http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/6/60/Sacramento_Kings.svg
Sacramento Kings

1x Champion:
1951


678,697 gross building sq. ft.
18,594 Seating Capacity
50 Luxury Standard Suites
20 Luxury Mini Suites
4 Luxury Party Suites
240 Premium Loge Seats
80 Premium Ledge Seats
1,430 Club Seats
330 Courtside Club Seats
Courtside Club Lounge
4 concourses

The price tag for the complex is $387 millon USD.

The goal is to secure funding before the March 1, 2012 (NBA relocation deadline) and build and complete the new arena by May 2015.

PDF of the plans: http://www.news10.net/news/pdf/arena-study-052611.pdf


http://www.news10.net/slideshows/Drawings-of-Proposed-Sacramento-Arena/01.jpg
http://www.news10.net/slideshows/Drawings-of-Proposed-Sacramento-Arena/02.jpg
http://www.news10.net/slideshows/Drawings-of-Proposed-Sacramento-Arena/03.jpg
http://www.news10.net/slideshows/Drawings-of-Proposed-Sacramento-Arena/04.jpg
http://www.news10.net/slideshows/Drawings-of-Proposed-Sacramento-Arena/05.jpg

:banana:

I may have lost all hope in this city being able to accomplish anything, but it would be great to see this arena actually happen. I wait with baited breath.

The price tag for the complex is $387 million USD.
Really? How did they get such a low price on this?

Yeap...I want to know why the low price. If there is a penny/dime/nickel to be put by taxpayers in the proposal...It will over.

Yeap...I want to know why the low price. If there is a penny/dime/nickel to be put by taxpayers in the proposal...It will over.

I would imagine the cost to acquire land is much less than a similar building in a bigger city. I believe I also heard earlier that they want to build this at the Cal Expo Center, which has plenty of open land that is already state of city owned, plenty of parking, existing utilities and is already set up to handle the traffic associated with big events. That would save a ton of money.

Great looking building inside and out. I hope this happens for Sacramento.

Is the interior a similar layout to the Amway Center? :dunno:

Can it be used for ice hockey ?

Really? How did they get such a low price on this?
That's pretty steep, actually...

Is the interior a similar layout to the Amway Center? :dunno:

I thought the same thing when i saw the renderings. It is a nice looking design though. I hope Sac will make this happen. LA/Orange County doesn't need a 3rd NBA team. The Clippers should've moved from LA like yesterday

Is the interior a similar layout to the Amway Center? :dunno:

The Amway Center was used as the blueprint.

Really? How did they get such a low price on this?

Cutting corners on construction costs. I would advise against sitting in the upper deck.

I kid.

Sacramento, please build this arena, the existing ARCO Arena is the currently the lamest in the NBA.

The Downtown/Railyards plan would be so much better in terms of atmosphere and revitalization

http://img402.imageshack.us/img402/673/unled1ic.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/402/unled1ic.jpg/)

http://img805.imageshack.us/img805/9773/unled2yk.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/805/unled2yk.jpg/)

Uploaded with ImageShack.us (http://imageshack.us)

From: http://www.news10.net/news/pdf/arena-study-052611.pdf

^^ The Railyards would be great for the arena, but something also needs to be done about Downtown Plaza and K Street. I know a lot of people would be interested in tearing down the east half of DP and putting the stadium at the end of K Street. At this point, I don't care where the hell this gets built: AS LONG AS IT GETS BUILT.

Build it with High Speed Train in mind...so whichever has the terminal closes should be chosen.

Really? How did they get such a low price on this?

Look at the prices for NBA arenas. $387 million would put it near the top.

I prefer the Downtown Railyards location over the Natomas location.

Build it with High Speed Train in mind...so whichever has the terminal closes should be chosen.

The railyards location is surrounded by AMTRAK, light rail, and the future high speed rail

Yeah but most NBA arenas were built in the 90's so if you adjust for inflation their price tags would be much higher.

Yeah but most NBA arenas were built in the 90's so if you adjust for inflation their price tags would be much higher.
According to this inflation calculator, (http://www.usinflationcalculator.com/) most NBA arenas would still not cost as much as this proposal if built today.

According to this inflation calculator, (http://www.usinflationcalculator.com/) most NBA arenas would still not cost as much as this proposal if built today.
There's still that pesky building to withstand earthquakes thingy in California. Because we like our buildings to last. And please don't try to claim that Sacramento is too far from the main fault zones. That area is more active seismically than about 40 states in the US.

There's still that pesky building to withstand earthquakes thingy in California. Because we like our buildings to last. And please don't try to claim that Sacramento is too far from the main fault zones. That area is more active seismically than about 40 states in the US.
true dat

I know it factored into the costs for Cal's renovation

true dat

I know it factored into the costs for Cal's renovation
Even here that is a special case. I won't sit on the west side of that stadium.

