PM
Ric bucher is wrong

Vinylman
05-10-2013, 07:14 PM
Ric bucher is wrong

that actually ISN'T Surprising :laugh2:

Baller1
05-10-2013, 07:21 PM
Now Seattle is the "bad guy"? :laugh2:

Get your ****ing team ripped away from your city and let us know how you feel. ****ing nonsense.

cvietti23
05-10-2013, 07:25 PM
So it's okay to steal a team but it's not okay to get your team stollen? Okay. That's logical

Chitownhero1992
05-10-2013, 07:28 PM
How is this stealing a team? Why are fans hating each other over nothing they can control...

Seattle deserves a team....Sacramento deserves a team....everyone has their own opinion why do you guys openly fight over "stealing" teams.

It's not stealing its the owner selling because he wants money, the new owners moving because they believe they can make more money in a different place. It has nothing to do with stealing its pure business.

Personally I don't care which place has a team, I loved seeing the old Sonics back in the 90's but also the King's have had nice teams in the past. So whoever gets the team as long as they are a good team who cares where they are.

waveycrockett
05-10-2013, 07:44 PM
Half of the western conference is in california. Sacramento fans need to get over it they have a bunch of options to chose from when the Kings leave

JLynn943
05-10-2013, 07:53 PM
Half of the western conference is in california. Sacramento fans need to get over it they have a bunch of options to chose from when the Kings leave

and how far are the Knicks, sixers, Celtics, and wizards from you? no need to have the Nets either in that case. not everyone just likes teams because of geographic proximity anyway.

cvietti23
05-10-2013, 07:58 PM
I grew up a kings fan. You can't just change teams lol. And I'm not hating. Just thought it was a bit hypocritical.

JLynn943
05-10-2013, 08:01 PM
Now Seattle is the "bad guy"? :laugh2:

Get your ****ing team ripped away from your city and let us know how you feel. ****ing nonsense.

I guarantee you view Clay Bennett as the bad guy. Same thing now, it's just that you'd benefit this time. Hypocrites.

hyphy king 88
05-10-2013, 08:30 PM
He did? Isn't that dick rick bucher running his mouth saying it hasn't happened yet?

just wondering... no skin in the outcome at all...

Hes always wrong. Rarely right. Almost everything he said about this situation has been wrong. His "sources" are himself most likely.

nico916
05-10-2013, 08:31 PM
aint baller101200 the same guy who was trolling on sacs forum and then disappeared after the NBA announced things like throwing money around aint everything when it comes to being able to acquire a team and its about long term for all parties including what looks best for future teams and future cities looking to get an NBA team? You sir are sounding like a hypocrite as well when you say we shouldn't be looking at your Seattle investors as the bad guy when your on the other side of this equation. All the owners not just Stern and Adam Silver are saying Hansen is doing things to burn bridges by being a spoiled brat tryna throw money at a situation till someone bends. I hope you guys get a team in the very near future but just not this one. It has been said by everyone outside of Seattle that Kings need to stay right where they are or no team or city should feel like there should be any loyalty between your fan base and any league because more Hansen's will pop up rip your team away from your hearts especially if your a small market city.

PHX2daDEATH
05-10-2013, 08:34 PM
So the ghost sonics are offering 625 million for cousins, evans, isiah jr, and ruben Patterson.. Seems like too much.

DumDum
05-10-2013, 08:46 PM
big money give Seattle their supersonics back

True Sports Fan
05-10-2013, 09:42 PM
All that comes to mind is **** you Hansen and **** you magoofs

True Sports Fan
05-10-2013, 09:44 PM
Half of the western conference is in california. Sacramento fans need to get over it they have a bunch of options to chose from when the Kings leave By that logic, shouldn't Seattle get over losing the franchise then with the other teams in Seattle? :wink:

Please tell me that sounds idiotic to you..

Baller1
05-10-2013, 09:52 PM
aint baller101200 the same guy who was trolling on sacs forum and then disappeared after the NBA announced things like throwing money around aint everything when it comes to being able to acquire a team and its about long term for all parties including what looks best for future teams and future cities looking to get an NBA team? You sir are sounding like a hypocrite as well when you say we shouldn't be looking at your Seattle investors as the bad guy when your on the other side of this equation. All the owners not just Stern and Adam Silver are saying Hansen is doing things to burn bridges by being a spoiled brat tryna throw money at a situation till someone bends. I hope you guys get a team in the very near future but just not this one. It has been said by everyone outside of Seattle that Kings need to stay right where they are or no team or city should feel like there should be any loyalty between your fan base and any league because more Hansen's will pop up rip your team away from your hearts especially if your a small market city.

Show me how I trolled. It's an open forum, just because I don't share the same thoughts as you doesn't mean I'm trolling. Nice try.

Baller1
05-10-2013, 09:54 PM
I'll go ahead and say it again...

If you get your team taken away Sactown, let me know how you'll be feeling in a couple years when you could possibly be in place to take the Bucks from Milwaukee. You'll be singing an entirely different tune. So **** off, I'll be as hypocritical as I like.

True Sports Fan
05-10-2013, 10:00 PM
I'll go ahead and say it again...

If you get your team taken away Sactown, let me know how you'll be feeling in a couple years when you could possibly be in place to take the Bucks from Milwaukee. You'll be singing an entirely different tune. So **** off, I'll be as hypocritical as I like. I'll return with a **** off right back to you sir.

If MY Kings moved I wouldn't want any other franchise to suffer through what Seattle fans have and what us Kings fans are going through. . So no I wouldn't be a hypocritical *******. Besides I'd have no interest watching a team slapped as the Sacramento Kings when we all know they aren't the reak Kings

lovesports443
05-10-2013, 11:03 PM
I'll go ahead and say it again...

If you get your team taken away Sactown, let me know how you'll be feeling in a couple years when you could possibly be in place to take the Bucks from Milwaukee. You'll be singing an entirely different tune. So **** off, I'll be as hypocritical as I like.

Proud to be a seattle fan huh? With the Mariners being second to last in attendance and the hawks who have yet to win a superbowl. Yeah I would be real proud to take away another city's team.

Baller1
05-10-2013, 11:06 PM
Proud to be a seattle fan huh? With the Mariners being second to last in attendance and the hawks who have yet to win a superbowl. Yeah I would be real proud to take away another city's team.

Seems kinda ****ing stupid to talk **** on my city's teams when your team has no other teams. Well done sir.

JLynn943
05-10-2013, 11:07 PM
I'll go ahead and say it again...

If you get your team taken away Sactown, let me know how you'll be feeling in a couple years when you could possibly be in place to take the Bucks from Milwaukee. You'll be singing an entirely different tune. So **** off, I'll be as hypocritical as I like.

The difference being we have a viable alternative trying to keep the team while Seattle had no shot. Sacramento is doing what you wish you guys could have and you won't even acknowledge it. Sacramento deserves the team.

kobe4thewinbang
05-10-2013, 11:19 PM
Never knew the Kings were worth this much.

:shrug:

imbetterthanyou
05-10-2013, 11:37 PM
First reaction to the news: yawn.

Second...baller101200 is hilarious "get your team stolen and tell me how you feel" then "ill be hypocritical as I like" please bro...clamoring for everybody's sympathy in this forum with your "whoa is me" attitude and then turning around and saying its cool for your wronged city to steal a team from a city thats done everything right. Ill be glad when this is still Sacramento's team and youre still crying.

Baller1
05-11-2013, 01:37 AM
Haha, easy to say that when you've never had your team stolen.

Randy West
05-11-2013, 05:48 AM
It'll be a matter of time before they fade out, they aren't innovative & have no idea how to invest.

Not to mention losing the beer distributorship was the nail in the coffin.

Sad thing is they actually sold it to invest in their failed casino which again goes to show you the business prowess these knuckleheads posses. The liquor business always makes money, times are good people drink, times are bad people drink more.

Randy West
05-11-2013, 05:49 AM
Haha, easy to say that when you've never had your team stolen.

I thought they were bought and moved??

MHoover101709
05-11-2013, 06:21 AM
I heard a lot of Kings rumors to Seattle

deaner
05-11-2013, 10:13 AM
Stern/Silver should shut this offer down, and then expand the league by 4 teams. Take any profits and invest in making the refs legit. The league has manipulated story lines comparable to WWE.

ThaDubs
05-11-2013, 12:09 PM
Why didn't they just hold a ****ing auction for this ****.

DumDum
05-11-2013, 12:14 PM
Stern/Silver should shut this offer down, and then expand the league by 4 teams. Take any profits and invest in making the refs legit. The league has manipulated story lines comparable to WWE.

wwe get their story lines the nba not the other way around and the media embellishes and then fans think its fake but so no proof of said "fake-ness"

ThaDubs
05-11-2013, 12:23 PM
wwe get their story lines the nba not the other way around and the media embellishes and then fans think its fake but so no proof of said "fake-ness"

The NBA is nothing like the WWE. It's manipulated by the refs and the players try to win ball games to the best of their ability. It's almost like a game within a game for the players in the NBA if you're trying to beat the team and beat the ref squad. The WWE is scripted.

DumDum
05-11-2013, 12:32 PM
The NBA is nothing like the WWE. It's manipulated by the refs and the players try to win ball games to the best of their ability. It's almost like a game within a game for the players in the NBA if you're trying to beat the team and beat the ref squad. The WWE is scripted.

conspiracy theories. Maybe in the 90s and early 2000s but you just don't see out right favoritism among refs for a certain team or player in todays nba. a couple blown calls at the end of games but thats about it

ryder78c
05-11-2013, 12:49 PM
Thank you for missing the point.

No matter what the offer is from seattle, the kings are not leaving Sacramento.

sorry to tell you but the deal isnt over that was like a warm up before the real vote which doesnt happen until Late May

ryder78c
05-11-2013, 12:51 PM
i still think the owners will figure something out why not expand by 1-2teams or just move the bobcats to seattle

justinnum1
05-11-2013, 12:51 PM
sorry to tell you but the deal isnt over that was like a warm up before the real vote which doesnt happen until Late May

If 12 people already voted for them to stay, they only need 4 more votes lol. They are staying in Sacramento, get over it.

ryder78c
05-11-2013, 01:09 PM
If 12 people already voted for them to stay, they only need 4 more votes lol. They are staying in Sacramento, get over it.

i could careless im a blazers fan so you get over it but the REAL vote doesnt happen until next week you can say there staying all you want but you cant tell the future and for that you are ignorant and miss the point it go back to to your Cavs Thread...i Mean Miami Thread....oh wait Lebron might be leaving u gotta switch teams again funny thing is you made your account as a Cavs Fan back in 2010

deaner
05-11-2013, 01:39 PM
conspiracy theories. Maybe in the 90s and early 2000s but you just don't see out right favoritism among refs for a certain team or player in todays nba. a couple blown calls at the end of games but thats about it

A couple of blown calls? Really? Officiating is pretty bad and the NBA hasn't accomplished anything to build back the trust of fans since the scandal.

justinnum1
05-11-2013, 01:57 PM
i could careless im a blazers fan so you get over it but the REAL vote doesnt happen until next week you can say there staying all you want but you cant tell the future and for that you are ignorant and miss the point it go back to to your Cavs Thread...i Mean Miami Thread....oh wait Lebron might be leaving u gotta switch teams again funny thing is you made your account as a Cavs Fan back in 2010

I love when people say this. lol. Go back to heat forums before lebron came and see my posts. You ******* ***** lol

But thanks for getting mad. :laugh2:

lovesports443
05-11-2013, 07:23 PM
Seems kinda ****ing stupid to talk **** on my city's teams when your team has no other teams. Well done sir.

You mean Baltimore, MD. Area code 443 right. Ravens? Have a nice day baller.

Sssmush
05-11-2013, 07:28 PM
http://www.king5.com/news/arena/Chris-Hansen-75-million-to-Kings-offer-206957551.html
****** Wiretap
Basketball news gathered from around the net.

