HUGE NEWS! Clay Bennett & Co. buy Supersonics!

[Karried]

Hotrod lives in Seattle ...

[Watson410]

haha yeah? where you not aware of that Karried?

[Karried]

Whats this "real life" thing you speak of?

lol, yes I was aware of that .. I was answering ouadonis in case he wasn't aware of it... maybe I didn't understand his question either.. wouldn't surprise me...

I'm giddy with excitement!

[Karried]

From the Seattle Supersonics.com:

Excerpts From Clay Bennett’s Press Conference

Excerpts from the news conference Friday:

ON THE STORM'S FUTURE:
“The Seattle Storm will play their games in Seattle next year. We’ve seen enormous support for the Storm come through the office, and we truly believe that the Storm is a tremendous asset. We’re very pleased we could make that announcement today. We’re looking forward to having a competitive season next year.”

IN RESPONSE TO THE MUCKLESHOOT STUDY:
“I first and foremost want to say we are very appreciative of the leadership of the Muckleshoot Tribe. I’ve had the chance to meet them on a couple of occasions, and I find them to be a very impressive group of business people. They’ve been highly successful and we look forward to continuing our discussions. We will fully evaluate their proposal and stay engaged with them.”

“We have also received other proposals. We fully evaluate those as well. I will say that all proposals are wrought with political challenges and they’re certainly going to present financial challenges.”


ARBITRATION FILING:

“In an effort to bring some clarity as to where we are relative to our lease, we believe it’s time to take some formal action and find the legal determination as to certain elements of the lease. This morning we have filed for a ruling through the arbitration process, by which we hope to find some clarity, or more understanding, of the elements of our lease document. As we approach the Oct. 31 deadline, we’ve seen nothing tangible, we’ve seen nothing come together that is formal, legal or binding that would suggest the development of an arena. Given the tenor of the city in enforcing and demanding that we play in KeyArena for the next three years and given the city’s retention of a highly-respected former U.S. Senator and given their efforts in their own statement of ‘lawyering up,’ we believe it is time to engage.

Further, we believe it does not make sense to stand and wait and watch the clock strike twelve on Oct. 31. It’s clear that we need to make things happen and get more engaged in advance of that deadline. KeyArena is not a viable NBA arena. A renovated KeyArena is not a viable NBA arena. I understand the timing of this legal filing is in advance of Oct. 31.

I want to be very clear that we remain absolutely committed to engage in the same process that would bring about the development of a new building. This is absolute consistent with our original commitment to the selling group, the NBA and the public at-large. We have been consistent about the perimeters and the framework of this acquisition. The franchise will not remain in this marketplace without a new arena. We will not break the lease. We will operate within the legal perimeters set forth in the document, which we now hope will be more clearly defined, and with the guidance of the NBA commissioner and the other owners.

I’ve said previously that we were going to move the date of the actual filing of our relocation application off of Nov. 1, which I’ve previously stated. This is an effort to move it away from the opening of our season.

Hopefully this will give a platform for our team, our coaches and our entire organization to launch a positive year. There is no new time or date set, except to say that we are developing our application, and we will file.

We’ve also been made aware that there is interest in local investors acquiring the team.

The teams are not for sale. We remain bullish on the NBA for many, many reasons, notwithstanding our current operating challenges which are tied to playing in an unworkable facility.

I want to speak to our most important constituency: our fans, season ticket holders and our courageous sponsors. This is the first year that we’ve really had an imprint on this team and we’re very excited about the season. We have a dynamic mix of young and dynamic players, a first-rate coaching staff and a basketball staff led by Sam Presti and P.J. Carlesimo. You’ll see a disciplined, hard working, smart team on the floor working hard every day to get better. We are committed to providing the ultimate basketball entertainment and social experience to our fans. We will provide solid and meaningful value for our sponsors and marketing partners.

I want to close and reiterate with what I think are the important points. Our action today sends a signal of urgency and will serve as a catalyst to bring leadership together to find a solution.

We will engage in any realistic, leadership-driven opportunities that come our way. Nothing has changed in our commitment on July 18, 2006.

If we can reach an acceptable lease agreement with a new arena facility, the Sonics and Storm are here for a very long time.

If a commitment for a new building is not realized, we will evaluate our options, which will include relocation. We are seriously committed to finding an answer in this marketplace.

We stand ready to engage with our professional consultants and anyone we can bring to the table that can assist in the development of a workable plan.

