http://www.nba.com/news/bog_sonics_080418.html NBA Board of Governors Approve Sonics Move to Oklahoma City Pending Resolution of Litigation NEW YORK, April 18, 2008 – The NBA Board of Governors today endorsed the recommendation of the NBA Relocation Committee and approved the move of the SuperSonics from Seattle to Oklahoma City for the 2008-09 season, subject to a resolution of the pending litigation between the Sonics and the city of Seattle that removes any requirement for the team to play at KeyArena for the next two seasons. “The support for the NBA demonstrated by the fans, government leaders and business community of Oklahoma City over the last three years has been extraordinary,” said NBA Commissioner David Stern. “The Board of Governors is confident that that level of local support will result in success for the Sonics franchise in Oklahoma."
There are three lawsuits that need to be settled before the Sonics move. 1. Lawsuit to be filed by former team owner to rescind sale of team due to fraud in the inducement. The former owner states that the sale was partially premised on the idea that the new owner would actively try to keep the team in Seattle. A memo from 2 weeks after the sale has come to light stating that there was no intention to stay in Seattle. 2. Class action lawsuit by season ticket holders claiming that they were duped into buying tickets, thinking that the team was going to remain in Seattle. 3. Lawsuit between city and the team. There is no chance that all of these will be resolved in enough time to move the team for next season.
GO Mark Cuban! He actually knows what will happen if the Sonics move. Bad decision by the NBA. Oklahoma is a tiny market (the ENTIRE state). Seattle's market is actually the size of the entire state of Oklahoma. Stupid Stern and Friends.
Lawsuit 3 is schedule to go on this summer, and I think Seattle will prevail and force Bennett to stay in Seattle for 2 more years. The question becomes does he sell the team in those 2 years or can the city get an arena deal done? I don't think Bennett wants to sell right now, but if he's going to lose a bunch of money, maybe he reconsiders. I don't see Seattle giving Bennett an arena on his terms. They would to a group of local investors willing to put up some money and place the arena downtown. Lawsuit 2 might cost Bennett a bunch of money, but it will do nothing for keeping the team in Seattle. I'm still very curious to see what happens when Schultz sues Bennett. He's going to have to reveal on what grounds he's suing, and that'll force him to reveal what kind of clauses were signed when the team exchanged hands. I can't say I'm surprised by NBA vote but kudos to Allen and Cuban for voting no. I expected them both to do so. Allen is from Seattle, and Cuban understands this is a horrible move for the NBA. Gotta say I'm disappointed in Alexander. Save Our Sonics!
david stern is a douchebag for letting this team go to OKC, no offense to okc, but a team with history like supersonnics shouldn't move... teams that should move are like grizzlies...
ONLY the lawsuit by the City will provide a possible delay of moving the Sonics to OK City for 2 years. But, if the Sonics leave in a bitter way, I think there will be no NBA franchise that'll play in Seattle or Wahsington state for a LONG, LONG time. The best way is to let the Sonics go by the City with a settlement and ask Bennett & company to leave behind The Sonics' name, logo, color and history. The ship has long been sailed.
OKC has nothign but college football to root for and they are rowdy crazy fans. I can see the Sonics becoming one of the best home crowds in a few years. Think Utah but more redneck. These people have nothing else to do. Its gonna be so annoying if they keep the name sonics and logo and just change the colors or something...
Maybe so, but as a Seattle resident I'm telling you: there's no way the city will just let them go quietly. They will drag it out court as far as they can possibly can. I'm curious to see how it plays out. Save Our Sonics!
Unless the written agreement had a clause in it that states that the writing is the entire agreement of the parties, the side deal requiring that the new owner make best efforts to keep the team in Seattle can be oral. That would still allow breach of contract. Another ground would be fraud in the inducement. If Schultz can prove that keeping the team in Seattle was a sticking point in the negotiations, that assurances were given, and that there was no intention to keep the team in Seattle, fraud in the inducement may be found. The judge may then have the power to rescind the sale. Apparently, Schultz believes that he has documentary evidence from two weeks after the sale stating that there was no intention on keeping the team in Seattle.