Seattle Group Raises Bid For Kings By $75M
May 10, 2013 3:14 PM EDT


Chris Hansen has increased the bid of his Seattle-based investor group for the Sacramento Kings by $75 million to a valuation of $625 million.

Hansen had already raised the valuation of his bid to $550 million in an attempt to sway NBA owners.

The NBA's relocation committee voted a recommendation that the Kings remain in Sacramento.




RIP Sacramento. HELLLLLLLLOOOOOOOOOOOO SEATTLE

The owners who were striking are a joke.

dopeboy206
05-11-2013, 07:34 PM
If 12 people already voted for them to stay, they only need 4 more votes lol. They are staying in Sacramento, get over it.

Word has it only 7 voted and it was a 4-3 vote but the NBA just want the public to see how united the owners were so they said it was a 7-0 unanimous vote. You paint the picture a 4-3 vote wouldn't look good in the public's eyes.

dopeboy206
05-11-2013, 07:37 PM
It's gettin uglier and uglier.....For Sacramento that is...Can the NBA force the Maloofs to sell to the Sac group?
http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/9265605/sources-maloof-family-cuts-new-deal-sacramento-kings

NateyB24
05-11-2013, 07:41 PM
The group trying to move the Sacramento Kings to Seattle is continuing to be relentless in its pursuit.

And the NBA could be listening.

Chris Hansen and Steve Ballmer, the deep-pocketed Seattle-based investors trying to acquire the team, have struck a new deal with the Kings' current owners, the Maloofs, that may create more drama in Sacramento and the league office.

Two sources told ESPN.com the Maloofs have informed their fellow owners that if their deal to sell and relocate the Kings to Seattle is not approved by league owners next week, they will not sell the team to a Sacramento-based group that promises to keep the Kings in Sacramento.

Instead, the cash-strapped Maloofs have made a "backup" agreement with the Hansen-Ballmer group to sell it 20 percent of the team for $125 million to allow the Maloofs to continue to operate the franchise.

That new "backup" plan comes on the heels of Hansen's announcement on Friday that he had upped his offer to buy the Maloofs' 65 percent of the Kings to $409 million (from $358 million) for a total valuation of $625 million.

Sources said that new proposal also included a $115 million offer to owners as a relocation fee, which would amount to about $4 million per team. By comparison, in 2008 when the Oklahoma City Thunder moved from Seattle, they paid a $30 million total fee to the other owners.

To consider these incredible new figures, the NBA relocation committee is planning to re-evaluate the Hansen-Ballmer offer and has scheduled another meeting ahead of next Tuesday's full owners meeting in Dallas, sources said.

Two weeks ago, that same committee voted unanimously to reject the relocation request to Seattle, and the full body of owners was expected to follow that recommendation. It appeared a prospective ownership group based in Sacramento had won and the team would stay long term.

Now, the Hansen-Baller's super-aggressive, cash-laden increased offer is apparently causing at least some reconsideration.

A league spokesman did not reply to a request for comment.

Just as with relocation, teams cannot sell minority shares without approval from league owners. It's questionable whether the owners would approve of a group that clearly wants the team to end up in Seattle to buy a large stake in a team they voted to be kept in Sacramento. But they also cannot compel the Maloofs to sell the team.

In the last three months, the NBA has negotiated its own backup plan for the Kings with a group led by Silicon Valley billionaire Vivek Ranadive. That group, which has changed its leadership several times, ultimately offered a valuation of $525 million for the Kings and brokered a deal with local governments to building a new arena with more than $250 million in public funds.

After studying the offers closely, the relocation committee ultimately decided that Ranadive and the city of Sacramento's offer was suitable. Ranadive, who has put 50 percent of the purchase into escrow, was hoping the owners also will green light his purchase when they settle the matter next week.

But the Maloofs' latest move with the Hansen-Ballmer group's new promises could throws all that into question again. The Maloofs have favored the Hansen deal the entire time and did not negotiate with Ranadive or the city of Sacramento involving the new arena.

The strategy is rather transparent. If the relocation bid is officially blocked, Hansen and Ballmer want a piece of the Kings so they could apply pressure on the city of Sacramento to execute an arena deal with them. The city and the Maloofs have failed to come to an agreement on a new arena several times in the past decade. If the Maloofs keep the team and an arena deal can't be reached, the franchise could apply for relocation again.

Several ownership sources told ESPN.com that there was some concern that Ranadive and the city of Sacramento could close and execute the deal for the new arena. Those concerns could be driving this last round of fighting by the Seattle group as it tries to sway owners who may not have fully made up their minds.

Throughout this tedious process, the Maloofs and the Hansen-Ballmer group have worked without involving the league office and powerful NBA commissioner David Stern. Meanwhile, the Sacramento group and Mayor Kevin Johnson have worked with Stern every step of the way. That partnership seems to have helped the city and Ranadive get into favorable position with other owners.

That trend has not stopped the Seattle group from pressing forward with these plans.

http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/9265605/sources-maloof-family-cuts-new-deal-sacramento-kings

justinnum1
05-11-2013, 07:43 PM
Word has it only 7 voted and it was a 4-3 vote but the NBA just want the public to see how united the owners were so they said it was a 7-0 unanimous vote. You paint the picture a 4-3 vote wouldn't look good in the public's eyes.

I read it was 12 people who voted and they all voted for them to stay.

NateyB24
05-11-2013, 07:44 PM
I read it was 12 people who voted and they all voted for them to stay.

It's not voted on till the 15th this was just a recommendation he/she is correct though only 7 were present and voted on the recommendation.

justinnum1
05-11-2013, 07:52 PM
delete

TeamSeattle
05-11-2013, 07:54 PM
delete

Only 7 voted and it was indeed a 4-3 vote but stated as unanimous.

NateyB24
05-11-2013, 07:56 PM
delete

Here is a source if you need one:


Thiel report also mentions what we have talked about and heard from multiple NBA sources: Relo vote was 4-3. 7-0 at end for unanimity

https://twitter.com/Softykjr/status/333093855874387968

dopeboy206
05-11-2013, 07:57 PM
Question: Can the NBA force the Maloofs to sell to the Sacramento group or is there a rule against that?

justinnum1
05-11-2013, 07:58 PM
yea, just read that. thanks

NateyB24
05-11-2013, 07:59 PM
Question: Can the NBA force the Maloofs to sell to the Sacramento group or is there a rule against that?

No they can denie the sale but they can't force an NBA owner to sell the team to who they want.

sacgiants1213
05-11-2013, 08:03 PM
Maloofs gonna Maloof.

justinnum1
05-11-2013, 08:16 PM
With a viable plan in place to keep the kings in Sacramento, i think the NBA denies the relocation request.

dopeboy206
05-11-2013, 08:24 PM
With a viable plan in place to keep the kings in Sacramento, i think the NBA denies the relocation request.

All they need is 16 votes to relocate

THE MTL
05-11-2013, 08:27 PM
Give the Kings to Seattle! They deserve it. That offer is already FAR more than what the team is worth. Seattle will make that team a powerhouse. That Seattle market is a top 5 NBA market waiting to happen

KingsMadness44
05-11-2013, 11:19 PM
Give the Kings to Seattle! They deserve it. That offer is already FAR more than what the team is worth. Seattle will make that team a powerhouse. That Seattle market is a top 5 NBA market waiting to happen

Why are you so against Sacramento in this?

dopeboy206
05-11-2013, 11:40 PM
Forgive me for the false info. A league spokesman said reports of an initial committee vote of 4-3 were false, and that the only vote taken was unanimous to reject relocation.
http://www.nba.com/2013/news/features/david_aldridge/05/11/chris-hansen-sweetens-offer-kings/index.html

Sactown
05-12-2013, 01:05 AM
Lol 75 Mil is pennies on the dollar, the board is committed to keeping the team in Sacramento because Sacramento is hell bent on keeping the team.. Seattle played it's hand and lost, upping the bid 75 Mil isn't going to change anything...

Stern has asked the Sacramento group to deposit it's cash into an escrow account...

Honestly at this point, the Hansen/Balmer group is hurting their chances of ever getting a franchise, trying to show up the committee and the commish.

NateyB24
05-12-2013, 01:40 AM
Lol 75 Mil is pennies on the dollar, the board is committed to keeping the team in Sacramento because Sacramento is hell bent on keeping the team.. Seattle played it's hand and lost, upping the bid 75 Mil isn't going to change anything...

Stern has asked the Sacramento group to deposit it's cash into an escrow account...

Honestly at this point, the Hansen/Balmer group is hurting their chances of ever getting a franchise, trying to show up the committee and the commish.

How does upping the price hurt them in the future if they don't get the Kings?

Sactown
05-12-2013, 01:58 AM
How does upping the price hurt them in the future if they don't get the Kings?

Their poor attitude

Stern said this was going to be settled; the vote happened and Seattle didn't like the results so they restructured a new deal, and had the maloofs threaten to keep the team if sale didn't go through... From what Chris Hansen is reporting that the way H/B+ Maloofs set up the deal, the league would have to reject the sale 3 times instead of one.. Seattle is trying to buy time, and I don't think Stern is going to be happen with the maloofs threat

utl768
05-12-2013, 02:11 AM
seattle deserves a team

california dont need 4 teams

Sactown
05-12-2013, 02:15 AM
seattle deserves a team

california dont need 4 teams

This is a very ignorant statement

From Sacramento to the LA area is 384 Miles AWAY Projected 5 hours 47 minutes away
Seattle to Portland is 173... projected 2 hours and 45 minutes

Do the math...

Seattle has a team very close they can root for...

lovesports443
05-12-2013, 02:19 AM
Give the Kings to Seattle! They deserve it. That offer is already FAR more than what the team is worth. Seattle will make that team a powerhouse. That Seattle market is a top 5 NBA market waiting to happen

Your right and they had a team and moved to Oklahoma and Seattle blew it. Check their baseball attendance. Yeah powerhouse... I see ur a knicks fan. I'm assuming you like the giants. I was watching them vs the ravens and man. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dBfONei3ABM

Anyway, it will be interesting to see what happens in this.

NateyB24
05-12-2013, 02:24 AM
Their poor attitude

Stern said this was going to be settled; the vote happened and Seattle didn't like the results so they restructured a new deal, and had the maloofs threaten to keep the team if sale didn't go through... From what Chris Hansen is reporting that the way H/B+ Maloofs set up the deal, the league would have to reject the sale 3 times instead of one.. Seattle is trying to buy time, and I don't think Stern is going to be happen with the maloofs threat

I don't think Hansen or Balmer really care what Stern thinks he doesn't have a vote so even if Hansen doesn't get the Kings they still have a real good shot the next time.

utl768
05-12-2013, 02:24 AM
You're an idiot..

From Sacramento to the LA area is 384 Miles AWAY Projected 5 hours 47 minutes away
Seattle to Portland is 173... projected 2 hours and 45 minutes

Do the math...

Seattle has a team very close they can root for...
sac to oakland is 80 miles

ur the idiot

Sactown
05-12-2013, 02:25 AM
Who cares what Stern think's what the owner's think and they aren't going to turn Balmer away in the future if he doesn't get the Kings.

All sales are voted on by the board which is usually influenced by Stern, so I think H/B do....

Sactown
05-12-2013, 02:26 AM
sac to oakland is 80 miles

ur the idiot

Your right

Seattle Portland area has 1 team

Sac Oakland has 2 teams

Let's move the Kings to cut the average drivers time by 1 hour and 20 minutes

So Sac Oakland has 1 team

Seattle Portland has 2 teams...

And I'm the idiot...

NateyB24
05-12-2013, 02:30 AM
All sales are voted on by the board which is usually influenced by Stern, so I think H/B do....

Yea still not buying it if expansion ever became available and Hansen doesn't get the Kings they will follow the $.

Sactown
05-12-2013, 02:32 AM
Yea still not buying it if expansion ever became available and Hansen doesn't get the Kings they will follow the $.

At first, when the vote was unanimous in Sac's favor I thought expansion was coming, but I don't think it is after the lockout and the owners crying poor..

