Doesn't matter how many show up. Team owned by CB et al and worse case gone in two.

Clay is to testify this morning.

Day 2.....

Minute-by-minute: Day 2 at Seattle vs. Sonics trial | Seattle Sonics | KING5.com | News for Seattle, Washington

That is completely ludicrous. This is FEDERAL COURT, not the principal's office. Hopefulyl Pechman heard that the guy was intentionally trying to disrupt proceedings and will nail the next butthead with contempt.

well, bennett testified and i still feel really good about the case! it definitely seems that nickels hurt seattle immensely yesterday.

my bad.... looks like he isn't through testifying yet.

Looks like Seattle is spending a lot of time trying to show that the PBC was aware there were risks and that the lease sucked. I'm thinking... so what? Companies buy other companies all the time with bad leases in place. Usually they have every intention of renegotiating them where they can or liquidating them to get them off the books.

Anyway, I'm not sure if this case can resolve everything in time for a move this year. If I understand it correctly, this case will only answer the question of whether or not the PBC can pay off the lease, not how much it will cost to do so. So, even if they win, aren't we looking at some sort of mediation at least to find the price, especially if the city really is in a stall and bleed strategy.

I also think it's funny that Seattle pointed out there is no buy out clause, because this is usually something that the lessor wants to put in so that it can stipulate any fee or penalities in doing so, especially because leases or so rarely specifically enforcable. They may have actually cost themselves some money by not including it. In my experience, most people understand that if you just pay off the remaining term of the lease, then you're good. That's usually a sweet deal for the lessor anyway. But, I've never had a lease with a city or owned anything nearly as high profile as a professional sports team, so what do I know...

Yes, but if monetary damages are awarded, then that ensuing mediation/hearing won't keep the team from moving to OKC.

From the PI - Surprise e-mails that I would think would put a big hole in Schultz's case:
The defense talks with Bennett
Lead defense attorney Brad Keller seeks to establish that Clay Bennett worked hard to try to get an arena in Renton and is reviewing the entire process of the PBC group hiring firms to evaluate sites, Bennett's calls to local leaders trying to drum up support and he disappointment that it did not occur.

*Bennett tells Keller that the PBC group would have more leverage in gaining a new arena than the Howard Schultz group because it could use relocation as a negotiating ploy

*Bennett reveals Oklahoma business Larry Nichols was an original invest in the team but he pulled out when it was revealed, "the Sonics would be committed to keep the team in Seattle."

*Bennett told Keller that trading Ray Allen and allowing Rashard Lewis to sign a $118 million contract with the Orlando Magic were strictly basketball decisions: "In this business, basketball is first and foremost and team development is first and foremost those decisions were purely made to redevelop and reposition the basketball program."

*Bennett said less than a day after the sale was finalized on Oct. 30, 2006, he toured potential arena sites in King County.

*Bennett then hired HOK, an architectural firm that designs state-of-the-art arenas to began a design of a new Seattle arena.

*Keller asked why Bennett was against renovating KeyArena.

"There is an industry understanding of KeyArena," Bennett said. "It has nice site lines, approximate seating to the floor." but "It would not meet the economic model of the NBA."
For once, we've got some e-mail revelations that seriously hurt the Schultz's suit, IMO:

Bennett said the arena lacks "high-end amenity" such as club seats and luxury boxes closero the floor, a refurbishing "requires the courtside footprint to be dramatically changed."

*Bennett also pointed out the lack of NBA specified facilities, locker rooms and press areas

BELLEVUE AND RENTON

When asked about a potential Bellevue site, Bennett said, it was "A significant part of our market potential but there were restrictions in that site. It required a significant land assemblage." He also pointed out that the Safeway site was too close to road systems and they could not develop ample parking.

*Bennett also said he expressed interest in NHL Hockey, met with commissioner Gary Bettman met before their board at one time.

When asked about Renton, Bennett said he was excited about the site there: "Renton really wanted the building they were very enthusiastic about it. Completely an economic turnaround for the area."

"We felt the conversations were going pretty well as far as the Renton site, getting indications that we're making progress."

Keller presents Exhibit 558, an e-mail to Sonics employees

Here are some key points:

Bennett sent and e-mails to team employees saying: "We are not going to give up," regarding a new arena

*Bennett solicited assistance from Microsoft mogul Steve Ballmer

A Bennett e-maill to Steve Ballmer on Feb 15, 2007 said: "Speaker (Frank) Chopp blasted us this time (in the state legislature). Would appreciate anything you would be willing to do!!! Thanks!!!"

In another email, Bennett wrote to Ballmer: "Legislative leadership needs to get a message that the big boys want this to move, the dirty work will be addressed at the county. It doesn't need to come directly from you, but Ross Hunter, Lisa Brown and Frank zchopp needed a push. Continued support of the Governor would help as well.
Thank you!"

*Bennett said he also met with land developer Dave Sabey and the Muckleshoot Tribe

I thought the same thing. PBC's "damning evidence" is having a lot more impact because they didn't leak to the media weeks ago.

It's having an impact on me. PBC's attorney is scoring against Seattle's economist right now. Apparently the economist is testifying as to the unquantifiable benefits of having a team (thus requiring specific performance). Apparently the economist did a study that said this for Seattle and didn't quantify damages. However, the SAME economist quoting his OWN owrk in a similar study based on Los Angeles DID quantify a number. PBC's attorney is questioning why, with such similar studies, one had quantifiable damages and the other didn't! DING!

