your life literally hinging on a sports team.
I've heard reports that part of the reason Kawhi didn't get offered the supermax were complications from the divorce. Not sure how they are tied, but it might have been a money issue. That's a reason to sell the team to wealthier investors. That said, if it's for sale, there will be a ton of bidders, so it's not something that will be secret for long, if true.
Good point! If the Spurs are for sale, it would make sense not to go on full re-build and try to make the playoffs.
I doubt the SuperMax would ever be on the table without more communication between them and Kawhi. It's what DRob and alot of other peeps have been hinting at. "We will give you the SuperMax but you have to act like a true Spurs spokesperson on and off the court and be a willing and happy camper." Dude started to act like he deserves the Supermax just because he's good. Big gamble for nearly 40% of your payroll for the Spurs. Not to mention if he is injured. In hindsight it was the right call because look how fragile he looked because of this mysterious injury. Spurs dodged a huge bullet. But I do wish the best for Kawhi. Hope he becomes a better man.
I was just warming up.
Don't the Spurs have multiple owners? I was thinking the Holts only owned something in the 30s percent of the team. I had been thinking they would be selling off their share or at least part of it with the divorce. What would happen is a new Chairman would be put in place.
Yup, that was almost a given once the divorce papers were filed, despite their protests.
From February:
https://www.expressnews.com/spurs-na...n-12607592.phpWhile the Holts’ net worth isn’t publicly reported, the couple are believed to own about 40 percent of the team, which, if accurate, would mean their share of the Spurs is valued at about $620 million.
So unless other owners sell also or agree with new owners bent on moving, the Spurs aren't even going to try to go anywhere else during the lease.
Yes, Holts are the majority owners. But if 40% of the ownership, which is the majority by far, says they want out, it's got to put pressure on all the other minority owners.
New ownership holding 40% of the franchise could incentivize other owners to sell. Or new ownership might want a controlling bloc, and offer a premium on the Holt's shares + 11%.
By definition, majority ownership requires 50% + 1 share of ownership. The Holts have the “controlling” interest.
If memory serves, the Spurs are a limited partnership and with the Holts owing the controlling interest, Julianna Holt is the General Partner and therefore runs the show. I think this is correct, but if not, please correct.
Plurality owners. I only bring that up because I remember there being a mildly entertaining debate about that a few years ago.
lol this misunderstanding again
Peter has some stuff he's working on. God bless him and his family.
Why do stupid s keep talking about the team moving
San Antonio had the most growth of any US city in 2017. Carry on with the stupid though
I don’t know why people keep trying to float relocation rumors or relocation possibilities. The Spurs have a lease with the county that calls for no relocation. There is no buy out in the lease. The lease terms are great for the team. The Spurs just extended the lease two years ago to get a $100 million renovation on the att center. The lease runs at least thru 2032 if not 2037.
But yeah, sure, they are going to move to Seattle or Austin. Lol.
Good maybe season ticket holders can stop getting bent over with new ownership.
Cant be any worse.
SA Sports is an LLC. They dont have to sell because of the divorce. They can just split the ownership of their share. They have plenty of other money/interests with Cat dealership and stock.
But cities don’t buy NBA teams
You really don’t know how any of this works, do you?
If Bush is elected i am moving to Canada.
JHH probably will sell her stake.
The Spurs aren’t going anywhere. It’s not 1998 anymore.
No, he doesn’t, but his point about Seattle very much applies to Seattle’s willingness to pay for the corporate welfare, stadiums etc. that all teams demand. Your insults are cute but belie your dumbass politics.
Selling doesn't mean moving. Stop the panic
I've posted that the rumors about the Spurs having issues to offer the supermax started in 2017. It was about the uncertainty of Spurs' future.
The supermax was a 5 years contract, Pop would coach just the first year of those 5 years, we can imagine how hard would it be for PATFO to sell this contract to the owners without Pop in next years while 35% of cap is about just one player, Holts are in the middle of a divorce, the small market thing...That contract was never going to happen.
Spurs are owned by Spurs Sports and Entertainment LLC, if I recall correctly. Holt family company owned only 10-15% at one time; I suppose this may have increased to as high as 40% over time from buyouts.
This would be a plurality (the correct term), but either the Holt en y serves as the Managing Member, or Peter / his wife is the CEO of SSE. Or both. I’m sure the other members have voting rights for big decisions.
The other owners include several Texas and national businesses that have a longstanding active presence in SA. In some ways, the “town” owns the team.
A change of ownership would be sad if only because all great teams start at the top. Most lead owners would not be as talented or dedicated, or conscientious, as the Holts. But who knows. Maybe Cuban can buy them out. Unlike many here I think he is a great owner.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