Adding a team cuts into the pie, and like you said, they will follow the money....

PleaseBeNice
05-12-2013, 02:46 AM
So how many binding contracts is this now? 3? 4? wut.

mikekhelxD
05-12-2013, 02:56 AM
Well, to be fair, the board really haven't voted on it.

Sactown
05-12-2013, 02:59 AM
Well, to be fair, the board really haven't voted on it.

It was a recommendation vote, and all 12 members recommended the league vote in favor of Sacramento, and I'd be more than very surprised to see the rest of the voters go in the opposite direction of the recommendation of the BOG

Boozerguy47
05-12-2013, 03:29 AM
Your right and they had a team and moved to Oklahoma and Seattle blew it. Check their baseball attendance. Yeah powerhouse... I see ur a knicks fan. I'm assuming you like the giants. I was watching them vs the ravens and man. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dBfONei3ABM

Anyway, it will be interesting to see what happens in this.

You talk about reduced attendance numbers for the Mariners... What do you expect? The team hasn't been to the playoffs in a decade and only has one winning season in the recent past. Similar situation to when the Sonics left. The team was struggling, fans didn't want to spend their money on a poor product. Winning leads to increases in demand. Losing has the opposite impact. Pretty ignorant to think if the Mariners were in LA or NY that attendance numbers would have stayed relatively constant over the last several years.

Why post the highlights of the Ravens and Giants? That has nothing to do with this topic.

Boozerguy47
05-12-2013, 03:33 AM
This is a very ignorant statement

From Sacramento to the LA area is 384 Miles AWAY Projected 5 hours 47 minutes away
Seattle to Portland is 173... projected 2 hours and 45 minutes

Do the math...

Seattle has a team very close they can root for...

Portland and Seattle are larger markets than Sacramento. One advantage Sacramento and Portland have over Seattle is the fact the two cities don't have as many professional teams to support. OKC has shown the NBA can thrive in smaller markets when the situation is right. But, it also helps when the team is improving each year.

http://www.arbitron.com/home/mm001050.asp

Sactown
05-12-2013, 03:48 AM
Portland and Seattle are larger markets than Sacramento. One advantage Sacramento and Portland have over Seattle is the fact the two cities don't have as many professional teams to support. OKC has shown the NBA can thrive in smaller markets when the situation is right. But, it also helps when the team is improving each year.

http://www.arbitron.com/home/mm001050.asp

This has nothing to do with what I posted.. I concede the fact that Sacramento is a smaller market, but the Sonics have had a poorer attendance when they were there than Sacramento has had now, even with a bottom feeder over the last few seasons... This probably has something to do with the fact that Seattle provides more to do than Sacramento does..

Boozerguy47
05-12-2013, 03:59 AM
Perhaps I chose my words poorly, but I wasn't trying to make it sound like a team's attendance numbers are only correlated with the number of other professional teams in the city. Couldn't tell if you were going the sarcasm route. Numerous factors contribute to demand, but winning is no doubt number one and the Kings largely outperformed the Sonics in the recent past.

waveycrockett
05-12-2013, 09:01 AM
Portland and Seattle are larger markets than Sacramento. One advantage Sacramento and Portland have over Seattle is the fact the two cities don't have as many professional teams to support. OKC has shown the NBA can thrive in smaller markets when the situation is right. But, it also helps when the team is improving each year.

http://www.arbitron.com/home/mm001050.asp

It's pretty easy to have a thriving small market team when you have 2 superstars playing in your town. The Kings were once a thriving small market team when Cwebb, Vlade, Bibby and Peja were all there now look at them.

waveycrockett
05-12-2013, 09:02 AM
It was a recommendation vote, and all 12 members recommended the league vote in favor of Sacramento, and I'd be more than very surprised to see the rest of the voters go in the opposite direction of the recommendation of the BOG
That was before the Seattle group raised their bid by 75 Million. Sure they are singing a different tune now

alexander_37
05-12-2013, 10:24 AM
How does upping the price hurt them in the future if they don't get the Kings?

Their poor attitude

Stern said this was going to be settled; the vote happened and Seattle didn't like the results so they restructured a new deal, and had the maloofs threaten to keep the team if sale didn't go through... From what Chris Hansen is reporting that the way H/B+ Maloofs set up the deal, the league would have to reject the sale 3 times instead of one.. Seattle is trying to buy time, and I don't think Stern is going to be happen with the maloofs threat

You realize that
A. Stern has no say or power in this right?
B. the vote was nothing but a recommendation. It holds almost as little bearing on this as Stern.

JLynn943
05-12-2013, 10:40 AM
It's pretty easy to have a thriving small market team when you have 2 superstars playing in your town. The Kings were once a thriving small market team when Cwebb, Vlade, Bibby and Peja were all there now look at them.

Sacramento has had 19 sellout seasons since 1985, two of the 5 longest sellout streaks in NBA history, and had higher attendance than Seattle in 20 of the 23 seasons where both cities had teams. Sacramento fans don't need to have stars to support the team. The only reason attendance is so low now is because of the Maloofs repeatedly trying to screw over the fans.

waveycrockett
05-12-2013, 10:47 AM
Sacramento has had 19 sellout seasons since 1985, two of the 5 longest sellout streaks in NBA history, and had higher attendance than Seattle in 20 of the 23 seasons where both cities had teams. Sacramento fans don't need to have stars to support the team. The only reason attendance is so low now is because of the Maloofs repeatedly trying to screw over the fans.
I'm not denying the Sac fans are/were great but it's alot harder to keep owners of small market teams accountable. 5-10 years down the road I would not be surprised to see Sac in the same situation it is now with the Maloofs. Small Market owners are notoriously profit driven which is typically a disaster for prosports teams. SEA is a bigger market, the Key Arena was a DUMP and SEA has become a big sports town.

JLynn943
05-12-2013, 10:56 AM
I'm not denying the Sac fans are/were great but it's alot harder to keep owners of small market teams accountable. 5-10 years down the road I would not be surprised to see Sac in the same situation it is now with the Maloofs. Small Market owners are notoriously profit driven which is typically a disaster for prosports teams. SEA is a bigger market, the Key Arena was a DUMP and SEA has become a big sports town.

I do think that Sacramento's market size is understated by a lot of people here. It's still the 20th largest media market in the country and somewhere around 12th-14th among teams in the league. Seattle's is certainly bigger, but Sacramento still being that large and without another pro team still makes it a significant market. I think that fact, plus the history of fan support, is a major reason this situation isn't a landslide in Seattle's favor. If the Seattle group went after a team that hasn't been supported well, I think this would have been a lot smoother. But, you take the first opportunity you get I suppose.

I think a good owner would be able to do quite well in Sac. The fans are still there. They're just waiting for the Maloofs to be gone.

Randy West
05-12-2013, 11:31 AM
You realize that
A. Stern has no say or power in this right?
B. the vote was nothing but a recommendation. It holds almost as little bearing on this as Stern.

Stern does have say in this, the team just isn't going to the highest bidder. The NBA has franchises they have a say in what the franchises do. The NBA will do whats in the NBA's best interest regardless of what the owners want to do.

The vote was 7-0 you do realize that you have to have majority support from the other owners for this transaction to take place so you need 23 votes one way or the other. So yes the vote does matter because you know how many times the league has gone against the BOG recommendations.......none as of yet.

Vinny642
05-12-2013, 11:44 AM
Maloofs said they will only sell to the Seattle side, so idk

Sactown
05-12-2013, 11:47 AM
That was before the Seattle group raised their bid by 75 Million. Sure they are singing a different tune now

No they won't be singing a different tune, 75 mill is nothing when the whole franchise is costing 550 Mil +, even if the league were to allow them to up the bid (highly doubt they do, as Stern said this will not be a bidding war) the Sacramento Group has more than enough money to match again....

Sactown
05-12-2013, 11:49 AM
I'm not denying the Sac fans are/were great but it's alot harder to keep owners of small market teams accountable. 5-10 years down the road I would not be surprised to see Sac in the same situation it is now with the Maloofs. Small Market owners are notoriously profit driven which is typically a disaster for prosports teams. SEA is a bigger market, the Key Arena was a DUMP and SEA has become a big sports town.
Sacramento's attendance has allows been better than Seattle, so obviously you're posting your opinion before looking up the facts... The Kings have had more sellout seasons than successful ones record wise.. The team has always had support, and with a new arena they would more than flourish... The Maloofs went broke not because of the basketball team, but because they were poor business men.. Fact is many teams lost a lot more money than the Kings did before the lockout, I actually believe the kings were barely in the red... Our market is fine..

Sactown
05-12-2013, 11:53 AM
You realize that
A. Stern has no say or power in this right?
B. the vote was nothing but a recommendation. It holds almost as little bearing on this as Stern.

A. Stern has a lot of power.. He's allowed the Kings to match, He's allowed them to make so many presentations, he's told them what to do every step of the way... And I don't think the BOG group was unanimous without his input... So don't be so ignorant.. If you had watched and listened to every piece of news you would understand his power..

B. Yes it was a recommendation vote, but the BOG holds 12 votes and they all went Sacramento's way... Seattle would need 16 of the next 18 votes to win out.. I don't think 16 of the 18 teams are going to go against the BOG and Stern, and believe that is just silly... So while it was a "Recommendation vote" it means a lot more because it was unanimous... I'd be singing a different tune if the split was 8-4 or 6-6... but it was TWELVE TO NOTHING... Saying that the recommendation vote means nothing is just denial at its finest.

Sactown
05-12-2013, 11:53 AM
Maloofs said they will only sell to the Seattle side, so idk

David Stern has the power to force a sale to the Sac group...

waveycrockett
05-12-2013, 11:58 AM
No they won't be singing a different tune, 75 mill is nothing when the whole franchise is costing 550 Mil +, even if the league were to allow them to up the bid (highly doubt they do, as Stern said this will not be a bidding war) the Sacramento Group has more than enough money to match again....

Since when is $75 Million peanuts? Thats basically 1/3 the valuation of a lot of NBA teams.

waveycrockett
05-12-2013, 11:59 AM
David Stern has the power to force a sale to the Sac group...

That violates anti-trust laws. NBA would face huge lawsuits if he did that.

mgsports
05-12-2013, 12:01 PM
Or he could get St.Louis or KC or Tampa Bay involved or let them go to Las Vegas.

Sactown
05-12-2013, 12:08 PM
That violates anti-trust laws. NBA would face huge lawsuits if he did that.

Actually, David Stern has a clause as the commish that he has the right to do what's in the best interest of the league, and there's already prescenance for this..

In MLB the Dodgers owner was forced to sell because they were hurting the integrity of the league... David Stern has already told the Maloofs if they go for Sacramento that their lawsuit would have no teeth.. But of course you would know this if you were reading every single thing published so far instead of ESPN articles...

Sactown
05-12-2013, 12:10 PM
Since when is $75 Million peanuts? Thats basically 1/3 the valuation of a lot of NBA teams.

Obviously you haven't been paying attention.. A. 75 MIll isn't 1/3 of over 500 Million.. and B. buying the team is only half of what is needed to secure the team... The Arena is another big part of it, and with the combination of the too you're talking over a BILLION dollars.. making 75 Mill peanuts..

THE MTL
05-12-2013, 12:17 PM
Why are you so against Sacramento in this?

I just see Seattle as a better situation than Sacramento. Seattle is motivated and determined and are willing to do anything to get a team. And that is going to reflect on the product they put on the floor too. I see Seattle actually trying to make that team into something special instead of doing whatever the Kings been doing since C-Webb got traded to the Sixers.

Sure, Sacramento can say they got the money and the stadium (even though Seattle proves to be ahead of them in that department too)......but you see I'm a fan of BASKETBALL and I want to see good exciting teams. Kings arent trying to do anything in Sacramento. But if they moved to Seattle, you can be damn sure they not only get that city a team but a damn good team as well.

waveycrockett
05-12-2013, 12:18 PM
Obviously you haven't been paying attention.. A. 75 MIll isn't 1/3 of over 500 Million.. and B. buying the team is only half of what is needed to secure the team... The Arena is another big part of it, and with the combination of the too you're talking over a BILLION dollars.. making 75 Mill peanuts..

