Canzano says Blazers being prepared for auction

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

A Mexico City based NBA team would be insane! More valuable than Knicks or Lakers, biggest TV contract.
I mean, a lot of fuss don't even want to go to Toronto because it's in another country. Mexico city would really struggle attracting anybody to go there.
 
I think it's a matter of actually guaranteed revenue versus projected revenue. Guaranteed revenue will always be worth more. Like I said, some potential buyer might try to get ahead of that spike in price and barely undercut what it will be in two years but Jody and the Vulcans might be smart to either make sure they know just how much the league is able to get out of broadcasters or let the market be set by another team, so they can maximize how much they get. If they weren't waiting for the value of the team to jump, they would have gotten rid of it soon after Mr. Allen died. The TV deal is the only logical reason they're holding onto it.

After a TV deal is signed the team could be worth more, but it could also be worth less. There might be concessions the league ultimately makes.

We don't know Jodi finances or the terms of Paul's estate. Could be restrictions on when she can sell, or she could need to delay for tax reasons, etc. There are hundreds of possible reasons in addition to the TV contract.
 
Zero.

The NBA wants to expand the league.

There is no financial reason to move the Blazers.

Hello. Even the potential of increased revenue with a larger market? Or more conveniently located market? I know there is good money to be made in the NW but i could see an owner minimizing that by cutting on travel expenses by relocating to somewhere like Nashville? SLC? Tampa? Baltimore? Pittsburgh?
Seattle???

I do not think it likely, but my doomsday scenario plays out much as such.
I am a longtime fan since childhood; deeply invested and it would crush me for them to leave.
 
I mean, a lot of fuss don't even want to go to Toronto because it's in another country. Mexico city would really struggle attracting anybody to go there.
They'd be like billionaires in Mexico... I think the problem with Toronto is the taxes.
 
We could have the first Team to go space!

With Damian as the first player ever to be in a movie about Space and actually go to space!

Maybe someone will pay for a bulletin board begging Elon to buy the Blazers!

On the serious, he is an investor and from what i know(not much), for the elite rich, pro sports franchise are a near slam dunk investment?
 
Hello. Even the potential of increased revenue with a larger market? Or more conveniently located market? I know there is good money to be made in the NW but i could see an owner minimizing that by cutting on travel expenses by relocating to somewhere like Nashville? SLC? Tampa? Baltimore? Pittsburgh?
Seattle???

I do not think it likely, but my doomsday scenario plays out much as such.
I am a longtime fan since childhood; deeply invested and it would crush me for them to leave.

The owners make $$$$$$ off of expansion fees, they make nothing if the Blazers relocate.
 
With Damian as the first player ever to be in a movie about Space and actually go to space!

Maybe someone will pay for a bulletin board begging Elon to buy the Blazers!

On the serious, he is an investor and from what i know(not much), for the elite rich, pro sports franchise are a near slam dunk investment?
They are and many financial conglomerates want in on it but Id rather have a sole owner!
 
MacKenzie Scott might be amazing. She's become very free-spending with her Amazon fortune, and she's a NW gal.
Sadly, I think she spends it on actual worthy causes. We are not the Boys and Girls Club.
 
The league would not sanction a move, period.

It's bad for business, bad for the NBA brand, bad for their fans/customers, bad for Portland, and very bad PR. Additionally, the team is beloved here - that's not insignificant; the uproar would be huge, and not just here. If they wouldn't let the Kings move - and they wouldn't - the definitely won't let the Blazers move.

Ballmer didn't move the Clippers to Seattle. I wonder why? Because 1. Yes, L.A. is lucrative, even in the Lakers' shadow, but also, 2. The league doesn't sanction moves hardly ever.
 
Allen signed 30-year pact declaring team can't move
A legal document signed by Paul Allen prohibits him from relocating the Trail Blazers to another city while he owns the NBA franchise. If he sells the team, Allen agreed to make sure the new owner would be bound by the same conditions.

Under a 30-year 'exclusive site agreement' with the city of Portland that went into effect June 23, 1993, Allen promised to keep the Blazers in Portland.

The 18-page document is signed by Allen and then-Mayor Vera Katz, among others. Parties to the agreement include Allen, the city of Portland and Trail Blazers Inc.

Three weeks ago, Allen's representatives made public a plea to city, county and state officials for financial support for the Blazers through a proposed 'public-private partnership' to help fix a 'broken financial model.' A representative said then that the NBA club stands to lose $100 million over the next three years.

In meetings with local government officials, Allen's representatives have not been specific about what sort of form that partnership could take. But there have been veiled references to Portland's somehow losing its NBA team. In fact, in a posting on the Trail Blazer Web site last weekend, in a 'Conversation with Paul Allen,' the owner broached the possibility of the team's moving:

'I want the team to stay in Portland,' he wrote. 'If this all ends up in the courts, or someone buys the team and moves it, it would be a shame.'

But the 'Exclusive Site Agreement' would seem to make that impossible.

Portland Mayor Tom Potter was unavailable for comment. His press aide, John Doussard, said Potter 'is aware of the document. I don't know he has read it. We know the document exists and know what it says. I have seen the document. (But) Paul Allen has not called us up and talked about moving the team.'

Under terms of the 1993 document Ñ signed more than two years before the Rose Garden opened Ñ moving the Blazers would be a costly proposition for the world's sixth-richest man. Allen's personal liability is limited to Sections 3.4, 3.5 and 3.7, which deal with transfer of ownership of the team. In signing, Allen agreed that a franchise move to another city would result in paying damages to the city of Portland.

'In the event of a breach of this agreement by TBI (Trail Blazers Inc.) or Allen,' Section 4 begins, 'the city will suffer both damages compensable by the payment of money, and damages (that) will not be compensable by money and É will be irreparable.'

If that happened, the city could ask for a judge to issue an injunction to prevent Allen from selling or moving the club until its legality was decided in a court of law.

The document stipulates that a purchaser of the Blazers would 'agree É without modification or qualification, with the covenants and restrictions applicable to Allen set forth in this agreement.'

A legal opinion obtained by the Portland Tribune suggests that the agreement is unusually strong on the side of the city, which would be the third-party beneficiary for any breach of contract.

Even if Trail Blazers Inc. were to file for bankruptcy, the party assuming ownership of the club would be responsible under Section 3.2, which reads, 'In the event of the liquidation or dissolution of TBI, the covenants and restrictions É set forth in this agreement shall be binding upon the shareholders of TBI or any other distributee of the franchise and related assets and properties of TBI.'

Blazer team President Steve Patterson and J. Isaac, the team's senior vice president of business affairs, referred questions to Andy Brimmer, communications director for Vulcan Capital, Allen's private investment group.

'As we said yesterday, both Vulcan and the city expressed a common goal of keeping the franchise in Portland,' Brimmer said in an e-mail. 'However, in the ongoing discussions, we decline further comment.'

https://pamplinmedia.com/pt/9-news/97715-tough-city-contract-keeps-grip-on-blazers?jr=on
So it expires next year?
 
Thanks for the recap....I refuse to click on anything this Spunk Bubble types. Curious why the term auction was used and not sale?
because Canzano... it generates more outrage

STOMP
 
Wow is Phil at 49 billion?! Damn even more so my point. I don’t get why he doesn’t buy the blazers and just use it for an investment toy.
Spitballing. Phil's brand is across the sporting universe. It may be marketing's view that being associated with the Ducks is enough micro when he's really about appealing macro.

He buys the Blazers and they succeed building a champion in the most organic way... it's perceived that he is the Don Corleone buying championships and there is a reaction against Nike products. I don't think thats farfetched.

STOMP
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top