NBA Bans Donald Sterling for Life

[mikiemo83]

I tend to agree, unless other owners decide that, due to their own skeletons in the closet, to back one of their own.
Doubtful, though.

I bet there are many skeletons hanging in cyberspace

 

[O_P_T]

LOL @ that.

Sterling isn't going to lose anything. Nobody is going to seize the team under eminent domain, like Baltimore tried to do with the Colts.

But he has absolutely zero rights to belong to a club that doesn't want him.

And the NBA doesn't want him.

No? From the link you provided.

Q: Is it possible for Silver and the NBA to terminate Sterling's franchise ownership?

A: Yes. Under the terms of Paragraph 13 of the constitution, the owners can terminate another owner's franchise with a vote of three-fourths of the NBA Board of Governors, which is composed of all 30 owners. The power to terminate is limited to things like gambling and fraud in the application for ownership, but it also includes a provision for termination when an owner "fails to fulfill" a "contractual obligation" in "such a way as to affect the [NBA] or its members adversely." Silver and the owners could assert that Sterling's statements violated the constitution's requirements to conduct business on a "reasonable" and "ethical" level.

Any owner or Silver can initiate the termination procedure with a written charge describing the violation. Sterling would have five days to respond to the charge with a written answer. The commissioner would then schedule a special meeting of the NBA Board of Governors within 10 days. Both sides would have a chance to present their evidence, and then the board would vote. If three-fourths of the board members vote to terminate, then Sterling would face termination of his ownership. It would require a vote of two-thirds of the board to reduce the termination to a fine. Terminating a franchise would obviously be a drastic remedy, but the potential of the termination procedure gives Silver and the other owners vast leverage in any discussion with Sterling about an involuntary sale of his team.

So if they terminate his franchise, he hasn't lost anything?

 

[Providence Colt]

Am I the only one having Zimmerman flashbacks?
When Steve-O is on a personal crusade, watch out!
Of course, he also likes to count his eggs before they hatch. Have the owners voted yet? No?

Steve-O excoriating a deplorable human being and the exact same cast and characters finding a way to take issue with it?

Yeah, the flashbacks are downright eery.

 

[Steve-o]

No? From the link you provided.



So if they terminate his franchise, he hasn't lost anything?

If they terminate the franchise, all he will lose is the value of the franchise, which is based on its association with the NBA.

He would still own the Clippers, but without a league, the team would be worthless.

I'm sure even you would agree that he has no inherent right to be a member of the NBA.

 

[king of kings]

If they terminate the franchise, all he will lose is the value of the franchise, which is based on its association with the NBA. He would still own the Clippers, but without a league, the team would be worthless. I'm sure even you would agree that he has no inherent right to be a member of the NBA.

Right now he owns it in name only. under the commish punishment . Does not have any say over anything the clippers do. I'm just waiting for him to sue the NBA . Once they vote him out of the league.

 

[Dwight Schrute]

The idea that this would be settled within the next couple of weeks - where a man loses over $500 mil - is ...... well, I just can't fathom ANYBODY thinking it would be settled like this.

Lawyers will be feasting on this like vultures on a dead elephant in the high noon sun on the African plains for months IMO. Maybe years.

 

[Steve-o]

The idea that this would be settled within the next couple of weeks - where a man loses over $500 mil - is ...... well, I just can't fathom ANYBODY thinking it would be settled like this.

Lawyers will be feasting on this like vultures on a dead elephant in the high noon sun on the African plains for months IMO. Maybe years.

He isn't going to lose $500 million.

He's going to end up making close to $1 billion.

Though, to be honest, my favorite end result would be for him to hang on and the franchise value turn to zip, and have him lose nearly a third of his net worth.

That would be hilarious.

 

[Steve-o]

And regarding litigation, the only good precedent would be Piazza and Tirendi v. Major League Baseball.

Didn't work out for the plaintiffs in that case, either. They wanted to buy the S.F. Giants, and MLB said no.

You can't just buy a professional sports franchise in any league, without approval from the other owners.

The same will hold true of continued ownership.

 

[Dwight Schrute]

Traffic tickets don't move thru the judicial process this quick.

Forced sale of assets worth in excess of $500 mil will probably need a bigger time window.

 

[tehrick67]

Steve-O excoriating a deplorable human being and the exact same cast and characters finding a way to take issue with it?

Yeah, the flashbacks are downright eery.

