Tag Archives: david stern

News, Sports

Seattle to NBA: Do We Get Our Sonics Back or Not?

2 Comments
Chris Hansen
Future Sonics owner (knock on wood) Chris Hansen, speaking to the media yesterday in NYC

The city officials and NBA-owner-wannabes of Seattle and Sacramento presented the merits of their respective fan bases and arena deals to league owners Wednesday in New York City, and what have we learned? Nothing. In fact, we actually know less.

Here were the facts heading into Wednesday:

  1. Chris Hansen and his group of Seattle investors have purchased the Sacramento Kings, pending NBA approval.
  2. Leading Sacramentonianites will be permitted to lobby NBA owners to cancel Hansen’s purchase agreement, and are touting an alternate bid for a new arena in Sacramento.
  3. NBA owners will vote on whether to approve Hansen as an owner—and his plan to relocate the Kings to Seattle—at their April 18-19 Board of Governors meeting.

The cities made their pitches in two two-hour blocks at the St. Regis Hotel. The principals, including NBA commissioner David Stern, then met with the media. And the only new information conveyed was that we can scratch #3 off our facts list. Stern now says that the question “Seattle or Sacramento?”—an easy decision for tourists—may be too complex for NBA owners to answer by April 19.

Stern indicated that the owners are specifically interested in the construction timelines for the new arenas that have been proposed in each city, and any potential political and regulatory obstacles. The league presumably also wants to assay the economic strength of the two markets, potential fan and corporate support, and the personalities of the future owners. Which of these factors is most important? Which presentation was best? No one who matters is saying.

Sure, you can find plenty of speculation and opinion. The Sacto group “offered the most intriguing sales pitch of the day,” writes Art Thiel of SportspressNW. “If I was confident going in, I am even more confident now,” King County Executive Dow Constantine told Bob Condotta of the Seattle Times.

Hansen and Steve Ballmer made Seattle’s presentation, with support from Mayor Mike McGinn, Constantine, and current Kings owner George Maloof, who told owners he wants the Hansen deal approved. From Hansen’s four-minute press conference, you can sketch how the Seattle group tried to differentiate their bid from the Sacramento one. “We’ve been working on this for 883 days,” Hansen told the media. (Sacramento lead bidder Vivek Ranadive got involved just 2 weeks ago.) Hansen: “Seattle is doing very well economically, we’ve got the right kind of industries growing.” (Sacramento’s major industry is the state government of California.)

But it’s all conjecture. As former St. Regis resident Ernest Hemingway once said: “Never confuse movement with action.”

The biggest question remains unanswered: If the NBA cancels Hansen’s purchase agreement, by what mechanism would the league force the current owners to sell to the Sacramento group? As I have written here before, this fact—that a purchase agreement has been signed, that the Kings are not a beef cattle up for auction—is the single strongest factor in the Seattle group’s favor. KCPQ’s Aaron Levine tried to get clarity on the issue by asking Stern if the fact that a purchase agreement has been signed pushes the needle Seattle’s way. Stern refused to answer.

So, after a hotly-anticipated day yielded nothing, we count down until…well, who knows? The Sonics’ move to Oklahoma City for the 2008-09 season was not official until July 2, 2008, when Clay Bennett’s ownership group reached agreement to buy out the final two years of the KeyArena lease. If you’re wondering how long the NBA could let this drag on, the answer would seem to be at least another three months.

My recommendation is this: Ignore all of it—yes, wipe this meandering article from your mind MIB-style—until the NBA owners announce their decision. Nothing you learn between now and then will be authoritative, and nothing you can do between now and then will be influential. Meantime, enjoy this exclusive video I obtained from highly-placed league sources showing Steve Ballmer’s part of the presentation.

News, Sports

NBA in Seattle Inches Closer as League Gets Relocation Application

sonicsnodderAt a news conference in Minneapolis yesterday, NBA commissioner David Stern announced that the Sacramento franchise has applied to move to Seattle and play this fall in KeyArena.

This is step two of a process that will end in 70 days — on April 18 (Mark your calendars!) when NBA owners will vote on the proposed sale and move. Stern said that he has combined the vote on the sale and move, even though the sale requires a 3/4-majority, and the move only a 1/2-majority. Which makes sense — with the new owners wanting to move the team to Seattle, purchasing authority without moving authority would make no sense, and vice versa.

Stern clarified the nature of the pitch Sacramento mayor Kevin Johnson will make before the Board: He will be able to suggest an “alternate plan,” and the Board will decide the issue on the merits of the two plans. If you were wondering why Chris Hansen wanted city and county backing of his proposed arena before going after a team, this is why — so he can demonstrate the strong probability that he will indeed be able to build a new arena in Seattle, just as Sacramento promises the same.