But we cannot stay at KeyArena. I implore leadership – elected leadership, business leadership, civic leadership and people of influence who can move this thing forward – please, come to the table. Let’s talk.


document.write("E-mail this story");

[Kerry]

Someone just tell me when I am supposed to sign up for NBA League Pass on DirectTv.

[Pete]

Ooooooh, this is starting to look good:

*************************************


Fri September 21, 2007

Bennett asks for arbitration to get out of lease


From staff reports

SEATTLE — Sonics owner Clay Bennett has asked for an arbitration panel to rule his team can get out of its arena lease and relocate after the coming season, most likely to Oklahoma City.

In a news conference on Friday, Bennett had a grim assessment of the state of the Sonics. The Oklahoma City businessman has set an Oct. 31 deadline for a new arena deal to be in place for the NBA franchise. If that deadline isn't met, relocation is the alternative.

"As we approach the Oct. 31 deadline, we've seen nothing tangible,” Sonics chairman and Oklahoma City businessman Clay Bennett said Friday, referring to movement toward a new, $500 million building and the deadline he created after the team filed a demand for arbitration with the American Arbitration Association this week.

"It's not working at all today here,” said Bennett, who has estimated his Oklahoma City-based ownership group lost $20 million running the team for the first time last season.

"We have significant cash loss. Our sales are way off ... just compared to what is happening with the Mariners and the Seahawks.

"The business model today, where we are, cannot continue.”

But could the team survive in Oklahoma City? Bennett thinks so.

"I absolutely know the team can survive and be profitable in Oklahoma City,” Bennett said. "The Ford Center (there) is quite adequate — but another building would be needed in the future.

"I can tell you there is high interest in bringing the NBA to Oklahoma City.”

Bennett, whose group bought the Sonics and WNBA's Storm for $350 million in 2006, said he hopes to have a decision from a three-member arbitration panel by January. That would then give Seattle's NBA team since 1967 time to file for relocation with the NBA for the 2008-09 season. Teams must file for relocation with the league by March 1 for the following season.

Seattle Deputy Mayor Tim Ceis has said the city will continue to enforce the lease at KeyArena, which runs through 2010. NBA commissioner David Stern has called the lease the league's worst.

Ceis acknowledged both sides could agree to amend their agreement and permit a buyout.

The Sonics say the cost of such a buyout is contained in the lease, though they haven't determined an exact price tag yet pending the arbitrators' ruling. The figure would presumably cover revenue lost to the city should the Sonics leave before 2010.

Bennett said his Oklahoma City-based ownership will keep the Storm in Seattle for one more season, through next summer, but that his preference is to keep the two teams together beyond that.

He also said he intends to remain "engaged” with the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe, which funded a just-completed feasibility study that said an arena could prosper on tribe-owned land in Auburn, 25 miles south of Seattle. But Bennett again said Friday that he was concerned about the site's relative remoteness and the traffic issues surrounding it.

Bennett also said he has been approached by potential investors with other proposals — some of which he wasn't sure were earnest and valid. He said neither the Sonics or the Storm is for sale, though he acknowledged he's fielded some inquiries from Seattle-area business people about potentially buying the teams.

[Karried]

The New York Times



September 22, 2007

Sonics Explore Options

By AGENCE FRANCE-PRESSE

Clay Bennett, the Seattle SuperSonics’ owner, filed paperwork to have an arbitrator rule on whether the club could escape the last two years of its arena lease and relocate.

The team has sought construction of a new home arena and Bennett is from Oklahoma City, which drew rave reviews as a temporary home for the Hornets after Hurricane Katrina devastated New Orleans.

A deadline for having a new arena deal is set for Oct. 31, the day the N.B.A. season opens.

[metro]

Funny how the Seattle Times still won't admit that the team will go to Oklahoma City if it relocates. They like to use the term "most likely OKC" instead of if an agreement isn't reached they WILL move to OKC. They can't stand the fact they might lose the team to OKC. Their writers still mention KC and Vegas as possibilities.

[SouthsideSooner]

and Seattle fires back......


Seattle sues to hold Sonics to lease
By Seattle Times staff

Seattle officials announced this morning that they have filed a lawsuit in King County Superior Court today in an attempt to force the Sonics to continue playing at KeyArena through 2010.

The lawsuit also seeks to block the Sonics' attempt to move the fight to arbitration, a legal tactic team owners announced last week.

The city's lawsuit is also seeking attorney fees from the team. A press conference is under way this morning.

