Really, did anyone honestly believe the new owners intended to keep the Sonics in Seattle?
The Seattle Times front page today is screaming:
…
U.S. Sen. Patty Murray said, “Clearly this ownership group never intended to keep this team in Seattle. I find that disappointing.”
…
“For the people who voted for the deal, the good-faith, best-efforts promise was a significant factor in supporting the deal,” (Former Sonics President and co-owner Wally) Walker said. “This is not what they signed up for.”
Dishonest, righteous indignation is a wonderful thing to watch if you’re interested in entertainment and not anything approaching the truth. Yes, I know Clay Bennett and Co. included a “good faith” clause in their agreement to buy the Seattle Sonics that stated they would try for one year to work out a deal to keep the team in Seattle. But seriously, did ANY reasonable person believe that they intended to do anything other than move the team to Oklahoma City? The new owners are based there, they have a nice new arena, and the city just finished a taste of the NBA courtesy of Hurricane Katrina.
Bennett and Co. bought the Sonics solely to move them ASAP to OKC. So it’s theatrics we see here, all this sudden anger and shock at various email revelations. For the record, I think what we’ve seen here is pro sports at its worst – demanding mass cash from a city that has supported a team for decades, and holding the sword of a franchise move above the heads of loyal fans to push along a twisted form of municipal extortion. But honestly, could we just cut the pretend outrage and admit we all knew the “good faith” clause was so much BS right from the start?
The best quote in that Times article however is one that many a folk in the business world should read especially closely:
At the very least, Bennett and his co-owners demonstrated extraordinary cluelessness in committing their thoughts to e-mail, McCann said. “It’s unbelievable that sophisticated business persons would lack the common sense to know that e-mails are records that are admissible in trials.“







Comments are closed.