Jump to content






Photo

The End Of The Sacramento Kings?


  • Please log in to reply
53 replies to this topic

#31 Dave Burrell

Dave Burrell

    Folsom Citizen

  • Moderator
  • 17,588 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Folsom
  • Interests:Beer, Photography, Travel, Art

Posted 30 September 2010 - 09:27 PM

But you are ok with cvaderveen calling another person a troll because they expressed an opinion and may not like the Kings? He even said I made a childish insult. He never said WHO I insulted, he just hurled mean spirited words at me.

What gives? Is there some secret "Kings fan" club that gets bashed for not being a true fan??

I think this board is more tense about the Kings than all of Sac.


Taking a stab in the dark here but I think he meant that your statement calling them the "Maloof's was the childish insult.

There are indeed more then a few dedicated King's fans here and they likely feel slighted when people say the kings can go and are worthless and good riddance and all that, folks like that are often perceived as non-fans who've never gone to a game nor watched any games on TV.

That is not the case for you obviously since posted that you've been to a few games mostly on someone elses dime.... which btw, is pretty much how I've seen all the games I've attended too ... not being a huge fan I'm kind of hard pressed to spend my money on tix, let alone the danged $9 dollar beers.... it still blows me away that they're raping the fans that much for one freakin' beer

I like the ideas about tourism taxes to help pay for a new stadium... course I'm the odd man out because I personally don't see a huge problem with Arco, but I'm not really qualified to judge the place because I don't go very often.

BTW, If I were you and those punks were throwing f-bombs around my 8 year old at the game, I would have asked them to stop or gone to security to make them to stop or boot them out (they'll do it). There's no need to act like an asshat at any event, let alone around small children.

Travel, food and drink blog by Davehttp://davestravels.tv

 


#32 Chad Vander Veen

Chad Vander Veen

    Hopeless Addict

  • Premium Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,209 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Folsom

Posted 01 October 2010 - 06:30 AM

wow, hello to you too C_vanderwhatever, i guess opinions count only if they agree with you. i dont consider myself a troll since i have been posting for a little while now, and havent posted one thing and left. but i can see how people dont really want to stick around this site because if they dont agree with an almighty "superposter" such as youself,then they get bullied out or called hurtful things like "troll!" As for the Kings, maybe i just dont like basketball, maybe i dont agree with the way the kings have been run, recruiting and personnel issues. maybe too many of our youth are idolizing too many overpaid street thugs throwing a ball around! Or..maybe, just maybe, someone just flat out doesnt agree with your opinion! have a nice day your highness "c-vandernerd"


1) "Adios...viva las vegas! or wherever they wind up!" is not an opinion, it's a statement

2) and by adding a Mavericks avatar since you posted you've clearly shown yourself to be a troll.

#33 Robert Giacometti

Robert Giacometti

    There are no Dumb questions

  • Premium Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,850 posts

Posted 01 October 2010 - 07:48 AM

I like the ideas about tourism taxes to help pay for a new stadium... course I'm the odd man out because I personally don't see a huge problem with Arco, but I'm not really qualified to judge the place because I don't go very often.


What I don't understand is IF Arco is booking as many events as John indicates annually, then do we really NEED a new Arena or do some WANT a new Arena? With this many events being booked no doubt the owners of Arco are making money, which is good, so I don't see them being motivated to spend the mega millions to build a new one.

IF a new Arena would make the owners more money, why in the world wouldn't they go out and do it? I think the answer is they won't make that much more money to pay for the cost of the Arena. Also, I don't see the Kings getting a better deal by moving anywhere else at this time, so they aren't going anwhere.

A final thought, IF Sac City builds a new Arena Downtown, what Guarantee is there the Kings would give up the control of revenue they get now by playing at Arco to simply play in a new Arena?

#34 Dave Burrell

Dave Burrell

    Folsom Citizen

  • Moderator
  • 17,588 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Folsom
  • Interests:Beer, Photography, Travel, Art

Posted 01 October 2010 - 08:35 AM

What I don't understand is IF Arco is booking as many events as John indicates annually, then do we really NEED a new Arena or do some WANT a new Arena? With this many events being booked no doubt the owners of Arco are making money, which is good, so I don't see them being motivated to spend the mega millions to build a new one.

IF a new Arena would make the owners more money, why in the world wouldn't they go out and do it? I think the answer is they won't make that much more money to pay for the cost of the Arena. Also, I don't see the Kings getting a better deal by moving anywhere else at this time, so they aren't going anwhere.


Won't get any arguments from me on this - like I said, I personally don't see anything wrong with the current Arena. I've attended several concerts and several games and IMO it was just fine..... but that's just me.