Sonics owner Clay Bennett on Friday filed a demand for arbitration, seeking to get out of the final two years of the Sonics' KeyArena lease.

Bennett said he wants a panel of impartial arbitrators to "bring some clarity" to the lease — specifically on the question of whether the Sonics simply can pay a cash settlement to leave KeyArena before the lease expires in 2010.

Bennett said his arbitration demand, filed by the Seattle law firm Byrnes & Keller, was a response to increasingly hostile statements by Seattle officials, who have vowed to bind the Sonics to KeyArena until the team's lease ends in September 2010. He cited Seattle Deputy Mayor Tim Ceis' recent comment that the city was "lawyering up" by enlisting former Sen. Slade Gorton to help enforce the KeyArena lease.

With the filing of today's lawsuit, the city appears to have officially hired Gorton's law firm, K&L Gates, to work on the lease dispute. The city already has requested setting aside $1 million in next year's budget for legal fees.

Bennett has said that even a renovated KeyArena "is a dead end."


Local News | Seattle sues to hold Sonics to lease | Seattle Times Newspaper

[Karried]

Here we go again.. reminds me of the Hornets... back and forth, back and forth.. unfortunately, the outcome of that exchange wasn't one I wanted to have happened but I understand and accept that they needed to go Home ( as hard as it was).

This is different in a lot of ways.. but not the way in which the fans attack our city and residents.

That's sad... all the insults and stereotype bashing you can possibly imagine come out.

I just want it to be over.

[betts]

Perhaps the lawsuit will work, but it seems to me that the key player in all of this is David Stern, who's not said a word about the Seattle situation in months. He can recommend a franchise move to the BOG or use his considerable influence to try and block it. He wasn't very complimentary to the city of Seattle when he did last say something. By being the aggressor when they refuse to build a new arena, Seattle may not be improving their case with Stern. Far better to have sat back, had your lawyers look at the lease to see if it even allowed mediation and whined to Stern that Clay wasn't playing nicely. Of course there's always the possibility that he is pulling all the strings, and the lawsuit was at his behest, but it seems unlikely right now.

[Kerry]

Suing somone for something that hasn't happened yet? Isn't this putting the lawer before the ambulance, so to speak. On what possible grounds could the City of Seattle possible bring forth a lawsuit? Don't be surprised if this gets thrown out of court.

[PUGalicious]

Suing somone for something that hasn't happened yet? Isn't this putting the lawer before the ambulance, so to speak. On what possible grounds could the City of Seattle possible bring forth a lawsuit? Don't be surprised if this gets thrown out of court.

Is that your professional legal opinion?

[CuatrodeMayo]

I believe you can sue if the breach of contract is eminent. Mid?

[Pete]

All they can do is try and get damages for a breeched contract once that comes to pass.

It's exactly the same as trying to arbitrate a lease buy-out, just from the other side of the table.

They can't force the team to play in the building any more than a landlord can force a tenant to live in an apartment. What they can do is litigate for damages... In other words, a buy-out of the agreement.


All of this has been attempted in the past when cities are certain their local team is going to flee. And to my knowledge, those teams have all left anyway and merely paid some sort of settlement.

[Kerry]

Is that your professional legal opinion?

Yes it is. I am in the process of reading the lease between the City of Seattle and SSI (the original lease signer) and I see a way out of the entire lease and I didn't have to get any further than the Where As clauses. The City of Seattle promised to build an new facility (the word New emphasized each time). However, they did not build a new facility that would have cost several hundred million dollars. They renovated the existing facility for $78 million. The City broke the original lease when they didn't build a new arena as promised. If anything, the Sonics should sue the city for not providing the facility the City promised.

For those interested, Articale XXVI cleary states that Sonics can simply walk away and only owe the city an unpaid rent through the remainder of the contract.
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/ABP...2003899710.pdf

In fact, the entire Seattle lawsuit is based on Articale II that relates to definitions. It doesn't matter because by exercising Articale XXVI, the entire contract becomes void.

[betts]

Below is a slightly different case. MLB wanted to contract by eliminating two teams, and it was pretty well known, although not announced, that the Twins and Montreal were those two teams. The below injunction kept the Twins from being eliminated as a team through 2003, and of course ultimately neither team was disbanded although the Expos are now the Nats. I don't know if that could be considered a legal precedent for the Sonics or not

"The primary road block to eliminating the Twins was their lease at the Metrodome, extended by the team in September through the 2002 season.

