Other teams on the decline include the Indiana Pacers and Sacramento Kings, which both saw their...

Other teams on the decline include the Indiana Pacers and Sacramento Kings, which both saw their values drop 9% this year. Both teams were model small-market NBA franchises for years, with passionate fan bases and winning squads. The Kings sold out every game from 1999 until last year's opener.

But attendance fell off a cliff last season, down 18% as the team stumbled and fans grew tired of the Maloof brothers' pleas for public money to fund a new arena for their team.

Forbe's Annual "Business of Basketball" Package

about 3 years ago Tom Ziller 14 comments 0 recs |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Direct link

Direct link the Kings’ numbers

So glad they used the photo of é holding Q and shoving his hand into his shorts.

by Tom Ziller on Dec 3, 2008 3:15 PM PST reply actions

Douby often has that effect on people

Never forget: I am a complete idiot

by Exhibit G on Dec 3, 2008 4:05 PM PST up reply actions

Not me.

I put my hand to my forehead. Or stomach.

Let's go home.-Kevin Martin

by LeaguePassAddict on Dec 3, 2008 4:15 PM PST up reply actions 2 recs

Or use both

to cover your eyes

by misterbrister on Dec 3, 2008 4:18 PM PST up reply actions 2 recs

nice

Rec’s for both LPA and misterbrister

Never forget: I am a complete idiot

by Exhibit G on Dec 3, 2008 4:21 PM PST up reply actions

it's this dilemma

that makes me think that the Maloof’s impatience may make them keen to fast-track the rebuilding by pulling the pin on a bigger trade earlier. (maybe even trading away some good youth).

i hope this does not happen, but it would not surprise me.

by thisismellow on Dec 3, 2008 3:55 PM PST reply actions

200 million(paper money) in the 10 years they’ve owned the team just on increased team value. If I read it right that’s an 8% return. Very nice. And we’re number 16 in the league with an income of 7 million a year. It would seem to me that the team is still doing well for the Maloofs even in these tough economic times.

Seems to me that if they still made money last season with the declining attendance and the team payroll flirting with the luxury tax, that the team is solid financially. Even if they have to absorb a couple of seasons in the red, while the team gets it’s cap situation in order and gets back to winning and thus gets its attendance back up, a couple of years of minor losses won’t put a dent in the massive profit they’ve generated over the last 10 years.

Ball movement ... is like jogging for most people: They do it occasionally, and it makes them happy. Then they go back to not doing it. - Henry Abbott

by Kfan in Korea on Dec 3, 2008 4:09 PM PST reply actions

Didn't mean (paper money)

should have been (paper profit) or (on paper).

Ball movement ... is like jogging for most people: They do it occasionally, and it makes them happy. Then they go back to not doing it. - Henry Abbott

by Kfan in Korea on Dec 3, 2008 4:12 PM PST up reply actions

Yes franchise value went up

The Franchise value went from $156M to $350M, but the overall profit for the last 10yrs was $53M. That put their return at 160 percent of the original investment over 10 yrs. Assuming that they could actually find someone willing to pay them $350M for the franchise.

Still rich people don’t like to lose, so looking ahead to the 08/09 seasons earnings probably doesn’t make the boys too happy. They pobably anticapate having to give up some of their play thing when mama maloof finds out that they lose their lunch money again.

"If you don't have anything good to say, LIE" - Mom

by HighTops on Dec 3, 2008 6:25 PM PST up reply actions

No body likes to lose

It’s still a good investment, even with a couple of down years on the horizon. It’s not like they invested in real estate.

Ball movement ... is like jogging for most people: They do it occasionally, and it makes them happy. Then they go back to not doing it. - Henry Abbott

by Kfan in Korea on Dec 3, 2008 8:30 PM PST up reply actions

I dont feel one ounce of sympathy for them

Billionaires can cry on their next billion for all I care.

No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. It's simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get tangled, you tango on

by pookeyguru on Dec 4, 2008 10:09 AM PST up reply actions

Oddly enough..

The fact that Sacramento does not have a new arena could work in their favor. True, they don’t have any big fancy arena with tons of luxury boxes. Yes, they lose out on some good revenue streams by not having these.

However, they’re playing in a building that is 20 years old. Unless they refinanced that puppy, it’s most likely paid for, or very close to it. In a down economy, I can imagine it being very nice to not have any mortgage payments on the books. Large fixed costs are very detrimental to any kind of company in a down economy.

Seems like an interesting catch-22. No huge ticket sales coming in, but no huge lease on the books, either.

by misterbrister on Dec 3, 2008 4:23 PM PST reply actions

Even so...

I think the Maloofs still owe the city of Sacramento something like $60 million on a low-interest loan from awhile back. They could just fork over one month’s profit from the Palms and call it even.

Rocks are free, and slingshots easily stolen.

by andy sims on Dec 3, 2008 7:57 PM PST up reply actions

Not in this economy...

The Palms and the rest of Vegas is being hit hard and it’s only going to get worse. At this point, any concerns about the Kings is probably greatly trumped by their investments in Vegas (which I would also guess are carrying a much higher debt load).

by cabz on Dec 4, 2008 1:40 PM PST up reply actions