HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > The Business of Hockey
The Business of Hockey Discuss the financial and business aspects of the NHL. Topics may include the CBA, work stoppages, broadcast contracts, franchise sales, and NHL revenues.

OT Sacramento looking to finance new arena; UPD NBA rejects relocation to Seattle bid

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
03-01-2013, 12:27 AM
  #76
gstommylee
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 4,000
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clowe Me View Post
You and I and everyone else have no idea what is going on in private. To say what you think is going on is simply speculation and nothing of any merit.
As far as we know Kings move to seattle could be already a done deal and the NBA is saving face with Sacramento fans by allowing them a chance to try to keep the kings. NBA rarely votes no on a sale/relocation unless there is financial problems. NBA voting no on Seattle would be the first that they ever said no to a sale that i am aware of due to some reason than money problems.

Remember Seattle never got the chance that Sacramento is getting now.

gstommylee is online now  
Old
03-01-2013, 12:28 AM
  #77
Pinkfloyd
Registered User
 
Pinkfloyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Roseville
Country: United States
Posts: 29,260
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by gstommylee View Post
As far as we know Kings move to seattle could be already a done deal and the NBA is saving face with Sacramento fans by allowing them a chance to try to keep the kings.

Remember Seattle never got the chance that Sacramento is getting now.
Seattle didn't put the resources together either.

Pinkfloyd is online now  
Old
03-01-2013, 12:31 AM
  #78
gstommylee
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 4,000
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pinkfloyd View Post
Seattle didn't put the resources together either.
Doesn't matter that Seattle didn't. NBA never allowed Seattle the possibility to come up with a counter offer to the NBA before they approved the sale of the Sonics to Bennett. Even if they could the NBA could still had approved the sale to Bennett.

NBA has learned from that mistake hence why they are giving Sacramento a chance to try to keep the team there.

gstommylee is online now  
Old
03-01-2013, 12:34 AM
  #79
Pinkfloyd
Registered User
 
Pinkfloyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Roseville
Country: United States
Posts: 29,260
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by gstommylee View Post
Doesn't matter that Seattle didn't. NBA never allowed Seattle the possibility to come up with a counter offer to the NBA before they approved the sale of the Sonics to Bennett. Even if they could the NBA could still had approved the sale to Bennett.

NBA has learned from that mistake hence why they are giving Sacramento a chance to try to keep the team there.
And they will only compound that error if they're just doing this as a token gesture. If they're not serious about it, they will pay a hefty price PR-wise...and worse than Seattle.

Pinkfloyd is online now  
Old
03-01-2013, 12:36 AM
  #80
Clowe Me
Registered User
 
Clowe Me's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: 530
Country: Uzbekistan
Posts: 15,131
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by gstommylee View Post
As far as we know Kings move to seattle could be already a done deal and the NBA is saving face with Sacramento fans by allowing them a chance to try to keep the kings. NBA rarely votes no on a sale/relocation unless there is financial problems. NBA voting no on Seattle would be the first that they ever said no to a sale that i am aware of due to some reason than money problems.

Remember Seattle never got the chance that Sacramento is getting now.
Quote:
Originally Posted by gstommylee View Post
Doesn't matter that Seattle didn't. NBA never allowed Seattle the possibility to come up with a counter offer to the NBA before they approved the sale of the Sonics to Bennett. Even if they could the NBA could still had approved the sale to Bennett.

NBA has learned from that mistake hence why they are giving Sacramento a chance to try to keep the team there.
That's the thing, no one does know for certain. People can have hunches and opinions, but the fact is this situation is complex and will be looked at objectively.

Clowe Me is online now  
Old
03-01-2013, 12:38 AM
  #81
Clowe Me
Registered User
 
Clowe Me's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: 530
Country: Uzbekistan
Posts: 15,131
vCash: 50
Fact is, if anyone says for certain that the team is staying in Sacramento or that they are moving to Seattle, they have no idea what they're talking about.


Last edited by Major4Boarding: 03-01-2013 at 06:47 AM. Reason: I've got this
Clowe Me is online now  
Old
03-01-2013, 12:39 AM
  #82
gstommylee
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 4,000
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clowe Me View Post
That's the thing, no one does know for certain. People can have hunches and opinions, but the fact is this situation is complex and will be looked at objectively.
Oh i agree that it has to be seen objectively. To look at it from another prospective i could argue that there is 95 percent chance based on what we know now that the Kings to going to Seattle but a month from now that % it could go up to 99% chance. It could lower to 85% chance perhaps even lower.

It'll take a lot from Sacramento to convince the NBA that a team in Sacramento will provide a much larger benefit to the league than having team in seattle with Hansen/balmer/nordstroms as owners.