The Metropolitan Sports Facilities Commission, which operates the Metrodome, sued to force the Twins to honor their lease, and Hennepin County District Judge Harry Seymour Crump issued the injunction on Nov. 16. The Minnesota Court of Appeals upheld the order Jan. 22 in a 3-0 vote."

[Kerry]

Baseball is different than Basketball when it comes to legality. This is because MLB was granted an anti-trust exemption for being the national pastime. This is why baseball players testify before congress for steroid use but other sports don't.

[HOT ROD]

Guys, I was going to post this on the Seattle Times forum, but I figure - why the hell should I Help These Idiot Elitists out here - Seattle dug its own hole.

But in reality, KERRY IS RIGHT!!! The Lease Promises a NEW SEATTLE CENTER COLUSEUM was to be built, NOT A REMODEL!!!

I think Bennett DOES know what he's doing and SURELY - he should win. I think he might even try to move the Sonics this season, given the city's recent moves and the fact that the fanbase is surely gone now.

Oh Boy, Seattle think's they are soooo smart - yet the lawyers DONT EVEN properly cite the lease when they make their lawsuit claims (they say they agreed with the Sonics to rebuild the Coluseum - but NOWHERE in the lease does it say REBUILD, it says NEW!!!!!)

Can anyone here make sure Bennett and his crownies are aware of this ridiculous lease (Seattle prospective, since the city in fact did not deliver on the terms)??!!

Below is what I was GOING to post on the SeaTimes - now, the only way those idiot fans will find it is if they have the blz to thumb through OKCTalk and find this thread. Ha ha ha.

OKC definitely is not being used as a pawn this time!!!

Guys, a couple of things has me worried:

1) if you read the lease, it says that :"the city of Seattle shall build a NEW Seattle Center Coluseum"

and

2) if a breach of contract, typically the defendant is required to pay damages, NOT BE FORCED TO PLAY AT KEY ARENA

3) Clay Bennett sought to have the lease reviewed for arbitration of the duration, not necessarily a breach yet like before - the city is over-reacting with its rear end, further giving the middle finger to Stern and the NBA (instead of acting like the victim and pleading to him for support, which we probably might have got).

I dont see how Seattle will win this one. It might actually help Bennett move the team this year - if he can get a ruling soon and get the thumbs up from the BOG. Some of you think this wont happen, due to our "magical status or something" but I say

Stern and the BOG let Bennett buy the Sonics for a reason. They know him WELL and I believe he was approved unanimously (even our HERO who owns the Seahawks); they knew Stern's position on Seattle AND knew Bennett's desire for a team in OKC.

Regardless of the padding or whatever regarding the Hornets as far as butts in the seats, over 17,500 tickets were sold for a team that wasn't OKC's for two years - and this caught the eye of Stern and the NBA placing OKC at the top of the list.

OKC has an immediate solution available for the Sonics and this lease is NOT iron clad at making the Sonics play at Key Arena. Like was mentioned earlier, the lease states a "new Seattle Center Coluseum" to be built - NOT A REMODEL AND RENAME which did happen. ...

This has me worried from a fan prospective, the city got a fast one on the Sonics by remodeling the Coluseum but in fact - that very lease says specifically that a new one was to be built. NO WHERE DOES IT SAY THAT THE SONICS ACCEPTED THE REBUILT COLUSEUM AS FULFILLING THE TERMS - I think this IS Bennett's way out

and he might not even have to pay a dime. Not only that, but because of the city's recent moves; I BET that Bennett will announce the Sonics will play in OKC this year!!!

[HOT ROD]

I encourage all OKCians to read the lease from the link Kerry provided. Get past the Seattle lawsuit mumbo-jumbo crap (they are just crying like babies) and get to Exhibit A which is the lease.

In all honesty, this really makes Seattle look stupid and NOT like the so-called intelligent billionaire yuppies that the MEDIA makes us all out to be.

OKC, when the Sonics/Bennett does come DONT make the same mistake of this lease. Get a sweetheart deal between the city and Bennett which ensures a long lasting (ie forever) LOCAL relationship that will forever place OKC in the minds of the populous of the world!!!

And none of this Seattle so-called "major league" bantering and posturing!!!