Even here that is a special case. I won't sit on the west side of that stadium.

What's up with that?

What's up with that?
I think he's afraid of falling into the Pacific Ocean if there's an earthquake.

What's up with that?
The Hayward fault runs directly beneath/through the stadium. In the UC-Berkeley thread you can tell where the west side of the stadium is creeping north in relation to the east side, at roughly the same speed as your fingernails grow. So if I happen to be at an event when a larger quake strikes, I would much rather be sitting on solid ground (the east side) rather than a structure that could be ripped apart (the west side).

I think he's afraid of falling into the Pacific Ocean if there's an earthquake.
Uh, no. The San Andreas and related faults are of the strike/slip variety, which means the two sides move horizontally. The subduction made infamous by Indonesia and Japan cannot happen in California. And I actually live west of the fault.

more renders please?

http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/7621128/sacramento-kings-strike-arena-deal-stay-city

Seattle and Orange County's reaction:

http://static.tumblr.com/wkbhi3c/pDolycmf6/0714.fuuuuu.png-550x0.png

seattle yes, but oc never really wanted nor needs a team. Nobody here is upset. Anyway those renderings are really nice, glad sac is staying there.

http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/7621128/sacramento-kings-strike-arena-deal-stay-city

Wow. I didn't see that coming. Also, I still find it weird hearing "Kevin Johnson" and "mayor of Sacramento" in the same sentence.

seattle yes, but oc never really wanted nor needs a team. Nobody here is upset. Anyway those renderings are really nice, glad sac is staying there.

Really? I've heard otherwise from Californians....

seattle yes, but oc never really wanted nor needs a team. Nobody here is upset. Anyway those renderings are really nice, glad sac is staying there.

im glad the team is staying in Sacramento and the proposal looks pretty good but Anaheim was definitely very close and is still interested in a team. they just allocated funds to improve the Honda center in order to get a team.

Really? I've heard otherwise from Californians....

No, he is correct. Getting an NBA team in Orange County is not a huge priority. They would definitely support the team if they did get one, but with two NBA teams in Southern California already, it's not a significant development.

Really? I've heard otherwise from Californians....

I'm sure there are a few ppl disappointed, but the vaaaaaaaaast majority don't give a shit.

Most NBA fans in OC are already fans of either the Lakers or Clippers.

iapDrwRyOFU

I'm sure there are a few ppl disappointed, but the vaaaaaaaaast majority don't give a shit.

Most NBA fans in OC are already fans of either the Lakers or Clippers.

True dat; I know serious sports fans who had no idea that Anaheim was going after a basketball team.

But, still, it will be a disastrous decision by the city and the Maloofs if the city council doesn't stop it. A small market with bad economics, govt. employment shrinking and few large businesses; increased ticket prices; selling off parking revenues for the foreseeable future. A white elephant for decades.

I'm sure there are a few ppl disappointed, but the vaaaaaaaaast majority don't give a shit.

Most NBA fans in OC are already fans of either the Lakers or Clippers.

Huh... well, ok then.

It takes the Kings of the eviction list, I guess.

So I guess it just begs this question.... which comes first (to Seattle)?

Relocation or expansion?

Does this latest news mean we'll see a completely new design? Rather than it being this:

http://img32.imageshack.us/img32/3865/95430357.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/32/95430357.jpg/)

http://img577.imageshack.us/img577/7544/4e57806b01c3172d9e50f7e.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/577/4e57806b01c3172d9e50f7e.jpg/)

http://img689.imageshack.us/img689/5825/31b24ee4f181e7f91314542.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/689/31b24ee4f181e7f91314542.jpg/)

Seattle and Orange County's reaction:
/IMG]

Well I'm really glad that Orange County will not be getting a team. No metro area needs three teams. I wouldn't mind it at all if the Clippers left LA to be honest.

I do hope Seattle still can get a team though in the next few years. Growing up I always thought of them being one of the better basketball cities and they didn't lose a team do to apathey.

[QUOTE=RMB2007;88987923]Does this latest news mean we'll see a completely new design? Rather than it being this:

I would like to hope so. This looks like Amway Center West. From the interior to the exterior. Maybe these renders are just placeholders.

zLdx15vvkYE

Well I'm really glad that Orange County will not be getting a team. No metro area needs three teams. I wouldn't mind it at all if the Clippers left LA to be honest.

I do hope Seattle still can get a team though in the next few years. Growing up I always thought of them being one of the better basketball cities and they didn't lose a team do to apathey.

