Newark Hoop Dreams

[ghoti]

A Star-Ledger Editorial:

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>When developer Bruce Ratner bought the team in 2004, the arena's estimated cost was $600 million. That has grown to $950 million, which would make it the most expensive arena ever. Delays caused by local opposition and financing problems could make it more expensive than that. Those who dream in New Jersey know the rumors that developer Ratner bought the Nets only to sweeten the appeal of the development project. The reverie is that if Brooklyn falls through, a coalition of New Jersey buyers (led by the New Jersey Devils hockey team, perhaps?) would take the Nets off Ratner's hands. Then the Nets would move into the shiny new Prudential Center, which the Devils built with the city of Newark. Whether the financing of the Newark arena made sense (the city put up the lion's share), it's built and it draws tons of fans via mass transit. The arena here was originally planned as a home for the Nets, and that's where the team belongs.

What stands in the way of the dream? Well, there's Ratner. "Newark is not even a consideration. We're moving to Brooklyn," said a spokesman for the builder and the team. They are planning to break ground this year. They say.

Apart from whatever Ratner may be dreaming, there is the stumbling block of a clause in the Nets' contract with the New Jersey Sports and Exposition Authority, which owns the Izod Center. If the Nets leave to play anywhere other than Brooklyn, the team must pay the authority a penalty that starts out at $12 million a year.

That clause was generally considered to be anti-Newark. Considering that the authority is a state agency, the provision seemed as hideous and out of place as a giant, psychedelic Ferris wheel in a swamp.

Something has happened. The hateful clause is being explained as a nonhostile means of preventing the Nets from pitting the Meadowlands against Newark. It was meant to avoid a bidding war for a short-term contract while the Brooklyn arena was built.

In fact, sources have told The Star-Ledger editorial board that if the Nets sign a long-term deal to play in Newark, the sports authority would waive that clause and happily cooperate with the Prudential Center for the greater glory and profit of both New Jersey venues.</div>


Link.

 

[Dark Defender]

I don't understand why he can't move the team to Newark temporarily until Brooklyn is ready.

 

[cpawfan]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Dark Defender @ Apr 28 2008, 11:57 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I don't understand why he can't move the team to Newark temporarily until Brooklyn is ready.</div>

I don't understand why people don't understand that Ratner doesn't want to be, at best, second fiddle to the Devils

 

[Netted]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (cpawfan @ Apr 28 2008, 12:11 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Dark Defender @ Apr 28 2008, 11:57 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I don't understand why he can't move the team to Newark temporarily until Brooklyn is ready.</div>

I don't understand why people don't understand that Ratner doesn't want to be, at best, second fiddle to the Devils
</div>
What's he care if he's moving to Brooklyn? He would just be hanging his hat there for a few years and being second fiddle only reinforces that. At least it gives the NYC/Brooklyn fans better access to their team. He may get fewer marketing opportunitues, but he'll get better fan support and he'll make his fewer opportunities more valuable. Would be a wash in the end and a better experience for the fans.

On a separate note, I still think the guy is an idiot if he names them Brooklyn Nets. Should go back to New York Nets and have a broader fan base. Why alienate other potential NY fans. The Knick fan base is ripe for the taking.

One more thing, if Brooklyn falls apart and he needs to sell the team they will be more valuable playing in Newark!!

 

[SportsTicker]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Netted @ Apr 28 2008, 11:16 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (cpawfan @ Apr 28 2008, 12:11 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Dark Defender @ Apr 28 2008, 11:57 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I don't understand why he can't move the team to Newark temporarily until Brooklyn is ready.</div>

I don't understand why people don't understand that Ratner doesn't want to be, at best, second fiddle to the Devils
</div>
What's he care if he's moving to Brooklyn? He would just be hanging his hat there for a few years and being second fiddle only reinforces that. At least it gives the NYC/Brooklyn fans better access to their team. He may get fewer marketing opportunitues, but he'll get better fan support and he'll make his fewer opportunities more valuable. Would be a wash in the end and a better experience for the fans.

On a separate note, I still think the guy is an idiot if he names them Brooklyn Nets. Should go back to New York Nets and have a broader fan base. Why alienate other potential NY fans. The Knick fan base is ripe for the taking.

