Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 87

Thread: Maloof Money Part 1

  1. #1

    Maloof Money Part 1

    By all accounts, the Monarch weren’t making the Maloofs money but the team wasn’t losing much either. In November, the Maloofs abruptly folded the Monarchs claming they needed more time to focus on the Kings. A few weeks later, the Maloofs decided to sell their family beer distributorship – which was a reliable profit center for decades. Once again, the family insisted the move was solely about focusing their energy on Sacramento and Las Vegas. Looking at the facts below, while the Maloofs overall wealth remains substantial, it appears they might be experiencing cash flow issues. This shouldn’t come as a huge surprise as both the Kings and Palms require huge operating costs and rely on discretionary income during an economic crisis.
    In 2002, the Maloofs opened up their books to the Sacramento Bee. (Footnote (FN) 1.) The family’s assets were estimated at approximately one billion dollars with four main components: the Kings, the Palms, the New Mexico Beer Distributorship, and Wells Fargo stock. (FN1.) Seven years later, the values of the Palms and stock have fallen sharply. Some fans focus on the Kings losses, but those figures are merely a fraction of the losses the Maloofs have suffered recently.
    Now, the family is selling the business that was both the cornerstone and backbone of their empire for many years. Therefore, it appears that sale – and to a much lesser degree the closing of the Monarchs – have more to do with freeing up cash than prioritizing their businesses.

    A. Background
    The family has been in the beer business forever. Based upon the need to move beer from Colorado to New Mexico, the family also operated a successful trucking business. George Maloof bought the Rockets in 1979. After his death, the family sold the team in 1982. (FN1) In 1994, the family built the Fiesta Casino in Las Vegas for $30 million dollars. After successfully managing the small casino, they sold it for $170 million in 2000. (Id.)

    B. Wells Fargo & Co. Stock
    1976, the Maloofs paid $10 million for a 77 percent stake in First National Bank in Albuquerque. (FN1.) In 1994, the bank merged with Salt Lake City-based First Security Corp. in a $200 million stock swap. In 2000, Wells Fargo & Co. acquires First Security in a stock swap, with the Maloofs receiving nearly 4.87 million shares of Wells Fargo stock. (Id.)
    In 2002, when the price was trading at almost $50 a share, their Wells Fargo stock was worth $248 million. (Id.) Friday, the stock was trading just above $25. However, that price is up significantly from its low of $7.80 in March 2009.

    C. Beer Distributorship
    As a preliminary matter, beer distributorships are profitable, extremely hard to get, and almost recession proof. You get the exclusive right to sell a product with a decent margin.
    The family the family obtained a Coors distributor ship in 1937, with the exclusive right to supply the state of New Mexico. In 2002, the company was valued at 45 million dollars. (FN1.) The next year, the company expanded. In 2003, the Maloofs bought the third largest distributorship in the state and merged the companies. At which point, the supplied 42 percent of the states’ beer, with exclusive rights to all Coors, Miller, Corona, and Heineken sales as well as 40 other products. (FN2.)
    Since the expansion, the business has remained profitable. In May 2009, George Maloof, Jr. described 2008 as a “huge successes” for the distributorship. (FN3.) Michael Bellas, chief executive of the New York consulting firm Beverage Marketing Corp recently estimated the annual revenue is “likely well more than $100 million.” (FN4.)