There are more people in LA than in over 35 states... LA most definitely can handle 2 teams, if not a third. Orange County alone has 4 million people.

Getting back to the arena... i like it a lot, but it seems to only have a few suites. will that fly with the NBA?

There are more people in LA than in over 35 states... LA most definitely can handle 2 teams, if not a third. Orange County alone has 4 million people.

Getting back to the arena... i like it a lot, but it seems to only have a few suites. will that fly with the NBA?

It will have between 76-79 suites, double what they currently have. I don't think the number is of concern since the NBA brokered the deal and was in on the process more than the Maloofs.

Rather, the issue is there a market there to sell them all with the lack of a team they are currently giving the public.

Orange County alone has 4 million people.
Actually the 2010 census had it at almost exactly three million.

The demographics are not a problem. The OC has well over 3M at this point, the IE around 5M and northern SD, which is very well-to-do and half an hour away, another 1M. And this does not include the rest of SD, which is another 2M without a basketball team. Plus all these areas are growing.

Sacto. is about 2M, depending on where you think Warrior territory starts; disproportionately govt. and logistics employees. And with looming govt. cuts, there's little reason to think it will either expand or grow wealthier.

I know Sacto. wants a team in the worst way, but it's a tough decision to support on rational grounds.

Let me get this straight...

This new arena won't be built near the existing Power Balance Pavilion?

Rather, it will be built on a bunch of railyards?

Where are these railyards located?

Where are these railyards located?

Northwest edge of Downtown next to I-5.

It's going to be roughly where the Amtrak Station is on this map:

http://www.carolmendelmaps.com/mapca/sacto.gif

Full term sheet has been released. (http://sacramento.granicus.com/MetaViewer.php?view_id=21&event_id=663&meta_id=380674)

It includes another 1,000 seat "premium" garage which will be privately built.

Ticket surcharges on hoped for events; private parking lots to be built some time; more money perhaps needed from the Maloofs; bonds issued by the city secured by guys who are basically bankrupt. A few million to be raised by passing the hat.

A professional would give this an incomplete; it will be interesting to see what the city council says.

New renderings

http://www.sacbee.com/2012/03/02/4306725/city-of-sacramento-unveils-new.html

^^

http://img14.imageshack.us/img14/1317/ovq51xl4.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/14/ovq51xl4.jpg/)

http://img402.imageshack.us/img402/6876/ulunmxl4.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/402/ulunmxl4.jpg/)

Northwest edge of Downtown next to I-5.


Here is what the site looks like currently:
http://www.socaltrailriders.org/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=119515&d=1298611286

Here is what the site looks like currently:
http://www.socaltrailriders.org/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=119515&d=1298611286

Whoa.... yeah, that should help A LOT.

Here is what the site looks like currently:
http://www.socaltrailriders.org/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=119515&d=1298611286

Are they going to tear down those small buildings situated in the middle of that site? Are those buildings abandoned?

Are they going to tear down those small buildings situated in the middle of that site? Are those buildings abandoned?

The buildings are gonna stay. It looks like they are going to build around them. They are part of the old railyards and they are unused and abandoned. They hold some historical value, but I can see them turned into lofts of some type of mixed use space. The city sees the arena as away to spurn development at the site. They've been trying to do something with that land for decades.

The buildings are gonna stay. It looks like they are going to build around them. They are part of the old railyards and they are unused and abandoned. They hold some historical value, but I can see them turned into lofts of some type of mixed use space. The city sees the arena as away to spurn development at the site. They've been trying to do something with that land for decades.

Not to pick on you (I make mistakes constantly) but that's a funny typo there.

Not to pick on you (I make mistakes constantly) but that's a funny typo there.

Oops! My bad!

Looks like the development and arena will be tucked in a nice spot in the downtown area.

http://img28.imageshack.us/img28/5565/sacremento.jpg

Looks like the development and arena will be tucked in a nice spot in the downtown area.
http://img28.imageshack.us/img28/5565/sacremento.jpg
Doesn't that mean they will have to undo some of the brand new construction at the relocated station?

Looking at that design and the google map I think one of them is in the wrong place

This new project now needs its own Wikipedia page.;)

Any more on this? I suppose with the Maloofs getting cranky again, nothing is going on?

Any more on this? I suppose with the Maloofs getting cranky again, nothing is going on?

I turned on fox sports radio about a week ago and heard some guys out of LA saying they were most likely moving to Anaheim or Vegas with small chance of KC with the new arena in place if the deal in Sacramento falls through.

The deal with Sacramento has definitely fallen through if you ask the Maloofs. It was never really a deal at all but a "term sheet and handshake" which in deal parlance means that you will go back and see if it really works when you fill in the blanks and estimates and if the operations people, lawyers, finance, etc., can live with it. Then you negotiate the real deal.

