One Of Kings' Original Sacramento Owners' 7 Percent Stake In Team Up In Air
Bob Cook was one of the original investors who helped bring the Kings to Sacramento. He's an area developer, and currently* owns a 7-percent stake in the team. Why the asterisk? Because he could be losing the stake via bankruptcy. From the Sacramento Bee:
Cook's financial troubles stem from the construction of Le Rivage, the upscale hotel he opened on the Sacramento River in 2008. The hotel defaulted on its debt last year, and Cook filed for Chapter 11 personal bankruptcy protection in August.
Ramping up the financial pressure, one of his creditors is trying to drag into Bankruptcy Court the partnership through which Cook holds his Kings ownership stake. [...]
Cook put up his Kings stake as security when he borrowed $10 million from Omni four years ago, according to court records. He defaulted on the debt, which now totals $13 million.
Cook denies that the stake in the Kings can be seized in bankruptcy proceedings, so it'll be interesting to see how this shakes out. (Another creditor is also laying claim to the stake; check the story for details.) Anyone have $13 million laying around? If Cook really wanted to keep the Kings in Sacramento, perhaps he'd sell that stake and his debt to Darius Anderson or Ron Burkle. Just a thought.
29 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Ugh
Silver lining: I have little confidence in the Maloofs’ abilities to pull together $13 million.
In most polarizing arguments, the truth is found somewhere in the middle.
Follow me on Twitter
Author of Inside-Out Game
If Burkle was really interested in the Kings
this would be a fairly easy starting point for him.
by wallywagon11 on Oct 31, 2011 7:10 AM PDT reply actions 2 recs
Once he has his foot in the door,
he’ll be all:

"We're not talking about me and Darko in the same sentence." - Chris Webber vs KAHN!
by caseycheesecake on Oct 31, 2011 7:48 AM PDT up reply actions 5 recs
Would they?
That can’t be decided by Cook himself?
Author of NBA Mashups. Follow me on Twitter here.
There could be.
But that is not the way it hardly ever happens, ever. If you think about the word “partnership,” it has a trust element associated with it. And because of that, partners always have a say in who they will be in business with.
/ Wondering if I should change my signature
An StR contingent as a minority partner?
Over time, we can slowly buy out the remaining partners until we’re in charge.
The only thing left to decide is who would do what in the organization (coach, GM, feeding grapes to Pookey, etc.)
Be careful what you wish for
![]()
No mistakes in the tango, Donna. Not like life. Simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get all tangled up, you just tango on.....
by pookeyguru on Oct 31, 2011 10:17 AM PDT up reply actions 3 recs
On the plus side
The Rancor has a mean left hook.

by wallywagon11 on Oct 31, 2011 11:32 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
What does this mean?
As a minority partner would you have any say in anything team related? Relocation? Personnel decisions? ANYTHING?
by Mityt on Oct 31, 2011 8:12 AM PDT via mobile reply actions
No
Check the story. Cook even says (or is quoted from previous stories, rather) saying that Gavin Maloof wouldn’t even give him details on the Anaheim negotiations. He can’t even get info, let alone power.
Being a minority partner makes no difference whether one is in the "know."
Being a minority partner means they do not have controlling interest themselves, but a bunch of minority partners can become a majority together. The issue is whether the partnership is member or manager managed. If it is manager managed the owners pay someone to manage the business, and that person makes all of the decisions. If it is member managed, general partners manage the business, while limited partners do not and are not in the “know.”
Cook is a minority owner, who must also be a limited partner, since he does not have say in the running of the business or have knowledge of situations.
/ Wondering if I should change my signature
Remember that the Maloofs bought a minority stake in the team a year before they took over majority ownership
And 13 million for 7% would be a huge discount.
Sad to hear about Cook though, one of the original owners that brought the Kings here.
Is he the same guy that owns the Cook Hardware on Del Paso Blvd?
/ Wondering if I should change my signature
Jeez
Cook listed assets of $858,000 and debts of $48.3 million.
Author of NBA Mashups. Follow me on Twitter here.
no chance in hell Cook only has $858,000 in assets
by wallywagon11 on Oct 31, 2011 10:13 AM PDT up reply actions
I'm guessing that is some of the same creative accounting
That shows most NBA teams are losing money.
by otis29 on Oct 31, 2011 10:14 AM PDT up reply actions 5 recs
Somebody wasn't reconciling his checkbook at the end of the month
SACTOWN ROYALTY - Try our thick creamy shakes!
by section214 on Oct 31, 2011 10:52 AM PDT up reply actions 2 recs
Trying to be clever and listing revenue-generating operations, which I’m sure he has, as debts. Once he gets his debt wiped free, he’ll still be making loads of money. If this is true, he’s a scumbag that we owe a lot to for bringing the Kings here.
I have an in-law who does the same thing every 10 years or so with regards to bankruptcy.
"We're not talking about me and Darko in the same sentence." - Chris Webber vs KAHN!
by caseycheesecake on Oct 31, 2011 11:43 AM PDT up reply actions
This is one of our allies
but we can’t let the stake fall into the wrong hands.
"Victory goes to the player who makes the next-to-last mistake."
- Chessmaster Savielly Grigorievitch Tartakower

by 














