yeah its not surprising that this is happening right before all rumored expansion to LV and Seattle. People talk about the owners not wanting to split up the leagues revenue with another two teams, but another thing about expansion to those two markets is it weakens their capacity to threaten to move. So now Dundon is helping them make it seem like more of a real threat and Kansas City is getting hyped up to be the next boogeyman of an NBA-less city.

[deleted]

They voted down the Kings moving 22–8 and the relocation committee unanimously opposed it.

I think the big difference there was that the sale wasn’t finalized and Sacramento Mayor found another buyer group that could step in and wanted to stay. The NBA had an easy out; voted against relocation, Seattle group walked, and team still had a buyer anyway.

Like, I hope they follow that precedent, but it does seem different voting against the interests of a current owner vs just a theoretical, prospective owner.

A refurbishment deal that the city, county, and state are all willing to chip in for! This is exactly what the owners want to happen everywhere (at least everywhere the cost of developing the arena privately is too great). If El Cheapo is too skinflint or arrogant to deal with the reasonable conditions that come with that money, it’s on the other owners to set him straight before he jeopardizes their future earnings.

Moda center is nowhere as nice as the warriors or clippers new arenas

Silver has literally zero control over who’s allowed to buy a team

As a Celtics fan for close to 50 years, I’m still on pins and needles what Bill Chisholm wants to do.

Having said that, this is what the market bears now: a multi-billion dollar price tag, and the only people who seemingly are either willing to pay it or have the ability to are morally questionable at best. There’s some element to the scruples and morals of the uber-wealthy, but the NBA is too eager to just take a warm body now.

Looking back, it was a quaint time when the NBA ran the Hornets for a year. Maybe that’s what the league needs to do more often to see if other suitors get involved instead of just welcoming anyone who can scratch a check with open arms.

What’s wrong with ishbia other then he made a bad gamble on KD?

Don’t forget Mikhail Prokhorov, the Nets owner from 2010-2019 who traded all their future picks for washed KG, Paul Pierce, and Deron Williams then sold the team once it failed.

It’s not a fine, it’s a fee. And it’s surely already baked into the price he and his investors paid. They didn’t go in blind.

No one on the legal counsel team would intentionally fake a fuck up like this. That’s a career ender.

Lmao this was not intentional, wild to see people just upvoting this

Subprime Dumb Dong just fired a large part of the org. I wouldn’t be surprised if a recently fired employee somehow had access these emails and leaked them.

I’m thinking it is on purpose. Dundon probably is lowballing the law firm on the rate of billable hours, so….law firm probably decided to just terminate the agreement in this fashion.

Lol, what a mistake!

Rule one of Law School: never author documents how you speak to your homies

Oregonians are looking to bang that’s for sure

It’s crazy how much prison I would go to for such little reward.

Seriously. A misread so bad that it feels intentional. I probably shouldn’t respond, but hopefully can answer some of the dizzying spin if people happen to read. Ridiculous.

No. It’s clear that

1. Blazers and City (mayor, attorney, etc) have had verbal discussions. No clear, reported terms have emerged, but the sense is that Blazers want complete terms. 100% public investment, no liability for overruns or maintenance, etc.

2. City tries to confirm Blazer’s official stance. Blazers do not respond beyond “you have the answers,” alluding to the earlier meetings. Formal communication on actual terms doesn’t happen for months.

3. NBA gets involved. City says it’s trying to figure out key details to advance negotiations. Team says “city already knows.”

4. Without having official positions and key details from Blazers, that can help answer questions on how to pay for this thing, the City (mayor, attorney) issues a Term Sheet.

5. Blazers instantly reject Term Sheet, saying it’s nothing like they have asked for (100% public) but not officially asked for. Blazers then also say, they haven’t talked to City because of fear of litigation under the current Bridge Lease they have with the city.

6. Emails come out. Mostly show that the Blazers don’t want to officially answer the city because they know their terms are unpopular (100% public) and made up the excuse about litigation.

The Blazers are clearly just stonewalling the city. The KATU report shows the city has tried to negotiate on multiple issues including:

Pre-construction fees:

The city responded on April 22 and declined to release the funding early, but McGair offered two alternatives. He proposed amending the current arena operating lease to cover pre-construction and architectural costs if the team split them 50-50. He also said the city was open to a Letter of Intent making those costs reimbursable if the parties ultimately signed a long-term lease.

Indemnity issues:

Despite this, on July 7, the city sent a letter to team leaders in an apparent effort to ease their concerns about potential litigation. First, McGair said the city would not waive its right to litigation “if the parties fail to extend the current lease or enter into a new lease for the arena.”

However, the city confirmed it was willing to agree that any information the team shared as part of the renovation negotiations would not be used in future litigation, subject to state laws.

Future maintenance fees:

Finally, the letter outlined the city’s commitment to renegotiate the ongoing maintenance and capital expenses standard in a future lease.

“The City and [Rip City Management] will agree to negotiate a new benchmarked ongoing maintenance and capex standard and operator responsibility in any future lease and development agreement associated with a renovation,” McGair wrote.

The Blazers are just flatly refusing to consider anything other than total capitulation and trying to act like they aren’t doing that.

The City is just passing an official “this is our offer.”

Based on Blazer’s current stance, they will reject the offer, and negotiations will continue. Maybe even longer than 4 months.

That will impact the State bonding legislation, but that doesn’t mean they can’t propose another bill.

Things will probably get messier before they get closer though. NBA could have to step in imo.