- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Winter Olympics
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Posted on 9/16/22 at 1:21 pm to Parrish
quote:
Forbes estimates $1.8B for Suns valuation.
They are about to sign new TV and right deals, plus 2 expansion franchises.
If he can hold on for 2 more years, he could double his money. Should be easy if he is suspended for a year. If he's smart, he'd do a Mia culpa, take a 2 year ban, and pay triple the fine. Shrink back from the spotlight, then sell in 3 years. It wouldn't be smart to get out now.
Bad thing right now is that there are Suns players (Booker) that might supposedly demand trades..
Posted on 9/16/22 at 2:58 pm to brmark70816
quote:
f he can hold on for 2 more years, he could double his money. Should be easy if he is suspended for a year. If he's smart, he'd do a Mia culpa, take a 2 year ban, and pay triple the fine. Shrink back from the spotlight, then sell in 3 years. It wouldn't be smart to get out now.
He won't have a choice
quote:
Bad thing right now
Is the sponsors
quote:
s that there are Suns players (Booker) that might supposedly demand trades..
That's Knicks fanfic
Posted on 9/16/22 at 3:07 pm to saintsfan22
So it looks like Sarver owns 35% of the team, based on the $1.8 Billion valuation of the team, that should be around $650M. If they are serious, buy him out for $1.0B.
Posted on 9/16/22 at 4:10 pm to whatiknowsofar
quote:
Forget all of the race stuff, if it was just the sexual misconduct stuff he should be canned/resign
Reading the stuff he's done he seems like a real life Michael Scott except it's real life so none of it is endearing to his employees like it is on a sitcom.
Posted on 9/16/22 at 4:37 pm to saintsfan22
We counting the time that he turned the GM’s office into some kind of livestock yard?
Posted on 9/16/22 at 4:49 pm to teke184
That, pulling down someone's pants in front of everybody during the ice bucket challenge just like Michael pulling down Toby's pants before the raccoon fun run, asking a woman if she got her boobs done, showing bikini pics of his wife to employees just like Michael with Jan.
Posted on 9/17/22 at 10:11 am to saintsfan22
Sarver being an idiot isn’t necessarily against the law.
And I think the league will be VERY hesitant to push this simply because the bar to pushing an owner out needs to be so high that it is about a once in a lifetime issue.
Sarver isn’t it. Sterling is an easier argument.
If the Sarver precedent stands, then the league could have forced out George Shinn in the late 90s / early 2000s, which would have meant no NOLA team, no OKC team after Katrina, no Bobcats, etc.
And I think the league will be VERY hesitant to push this simply because the bar to pushing an owner out needs to be so high that it is about a once in a lifetime issue.
Sarver isn’t it. Sterling is an easier argument.
If the Sarver precedent stands, then the league could have forced out George Shinn in the late 90s / early 2000s, which would have meant no NOLA team, no OKC team after Katrina, no Bobcats, etc.
Posted on 9/17/22 at 10:17 am to teke184
quote:I think because race is such a hot button topic today that is all we're focusing on with Sarver.
Sarver isn’t it. Sterling is an easier argument.
If you look at the totality of the shite and the sexual inappropriateness, I think you can argue that Sarver's allegations are every bit as bad as Sterling's.
Posted on 9/17/22 at 10:25 am to shel311
Sterling had a well documented history in court of his issues including losing a federal discrimination suit and being sued by numerous team employees over a long time period.
Posted on 9/17/22 at 10:46 am to teke184
quote:But that all had zero to do with the case that eventually ended with the selling of the team.
Sterling had a well documented history in court of his issues including losing a federal discrimination suit and being sued by numerous team employees over a long time period.
Feels like 99% of the Sarver discussion is around race and some of the sexual stuff is arguably much worse.
Posted on 9/17/22 at 11:28 am to teke184
quote:
Sarver being an idiot isn’t necessarily against the law.
Not against the law in that he'll be jailed but very much against the law in the way that he'd get a company sued a bunch and get fired in a normal job. Pulling an employee's pants down in front of everybody, a big no no. Telling a pregnant employee that she's not going to be able to do her job because she will have to breast feed, a big no no. Saying the n word a bunch, a big no no.
quote:
If the Sarver precedent stands, then the league could have forced out George Shinn in the late 90s / early 2000s, which would have meant no NOLA team, no OKC team after Katrina, no Bobcats, etc.