    D. Palms
    The Palms opened in 2001. In 2005, the Maloofs opened the “fantasy tower” at a cost of approximately $600 million. In 2008, the Maloofs opened a third tower called Palms Place, which includes a hotel, spa, and 600 condo units.
    Station Casino Inc. owns 6.7 of the Palms. Station is currently in Chapter 11 bankruptcy. The Maloofs aren’t providing any specifics about the value of their casino, but Station’s filings with the SEC indicate the value of the Palms continues to fall sharply. (FN3.) In March of 2009, Station filed papers with the SEC that claimed their share of the Palms fell from 25.9 million in January 2008 to 3.3 million. (Id.)
    Station’s filings also address the overall value of the Palms. It was reported that in early 2008, the casino had a value of $386 million. In March 2009, Station reported the value was only $50 million and cash flow had fallen 19% from the previous year. (Id.) On September 30, 2009, Station indicated the value of the Palms was $20 million. (FN4.)
    Here are a couple of things to consider. Because they are in a bankruptcy proceeding, Station has an incentive to emphasize liabilities and minimize assets whenever possible. At the same time, perjury - particularly to the SEC - has significant consequences and a $366 million loss isn’t exactly “fudging” a number on a balance sheet. Moreover, no one disputes that most Las Vegas casinos are in serious economic trouble. MGM Mirage, which owns 10 casinos, the most on the Strip, posted a $750.4 million net loss. And Harrah's Entertainment Inc., which owns eight casinos in Las Vegas, had more than a $1 billion net loss. (FN5.)
    While the Palms remains world renowned and a popular tourist destination, like the Fiesta, it is located off the Strip in order to attract to local customers. Because Las Vegas is among the cities hit the hardest by the collapse of the United States housing market that money has dried up significantly.
    Because reports indicate a combined $900 million was spent on the Palms this decade, it is hard to comprehend the value could be only $20 million. However, the fact accountants can even make that claim, under the threat of SEC fines and jail time, is staggering. We know that Station is reporting their share of the Palms has fallen 87% over the last two years. (FN3.) If you apply that figure to 900 million, the value of the Palms would be 108 million. While that’s significantly higher than 20, it would still reflect a three quarter of a billion dollar loss. When you consider at least some of the $600 million investment was borrowed, it’s entirely possible the Palms is worth only $20 million.
    Other than vaguely claiming the casino is “holding its own” the Maloofs aren’t talking about the status of the new family flagship. Kings fans pouring over the Forbes franchise values, but these are the numbers that are truly frightening for the Maloof family.

  2. #2

    Kings Money Part 2

    E. Kings
    In 2008, it was reported that the Kings were on track to lose between $25 and $28 million dollars last season. After making several trades in early 2009, the team trimmed the loss to $2.8 million but the overall value of the franchise fell 13%. (FN6.)The Maloofs still have lot of equity in the Kings – which is where a significant portion of the profits in professions sports are derived.
    In the off season, the team trimmed overhead significantly, with employees and pre and post game shows falling by the wayside. With the salary of Kings’ players exceeding $55 million, everyone recognizes that running an NBA team requires massive operating costs. But many fans fail to recognize the overhead associated with day-to-day operations like the Kings telecasts. Unlike some other teams, Comcast doesn’t pay team for the right to broadcast games. Instead, the Kings buy airtime from Comcast, produce the telecasts, and sell ads during the broadcast. Therefore, like ticket sales, the Kings television revenue is based upon a model where the Kings spend large sums of money before the season and try to make it back during the season based upon fan support. The structure of the deal causes one to question the amount of revenue derived from the numerous ads for concerts and events at ARCO Arena.
    However, it is unclear whether the overhead that was trimmed last summer will be enough to avoid further losses this season. While the Kings continue to report crowds above 10,000 fans, paid attendance has fallen to 7,606 fans a game, down 21.1 percent from this time last year. (FN 7.)
    Finally, it should be noted that some of the team’s best years and their recent failures at the box office were caused by the same event – the fracturing of the season ticket base. In the 90s, most of the season tickets were held by either one person or a pair of partners that had owned the tickets for many years. In 2002, the Kings captured the hearts and minds of Sacramento during a time when the housing market and interest rates led many to believe they were wealthy and massive debt was not a problem. Ticket prices rose sharply. Many fans compensated by taking on additional partners and selling tickets on a thriving secondary market. But when the demand fell off, those options were no longer available and many long time customers reluctantly left the season ticket rolls along with the bandwagon fans. Consequently, the season ticket base is now at an all time low. The Maloofs could not have collected huge ticket revenues earlier this decade without fracturing the season ticket base, but for the first time ever the franchise relies primarily upon walk up tickets to fill most of the arena. Which leads to things like 10,000 people showing up to watch the Pacers.