One more thing, if Brooklyn falls apart and he needs to sell the team they will be more valuable playing in Newark!!
</div>

Why would Ratner want to "partner" with the Devils owner who OWNS the Prudential Center. He would be a tenant with a great disadvantage in negotiatiing things like concessions, parking, ticket sales, etc.

The Brooklyn arena, which is 11 miles as the crow flies, 15 by car, from the IZOD Center, will be the most iconic, most expensive arena in the world. The deal is sooo sweet it will turn the Nets from a big loser to a big money maker. Ratner will pay an annual rent of $1.00 per year and pay a negotiated amount in lieu of taxes. Most of those opposed to this deal don't pay taxes to New York State or City. So why be opposed to it.

Oh, one other thing, Newark is a pit.

 

[Netted]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (NetIncome @ Apr 30 2008, 02:27 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Netted @ Apr 28 2008, 11:16 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (cpawfan @ Apr 28 2008, 12:11 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Dark Defender @ Apr 28 2008, 11:57 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I don't understand why he can't move the team to Newark temporarily until Brooklyn is ready.</div>

I don't understand why people don't understand that Ratner doesn't want to be, at best, second fiddle to the Devils
</div>
What's he care if he's moving to Brooklyn? He would just be hanging his hat there for a few years and being second fiddle only reinforces that. At least it gives the NYC/Brooklyn fans better access to their team. He may get fewer marketing opportunitues, but he'll get better fan support and he'll make his fewer opportunities more valuable. Would be a wash in the end and a better experience for the fans.

On a separate note, I still think the guy is an idiot if he names them Brooklyn Nets. Should go back to New York Nets and have a broader fan base. Why alienate other potential NY fans. The Knick fan base is ripe for the taking.

One more thing, if Brooklyn falls apart and he needs to sell the team they will be more valuable playing in Newark!!
</div>

Why would Ratner want to "partner" with the Devils owner who OWNS the Prudential Center. He would be a tenant with a great disadvantage in negotiatiing things like concessions, parking, ticket sales, etc.

The Brooklyn arena, which is 11 miles as the crow flies, 15 by car, from the IZOD Center, will be the most iconic, most expensive arena in the world. The deal is sooo sweet it will turn the Nets from a big loser to a big money maker. Ratner will pay an annual rent of $1.00 per year and pay a negotiated amount in lieu of taxes. Most of those opposed to this deal don't pay taxes to New York State or City. So why be opposed to it.

Oh, one other thing, Newark is a pit.
</div>
I was referring to playing in Newark over the IZOD Center (which is a pit) until Brooklyn is ready. Not instead of Brooklyn. However, in the unlikely event that things should head south with Brooklyn he is in a better place to sell the team if it's in a new arena in Newark.

He will have more luxury boxes in Newark that he could market to corporations (which is a PATH train away from Wall St) in advance of the Brooklyn arena. And you negotiate concessions, parking, and tickets BEFORE you sign your lease not after. I would venture to guess that the Newark arena would love to have another tenenat, even if temporary, to alleviate some of their costs.

 

[ghoti]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (cpawfan @ Apr 28 2008, 12:11 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Dark Defender @ Apr 28 2008, 11:57 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I don't understand why he can't move the team to Newark temporarily until Brooklyn is ready.</div>

I don't understand why people don't understand that Ratner doesn't want to be, at best, second fiddle to the Devils
</div>

Maybe as a consideration to the fans. Maybe because people might actually buy tickets to see the team play instead of the current buy one get nine free promotions to artificially inflate the attendance.

Maybe because players keep siting the lack of home court atmosphere as a reason they don't like playing for the Nets.

I just hope the NBA lets Ratner sell to New Jersey connections. I can see Stern blocking that and forcing a sale to Seattle or Vegas or wherever. The NBA doesn't want a team in NJ at all.

 

[Claud]

I dont want the team to go to newark. 0 chance it happens if ratners still with us.
Brooklyn is a perfect fit for the nets. They are alot of people there that already like the nets, and since the announcement of the nets move, have been excited. Plus wed have the best arena & fans in the nba.