The reason Shinn left Charlotte was because their attendance cratered after his scandal with a cheerleader. The league would've definitely leaned on him to sell rather than move nowadays.
This post was edited on 9/17/22 at 11:30 am
Posted on 9/17/22 at 12:12 pm to saintsfan22
Shinn had a lawsuit of some kind which got ugly outside of the cheerleader incident IIRC.
Either way, he was a pariah in Charlotte and looked to move in order to keep the team. The league forcing a sale rather than allowing the move would have major effects on the whole league between players and other things involved.
Baron Davis, CP3, AD, and Zion clearly have altered careers at a least. All of those guys are or were superstars who were highly drafted, so their movements would have impacted competitiveness in the league for various teams.
OKC doesn’t end up with a team due to Katrina proving they could pull it off, which potentially impacts the careers of Durant, Westbrook, Harden, and others. It also means Seattle likely doesn’t lose the Sonics, though not guaranteed if the ownership situation were still in flux.
Charlotte keeping the Hornets means no reason to expand with the Bobcats, which means likely no opportunity for Michael Jordan to buy the team. If the Hornets ownership were stable after about 2000 or so and MJ didn’t have the money yet, he doesn’t have an opportunity to buy the team when Robert Johnson sells.
Either way, he was a pariah in Charlotte and looked to move in order to keep the team. The league forcing a sale rather than allowing the move would have major effects on the whole league between players and other things involved.
Baron Davis, CP3, AD, and Zion clearly have altered careers at a least. All of those guys are or were superstars who were highly drafted, so their movements would have impacted competitiveness in the league for various teams.
OKC doesn’t end up with a team due to Katrina proving they could pull it off, which potentially impacts the careers of Durant, Westbrook, Harden, and others. It also means Seattle likely doesn’t lose the Sonics, though not guaranteed if the ownership situation were still in flux.
Charlotte keeping the Hornets means no reason to expand with the Bobcats, which means likely no opportunity for Michael Jordan to buy the team. If the Hornets ownership were stable after about 2000 or so and MJ didn’t have the money yet, he doesn’t have an opportunity to buy the team when Robert Johnson sells.
Posted on 9/18/22 at 7:18 am to teke184
The league didn’t force the clippers owner to sell
Posted on 9/20/22 at 8:31 pm to Spitting Venom
quote:
such weird wording for an owner
Can you resign from owning a house
I agree with your general premise, but there are significant differences re: thsi analogy:
1. As per a couple of years ago, there are no longer "owners" in the NBA, after statements by black players saying "owners" were too akin to a slavery situation. League leadership caved; now calls them "governors".
2. You buy a house, you buy a business, and own it outright. You must be vetted and approved by other owners to purchase one of only 30 (thirty) FRANCHISES in the NBA. It is a limited and exclusive cabal or cartel.
3. The NBA, along with the other major leagues, have unionized talent, and have moved to more of a "partnership" model, often with pre-agreed sharing of profits. Players are far from being considered "employees" anymore.
4. Sarver does not own all of the team; he does not even own a majority of it (50%+). He is the largest shareholder, at about 35% and could be forced out by a coalition of the rest of the franchise's owners.
Posted on 9/21/22 at 11:39 am to TigerinATL
Looks like it worked. Sarver is looking for buyers during his year hiatus.
Posted on 9/21/22 at 12:02 pm to 50_Tiger
His statement sounds so bitter. Suns fans are excited but I can see Sarver trying to torpedo the thing by selling to the least NBA acceptable new owner.
It may be difficult to find someone that wants to drop that much money and not be a majority owner. Seems like it'd suck to drop near $1B and not be able to call the shots.
It may be difficult to find someone that wants to drop that much money and not be a majority owner. Seems like it'd suck to drop near $1B and not be able to call the shots.
Posted on 9/21/22 at 12:21 pm to 50_Tiger
quote:
"As a man of faith, I believe in atonement and the path to forgiveness," Sarver said in a statement Wednesday. "I expected that the commissioner's one-year suspension would provide the time for me to focus, make amends and remove my personal controversy from the teams that I and so many fans love.
"But in our current unforgiving climate, it has become painfully clear that that is no longer possible -- that whatever good I have done, or could still do, is outweighed by things I have said in the past. For those reasons, I am beginning the process of seeking buyers for the Suns and Mercury."
Posted on 9/21/22 at 12:42 pm to cgrand
quote:
by things I have said in the past.
And done. Like pantsing an employee in front of 60 of his peers
Popular
Back to top


1