Last edited by gstommylee: 03-01-2013 at 12:45 AM.
gstommylee is online now  
Old
03-01-2013, 12:43 AM
  #83
Clowe Me
Registered User
 
Clowe Me's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: 530
Country: Uzbekistan
Posts: 15,131
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by gstommylee View Post
Oh i agree that it has to be seen objectively.
I hope that is really is.

Clowe Me is online now  
Old
03-01-2013, 12:45 AM
  #84
Clowe Me
Registered User
 
Clowe Me's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: 530
Country: Uzbekistan
Posts: 15,131
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by gstommylee View Post
To look at it from another prospective i could argue that there is 95 percent chance based on what we know now that the Kings to going to Seattle but a month from now that % it could go up to 99% chance. It could lower to 85% chance perhaps even lower.
How could you really argue percentages? When all the information comes out, that will be telling on whose deal gets accepted.

Clowe Me is online now  
Old
03-01-2013, 12:46 AM
  #85
gstommylee
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 4,000
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clowe Me View Post
I hope that is really is.
Personally i rather have expansion than to see another city loose a team but that is not an option.

gstommylee is online now  
Old
03-01-2013, 12:49 AM
  #86
Clowe Me
Registered User
 
Clowe Me's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: 530
Country: Uzbekistan
Posts: 15,131
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by gstommylee View Post
Personally i rather have expansion than to see another city loose a team but that is not an option.
Unfortunately not. Also unfortunate is the fact that one of these cities won't have a team soon.

If Seattle ends up being the better option, I hope they go there. But, I would like to see both deals before having a decision predetermined, I hope the league and bog members are the same.

Clowe Me is online now  
Old
03-01-2013, 12:50 AM
  #87
gstommylee
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 4,000
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clowe Me View Post
How could you really argue percentages? When all the information comes out, that will be telling on whose deal gets accepted.
Based on what we know today there is no approved arena plan in Sacramento. With out that arena plan Sacramento has no shot at keeping the team.

If you saw what was said last Tuesday in Sacramento city hall they are starting over from scratch on the arena. Sacramento is running out of time. Its not a sure thing that they will have an arena deal done and submitted to the NBA before April 19th.

gstommylee is online now  
Old
03-01-2013, 12:53 AM
  #88
Clowe Me
Registered User
 
Clowe Me's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: 530
Country: Uzbekistan
Posts: 15,131
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by gstommylee View Post
Based on what we know today there is no approved arena plan in Sacramento. With out that arena plan Sacramento has no shot at keeping the team.

If you saw what was said last Tuesday in Sacramento city hall they are starting over from scratch on the arena.
That's a given. But, that hasn't happened yet. I have confidence that Burkle will do a fine job getting an arena plan established and voted upon. He was involved with the last one, so I'm sure he and others already had some ideas in store for this time.

Clowe Me is online now  
Old
03-01-2013, 12:58 AM
  #89
gstommylee
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 4,000
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clowe Me View Post
That's a given. But, that hasn't happened yet. I have confidence that Burkle will do a fine job getting an arena plan established and voted upon. He was involved with the last one, so I'm sure he and others already had some ideas in store for this time.
Burkle has 7 weeks to get that done. In comparison it took us 8 months to get ours done.

They have 7 weeks to get everything done with funding all accounted for no gaps and last i heard they still are going for funding from parking and who knows how much that will actually provide or when that bidding will actually take place.

Nevermind there was that report of one of the minority owners getting involved in a separate effort to buy the team and build an arena that is all 100% privately funded.

So its not a guarantee that there will be an agreed deal between Sacramento and burkle in 7 weeks.

They have to follow the political process. They can not rush to get it done or they could possibly face lawsuits cause they didn't allow the public a fair chance to offer their opinions.

gstommylee is online now  
Old
03-01-2013, 01:06 AM
  #90
Clowe Me
Registered User
 
Clowe Me's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: 530
Country: Uzbekistan
Posts: 15,131
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by gstommylee View Post
Burkle has 7 weeks to get that done. In comparison it took us 8 months to get ours done.

They have 7 weeks to get everything done with funding all accounted for no gaps and last i heard they still are going for funding from parking and who knows how much that will actually provide or when that bidding will actually take place.

Nevermind there was that report of one of the minority owners getting involved in a separate effort to buy the team and build an arena that is all 100% privately funded.

So its not a guarantee that there will be an agreed deal between Sacramento and burkle in 7 weeks.

They have to follow the political process. They can not rush to get it done or they could possibly face lawsuits cause they didn't allow the public a fair chance to offer their opinions.
I got you now. Seattle definitely has the advantage right now with the fact that they do have an arena deal together.

I simply didn't understand your rationale with the percentages.