    F. Conclusion.

    When you step back, an overall picture starts to emerge. For many years, the Maloofs were family that built its fortune on key local businesses – the beer distributorship, banking, a small local hotel and stores in New Mexico. When the sale of distributorship is completed, all of those businesses will be gone.
    In 1994, the Maloofs parlayed their banking success into the Fiesta, which was also a smashing success. In 2000, the Well Fargo transaction dwarfs all prior achievements. Around that time, the Maloof family lays out a ton of money to become the primary share holder in two businesses with large operating costs. (They spent 247 million on the Kings; the Palms cost 265 million to open as was expanded to the tune of 600 million.)
    Right now it looks like it could have been too much at the wrong time. You can justify both moves. After running the small Fiesta, the family wanted to try their hand with a large casino. The Maloofs also wanted to get back into professional sports and there was at least some reason to believe the Kings could become profitable. Although the Kings were chronically mismanaged prior the Maloofs talking over, the team generally didn’t have problems selling tickets – even during down years. When the team became wildly successful during the Maloofs tenure, the history of the NBA (although not California) suggested the public might finance most of a new arena –which would provide the franchise with both new revenues and a drawing card for several seasons. Then, Webber’s knee popped, the city didn’t make a deal, and the voters said no.
    At the same time, Wells Fargo went into the tank and Las Vegas started to experience its leanest years. Soon, the Maloofs will have most of their assets invested in two businesses with uncertain futures. Both rely upon discretionary income during a period of time when the country is in an economic crisis. Based upon the facts above, it appears the assumptions of some fans that the Kings are awash in red ink are overstated, or at the very least premature. But at the same time, the condition of the Palms and the overall holding of the Maloofs are underreported.
    The Maloofs have claimed the sale of the distributorship is about “prioritizing their businesses” and “a good deal” but they don’t spend much time in the 47th state and by all accounts the distributorship was the most consistent business over the years and recently the most profitable. Therefore, it appears the former backbone of the family’s fortune will be liquidated to provide operating capital for the other businesses – particularly the Palms.







    1. (Bee story. April 14, 2002; Bee: Maloofs losing money now but they're investing for the long haul; http://www.kingsfans.com/forums/archive/index.php/t-16321.html)
    2. http://sacramento.bizjournals.com/sacramento/stories/2003/07/14/daily8.html
    3. http://www.sacbee.com/business/story/1883492.html
    4. http://www.sacbee.com/topstories/story/2378296.html
    5. http://www.thesunnews.com/business/story/1199248.html
    6. http://www.forbes.com/lists/2009/32/basketball-values-09_Sacramento-Kings_327146.html
    7. http://ken-berger.blogs.cbssports.com/mcc/blogs/entry/11838893/18850386?source=rss_blogs_NBA

  3. #3
    Ouch, sounds like the Palms is hemorhaging money and costing them their other businesses.
    Quote Originally Posted by piksi View Post
    Ve are a very special team. What I really meant is that we are a special olympics team

  4. #4
    Senior Member Chupacabra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Georgia
    Posts
    1,428
    Seems as though the Maloofs are banking on a rebound of the world economy. Then again, who isnt?

  5. #5
    There's no question the Maloof empire is in some financial trouble, just like the over-all local, national, and world economy. The only question is the degree, how desperate are things actually for the billionaire family. Even public words about their businesses are not very inspiring, "holding its own," or "breaking even." Thanks for posting thorough report, Larry David.
    "I want the community to know that we're going to fight like crazy to get to where we need to be."
    – Kevin Johnson, reacting to reports of a potential sale of the Kings to a Seattle group

    What's the difference between ignorance and indifference? I don't know and don't care.

  6. #6
    Don't Make Me Use The Bat Contributor
    Moderator
    Bricklayer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Posts
    32,277
    Larry David, don't know who you are, but thank you for this breakdown. Amongst other things it really shows how a family with massive "on paper wealth" can quickly see a huge chunk of that wealth disappear in a downturn. That also suggests BTW that it could come back in an upturrn when valuations increase. But you have to survive until the upturn, which is why they are selling off their assets to try to make it through.

    As an aside, from the above numbers you could get this approximate summary of what happened to the Maloof's wealth:

    At peak
    Wells Fargo $248mil (2002)
    Beer Distributor $45mil (annual revenues $100mil, but no menton of offsetting expenses)
    Palms $386mil (2008)
    Kings $385mil (2007 value via Forbes)
    -----------------
    $1,064,000,000

    Now
    Wells Fargo $124mil (up from scary nadir of $39mil 9 months ago)
    Beer Distributor SOLD
    Palms $108mil (possible estimate from partner bankruptcy hearings)
    Kings $305mil (2009 value via Forbes)
    -----------------
    $527,000,000


    Which if accurate would mean that the Maloofs have lost half their wealth, and just as importantly from a Kings fan's perspective, the bulk of their stable equity is now in the Kings. The Kings now are the heart of the empire until things pick up again economically -- there are no longer outside resources to bail the Kings out or build arenas or that sort of thing. The Kings have to become profitable and pay for themselves thus putting the Maloofs on the same pay as you go footing as most NBA owners. And also BTW making them far more vulnerable to monetary temptations from competing cities.

