Ellison in talks to buy Memphis Grizzlies
Oracle CEO and billionaire Larry Ellison has been getting some sun down in Indian Wells, where one of his sports properties, the BNP Paribas Open tennis tournament, has been going on for the last two weeks. That hasn’t stopped him from accelerating his quest for an NBA franchise. The basketball fan almost bought the New Orleans Hornets with the possible intent to move the franchise to San Jose. After those overtures were denied by the league, he’s back to buy another Southern team, the Memphis Grizzlies. CSN Bay Area’s Matt Steinmetz reports that Ellison has a “handshake agreement” with current Grizzlies owner Michael Heisley to acquire the franchise.
The Grizzlies are locked into a lease at FedEx Forum through at least 2017, so there’s no chance of Ellison being able to relocate the franchise immediately (if he wanted to). The Merc notes that Heisley’s asking price is $350 million, a $40+ million premium over the franchise’s most recent Forbes valuation. That figure is also in line with the amount the NBA is looking to get for the Hornets, who are expected to be sold to a consortium headed by LA businessman Raj Bhathal sometime in the next few weeks.
Both Heisley and Ellison were expected to be bidders on the Dodgers. Only Heisley submitted a bid. Frequently criticized for being cheap in his tenure as Grizzlies owner, Heisley managed to end up on the short list of Dodger bidders, making it past the first two rounds after he teamed up with Tony Ressler.
The $350 million sales price appears to be the key for Ellison, as he bid lower than Joe Lacob and Peter Guber when the Warriors were put up for sale. That’s the same amount he bid on the Hornets in late 2010. Still, the franchise is in Memphis and is not going to move for a while if at all. With his interest tied up in the ongoing America’s Cup defense and running a NASDAQ-100/S&P 500 company, you have to wonder if Ellison would end up being something of an absentee owner. An hour jet ride to Palm Desert once a year is a lot more manageable than frequent four-hour trips to Memphis. Despite that “hardship” it’s clear that Ellison wants in on owning an NBA franchise, which is more than I can say for his supposed interest in baseball.
@Sid – Anaheim didn’t have to redo the lower bowl because it was done properly at the start. San Jose would have to do it. I’m amused at how you keep saying HP is superior in some ways as a basketball arena, citing the upper level as the reason. Guess what? The upper level is not what provides serious revenue. Much of the upper level for NBA teams is practically a loss leader. Those corner lower bowl seats, the ones you say are better at Oracle, are corridors and empty space at HP. That has to be addressed to maximize revenue. Take the San Jose blinders off and look at the history of arenas throughout the league. The NBA is not going to be satisfied with building a few walls and calling it a day. The NBA franchise will already be in a disadvantageous position at HP (scheduling, revenue split) when they move in unless the Sharks own a piece of the team. Maximizing revenue is of the utmost.
Rick Barry being any kind of an arbiter on class is the height of absurdity. I’m sure all Barry’s old teammates recognized his “show some class” glare as the close relative of his “how could you drop that pass” glare he used to shoot them on the court.
Barry would have been well-advised to remember Mike Dunleavy’s quote before getting involved in any dispute, “He lacks diplomacy. If you sent him to the U.N., he’d end up starting World War III.”
@ML “Those corner lower bowl seats, the ones you say are better at Oracle, are corridors and empty space at HP”
.
I see your point comparing corner bowl seats at Oracle and HP, but not sure I see it comparing HP and Honda Center. The picture in your earlier post showing Honda Center in NCAA config seems to show some might big corridors and empty space in the corners.
.
Also, assuming this is a deficiency, not sure why it wouldn’t be considered a deficiency for hockey as well.
Despite what happened last night, Oakland basketball fans are the best and most loyal in the NBA. True Warrior fans aren’t going to become Grizzly fans as long as the team stays in Oakland. Bringing another team to San Jose would just mean two weak franchises in a tiny two team market.
Lacob didn’t belong on the court last night. If he wants to succeed he should commit to Oakland.
Sid, have you been to basketball games at HP Pavilion? As I stated earlier, I have seen Warrior and NCAA Tournament games there and it is far from ideal.
Because the holes don’t exist when the arenas are both in hockey config.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/stevenbowles/3214179581/
Take a look at the HP center in the corners when it’s in basketball config. The seats that are blocked in by the basketball seats extending out, themselves extend out in hockey config filling in the majority of the empty space that exists during basketball config.
You can see Honda Center has the same issue. Though with Honda Center part of the “luxury seat” issue is offset by that arena’s luxury box set up. Honda Center has two levels of luxury boxes below the upper deck whereas HP Pavilion only has one level of luxury boxes below the upper deck. The second level of HP Pavilion’s luxury boxes are up in the rafters at the top of the upper deck.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/dirkhansen/2353429145/
Warrior fans are great and they do very well in Oakland. That said, the team is pretty invisible in the south bay. I find it surprising when I see so much as a license plate frame repping the team down here. That comes from the whole basketball/hockey seasonal divide, or at least that is the only why I can explain it.