I never said $75 Million was a 1/3 of 500 Million. I just said it wasnt peanuts like your trying to make it out to be. No businessman is ever going to scoff at $75 Million which is what David Stern and NBA Owners ultimately are. The arena has nothing to do with the sale itself. Which Seattle has the advantage of anyway since they cleared permits and have plans drawn up and ready to break ground.

Sandman
05-12-2013, 12:20 PM
Such a ridiculous over-valuation of the team (because, monetarily, the Kings are not worth what either group is willing to pay for them) would have interesting consequences. If the NBA allows this deal to Seattle, other owners who have teams that are more valuable than the Kings are going to expect more money when sold, but this over-valuation is only due to an incredibly desperate, incredibly wealthy man trying to steal a team from another city. Other owners will not get the value that the Kings sale would dictate unless this same type of situation happens with every sale - where someone insanely wealthy is just on a mission to move a team. Selling to Hansen would thus just lead to unsaleable franchises or this same mess over again.
For crying out loud, stop with the "OMG HES TRYING TO STEAL A TEAM FROM ANOTHER CITY".

He's trying to buy a team thats for sale. Thats it.

Obviously you haven't been paying attention.. A. 75 MIll isn't 1/3 of over 500 Million.. and B. buying the team is only half of what is needed to secure the team... The Arena is another big part of it, and with the combination of the too you're talking over a BILLION dollars.. making 75 Mill peanuts..
It doesn't have anything to do with the arena cost or anything else. Its about a 15% increase in the BID, but what he's talking about is that it is more than 1/3 of what other teams are currently valued it. If the Kings get sold for 625 or whatever the number is at now, the value of a lot of smaller teams can rise significantly.

Actually, David Stern has a clause as the commish that he has the right to do what's in the best interest of the league, and there's already prescenance for this..

In MLB the Dodgers owner was forced to sell because they were hurting the integrity of the league... David Stern has already told the Maloofs if they go for Sacramento that their lawsuit would have no teeth.. But of course you would know this if you were reading every single thing published so far instead of ESPN articles...
The Dodgers being forced to sell is different from the Dodgers being forced to sell to a particular bidder. This would create anti-trust lawsuit coming from the Seattle group.

Randy West
05-12-2013, 12:31 PM
I wonder how Seattle group would look to the nba and other owners if they tried suing everyone because they couldn't basically bribe them with the most cash?

If I were the Seattle group I would tread very carefully here. They could be making it much more difficult to do anything with the nba and the other owners if they piss off enough of them.

Sactown
05-12-2013, 12:57 PM
I never said $75 Million was a 1/3 of 500 Million. I just said it wasnt peanuts like your trying to make it out to be. No businessman is ever going to scoff at $75 Million which is what David Stern and NBA Owners ultimately are. The arena has nothing to do with the sale itself. Which Seattle has the advantage of anyway since they cleared permits and have plans drawn up and ready to break ground.

You're joking right? The Arena is constantly being discussed, and yes out of the 1 Billion dollars on the table 75 million is easily matched when you're talking about multiple BILLIONAIRES... Also Yes Seattle has an Arena plan that would be finished in 2017, Sacramento's would be finished in 2015, and is a big reason why the VOTE WAS UNANIMOUS IN SACRAMENTO'S FAVOR... clearly these "Business Men" have seen the business being presented and have decided in favor of Sacramento

Also.. A 27 Ranked market selling for 550 Million would increase the value of each franchise more than 550 Million for a 13th ranked market...

Also, Sacramento has had more success in a basketball market than Seattle had... Clearly if Seattle deserved a team so much, they should of fought for theirs more than watching it move away...

waveycrockett
05-12-2013, 12:59 PM
You're joking right? The Arena is constantly being discussed, and yes out of the 1 Billion dollars on the table 75 million is easily matched when you're talking about multiple BILLIONAIRES... Also Yes Seattle has an Arena plan that would be finished in 2017, Sacramento's would be finished in 2015, and is a big reason why the VOTE WAS UNANIMOUS IN SACRAMENTO'S FAVOR... clearly these "Business Men" have seen the business being presented and have decided in favor of Sacramento

Also.. A 27 Ranked market selling for 550 Million would increase the value of each franchise more than 550 Million for a 13th ranked market...

Also, Sacramento has had more success in a basketball market than Seattle had... Clearly if Seattle deserved a team so much, they should of fought for theirs more than watching it move away...

And if it sold for $625 Million it would do more no?

JLynn943
05-12-2013, 01:00 PM
For crying out loud, stop with the "OMG HES TRYING TO STEAL A TEAM FROM ANOTHER CITY".

He's trying to buy a team thats for sale. Thats it

Learn to read. You quoted me saying the situation that this sale will create, which you apparently can't respond to.

Sactown
05-12-2013, 01:01 PM
For crying out loud, stop with the "OMG HES TRYING TO STEAL A TEAM FROM ANOTHER CITY".

He's trying to buy a team thats for sale. Thats it.

It doesn't have anything to do with the arena cost or anything else. Its about a 15% increase in the BID, but what he's talking about is that it is more than 1/3 of what other teams are currently valued it. If the Kings get sold for 625 or whatever the number is at now, the value of a lot of smaller teams can rise significantly.

The Dodgers being forced to sell is different from the Dodgers being forced to sell to a particular bidder. This would create anti-trust lawsuit coming from the Seattle group.

Stern has already told them IF THEY DECIDED TO GO WITH SACRAMENTO AS THE PERSON BEING SOLD TO, THE MALOOFS WOULD HAVE NO GROUND TO STAND ON IF THEY TRIED TO SUE HIM... He said this... So obviously he thinks he has the power to force a sale... HIS WORDS, NOT MINE..

Everything so far has come down to the Arena, it was why there was a presentation at the BOG, if you had been paying attention during April 3-18 you would know this.. Sacramento has provided facts that they would be able to build an arena quicker than Seattle... PLUS the League does not like the fact that Seattle WOULD NOT BE PUTTING MONEY IN on the Arena, and the League is scared that this would set a prescenance that Franchises would be solely responsible for the finances..

Also David Stern has stated that MOVING FRANCHISES is the BLACK EYE of his career. If you don't believe Sacramento has the ADVANTAGE after a TWELVE TO NOTHING VOTE... Stern HELPING THEM... Than you're as blind as the sun is bright...

ALSO David Stern likes the idea of having the first Indian owner, as it would help globalization and marketing..

Sactown
05-12-2013, 01:02 PM
And if it sold for $625 Million it would do more no?

Sacramento has matched them each step of the way... 75 million isn't going to stop BILLIONAIRES.. as there are 4 of them...

TeamSeattle
05-12-2013, 01:04 PM
Stern has already told them IF THEY DECIDED TO GO WITH SACRAMENTO AS THE PERSON BEING SOLD TO, THE MALOOFS WOULD HAVE NO GROUND TO STAND ON IF THEY TRIED TO SUE HIM... He said this... So obviously he thinks he has the power to force a sale... HIS WORDS, NOT MINE..

Everything so far has come down to the Arena, it was why there was a presentation at the BOG, if you had been paying attention during April 3-18 you would know this.. Sacramento has provided facts that they would be able to build an arena quicker than Seattle... PLUS the League does not like the fact that Seattle WOULD NOT BE PUTTING MONEY IN on the Arena, and the League is scared that this would set a prescenance that Franchises would be solely responsible for the finances..

Also David Stern has stated that MOVING FRANCHISES is the BLACK EYE of his career. If you don't believe Sacramento has the ADVANTAGE after a TWELVE TO NOTHING VOTE... Stern HELPING THEM... Than you're as blind as the sun is bright...

The vote was NOT 12-0. It was 4-3 in the recommendation for the moving of the franchise and later stated as unanimous.

Sactown
05-12-2013, 01:05 PM
The vote was NOT 12-0. It was 4-3 in the recommendation for the moving of the franchise and later stated as unanimous.

Article please.

Sactown
05-12-2013, 01:09 PM
ALSO, I am so confident the Kings stay in Sacramento, I will bet anyone on PSD that if the Kings move I'll leave PSD, but if they stay, you have to...

Any takers?

TeamSeattle
05-12-2013, 01:11 PM
Article please.

Ok, some reports say it was 7-0 and some are saying it was 4-3. One thing that is fact is that only 7 people made the recommendation

http://blog.seattlepi.com/sonics/2013/05/11/report-kings-relocation-vote-4-3-not-7-0/?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter
http://sportspressnw.com/2151123/2013/hansen-ups-bid-for-nba-kings-to-625-million

Sactown
05-12-2013, 01:14 PM
Ok, some reports say it was 7-0 and some are saying it was 4-3. One thing that is fact is that only 7 people made the recommendation

http://blog.seattlepi.com/sonics/2013/05/11/report-kings-relocation-vote-4-3-not-7-0/?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter
http://sportspressnw.com/2151123/2013/hansen-ups-bid-for-nba-kings-to-625-million

Seattle is coming out and claiming that the vote was 4-3, while every other news outlet has said 7-0.. I think I can gather on who's telling the truth, and yes you're right it was 7 instead of twelve... Either way that's huge that a recommendation vote went unanimous when David Stern came out and said we will not be looking for a unanimous vote.. Also...

TheMontyShow has said they are hearing word from 4 sources that David Stern will "David will have to evoke his power to act in the best interest of the league"

So I'd love to see the Maloofs sue them.

True Sports Fan
05-12-2013, 01:25 PM
seattle deserves a team

california dont need 4 teams

This is a very ignorant statement

From Sacramento to the LA area is 384 Miles AWAY Projected 5 hours 47 minutes away
Seattle to Portland is 173... projected 2 hours and 45 minutes

Do the math...

Seattle has a team very close they can root for... Yet according to Seattle fans we are supposed to root for Lakers or clippers since there close.... How about they root for Blazers then 'laugh2:

alexander_37
05-12-2013, 01:28 PM
And if it sold for $625 Million it would do more no?

Sacramento has matched them each step of the way... 75 million isn't going to stop BILLIONAIRES.. as there are 4 of them...

They didn't even match 525 yet, they are going to put the city even further in the toilet with the publicly funded portion when this ownership group squeezes more money out of them to match this 100 million they put up. This is a lose lose for sac.

Sactown
05-12-2013, 01:31 PM
Yet according to Seattle fans we are supposed to root for Lakers or clippers since there close.... How about they root for Blazers then 'laugh2:

Every argument I have easily refuted.. Obviously my information is more accurate, or the vote and David Sterns comments wouldn't have been soooooo one sided..

More and more information is coming out on twitter, Chris Hansen, the reporter for Seattle has reported minimal to nothing since the vote, and he was all gun ho, on Seattle winning over the franchise..

Aaron Bruski

Source: “Ballmer is playing a game of Russian Roulette with SEA’s NBA future. He can’t throw money at the problem like this is Microsoft.”

More: Reports that the league has any real concern about SAC’s arena plan or ownership group are outright false.

Source :The idea that Hansen/Ballmer would own any portion of the Kings while they play in Sacramento is a “non-starter.”

Source on NBA using Best Interests of the League clause vs. Maloofs: The league "will use all options at its disposal to protect the logo.”

alexander_37
05-12-2013, 01:34 PM
Yet according to Seattle fans we are supposed to root for Lakers or clippers since there close.... How about they root for Blazers then 'laugh2:

Every argument I have easily refuted.. Obviously my information is more accurate, or the vote and David Sterns comments wouldn't have been soooooo one sided..

More and more information is coming out on twitter, Chris Hansen, the reporter for Seattle has reported minimal to nothing since the vote, and he was all gun ho, on Seattle winning over the franchise..

Aaron Bruski

Source: “Ballmer is playing a game of Russian Roulette with SEA’s NBA future. He can’t throw money at the problem like this is Microsoft.”

