Drama, more drama

While the City of San Francisco continues its schmoozing of the Warriors, Kings ownership is going to war with Sacramento. Apparently the Maloofs hired a former FBI agent to look into the signatures provided by supporters of ThinkBig Sacramento, a civic group whose focus is to keep the team in the capital city. That caused ThinkBig to retaliate, as they want the US Attorney General to investigate the Maloofs to see if they harassed those supporters.

And you thought the relationship between the A’s and Oakland was bad.

In addition, newly dug up documents show that the Maloofs and the NBA had a disagreement about terms the team was asking for and items they would commit to: collateral, gameday and municipal expenses. Naturally, the Maloofs balked at putting up any of that even though it’s standard practice in stadium/arena building these days. Buzz is building that they’ll apply for relocation as the 2012-13 season ends, and there’s no telling how awkward the situation will be between the team and fans at Power Balance Pavilion this fall.

It’s all so bizarre. Excuse me while I grab some popcorn.

27 Responses to Drama, more drama

  1. Kurtis says:

    As a lifelong Kings fan, this is truly an embarrassing day. I hope the NBA relocation committee pushes back and denies relocation again. Unfortunately, that will only push this thing to court. This ain’t over by a long shot.

  2. Dan says:

    Wow, just when you thought the Maloofs couldn’t stoop any lower they find a way to reinforce their claim to the title of worst sports team owners in the history of American professional sports. I mean scum like Al Davis, Bud Adams and the guy who moved the Cleveland Browns have NOTHING on these bozos. I hope they apply for relocation after next season. And I hope the league tells them to go fuck themselves with a broken off broomstick.

  3. daniel says:

    Kings fans should not go to the games next year. Let them play in an empty area.

  4. Dan says:

    Normally I’d say that’s the absolute worst thing you could do, but in the Kings case it might actually be enough to bankrupt the Maloofs.

  5. jeff-athletic says:

    This is going to bite the Maloofs in the ass. They are so stupid it’s astounding. Nobody is going to go to games next season, and they are going to be in a world of hurt, because the Kings are their only source of income.

  6. Dan says:

    Well it’s a risk but I’m sure they think that if they can drive down attendance the league will let them move after next season. Problem they’ve got is the league owners aren’t stupid. They know the Maloofs looked a gift horse in the mouth with how much Sac offered them for the arena, that the Maloofs poisoned the deal and are broke, and that Burkle is waiting in the wings to buy the team. And on top of that the other owners reportedly have never liked the Maloofs. I can see the other owners being spiteful enough to deny a move and force the Maloofs to sell, be it to Burkle or the Seattle group. But either way I’d be shocked if the Maloofs still own the team after the 2013-14 season.

  7. duffer says:

    Perhaps that produced new arena agreement between the Maloofs and Sacto was a ruse by the Maloofs to keep fans in the seats until the Kings move to Anaheim. The rumor is that the Maloofs planned the move to Anaheim for the start of the ’12-13 season (not the ’11-12 season) because the Lakers ended their cable contract with Fox Sports after the end of the ’11-’12 season and the Maloofs could gain a better cable contract from the LA fanbase and playing in Anaheim than the Sacramento sports market could offer.

  8. Dan says:

    Can’t move for 12-13 however. They didn’t file to move by Mar 1. And they’d still need league approval that likely wouldn’t be forthcoming with both Sterling and Buss opposed and Stern peeved at the Maloofs.

  9. duffer says:

    Stern and NBA must not be pleased with the Maloofs’ antics. Also Anaheim may be losing interest after observing how the Maloofs have hosed Sacto.

  10. Sid says:

    Rip on the Maloofs all you want it is the City of Sacramento that has failed all Kings fans. Not to say the Maloofs are not scum in their own right but they are the lesser of the two evils by far.

    The Maloofs turned down the city’s offer and why? There is no way both parties (The city and Maloofs) could make $$ after 10 years into the deal hence why the Kings refused to sign a 30 year lease.

    The City of Sacramento’s proposal was simply put a pipe dream that had no legs to it period. You cannot take 9M a year from the General Fund of the city by privatizing parking without a public vote.

    This plus Sacramento did not even have an EIR complete for the site in question. What if there were transportation improvement costs? Who would pay for that? The city? The Maloofs? That has to be done before doing any kind of budgeting for construction costs.

    Kevin Johnson continuously put the Chicken before the Egg time and time again and when the Maloofs questioned the city for answers to the questions similar to the ones I have above what did they city do?? Point fingers at the Maloofs stating they were trying to derail the deal instead of providing direct answers.

    It is sad that people blame the Maloofs here when it is really it is Sacramento’s fault for trying to do this by the seat of their pants without doing their own due diligence.

    The NBA will let the Kings move to Anaheim creating the largest 1-team TV market in the NBA for the Warriors who will now be televised all the way to Eureka where as they are blacked out now outside of the Bay Area.

    The Kings will become the Royals after next season and I wish them well in Orange County as it is a huge under-served sub market of So Cal. Hopefully Henry Samueli takes over for the Maloofs as owner, one dirt bag to another.

  11. Sid says:

    @Dan- The Maloofs do not need league approval to move as Sterling and Al Davis can attest. This is not MLB where T-rights come into question.

    The league relocation committee is simply a motion that now will approve the move as you will see 1 year from now.

