http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article. ... Anew548843
Hmmmm...New NBA team represented...currently the 66ers are affiliated with the Bucks and Spurs...maybe they were bought outright by the OKC team? Maybe new name??
Major D-League announcement in Tulsa today
-
SignGuyDino
- Site Admin
- Posts: 1421
- Joined: Wed Nov 26, 2003 3:33 am
- Location: Fletcher, NC
- Contact:
Major D-League announcement in Tulsa today
Never make anyone a priority that makes you an option.
-
Minor League Man
- Site Admin
- Posts: 2314
- Joined: Mon Nov 21, 2005 6:22 am
- Location: Racine, Wisconsin
- Contact:
[quote=""SignGuyDino""]http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article. ... Anew548843
Hmmmm...New NBA team represented...currently the 66ers are affiliated with the Bucks and Spurs...maybe they were bought outright by the OKC team? Maybe new name??[/quote]
The Spurs were never affiliated with the 66ers.
The OKC team today joined the Lakers (D-Fenders) and Spurs (Toros) in owning an NBA team of their own.
Story at: http://www.nba.com/dleague/tulsa/tulsa_okc_080731.html
Hmmmm...New NBA team represented...currently the 66ers are affiliated with the Bucks and Spurs...maybe they were bought outright by the OKC team? Maybe new name??[/quote]
The Spurs were never affiliated with the 66ers.
The OKC team today joined the Lakers (D-Fenders) and Spurs (Toros) in owning an NBA team of their own.
Story at: http://www.nba.com/dleague/tulsa/tulsa_okc_080731.html
Proud to be a veteran of these boards for the last 5 years...
ESPN reported that the franchise sold for $2.25 mil WOW!
Teams were selling for 250,000 three years ago.
How said multi-team ownership does not work (KEN?). SW Basketball sold Austin for 1 mil and Tulsa for 2.25 mil and sold 25% of Reno for 250,000.
That makes 3.5 mil and counting. (They still own 75% of Reno and the rights to the Flyers)
Maybe Apex just picked the wrong league.
ALSO
How said D-League would not sell for 10 mil within 10 years?
Teams were selling for 250,000 three years ago.
How said multi-team ownership does not work (KEN?). SW Basketball sold Austin for 1 mil and Tulsa for 2.25 mil and sold 25% of Reno for 250,000.
That makes 3.5 mil and counting. (They still own 75% of Reno and the rights to the Flyers)
Maybe Apex just picked the wrong league.
ALSO
How said D-League would not sell for 10 mil within 10 years?
Last edited by bectond on Thu Jul 31, 2008 9:30 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Basketball Junkie and Rummikub Champion
Remember that both of these teams were Southwest basketball's teams.
Teams that were originally given to Southwest Basketball to expand the league and then sell.
Would it surprise you if the figure of sale was overly inflated? Or was the amount that the team has lost in the last couple of years? Or that the league may want to rid itself of Southwest basketball?
Just some stuff that's been floating around Albuquerque about the relationship of the league with the T-birds and Southwest Basketball, which has been verified by the Suns bolting on the T-birds due to lack of a trainer and the team being less than communicative with the "big" club.
Teams that were originally given to Southwest Basketball to expand the league and then sell.
Would it surprise you if the figure of sale was overly inflated? Or was the amount that the team has lost in the last couple of years? Or that the league may want to rid itself of Southwest basketball?
Just some stuff that's been floating around Albuquerque about the relationship of the league with the T-birds and Southwest Basketball, which has been verified by the Suns bolting on the T-birds due to lack of a trainer and the team being less than communicative with the "big" club.
Skippy good buddy, this is Stern we are talking about. The prices will not go back down. 2.25 mil inflated or not is the new D-League franchise asking price. Talk about inflated prices, the Sonics lost 40 mil a year and still sold for 300 mil.
Yes, the league gave SW 4 for the price of one so SW could sell them off later for a profit. I'd say SW got their money back and then some. Let's say SW lost 3.25 mil overall, well they made 3.5 mil selling two and a quarter teams and they still own two clubs that they can parlay into cash at a later date.
You are right, the suns hated dealing with SW's cheap skate ways, but I don't see how that affects SW standing with the league.
Yes, the league gave SW 4 for the price of one so SW could sell them off later for a profit. I'd say SW got their money back and then some. Let's say SW lost 3.25 mil overall, well they made 3.5 mil selling two and a quarter teams and they still own two clubs that they can parlay into cash at a later date.