I also agree that with the cost of a new arena being somewhere in the 100's of millions, I don't see how they could make any more money with a new arena, hell if they do that now the beers would cost $30 each

Travel, food and drink blog by Davehttp://davestravels.tv

 


#35 john

john

    Founder

  • Admin
  • 9,841 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Prairie Oaks

Posted 01 October 2010 - 09:40 AM

What I don't understand is IF Arco is booking as many events as John indicates annually, then do we really NEED a new Arena or do some WANT a new Arena? With this many events being booked no doubt the owners of Arco are making money, which is good, so I don't see them being motivated to spend the mega millions to build a new one.

IF a new Arena would make the owners more money, why in the world wouldn't they go out and do it? I think the answer is they won't make that much more money to pay for the cost of the Arena. Also, I don't see the Kings getting a better deal by moving anywhere else at this time, so they aren't going anwhere.

A final thought, IF Sac City builds a new Arena Downtown, what Guarantee is there the Kings would give up the control of revenue they get now by playing at Arco to simply play in a new Arena?


Many events do not come to Arco because the facilities are not adequate. Ice hockey, NCAA basketball, and a number of performers like Beyonce come to mind. This will continue to deteriorate over time. Arco was simply not designed as a long term arena. It was really built on the cheap. Without a new arena, we risk losing the Kings as well. The Kings know that a new arena would be an instant boost to attendance and would give them the ability to attract better players too. It's in the Maloofs best interest to play in a new arena.

If we had a new arena, not only will the Kings be here for 30+ years (lease), we could probably attract a minor league ice hockey team as well, and NCAA tournaments, conventions, etc...

as far as revenue, the Kings would sign a lease for 30 years, and the lease means they get revenue from Kings games and Maloof events. This would not apply to concerts, NCAA games, etc... no different than a tenant in a strip mall - the lease is simply the "rent", but it also helps pay for the property (which in the arena's case, the owner of the property would be the city).


#36 Bill Z

Bill Z

    Hopeless Addict

  • Premium Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,795 posts
  • Location:Briggs Ranch

Posted 01 October 2010 - 10:09 AM

Have you ever been to a King's game or watched them play on TV?
- just curious

I've watched them on TV a few times (when they've made it to the playoffs), but Basketball isn't a sport I actively follow. Which is likely why for me they have worn out their welcome. I see more of the politics and badside of the King's in the news than I see of the good.

I went to one professional Baseball game once, and decided it was a waste of time and money, I would rather go watch a little league game, than spend the first 7 innings of mostly 3-up 3-down.

I am a more active Football fan, but at the price of their tickets, ain't no way I'm ever going to a live game, I much rather see instant replay in the comfort of my living room or at a sports bar.
I would rather be Backpacking


#37 texson

texson

    Veteran

  • Premium Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 101 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:briggs ranch
  • Interests:fishing, camping, snow skiing, my wife

Posted 01 October 2010 - 10:55 AM

1) "Adios...viva las vegas! or wherever they wind up!" is not an opinion, it's a statement

2) and by adding a Mavericks avatar since you posted you've clearly shown yourself to be a troll.

Because there are no connections to my screen name and avatar? texson and a Dallas Mavs fan? wierd!
I did'nt even know there were avatars to choose from until last night. And by the way, a "statement" is an opinion.

#38 Robert Giacometti

Robert Giacometti

    There are no Dumb questions

  • Premium Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,850 posts

Posted 01 October 2010 - 11:23 AM

Many events do not come to Arco because the facilities are not adequate. Ice hockey, NCAA basketball, and a number of performers like Beyonce come to mind. This will continue to deteriorate over time. Arco was simply not designed as a long term arena. It was really built on the cheap. Without a new arena, we risk losing the Kings as well. The Kings know that a new arena would be an instant boost to attendance and would give them the ability to attract better players too. It's in the Maloofs best interest to play in a new arena.

If we had a new arena, not only will the Kings be here for 30+ years (lease), we could probably attract a minor league ice hockey team as well, and NCAA tournaments, conventions, etc...

as far as revenue, the Kings would sign a lease for 30 years, and the lease means they get revenue from Kings games and Maloof events. This would not apply to concerts, NCAA games, etc... no different than a tenant in a strip mall - the lease is simply the "rent", but it also helps pay for the property (which in the arena's case, the owner of the property would be the city).


The Maloofs are getting ALL the revenue from from ALL the events at Arco now. If they moved into a new City owned Arena, they wouldn't get all the revenue from all the other events. Yes, they would have a more modern Arena to play in but making LESS money.

The other opportunities you mentioned for the region with a new Arena are legitimate, but the Maloofs would be making less money overall by giving up what they currently have. The only option I see in making new Arena a reality is for toursim dollars contributing to the cost of building it with the Maloofs paying the largest chunk and owning it and operating it. Sac city would benefit from the additional tax dollars generated by adding the events you talked about spent outside the Arena.