Calling it a "done deal" was more PR for Johnson and the NBA than reality (if you saw the Maloofs' faces you got the impression they were at a funeral not a victory party).

This week we should know if the NBA is going to make the Maloofs negotiate or give them a chance to move to Anaheim, which is what they want. If they can't move I suspect they will sell (Larry Ellison and San Jose?).

Wow, the agony hits. A leading economist says that the new arena deal would leave the Kings losing money forever and put the city at the edge of bankruptcy (costs underestimated, attendance overestimated; additional uses highly improbable, etc.).

DJ says that the deal is final and won't change (which is highly disengenous since it was a "term sheet" which is well understood to be changeable based on review by professionals). George M. says in that case the deal is dead and proposes the renovation of Power Balance Arena (which really should be renamed since Power Balance isn't making any payments). And speaking of disengenuos, you wonder if George really means "the Duck Pond").

Unfortunately, it looks like it might just get uglier before it gets better.

According to ESPN, the deal for a new Kings arena has fallen apart:

http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/7810708/deal-new-sacramento-kings-arena-falls-through

It doesn't take long. An Anaheim official says they have been in contact with George M and told him "they don't charge pre-development fees" to their tenants. Rumors are that loans are available to help the transition. Unclear if they will try to buy-out the last year in Sactown.

With KJ rejecting the Power Balance refurb (which I assume would have required a popular vote) this looks like a done deal. In fact, the whole thing looks pretty much orchestrated to allow KJ to say he gave his all but the Maloof wouldn't cooperate; the NBA sadly (but quickly) agrees the deal is dead; and the Maloofs (probably correctly) claim the economics just aren't there. Call me cynical, but when "crisis managers" have been hired, you know there is a gameplan somewhere.

So we must say hello to the Anaheim Kings?

So we must say hello to the Anaheim Kings?

They would be the Anaheim Royals. The Maloofs already trademarked the name last year when it looked like they were moving.

Looks pretty certain they'll be moving now--just a matter of where.

Seattle doesn't have a decent arena...Vegas, no good arena and horrible economy....KC and St.L are small markets...

Anaheim seems the only decent option--NBA ready arena...big TV money...only dilemma would be getting around the Clips and Lakers objections.

That's gotta be heartbreaking.


But I will still ask, which place would be best?

- Anaheim
- KC
- Louisville
- Vegas
- St. Louis
- Seattle, even with their out of date arena?

EDIT: I guess Marcky answered 5 out of these 6 for me...

They would be the Anaheim Royals. The Maloofs already trademarked the name last year when it looked like they were moving.

Looks pretty certain they'll be moving now--just a matter of where.

Seattle doesn't have a decent arena...Vegas, no good arena and horrible economy....KC and St.L are small markets...

Anaheim seems the only decent option--NBA ready arena...big TV money...only dilemma would be getting around the Clips and Lakers objections.

That's gotta be heartbreaking.


But I will still ask, which place would be best?

- Anaheim
- KC
- Louisville
- Vegas
- St. Louis
- Seattle, even with their out of date arena?

EDIT: I guess Marcky answered 5 out of these 6 for me...

The Maloofs can lobby all they want, but if the NBA BoG and collection of owners did not want a 3rd team in L.A./OC last year they won't in the 2012-13 season. Plus, they (apparently) are still to meet payroll, so they will still be able to control the franchise, not the NBA

It is not really about how much cash $$$ you have as an owner, but it is if the current group of owners want you "in their club". If the Kings moved to the O.C., Samueli will be puppeteer, with the Maloofs as the puppets in terms of ownership as well as a sub-tenant within Honda Center.

STL is out since the Blues and the Scottrade Center are still up for sale (the club owns/operates the physical building, but leases the land underneath it from St. Louis City/County).

Louisville, as a city, cannot make $$$ from the KFCYum Center now, and it would be Memphis v2.0 with the Cardinals Final Four trip. They would have to give more concessions to a NBA franchise to make it work, but they probably cannot afford to do that for 41+ dates

You're right about the NBA being a potential obstacle.

The economics is really a no-brainer. As has been discussed in many sports blogs, 3 teams in LA makes more sense than 1 team in STL, KC, Seattle, LV, etc. In fact, most of these cities are in economic trouble and/or have lost or are in threat of losing sports teams. They are wonderful cities, but the economics don't look promising.