What I see is that Keller's folks have done real top-notch trial prep. The PBC witnesses have been through extensive coaching, major background research has been done on each City witness.

The city on the other hand seems to have hired a firm which is content to fly by the seat of their pants. I'm wondering if this was a low-bid type job?

__________________
It's a friendlier OKCTalk!

If it had been me, I would have quoted all of Zimbalist's studies back at him. He shouldn't be able to provide any quantifiable economic losses, because he doesn't believe there are any. He's selling himself to the highest bidder, and will change his story on a dime. Here's a prior quote from him:

"Q: Talk for a moment about the impact of sports on regional and local economies. How have sports altered the social development of communities?

A: The independent economic research that's been done on the question of whether sports teams and sports facilities have an economic impact on an area has uniformly found that there is no positive impact. By having a sports team or a new stadium or arena, you don't increase the level of per capita income, and you don't increase the level of employment. There's no direct economic development benefit."

Q: To sum up, then, do sports contribute to economically healthier, more viable communities?

A: I don't think sports contribute to economic viability in a community. They do provide a form of entertainment, engagement, and community identity, and that can be very positive."



This is about as positive as he has ever been about sports in a community. I do wonder why Taylor didn't question him about any of his papers.

I LOVE IT!!!!

__________________
Oklahoma City - The surprise your family has been looking for.

Justice bought and sold. In our legal system, little is decided on its merits, but on how much money you have, and are willing to pay, for justice. Looks like maybe the Gaylords, etc. have chosen to pay for the best legal team. If it gets the team here - great. But just reading your post made me think again how in our legal system - it's all about the money.

Solitude you are so far off base on that comment it isn't even funny. The City of Seattle has access to way more funds for this trial than PBC has.

__________________
Oklahoma City - The surprise your family has been looking for.

Um, they set aside ONE MILLION DOLLARS to litigate. I think they're doing fine on funds.

Seattle has a $19 million set aside for lawyers this year. If they need more they can get it. Aside from the dollar amount, the comment was pretty offensive to me as an American.

__________________
Oklahoma City - The surprise your family has been looking for.

Actually, I think the performance of Seattle's counsel is more of a reflection of strategy and motivation than of competence. This action has been heavily motivated by publicity and probably spite. Their strategy is designed more around politics than law. They wanted their stuff leaked, because what they really want from all of this is to make themselves look good to the Sonics supporters, keep themselves from looking impotent, and make the PBC look like a bunch of pirates, so the city of Seattle doesn't look like it lost a pro team on its own merit. An actual win for them would just be a bonus.

On the other hand, the PBC needs the win or they risk losing a lot of money for two years, before they even have a chance at seeing positive cash flow. So, they actually had no motivation to release any of their arguments or evidence before it was legally required of them. Doing so would just be tipping their hand. What we're really seeing is not a match up of good versus bad lawyers, but politicians versus businessmen and the differences in capital between their two fields.

Bingo. Excellent post BDP.

So tomorrow we have Bennett answering questions from his own lawyers and a redirect from the City. I would assume we will see McClendon. Who else do you think Seattle will call? I assume they would want someone that was pro-city since 3 of their first 4 didn't work out so well for them.

I personally can't wait for Wally Walker to explain who put the Ballmer group together, what their mission was, and the City's role in that mission.

__________________
Oklahoma City - The surprise your family has been looking for.

I don't know who has more money set aside for a lawsuit about a basketball team --- and that wasn't really my point.

My comment was offensive? That justice is for sale in America? Did you read Midtowner's post? He said:
That kind of thing costs BIG bucks. In this case it doesn't matter. When a person has been accused of robbery, rape or murder and it's prosecution of the state versus a public defender who doesn't have the funds to do all the things an expensive lawyer could do? What's that called, Kerry? It's called Justice For Sale. If that offends you as an American, why not acknowledge that it happens everyday in this country and try to change it instead of making out like I said something outrageous? Some of you Republicans just think you can pretend social inequities away.

Sorry.....back to topic.

While you have a point, it doesn't exist in this case, Solitude. Both sides have deep pockets.

i'm not sure why liberals seem to hate america. every country has flaws, but the Us is still the greatest country ever. no one else can touch us.

I'm with solitude about the legal system in general. But, let's also consider that one of the reasons that the Sonics are having a better time of it is because they're not really asking for anything unreasonable. They're asking to break a lease because they are losing a lot of money by fulfilling that lease. They have never suggested they won't compensate the city for it's losses, and I suspect there was an offer floated before the trial began that was over $26.5 million. The city of Seattle is demanding to keep a team in a location, not for financial reasons, but for fear of offending potential voters. Clearly, the mayor is not a Sonics fan, but he's worried about being known as the mayor who lost the Sonics, and that they will be missed more if/when they're gone than people currently anticipate. They want what I call municipal welfare, the reverse of corporate welfare. They want the Sonics' ownership to not only float the cash to buy the team the city considers its', but also to assume all losses AND provide a venue. So personally, I believe that the Sonics' ownership is going to look better during the trial. The question is, will the judge consider any of that, or will "specific performance" be demanded regardless of the financial losses that will be incurred by both the team and the city if it is enforced.