Anaheim Kings?

[CubsFanBudMan]

IceCap, I don't think the Coyotes situation is a fair comparison to this (or perhaps anything we've ever seen before). There are basketball fans in the L.A. area, and likely enough to support three teams. As far as Anaheim as a separate market, I've been on the L.A. suburb side of the argument when it has played out here in the past. This move by the NBA is going to test that, no question about it. They'll be branded Anaheim just like the Nets will be branded Brooklyn. In some ways it's a twist on the NBA's small-market strategy.

(As far as Newark, I'm not sure how that can't be considered the N.Y. market in the same way we put Anaheim with L.A. I'd be curious to hear your reasoning, but perhaps this isn't the thread for that.)

Also, being the third overall team in a smaller market like KC might not be any more lucrative than being the third NBA team in the huge L.A. market.

[IceCap]

Baseball season doesn't overlap with the NBA season. So no competition from the Royals. The NFL season would only pit the Chiefs against the Kings for the first portion of the NBA season. There's no NHL team in Kansas City, so the Kings would have the market to themselves for most of the season.

In Anaheim the Kings would have to not only have to compete with the Lakers and Clippers, but also the Ducks and LA Kings. The market is saturated enough as is. The Nets in Brooklyn isn't a good comparison because they would be the market's second NBA team, not the third. Also, the Brooklyn name has a legacy behind it, as well as being extremely marketable. Anaheim has neither.

Anaheim is essentially a LA suburb, and its fans are, from all accounts, already devoted to the Lakers. I'm sure there's a few Clippers fans in there as well. No one's switching allegiances from the Lakers to the Kings. And no one who's stuck with the Clippers this far is bailing now.

Also, I didn't compare this to the Coyotes situation, I only used it to illustrate how silly the "we'll have to grow the fanbase" business plan can be.

[McCall]

Baseball season doesn't overlap with the NBA season. So no competition from the Royals. The NFL season would only pit the Chiefs against the Kings for the first portion of the NBA season. There's no NHL team in Kansas City, so the Kings would have the market to themselves for most of the season.

In Anaheim the Kings would have to not only have to compete with the Lakers and Clippers, but also the Ducks and LA Kings. The market is saturated enough as is. The Nets in Brooklyn isn't a good comparison because they would be the market's second NBA team, not the third. Also, the Brooklyn name has a legacy behind it, as well as being extremely marketable. Anaheim has neither.

Anaheim is essentially a LA suburb, and its fans are, from all accounts, already devoted to the Lakers. I'm sure there's a few Clippers fans in there as well. No one's switching allegiances from the Lakers to the Kings. And no one who's stuck with the Clippers this far is bailing now.

Also, I didn't compare this to the Coyotes situation, I only used it to illustrate how silly the "we'll have to grow the fanbase" business plan can be.

MLB and NBA do overlap in April, but by then the Kings and the Royals would be out of playoff contention so it wouldn't really be an issue.

I think New York is about the only market that would work for 3 teams. With all of NYC/Long Island, Connecticut and the Northern part of New Jersey, I think it has the size to make it work. LA is a 2 sport city/market. It's not the entire Southern Cal market. San Diego is far enough away that it's not part of the LA market and thus is it's own. People there aren't gonna start rooting for the "Kings" just cuz they're in Anaheim. They'll either stick with whatever team they already do, or just ignore the NBA altogether.

[BBTV]

If you're the suburban dad who's kids want to go to NBA games but you can't get Lakers tickets (either availability or cost reasons) or just don't want to go into downtown LA on a weeknight, the Anaheim Kings might offer a nice local lower-cost alternative. Not saying it's the best way to rationalize it, or the best way to build a fan base, but I could see them at least selling a lot of tickets and being like another Clippers as far as being "profitable" but not "successful".

[The_Admiral]

With what money? Nobody has any money.

And when you say "nobody has any money," you mean that no municipalities (excepting Glendale, even though it doesn't really) have money to build stadiums for rich old guys to help them make more money. That era in American history is over for now, and hopefully forever.

And especially Las Vegas. Even if they built it, they wouldn't have enough revenue to operate it. Las Vegas is seriously dicked.

[ninersdd]

Also the Kings were at a time, a very bitter rival of the Lakers, so it would tough to get Laker fans to switch allegiances.

[The_Admiral]

True, but next year will mark ten years since the dubious Game 7 victory. (Good god, where does the time go.) Kids in fourth grade won't have been alive for the Kings getting jobbed. Kids in 6th grade were alive but surely unaware of the sports scene.

I wonder how provincial and borderline (if you'll pardon the expression) offensive the marketing effort will get to make sure that Orange County gives up the Lakers for them. "If you don't like THOSE LIMOUSINE LIBERALS sitting in the front row, this is the team for you!" "If you don't like to flip a car over every time we win, this is the team for you!" "If cholos frighten you, this is the team for you!"

