Meeting with Mastrov and latest news, etc.

[Mike0476]

Key points as to how important it is for us to show up to Sacramento City Hall this Tuesday at 5pm for the 6pm meeting.

1. Mayor Kevin Johnson said last week he hasn't settled on an arena site, as long as it's downtown. (WE NEED TO SHOW UP TO CITY COUNCIL TO LET THEM KNOW WE WANT TO CROWN DOWNTOWN)

2. A majority of the council gave its initial blessing to the idea last spring, but would need to vote again on the new plan. The size and nature of the subsidy – to be funded from the city's parking revenues – would surely raise some controversy.

3. The Burkle-Mastrov group will likely pitch its plan to the NBA sometime in March, leaving city officials about a month to work up a plan for Downtown Plaza. Assistant City Manager John Dangberg said the city could meet the ambitious timeline.

4. "We feel pretty confident that both sites (the railyard and Downtown Plaza) have pretty equal delivery dates," Dangberg said. "I'm encouraged and feel pretty strongly we could catch up quickly."

[JB_kings]

Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/2013/02/03/516...#storylink=cpy

The 3,700 number is not correct. 3,700 is the total number of city owned parking spaces at all three garages at DTP. The Downtown Plaza West and Central garages are not going to be impacted at all. Only the East garage and it's 1,920 spaces are in the potential arena site. Even all of those won't be lost to construction. So that line is very misleading.

[Čarolija]

When can we expect the official announcement regarding our own whales?!

For us who live outside of Sacramento, or USA for that matter, it all seems to have gone very quiet all of a sudden. Are we waiting for the results of the Downtown Plaza studies before we announce the whales?

Feeling a bit nervous after the initial confidence!

[UK_King]

I read last week the announcement could be "this week or next week" with no official time frame.

think that was from news10

[HereWeVivek]

hmm still quiet huh

[LWP777]

hmm still quiet huh

Looks like that.....kinda worried

[Capt. Factorial]

Looks like that.....kinda worried

I wouldn't panic.

[macadocious]

[Chupacabra]

Ill be nervous if there hasnt yet been an offer made from the sacramento group the day before the BOG meeting. We're good.

[Čarolija]

Right of First Refusal explained....

http://probasketballtalk.nbcsports.c...s-for-seattle/

[Livinthedream]

The maddening part of all if this is that the Maloofs had nothing to lose by allowing the minority owners to try to match. I maintain that if the Maloofs or Hansen would try to use any kind of argument that they will be harmed financially because of the $30 mil deposit, Sac has already raised $25 mil towards that deposit to shut them up. This could keep everyone out of court if Hansen backs out.

The league does not want any of this in court, be it for the return of a deposit or for rofr. Might be a good time for the league to enact that "best interest of the league" clause.

[funkykingston]

So Geoff Petrie is on my flight to Dallas/Ft Worth this morning. If I thought I'd actually get an answer (and was uncouth enough to bother a stranger who also looks tired) I'd ask him if he had any inside info on the situation.

[HndsmCelt]

Right of First Refusal explained....

http://probasketballtalk.nbcsports.c...s-for-seattle/

I read this article earlier today. Good read and good news. Let's hope that a partner or two are willing to invoke and go after the Maloofs shares. I have seen speculation that the 30 million deposit was a hedge against this giving the Rain town boys a case for harm, but that suit would only apply to the Maoofs NOT the buyers. I suspect it may be a way to reimburse the Maoof before the fact for a potential law suite filed by the minority owners claiming harm from the attempted breach of contract when the Maloofs failed to notify them of the sale according to the stated time line.

[UK_King]

I wont pretend to understand all the legalities.

but i read someone suggesting this news may effectively keep the kings in Sac through next season while the legal wrangling is sorted out.

I mean that can't be good news for anyone surely. Another season written off with no ability to trade or change the coaching situation would just be ugly as hell.

[The Hammer]

So, let's all just keep some very, very basic things in mind.

1. The League can block any sale of any franchise and has the right to approve/disapprove all new owners.

2. The League can block any move of any franchise and can approve/disapprove any moves.


There are precedents for both.

We can all relax. Hanson is plain and simple not taking this team. Legal wranglings with rofr, etc... none of it really matters. The point is Stern knows Sac is a viable market, and we have multiple serious bidders. Much thanks to KJ and Mike for showing the League that. I'm so not worried. This is going to be a comeback story like you wouldn't believe.

[Section 101]

The maddening part of all if this is that the Maloofs had nothing to lose by allowing the minority owners to try to match. I maintain that if the Maloofs or Hansen would try to use any kind of argument that they will be harmed financially because of the $30 mil deposit, Sac has already raised $25 mil towards that deposit to shut them up. This could keep everyone out of court if Hansen backs out.

The league does not want any of this in court, be it for the return of a deposit or for rofr. Might be a good time for the league to enact that "best interest of the league" clause.

And as I have wrote several times, CA contract law doesn't recognize non refundable. It doesn't hold up in court. The Maloofs would have to prove damages in order to keep any part of the deposit. Hansen has no standing against the NBA. He is not an owner it would have to be the Maloofs suing.

[Livinthedream]

And as I have wrote several times, CA contract law doesn't recognize non refundable. It doesn't hold up in court. The Maloofs would have to prove damages in order to keep any part of the deposit. Hansen has no standing against the NBA. He is not an owner it would have to be the Maloofs suing.

I'm not arguing CA law. It won't hold up in court, but it could still go to court, which the NBA doesn't want. What could also happen is the Maloofs could claim to the league that they were harmed financially by not being able to sell the team and keep the deposit. Do I think they will? No, because they don't have the money to see the lawsuit through. But the NBA is not going to want that to even be a possibility. The easiest way to get out of this is to make all parties involved whole outside of the courtroom. Messy franchise sales are not something any league wants to be a part of.