Steve Ballmer rebrands Clippers

[HomeRunBaker]

Long story short, TV contracts (and they're up for a new one soon, both the local clippers and the league), the best international marketing, and an extremely owner friendly CBA.

While this is all true the valuations are still going to be extremely high.

To answer original posters question the current annual revenues are $130m for LA to $109m for the Bucks. Milwaukee sold at a 5x multiple based off future revenue expectations such as the new ESPN/TNT contract in two years. For LA's multiple to equal this Ballmer would have to find a way to turn $130m annually into $400m......no small task.

The one outlier is the local TV bidding war between Fox and Time Warner that could result in an equity partnership but still that figures to get them up to $200m. I'm comfortable with the valuation I posted weeks ago of $1.3-1.5B.

Ballmer has more motives than solely profit here however.....plus the world is going to see how completely insane he is. Makes Cuban look tame.

 

[snowmanny]

SumnerH-I understand that, but is the local TV market for regular season basketball of the number 2 team in LA worth 1.5Billion more?

And how much are the Nets worth? They sold for less than the Bucks.

Edit:HRBs post makes a lot of sense, thanks.

 

[CoRP]

Don't confuse sports "franchises" with typical franchise arrangements, e.g. McDonalds or Pizza Hut, where there is a big franchisor and a bunch of small franchisees.

Most states have statutes to protect the little franchisee against the big bad corporate franchisor. These statutes require due process, e.g. prior notice and cause for franchise termination.

The NBA is really a legal cartel formed by 30 big guys. Their arrangement is set out in a constitution which someone posted here (thanks!) to which every owner agreed. This document sets out the grounds for termination and what process is due. The owner being terminated gets a hearing and then there is a vote by the other 29 owners. If 3/4 vote to terminate an owner, he's out. The ousted owner doesn't forfeit his property. He's simply required to convert one form of property (the franchise) into another (cash) at a time when he or she may not care to do so.

Got it. So it's just like baseball. Essentially operates outside of the law because every other form of cartel is, of course, illegal. 
 
Btw, isn't eminent domain kinda similar? Property owners are simply require to convert one form of property for cash?

 

[Brickowski]

Btw, isn't eminent domain kinda similar? Property owners are simply require to convert one form of property for cash?

I suppose it is, but in eminent domain, the government does the taking. Also, there is no "wrongdoing" required. If they want to build the highway and your property is in the way, they can force you to sell (but they have to pay fair market value).

 

[BigMike]

yep.
 
 
 
No kidding. what a fucking tool he is -- i knew that from his term at Windows, but a quick glance at that idiotic video just gives confirming images.  I"m guessing he stays out....hopefully for the Clippers that's true.

 
 
Come on we are going way over the top here. 
 
He was the star of company meetings where he was playing to his employees.   His "I Love this Company" stick can look silly from the outside, but when you are in the room, or the stadium as the company meetings are, he is out there playing to a crowd, and he is most beloved.
 
He is going to be a great owner.   He wears his passion on his sleeves, and will be a sight to watch on the sidelines or in his box at Clippers game.  I assume he will be in a box, simply because he has way to much nervous energy to sit watching.
 
There is nothing in his history to suggest he will become a Jerry Jones type reactionary owner.  He will give his employees the money they need to do their job, and will expect results no doubt about it. But at the same time, while he may be a guy in the room at the draft party, more likely making the announcements,  I don't seem him being the guy pushing his agenda on draft picks, or forcing trades

 

[Marciano490]

Ballmer probably has pretty good lawyers and if they weren't fairly sure that Sterling would lose Ballmer would not have made the offer. And if Sterling delays or manages to torpedo the sale of the Clippers, Ballmer may have claims against Sterling for tortious interference, among other things.

Tortious interference with a contract that might lose him money? He's paying a ton for this franchise.

 

[Cellar-Door]

Can anyone explain to me why the Clippers are worth ~4x more than the Bucks? Or whether $2Billion is what most sports franchises are actually worth? I mean, I would have assumed that the Cowboys and Yankees and Red Sox and lots of teams were worth way more than the Clippers. I would have assumed the Celtics were worth as much.

Is there legitimacy to this purchase price or is this like people bidding on tulips or Beanie Babies or something?

They are in the second biggest media market and have a good team.
The Bucks are in Milwaukee and suck. Also the owner took less money to make sure the team wasn't moved. If he hadn't cared the Bucks would have sold for more and been on their way to Seattle.