 

[meltz1]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Claud @ Apr 30 2008, 04:41 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I dont want the team to go to newark. 0 chance it happens if ratners still with us.
Brooklyn is a perfect fit for the nets. They are alot of people there that already like the nets, and since the announcement of the nets move, have been excited. Plus wed have the best arena & fans in the nba.</div>
Many people are missing the point here. I don't believe any wants the team to play at prudential in lieu of brooklyn, but, instead, play there during their lame duck period in new jersey. i don't see how playing at the IZOD is more beneficial than a state of the art arena with access to public transportation.

 

[Claud]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (meltz1 @ Apr 30 2008, 07:09 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Claud @ Apr 30 2008, 04:41 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I dont want the team to go to newark. 0 chance it happens if ratners still with us.
Brooklyn is a perfect fit for the nets. They are alot of people there that already like the nets, and since the announcement of the nets move, have been excited. Plus wed have the best arena & fans in the nba.</div>
Many people are missing the point here. I don't believe any wants the team to play at prudential in lieu of brooklyn, but, instead, play there during their lame duck period in new jersey. i don't see how playing at the IZOD is more beneficial than a state of the art arena with access to public transportation.
</div>

Yeah i get what your saying but to play there they would have to play an extra 12 MILL yearly. Why the hell would they do that?

 

[ly_yng]

I'd like to see the team move to Brooklyn, if only so that the arena might fill up every once in a while. I also live in Chicago, so I consider my opinion less relevant than ghoti's.

NI, what do you mean that "Most of those opposed to this deal don't pay taxes to New York State or City"? I tend to think that subsidizing arenas is a HUGE waste of taxpayer money, and cities only do it because the NBA takes them hostage and threatens to move the team if they don't (see: Seattle). If it's not the taxpaying citizens of Brooklyn who oppose it, then who does?

 

[Real]

The Star-Ledger is reporting NJ Devils owner Jeff Vanderbeek and Newark mayor Cory Booker are assembling a group of investors to buy the Nets.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>Effort under way to bring Nets to Newark's Prudential Center
by Ian T. Shearn, Maura McDermott and George E. Jordan/The Star-Ledger
Wednesday April 30, 2008, 8:52 PM
The owner of the Devils hockey team and Newark Mayor Cory Booker are seeking to assemble a group of investors to buy the Nets and move the basketball team to Newark, people familiar with the effort said.

In recent weeks, Devils owner Jeffrey Vanderbeek has met with Nets owner Bruce Ratner, while Booker has spoken to an official at Ratner's development company, Forest City Ratner Cos., according to three people with direct knowledge of the discussions. The outcome of each talk was characterized as "open-ended." The parties spoke on the condition they not be identified.

The effort to bring the Nets to Newark, where they would play at the Prudential Center along with the Devils, comes amid growing speculation on whether Ratner can complete a $4 billion retail and residential development in Brooklyn, given the deepening crisis in the credit markets.

To date, there is no indication the Nets are for sale, and Ratner repeatedly has said he is happy owning the team and looks forward to moving to a new arena in Brooklyn.

"The team is absolutely not for sale," Ratner said through his spokesman, Howard Rubenstein. "We're inches away from completing the deal in Brooklyn."

At the same time, one of the sources said Vanderbeek has been approached over the past two years by a half dozen people who have expressed interest in investing in a Nets purchase. It was unclear who Vanderbeek and Booker have spoken to about a potential purchase. But two of the sources said Booker also has tried to entice Ratner by offering him development possibilities in Newark.

Asked this week about his interest in the Nets, Vanderbeek would say only: "The Nets have stated they are going Brooklyn. We wish them all the luck in the world."

Booker's office declined comment.

Carl Goldberg, chairman of the New Jersey Sports and Exposition Authority, said he believes the Nets could remain at the Izod Center in the Meadowlands.

"The likelihood of the Nets actually building a new facility in Brooklyn and leaving our facility at the Izod Center is diminishing by the moment," Goldberg told a group of Star-Ledger editors in February. "The cost of steel and concrete and the challenges of building a facility of that nature over the railyards are becoming more difficult."

Read the full story in Thursday's Star-Ledger.</div>

Link

 

[GMJ]

WTF. No Brooklyn + No Jay-Z(?) = No Lebron. Stop ruining this for me!

 

[Real]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (GMJigga @ May 1 2008, 12:48 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>WTF. No Brooklyn + No Jay-Z(?) = No Lebron. Stop ruining this for me!</div>

You know...we really don't need Brooklyn, Jay-Z or LeBron to win a title.