KINGS BASKETBALL: We don't riot when we win titles. Probably because we don't win titles!

[dfwabel]

If you're the suburban dad who's kids want to go to NBA games but you can't get Lakers tickets (either availability or cost reasons) or just don't want to go into downtown LA on a weeknight, the Anaheim Kings might offer a nice local lower-cost alternative. Not saying it's the best way to rationalize it, or the best way to build a fan base, but I could see them at least selling a lot of tickets and being like another Clippers as far as being "profitable" but not "successful".

I would not claim that the kings will be "profitable" since they are currently in debt with the city of Sacramento for about $70MM and the loan which the Ducks owner will float them is like using one credit card to pay off another. They are still going to have millions of debt to pay off and the Maloof family does not seem willing to dip into their pockets for it themselves.

That said, your point about the suburban family could work, if they concentrated on the IE (Inland Empire) since a trip from San Bernardino and Riverside is basically equidistant to downtown L.A. or Anaheim.

[tigerslionspistonshabs]

Kansas City Kings does sound mighty freakin' nice...

[CubsFanBudMan]

Baseball season doesn't overlap with the NBA season. So no competition from the Royals. The NFL season would only pit the Chiefs against the Kings for the first portion of the NBA season. There's no NHL team in Kansas City, so the Kings would have the market to themselves for most of the season.

In Anaheim the Kings would have to not only have to compete with the Lakers and Clippers, but also the Ducks and LA Kings. The market is saturated enough as is. The Nets in Brooklyn isn't a good comparison because they would be the market's second NBA team, not the third. Also, the Brooklyn name has a legacy behind it, as well as being extremely marketable. Anaheim has neither.

Anaheim is essentially a LA suburb, and its fans are, from all accounts, already devoted to the Lakers. I'm sure there's a few Clippers fans in there as well. No one's switching allegiances from the Lakers to the Kings. And no one who's stuck with the Clippers this far is bailing now.

Also, I didn't compare this to the Coyotes situation, I only used it to illustrate how silly the "we'll have to grow the fanbase" business plan can be.

When it comes to MLB vs. NFL vs. NBA as it pertains to Kansas City, it's not just about attendance and scheduling conflicts, but also about how many corporate dollars there are to go around.

The Kings are in the 25th largest media market (via wiki) with no pro competition, yet you and others are suggesting that they move to the 29th largest with two longtime pro franchises already entrenched, one of which claims poverty due to its market size. Meanwhile L.A. is No. 2.

And those numbers actually make the numbers sound closer than they are. L.A. has 12.8 million, Sacramento 2.1 million and Kansas City 2 million. Plus, Orange County alone has 3 million. Now, is everyone in L.A. or Orange County going to convert? No. But everyone doesn't have to to beat Sac and KC. Add in media coverage and corporate dollars and I'm willing to bet it isn't even close.

We are all trained to think cities can't handle more than 2 teams in any one sport, because that's how it's always been. But No. 2 L.A. is double the size of No. 4 Dallas (6.4 million). (New York is 19 million and Chicago is 9.5 million, FWIW.) These smaller cities are dwarfed by them, so you don't even need to split the market in equal thirds to see why they are about to take this risk.

[Lights Out]

"If cholos frighten you, this is the team for you!"

Don't the Angels already use this one against the Dodgers?

[bosrs1]

Baseball season doesn't overlap with the NBA season. So no competition from the Royals. The NFL season would only pit the Chiefs against the Kings for the first portion of the NBA season. There's no NHL team in Kansas City, so the Kings would have the market to themselves for most of the season.

In Anaheim the Kings would have to not only have to compete with the Lakers and Clippers, but also the Ducks and LA Kings. The market is saturated enough as is. The Nets in Brooklyn isn't a good comparison because they would be the market's second NBA team, not the third. Also, the Brooklyn name has a legacy behind it, as well as being extremely marketable. Anaheim has neither.

Anaheim is essentially a LA suburb, and its fans are, from all accounts, already devoted to the Lakers. I'm sure there's a few Clippers fans in there as well. No one's switching allegiances from the Lakers to the Kings. And no one who's stuck with the Clippers this far is bailing now.

Also, I didn't compare this to the Coyotes situation, I only used it to illustrate how silly the "we'll have to grow the fanbase" business plan can be.

When it comes to MLB vs. NFL vs. NBA as it pertains to Kansas City, it's not just about attendance and scheduling conflicts, but also about how many corporate dollars there are to go around.

The Kings are in the 25th largest media market (via wiki) with no pro competition, yet you and others are suggesting that they move to the 29th largest with two longtime pro franchises already entrenched, one of which claims poverty due to its market size. Meanwhile L.A. is No. 2.