Hopefully KJ and the Maloofs can get this accomplished, without having the locals foot the bill for this.

I don't see anything happening for the next 6 years or so, this is why its crucial to get the funding source started now through a tourism Tax. Right now the Maloofs hold all the cards. By getting a funding source established it forces the Maloofs to act, because if they don't take this deal now and move the kings, these funds become more atractive as they grow in time to another possible owner. All this at NO cost to the locals!

#39 Chad Vander Veen

Chad Vander Veen

    Hopeless Addict

  • Premium Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,209 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Folsom

Posted 01 October 2010 - 12:06 PM

And by the way, a "statement" is an opinion.


No it isn't.

"Enjoy your vacation" or "The time is 3:30" are statements. They're not opinions.

#40 old soldier

old soldier

    Living Legend

  • Premium Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,715 posts

Posted 01 October 2010 - 01:01 PM

is it good or bad to be a troll, what do trolls do?

#41 texson

texson

    Veteran

  • Premium Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 101 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:briggs ranch
  • Interests:fishing, camping, snow skiing, my wife

Posted 01 October 2010 - 01:51 PM

Old soldier, i guess a troll is someone who does not agree with a select few, and gets bashed by them. As far as my statement, its a direct result of an opinion, as in i dont really care what the kings do or where they wind up, hence a comment derived from my opinion. Anyways, i thought the topic was about the kings. So, i have already stated my opinion about the ongoings of the team. Why cant they build a new arena w/o tax payers $? i still cant understand why the maloofs cant foot the bill since they will see the profit and get the money. Just seems like everytime you turn around there is another reason to gouge the taxpayers and for what? sports/entertainment venue? i think we have bigger issues to resolve regionally and statewide. Whats with all the crazy land swap deals? the more smoke and mirrors and shell games that go on it seems that the public, fans included are losing interest.

#42 Dave Burrell

Dave Burrell

    Folsom Citizen

  • Moderator
  • 17,588 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Folsom
  • Interests:Beer, Photography, Travel, Art

Posted 01 October 2010 - 02:20 PM

is it good or bad to be a troll, what do trolls do?


depends if you own a bridge or not, they collect toll fees :lol:

Travel, food and drink blog by Davehttp://davestravels.tv

 


#43 old soldier

old soldier

    Living Legend

  • Premium Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,715 posts

Posted 01 October 2010 - 02:46 PM

Old soldier, i guess a troll is someone who does not agree with a select few, and gets bashed by them. As far as my statement, its a direct result of an opinion, as in i dont really care what the kings do or where they wind up, hence a comment derived from my opinion. Anyways, i thought the topic was about the kings. So, i have already stated my opinion about the ongoings of the team. Why cant they build a new arena w/o tax payers $? i still cant understand why the maloofs cant foot the bill since they will see the profit and get the money. Just seems like everytime you turn around there is another reason to gouge the taxpayers and for what? sports/entertainment venue? i think we have bigger issues to resolve regionally and statewide. Whats with all the crazy land swap deals? the more smoke and mirrors and shell games that go on it seems that the public, fans included are losing interest.


The way I look at things, you build something that will make you more money, and that goes for a city as well. A city might do something that would make the people happier as well as not dumping a lot of money. with that said I have trouble seeing why people go into politics, cause the salary they get doesn't compare to the money they have to spend to get elected. it may be they are just not smart, or maybe there are secret ways to make money outside of a salary in politics. Going back to the not smart excuse, that would explain why the state and city governments are in so much trouble...

I wonder if gloria alred has ever thought of defending the rights of trolls

#44 MikeinFolsom

MikeinFolsom

    Living Legend

  • Premium Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,198 posts

Posted 01 October 2010 - 04:33 PM

K.....who said the statement "you can't attract good players without a nice arena"? Pretty much from what I've seen of NBA players, show them the money and they'll play at the Hiram Johnson HS gym downtown.

I think you're right one one aspect. If it was such a moneymaking bonanza, the Maloofs wouldn't be looking for public help on building the arena. I'm guessing they might not even break even on the deal?

#45 john

john

    Founder

  • Admin
  • 9,841 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Prairie Oaks

Posted 01 October 2010 - 09:10 PM

The Maloofs have made it clear that they will pay their fair share. (The convergence plan had them chipping in $300M) However it's pretty unrealistic to think they are going to 100% bankroll a $600M (or whatever) arena. The city would benefit tremendously from increased revenue and tourism, especially if they can start bringing in major events.

As far as "show me the money" - you are mostly true, but it sometimes takes more than straight cash to make a player want to play somewhere. Sacramento is a small market and they play in a barn. Right now, other than the youth on the team, it doesn't hold many good cards to lure free agents who are on the fence on choosing a city to play in.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users