As a matter of fact, I don't believe no team from Brooklyn, co-owned by Jay-Z with LeBron as its' star player has ever won a title.

Just my .02

 

[cpawfan]

Ratner is in the process of building the defining development of his life. There is no way he sells the primary thing that helps him get that built.

 

[cpawfan]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Real @ May 1 2008, 02:14 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (GMJigga @ May 1 2008, 12:48 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>WTF. No Brooklyn + No Jay-Z(?) = No Lebron. Stop ruining this for me!</div>

You know...we really don't need Brooklyn, Jay-Z or LeBron to win a title.

As a matter of fact, I don't believe no team from Brooklyn, co-owned by Jay-Z with LeBron as its' star player has ever won a title.

Just my .02
</div>

As a matter of fact, pro teams that play at the Prudential Center perform worse in the playoffs than they did when they played at the Swamp.

 

[Netted]

The more I thought about this I think Ratner and Vanderbeek are foolish if they can't work a deal out for a couple years. Vanderbeek should give them access to the arena and take only enough to cover arena expenses in exchange for the Nets marketing machine taking over the marketing of the Devils and the new arena.

For Vanderbeek he gets the arena and Devils profile elevated and with the Nets gets more people accustomed to coming to the arena in Newark, he gets access to the Nets corporate sponsors, and if the Brooklyn project fails he has an idea of the true value of the team playing in Newark.

For Ratner he gets access to the Devils fan base, has a better arena for his marketing machine to sell, he's near mass transit that is accessable to his future fanbase and coporate/luxury suite buyers, and he gets a generous cut of the gate.

 

[J-HoAgZ]

Is this Brooklyn thing ever gonna get done or am I getting hyped over nothing?

 

[infinet]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (cpawfan @ Apr 28 2008, 08:11 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Dark Defender @ Apr 28 2008, 11:57 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I don't understand why he can't move the team to Newark temporarily until Brooklyn is ready.</div>

I don't understand why people don't understand that Ratner doesn't want to be, at best, second fiddle to the Devils
</div>

Newsflash!

The Nets have ALWAYS been second fiddle to the Devils (even during our back-to-back title runs).

Plus, that's not the motivation here. Everyone knows that from day #1; his motivation to move the team is not for personal reasons or "being second fiddle". It's all about his real estate aspirations in Brooklyn.

 

[cpawfan]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (infinet @ May 1 2008, 11:38 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (cpawfan @ Apr 28 2008, 08:11 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Dark Defender @ Apr 28 2008, 11:57 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I don't understand why he can't move the team to Newark temporarily until Brooklyn is ready.</div>

I don't understand why people don't understand that Ratner doesn't want to be, at best, second fiddle to the Devils
</div>

Newsflash!

The Nets have ALWAYS been second fiddle to the Devils (even during our back-to-back title runs).

Plus, that's not the motivation here. Everyone knows that from day #1; his motivation to move the team is not for personal reasons or "being second fiddle". It's all about his real estate aspirations in Brooklyn.
</div>

The Nets weren't second fiddle when it came to scheduling the arena as they would be in Newark as a temporary tenant.

As for your comment about motivation, it has nothing to do with a temporary move.

 

[Claud]

Am i the only one that thinks its foolish to pay 12mill more yearly to play at another arena for only 2 or 3 years? And dont even tell me more fans would show up at games there than at the Izod. Maybe a little bit more but it wouldnt make up the extra $$ they have to pay to play there for a few years. ITS BAD BUSINESS!

 

[Netted]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Claud @ May 1 2008, 06:08 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Am i the only one that thinks its foolish to pay 12mill more yearly to play at another arena for only 2 or 3 years? And dont even tell me more fans would show up at games there than at the Izod. Maybe a little bit more but it wouldnt make up the extra $$ they have to pay to play there for a few years. ITS BAD BUSINESS!

</div>
First, you negotiate that number with the NJSEA, which they seem open to doing. Second, if Ratner can start getting some of his corporate clients commited to luxury boxes in Newark before the move to Brooklyn he will get a lot more money. Also, the more fans they get there the more valuable all the branding and sponships become. Don't underestimate how many more fans could come to Newark. With the access to the trains there could be many more Brooklyn/NYC fans attending the games. Better to steal those fans while the Knicks are rebuilding than to find yourself competing for fans with a strong franchise in a few years.