@ Ted – your typical team fanboism shows through again. ” Bringing another team to San Jose would just mean two weak franchises in a tiny two team market.” So you consider the whole Bay Area a “tiny” market even though GDP is above many nations? How many people in the total populace here again? I will agree with you however that “True Warrior fans aren’t going to become Grizzly fans as long as the team stays in Oakland.” and will parallel it with the A’s move to SJ: true pumpkin Gnats fan will remain loyal fans regardless, so the whole “fan conquest” argument should be thrown out the window….
@ NT – There are some pockets of fans, but I can see many growing up Lakers fans during the Showtime years. I converted back to the W’s once Run TMC took off, and followed Timmy to Miami…
Anon, attack the argument, not the person arguing it. I’d agree with him. The Bay Area is a smaller market when it comes to basketball. The Warriors do ok, but they’re not sold out every game and are definitely skewing their attendance numbers somewhat (to what extent we can’t know but they’re not reporting actual attendance). And there is not much hype around the team despite them being the only game in town when compared to the Giants, Niners, Raiders, and Sharks. Could the Bay Area be a bigger market with some work by an ownership group, sure. But to date it hasn’t been done.
@Nam Turk – I have several friends in the South Bay who are season ticket plan holders. The W’s fanbase is strong here, though I suspect people would easily switch to a new team if one came in (and was good). The Bay Area is a very good NBA market. I’m not sure it would support two teams well. Unlike the Giants’ argument, there is a real threat of an incoming team leaching fans from the W’s. No antitrust exemption to help the league or the W’s.
Anon, I am a Warrior fan who has never converted or jumped bandwagons to Miami or LA. I am not sure what Fanboism means. The Bay Area is a tiny two team market compared to other NBA two team markets is it not? We are not talking about the A’s and the Giants here so I am not going to respond to your Gnat Pumpkin comments.
This conversation takes me back to the portfolio.com study on expansion markets and the various economic prerequisites for each professional sport. That report showed that here was not enough economic might in the Bay Area for a new NBA franchise (if you combined what it called the San Jose market with the Oak-SF market). I think a second NBA franchise in the Bay Area (no matter where) would be bad for the NBA’s bottom line.
@ Ted – That’s nice that you’re a W’s fan, so am I. Fanboism means that you hype up your favorite team regardless of any argument others may present. As for the Bay Area being comparable to other 2 team markets, that’s an easy thing to say since there aren’t many 2 team markets in the first place. The closest would be LA and their population does dwarf ours, but our corporate base is much stronger and attendance requirements is much smaller in an NBA venue vs. MLB. And regarding the halloween Gnats discussion, we’re always talking about the A’s here, since after all, it is the “new A’s ballpark” site or did you take a wrong turn on the Bay Bridge?
@ Dan – The Warriors historically are in the top 10 of NBA attendance averaging more than 90% of capacity for the past 7 years even with crappy teams, an uninterested coach, dysfunctional front office, and crappy owners . I’m sure this will accelerate more once they move to their new venue in SF. I would also argue that basketball is one of the most popular sports here, so i think it is a much stronger market than people think.
Anon, there aren’t many other two team markets for a reason and there is no reason to believe that Northern California could adequately support three teams. I also wonder how well the Warriors would have drawn over the past 10 years in San Francisco or San Jose.
Ted – No need to guess how well they would draw in SJ. In 96-97, they drew an average of 15,167 which was then the highest attendance in team history. While it is just one data point, it is a very critical one illustrating that the South Bay could support a team within its locale.
Anon, actually it’s nothing of the sort. You’re looking at a one off in a one team market when the arena was still a new novelty. Not a great metric to assume a second NBA team would draw well to an older less basketball friendly arena, particularly IF the Warriors do make a move to a new basketball pleasure palace on the SF waterfront.
Anon, they were novelty when they played in San Jose. I am not sure that fans down here would put up with a team that never wins and I am sure that they would lose much of their East Bay fan base when they moved to San Jose.
Not to mention that the STH’s had to re-up in the SJ year or lose the rights to their seats. A North or East Bay STH might be willing to make that drive for one year, but not for good.
@ Ted – I would argue that the Sharks, even with all their success, haven’t won any championships but enjoy rabid support even for a sport as foreign as ice hockey. Since you grew up in the South Bay, you know how popular basketball is with the local kids since it’s much more easy to get a pickup game of hoops as opposed to the other major sports. However, I realize that there isn’t much support of local college basketball for some reason….
@ Dan – Yes, it is an admitted limited sample size unfortunately, but interesting nonetheless. If there were any novelty associated with a new team/venue, I would note that the Sharks support would of faded by now. BTW – did you notice that with the recent lockout the “We Believe” reunion was showcased in SJ as opposed to Oracle Arena? Not much there i know, but interesting nevertheless.
@ Brian – I was not implying a move by the W’s south, but rather a 2nd team in the South Bay. If such a thing occurred and I admit it is more speculation than anything at this time, the W’s would essentially own SF and the EB.
http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/7714701/how-annoy-fan-base-60-easy-steps Simmons take on the W’s problems.
.
I realized the basketball smarts of W’s fans was vastly overrated during the playoffs a few years ago, when they started the wave right as their own guy was shooting free throws.