    1 query though -- where did that guy get the 7,606 paying fans bit at Arco? How did he account for the other 5,000 fans listed as attending? So far as I know there are no free seats, so is that implying 5,000 giveaways? Or massive overreporting of attendance? Or...? Was that just the remaining season ticket holders?
    Last edited by Bricklayer; 12-14-2009 at 06:48 AM.
    "All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident." -- Arthur Schopenhauer

    "Great spirits have always found violent opposition from mediocrities." --Albert Einstein

    "Petrie signings are more akin to the splash you get when you accidentally drop your toothbrush in the toilet. " -- swisshh

  7. #7
    Senior Member Contributor kennadog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Valley of the Kings
    Posts
    13,658
    Quote Originally Posted by Bricklayer View Post
    As an aside, from the above numbers you could get this approximate summary of what happened to the Maloof's wealth:

    At peak
    Wells Fargo $248mil (2002)
    Beer Distributor $45mil (annual revenues $100mil, but no menton of offsetting expenses)
    Palms $386mil (2008)
    Kings $385mil (2007 value via Forbes)
    -----------------
    $1,064,000,000

    Now
    Wells Fargo $124mil (up from scary nadir of $39mil 9 months ago)
    Beer Distributor SOLD
    Palms $108mil (possible estimate from partner bankruptcy hearings)
    Kings $305mil (2009 value via Forbes)
    -----------------
    $527,000,000
    These numbers would be valuation of the assets only, of course and is not the same as net wealth after subtracting liabilites. I'm sure there is substantial debt as a liability against those assets, particularly the Palms.

    As far as paying for themselves in terms of actual cash flow, it looks pretty bleak, when you are just holding your own.

    And you are right Brick, Moving the Kings will look increasingly attractive due to Sacramento's apparent lack of interst in the team. Paid attendance numbers are pathetic. I'm just saddened by the lack of interest in the Kings, even though they are clearly more entertaning this year.

    As I've said, the Maloofs/Kings wouldn't be leaving Sacramento. Sacramento already appears to have left the Kings.
    PROUD OF SACRAMENTO. PROUD TO BE A KINGS FAN.

  8. #8
    Senior Member stevetaebo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    So Cal
    Posts
    545
    Quote Originally Posted by Bricklayer View Post
    Larry David, don't know who you are...
    Jeffrey Wigand or W. Mark Felt?
    This is the year that Sacramento will realize that the Arena is an investment, not an expenditure. Here We Build

  9. #9
    Don't Make Me Use The Bat Contributor
    Moderator
    Bricklayer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Posts
    32,277
    Quote Originally Posted by stevetaebo View Post
    Jeffrey Wigand or W. Mark Felt?
    Not sure what has been exposed here other than a rich family that isn'tnearly as rich as it once was.
    "All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident." -- Arthur Schopenhauer

    "Great spirits have always found violent opposition from mediocrities." --Albert Einstein

    "Petrie signings are more akin to the splash you get when you accidentally drop your toothbrush in the toilet. " -- swisshh

  10. #10
    As ususal, great points Brick. But as it was pointed out, these are assets without looking at the other side of the balance sheet. Also, you use my Palms estimate which is signficantly higher than both the last two reported values combined.

    At peak
    Wells Fargo $248mil (2002)
    Beer Distributor $45mil (since was expanded a year later, may not the peak value - probably not)
    Palms $386mil (2008)
    Kings $385mil (2007 value via Forbes)
    -----------------
    $1,064,000,000

    Now
    Wells Fargo $124mil
    Palms $20mil (as reported to SEC and by the Bee)
    Kings $305mil (2009 value via Forbes)
    -----------------
    $449,000,000

    --------------

    We know the team still owes just below 70 million on the Arco loan, which needs to be taken out of the Forbes value - which puts the total down to $379 million.

    I couldn't find how the 2nd Palms investment was set up. We know there are some partners and surely there was a loan of some size. The open question is - how much Maloof money and/or debt was in the 600 million investment? Because right now, that 2nd investment is in the red.

    When you subtract whatever that loss is from $379 million - then you get where they stand right now.

    The also have a lot of room to improve - but almost all of their holdings are in three businesses. Two rely solely on discretionary spending - the other is a bank stock. Even when things improve, the tide doesn't affect all boats equally.

    Finally, everybody considers the Maloofs selling the Kings a longshot, but if they need to sell off again - it's the logical move. Probably not anywhere near on the table right now, but it would be the next move. They cannot sell the Palms. Too much money tied up there. And I wouldn't unload the Wells Stock anytime in the next 3-5 years. The Sacto market/arena probably comes to a head well before that's even on the table, but something to consider as fans think about what these numbers mean for the Kings.