SoCal has 22M people, of which 20M are in easy driving or train distance to LA or Anaheim. Even if you give the 10M in LA County to the Lakers and Clips, you have 3.5M in the OC, 1M in north SD county, 3M in close-in IE all up for grabs. And OC and SD are in the top 5 counties in the country in terms of millionaires (most of them avid sports, food and wine fans, which fits the target demographic perfectly). Add in the cable rights and possibility of joining the Rams/Raiders or other NFL team in a broadcast deal. The only real negative is Anaheim's insistance on keeping "LA" out of the name; smart marketing people will work their ways around that.

And a world-class arena is ready for use, AND being refurbed with expanded VIP entertainment and retail areas; new locker rooms and training facilities. And the City Council loves you and is willing to issue bonds and loan you money to make you happy.

Maybe not heaven, but not bad as the NBA goes.

We have the market and the facility here in So Cal to support a third NBA team, but as a fan of the game, I would like to see the Kings either stay in Sacramento or return to Kansas City. The Sprint Center in Kansas City is a gorgeous facility, and 2.1 million metro population is enough to carry an NBA team.

The Sprint Center in Kansas City is a gorgeous facility, and 2.1 million metro population is enough to carry an NBA team.

Population is only one variable of many needed to support an NBA franchise. TPI and corporate dollars are much more important than population.

KC's TPI and available local corporate sponsorship money might not be up to the task of supporting another team in the region.

*sigh* :(

http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5111/6932852008_99cc294a87_b.jpg

I think Stern would prefer having Seattle back in the league if they can get that arena deal done.

*sigh* :(

http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5111/6932852008_99cc294a87_b.jpg




photo unavailble !

Population is only one variable of many needed to support an NBA franchise. TPI and corporate dollars are much more important than population.

KC's TPI and available local corporate sponsorship money might not be up to the task of supporting another team in the region.
Shit like that doesn't matter if you win...

photo unavailble !

http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5111/6932852008_99cc294a87_b.jpg

Actually, I'm surprised that SJ hasn't come up. The arena is there, it allows the current fans to take the train easily to games and puts the team in the middle of Silicon Valley's masses of billionaires.

Actually, I'm surprised that SJ hasn't come up. The arena is there, it allows the current fans to take the train easily to games and puts the team in the middle of Silicon Valley's masses of billionaires.

It would be the same situation as moving to L.A./Orange County. The team would be within the territory of an existing franchise (here Golden State). Also, the Kings would still be a secondary tenant to a NHL team and they would complain about that, the split of suite revenue, tv revenue...

The NBA BoG did not accept the bids which Oracle CEO/founder Larry Ellison placed for the Warriors, the Hornets, and most recently the Grizzlies because they fear he would relocate any team to San Jose. He easily has the $$$ to operate a team, but they have yet to allow him "in the club".

Thanks jjg but it still is not working. Think I might have to sign up to flickr :/

Thanks jjg but it still is not working. Think I might have to sign up to flickr :/
I'm signed up, and I get the 'photo unavailable' message, too.

^^What was it a picture of?

Huh...... Well now I can't even see it.

Oh well.

It was basically a meme joke with Dallas having a team and Fort Worth NOT getting a team, where Dallas had the Mavs and Fort Worth was "Forever Alone".

I guess it was deleted.

Epic Fail all round then.

Epic Fail all round then.

Oh well.

Either way, I still don't think there should be a 3rd team in the L.A. metro area.

Looks like the Kings story just gets better and better. A reality TV site indicates that Adrienne Malooff (one of the stars of Real Housewives of Orange County) didn't moved the team last year because she felt so sorry for the Sacto. fans, but that after the economics didn't work out, they are thinking they have to move after all. ( I refuse to post the link, but you can find it easily enough.)

And in the other corner, Chris Lehane, a poliltical attack dog, has formed a front group to force the Maloofs to sell the Kings. Lehane is best known as a Sacto/SF crisis manager who has worked for the power companies during the California power crisis and helped structure the attacks on the various women Clinton assaulted (allegedly, that is). He drew a bit of attention a while back when he was hired by one party and then switched sides when the other party offerred more money. With friends like this...

So who's really telling the truth: the media spin doctor or reality tv?

Oh, Kevin Johnson.

He wants to build the facility regardless if there is a tenant (http://blogs.sacbee.com/city-beat/2012/04/mayor-sacramento-should-continue-arena-effort-even-without-kings.html)


Johnson said the city would explore "the Kansas City model." City officials and arena operator AEG constructed the Sprint Center in Kansas City without a professional sports tenant.

The mayor said he still considers AEG a partner in its arena effort, even after the collapse of a deal that would have made the firm the operator of a downtown facility.

Johnson acknowledged that without the $73 million the Kings would have contributed to the arena, another facility might have to be smaller than the one originally proposed.

It is likely to be a challenge. David Taylor, the developer signed on to construct the downtown arena, said last year that the project would be a long shot without an anchor tenant, such as the Kings.