More: Reports that the league has any real concern about SAC’s arena plan or ownership group are outright false.

Source :The idea that Hansen/Ballmer would own any portion of the Kings while they play in Sacramento is a “non-starter.”

Source on NBA using Best Interests of the League clause vs. Maloofs: The league "will use all options at its disposal to protect the logo.”

I have a source that says an alien invasion is happening tomorrow. Doesn't make it true, nobody knows how this is going to turn out.

Sactown
05-12-2013, 01:35 PM
They didn't even match 525 yet, they are going to put the city even further in the toilet with the publicly funded portion when this ownership group squeezes more money out of them to match this 100 million they put up. This is a lose lose for sac.

FALSE,

The NBA has looked into the Sacramento Market and has said that it is "More than enough" to support a franchise, There are already MILLIONs in pledged money from the fans, The ownership has looked into Sacramento and liked the Market, and these are PREVIOUS INVESTORS IN FRANCHISES... Vivek with Golden State, and Burkle with the Penguins... Obviously if it was a poor basketball market this wouldn't be up for discussion... Sac has had a better attendance throughout the franchise when in comparison with SEATTLE... so stop being so ignorant.. I know you're a Seattle Fan and want the best.. But posting garbage isn't helping.

And yes the 525 has been matched, although differently, they don't have to fully pay back Sacramento's dept like Hansen would have to, which accounts for 80 MILLIon, also relocation isn't an issue.. At first there was uncertainty to the bid amount H/B put up, and Stern helped the Kings on the # and then they were matched...


Stern would not have asked them to put the money in an escrow account of it wasn't there... if the money wasn't ready the BOG wouldn't of voted for SAC.

Sactown
05-12-2013, 01:37 PM
I have a source that says an alien invasion is happening tomorrow. Doesn't make it true, nobody knows how this is going to turn out.

That argument is called a red herring, and it's a fallacious argument.. Aaron Bruski has been reporting on this since day #1 and has been more accurate than anyone..

alexander_37
05-12-2013, 01:40 PM
They didn't even match 525 yet, they are going to put the city even further in the toilet with the publicly funded portion when this ownership group squeezes more money out of them to match this 100 million they put up. This is a lose lose for sac.

FALSE,

The NBA has looked into the Sacramento Market and has said that it is "More than enough" to support a franchise, There are already MILLIONs in pledged money from the fans, The ownership has looked into Sacramento and liked the Market, and these are PREVIOUS INVESTORS IN FRANCHISES... Vivek with Golden State, and Burkle with the Penguins... Obviously if it was a poor basketball market this wouldn't be up for discussion... Sac has had a better attendance throughout the franchise when in comparison with SEATTLE... so stop being so ignorant.. I know you're a Seattle Fan and want the best.. But posting garbage isn't helping.

And yes the 525 has been matched, although differently, they don't have to fully pay back Sacramento's dept like Hansen would have to, which accounts for 80 MILLIon, also relocation isn't an issue.. At first there was uncertainty to the bid amount H/B put up, and Stern helped the Kings on the # and then they were matched...

I am a rockets fan :s so... Yeah i really don't care, to be honest i kinda prefer no nba team so theres more focus on the Seahawks which i am a fan of.

However I really think you are grasping at straws, Hansen wouldn't raise the bid if all of what you are saying is true. Believe it all you want but he is much smarter and more well informed than yourself, all of these "sources", and people who write these articles you cling to so desperately.

alexander_37
05-12-2013, 01:42 PM
I have a source that says an alien invasion is happening tomorrow. Doesn't make it true, nobody knows how this is going to turn out.

That argument is called a red herring, and it's a fallacious argument.. Aaron Bruski has been reporting on this since day #1 and has been more accurate than anyone..

And it is just as valid as these unnamed sources. Again Hansen is not stupid, if he knew it was as bad as you think it is he would have been done wasting his time.

TeamSeattle
05-12-2013, 01:45 PM
I am a rockets fan :s so... Yeah i really don't care, to be honest i kinda prefer no nba team so theres more focus on the Seahawks which i am a fan of.

However I really think you are grasping at straws, Hansen wouldn't raise the bid if all of what you are saying is true. Believe it all you want but he is much smarter and more well informed than yourself, all of these "sources", and people who write these articles you cling to so desperately.

Raally though this guy sounds like he knows every detail of the situation and he's just a fan like everyone else. Lets just see how things play out from here on out.

Sactown
05-12-2013, 02:05 PM
I am a rockets fan :s so... Yeah i really don't care, to be honest i kinda prefer no nba team so theres more focus on the Seahawks which i am a fan of.

However I really think you are grasping at straws, Hansen wouldn't raise the bid if all of what you are saying is true. Believe it all you want but he is much smarter and more well informed than yourself, all of these "sources", and people who write these articles you cling to so desperately.

Really? If he was SO well informed then how did the vote end up being so one sided? Which he had conceded, maybe he's a BILLIONAIRE with a complex who thinks he has more money than God and shouldn't lose.. If he was so informed then why hasn't he either, backed out of the runner, or owned the team already.. You can claim that he is so well informed but at this point he's fighting a losing battle... I think it's funny when Seattle reports one thing while everyone else is reporting another.. It's no secret Stern doesn't want this team to be moved, it's no secret that Sacramento is a viable location as the Maloofs have tried to fight it and lost, it's not secret SAC HAS THE MONEY as Stern has stated it's there, it's not secret the BOG vote was unanimous, and it's no secret SAC can have an arena built first.... I don't see where Seattle has the edge

Sactown
05-12-2013, 02:15 PM
Raally though this guy sounds like he knows every detail of the situation and he's just a fan like everyone else. Lets just see how things play out from here on out.

I'm stating things that have been stated, while you guys are making assumptions...

TeamSeattle
05-12-2013, 02:18 PM
I'm stating things that have been stated, while you guys are making assumptions...



"SAC HAS THE MONEY as Stern has stated it's there, it's not secret the BOG vote was unanimous, and it's no secret SAC can have an arena built first.... I don't see where Seattle has the edge "

All that is heresay, Sacramento could never get another 75 Million in time; I'm not even sure they have the 525 Million yet as they have to still get more investors and beg the community for help.

sacgiants1213
05-12-2013, 02:24 PM
All that is heresay, Sacramento could never get another 75 Million in time; I'm not even sure they have the 525 Million yet as they have to still get more investors and beg the community for help.

:confused:

They 'have to still get more investors" yet it's been reported that Vivek Ranadive has been rejecting interested investors.... This isn't about the potency about Seattle's offer, it's about the fact that the Kings have done everything that the NBA asked them to do.

waveycrockett
05-12-2013, 02:32 PM
:confused:

They 'have to still get more investors" yet it's been reported that Vivek Ranadive has been rejecting interested investors.... This isn't about the potency about Seattle's offer, it's about the fact that the Kings have done everything that the NBA asked them to do.
And still at the end of the day $$$ is King. I have a hard time seeing the NBA refusing to sell a small market team for a whopping $625 Million

Baller1
05-12-2013, 02:33 PM
Tonight, ESPN broke the news that Chris Hansen's group had reached a back-up agreement with the Maloofs for a 20% share of their franchise, with an option to purchase a majority stake over the following two years. According to Chris Daniels, the Maloofs have told the NBA on three different occasions that there isn't a scenario where they will accept a bid from the Ranadive group. Others have reported that the league is still attempting to "entice" or coerce the Maloofs into accepting the back-up offer from Sacramento, but the new Hansen agreement may put those discussions to rest. Along with the new offer for $406 million and the 20% back-up offer, the Hansen/Ballmer group has also raised the relocation fee to $116 million and agree to contribute into the revenue sharing system. When the SuperSonics left for Okalahoma City, the relocation fee was $30 million dollars.


Well, the same committee that voted against the relocation to Seattle is now meeting again on Monday to discuss the ever evolving story. If the dynamics hadn't shifted at all, there would be no need to reconvene this committee. The NBA doesn't like to be painted into a corner, and it is possible for them to deny all three sales (the 65% share, the back-up offer for 20%, and Bob Cook's 7%) and wait out the Maloofs, but that means another lame duck season in Sacramento, and another All-Star Weekend and Board of Governors meetings dominated by the Sacramento Kings, the same issue that has been at the center of things for the past few years.


All along, the biggest card Chris Hansen had to play was the Maloofs themselves. Hated in Sacramento, the Maloofs have rescued Chris Hansen's efforts to remain a viable choice for the NBA owners heading into the May 15th meeting. The Maloofs can be denied relocation, but nobody can tell them who to sell their team to. If Chris Hansen has reached an agreement with the Maloofs that will ultimately keep them as majority owners, this might be the poison pill the league wanted to avoid.


However, an increase in $65 million dollars isn't pocket change, even for the wealthiest owners. This new price will increase the price of every franchise in the NBA, Seattle will contribute revenue through the revenue sharing system, and each owner will receive a $4 million dollar check for the relocation fee. As much as this has become a head vs. heart story, money has talked in the past. The NBA would have to decide to burn the Seattle bridge forever in order to deny a resolution that meets their standards.


So does this change the game?

Yes. This isn't about increasing dollar amounts anymore. It's about the Maloofs telling the NBA that they can't be coerced and will accept nothing less than the Seattle's larger offer. If the NBA wants to play chicken, they certainly can, but finding a more desirable resolution is in the interest of both cities who have watched this saga drag on long enough. Does this mean expansion is on the table? Maybe. But it will be surprising if Seattle will be the one promised expansion. Hansen has made it clear that Seattle is ready for an NBA franchise right now.

Yup, lets ignore some of the very obvious factors that favor Seattle.

sacgiants1213
05-12-2013, 02:36 PM
And still at the end of the day $$$ is King. I have a hard time seeing the NBA refusing to sell a small market team for a whopping $625 Million


League sources maintain after today's media attack by the SEA/Maloof camp that the decision to relocate is about SAC's bid and not SEA’s.

https://twitter.com/aaronbruski/status/333500344648740864

waveycrockett
05-12-2013, 02:43 PM
https://twitter.com/aaronbruski/status/333500344648740864

What exactly is SAC's bid? Is it still $525 Million?

sacgiants1213
05-12-2013, 03:13 PM
What exactly is SAC's bid? Is it still $525 Million?

I believe so. They haven't needed to match the Sonics offer because the NBA says their bid is good enough.

alexander_37
05-12-2013, 03:18 PM
The NBA can't force the Magoofs to sell for less money. Nor would the rest of the NBA's owners.

sacgiants1213
05-12-2013, 03:20 PM
The NBA can't force the Magoofs to sell for less money. Nor would the rest of the NBA's owners.

Stern could use the 'best interests of the league' clause.

alexander_37
05-12-2013, 03:22 PM
Stern could use the 'best interests of the league' clause.

There is no way they turn down a 100 million dollar higher offer. Simple as that.

sacgiants1213
05-12-2013, 03:26 PM
There is no way they turn down a 100 million dollar higher offer. Simple as that.

Vivek's group would just match if it came down to that.

alexander_37
05-12-2013, 03:28 PM
Vivek's group would just match if it came down to that.

Why didn't they? Instead of matching the offer they offered to give up future revenue.


A group in Sacramento led by Vivek Ranadive has bid $341 million for the Kings and secured the promise of more than $250 million in public money to keep the team and build a new arena. That puts the total value of the team at $525 million.

In a backroom deal cut just before the relocation committee vote two weeks ago, Ranadive sweetened his offer considerably when he promised to forfeit tens of millions in revenue sharing to fellow owners in the coming years.

That incentive could be worth between $15 million to $20 million per season, money other owners would not have to share under the current agreement between teams.

We all know if they match it they win, doesn't seem like the action of people who can match the bid.

dopeboy206
05-12-2013, 03:44 PM
Sacramento has had 19 sellout seasons since 1985, two of the 5 longest sellout streaks in NBA history, and had higher attendance than Seattle in 20 of the 23 seasons where both cities had teams. Sacramento fans don't need to have stars to support the team. The only reason attendance is so low now is because of the Maloofs repeatedly trying to screw over the fans.