.............but there was the opportunity two years ago to do something on the arena deal (when they had local ownership) and it didn't happen. Now with the impending loss...........they will be finally motivated? Schultz was saying there was a problem two years ago. Schultz: Sonics may leave without cash (Feb 2, 2006) As their playoff prospects continue to dwindle and the sea of empty red seats at KeyArena grows exponentially each game, Sonics chairman Howard Schultz issued his strongest demands to city officials and state legislators who have appeared to turn a deaf ear. Before Wednesday's 111-107 victory over Golden State, Schultz said he wasn't making a threat, but promised the team will leave Seattle or sell if it doesn't win support for a taxpayer-financed $200 million expansion of KeyArena and reach agreement on a more lucrative lease to replace the one that expires in 2010............ ...........Should the Sonics sell, Walker said he would seek the highest price to appease minority owners who bought the team for $200 million in 2001 and have lost $58 million over the past five years. Owners were also forced to answer a '05 cash call totaling about $17 million. Over the last five years, Charlotte sold for $300 million, Boston ($360 million), Phoenix ($401 million) and Cleveland ($375 million). "We're on a collision course with time and we can't wait," said Schultz, chairman of Seattle-based Starbucks. "If people want to make me the villain, that's their prerogative, but I'm here to tell you that we've tried for almost two years to meet the elected officials halfway and we're not getting anything back." Seattle big shots still trying to save Sonics SEATTLE (AP)—The supposedly obsolete arena is dark. After enduring billionaire power plays, broken promises and the team’s worst season ever, Seattle is on the brink of losing its first big-time sports franchise. On Friday, NBA owners are set to approve the SuperSonics’ move to Oklahoma City. The last two votes on moves—the Hornets from Charlotte to New Orleans and the Grizzlies from Vancouver to Memphis—passed by a combined vote of 59-1. “I just want to know if we’re going to leave or stay,” rookie superstar Kevin Durant said Thursday as he cleaned out his locker after a dismal 20-62 season. Sorry Kevin. Friday’s approval won’t quite decide whether 41 years of NBA history in the city is over. “I’m not so worried about the board of governors’ vote, really,” Seattle mayor Greg Nickels said Thursday. “We expect they are going to approve it … convincingly. We’re really focused on litigation.” Yes, this two-year saga likely will be settled in court. Or with Sonics owner and Oklahoma City tycoon Clay Bennett writing a huge check to avoid the courts, a windfall Seattle might not be able to refuse. The city already has rejected Bennett’s offer of $26 million to settle the lease agreement, which runs through 2010. Nickels laughed and declined to directly answer three different questions on whether there is a price at which Seattle would agree to let Bennett take the Sonics to Oklahoma. “We intend to have the Sonics be a part of our community for a long, long time,” is all the mayor, who stood on the downtown sidewalks for the Sonics’ parade after they won the NBA title in 1979, would say. Seattle’s best hope to at least delay the Sonics’ flight to Oklahoma City is a three-pronged legal fight against Bennett and his partners: — A trial, set to begin June 16, in which the city is trying to force the team to play out its KeyArena lease. — A class-action lawsuit brought by season-ticket holders who say they were duped into buying tickets under the premise the Sonics wouldn’t leave. — Former team owner Howard Schultz’s new plans to sue to get the team back. The Smooth-talking Starbucks chairman—widely considered the villain in this civic drama—is citing new evidence indicating Bennett’s group lied while promising to make a good-faith effort to keep the team in Seattle. The federal judge hearing the city’s lawsuit forced the team to give Seattle’s lawyers damning e-mails between Bennett and his partners. The messages display their eagerness to move the team to Oklahoma City almost as soon as they bought it. Even so, Schultz’s lawsuit has provoked the same bitter laughter among Seattlites that greeted news of the sale, which he pitched then as a wake-up call to local officials. “If the city didn’t believe we’d potentially move the team, we obviously have a group now that does have an out,” Schultz said in 2006. Frustrated by state and local officials’ unwillingness to foot the bill to renovate KeyArena, Schultz sold the team to Bennett for a profit of $69 million in 2006. Bennett, Schultz argued, had better leverage to negotiate for a new arena because he had his eager hometown with six-year-old building waiting if he failed. Instead, Bennett focused on relocating the Sonics to his hometown after his proposal for a new arena in the suburbs, which he bragged would be the most expensive arena ever built, died