I haven't taken issue with it, I'm wondering what took so long. Sterling should have been taken care of a long time ago....

 

[Steve-o]

I haven't taken issue with it, I'm wondering what took so long. Sterling should have been taken care of a long time ago....

It sounds like Stern didn't want to deal with him, or was waiting for him to screw up so publicly like this.

 

[HSanders]

Getting sued over discrimination is pretty major IMO especially if you have to settle for millions, making it look like there was culpability there and not just "let's settle to make it go away". And he didn't "screw up so publicly", what he got banned for is something he said privately.

 

[Mark_Henderson]

Getting sued over discrimination is pretty major IMO especially if you have to settle for millions, making it look like there was culpability there and not just "let's settle to make it go away". And he didn't "screw up so publicly", what he got banned for is something he said privately.

It's public because everyone in America is listening to it in their living rooms. The housing discrimination was a crime, but Sterling still gave BS explanations claiming he got hosed. It doesn't capture people's imagination like actually listening to him rant.

Sterling was willing to pay to try to buy a better image with NAACP awards (of course it's ridiculous that he could), so he probably cares some about public perception and if the price is right, he might be willing to sell quickly just to make the negative press attention go away. He paid $13 million for the team and will get nearly a billion for it. That's a given, but he probably is talking to PR consultants about how his image can look less negative (which it can't).

I'm at least glad that he traded Bill Walton to the Celtics in 1985.

 

[HSanders]

It's public because everyone in America is listening to it in their living rooms. The housing discrimination was a crime, but Sterling still gave BS explanations claiming he got hosed. It doesn't capture people's imagination like actually listening to him rant.

I think it's pretty damning upon our current county and its priorities (or maybe people in general since whenever)that a stupid namecalling rant, no matter how vile, done in private is more powerful in people's minds than an actual crime.
Almost always, deeds>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>words in my book.
I mean Ted Bundy was a nice dude in public. No one suspected a thing about him for years, not even the female police detective with whom he worked as a volunteer at a hotline for awhile.

 

[Dwight Schrute]

I think it's pretty damning upon our current county and its priorities (or maybe people in general since whenever)that a stupid namecalling rant, no matter how vile, done in private is more powerful in people's minds than an actual crime.
Almost always, deeds>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>words in my book.
I mean Ted Bundy was a nice dude in public. No one suspected a thing about him for years, not even the female police detective with whom he worked as a volunteer at a hotline for awhile.

 

[O_P_T]

If they terminate the franchise, all he will lose is the value of the franchise, which is based on its association with the NBA.

He would still own the Clippers, but without a league, the team would be worthless.

I'm sure even you would agree that he has no inherent right to be a member of the NBA.

So having the value of his asset go from $575M to $0 means:

Sterling isn't going to lose anything.

I'd say he'd lose $575 million George Washington's.

Whether the action by the NBA is appropriate or inappropriate and what his rights are or are not is moot.

I'm simply responding to your statement that he "isn't going to lose anything." The simple fact of the matter is that if the NBA terminates his franchise, he's out $575M.

 

[Steve-o]

So having the value of his asset go from $575M to $0 means:



I'd say he'd lose $575 million George Washington's.

Whether the action by the NBA is appropriate or inappropriate and what his rights are or are not is moot.

I'm simply responding to your statement that he "isn't going to lose anything." The simple fact of the matter is that if the NBA terminates his franchise, he's out $575M.

If that happens, it will be his own decisions that lead to it. His own decisions have led to this.

And I don't care what any of you say.

Sterling is going out not with a bang, but with a whimper.

 

[PatsFan09]

If that happens, it will be his own decisions that lead to it. His own decisions have led to this. And I don't care what any of you say. Sterling is going out not with a bang, but with a whimper.

Because your predictions come out so swimmingly.
And, let's not forget, Ortiz is overrated.

 

[Big/Sky/Fly]

If that happens, it will be his own decisions that lead to it. His own decisions have led to this.

And I don't care what any of you say.

Sterling is going out not with a bang, but with a whimper.

So, are you the resident Barney Fife here?

 

[O_P_T]

If that happens, it will be his own decisions that lead to it. His own decisions have led to this. And I don't care what any of you say. Sterling is going out not with a bang, but with a whimper.

What part of "moot" don't you understand?

Very simple question, yes or no.

If the NBA "terminates" his franchise, has he "lost" anything?