And those numbers actually make the numbers sound closer than they are. L.A. has 12.8 million, Sacramento 2.1 million and Kansas City 2 million. Plus, Orange County alone has 3 million. Now, is everyone in L.A. or Orange County going to convert? No. But everyone doesn't have to to beat Sac and KC. Add in media coverage and corporate dollars and I'm willing to bet it isn't even close.

We are all trained to think cities can't handle more than 2 teams in any one sport, because that's how it's always been. But No. 2 L.A. is double the size of No. 4 Dallas (6.4 million). (New York is 19 million and Chicago is 9.5 million, FWIW.) These smaller cities are dwarfed by them, so you don't even need to split the market in equal thirds to see why they are about to take this risk.

Also can't forget however that Anaheim is close enough to be a reasonable draw for fans from Riverside and San Diego counties who can't get to Staples center due to distance, which is another 5.2 million people potentially. Not to mention the TV markets in those locations as well.

[The_Admiral]

Man, if you're banking on Riverside to make it work, oooooooooookayyyyy.

Yes, the pie is bigger in Los Angeles than it is in Sacramento. The Kings could have a mere slice of the pie and still get as much pie as they did in Sacramento. But it doesn't matter how big the pie was if the Lakers already ate the whole pie.

I find it quite unlikely that there's this wealth of nebulous "corporate dollars" just waiting to plop down their money for a suburban NBA team that sucks. The Lakers not only have more big accounts available to them than teams in smaller towns, but they likely sign more of them than teams in smaller towns. Have we forgotten that the Staples Center practically has more luxury boxes than it does regular seats? They're tuna-netting the corporate money with that place, and I'm sure the people buying have been quite happy with the results.

[tigerslionspistonshabs]

The age old question is... will the fans support a new team tossed into a market with an already established franchise?

I know there's been recent flirtation with adding an NHL team in Toronto and an NBA team in Chicago, but those cities are already home to 2 of the most loved franchises in their respective sports. Would fans support a second team?

How was it when the Islanders joined the league in the Rangers' town? (and the Devils for that matter?)

Clippers in LA?

etc, etc...

How long did it take for these teams to be embraced? If the Isles and Devils hadn't won all those Cups, would they still be in town? I mean, they're barely hangin on now...

[dfwabel]

Kansas City Kings does sound mighty freakin' nice...

Unlike Anaheim, Kansas City does not have anyone willing to give the Maloof's $100M to pay the city of Sacramento and the NBA to relocate. Plus, AEG, the manager of the Sprint Center already makes a profit on the current events held there and really do not care if the city has problems in paying back the bonds used to build the facility.

Apparently, they are also having issues with their gaming operations in terms of revolving credit with private equity groups acquiring the loan.

[rams80]

This used to be a good forum. CC's a great guy but for the last few years nitwits have taken over the discourse. Now it's hardly worth reading much less posting @. Seriously guys, grow up, unplug, get laid, get lives. I DID.

Oh look...a fan who is butthurt about his team's pending move.

[MadmanLA]

As a point of reference, and this is where it really counts, the Los Angeles television market is comprised of Los Angeles, Orange, San Bernardino, and Ventura Counties, plus the western and eastern thirds of Riverside County (central Riverside County is its own TV market--Palm Springs), the southeastern portion of Kern County. The eastern third of Riverside County for years was once part of the Phoenix television market, because of its close proximity to the Arizona border, and Phoenix claims most of the state of Arizona (except Tucson and Yuma) as part of its own market.

With all that said, these areas are distinct of their own from a socioeconomic standpoint, and surely Orange County (based on population size) by itself can support major league sports. But, they can also draw from other areas in the surrounding counties--Southeastern L.A. County (Long Beach and vicinity), the Inland Empire (Riverside/San Bernardino), and parts of Northern San Diego County. However, the fact of the matter is that any or all advertising and broadcasting dollars will be coming from Los Angeles, whether Orange County wants to claim otherwise. Orange County's television stations consists of a second-tier UHF independent, a PBS station (who actually became the primary PBS station for the L.A. market this year), and a God-caster (TBN). Hell, even the aforementioned UHF indie (KDOC) practically markets itself as a "Los Angeles" station after years of just being the "hometown" station.

[rams80]

I know there's been recent flirtation with adding an NHL team in Toronto and an NBA team in Chicago, but those cities are already home to 2 of the most loved franchises in their respective sports. Would fans support a second team?

Minor correction: Emperor Daley pitched Chicago as a home for a 2nd NFL team. Which would still be stupid. Same with hypothetical NBA or NHL additions.

[The_Admiral]

No, there was also talk of the Vancouver Grizzlies moving to Flossmoor or thereabouts. Equally stupid.

[poser]

My uncle who lives in the Sacramento area says one of the main problems is that its hard for the people in surrounding cities to get to the games. From his house its a 45+ min drive to a Kings game but he can get to a RiverCats game on a 20 min trolley ride. The teams fanbase is too spread out to gain support behind a new arena.