Clowe Me is online now  
Old
03-01-2013, 06:14 AM
  #91
wildthing202
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Douglas, MA
Country: United States
Posts: 576
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to wildthing202 Send a message via Yahoo to wildthing202
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clowe Me View Post
Where are you guys getting this 'Stern wants the team moved to Seattle' crap? He has said Seattle would be a great place for an nba team. In the same interview, he said Sacramento is a great market and deserves a team.

I likes both markets. I don't see bias towards either.
http://probasketballtalk.nbcsports.c...ck-in-seattle/
http://sports.yahoo.com/news/nba--da...-25321709.html

Sounds like he wants a team in Seattle before he leaves and for the most part what the commish wants he gets not to mention it doesn't really matter what Sacramento does since the Maloofs don't have to sell the team locally if they don't want to.

wildthing202 is offline  
Old
03-01-2013, 07:55 AM
  #92
gstommylee
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 4,000
vCash: 500
PR wise nothing beats the national PR nightmare the NBA took after the sonics left especially with how it was handled. NO way Kings leaving would offer a worse PR hit than sonics leaving.

gstommylee is online now  
Old
03-01-2013, 08:00 AM
  #93
Patofqc
Registered User
 
Patofqc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 3,282
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shockmaster View Post
So then what happens if the NBA Board of Governors approves the sale to the Seattle group in April? Does that make this a wasted effort by Sacramento?
Is Sacramento can get a new arena confirmed and have a new owner locally, will the NBA still move the team. Will the NBA just abandon a city they have been there even if they fixed their problem?

Patofqc is offline  
Old
03-01-2013, 08:04 AM
  #94
gstommylee
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 4,000
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patofqc View Post
Is Sacramento can get a new arena confirmed and have a new owner locally, will the NBA still move the team. Will the NBA just abandon a city they have been there even if they fixed their problem?
I question that they will fix their problem in 7 weeks. Getting an arena approved in city government takes longer than 7 weeks. They just approved a motion to start negotiating on a deal with burkle. It could take a couple weeks on that then who knows how long it'll take once deal is submitted to city council for consideration.

Maloofs can still not decide to sell it locally. If NBA says no and maloofs keep team then what?

gstommylee is online now  
Old
03-01-2013, 01:31 PM
  #95
superdeluxe
Seattle SuperSonics
 
superdeluxe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Sodo, Wa
Country: South Korea
Posts: 2,150
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patofqc View Post
Is Sacramento can get a new arena confirmed and have a new owner locally, will the NBA still move the team. Will the NBA just abandon a city they have been there even if they fixed their problem?
Sure.

superdeluxe is offline  
Old
03-01-2013, 02:31 PM
  #96
tank44
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Seattle, WA
Country: Canada
Posts: 156
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by gstommylee View Post
As far as we know Kings move to seattle could be already a done deal and the NBA is saving face with Sacramento fans by allowing them a chance to try to keep the kings. NBA rarely votes no on a sale/relocation unless there is financial problems. NBA voting no on Seattle would be the first that they ever said no to a sale that i am aware of due to some reason than money problems.

Remember Seattle never got the chance that Sacramento is getting now.
I recall that Balmer tried to buy the Sonics back from Bennett to keep the team in Seattle, play at Key Arena and work out an arena solution. NBA & Bennett said no and left for OKC.

tank44 is offline  
Old
03-01-2013, 02:55 PM
  #97
maruk14
Registered User
 
maruk14's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Seattle, WA
Country: United States
Posts: 2,912
vCash: 500
Anyone have an example where the NBA owners have rejected the sale and relocation of a franchise that wasn't due to shaky finances (ala T'Wolves in '94)?

maruk14 is offline  
Old
03-01-2013, 03:19 PM
  #98
gstommylee
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 4,000
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by maruk14 View Post
Anyone have an example where the NBA owners have rejected the sale and relocation of a franchise that wasn't due to shaky finances (ala T'Wolves in '94)?
No not that i am aware off.

gstommylee is online now  
Old
03-01-2013, 03:20 PM
  #99
gstommylee
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 4,000
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by tank44 View Post
I recall that Balmer tried to buy the Sonics back from Bennett to keep the team in Seattle, play at Key Arena and work out an arena solution. NBA & Bennett said no and left for OKC.
NBA already approved Bennett as owner before Balmer tried to buy the sonics which is different compared to the Kings situation where there is a pending PSA.

gstommylee is online now  
Old
03-01-2013, 07:35 PM
  #100
Mightygoose
Registered User
 
Mightygoose's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Ajax, ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,157
vCash: 514
Bid from Marstov and Burkle officially submitted.

https://www.google.ca/search?q=march...&client=safari

No financial details are known as of yet.

Next step, IMO is if the group can reach a viable arena deal with the city in the next month and a half. Could they really pull it off?

Mightygoose is offline  
Closed Thread

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:26 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.