NBA team soon to be formerly known as the Sonics...

You hit the nail on the head, Dio. The only way Clay misrepresented himself is if they only planned to bring the team to OKC, even if an arena deal emerged. Plans to ultimately re-sell the team after performing (securing an arena deal and a longterm lease), if Seattle allowed them to perform, are immaterial.

 

That's why Aubrey's comments of last year were more damaging than any of these e-mails. I suspect that all along he basically just wanted and wanted to dispense with all of the bull****. Unfortunately, that would have constituted a breach, and Clay knew it.

Not to mention that Clay was probably more interested in the profit potential of staying in Seattle than Aubrey was. Not that Clay needs money, but there is a world of difference in the net worth of both men.

 

Here is what I am saying.

Clay said that he wanted to keep the team in Seattle. Clay did not actually want to keep the team in Seattle. This is a lie. Lies are bad.

 

And all I am saying is: We'll never know if he was lying or not, because condition #1 in this whole deal was a new arena, and that never happened. He would have left that team in Seattle if the city/state built the arena, and used his huge profits from the sale of the Sonics to get a different team for OKC.

 

What I'm saying is, where is the proof that he did not actually want to keep the team in Seattle? Jeebus. IF THEY BUILD AN ARENA IN SEATTLE, THEY MAKE A "NICE FLIP." THE TEAM STAYS IN SEATTLE UNDER THOSE CIRCUMSTANCES! What is so difficult to understand about that???!?

It is most certainly NOT a lie. HOW IN THE HELL IS IT A LIE??!!? It's not even a shaded truth.

 

And I would say that based on the e-mail that was EXACTLY what he intended to do. At the very least, the first part of it, meaning new arena = team stays in Seattle and Clay & Co. then sell for huge profit. It's a very, very simple and basic business transaction, and it is not dishonest, immoral, or "bad."

 

If anything, the e-mail proves that he actually was willing to keep the team in Seattle with a new arena, instead of only planning to move, as some have suggested. That e-mail actually PROVES good faith on his part.

 

The City of Seattle gave me a kidney once.

 

Here is the lie. It really is simple.

What Bennet says: "I really want to keep the team in Seattle. If I can't then I will take the team to Oklahoma City"
What Bennet believes: "I really want to take the team to Oklahoma City. If I can't I will keep the team in Seattle and sell it."

Aubrey flat out said they bought the team to bring it to Oklahoma City.

Bennett told Aubrey and Ward before the sale that, the good faith agreement to try to get an arena isn't a problem. Because even if they do they will just sell the team and try again to get a team to Oklahoma.

Do you not understand that what Clay and the ownership group really wants and has always wanted is to get the team in Oklahoma City?

 

it's to get A team to OKC

if the area thing went through, they'd sell. that's apparently been pretty upfront the whole time.

the good faith thing is that he tried. he tried enough to keep his side of the bargain.

 

Fixed, but yermom beat me to it.

Clay said he'd try to get an arena built up there, but he never once said he'd own the team forever.

 

Read this article about Howard Schultz before he sold the team to Clay Bennett, and tell me who's lying.

If Schultz couldn't get anything done in his own city in 2 years, how can he say Bennett didn't act in "good faith" when he ran into the exact same roadblocks Schultz did?

 

Schultz has lied worse than Bennett ever did. And from the motion Bennett filed against Seattle, it sounds like he has proof that Seattle makes everyone else look like total angels in comparison.

 

There is NO EVIDENCE of this. Total speculation on your part. Where's the proof? He said he would give a good faith effort to getting an arena, and he did. He spent a ****load of money on said effort. SEATTLE is the entity that made no good faith effort, WHATSOEVER. And if you read Dio's above link, from 2006, it's obvious that was their mindset from the beginning. Absolute arrogance, complete refusal to even consider making things better for investors who were taking a bloodbath. In fact, they didn't even try to conceal their indifference and contempt. Clay walked into a buzzsaw of "we don't give a **** about you or your problems... ...or your team."

Do you not recognize that different partners may have had different goals? Aubrey has a track record of getting whatever he wants by paying sometimes outlandish prices. He wanted a team in OKC, even if it was a financial loser to bring it here. Aubrey is a billionaire four times over. $50 million (his investment) doesn't really mean that much to him. It means a hell of a lot more to Clay and to some of the other investors. Sure, Clay is really freaking rich. But not Oprah rich, like Aubrey. If Clay could be part of a $200 million net flip and still get a team here eventually (the prevailing thought at the time was that the Hornets go bankrupt in NOLA, which could still happen), he probably would do it.

There were/are a number of investors in this deal, and it's entirely possible that each and every one had slightly different personal goals. That's the nature of business partnerships. Aubrey made an unfortunate comment, but that doesn't mean that's the way Clay or even the rest of the members felt.

The way that LLC most likely worked is that they set Clay up to run the business (nothing against Clay, but he probably had more time to run a basketball team than they did), gave him some directions ("Clay, we trust you to do the right thing and use your NBA experience to help us eventually get a team here, and hopefully make some money, maybe not in that order... ...now we've got multibillion dollar corporations to run, just keep us posted on the progress...").

Like others have said, to get A team to Oklahoma City. A team. Clay was empowered by his partners to do as he saw fit. If he got an arena deal done, they made a crapload on the flip, and were still first in line for the next team (which was likely to be the Hornets, or the Grizzlies, or an expansion, or whatever), it would still make them happy. They knew that they would still get a team here, eventually.

Nobody has EVER denied that one of their biggest longterm goals was to get a team to OKC. They even mentioned that during the purchase, saying it would get their foot in the door in the league, and allow them to help bring a team here at some point. THEY SAID IT MORE THAN ONCE, IN PUBLIC VENUES, FERCRYINOUTLOUD!

They knew that if they got the deal done to save the Seattle market, David Stern would be incredibly indebted to them (especially in light of their support of the Hornets while they were in OKC). An eventual team relocation or expansion to OKC would be a foregone conclusion at that point, with the same investors on board. The only variable would be when.

 

I keep reading this incredulously. What the hell is the problem with this? "If we get the arena deal done, we flip the team, make an assload of money, and are really well positioned to jump on the next opportunity to bring a team to OKC."

If the chips fell in whichever direction, they were willing to roll with it, with the faith that they could turn it into a positive for them and/or for their community.

It wasn't a huge gamble for them. They knew that ultimately they could/would get a team in OKC; they were just biding their time and trying to make money/gain experience in the interim.

 

I haven't figured out if skipster doesn't want to see the situation for what it is, or just can't see it for what it is.

I'm about ready to lean to the third camp which is that Starbucks is a high priority in skip's life, either that or he worships at the altar of lackofcojones bayless.

 

Schultz has NO CHANCE, NO CHANCE...

 

Nobody in Seattle seemed to care as much when they thought the team might relocate to Las Vegas or Kansas City, but when OKC was announced as the destination of choice those Frasier Crane wannabes got their panties all in a wad about how big of a market they had and how OKC was so inferior and that is when the legal **** hit the fan.
I also find the hypocrisy of politicians accusing some one of telling half truths and having hidden agendas to be extremely funny.

 

Or it could be that he's getting his jollies antagonizing BRJ into replying ad infinitum to his contrarian nonsense.


That's why I say when it comes to this thread:
[youtube]6IpHHtl8gC4[/youtube]