OT: Howard Schultz has Sonicsgate person removed from building

This happened during a book signing of Howard Schultz at a Costco on April 8, 2011.
[video=youtube;MBmnaZDnK38]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MBmnaZDnK38&[/video]

 

Great documentary! If you haven't seen it, check it!

http://www.sonicsgate.org/

 

I still get pissed off when I think about that fiasco. The Sonics were our biggest rival!

 

The people of Seattle should have come up with a bond to keep the sonics there. Instead they decided to tax a certain county for a new building and the bond got rejected.

 

I don't know why he got mad. I was only asking him to autograph the cellophane around my 5 dozen rolls of toilet paper.

 

He is such an ass - I'd be embarrassed too.

 

Well, considering Howard Schultz took away Paul Allen's mother's season tix after the Blazers hired Whitsitt, I'm not surprised.

 

I hadn't heard that Schultz took away Paul Allen's mother's season tickets, but even if true, I don't think Whitsitt was the reason, because Schultz became owner 7 years after previous owner Ackerley replaced Whitsitt with Wally Walker. Ackerley died 3 weeks ago, as I announced here.

http://sportstwo.com/threads/182516...Allen-sucks.?p=2571954&viewfull=1#post2571954

 

Perhaps it was when Paul hired Nate. Or, was that the time Schultz ran over Paul's dog with his SUV?

No matter when it happened, if Schultz took away Allen's mother's seasons tix, it was a douchebag move. If she had Sonics season tickets, she was supporting the team and probably a long time Sonics fan. Punishing her because of something her adult offspring did seems petty and misdirected. But, it did establish a precedent for not giving a flying fuck about the fans that had supported his team for many years. He took away her season tickets and then he took away their team (yes, I know Clay Bennett moved the team, but Howard Schultz was complicit and allowed it to happen in spite of publicly stating, at the time of the sale, his ultimate goal was to preserve professional basketball in the NW region and reaffirm the commitment to their fans).

BNM

 

I have never heard that "tale."

Ultimately the blame goes to the top, Stern. Stern approved the impoverished owner group headed by Schultz. Every time the team needed cash it was an emergency for the 80 small owners. They didn't have it. Schultz had the job of herding cats. Wally Walker was a cheapskate and kept the talent at the bottom of the barrel because the owners had no money. Schultz was the only one with much money. When they sold, no one in Seattle with any money was interested. The non-Bennett group that was interested would have moved the team to the Bay Area.

 

You are correct, if Stern had wanted NBA basketball in Seattle, the Sonics would still be there. He would have bailed out the "poor" owner in Seattle like he just did in New Orleans.

BNM

 

I know my dates are correct but may have my owners incorrect, if so, I thank jlprk. But yes, Paul Allen's mother had Sonics season tix for years, and would go to games with her sister or women friends. Then they got taken away, and I'm pretty sure it was the Whitsitt and not the Nate hire that was the trigger. I remember thinking at the time can't a couple of supposedly intelligent middle aged men resolve things without draggin in someone's mother? I guess I remember it because it was so petty and ridiculous.

 

For all the hand wringing over the loss of the Sonics, no one seems to connect the dots with OKC being one of the most enthusiastic fan bases in the league, despite everyone thinking it would be a disaster. The team happens to be pretty good, too. It's not a popular thing to say, but it looks like that move worked out quite well.

 

No so.

First, no one (outside of a handful of delusional Sonics fans wishcasting) thought the OKC market wouldn't support a team with some gusto. That was proven with the Hornets. Saying folks predicted it would fail is wrong.

Second, the team is "pretty good" in large part because of some excellent luck. The team won the 2nd pick in the lottery during a year when there were two franchise players available to draft. The team also hit a homerun with the Westbrook pick. Everything else is a mixed bag, like most teams. Take away the big two (say they got Oden instead of Durant and take Eric Gordon instead, or if OJ Mayo had dropped to them instead of Westbrook.). Now how does that team look? Those two things are the essential ingredients and there was a lot of luck involved.

Second, it remains to be seen if the OKC Thunder will be successful long-term. Essentially, the owners gambled that the new CBA will be much more friendly to small-market teams. If it isn't, they are in trouble.

Modern NBA requires BOATLOADS of cashflow.

An entire stadium full of college-like crazed fans is a good start, but far, far short of meeting the requirement.

The number one element is large TV audience combined with a local broadcaster willing to build a network around the team. That is what leads to monster TV deals.

 

I have now become a OKL Thunder Hater.

 

You remember it differently than I do. As I recall, it was more surprise/disbelief that OKC supported the Hornets as well as they did, and continued disbelief that it could keep up. Everything was doom and gloom around the NW.

I call b.s. on that. Luck and intelligence are impossible to differentiate when it comes to drafting at the top of the board. Fact is, OKC has hit home runs with the majority of its picks: Durant, Westbrook, Ibaka, Harden, and even Green who was flipped for a better fit. (Much like Telfair is one of the best picks in Blazers history because he was flipped for Roy!) That's not luck there, that's building a complete roster from the draft with nary a miss.

That's entirely irrelevant to whether they're successful now...

 

Wait until the honeymoon is over. ALL fan bases initially support their new team - especially when it's their first professional team without competition for their discretionary spending dollars from NFL, MLB or NHL teams

Ironically, the first several seasons the Hornets were in the league (in Charlotte), they lead the NBA in attendance. It was eerily similar to OKC's current love affair with their new team. Newness, combined with draft luck (Larry Johnson and Alonzo morning on Charlotte's case) that led to almost instant success on the court drew the fans in. As the only professional team in a small market and a history of fervent support for local college teams further enhanced and extended the honeymoon period. Once the Hornet's fell on hard times, and started losing, the fan base quickly turned on the team and the owner and couldn't wait to chase them out of town.

I wonder how well OKC would draw if Durant left and the team suffered through 5 or 6 straight losing seasons. It's easy for a small market to support a winner. The real test is if will they support a loser long enough for them to rebuild and resume winning?

BNM

 

Gee, like the Jail Blazers? The same could be said of any unsuccessful team. Winning is all that matters, regardless of the location. See: Lakers and Clippers.

 

Sounds like Ackerley, not Schultz, made the billionaire's spoiled sister pay for her own tickets. Why does this mean that men are immature and not grown-ups? Why do you think that 2 men should make a deal about a woman without involving the prima donna? Do you hate women? To use your words, why can't the supposedly intelligent billionaire woman resolve things without dragging in her entitlement of a free lunch from a man?

 

except for this guy.

We gave many more reasons which may yet prove correct, like the age and size of Ford Center. OKC voters approved its expansion, then once they got the Sonics, started opposing expansion. After OKC spends money like Seattle did on KeyArena, we'll see whether the owners return 6 years later demanding an all-new half-billion dollar arena located far from downtown, as they did in Seattle, and then settle for a used arena in a city a fourth the size, as they did in OKC.