NBA owners firm about Kings future (Sacramento: sale, homeowners association, attorneys)

[vplegend]

"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."
-Brian Windhorst

Owners don't change stance on move of Sacramento Kings - ESPN

It's unofficially, officially over for Seattle...again lol.

[bluevelo]

Originally Posted by vplegend

"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."
-Brian Windhorst

Owners don't change stance on move of Sacramento Kings - ESPN

It's unofficially, officially over for Seattle...again lol.

I predict this will end in bankruptcy court. The Maloofs will refuse to sell to anyone else, like children holding their breath and not getting their way.

[CeJeH]

Originally Posted by bluevelo

I predict this will end in bankruptcy court. The Maloofs will refuse to sell to anyone else, like children holding their breath and not getting their way.

The Maloofs are doing this because they need to cash out. They will put up just enough of a fight to avoid getting soon by Hansen/Ballmer, but they will eventually give in and take the $

[wburg]

So we're forcing them to do something they don't want to do, and calling them bullies for not wanting to do it?

[CeJeH]

Yes. They are trying to force the Kings out of town no matter what. If they can't move the team themselves, they are trying to force the NBA to allow a sale to an ownership group that will surely move them out of town. They didn't give a viable ownership group that wishes to keep the team in Sacramento a chance to buy, or even to make an offer, and are refusing to do business with the local group (allegedly). They are trying to burn the bridge between Sacramento and the NBA completely out of spite, which is wrong. They are also trying to use Steve Ballmer's deep pockets to try to force the NBA, either directly or indirectly, essentially making public bribes in order to get what they want. No sale is ever final, even for small pieces of a franchise, without approval from the NBA board of governors, and they tried to hammer out a contract under the table in an attempt to circumvent the NBA board of governor's bylaws and force the sale of the team. The Nothing But Attorneys association will not allow that to happen.

[Bulldogdad]

Originally Posted by wburg

So we're forcing them to do something they don't want to do, and calling them bullies for not wanting to do it?

they belong to an organization that has rules. Kinda like a homeowners association. No problems when times are phat. Now that they are in the pisser they whine ***** and moan like pissants.

[wburg]

So the rules say we can bully them, but they can't bully us?

How is Hansen's most recent offer a bribe, but Ranadive's response (an offer to decline revenue sharing) not a bribe? Both directly benefit the NBA.

[tifoso]

Originally Posted by wburg

So the rules say we can bully them, but they can't bully us?

How is Hansen's most recent offer a bribe, but Ranadive's response (an offer to decline revenue sharing) not a bribe? Both directly benefit the NBA.

Hansen/Ballmer's most recent offer not only includes an insanely high purchase price for the team, but also features an unprecedented $115 million re-location fee, divided up amongst the other owners. The last team a team moved (SEA to OKC) the re-location fee was $30 million. If that extra $85 million doesn't meet the generally understood definition of a bribe then the word has lost its meaning.

As for revenue-sharing, Ranadive's offer to decline payment is still short of what Hansen/Ballmer have offered, which is not just to decline revenue sharing, but to pay into that fund.

[CeJeH]

Originally Posted by wburg

So the rules say we can bully them, but they can't bully us?

How is Hansen's most recent offer a bribe, but Ranadive's response (an offer to decline revenue sharing) not a bribe? Both directly benefit the NBA.

Once again you twist around information to fit your narrative. Ranadive did not offer to decline revenue sharing in response to Hansen, he told the NBA that they wouldn't be needing it over a month ago, before Hansen's latest attempt to kick up the offer. And there is no bullying of the Maloofs going on, and why anyone would ever take their side here is beyond me. Thy are trying to break the rules of the NBA Board of Governors so the NBA is slapping them back. That's how these things work. It's pretty simple, and the reason why I give you so much **** is because you are smart enough to understand these facts, yet you choose to try to twist the information around in order to try to convince people that you are right. It's underhanded and degrading, it does no good.

[CeJeH]

Originally Posted by tifoso

Hansen/Ballmer's most recent offer not only includes an insanely high purchase price for the team, but also features an unprecedented $115 million re-location fee, divided up amongst the other owners. The last team a team moved (SEA to OKC) the re-location fee was $30 million. If that extra $85 million doesn't meet the generally understood definition of a bribe then the word has lost its meaning.

As for revenue-sharing, Ranadive's offer to decline payment is still short of what Hansen/Ballmer have offered, which is not just to decline revenue sharing, but to pay into that fund.

All of the this