- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
NBA owners could split a $1 billion pot if they can force Bucks to Seattle
Posted on 10/16/14 at 10:07 pm
Posted on 10/16/14 at 10:07 pm
LINK
quote:
In May, the NBA approved the sale of the Bucks to new owners Wesley Edens and Marc Lasry for a then-NBA record $550 million.
Shortly after the sale, Brian Windhorst and Marc Stein of ESPN.com learned that as part of the agreement, the NBA had the right to buy back the team for $575 million if a new arena was not approved, built, and ready to use by November, 2017.
quote:
the Donald Sterling fiasco in Los Angeles happened and Steve Ballmer bought the Clippers for $2 billion. Now, five months later, the Bucks still don't even have a location for a new stadium and the Bucks are worth a lot more than $575 million
quote:
If the Bucks can't get a new stadium built before the deadline, the NBA could buy the team for $575 million and then turn around and sell the team to a group in Seattle for an estimated $1.6 billion.
That would be a cool $1.025 billion profit for the league or about $35.3 million for each of the other 29 owners. As Simmons put it, "it's in [the NBA's] vested interest for Milwaukee not to have an arena."
Posted on 10/16/14 at 10:11 pm to RTR America
So do the Grizz move back East? Or NOLA?
Posted on 10/16/14 at 10:14 pm to jefffan
quote:
Or NOLA?
That would be sweet
Posted on 10/16/14 at 10:15 pm to RTR America
That seems a little fishy. The NBA could force the new owners to sell back to them for a relatively paltry profit and then resell the team to a Seattle group?
I just can't see any group of owners with the scratch to buy a team being dumb enough to give that much control up.
This theory makes a little more sense but still presumes a lot.
I just can't see any group of owners with the scratch to buy a team being dumb enough to give that much control up.
quote:
An alternative theory proposed by Simmons is that the NBA could agree to not buy the team if the new Bucks owners agree to not build a new arena and pony up some more money — presumably a transfer fee of a few hundred million — and they would be able to remain owners by moving the team to Seattle.
This theory makes a little more sense but still presumes a lot.
This post was edited on 10/16/14 at 10:17 pm
Posted on 10/16/14 at 10:17 pm to RTR America
i'd hate to see another fanbase have their team taken away, if this happens then hopefully Milwaukee gets an NHL team shortly after.
Posted on 10/16/14 at 10:28 pm to jefffan
quote:
So do the Grizz move back East? Or NOLA?
geographically, it should be Memphis to the East. Central Division team.
OKC to the Southwest division, Seattle to the Northwest Division.
Posted on 10/16/14 at 10:35 pm to QuackAttack716
Will she be following the team?
This post was edited on 10/16/14 at 10:36 pm
Posted on 10/16/14 at 10:38 pm to RTR America
Milwaukee is definitely not going to build an arena the bucks or so unpopular and I'm so bummed about it
this team will be a blast to watch in a year or so
this team will be a blast to watch in a year or so
This post was edited on 10/16/14 at 10:38 pm
Posted on 10/16/14 at 10:41 pm to RTR America
quote:
f the Bucks can't get a new stadium built before the deadline, the NBA could buy the team for $575 million and then turn around and sell the team to a group in Seattle for an estimated $1.6 billion.
If that is the case why wouldn't the current owners build the stadium themselves or sell the team themselves. Whats a totally state of the art basketball stadium cost? 200-300 mil MAX???
Posted on 10/16/14 at 10:51 pm to SirWinston
Bummed to hear that. Franchise has been there since 1970ish. Hate seeing small market teams move.
This post was edited on 10/16/14 at 10:52 pm
Posted on 10/16/14 at 10:53 pm to RTR America
Yeah basically they just have to keep the city of Milwaukee from building a new stadium.
Posted on 10/16/14 at 11:11 pm to lsu480
quote:
If that is the case why wouldn't the current owners build the stadium themselves or sell the team themselves.
That's my problem with this "theory".
A (presumably) savvy group of rich types with the cash to buy an NBA team are totally cool with including in the contract the ability for the NBA to buy back the team and give them a profit of "only" 25 million and then they'll be the ones to collect a cool billion on the sale? And forget the Clippers situation, which was unable to be predicted. They knew the new TV contracts were coming up that would greatly increase the value of the teams but they'll be cool with cashing out for original sale price plus 25 million.
OK.
Posted on 10/16/14 at 11:17 pm to lsu480
quote:
If that is the case why wouldn't the current owners build the stadium themselves or sell the team themselves.
The end of the article states that there is an option for the owners to pay more to remain owners of the team, but it will still move if no arena is built. Milwaukee is currently playing in the oldest arena in the NBA.
quote:
Whats a totally state of the art basketball stadium cost? 200-300 mil MAX???
The Fedex Forum is relatively new and cost around $250m. The issue is most arena's are publicly funded buildings.
Newest arena's:
Barclay's in Brooklyn (2012): $1 billion, $200m was from the owner
Amway in Orlando (2010): $480m, but it apparently over budget
TWC in Charlotte (2005): $314m
Posted on 10/16/14 at 11:18 pm to Walking the Earth
quote:
A (presumably) savvy group of rich types with the cash to buy an NBA team are totally cool with including in the contract the ability for the NBA to buy back the team and give them a profit of "only" 25 million and then they'll be the ones to collect a cool billion on the sale?
The contract is very real. The rumor is asking them to not build a new arena.
Posted on 10/16/14 at 11:23 pm to RTR America
quote:
The contract is very real.
If you've got a link I'd love to see it because that's pretty amazing. They knew NBA team values were about to increase by an incredible amount just from new TV contracts so boxing themselves out and passing up cashing in on the potential true value of the team in exchange for a 5 percent profit margin is incredible.
If Roger Goodell is worth 45 million then Adam Silver is worth 150 million for that alone.
Posted on 10/16/14 at 11:28 pm to Walking the Earth
I mean it makes perfect sense for a new arena to be a part of the contract considering the standing of their current arena. I don't see what is so unbelievable about that.
Posted on 10/16/14 at 11:34 pm to RTR America
Paying a then record sum for a franchise and being told that the franchise can, in effect, be yanked from them if they don't get a new arena in 5 years doesn't seem a little far fetched. Just an itty bitty bit?
Or am I reading this wrong and they simply have the option to sell back to the NBA? Like 480 said, why wouldn't the current owners get to dictate whom they sell to?
Or am I reading this wrong and they simply have the option to sell back to the NBA? Like 480 said, why wouldn't the current owners get to dictate whom they sell to?
Posted on 10/16/14 at 11:38 pm to Walking the Earth
quote:
Paying a then record sum for a franchise and being told that the franchise can, in effect, be yanked from them if they don't get a new arena in 5 years doesn't seem a little far fetched. Just an itty bitty bit?
I feel like there has been similar things listed in contracts in the past. Seems like a standard operating procedure from a professional sports league.
This is from April
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News