 

[SumnerH]

Come on we are going way over the top here. 
 
He was the star of company meetings where he was playing to his employees.   His "I Love this Company" stick can look silly from the outside, but when you are in the room, or the stadium as the company meetings are, he is out there playing to a crowd, and he is most beloved.

My friends at Microsoft thought he was a jerk.  Google indicates that they're not alone.

http://www.complex.com/tech/2011/07/horrible-bosses-the-worst-tech-ceos-of-all-time/steve-ballmer
 

Asshole moment: Snatching an employee’s iPhone, pretend to stomp it, and making several unflattering remarks about the person during a private company meeting.

A gaggle of Microsoft employees, as well as the general public, agree on one thing: Steve Ballmer is a nut job. If he's not screeching and frolicking on stage (reference his Dance Monkeyboy video), then he's putting his employees on blast for owning Apple products. This year's approval rating surveys from Glassdoor (29 percent) and GeekWire (40 percent) showed that employees voted him the worst tech CEO. And since taking over for Bill Gates at the turn of the century, the polarizing Ballmer has earned a rep amongst workers and investors as the arrogant egomaniac responsible for massive layoffs and losing billions. The KIN failure speaks for itself. When you take into consideration his long list of insane public outbursts, poor vision, and lack of leadership, it's no wonder Microsoft continues to struggle.

 

[Brickowski]

Tortious interference with a contract that might lose him money? He's paying a ton for this franchise.

If there is tortious interference with contractual relations, does it matter if it is a "good" contract or a "bad" contract? And if it does, who decides? But it's all probably moot because (according to reports) Shelly Sterling has indemnified the league and the other owners against any claims by Donald. So in effect he's suing himself and the other beneficiaries of the Sterling family trust.

 

[dcmissle]

My friends at Microsoft thought he was a jerk.  Google indicates that they're not alone.

http://www.complex.com/tech/2011/07/horrible-bosses-the-worst-tech-ceos-of-all-time/steve-ballmer
 

There is no doubt that he was an enormous asshole, literally. Nor is there any doubt that the company was eclipsed during his leadship.

But that was then and he a great chance to turn the page. Just hire -- and retain -- the right people, smile for the cameras, and stay the fuck out of the way.

 

[CoRP]

But it's all probably moot because (according to reports) Shelly Sterling has indemnified the league and the other owners against any claims by Donald. So in effect he's suing himself and the other beneficiaries of the Sterling family trust.

This is the most interesting part to me. I'd love to know the process by which Shelly managed to strip Donald of essentially all of his rights in this matter in what appears to be a matter of days and with nothing other than a doctor's note.

 

[dcmissle]

This is the most interesting part to me. I'd love to know the process by which Shelly managed to strip Donald of essentially all of his rights in this matter in what appears to be a matter of days and with nothing other than a doctor's note.

Ownership probably was placed in a trust when he acquired the team in 1981, for tax reasons. Trusts have a mechanism for transferring decision making authority when someone like Sterling becomes disabled. Suppose, for example, he had a massive stroke.

Pursuant to such a provision, reportedly, more than one doctor declared Sterling incompetent, and decision making authority was transferred to Shelly.

As we discussed a couple of days back, this could have been a face saving move on Sterling's part, but I don't know. He just strikes me as an old, idiosyncratic, racist rather than mentally incompetent in the legal sense of that word.

Consider -- Sterling has many business holdings. Have you seen anything that he has been removed from authority with respect to those?

 

[snowmanny]

There is no doubt he was a horrible person for a very long time, but if he has actual signs of dementia then what he said on those tapes and subsequently should be seen in a different light.

If the league accepts the notion that he is mentally incompetent to make responsible decisions then I certainly do not see how they can justify fining him for statements that may have been at least in part the result of a medical condition.

 

[dcmissle]

Yes, and are you a member of Sterling's legal team?

The League will be reluctant to attack the declaration of incompetency. It provided Silver with a useful lever to effect a lightning quick sale and to avoid a difficult owners' vote. But it fuels an argument that Silver's fine and lifetime ban were rash and disproportionate. It took all of 4 days to come down with the punishment. He verified that Sterling said those things. What about mitigating circumstances?

Of course, this leads nowhere for Sterling from a damages standpoint. He's laughing at the bank, at 81 with prostate cancer, having sold an asset for 4x what Forbes said it was worth last year and more than 2x what Rovell estimates it would have fetched last month.

The lawsuit is likely to fade, but if he chooses Sterling can have fun taking discovery this summer and fall. The money he would spend financing his suit and the League's defense would be relative chump change.

 

[bankshot1]

While I understand the NBA's desire to put this affair to bed, and get Sterling out of the league, I'm frankly surprised that the due diligence on Balmer etal was completed in hours.

 

[PBDWake]

I'm pretty sure Ballmer's been vetted at least twice before by the NBA in his attempts to purchase the Kings and the Bucks. In fact, wasn't he all set to buy the Kings before they swooped in last minute with the local ownership group?

 

[PedroKsBambino]

 
 
Come on we are going way over the top here. 
 
He was the star of company meetings where he was playing to his employees.   His "I Love this Company" stick can look silly from the outside, but when you are in the room, or the stadium as the company meetings are, he is out there playing to a crowd, and he is most beloved.
 
He is going to be a great owner.   He wears his passion on his sleeves, and will be a sight to watch on the sidelines or in his box at Clippers game.  I assume he will be in a box, simply because he has way to much nervous energy to sit watching.
 
There is nothing in his history to suggest he will become a Jerry Jones type reactionary owner.  He will give his employees the money they need to do their job, and will expect results no doubt about it. But at the same time, while he may be a guy in the room at the draft party, more likely making the announcements,  I don't seem him being the guy pushing his agenda on draft picks, or forcing trades

 
I don't think that's what his history at Microsoft suggests---he was not a well-regarded CEO either operationally or strategically.  What is the data you're using to suggest the above?

 

[Brickowski]

I don't think that's what his history at Microsoft suggests---he was not a well-regarded CEO either operationally or strategically.  What is the data you're using to suggest the above?

He was a ruthless prick from all accounts, but he's not stupid. He didn't meddle in Microsoft's software architecture, he just ran the business side. He'll hire a Phil Jackson or Danny Ainge type to run basketball operations. He won't be a Dolan.

 

[PedroKsBambino]

He was a ruthless prick from all accounts, but he's not stupid. He didn't meddle in Microsoft's software architecture, he just ran the business side. He'll hire a Phil Jackson or Danny Ainge type to run basketball operations. He won't be a Dolan.

 
Again, where does that come from?   I know of one business unit there that had heavy exec interference with development; what specifically are you citing for the above?

 

[Brickowski]

Again, where does that come from?   I know of one business unit there that had heavy exec interference with development; what specifically are you citing for the above?

I know a number of people who worked at MS or went to work there. But it's a huge organization, so it's like the blind men trying to describe the elephant. They may well have been units where the executives on the business or sales side (or Ballmer himself) meddled.

 

[soxhop411]

While I understand the NBA's desire to put this affair to bed, and get Sterling out of the league, I'm frankly surprised that the due diligence on Balmer etal was completed in hours.

He has tried to buy an NBA team before, so they already did a "background check" on him then

 

[bankshot1]

He has tried to buy an NBA team before, so they already did a "background check" on him then

I understand he gave them his  ID and all was copacetic
 

 

[bowiac]

He was a ruthless prick from all accounts, but he's not stupid. He didn't meddle in Microsoft's software architecture, he just ran the business side. He'll hire a Phil Jackson or Danny Ainge type to run basketball operations. He won't be a Dolan.

Unlike you or PedroKsBambino, I know nothing of Microsoft's internal organization under Ballmer, but I don't really think his tenure at Microsoft will have much predictive value for what he's going to be doing with the Clippers.
 
Meddling or not with a public company where you have shareholders, and legal duties to do what's best for the company's bottom line is a very different question than meddling with what is effectively a private toy. By almost any conventional business calculus, he badly overpaid for the team. He did so because owning a sports team is fun.
 
Put another way, if I somehow took over a sports team, I'd be a James Dolan/Mark Cuban type, even if I thought the team would be in better hands with someone else. Why? Because it's more fun. I'd rather screw around with the team and risk running it into the ground than sit back and let someone else have all the fun. (Obviously I'm also naive enough to think I'd do a better job than Dolan, but that's besides the point here).
 
I have no idea if Ballmer will do that or not, but I think the issue is largely unrelated from how he ran Microsoft.

 

[PedroKsBambino]

I agree it's a quite different context, and would not suggest we know with a high confidence level what he'll do when running a team; I also think it would be foolish to ignore the data we have on Ballmer's history completely, too.
 
Like many things, it's not black-and-white and the better approach is to think both about what we know and what we don't, I think.

 

[HomeRunBaker]

I have no idea how Ballmer will run the team but I'm guessing he's going to be loud, raucous, and having fun. I have a very good idea that bowiac would do a better job than Dolan had done in pretty much handling the teams acquisitions over to Worldwide Wes and all the CAA clients.

As an aside it will be interesting to see how Phil handles Wes and his stable of Knick clients as well as the relationship with Dolan.

 

[bowiac]

I have no idea how Ballmer will run the team but I'm guessing he's going to be loud, raucous, and having fun. I have a very good idea that bowiac would do a better job than Dolan had done in pretty much handling the teams acquisitions over to Worldwide Wes and all the CAA clients.

If I could resist the urge to make myself the coach (and maybe 10th man off the bench)...

 

[HriniakPosterChild]

Donald Sterling steps out of way in Ballmer’s $2 billion deal for Clippers
 

Los Angeles Clippers owner Donald Sterling agreed Wednesday to sign off on selling the team to former Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer for what would be a record $2 billion, according to his attorney.
 
Sterling “has made an agreement with the NBA to resolve all their differences” and as co-owner has given his consent to a deal that was negotiated by his wife, Shelly Sterling, to sell the team, said attorney Maxwell Blecher.
 

 

 

[soxhop411]

NEW LOGO!
 

 

[soxhop411]

Arash Markazi ‏@ArashMarkazi  10h10 hours ago
The Clippers are set to unveil their new logo and uniforms tomorrow morning. http://es.pn/1R4Hm1z 

 

[soxhop411]

 

[Infield Infidel]

 they should have taken one of the one's Colbert Report made for them
 

 

[Nick Kaufman]

I am not crazy about and I thought the old logos and unis worked pretty well.

 

[Bigpupp]

It looks like shit on the shirt, but I actually like the second one posted.

 

[Tangled Up In Red]

Formal logo looks very NBA branded.

 

[kfoss99]

Maybe I'm an old fuddy-duddy, but why can't the clippers' logo be an actual clipper ship?  I was under five when they stopped using this logo, but ships are cool.  Why have a new logo that seems interchangeable with the Thunders'?
 

 

[Stevie1der]

If you look at the logo another way, it doubles as Cal, short for California.  I wonder if that was intentional?

 

[JohntheBaptist]

If you look at the logo another way, it doubles as Cal, short for California.  I wonder if that was intentional?

I'm just seeing a Cla Meredith study hall doodle.

The logo with CLIPPERS in big black letters upthread a bit looks like the front of an EA Sports video game.

 

[steveluck7]

EA Sports presents:

 

[Tangled Up In Red]

EA Sports presents:

That's it.

 

[Buster Olney the Lonely]

EA Sports presents:

Yeah, that was my first thought. The Clippers have basically had the same logo, color palette and typography since the 80s (http://www.sportslogos.net/logos/list_by_team/236). 
I've thought for a while that they were due for a rebranding more than any other team in the NBA. 
That's so boring, though. 

 

[Conigliaro's Potential]

 

[Nick Kaufman]

Yeah. I don't like the EA sports logo either.

 

[jayhoz]

NEW LOGO!
 

 
Was this done in MS Paint?

 

[amlothi]

Looks like a staple.

 

[Conigliaro's Potential]

Staples Center.

 

[Drocca]

In the center?

 

[HomeRunBaker]

Staples Center.

Maybe Ballmer should have changed the teams nickname to The Staples......then DeAndre Jordan could be The Staples Center.

 

[ifmanis5]

It's about as creative and dynamic as Windows XP.

 

[IdiotKicker]

It's about as creative and dynamic as Windows XP.

It's a feature, not a bug.

 

[moly99]

Maybe I'm an old fuddy-duddy, but why can't the clippers' logo be an actual clipper ship?

 
The Columbus Clippers (Cleveland's AAA team) logo:
 

 
Personally I would either leave everything the same or go for a full rebrand. Keeping the name and colors and giving it a sterile, corporate look doesn't improve things.