Maloofs aren't ready to move Kings to LV

SACRAMENTO, Calif. -- Chris Webber was chilling in front of his locker before a recent game at Arco Arena when he was approached by a stranger.

The man introduced himself as a reporter from Las Vegas. He informed Webber he was writing a story on the Maloof family and its ownership of the Sacramento Kings.

"Why?" the powerful forward asked. "We movin' to Vegas?"

The answer was to the contrary.

"Dang!" Webber said with a chagrined smile, rolling his eyes and head simultaneously.

Ever since the Maloofs purchased a piece of the Sacramento Kings last year -- and even moreso when they bought controlling interest in January -- folks have wondered whether the team could ever move to Southern Nevada, where the family operates the Fiesta hotel-casino and is developing another resort property.

"I don't think there's a chance," Maloof Companies president Joe Maloof said. "That's been a concern of a lot of people, but we're not going anywhere. We've never thought about moving."

The Kings could be moved, if that's what the Maloofs wanted. A novel loan agreement made in 1997 between the city and acting owner Jim Thomas -- the Maloofs don't officially take over until July 1 -- to refinance Arco Arena affords the Kings a rare option to move without financial penalty.

The $70 million municipal loan was made in return for a 30-year commitment from the Kings, but the deal included several escape clauses.

If the Kings repay the loan in full after 10 years, they can leave.

The Kings can leave before then if, in addition to repaying the loan, their revenue drops to a designated percentage below the NBA average and the team loses money.

According to a Los Angeles Times story, the Kings' revenue would have to fall below the league average on a sliding scale from 25 percent below average during this season to 17.5 percent below average by 2002.

Financial World magazine estimated in 1997 the Kings' revenues were 12 percent below average.

But it's all moot, as the Maloofs insist they are in Sacramento to stay. The NBA likes it there, too.

"Sacramento is a great market," Maloof said. "It's the only major league sports team in the area. The team has a great following, and it's a market that's growing."

The Maloofs are quick to note the Kings sold out 497 consecutive games from the time they moved from Kansas City in 1985 until November, 1997.

"We like the fan enthusiasm in Sacramento," Maloof Companies vice chairman Gavin Maloof said. "We see long-term viability for us and for the franchise."

The Maloofs say Las Vegas isn't ready for major league sports. The family has knowledge of franchises in each of the big four sports: baseball, basketball, football and hockey.

The Maloofs owned the Houston Rockets from 1978-82. They sold the team shortly after the death of family patriarch George Maloof Sr. They attempted to re-purchase the Rockets in 1992, part of the expansion Toronto Raptors in 1995 and the San Antonio Spurs in 1996.

They also toyed with buying the New Jersey Nets and baseball's Texas Rangers in recent years, made a bid to place an NHL expansion team in Houston, were approached to buy into the Hartford Whalers (now the Carolina Hurricanes) and owned controlling interest in the now-defunct Birmingham Fire of the World League of American Football.

They were dangerously close to purchasing the NHL's Tampa Bay Lightning last year, but backed off in the 12th hour.

"I think hockey would probably want to come to Las Vegas eventually," Joe Maloof said. "I don't think football. I don't think baseball.

"Las Vegas is a major league city. It's hard to make it with minor league sports. You need one of the big four. If there was a (major league) team, the community would get behind it and it would be successful."

But if the Maloofs ever did want to move the Kings to Las Vegas, the NBA wouldn't stand in their way.

"I think any time anyone suggests a market to us," NBA deputy commissioner and chief operating officer Russ Granik said, "we would try to look at it objectively.

"Our constitution would have us set up a committee of owners, who would commission a study on how that team has done in its existing market and draw up a demographic report of the market and facility."

The first issue in Nevada would deal with gambling.

"There are considerations related to legalized (NBA) betting and that would be an issue," Granik said. "It's an issue that is important to the NBA."

The NBA, however, has overcome gaming problems before. It needed to address sports betting when it placed franchises in Vancouver and Toronto, where Canadian provincial lotteries allowed such wagering.

"We said we would put teams in Vancouver or Toronto if they ceased sports betting," Granik said.

If Las Vegas were to become a viable NBA market, Granik claims concessions could be made to place a team here if all parties were willing to accommodate.

"I always tend to believe if things make sense from a business standpoint you can work out the problems," Granik said. "I certainly wouldn't rule Las Vegas out just because of legalized (NBA) betting."

archive