[Kerry]

Hot Rod - I am now posting on the Seattle times site under OKC2008. I tried to use my name but someone already had it. Here is the only problem I see with the New arena statment in the preamble. The Sonics paid rent to play in a remodled arena. It makes it hard for that argument to stick when the Sonics apparently approved of it by paying rent. Now that is not to say the current owners are under the same obligation as the former owners. Just because a previous owner chose not enforce the "New" clause doesn't necessarly obligte Bennett and Co. to also rule it out. In fact, considering that Clay has been asking for a new arena from day one indicates that he might in fact be ble to make the case that Seattle didn't live up to their agreement to provide a new arena.

[HOT ROD]

Hot Rod - I am now posting on the Seattle times site under OKC2008. I tried to use my name but someone already had it. Here is the only problem I see with the New arena statment in the preamble. The Sonics paid rent to play in a remodled arena. It makes it hard for that argument to stick when the Sonics apparently approved of it by paying rent. Now that is not to say the current owners are under the same obligation as the former owners. Just because a previous owner chose not enforce the "New" clause doesn't necessarly obligte Bennett and Co. to also rule it out. In fact, considering that Clay has been asking for a new arena from day one indicates that he might in fact be ble to make the case that Seattle didn't live up to their agreement to provide a new arena.

I think you hit exactly what I was thinking and perhaps what Clay is doing in Bold!!!! HE NEVER approved of Key Arena, therefore NEVER approved of the lease!!!!!

I think we're on to something BIG that the elitists with blinders in Seattle who think they are 'untouchable' or that Slade 'the Blade' Gordon will Save The Day again, fail to see (or admit)!!!!!

It's interesting how the city's lawyers even twisted their opening pleading by stating that the Sonics agreed to a remodel when in fact the lease clearly says NEW Seattle Center Coluseum (not a remodel). Like you said, just because the past owners apparently approved (by paying the lease) does not predicate Bennett (whose said from day one that Key Arena is not viable (and is on record of that)) to those terms - especially when there was NO addendum to Bennett's purchase which states he 'accepts' Key Arena as the venue.

Looks like the City of Seattle's luck is gonna run out on them! LOL. I think this might be quickly ruled in Bennett's favour.

I can't wait!!! Seattle gets a REALITY CHECK!!!!

LONG OVERDUE

[betts]

Brian on Sonicscentral is saying there's a private arena deal in the works there. That could be a problem if it's true, as I don't think Stern would move the Sonics if he can get an arena built in Seattle. Now, if the terms of the new arena are that Bennett can't be the owner, I think Stern would have to balk there, as I don't believe he can or the BOG would force an owner to sell. He'd have to provide OKC with an expansion team to make that happen, IMO.

[Watson410]

Betts, I don't know that I would believe that about the private arena deal in the works. If that was the case why would Bennett be trying to get out of his last two years at KeyArena. That doesn't make much sense to me.

[HOT ROD]

OK guys,

On the SeaTimes forum they have pleas for people to email/call David Stern about this mess of a situation. Honestly, it is Seattle who is causing the mess - surely if they would just let the Sonics buy out the lease, I'd bet the NBA would be back with the Hornets (which could then be renamed into the New Supersonics).

but no. Between the city, the state, the local IDIOTS, and the ridiculous 'fans', Seattle has put up the proverbial middle finger at the NBA and is NOW trying to make their point that Clay Bennett can't "mess with Seattle".

I say - we need to BEST SEATTLE at everything they try. Since they are trying to sway David Stern, we need Oklahomans to write and call him as well.

We need to say that Seattle hasn't supported the team and has not and will not build a new arena - two points which OKC can and will do. We need to make sure that David Stern remains a NON-ISSUE until the courts and/or arbitration rule that the Sonics can in fact buy-out the lease.

This contract issue is NO DIFFERENT from any other lease agreements, if you move out you still have to pay - but you still get to MOVE OUT. How can the city be stupid enough to think that a court, even a WA one, would force a business to remain somewhere it doesn't want to be?? Are Seattleites (other than myself) so full of themselves???

Anyways, here is the contact information for David Stern (let's keep it civil but straight to the point, that OKC deserves the Sonics since Seattle has shown it's true colours - that they ONLY care about the pride of having a team yet not willing to do what it takes to keep them):

From the SeaTimes - 212-407-8300

Attention Commissioner Stern
NBA
Olympic Tower
645 Fifth Avenue
New York, New York 10022

We need to make sure that Stern either continues to stay out of this (my prediction) or that he supports Bennett and OKC if he does "Enter".

Seattle Bennett/NBA/OKC - that's my prediction!!