  11. #11
    Senior Member pdxKingsFan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Portland, OR
    Posts
    7,064
    Is it not possible that the low Palms numbers are based on the Fertittas family's minority stake? I find it hard to believe the whole casino is only worth 20 million, but a 6.7% stake, sure. That would still translate to a 50-66% drop in paper value which seems about on par.

  12. #12
    No those figures refer to the entire value of the Palms. They were filed by Station and reported to the Bee - and not really refuted by the Maloofs at either the 50 and 20 million figures.

    At first I thought the numbers refered only to Stations share, but Dale Kasler's, who is doing a great job covering this story for the Bee, makes the point those numbers refer to the total value of the Palms. More so in the 2nd story.

    When you look at the Vegas numbers and apply Stations' math to what little we know, it's possible.

    There is no shot 50% is on the table. You can debate that only 70% of the Palms investment is in the red, not 95% ... but you'd be guessing without any idea of the debt. Thus, while the numbers raise questions - they are the only facts on the table right now.

    Now matter how you look at it, the family is way upside down in their biggest investment.

  13. #13
    Senior Member pdxKingsFan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Portland, OR
    Posts
    7,064
    Is this the Kasler article you're referring to?
    http://www.sacbee.com/business/story/1883492.html
    Two outside experts said they believe the Palms remains financially strong. George Maloof Jr., who runs the resort, called Station's estimate "ridiculous." He said the resort is doing well in spite of a weak economy that has battered the casino industry.
    More than most of the elite Las Vegas casinos, the Palms does a strong business with local customers, and the region's weak economy is likely taking a toll, said William Thompson, a gaming expert at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas. Unemployment is at 10.4 percent, and Vegas is among the worst places in the nation for foreclosures.

    Still, he said the Palms is essentially healthy. "They have a good niche, very strong marketing, a good reputation," Thompson said.

  14. #14
    Senior Member Contributor kennadog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Valley of the Kings
    Posts
    13,658
    I would have to think the last expansion of the Palms, with 600 very expensive condo units to sell had to be very bad timing with the market collapse and the real estate collapse in Las Vegas in particular. I wonder if they've even sold all 600 of those luxury condos?

    You can bet most of the financing for that expansion came from debt. At lease sale of the condos to buyers would have enabled them to repay some of the construction debt.

    Bottom line is, we have no onformation on the liability side of any of these assets, so it's impossible to get any idea of the Maloofs net worth for the Palms. To me, if the Palms and Kings were both "holding their own" or breaking even, you would have to wonder why they would sell the beer distributorship which was maybe they only income-producing business they had. It would seem they needed cash rather than steady income right now. Of course, it gets them out of New Mexico and eliminates having to manage that business.
    Last edited by kennadog; 12-14-2009 at 12:52 PM.
    PROUD OF SACRAMENTO. PROUD TO BE A KINGS FAN.

  15. #15
    Senior Member pdxKingsFan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Portland, OR
    Posts
    7,064
    I suspect the decision to sell the beverage business wasn't one they made overnight. It was probably in the works well before the decision on the Monarchs.

    According to the article I linked around 250 units of the condos remain unclosed. It also notes that they are held by their own holding company so their value is not tied to the casino operations.

  16. #16
    Senior Member Chupacabra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Georgia
    Posts
    1,428
    Quote Originally Posted by kennadog View Post
    These numbers would be valuation of the assets only, of course and is not the same as net wealth after subtracting liabilites. I'm sure there is substantial debt as a liability against those assets, particularly the Palms.

    As far as paying for themselves in terms of actual cash flow, it looks pretty bleak, when you are just holding your own.

    And you are right Brick, Moving the Kings will look increasingly attractive due to Sacramento's apparent lack of interst in the team. Paid attendance numbers are pathetic. I'm just saddened by the lack of interest in the Kings, even though they are clearly more entertaning this year.

    As I've said, the Maloofs/Kings wouldn't be leaving Sacramento. Sacramento already appears to have left the Kings.
    I think its a combination of a lack of interest mixed with sacramento locals inability to afford to consistently attend kings games. Not many people have extra cash these days.

  17. #17
    http://www.sacbee.com/2010/02/27/256...ents_Container

    according to debtwire.com the maloofs have breached contract covenants on a $380 million dollar loan for the palms and that the owners of Harrahs are buying up palms debt and may be zeroing in for a takeover.

    I would think that the worse their financial woes get the more attractive a move out of Sacramento will get.
    Last edited by fansinceday1; 02-27-2010 at 11:19 AM.