Oh well.

Either way, I still don't think there should be a 3rd team in the L.A. metro area.

I agree. It's good for Los Angeles that the Clippers are good this season. If the Kings move to Anaheim, they are not going to do well. Move them to San Diego.

I agree. It's good for Los Angeles that the Clippers are good this season. If the Kings move to Anaheim, they are not going to do well. Move them to San Diego.

I would actually sympathize with this but the economics seems to favor Anaheim. First, there is an NHL quality arena in place and a team to share costs with. Second, Honda Center is getting upgrades aimed at the pricey crowd that season tickets attract. Third, there are many wealthy individuals and companies in the area.

And most basically, SD can only count on about 3M people, assuming that north SD county is about as far as people will commute from. Anaheim can look for about 6-7M people (3.5M from the OC, 1M from north SD County), maybe 2M from the IE (assuming zero from LA County).

Speaking very abstractly, probably the most equitable for fans would be the Clips in Anaheim and the Kings in SD. But I'm not proposing this or hoping it happens.

The municipal arena in San Diego is decidedly substandard. Built in 1966, about 14,000 seats for basketball, and zero suites. And there is almost zero chance of a new arena being built there, as the football Chargers are going after every possible dollar. The Kings are much better off in Sacramento than in San Diego. The wiki link has a pic of the inside:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valley_View_Casino_Center

This article in SI.com explains a little bit more about what is going on with each side in this. But there is no impartial third party appraisal, so I would take it all with a grain or two of salt.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2012/writers/sam_amick/04/16/thing.big.sacramento.kings/index.html

This article in SI.com explains a little bit more about what is going on with each side in this. But there is no impartial third party appraisal, so I would take it all with a grain or two of salt.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2012/writers/sam_amick/04/16/thing.big.sacramento.kings/index.html

Exactly, since this group was formed by Mayor Johnson.

That said, the only third party resource for publicly financed sports facilities I look at is Field of Schemes.

That said, the only third party resource for publicly financed sports facilities I look at is Field of Schemes.
Field of Schemes can hardly be called unbiased, as they are against any new stadium or arena construction, and have been caught more than once making up lies about new projects. They never did explain their claim that AT&T Park would cost the taxpayers of San Francisco $500 million.

Field of Schemes can hardly be called unbiased, as they are against any new stadium or arena construction, and have been caught more than once making up lies about new projects. They never did explain their claim that AT&T Park would cost the taxpayers of San Francisco $500 million.

First, they are against public financing of facilities. Secondly, before the original book was ever written, they used reports from the Brookings Institution who was negative on the use of eminent domain for all cities, including San Francisco.

Secondly, every local paper has a beat writer/sports columnist/editorial writer who will want such a project. Some may have a detractor as well, but the concept locally is to always make sure that funds for such facilities are the best thing for their community as it makes them feel, "Major League". Then oftentimes, reality hits, as we see with Jobbing.com Arena, the Astrodome, and Edwards Jones Dome.

Leaving aside the broad city. vs. private funding issues, the Kings discussion seems to have entered into a period of chaos, with new ideas being tossed out seemingly at random. Mayor KJ suggests a smaller arena, with no tenant in sight (come on, is the NHL really going to Sactown? and for sure no NBA teams wants to be there).

Another rumor has it that KJ and the Maloofs knew all along that the funding made no sense, but "political considerations" which could not be written down affected their public positions. I lend this some credence because KJ folded rather suddenly and cut off the possiblity of further negotiations, but now has jumped back in under public pressure.

And another report says the Maloofs never bought into the numbers and that the city and NBA were the only ones who bought into them. Given that team profitability turned on a very large increase in broadcast revenues ("no comment" from Comcast), suite sales, ticket prices and revenues from additional arena uses, the Maloofs weren't willing to take the risk.

^^The Bay Area market overshadows the Central Valley market in NorCal.

Move them to San Diego.

Can't move to a city with no suitable arena or any plans, intention or financing to build one.

Can't move to a city with no suitable arena or any plans, intention or financing to build one.

We know.

But that's out most outsiders feel. Like San Diego HAS to have a team....

We know.

But that's out most outsiders feel. Like San Diego HAS to have a team....

This is the great tension: the big money investors and risk takers control the teams, but only in a few cases can they afford to lose money indefinitely. You try to resolve this by moving to the area with the most fans (attendance plus media).

Analogous to a small shop which is failing in one location moving to another a few blocks or a mile away: good for some, bad for others. But it really should be the owners call where to put his time and money.

I guess the real complications come when the city (trying to keep fans happy) and NBA (looking for cartel profits) step in...