You are right, the suns hated dealing with SW's cheap skate ways, but I don't see how that affects SW standing with the league.
Last edited by bectond on Thu Jul 31, 2008 10:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Basketball Junkie and Rummikub Champion
I agree with bechtond.
The Suns may have had a gripe, but Sarver should be thinking about owning a D-League then. Some D-League teams are better to be self-governed and independent, but for someone who is trying to consistently stay in contention, owning your own D-League team is the way to go.
Those new East Coast franchises are going to cost a pretty penny.
The Suns may have had a gripe, but Sarver should be thinking about owning a D-League then. Some D-League teams are better to be self-governed and independent, but for someone who is trying to consistently stay in contention, owning your own D-League team is the way to go.
Those new East Coast franchises are going to cost a pretty penny.
-
Minor League Man
- Site Admin
- Posts: 2314
- Joined: Mon Nov 21, 2005 6:22 am
- Location: Racine, Wisconsin
- Contact:
[quote=""HKF""]I agree with bechtond.
The Suns may have had a gripe, but Sarver should be thinking about owning a D-League then. Some D-League teams are better to be self-governed and independent, but for someone who is trying to consistently stay in contention, owning your own D-League team is the way to go.
Those new East Coast franchises are going to cost a pretty penny.[/quote]
I think the Suns should have their own D-League team too...
My choices would be either Glendale or Prescott Valley...
The Suns may have had a gripe, but Sarver should be thinking about owning a D-League then. Some D-League teams are better to be self-governed and independent, but for someone who is trying to consistently stay in contention, owning your own D-League team is the way to go.
Those new East Coast franchises are going to cost a pretty penny.[/quote]
I think the Suns should have their own D-League team too...
My choices would be either Glendale or Prescott Valley...
Proud to be a veteran of these boards for the last 5 years...
-
SignGuyDino
- Site Admin
- Posts: 1421
- Joined: Wed Nov 26, 2003 3:33 am
- Location: Fletcher, NC
- Contact:
The Asheville Tourists are an "A" level baseball team that sold for $6 million just 2 or 3 years ago. It's based on the money the team can generate. This is not a surprise.
I expect NBA teams that want the advantages the Lakers and Spurs had with their own team will pay that much to get their own team, so they won't have to share players anymore.
Still, at that elevated price, it's clear to me that the OKC team anticipates a lot more exposure for their D-League team. I'd be very shocked if they don't get more time on NBATV, just for starters.
Now we're seeing two top-tier teams (Lakers and Spurs) and the lowly former Sonics now own their own team.
You have now seen the floodgates officially open. No going back now.
I expect NBA teams that want the advantages the Lakers and Spurs had with their own team will pay that much to get their own team, so they won't have to share players anymore.
Still, at that elevated price, it's clear to me that the OKC team anticipates a lot more exposure for their D-League team. I'd be very shocked if they don't get more time on NBATV, just for starters.
Now we're seeing two top-tier teams (Lakers and Spurs) and the lowly former Sonics now own their own team.
You have now seen the floodgates officially open. No going back now.
Never make anyone a priority that makes you an option.
Don't get me wrong. I don't think the price is going down.
If the league is saying 2.5 million, then that is what THEY value the teams at.
Or they may have thrown the D-league team in as a bone, to the new OKC ownership, or Stern could have required this is as part of the deal.
What is being reported may or may not be accurate. The newspaper or a website journalists only reports what it may know, and the victors write history and press releases, as well as feeding the starving fish hacks and buying their loyalty.
Given SW basketball's history, would it surprise you if they had only lost 3.5 million?
SW basketball wasn't given a 4 for 1 deal. They were given a four for nothing deal.
Of which they have either sold, or depending on your viewpoint, had several taken off their hands, and had one go into hibernation, which I think may be Reno now?
Would the inactive teams in Florida or the old Arkansas Rimrockers sell for less than the 2.5 million? Or would the d-league rather have SW basketball sell off it's teams? I don't know, it is curious situation, and I am just asking
Stern won't be around forever. I'd say 3 teams out of 30 buying into the d-league ownership is not a high ratio.
I'll admit my bias against the D-league lately, because all I've seen around here the last year is mismanagement, bad coaching, all wrapped up in a falling down, old,, facility better suited for monster truck pulls.