Seattle Center Coliseum only seated 13,000-14,000 what do you expect...?

dopeboy206
05-12-2013, 03:50 PM
David Stern has already told the Maloofs if they go for Sacramento that their lawsuit would have no teeth.. But of course you would know this if you were reading every single thing published so far instead of ESPN articles...

Actually if the Maloofs take this to court they wouldn't have a chance but if Hansen/Ballmer/Nordstrom group goes the would have a great ()very great chance) at beating the NBA in court.

lovesports443
05-12-2013, 04:30 PM
Poor seattle-
http://onlyagame.wbur.org/2011/05/21/seattle-fans
http://blog.seattlepi.com/baseball/2013/04/17/bad-baseball-and-poor-attendance-does-it-really-matter-for-the-mariners/

And they deserve a basketball team huh? Guess Maloofs go to the highest bidder??

Sactown
05-12-2013, 06:50 PM
Actually if the Maloofs take this to court they wouldn't have a chance but if Hansen/Ballmer/Nordstrom group goes the would have a great ()very great chance) at beating the NBA in court.

No they wouldn't the Commissioner has a clause in his contract that lets him act on the best interest of the league... Like he said, their lawsuit would have no teeth... No way the NBA loses in court...

and if Seattle sits 13-14 thousand then sell outs should of been easier to achieve... No excuse for their piss poor attendance..

Sssmush
05-12-2013, 06:55 PM
One thing that nobody is talking about, is that Seattle is a very vibrant affluent and economically expanding area, whereas Sacramento is somewhat flat. Every time I'm in Sacramento I'm a little less impressed; there's even been a lot written about how the Fresno Bulldogs gear and the Kings gear has been extensively coopted by the local gangs.

After the team is gone they will probably continue to sell even more Kings gear, because "Kings" will just be code for "Sacramento street gang" or whatever.

Let 'em move to Seattle, unless Sacramento is going to match the offer or try to outbid. Sorry, that's just the way it works. It's ridiculous though, during the strike when they were crying poverty, and negotiating for the Lakers to pay $200M + in revenue sharing every year, yet somehow these "broke" small market franchises are able to sell for $650M.

What a joke. It's actually not good for the league, because they have to borrow so much capital, so unless the franchise value goes up to a billion dollars and they make a profit in the meantime, they'll be crying for another lockout in like three years--"we just can't be profitable in this market. Give us money, Lakers, give us money. waahh waahh." But then some fool will always turn around and buy another team for $600M +

**** 'em. Seriously, the Lakers should just start their own pay per view and withdraw from the league. No one wants to see the fn Kings or the Sonics 2.0. Nobody cares, this is just some a-hole investment vehicle and everyone from the top down is just lining their pockets.

Sactown
05-12-2013, 06:55 PM
Yup, lets ignore some of the very obvious factors that favor Seattle.

Information is incorrect, a sale has to be voted through by the league.. If the vote to relocate was 7-0 I find it hard to believe 75% of the Owners are going to vote for this sale..

Forgot to mention that huh?

TeamSeattle
05-12-2013, 06:56 PM
What exactly is SAC's bid? Is it still $525 Million?

Nope its much less, I heard around 3-400 Million.

Sactown
05-12-2013, 08:38 PM
Nope its much less, I heard around 3-400 Million.

Both bids are at 350 Mill, evaluating the team at 525 Million as neither is buying 100% of the franchise..

dopeboy206
05-12-2013, 09:51 PM
No they wouldn't the Commissioner has a clause in his contract that lets him act on the best interest of the league... Like he said, their lawsuit would have no teeth... No way the NBA loses in court...

and if Seattle sits 13-14 thousand then sell outs should of been easier to achieve... No excuse for their piss poor attendance..


Best interest..? How is Sacramento's offer best interest for the league compared to what the Seattle group has to offer. The Seattle group can take the NBA to court and has a great shot at winning. I doubt the NBA wants to go to court with Hansen/Ballmer/Nordstrom. The Maloofs can't because they signed a contract as owners that won't allow them to sue the NBA but best believe if the Hansen/Ballmer/Nordstrom group takes the NBA to court (which I doubt the NBA wants) I can assure you the Maloofs will be backing Seattle up.

alexander_37
05-12-2013, 10:27 PM
Both bids are at 350 Mill, evaluating the team at 525 Million as neither is buying 100% of the franchise..

No ... Hansen's bid has it's valuation at 625....

Sactown
05-12-2013, 10:44 PM
No ... Hansen's bid has it's valuation at 625....

That's because they recently up'd the bid >< Idk if Sacramento plans on matching it or not... the news just recently broke... We're obviously going to hear later, but I would be more than surprised if Sacramento gave up after a 75 mill increase...

Sactown
05-12-2013, 10:47 PM
Best interest..? How is Sacramento's offer best interest for the league compared to what the Seattle group has to offer. The Seattle group can take the NBA to court and has a great shot at winning. I doubt the NBA wants to go to court with Hansen/Ballmer/Nordstrom. The Maloofs can't because they signed a contract as owners that won't allow them to sue the NBA but best believe if the Hansen/Ballmer/Nordstrom group takes the NBA to court (which I doubt the NBA wants) I can assure you the Maloofs will be backing Seattle up.
Actually Hansen/Ballmer group just said they have no interest in taking this to court if they lose.. it's an article on PSD that was just published.. And on top of that.. the league will never be pushed over by a lawsuit.. that's just silly to think that.. While Hansen/Ballmer have a lot of money, the NBA has more.... Idk why you think they would be scared, the NBA has TONS of lawyers protecting it, Hansen/Ballmer haven't even brought up a lawsuit, and I guarantee they're covering their ***.

dopeboy206
05-12-2013, 11:32 PM
While Hansen/Ballmer have a lot of money, the NBA has more.... Idk why you think they would be scared, the NBA has TONS of lawyers protecting it, Hansen/Ballmer haven't even brought up a lawsuit, and I guarantee they're covering their ***.

You think so..? The Hansen/Ballmer/Nordstrom group could buy the NBA with the dough they have why you think they're throwing their money like nothing. Look at this graph...It's just Steve Ballmer's networth and not the Nordstrom brothers or Chris Hansen...
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BJNzoPPCIAEDbcU.jpg:large

dopeboy206
05-12-2013, 11:44 PM
Source: NBA committees to discuss Hansen's new bid Monday



SEATTLE -- The NBA's finance and relocation committees are scheduled to hold a teleconference Monday to discuss the new bid for the Sacramento Kings from the Seattle group led by investor Chris Hansen, according to a person with knowledge of the situation.

The source spoke on condition of anonymity.

Both the Seattle and Sacramento camps are also expected to present a final pitch to NBA's Board of Governors on Wednesday before the owners vote on the pending sale and relocation.

The increased bid from the Seattle group, led by Hansen and Microsoft Chairman Steve Ballmer, was announced publicly on Friday and increases the valuation of the Kings from $550 million to $625 million in another attempt to sway NBA owners to allow Hansen to buy the franchise and move it to Seattle. The revised offer was sent to the league and owners earlier last week.

The offer by the Seattle group would also include a relocation fee of $115 million, or roughly $4 million per franchise, and include a contribution from the Maloof family. That is $85 million more than Clay Bennett paid when he moved the SuperSonics from Seattle to Oklahoma City in 2008.

If the NBA Board of Governors denies the proposal to sell the Sacramento Kings to Hansen's group and relocate the team to Seattle, Hansen has one other play he's trying to make.

On Saturday it came to light that the Seattle group has a backup plan to purchase a limited ownership of the Maloofs stake in the Kings. The limited partnership would be a purchase of at least 20 percent of the Maloofs stake in the franchise at a valuation of $600 million.

If the backup plan is used, the Maloofs would retain majority ownership of the franchise and continue to run the team in Sacramento. But Hansen's group would hold a two-year right to purchase a majority interest of the franchise at a later date.

If Hansen's group became limited partners in the Kings the sale would still need approval from the Board of Governors.

But this backup offer from Hansen's group would only come into play if the Board of Governors denies the sale and move of the Kings to Seattle. The BOG is meeting in Dallas on Wednesday and is expected to vote on the matter then. The league's relocation committee recommended unanimously nearly two weeks ago to deny the relocation of the Kings to Seattle.

Hansen has had a deal since January to buy a 65 percent controlling interest in the Kings from the Maloof family. He originally offered a total valuation of $525 million, and then increased that offer to $550 million after a competing Sacramento group matched his deal. The Maloofs have been steadfast throughout the process of their desire to sell to the Hansen and Ballmer group.

Hansen, in announcing the increased offer Friday, said the Seattle group's arena proposal was more advanced than the one in Sacramento. He said the Seattle ownership group had bought all of the needed property, had 100 percent of the private financing "committed and in place" and added that the environmental review process was further along.

"While we appreciate that this is a very difficult decision for the league and owners, we hope it is understood that we really believe the time is now to bring the NBA back to Seattle, and that it is paramount that we do everything we can to put Seattle's best foot forward in this process," Hansen said.

What remains unknown, and likely won't be answered until the Board of Governors meeting, is if the revised valuation and the backup offer will sway votes. The potential of an increased purchase price would also raise the value of other franchises, but NBA Commissioner David Stern has said repeatedly during the process that this would not become a bidding war.
Link:http://www.kval.com/sports/Source-NBA-committees-to-discuss-Hansens-new-bid-Monday-207140121.html

Baller1
05-12-2013, 11:56 PM
Information is incorrect, a sale has to be voted through by the league.. If the vote to relocate was 7-0 I find it hard to believe 75% of the Owners are going to vote for this sale..

Forgot to mention that huh?

You think they just scheduled a new meeting on Monday for fun?

Tmath
05-13-2013, 12:20 AM
I'm all for an NBA team back in Seattle. Cali has enough teams, If anything, move the Clips to Sacramento.

texanmonstra011
05-13-2013, 01:26 AM
Sometimes money isn't always the answer... if sac wins this whole saga (and they rightfully deserve to keep their team more than seattle deserves to steal sac's), this will just be another case where money doesn't always rule.

texanmonstra011
05-13-2013, 01:28 AM
If this isn't a time for expansion...i dont know what is. Both cities have proven they can support teams and build new arenas. Seattle does NOT deserve a team that they steal from an incredibly viable market with outstanding fan support. Seattle deserves an expansion team, Sac deserves to keep their team.

texanmonstra011
05-13-2013, 01:31 AM
Only 7 voted and it was indeed a 4-3 vote but stated as unanimous.

Art Theil, part of Seattle media, reported it was 4-3. An NBA spokesperson, as well as every other credible national source, reported it was 7-0. Who are you going to believe? Obviously not the biased seattle reporter who seems to be the ONLY guy who reported 4-3.

An NBA "high level source" (or spokesperson) called Theil's 4-3 claim "fabrication"

texanmonstra011
05-13-2013, 01:35 AM
Sacramento has had 19 sellout seasons since 1985, two of the 5 longest sellout streaks in NBA history, and had higher attendance than Seattle in 20 of the 23 seasons where both cities had teams. Sacramento fans don't need to have stars to support the team. The only reason attendance is so low now is because of the Maloofs repeatedly trying to screw over the fans.

This makes total sense. I don't think any NBA cities/fanbases would buy tickets to support a team that might move for the last 3 years with terrible owners. Sacramento's fan support should never be in question. They clearly support their team to the full extent. It's foolish for seattle fans to sum up Sac fan support on the last 3-5 years during losing seasons with moving rumors and the maloofs continuously screwing the fans over time and time again. Seattle has great fan support as well, but so does Sacramento. Fan support should not be an issue being discussed.

ccg34
05-13-2013, 02:05 AM
Both cities are good basketball cities that are capable of supporting an NBA franchise. Sacramento was crazy in the Webber years as well as seattle in the Payton and Kemp years. I don't think you can make an argument on which team is more deserving of an NBA franchise.