Well, "As the Ball Spins" gets more interesting as a former Councilmember (acting as a dummy?) files a document request with respect to Anaheim's communications with the Maloofs. This presumably counters the request the Maloofs made for Sactown internal documents.

The theory is that getting more information will help the parties work together to build a stadium. This is sort of like saying that my wife finding out more about my affairs is going to help save our marriage.

And speaking of marriages, KJ and the Maloofs are now kissing and making up (or at least acknowledging that they should talk). KJ says they will talk again soon, but George kind of deflates the whole thing a bit, adding that talking by phone is good enough.

Oh, well, even if nobody is reading, maybe this gives me some psychic relief.

The latest is that everybody wants to take one more shot at working out an agreement. Is it just me, or is this just a transparent effort by the Maloofs (with city cooperation?) to get one more year of money out of season ticketholders before the ax does its work and they're off to Anaheim, Seattle, LV, KC, Omaha, etc.?

The last proposal was bordering on economic insanity for the city (selling off future parking revenues for a payment now; this is in effect a loan at an enormous interest rate, a way of avoiding usury laws and/or public outrage). And now they need to come up with more money for the Kings, which includes HUGE increases in ticket prices and aggressive assumptions on broadcast revenue? How does taking this much risk and another year on the edge help anybody?

On the other hand, maybe I'm wrong and everything will be beautiful.

Oh, well, even if nobody is reading, maybe this gives me some psychic relief.

The latest is that everybody wants to take one more shot at working out an agreement. Is it just me, or is this just a transparent effort by the Maloofs (with city cooperation?) to get one more year of money out of season ticketholders before the ax does its work and they're off to Anaheim, Seattle, LV, KC, Omaha, etc.?

The last proposal was bordering on economic insanity for the city (selling off future parking revenues for a payment now; this is in effect a loan at an enormous interest rate, a way of avoiding usury laws and/or public outrage). And now they need to come up with more money for the Kings, which includes HUGE increases in ticket prices and aggressive assumptions on broadcast revenue? How does taking this much risk and another year on the edge help anybody?

On the other hand, maybe I'm wrong and everything will be beautiful.
The only flaw that I find here, is in the pessimistic possibility of squeezing the Sacramento ticket holder for another year. What would be the motive? And how would they come out ahead staying in Sacramento for just one year, as opposed to moving to Anaheim now? They are going to face a bit of an uphill battle carving out a fanbase down there, even if they aggressively market themselves in Orange, San Diego and Riverside counties.

For sure the cleanest solution is to get to Anaheim and end the misery. I'm assuming that that is impossibl, perhaps due to NBA rules or word from Stern not to do it or perhaps excessive cost of lease-breaking or other logistics. But I don't really know.

Again, assuming that there really is no grounds for making a deal that works.

For sure the cleanest solution is to get to Anaheim and end the misery. I'm assuming that that is impossibl, perhaps due to NBA rules or word from Stern not to do it or perhaps excessive cost of lease-breaking or other logistics. But I don't really know.

Again, assuming that there really is no grounds for making a deal that works.

There is not lease as the Maloofs own Power Balance Pavilion. However, when the Maloofs bought the Kings, they received a loan by the city of Sacramento which they have not yet repaid; about $77M. In 2011, the county appeals board last week reduced the valuation of the arena, the adjacent building, the land and fixtures by $12 million. The arena and practice court now are assessed at $35 million, and the total site at $51 million.

There is not lease as the Maloofs own Power Balance Pavilion. However, when the Maloofs bought the Kings, they received a loan by the city of Sacramento which they have not yet repaid; about $77M. In 2011, the county appeals board last week reduced the valuation of the arena, the adjacent building, the land and fixtures by $12 million. The arena and practice court now are assessed at $35 million, and the total site at $51 million.

Thanks; I remember this now. I think last year Samueli was offerring to loan them funds to pay off the loan.

Well, the arena deal is “dead” again. But we’re not sure if we’re in the middle of the zombie movie or in the last 2 minutes. Remember that it doesn’t bother zombies to be “dead”; they're like that all the time. To be REALLY dead he has to be beheaded, burned to a crisp and for insurance, sprinkled with holy water, exposed to sunlight and have a stake through his heart. Scattered to the wind. 5 miles deep in the ocean.

My guess is the deal was already dead two weeks ago, but that KJ was getting heat from a fairly successful Maloof claim that he had killed the deal by refusing to negotiate further. This pressured KJ to go through the motions one more time although everyone knew the outcome.

Of course, what is really meant by “dead” is that the Maloof’s aren’t putting in money or pawning their remaining assets; this is actually a step forward because everyone now admits the original deal had money missing. Now its time for Sactown or AEG to put some in, which they certainly could do if they don't mind taxing and cutting here and there.