If the league is saying 2.5 million, then that is what THEY value the teams at.
Or they may have thrown the D-league team in as a bone, to the new OKC ownership, or Stern could have required this is as part of the deal.
What is being reported may or may not be accurate. The newspaper or a website journalists only reports what it may know, and the victors write history and press releases, as well as feeding the starving fish hacks and buying their loyalty.
Given SW basketball's history, would it surprise you if they had only lost 3.5 million?
SW basketball wasn't given a 4 for 1 deal. They were given a four for nothing deal.
Of which they have either sold, or depending on your viewpoint, had several taken off their hands, and had one go into hibernation, which I think may be Reno now?
Would the inactive teams in Florida or the old Arkansas Rimrockers sell for less than the 2.5 million? Or would the d-league rather have SW basketball sell off it's teams? I don't know, it is curious situation, and I am just asking
Stern won't be around forever. I'd say 3 teams out of 30 buying into the d-league ownership is not a high ratio.
I'll admit my bias against the D-league lately, because all I've seen around here the last year is mismanagement, bad coaching, all wrapped up in a falling down, old,, facility better suited for monster truck pulls.
[quote=""skippy""]Don't get me wrong. I don't think the price is going down.
If the league is saying 2.5 million, then that is what THEY value the teams at.
Or they may have thrown the D-league team in as a bone, to the new OKC ownership, or Stern could have required this is as part of the deal.
What is being reported may or may not be accurate. The newspaper or a website journalists only reports what it may know, and the victors write history and press releases, as well as feeding the starving fish hacks and buying their loyalty..[/quote]
The former Sonics are planning to go the regional route. The Spurs obtained a lot of Sponsors via Autsin after buying their D-League team. The Thunder (Sonics) owners plan to copy everything the Spurs are doing down to buying a D-League team.
[quote=""skippy""]
Given SW basketball's history, would it surprise you if they had only lost 3.5 million?
SW basketball wasn't given a 4 for 1 deal. They were given a four for nothing deal.
Of which they have either sold, or depending on your viewpoint, had several taken off their hands, and had one go into hibernation, which I think may be Reno now?..[/quote]
SW does everything on the cheap, they may have lost 800,000 in Fort Worth, 600,000 in Austin, 1.2 mil in Tulsa and 1 mil in New Mexico.
But if you factor in the fact that (Yes) SW paid for one team then sold 25% shares to local shareholders (your 4 for none), then local shareholders shared in those losses. ( total cost about .9 mil of the 3.6 mil lost).
Then SW Sold Austin 75% of 1 mil, sold 25% of Reno for 250,000 and sold Tulsa for 75% of 2.25, which = about 2.7 mil
Therefore, they are most likely about even with two teams to sell.
If the league is saying 2.5 million, then that is what THEY value the teams at.
Or they may have thrown the D-league team in as a bone, to the new OKC ownership, or Stern could have required this is as part of the deal.
What is being reported may or may not be accurate. The newspaper or a website journalists only reports what it may know, and the victors write history and press releases, as well as feeding the starving fish hacks and buying their loyalty..[/quote]
The former Sonics are planning to go the regional route. The Spurs obtained a lot of Sponsors via Autsin after buying their D-League team. The Thunder (Sonics) owners plan to copy everything the Spurs are doing down to buying a D-League team.
[quote=""skippy""]
Given SW basketball's history, would it surprise you if they had only lost 3.5 million?
SW basketball wasn't given a 4 for 1 deal. They were given a four for nothing deal.
Of which they have either sold, or depending on your viewpoint, had several taken off their hands, and had one go into hibernation, which I think may be Reno now?..[/quote]
SW does everything on the cheap, they may have lost 800,000 in Fort Worth, 600,000 in Austin, 1.2 mil in Tulsa and 1 mil in New Mexico.
But if you factor in the fact that (Yes) SW paid for one team then sold 25% shares to local shareholders (your 4 for none), then local shareholders shared in those losses. ( total cost about .9 mil of the 3.6 mil lost).
Then SW Sold Austin 75% of 1 mil, sold 25% of Reno for 250,000 and sold Tulsa for 75% of 2.25, which = about 2.7 mil
Therefore, they are most likely about even with two teams to sell.
Basketball Junkie and Rummikub Champion