 

[pegs]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (NetsDaily)</div><div class='quotemain'>Ratner Denies Newark Talks
In a statement on Thursday, Nets owner Bruce Ratner emphatically denied any talks with parties looking to buy the Nets and move them to Newark. “”The team is very simply not for sale and any stories that suggest or insinuate that we would be interested in listening to those conversations are flat out false,” Ratner said. “We are focused on breaking ground on the Barclays Center in Brooklyn later this year and building all of Atlantic Yards, nothing else.”

Ratner: Nets Not For Sale - Tom Canavan - AP</div>

 

[ghoti]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (J-HoAgZ @ May 1 2008, 11:15 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Is this Brooklyn thing ever gonna get done or am I getting hyped over nothing?</div>

I've always gone on the assumption that it will not happen. If it does, fine, but if it doesn't Ratner will sell the team immediately.

The only question in my mind is if the NBA owners would allow the sale to connections that want the team to stay in NJ and play in Newark or if they would force the sale to out of towners.

My feeling is that Stern would be thrilled if there were no team in NJ.

 

[Real]

Booker vs. Markowitz

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>"After years of obscurity mired in the Meadowlands, the Nets are ready for a slam dunk in the Brooklyn big leagues. Who knows, maybe the Devils want to lace up and come here too! If my esteemed colleague Cory Booker in Brooklyn's 'western suburb,' a.k.a. Newark, New Jersey, is looking for a professional basketball team, maybe he should ask the Knicks," Markowitz said in a statement.

Booker responded by saying he would continue to pursue his "personal dream" of bringing the Nets to the $375 million Prudential Center "no matter how unrealistic."

"I yield to...Marty Markowitz, my esteemed colleague in the "eastern suburb" of Newark a.k.a Brooklyn, and would like to officially challenge him with the remaining shreds of my athletic pride to a one and one basketball game to battle for the Nets!"

Markowitz' website said one of his campaign promises was to bring the first national sports team back to Brooklyn since the Dodgers left.

"I accept Mayor Booker's challenge and must remind him that I am only 5-foot-5," said Markowitz. "I'll accept the challenge only if I can have a ringer play against him."</div>

Link

Are Booker and Vanderbeek bringing the Nets to Newark a realistic opportunity? Or is this whole thing just a joke for the media to report on.

 

[J-HoAgZ]

This is gonna be a disaster.. Forget LeBron is 2010, we are gonna have to find an arena to play in first.

 

[SportsTicker]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ghoti @ May 1 2008, 08:32 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (J-HoAgZ @ May 1 2008, 11:15 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Is this Brooklyn thing ever gonna get done or am I getting hyped over nothing?</div>

I've always gone on the assumption that it will not happen. If it does, fine, but if it doesn't Ratner will sell the team immediately.

The only question in my mind is if the NBA owners would allow the sale to connections that want the team to stay in NJ and play in Newark or if they would force the sale to out of towners.

My feeling is that Stern would be thrilled if there were no team in NJ.
</div>

And yet, you want the Nets to stay in New Jersey, lose more money and risk being moved to Kansas City or Las Vegas.

One...more...time: there is NO way, repeat NO way, for the Nets to "partner" with a cash-starved Vanderbeek and erase $40 million in annual losses. He needs the best deal possible from the Nets. He also wants to see Brooklyn die and IZOD closed. Vanderbeek barely had enough money to finish the arena and if the corrupt mayor of Newark, Sharpe James, hadn't given him almost two/thirds of what he needed to build the place, it wouldnt exist. (Imagine the city of Newark, with all its problems, financing a hockey arena.) The most profitable franchises in the NBA own their own arena and/or their own cable network. Why do you think the Knicks and Rangers can pay such outrageous salaries? Cablevision owns the Knicks, Rangers, Madison Square Garden and MSG outright.

New York state would help build the Nets build the arena with low interest financing and then the Nets would sell it to the state for $1.00 and a 99-year-lease. The Nets would pay no property taxes, but instead provide payments in lieu of taxes, based on arena revenues. It will get every dollar of every parking fee, concession sale, etc. It's a sweetheart deal, which favors the Nets.