Getting an alternative buyer seems an idle discussion since there are a number of cities that would be happy to take the Kings as is. But I wonder if Seattle or KC makes much sense given the attendance at their baseball teams. Could be wholly unrelated to how a hoops team would do.

The deal is "dead" as long as the Maloofs are still considered a partner in the deal. The mayor and city are still committed to trying to get the complex built, but they are looking for other partners instead. KJ made it clear the city was not going to deal with the Maloofs any further after they backed out of their word. Unless they uphold the tearm sheet previously agreed to, there will be no further bending to the idiot sons. And he made it clear the city would have no part in renovating Arco Arena.

Right now they are looking for AEG or another wealthy investor to step in and fill the gap. The arena will be needed for the Reno-Tahoe Olympic bid and the mayor and other city officials have said they are looking for other professional franchises to call Sacramento home that are not called the Kings. They are also holding out hope Stearn and the other NBA owners will force the Maloofs to sell to a local owner or one who will look at the sweetheart deal the city offered and jump all over it. Its starting to appear the Maloofs might not have the money they claimed or the teams best interest at heart.

This saga is far from over and I think its going to get a whole lot more interesting.

The deal is "dead" as long as the Maloofs are still considered a partner in the deal. The mayor and city are still committed to trying to get the complex built, but they are looking for other partners instead. KJ made it clear the city was not going to deal with the Maloofs any further after they backed out of their word. Unless they uphold the tearm sheet previously agreed to, there will be no further bending to the idiot sons. And he made it clear the city would have no part in renovating Arco Arena.

Right now they are looking for AEG or another wealthy investor to step in and fill the gap. The arena will be needed for the Reno-Tahoe Olympic bid and the mayor and other city officials have said they are looking for other professional franchises to call Sacramento home that are not called the Kings. They are also holding out hope Stearn and the other NBA owners will force the Maloofs to sell to a local owner or one who will look at the sweetheart deal the city offered and jump all over it. Its starting to appear the Maloofs might not have the money they claimed or the teams best interest at heart.

This saga is far from over and I think its going to get a whole lot more interesting.

Probably will be interesting, but KJ seems to have make a more of a pretense of further negotiations, with another quick fade to black. Looks more like a PR show.

Now Stern is explicitly saying that Sactown was offerred a great deal from AEG, the NBA and the Kings and is making a mistake walking away from it. This is probably true IF the Kings will step up and put in some serious taxes to fund the stadium rather than mortgaging the parking revenues. The team is still keep-able but the locals need to pony up real money instead of calling the Maloofs names.

It's becoming obvious that every time the Maloofs are asked to contribute something, the whole process comes to a screeching halt. I bet they declare bankruptcy to get out of repaying the loan to the city.

Probably will be interesting, but KJ seems to have make a more of a pretense of further negotiations, with another quick fade to black. Looks more like a PR show.

Now Stern is explicitly saying that Sactown was offerred a great deal from AEG, the NBA and the Kings and is making a mistake walking away from it. This is probably true IF the Kings will step up and put in some serious taxes to fund the stadium rather than mortgaging the parking revenues. The team is still keep-able but the locals need to pony up real money instead of calling the Maloofs names.

KJ is simply the lead negotiator for a city and fan base that is tired of the current ownership and decades of broken promises. I honestly think the relationship has soured so badly that a deal will probably be un-salvageable so long as the Maloofs are owners of the Kings. Unless they take the deal on the table, as previously agreed upon, KJ and Sactown say no thanks and open the door for Anaheim, Seattle or somewhere else.

The city and AEG are already paying the bulk of the pricetag. The Maloofs were to pay somewhere around 20-33% or even less (can't remember all the details). What more taxes does Sacramento need to dish out? If the Maloofs want a piece of the pie, they need to contribute. The deal Sacramento put forth was praised by owners around the league. Many were quoted as being jelous and wished their municipalities had given them similar deals. I think this is a situation in which the Maloofs want something they can't afford. In the past they were able to hold the city hostage by threatening to move. This time Sacramento is telling them to take their ball and go play elsewhwere.

I'm not takind sides or emotionally involved here either way. But Stern's comments are pretty frank for someone who was seen as blocking the Maloofs from leaving last year.

It's nothing personal; there is just one overriding fact: no one thinks there is enough advantage to himself to motivate him to put more money in. This is the classic problem with small-town markets and with failed businesses in general. The revenue sources aren't there.

It will be interesting to see if a better deal can come out of Seattle or KC (whose baseaball teams are right at the bottom of MLB attendance) or Anaheim (which has to compete against the Lakers and Clips). Not obvious that there is a clear winner in those places either.