The absurd thing about this situation is that the NBA is trying to prevent a sale to an owner thathas already agreed to sell it. They are forcing him to take a cheaper offer in order to keep them in Sactown. Just as Howard Schultz had the right to sell it to Clay Bennett, the Maloofs should have the right to sell it to Hansen.

TeamSeattle
05-13-2013, 02:15 AM
Art Theil, part of Seattle media, reported it was 4-3. An NBA spokesperson, as well as every other credible national source, reported it was 7-0. Who are you going to believe? Obviously not the biased seattle reporter who seems to be the ONLY guy who reported 4-3.

An NBA "high level source" (or spokesperson) called Theil's 4-3 claim "fabrication"

Both reports can be true to me, no absolute truth in this situation when we don't know everything that's going on behind the scenes no matter how much we can google or claim to have gathered; its wide open until the final verdict.

Boozerguy47
05-13-2013, 02:58 AM
Poor seattle-
http://onlyagame.wbur.org/2011/05/21/seattle-fans
http://blog.seattlepi.com/baseball/2013/04/17/bad-baseball-and-poor-attendance-does-it-really-matter-for-the-mariners/

And they deserve a basketball team huh? Guess Maloofs go to the highest bidder??

This argument is absurd. You do realize in Clay's first year owning the team (the last year the team was in Seattle) the Sonics had their worst season in history. What do you expect? Key Arena to be packed when the team goes 20-62?

As far as the Mariners. Yeah, attendance wasn't perfect in April... I guess the fact they had over 80,000 the last three days is irrelevant? The Ms were playing the As as well. A team we see multiple times each year in Seattle. Yet, the fans showed up, greatly increasing the home attendance average.

Boozerguy47
05-13-2013, 03:04 AM
You think so..? The Hansen/Ballmer/Nordstrom group could buy the NBA with the dough they have why you think they're throwing their money like nothing. Look at this graph...It's just Steve Ballmer's networth and not the Nordstrom brothers or Chris Hansen...
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BJNzoPPCIAEDbcU.jpg:large

Quite the exhibit. Looks about right...

NateyB24
05-13-2013, 12:25 PM
Forgive me for the false info. A league spokesman said reports of an initial committee vote of 4-3 were false, and that the only vote taken was unanimous to reject relocation.
http://www.nba.com/2013/news/features/david_aldridge/05/11/chris-hansen-sweetens-offer-kings/index.html

Unity even if they were split they aren't going to come out and tell the public they were going to be 7-0 either way.

JLynn943
05-13-2013, 12:43 PM
There's a report now that the NBA is beginning to work on the next TV deal now, 3 years before the current one expires. I'm speculating of course, but to me that suggests that they are seriously thinking about expansion for Seattle (which is easily the best option for everyone imo)

http://www.sportsbusinessdaily.com/Journal/Issues/2013/05/13/Media/NBA-TV-rights.aspx

NateyB24
05-13-2013, 03:20 PM
There's a report now that the NBA is beginning to work on the next TV deal now, 3 years before the current one expires. I'm speculating of course, but to me that suggests that they are seriously thinking about expansion for Seattle (which is easily the best option for everyone imo)

http://www.sportsbusinessdaily.com/Journal/Issues/2013/05/13/Media/NBA-TV-rights.aspx

Wonder how long it takes to get a expansion team KC wouldn't be to happy if Seattle is just given the team but maybe this is a special case that the NBA can get away with.

JLynn943
05-13-2013, 03:33 PM
Wonder how long it takes to get a expansion team KC wouldn't be to happy if Seattle is just given the team but maybe this is a special case that the NBA can get away with.

Could be a special case. Seattle is hitting all the same criteria as Sacramento that the NBA is considering for why a team should stay in a city - viable ownership group, arena plan, demand, etc. Plus the hurt of Seattle losing the Sonics is a lot fresher than KC. I'm really, really hoping that the Kings stay and Seattle is promised an expansion team asap. This doesn't have to end with one fanbase happy at the expense of another. The NBA can make this right.

RLundi
05-13-2013, 04:00 PM
Could be a special case. Seattle is hitting all the same criteria as Sacramento that the NBA is considering for why a team should stay in a city - viable ownership group, arena plan, demand, etc. Plus the hurt of Seattle losing the Sonics is a lot fresher than KC. I'm really, really hoping that the Kings stay and Seattle is promised an expansion team asap. This doesn't have to end with one fanbase happy at the expense of another. The NBA can make this right.

Expansion is a terrible idea. I agree Seattle needs a team or perhaps Sacramento doesn't deserve to lose a team, but to add 2 more teams to an already-watered down NBA is a mistake.

Contraction, as much as I hate the idea, is a better one. Why add more teams to a league where megapolises like Minneapolis, Atlanta, Detroit, DC and Philly can't draw or sell out regularly?

JLynn943
05-13-2013, 04:17 PM
Expansion is a terrible idea. I agree Seattle needs a team or perhaps Sacramento doesn't deserve to lose a team, but to add 2 more teams to an already-watered down NBA is a mistake.

Contraction, as much as I hate the idea, is a better one. Why add more teams to a league where megapolises like Minneapolis, Atlanta, Detroit, DC and Philly can't draw or sell out regularly?

I understand that there are good teams out there that can't even draw large attendance, but I don't think it makes sense to prevent Seattle or Sacramento (both cities which have historically done well with attendance) from having a team because of that. Maybe the owners of the teams in the cities you listed will try to relocate or something if attendance is that bad for them. The watered-down NBA argument is a better one (although I think that would lead to a greater emphasis on the D-League and actually developing players), but ultimately the NBA is a business and not having one of these two top-20 markets seems like a mistake in that sense.

Sactown
05-13-2013, 05:09 PM
LOL there's no meeting scheduled for what happened... The NBA is ignoring it and is saying the recommendation vote remains the same... Suck it

JLynn943
05-13-2013, 05:27 PM
LOL there's no meeting scheduled for what happened... The NBA is ignoring it and is saying the recommendation vote remains the same... Suck it

Well, the relocation and finance committee "met" via conference call today to discuss the new offer and then did not vote. So, technically, they didn't publicly say they are maintaining the same recommendation, but they didn't publicly withdraw it either.

http://www.cowbellkingdom.com/2013/05/13/nbas-relocation-and-finance-committee-meets-but-doesnt-vote-on-sacramentoseattle-situation/

chong2204
05-13-2013, 05:33 PM
LOL there's no meeting scheduled for what happened... The NBA is ignoring it and is saying the recommendation vote remains the same... Suck it

Chill bro.

sacgiants1213
05-13-2013, 07:50 PM
ESPN:
A committee of NBA owners who have been studying the future of the Sacramento Kings met Monday but did not change their position to recommend the team be kept in Sacramento and not moved to Seattle, a source told ESPN.com.

A final full vote on the matter is expected at owners' meetings Wednesday in Dallas. It remains unclear, however, who will own the Kings after Wednesday's meetings.

A group led by Silicon Valley billionaire Vivek Ranadive, who has worked closely with NBA commissioner David Stern to keep the Kings in Sacramento and build a new arena for the team, is hoping to gain control of the team. The Maloof family, the Kings current owners, have told the league they don't plan to sell to Ranadive if the move is blocked.

To sort though all this, the owners' relocation and finance committees held a teleconference in the wake of several developments in the last week from the group that is trying to buy the Kings and relocate them to Seattle. Two weeks ago the relocation committee voted unanimously to block the move. It has been expected the rest of the owners would follow that recommendation.

Last week in a bid to change the owners minds, Seattle group lead investor Chris Hansen increased his offer for 65 percent of the Kings to a record $409 million from $358 million. He also offered a relocation fee payout of $4 million per team for a total of about $116 million to attempt to sweet the pot and sway owners who may be sitting on the fence.

Also last week the Maloofs told fellow owners if they blocked the move to Seattle they had a backup plan where they would instead sell a 20 percent share to Hansen's group and keep controlling interest in the team.

Such a sale would have to be approved by 75 percent of the owners and it's uncertain if the Maloofs would have enough support considering Hansen's goal clearly is to move the team to Seattle. However, the league cannot force the Maloofs to sell to Ranadive.

The NBA league office has negotiated its own backup deal with Ranadive that includes a purchase price of $341 million for the Kings, which would still set a record by valuing the entire team at $525 million.

Ranadive appears to have gotten the support of league owners because it has worked with local government officials to secure more than $250 million in funding for a new downtown arena. While his deal is less money and in a smaller market, the league has repeatedly shown an interest in making the Kings work in Sacramento being its first priority.

Though there have been concerns among owners over the hastily-formed Ranadive group and its arena deal, the group has met some recent benchmarks that have satisfied the league, sources said.

Their effort to sweeten the pot for other owners was to promise to reduce and eventually eliminate the revenue-sharing proceeds the Kings would be owned over the next few years, a giveback that will likely total in the tens of millions.

Through the process, the Hansen group and the Maloofs have generally worked around the league office and communicated directly with the owners who will vote on Wednesday.

http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/9271574/owners-change-stance-move-sacramento-kings

QUICKTRADE
05-13-2013, 08:04 PM
how I wish Clippers just move here since they are sharing with the famous lakers anyways. Moving clippers in seattle will also enable seattle to convince PJ to come here and perhaps the winning history brings titles in the future.

Boozerguy47
05-13-2013, 08:32 PM
Heard on ESPN earlier today that Phil Jackson is still interested in a front office position with the Sonics if/when they return in the near future. Wouldn't expect PJ to continue to wait for Seattle to acquire a team. If it doesn't happen soon he'll go elsewhere. Still is interesting nonetheless.

Boozerguy47
05-13-2013, 08:32 PM
double post

hyphy king 88
05-14-2013, 01:54 AM
http://www.sonicsrising.com/2013/5/12/4324702/lets-be-honest-about-what-happened-here-and-what-is-happening-in


often see people make comments about Stern helping Sacramento as if that is somehow the wrong thing to do. Long before Hansen had an agreement with the Maloofs, David Stern had been quoted many times saying relocation is something he does not like to have happen.

Sacramento has come forward with an ownership group and an arena deal. Yes both are inferior to what we have by far but still in short time they fought as hard as possible while working with the NBA to save their team.

Remember, our politicians did NOTHING but basically say screw the NBA don't ask us for anything. Our legislature didn't want to approve $75 million. If they approved that the city of Seattle would have got a $30 million check from Clay Bennett but they never even discussed it. The state was offering no assistance and the city was weak and had no determination to make something happen unlike Sacramento which was the complete opposite. You think KJ would cut a deal to let the Kings out of a lease to leave town? Never.

We can pretend he didn't try at all in Seattle but the fact is that David Stern personally came here to speak with our political leaders. There was no offer from our side. There was a cold shoulder. There was no welcoming attitude at all.

In Sacramento it is the exact opposite. They are very welcoming and bending over backwards to accommodate the Sacramento Kings.

NEITHER cities fans deserved to lose their teams but our politicians basically gave our team away, they didn't lose them or have them taken. No one wanted to own the Sonics in Seattle because the Key Arena lease was a money loser and the politicians were not willing to work with team owners.

We were sold out by politicians. Yes Howard Schultz is to blame too but he was done owning the Sonics and the only qualified buyers wanted to move the team. He could have gotten more money and sold them to a guy guaranteed to move them but instead he took less and made an agreement with the buyer that he would have to try to keep the team here which mean getting an arena built. Of course we know what Clay's real intentions were. Remember Howard Schultz tried to take him to court which no one gives him any credit for.

If we had done then what Sacramento has just done we would have kept our team no doubt. Clay came with a BS offer but be real, any offer that involved even 1 penny was not going to be taken seriously by our leaders at that time. Even the majority of our citizens would have been against it which is why that law was passed by a large margin saying they had to make a profit of a certain amount in order to invest in an arena.