The drawback to Johnson’s plan is that the Hansen/Ballmer group already has a purchase agreement in hand. As Stern says, Johnson’s as-yet-unnamed investor group would have to “buy the team in Sacramento.” How they’ll do that remains unclear. Stern says the owners face “difficult decisions.” As previously discussed, the sale and move is considered very likely to be approved.

Here is the full transcript of David Stern’s comments on the move — or you can watch them yourself on this video from KING 5. For the latest news on the Sonics move and the proposed new arena, I strongly recommend following KING 5’s Chris Daniels on Twitter @Daniels5.

The latest with the Seattle/Sacramento situation is that have had submitted a signed agreement for the team to be sold to a very strong group from Seattle. We have had an application to have the team moved from Sacramento to Seattle. I have convened the appropriate committees and told them that as we get more information and more data, we will be sending the information to them because they’ll have to make a recommendation to the Board (of Governors), which will likely decide the issue both as to the sale and move in April at our board meeting. And the mayor of Sacramento has advised that he will be back to us soon with a proposal from a group to buy the team in Sacramento and build a building in Sacramento with a substantial subsidy from the City of Sacramento. And so we’re abiding events. The Seattle application is to play in KeyArena, which, we’d be there for two years, possibly three. There is no final approval with respect to a new building in Seattle, but events are well underway, moving in that direction. So they don’t currently have a building, but they propose to improve Key as a temporary facility while one is being built. And my guess is — it’s likely — that the mayor of Sacramento will appear before the Board with an alternate plan. And that’s why we have a Board of Governors: To make difficult decisions like this one.

(Here Stern responds to a questioner who is inaudible.)

I don’t think it’s a bidding war. There’s a series of issues that are defined by our constitution that have to be considered. And one of the things that our board is mandated to consider is the support for the team in the prior city. So there are real issues for the board to consider — about the buildings, about the likelihood that they’ll be built, about the support in both cities…I think I might have composed the standards, but sitting here today I can’t remember what they are. But there are a lot of them. And actually, to confuse it just a little bit, the application to transfer ownership requires a 3/4-vote, the application to move requires a majority vote. And so I did the sensible thing, I combined the committees and I said “You guys figure it out.” We’ll see how that works.

You can buy that Sonics bobblehead for $75 from Gasoline Alley Antiques.

Business, News, Politics, Sports

Ballmer and Nordstrom Brothers’ New Triangle Offense May Get NBA’s Attention

Detlef's fast break on Twitter

Yesterday a buzz started building that something new was afoot in the attempt to bring the NBA back to Seattle via a new stadium. Insiders were whispering about a game-changer. This morning, it’s clear what that is: Hedge-fund manager Chris Hansen revealed three big investor names on KJR Sports Radio: Microsoft’s Steve Ballmer, and Erik and Peter Nordstrom.

Geekwire explains why Ballmer might have wanted to let Hansen take lead on the project.

In retrospect, Mayor Mike McGinn’s visit with the NBA’s David Stern doesn’t look so hat-in-hand, though Hansen’s people claimed no knowledge of “Loose Cannon” McGinn’s plans. King County Executive Dow Constantine, an early political supporter of the effort, released this statement: “The names of Steve Ballmer and Peter and Eric Nordstrom add additional strength and credibility to this proposal, and even greater assurance of the financial stability of the investment team that is working to bring the Sonics back to Seattle.”

“Financial stability” is the key phrase in that statement, since the new stadium plan has been getting pushback, notably from the Municipal League of King County, who released a broadside of criticisms largely focused on financing assumptions and congestion mitigation issues. As summarized in the Seattle Times, the League’s argument referenced the speed at which KeyArena became “unsuitable” for NBA economics:

KeyArena didn’t deteriorate, the report says, so much as it was no longer big enough to accommodate the space deemed necessary for the new standard of arenas. If a region has to replace its arena every 10 to 15 years, it suggests that the new arena’s improvement fund should require annual deposits of at least $20 million. Are investors prepared, the League asks, to provide funding at that level?

If the investor group include Steve Ballmer and the Nordstroms, the answer to that question is suddenly less worrisome for people who’d like to see the Sonics return.

That leaves the concern, still, of the Port of Seattle and Mariners that two stadiums is company and three is a crowd. Yet the Port and the Mariners have different interests, I think–while the Mariners are fighting for market share, the Port may simply be looking for help (in addition to the $73 million in tax revenue they project to receive in 2012) paying for SoDo transportation infrastructure that is needed whether there’s a new stadium or not.