  12. daveybaby says:

    Warriors move to San Francisco, Kings move to Oracle. I keep my season tickets in my same seats, root for a new team. Larry Ellison finally as an owner with his team in his building. Wow, that was easy!

  13. daveybaby says:

    Seriously, would hate to see Sacramento lose their team. Sad to see some great cities with amazing history of support being threatened to lose their teams. But hey, that’s the world of pro sports.

  14. Briggs says:

    Lew Wolff and Larry Baer are in the same room today along with the rest of the MLB owners, probably talking about whatever MLB owners talk about like who’s embezzling them, who they’re embezzling or.. I don’t know… their kids? (Who are either illegitimate & half-Taiwanese or embezzling money from them).

  15. jeff-athletic says:

    @Sid
    Wow. Just. Wow.
    So many fallacies in your arguments. And I usually find your arguments about other issues pretty solid.
    I’m not going to bother arguing your points (you have your Sacramento hatred entrenched), so there is no sense trying to convince you otherwise. All I suggest is you check out Think Big Sacramento, SacBee.com, and other sources (Kings Bleacher Report), and spend some time informing yourself of the process and the long history.
    You can hate my city all you want, but the fact is this city, including it’s leadership, business community, and fans, has bent over backwards time and time again to get an arena deal done, and the Maloofs have balked every time.

  16. jeff-athletic says:

    If anyone doubts Sacramento’s efforts, or is behind the Maloofs in all of this mess, please read the following:
    http://www.cowbellkingdom.com/2012/05/08/maloofs-2013-relocation-sacramento-anaheim/

  17. Dan says:

    Sid, incorrect. Al Davis may have been the sole owner to move without league approval, but remember he had to go to court to do so. The Maloofs would be no different. And they don’t have the money for a protracted court battle. Not to mention the league is so peeved at them they could always just revoke the franchise. Remember the league ultimately grants franchises and they might just hate the Maloofs enough to revoke theirs and kill off the team completely. And all of this assumes there’s nothing in the Maloof’s ownership agreement that stipulates they have to get league approval by contract for a move.

  18. Dan says:

    As for Sac failing them, Sac came up with a workable arena plan in less than a year as the league requested. Were there issues to iron out, sure. But that’s not an excuse to throw the whole plan under the bus the way the Maloofs did. The third time they’ve done so by the way. There is only one villian in the whole story and that’s the Maloofs. There’s never been such a disingenuous group of scumbags to run a team. They’ve never had any intention of staying in Sac and have had the glitz of LA on the mind for years. Luckily the NBA ain’t biting.

  19. Larry Ellison says:

    Can I buy them out and move them the Kings to SJ?

  20. Dan says:

    If selling them were a solution they’d be staying in Sacramento. Burkle has already offered to buy them. The Maloofs stubbornly aren’t selling. They think Anaheim is the pot of gold at the end of a rainbow coming out of their asses. Which is ironic because according to the terms of the deal with Samueli in Anaheim they’d lose the team if they defaulted to him, which they’d undoubtedly do.

  21. SierraSpartan says:

    @ Dan – the main reason the Maloofs cannot sell is that they are currently in negative equity on the team. They control a 45% stake (they achieve majority status via a handshake deal with a 10% owner) in the team that’s worth roughly $300M. They currently have loans outstanding to the City for $60M (secured by Arco Arena) and to the league for roughly $100M to $125M. They could at best sell their stake in the team for ~~$135M, thus leaving them $50M in the hole if they sell.

    Long and short, they’re not just broke, they are dead-ass broke. They are using the NBA team as their cash generator right now, and the only reason they can do so is because of revenue sharing combined with rock-bottom salary and staffing – and the Commish is already on record as stating they will not be allowed to go on doing that forever.

    We are the New Clippers. Pray for us.

  22. jeff-athletic says:

    @SierraSpartan
    Perhaps the Maloofs could sell off Arco (Power Balance) and the land surrounding it (both of which they own), getting rid of, at least, the debt to Sacramento.
    Then maybe they can get a deal with the NBA, where they walk away without their debt to the NBA, the NBA assumes 45% ownership, which then sells the stake to Brukle.
    Then the Maloofs can all get jobs at Taco Bell.

  23. dknight007 says:

    The Maloofs are a joke!

    Look for the Maloofs to sell the team or move the team to Seattle.

  24. dknight007 says:

    If the Maloofs go to Anaheim, they will be even more of a laughing stock franchise, then the already are.

    Fans or the Laker and Clippers will never all of a sudden start rooting and attending Kings games in Anaheim? Fat chance!

    The goofy Maloofs are a bunch of idiots!

  25. pjk says:

    Meanwhle, having learned that telling the NBA “Build your own arena!” is the same as telling the league to leave town, Seattle looks to get its act together on a mostly privately funded arena.
    http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/7938287/arena-plan-moves-ahead-seattle-lures-nba

  26. Dan says:

    Jeff, Not sure they can sell Arco. One of the things that came up during the last year is that Arco isn’t a privately owned venue as we all thought. The Maloofs claimed it’s publicly owned at one point. I’ll see if I can find the article. But the point was that Arco’s status is in no way clear anymore.

  27. SierraSpartan says:

    @ Dan – it’s simple. When there’s work or renovation to be done, then it’s a publicly owned venue. However, when it’s needed for collateral for a loan, then all of a sudden it becomes “private.”

    Simple rule of thumb for the Maloofs: If something costs them money, it’s always somebody else’s responsibility to pay for it.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>