in the Legislature. Then lawmakers spurned Microsoft CEO Steve’s Ballmer’s 11th-hour offer of big bucks. Big-name billionaires of basketball, pressure politics and broken promises have Seattle on the brink of losing its 41-year-old NBA team. The names involved include Starbucks chairman Howard Schultz, Microsoft CEO Howard Ballmer and Oklahoma financial capitalist Clay Bennett. Despite so many efforts to keep the team from leaving, the NBA is set to approve the Sonics' move to Oklahoma City on Friday. Bennett has defended his efforts to keep the team in Seattle. He cites his many trips here, the consultants he hired and the money he spent toward finding the Sonics a new home. Last spring he proposed a $500 million palace in the suburb of Renton. He asked the state of Washington to authorize King County tax dollars to pay for $278 million of the building. Bennett offered $100 million. But the Oklahoman stepped into a political climate tired of public handouts for sports stadiums after tax money was used to build Safeco Field for baseball’s Mariners and Qwest Field for the NFL’s Seahawks. Since those two landmarks rose at the south end of the city’s skyline, the Washington Legislature has said no, no and no again. No last year to a NASCAR track. No this year to University of Washington’s plan for a huge update of Husky Stadium for football. And no last month to an 11th-hour plan led by Ballmer to expand KeyArena, the league’s smallest venue. Ballmer, a basketball fan, was willing to put up some of his Microsoft millions for a $300 million KeyArena expansion that would have used far less tax money—$75-$150 million—than Bennett’s arena. Big-name billionaires of basketball, pressure politics and broken promises have Seattle on the brink of losing its 41-year-old NBA team. The names involved include Starbucks chairman Howard Schultz, Microsoft CEO Howard Ballmer and Oklahoma financial capitalist Clay Bennett. Despite so many efforts to keep the team from leaving, the NBA is set to approve the Sonics' move to Oklahoma City on Friday. Six weeks ago, Oklahoma City voters didn’t hesitate to approve a sales tax extension to fund $121.6 million in improvements to a downtown arena and build a practice facility. Then Thursday, the Oklahoma House approved a tax incentive package designed to help lure the Sonics that was swiftly signed into law by Gov. Brad Henry. Meanwhile, Washington Gov. Christine Gregoire and U.S. senators Patty Murray and Maria Cantwell are asking the NBA to delay its decision amid the groundswell of nostalgia, sadness and anger in Seattle. “We’ve had NBA basketball for 41 years,” Mayor Nickels said. “This team means something to us.” Disputes between landlords and sports teams usually end with settlements instead of trial verdicts. When Cleveland Browns’ owner Art Modell announced in 1995 that he was moving the NFL team to Baltimore, the city of Cleveland sued. The NFL then struck a deal that allowed the team to leave but kept the Browns’ names, colors and history in town for use by the replacement team the league promised Cleveland. The “new” Cleveland Browns began play in 1999. Would Seattle accept a Browns-like guarantee from the NBA and then let Bennett take the team to Oklahoma City? “I’m not even going to go there,” Nickels said. “We think we’ve got a strong case that we can win.” Even if Bennett has to keep the Sonics there until the lease is fulfilled, the new/renovated arena issue will still be lingering just as it has been for the past several years. If Bennet and Schultz are unpopular, then Seattle should take a deal like doublebogey suggested. Even if a franchise like the Grizzlies is acquired by a Seattle area group - investor and targeted for relocation to Seattle..........the arena issue will still need to be addressed.
The city will put a new arena in. I liken the first vote to when Houston shot down the first arena deal to replace the Summit. The Sonics had a lease and despite his bluster, <B>nobody</B> thought Schultz would move the team. The guy grew up in Seattle and the Sonics were his boyhood team. There is support for a new arena, especially now when the team is hell bent on leaving. Bennett's second proposal was a half billion dollar arena in Renton, which is equivalent to putting it in Pearland. He wanted full taxpayer funding and also wanted naming rights as well as a very generous lease. There was no way that was going to happen. Schultz is unpopular now, but if he gets the team back with some of the other local investors, the city will vote for that arena package. They've been floating around a 300 million arena downtown and half-funded by the ownership. That would pass by healthy margins.
It isn't like the Oilers when Bud Adams was so detested that things finally happened on a new stadium only after he left?
It's not like that at all. It's a lot more like the Rockets situation. If Schultz gets the team back, the city will give him the arena this time around. The proposals flying around would definitely pass.