  18. #18
    Senior Member Trueblood's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Los Angeles but I hate the Lakers
    Posts
    798
    Quote Originally Posted by fansinceday1 View Post
    http://www.sacbee.com/2010/02/27/256...ents_Container

    according to debtwire.com the maloofs have breached contract covenants on a $380 million dollar loan for the palms and that the owners of Harrahs are buying up palms debt and may be zeroing in for a takeover.

    I would think that the worse their financial woes get the more attractive a move out of Sacramento will get.
    Could be but not necessarily. With a relocation fee and Natomas land loan payoff attached to a move out of Sacramento, you would think they would need as much non basketball related money to help make that a feasible transaction.

    I could be wrong but it looks to me like things are so financially bleak for them that they don't have the capital to pay those off. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if that was part of the reason that they called off any plans of filing for relocation this year. Keep in mind that they called that off long before the land swap idea began gaining momentum.

    On the other hand, if things get worse, they may have no other choice but to sell their largest asset. That would be the Kings. In that scenario, we would be at the mercy of whoever makes the best offer.
    Last edited by Trueblood; 02-27-2010 at 11:30 AM.

  19. #19
    See, I wasn’t just string the pot.

    I highly doubt this will happen, but there is another possibility on the table that I’m assuming nobody has thought about it … contraction. I put the odds at about 0.25%, but just for the sake of a hypothetical I’ll walk you through how we get there.

    Two things would need to happen:

    (1) The Maloofs would need to break the Kings piggy bank. This is the most unlikely part. Clearly they don’t want to sell, and the beer distributorship gave them a lot of cash to burn. Moreover, after the lockout the Kings will be a profit center for the family. However, they’ve got more on the line in Vegas. If they kept hemorrhaging cash in Sin City and were facing a takeover – and they decided to fight it- selling the Kings would be the only place to get the funds they need.

    Other option – or a combination – the arena situation blows up next spring because the convergence plan falls apart (hypothetically). At which point the Maloofs head into the locking realizing they are headed to a move or sell choice and they: (1) need the Vegas cash; or (2) could really use it to shore up the business.

    (2) I don’t think contraction is going to happen, but it’s possible. Bill Simmons recently brought it up on a podcast but quickly pointed out that Stern would be against it. If he won’t let the WNBA fold, he’s not itching to shudder a team. But Simmons and a few other writers have pointed out it could/may be considered during the lockout. It came up during baseball’s strike and the reason is simple: the owners are claiming they don’t take in enough revenue and reducing a team or two would increase the shares of the TV money (they pay upfront cost now and reap it later). Players will start off against it, because it means costing jobs. But really, if you asked most the players if they wanted to avoid another 1% cut or say goodbye to 30 jobs … I’m banking they don’t side with the Brian Skinners of the world. Moreover, Stern has said they are “at capacity for the number of US teams,” and they’ve got at least one market – Memphis that cannot move and nobody is sure if it’s a viable market in the long term. Plus, the league started getting push back for neew arenas because – while there are a few left – most cities realize the number of attractive alternate markets are slim. Thus, while it’s unlikely, you could come up with 16 owners who say- sure let’s all chip in 20 million buyout Sac and Memphis, move one team West, and reap the profits down the road. (Stern can argue against that – but in the end he has no vote.)

    The league would clearly offer Sacramento the best price.

    Again, I don’t think we get there. However, I think most fans assume – “I really don’t hope they move, but worst case they are probably moving to San Jose.” While it’s not likely – the possible financial implosion of the Palms, arena issues, and revenue debates during the lockout – could lead to another result, which is the Kings franchise ceasing to exist.


    With all of the other problems, it’s sorta like saying that Earth could be hit by an asteroid. I point this out not to be negative or lead anybody to believe it’s likely … but you’ve: (1) probably never considered it; and (2) if contraction gets seriously kicked around – the Maloofs might need to think about it. (Stern would rather have another buyer move in – but you’ve be buying the arena problem … which severely hurts the resale value … which the owners would be against. )
    Last edited by Larry David; 02-27-2010 at 02:09 PM.

  20. #20
    http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/d84a0ba0-2...b5df10621.html

    More info - which breaks down the debt, the falling profits, number of condos sold, ect.

    Looks like this has been going on for a while, most like Harrahs has bought up some of the debt, a lot more was due to his the market - thus the beer had to go.

    Story seems to point out that the beer sale won't end this issue - still more debt to pay off - and the next big deadline will be March 2011. Since that's right when moving papers are due and/or 3 month before a long lockout ... not a fan of that date.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •