Jump to content

LA Kings to KC?


Ez Street

Recommended Posts

I've heard these crazy rumors of the LA Kings possibly moving to Kansas City ever since they announced the Kings would play the Blues on Septemeber 22 at the Sprint Center.

Yes, AEG owns the Kings and runs the Sprint Center, but would they actually consider moving? Surely not.

I found this stuff on the internet. The author makes some compelling arguments in favor of this happening.

Why the Kings could move to Kansas City:

1) The owner of the team also owns the arena/arena operations in KC.

2) The owner of the team has insisted he has to have a major sports team as a tenant in the building in KC that he bought along with the City; he actually PROMISED this would happen.

3) The owner of the team owns the Staples Center and has been on record that he'd make more money with 10 concerts than he does with his 45 Clippers games.

4) The Kings shipped out two home-grown players, one looking for a big contract and the other already with a big contract. They are 13 million short of the salary cap floor and have almost no long term arrangements.

5) The Kings had an almost motionless off-season after finishing last.

6) The Kings lease is with an arena owned by the same company that owns the team.

7) The owner of the team is publicly listing a "percentage" of the team for sale.

8 ) The owner of the team has been in the range of 90% of a full building, got its salary cap put in and claims to be losing more money than ever!

9) The owner of the team has scheduled preseason games at the rumored arena vs. the new cities most likely geographic/NHL rival. (Kings vs. Blues next Monday)

10) The owner is heavily invested in the downtown real estate around the new arena, but does not have a "mover" type interest at all ... like they do with the Lakers, Clippers and concert stuff at Staples.

Regarding #3, AEG doesn?t own the Clippers, Donald Sterling does, and he will likely never move. If they had to remove on tenant to make more money, the Kings would make sense.

On #9, the Kings also have an exhibition in Las Vegas versus the Colorado Avalanche. One could say they are testing a potential rival their also. I'd more likely believe since they own/operate both arenas, they are just helping themselves fill events.

Not sue what #10 means. I?m not aware of AEG having any interests in KC besides the Sprint Center.

I'm not saying I buy that this will/could happen, but it does give you pause to think.

Rebuttals?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 62
  • Created
  • Last Reply
There's no way a LA team is ever moving to Missouri!

Oh wait...

Only to return to LA as early as 2010 becuase his mom, who owned the team, died earlier this year!

Chip won't be moving the Rams....if they move. He'll unload the team on someone else, who will then make the move.

On 8/1/2010 at 4:01 PM, winters in buffalo said:
You manage to balance agitation with just enough salient points to keep things interesting. Kind of a low-rent DG_Now.
On 1/2/2011 at 9:07 PM, Sodboy13 said:
Today, we are all otaku.

"The city of Peoria was once the site of the largest distillery in the world and later became the site for mass production of penicillin. So it is safe to assume that present-day Peorians are descended from syphilitic boozehounds."-Stephen Colbert

POTD: February 15, 2010, June 20, 2010

The Glorious Bloom State Penguins (NCFAF) 2014: 2-9, 2015: 7-5 (L Pineapple Bowl), 2016: 1-0 (NCFAB) 2014-15: 10-8, 2015-16: 14-5 (SMC Champs, L 1st Round February Frenzy)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Except the Kings (NBA) own that trademark.

They could change to Monarchs.

Doesn't MLB own the "Kansas City Monarchs" trademark though?

Another weird bit of trivia for you young'uns: the Kansas City Kings (NBA) had to change their name when the team moved there from Cincinnati. The reason? The team's name in their original home was the Cincinnati Royals.

nav-logo.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Except the Kings (NBA) own that trademark.

They could change to Monarchs.

Doesn't MLB own the "Kansas City Monarchs" trademark though?

Another weird bit of trivia for you young'uns: the Kansas City Kings (NBA) had to change their name when the team moved there from Cincinnati. The reason? The team's name in their second home was the Cincinnati Royals.

You're plumb forgittin' to tell the young 'uns about the Rochester Royals.

Most Liked Content of the Day -- February 15, 2017, August 21, 2017, August 22, 2017     /////      Proud Winner of the CCSLC Post of the Day Award -- April 8, 2008

Originator of the Upside Down Sarcasm Smilie -- November 1, 2005  🙃

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Except the Kings (NBA) own that trademark.

They could change to Monarchs.

Doesn't MLB own the "Kansas City Monarchs" trademark though?

Another weird bit of trivia for you young'uns: the Kansas City Kings (NBA) had to change their name when the team moved there from Cincinnati. The reason? The team's name in their original home was the Cincinnati Royals.

No, but I think the Negro Leagues Museum does. Whether or not their trademark pertains to anything outside the Negro League team I cannot say.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's no way a LA team is ever moving to Missouri!

Oh wait...

Only to return to LA as early as 2010 becuase his mom, who owned the team, died earlier this year!

Chip won't be moving the Rams....if they move. He'll unload the team on someone else, who will then make the move.

And he's made a criteria for buying the team (which is not up for sale, but is to an extent available) keeping it in St. Louis. Stadium issues are going to challenge that no matter who owns the team, but they're resolvable.

LA to KC would certainly be an interesting move.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Except the Kings (NBA) own that trademark.

They could change to Monarchs.

Doesn't MLB own the "Kansas City Monarchs" trademark though?

Another weird bit of trivia for you young'uns: the Kansas City Kings (NBA) had to change their name when the team moved there from Cincinnati. The reason? The team's name in their second home was the Cincinnati Royals.

You're plumb forgittin' to tell the young 'uns about the Rochester Royals.

D'Oh! I forgot about Rochester. My bad. To recap the progression...

The Rochester Royals moved to Cincinnati, becoming the Cincinnati Royals;

The Cincinnati Royals moved to Kansas City, becoming the Kansas City Kings;

For a season or two the team played some home games in Omaha, calling themselves the Kansas City-Omaha Kings;

Then the team moved to Sacramento, where they play today.

nav-logo.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's no way a LA team is ever moving to Missouri!

Oh wait...

Only to return to LA as early as 2010 becuase his mom, who owned the team, died earlier this year!

Chip won't be moving the Rams....if they move. He'll unload the team on someone else, who will then make the move.

Yeah, but arent the Rams locked into the Edward Jones Dome for at least another ten years??

I mean, that is the reason the Rams moved to STL -- and it's not like the dome is that old.

6uXNWAo.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've heard these crazy rumors of the LA Kings possibly moving to Kansas City ever since they announced the Kings would play the Blues on Septemeber 22 at the Sprint Center.

Yes, AEG owns the Kings and runs the Sprint Center, but would they actually consider moving? Surely not.

I found this stuff on the internet. The author makes some compelling arguments in favor of this happening.

Why the Kings could move to Kansas City:

1) The owner of the team also owns the arena/arena operations in KC.

2) The owner of the team has insisted he has to have a major sports team as a tenant in the building in KC that he bought along with the City; he actually PROMISED this would happen.

3) The owner of the team owns the Staples Center and has been on record that he'd make more money with 10 concerts than he does with his 45 Clippers games.

4) The Kings shipped out two home-grown players, one looking for a big contract and the other already with a big contract. They are 13 million short of the salary cap floor and have almost no long term arrangements.

5) The Kings had an almost motionless off-season after finishing last.

6) The Kings lease is with an arena owned by the same company that owns the team.

7) The owner of the team is publicly listing a "percentage" of the team for sale.

8 ) The owner of the team has been in the range of 90% of a full building, got its salary cap put in and claims to be losing more money than ever!

9) The owner of the team has scheduled preseason games at the rumored arena vs. the new cities most likely geographic/NHL rival. (Kings vs. Blues next Monday)

10) The owner is heavily invested in the downtown real estate around the new arena, but does not have a "mover" type interest at all ... like they do with the Lakers, Clippers and concert stuff at Staples.

Regarding #3, AEG doesn?t own the Clippers, Donald Sterling does, and he will likely never move. If they had to remove on tenant to make more money, the Kings would make sense.

On #9, the Kings also have an exhibition in Las Vegas versus the Colorado Avalanche. One could say they are testing a potential rival their also. I'd more likely believe since they own/operate both arenas, they are just helping themselves fill events.

Not sue what #10 means. I?m not aware of AEG having any interests in KC besides the Sprint Center.

I'm not saying I buy that this will/could happen, but it does give you pause to think.

Rebuttals?

these are the same idiots who moved the san jose earthquakes because san jose state didnt let them build a stadium and not let SJSU have any say over any events that go on there and then moved the quakes to houston, so them moving the kings would not suprise me

 

 

The Danimal said:
Texas is the state that gave us George W. Bush and Sarah Palin. 'Nuff said.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's no way a LA team is ever moving to Missouri!

Oh wait...

Only to return to LA as early as 2010 becuase his mom, who owned the team, died earlier this year!

Chip won't be moving the Rams....if they move. He'll unload the team on someone else, who will then make the move.

Yeah, but arent the Rams locked into the Edward Jones Dome for at least another ten years??

I mean, that is the reason the Rams moved to STL -- and it's not like the dome is that old.

Actually they will have an out beginning in 2015. (Sorry STLfanatic...I can't see the Edward Jones Dome receiving enough renovations to hit the criteria in the lease language)

Although, as Seattle has taught us, leases can be bought out as well. Especially if folks don't come to games.

On 8/1/2010 at 4:01 PM, winters in buffalo said:
You manage to balance agitation with just enough salient points to keep things interesting. Kind of a low-rent DG_Now.
On 1/2/2011 at 9:07 PM, Sodboy13 said:
Today, we are all otaku.

"The city of Peoria was once the site of the largest distillery in the world and later became the site for mass production of penicillin. So it is safe to assume that present-day Peorians are descended from syphilitic boozehounds."-Stephen Colbert

POTD: February 15, 2010, June 20, 2010

The Glorious Bloom State Penguins (NCFAF) 2014: 2-9, 2015: 7-5 (L Pineapple Bowl), 2016: 1-0 (NCFAB) 2014-15: 10-8, 2015-16: 14-5 (SMC Champs, L 1st Round February Frenzy)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Doesn't MLB own the "Kansas City Monarchs" trademark though?

No, but I think the Negro Leagues Museum does.

Yes, the Negro Leagues Baseball Museum holds the trademark on Kansas City Monarchs.

In your opinion, would this/could this effect naming them that?

Technically same goes for Kansas City Kings. Is there a precident for this?

I know in these trademarks they make no exclusive claims on town names like "Kansas City" or the nicknames such as "Kings", but together they do. Is that just for the spor they play or is it for anything using "Kansas City Kings" for example?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.




×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.