If the arena idea dies, Ratner will sell--and the NBA WILL approve a sale--to the highest bidder. The Nets have the heaviest debt load (as a percentage of value to debt) of any professional sports franchise in the US, according to Forbes. It is losing $40 million a year, according to the filings of Forest City Enterprises, Ratner's publicly traded parent company, with the Securities and Exchange Commission. The highest bidder might be from New Jersey, but it is more likely to be from Kansas City or Las Vegas, which are desperate for a team. The league is NOT going to demand he sell to someone in the NY area, particularly in NJ where the team hasnt been able to draw flies. To protect their reputation, the owners will let him sell to whoever writes him and FCE the biggest check. The Record speculated about this a couple of weeks ago. Sorry you guys missed it.

And if you think I'm bullshitting, take a good look at the Sonics, who are losing money in Seattle because of their arena deal and who will be moving to a much smaller market in Oklahoma City. Who was the owner most vocal in saying OKC was more viable that Seattle, one of the great gateway cities of North America? Lew Katz, the former principal owner of the Nets and now the second largest individual stockholder.

Get real. This is about money, period, not about some tradition of New Jersey Nets basketball.

 

[Claud]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (NetIncome @ May 2 2008, 11:23 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ghoti @ May 1 2008, 08:32 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (J-HoAgZ @ May 1 2008, 11:15 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Is this Brooklyn thing ever gonna get done or am I getting hyped over nothing?</div>

I've always gone on the assumption that it will not happen. If it does, fine, but if it doesn't Ratner will sell the team immediately.

The only question in my mind is if the NBA owners would allow the sale to connections that want the team to stay in NJ and play in Newark or if they would force the sale to out of towners.

My feeling is that Stern would be thrilled if there were no team in NJ.
</div>

And yet, you want the Nets to stay in New Jersey, lose more money and risk being moved to Kansas City or Las Vegas.

One...more...time: there is NO way, repeat NO way, for the Nets to "partner" with a cash-starved Vanderbeek and erase $40 million in annual losses. He needs the best deal possible from the Nets. He also wants to see Brooklyn die and IZOD closed. Vanderbeek barely had enough money to finish the arena and if the corrupt mayor of Newark, Sharpe James, hadn't given him almost two/thirds of what he needed to build the place, it wouldnt exist. (Imagine the city of Newark, with all its problems, financing a hockey arena.) The most profitable franchises in the NBA own their own arena and/or their own cable network. Why do you think the Knicks and Rangers can pay such outrageous salaries? Cablevision owns the Knicks, Rangers, Madison Square Garden and MSG outright.

New York state would help build the Nets build the arena with low interest financing and then the Nets would sell it to the state for $1.00 and a 99-year-lease. The Nets would pay no property taxes, but instead provide payments in lieu of taxes, based on arena revenues. It will get every dollar of every parking fee, concession sale, etc. It's a sweetheart deal, which favors the Nets.

If the arena idea dies, Ratner will sell--and the NBA WILL approve a sale--to the highest bidder. The Nets have the heaviest debt load (as a percentage of value to debt) of any professional sports franchise in the US, according to Forbes. It is losing $40 million a year, according to the filings of Forest City Enterprises, Ratner's publicly traded parent company, with the Securities and Exchange Commission. The highest bidder might be from New Jersey, but it is more likely to be from Kansas City or Las Vegas, which are desperate for a team. The league is NOT going to demand he sell to someone in the NY area, particularly in NJ where the team hasnt been able to draw flies. To protect their reputation, the owners will let him sell to whoever writes him and FCE the biggest check. The Record speculated about this a couple of weeks ago. Sorry you guys missed it.

And if you think I'm bullshitting, take a good look at the Sonics, who are losing money in Seattle because of their arena deal and who will be moving to a much smaller market in Oklahoma City. Who was the owner most vocal in saying OKC was more viable that Seattle, one of the great gateway cities of North America? Lew Katz, the former principal owner of the Nets and now the second largest individual stockholder.

Get real. This is about money, period, not about some tradition of New Jersey Nets basketball.
</div>


Thank you. Brooklyn is a great deal for the nets franchise. If it doesnt happen, then that my friends will really reallly suck. The swamps and Newark is pretty much the same. So i want them to finish this project ASAP.