Sacramento is being sold out by vindictive owners rather than politicians. That is the main difference here. Most NBA owners refuse to sale to someone who will move the team because they usually care about their bond with that city. Even Howard Schultz fits in this category because he truly did all he could really do by refusing to sale to the guy guaranteed to move and having a clause that the guy he sold to put in a good faith effort to build an arena in Seattle. The Maloofs make Howard Schultz look like a hero. They are doing the opposite of what owners usually do. They are refusing to sale to anyone who WILL keep the team in Sacramento. That is *** backwards man. Our situation was NOT worse than that.

When we are the "victims" our perspective is completely different. We need to have the ability to see things from someone else's perspective sometimes.

I am 100% fine and happy that Chris Hansen is doing what he is doing. I'm fine with rooting for the "bad guys" in this business transaction. I have no regret and I am proud to be a part of the group he is doing this for. Some of you guys gotta just be more realistic about what's going down because its not good to wear blinders or be in denial.

Being realistic in a situation and being fair rather than putting on blinders does not lower credibility it raises it. I want our Sonics back. I want Chris Hansen to do whatever it takes just like all of you. However, I will not participate in the group think that is going on that somehow Sacramento deserves their team less than us and Chris Hansen is not doing the same thing Clay Bennett did just because Hansen is telling the truth.

OrangeCrush
05-14-2013, 04:29 AM
I'd really love for the Sonics to come back. I don't see why California needs another team, and the great state of Washington that takes it's indoor sports very seriously deserves a good Basketball team. Really hope this happens.

alexander_37
05-14-2013, 09:59 AM
Lololololol at that Sac columnist calling Hansen a bully.

JLynn943
05-14-2013, 10:47 AM
Lololololol at that Sac columnist calling Hansen a bully.

The Voisin article? The article just posted from SonicsRising by a Seattle writer noted that Hansen is the "bad guy," too. It's fine for people to root for the Seattle group, but at least call it what it is. Hansen and Ballmer are just throwing more and more money at this to prevent a more than capable ownership group from buying and keeping the team in Sac - something Seattle wishes they had a couple years ago. Sacramento has done far more to keep their team than Seattle did and everyone hates Clay Bennett for what he did. In this case there is a real alternative in place trying to keep the team there and Hansen is still trying to take the team away. Him being the "bad guy" is to your benefit, but there are no logical objective grounds to condemn Bennett and simultaneously think Hansen is okay when they're both doing the same thing.

SOS
05-14-2013, 12:45 PM
I have no horse in this race but I find it unfair that the NBA can force an owner to sell his team that he purchased for less money. Seems communist

utl768
05-14-2013, 01:09 PM
seattle should apply as much pressure as possible

Baller1
05-14-2013, 01:10 PM
Could be a special case. Seattle is hitting all the same criteria as Sacramento that the NBA is considering for why a team should stay in a city - viable ownership group, arena plan, demand, etc. Plus the hurt of Seattle losing the Sonics is a lot fresher than KC. I'm really, really hoping that the Kings stay and Seattle is promised an expansion team asap. This doesn't have to end with one fanbase happy at the expense of another. The NBA can make this right.

I wish this is what ended up happening.

OrangeCrush
05-14-2013, 01:45 PM
In terms of expansion, does the NBA really need to get bigger? And won't the East coast need an expansion team then to balance the numbers?

TeamSeattle
05-14-2013, 01:53 PM
In terms of expansion, does the NBA really need to get bigger? And won't the East coast need an expansion team then to balance the numbers?

Yep. Expansion is a bad idea IMO. NBA is already watered down to begin with.

JLynn943
05-14-2013, 02:00 PM
I wish this is what ended up happening.

Me too. It's such an obvious solution with little-to-no drawbacks. It would be great for all parties as Sacramento and Seattle would have teams and the NBA owners and Stern would save face and actually come out looking great for doing the smart thing. Of course, because it's the smart option, it's probably the least likely....


In terms of expansion, does the NBA really need to get bigger? And won't the East coast need an expansion team then to balance the numbers?

I don't think it would need to be evenly balanced, but I could be wrong. MLB definitely had an unequal number of teams in the AL and NL, and I think the NFL has had inconsistent numbers of teams in divisions in the past (not sure though). It would make scheduling harder I suppose, but still doable.

As far as if the NBA needs to get bigger or not, I don't see why it can't. Seattle and Sacramento are both top 20 media markets, so having both is beneficial to the NBA. I also don't think a fear of watering down the product is legitimate at all. That would effectively be arguing that there is some huge difference in the quality of the 450th best player in the world and the 465th. Realistically, there isn't.

JLynn943
05-14-2013, 02:04 PM
Yep. Expansion is a bad idea IMO. NBA is already watered down to begin with.

At worst, there'd be one more bad team in the league. At best, there'd be increased interest in developing young players - possibly making the D-League actually matter. Good players will still team up with other good players. Adding the 451st-465th best players in the world to the NBA is not going to ruin the NBA and isn't even kind of enough of a drawback to justify one of Sacramento or Seattle not having a team imo.

Chitownhero1992
05-14-2013, 02:12 PM
I think the NBA can expand. Expansion isn't a bad thing in terms of making money they'll make more revenue however...the talent level would drop a little bit but you never know every time they expand new stars are found. When the Bobcats came no one was interested in guys like Gerald Wallace but he earned himself a big time contract and became coveted by many teams. Everyone always cries on here saying oh you can't expand there is already to many bad teams, or the parity would be bad theres over 300+ college teams, numerous players overseas, D-League, CBA, etc trust me you can find atleast 24 players out there that would be worth playing in the NBA!

Yes there would have to be 2 teams they wouldn't have a 31 team league, they saw how hard it was to be a 29 team league for a while in terms of scheduling. But Baltimore built an arena in hopes of a team, Virginia Beach almost nabbed the Kings, St. Louis? who is to say it has to be East Coast you can move Memphis into the East and add a western team like Las Vegas, Vancouver...etc

It would help with the Playoffs too. I still don't understand why more than half the teams 16/30 get into the playoffs. They need to either expand or change the Playoff format to make the post season make sense.

OrangeCrush
05-14-2013, 02:22 PM
I simply raise the issue of expansion purely because of attendance issues. The Kings already have the lowest attendances in the league. I don't really think the NBA could do with the prospect of a team that's averaging under 13,000 a game in attendances. All I'm saying is that whilst I hugely support Seattle getting a team back, I don't see the point of expansion if it's just going to bring us more filler teams.

JLynn943
05-14-2013, 03:04 PM
I simply raise the issue of expansion purely because of attendance issues. The Kings already have the lowest attendances in the league. I don't really think the NBA could do with the prospect of a team that's averaging under 13,000 a game in attendances. All I'm saying is that whilst I hugely support Seattle getting a team back, I don't see the point of expansion if it's just going to bring us more filler teams.

It's been said a million times at this point but as long as people are going to continually ignore it I'll keep saying it: the Kings have historically had great attendance. Two of the 5 longest sell-out streaks in NBA history, had 19 sellout seasons in 28 years, and had better attendance than Seattle in 20 out of the 23 seasons both cities had a team. And this is not just due to arena size. Look at the percentages:



1985-86 Percentage of Seats Sold: Sonics 48%, Kings 100%
1986-87 Percentage of Seats Sold: Sonics 50%, Kings 100%
1987-88 Percentage of Seats Sold: Sonics 69%, Kings 100%
1988-89 Percentage of Seats Sold: Sonics 74%, Kings 100%
1989-90 Percentage of Seats Sold: Sonics 70%, Kings 100%
1990-91 Percentage of Seats Sold: Sonics 71%, Kings 100%
1991-92 Percentage of Seats Sold: Sonics 82%, Kings 100%
1992-93 Percentage of Seats Sold: Sonics 89%, Kings 100%
1993-94 Percentage of Seats Sold: Sonics 85%, Kings 100%
1994-95 Percentage of Seats Sold: Sonics 90%, Kings 100%
1995-96 Percentage of Seats Sold: Sonics 100%, Kings 100%
1996-97 Percentage of Seats Sold: Sonics 100%, Kings 100%
1997-98 Percentage of Seats Sold: Sonics 100%, Kings 85%
1998-99 Percentage of Seats Sold: Sonics 100%, Kings 96%
1999-00 Percentage of Seats Sold: Sonics 87%, Kings 100%
2000-01 Percentage of Seats Sold: Sonics 91%, Kings 100%
2001-02 Percentage of Seats Sold: Sonics 90%, Kings 100%
2002-03 Percentage of Seats Sold: Sonics 91%, Kings 100%
2003-04 Percentage of Seats Sold: Sonics 89%, Kings 100%
2004-05 Percentage of Seats Sold: Sonics 96%, Kings 100%
2005-06 Percentage of Seats Sold: Sonics 94%, Kings 100%
2006-07 Percentage of Seats Sold: Sonics 93%, Kings 100%
2007-08 Percentage of Seats Sold: Sonics 79%, Kings 81%


source: http://www.sactownroyalty.com/2013/1/23/3904630/video-illustrates-fan-support-by-way-of-attendance-sacramento-vs

The past few years have only been bad because the Maloofs have been trying to move and are putting out a bad product. Seattle did the same thing before the Sonics moved. There's no reason for fans to keep giving money to owners who want nothing to do with the city.

knicksfan1794
05-14-2013, 03:11 PM
I think the nba needs to expand for many reasons

1-16-30 make the playoffs(over half the teams)
2-It will make the d-league matter
3-more competition between the bottom teams (maybe they can make something like relegating like they do in soccer highly unlikely because the d-league is terrible)
4-It would solve the issue of Seattle and Sacramento...
4a- im sure a place like kentucky could use an nba team, or even kansas city, im sure even canada might want another team
5-it will make more money for the nba
6-there will be a longer draft so more colleges players can get a chance

NYKalltheway
05-14-2013, 03:40 PM
I think the nba needs to expand for many reasons

1-16-30 make the playoffs(over half the teams)
2-It will make the d-league matter
3-more competition between the bottom teams (maybe they can make something like relegating like they do in soccer highly unlikely because the d-league is terrible)
4-It would solve the issue of Seattle and Sacramento...
4a- im sure a place like kentucky could use an nba team, or even kansas city, im sure even canada might want another team
5-it will make more money for the nba
6-there will be a longer draft so more colleges players can get a chance

1) Agreed there. First round needs to go back to 5 imo, upsets = good
2) the d-league will never matter
3) that's what me and Crooner have been saying for at least 3 years but it's never gonna be accepted in the US
5) not necessarily
6) and people will be saying that the talent pool is watered down even more

texanmonstra011
05-14-2013, 03:57 PM
Both cities are good basketball cities that are capable of supporting an NBA franchise. Sacramento was crazy in the Webber years as well as seattle in the Payton and Kemp years. I don't think you can make an argument on which team is more deserving of an NBA franchise.

The absurd thing about this situation is that the NBA is trying to prevent a sale to an owner thathas already agreed to sell it. They are forcing him to take a cheaper offer in order to keep them in Sactown. Just as Howard Schultz had the right to sell it to Clay Bennett, the Maloofs should have the right to sell it to Hansen.

well normally this would be the case and owners normally would have the right to sell it to whoever they want, but you forgot one critical, unique factor of this situation..... it's the Maloofs. The maloofs have screwed over sacramento (and the NBA for that matter) time and time and time again. In 2012, Sacramento city and everyone involved struck a deal to build a new arena and this whole Seattle thing never wouldve happened, but the maloofs backed out of the deal because they didnt have enough money. That really pissed off Stern and the rest of the NBA. The maloofs have been trying to leave a great NBA city/fanbase for years. They tried moving to Vegas 5 years ago. The maloofs have flipped back and forth numerous times and the league is just tired of them. The fact that they're trying to take the highest offer (which is understandable) after they have had their chances and screwed over Sac and the NBA multiple times is probably the reason why the NBA is in favor of Sacramento. At some point, the maloofs lost their ability to have any leverage by being liars and terrible NBA businessmen. Schultz was never AS bad as the maloofs...the maloofs have got to be one of the worst ownership groups in the history of pro sports, and that's not hyperbole.