Unprecedented Owner Conflict

[AHF]

For the sake of discussion, let's just pretend for a moment that Levenson sells his minority interest to someone and Ferry either quits or is fired or is no longer GM for whatever reason.

 

Can you imagine any attractive GM candidate coming here without a total changeover in ownership?

 

Let's look at the history of GMs under the ASG:

 

Billy Knight - Hired to run the team but when he makes a trade approved by ownership that one owner doesn't like that owner sues the team and ties his hands in free agency for years.  After that owner is outsted, he tells the remaining ownership repeatedly that he needs to fire Mike Woodson.  They block him and refuse.  Eventually he resigns over not being allowed to do his job.

 

Rick Sund - He is a puppet for Gearon Jr.  

 

Danny Ferry - Given freedom to actually run operations but then it comes out that Gearon writes a charged poison pen letter in an effort to get him fired.

 

Wow.

 

Who are you going to get to step into a position where the last few GMs have either been actively undermined by ownership or acted as a puppet?  This ownership group's dysfunction is not going to let us land a GM that anyone else wants.

Edited September 11, 2014 by AHF

[Guest]

For the sake of discussion, let's just pretend for a moment that Levenson sells his minority interest to someone and Ferry either quits or is fired or is no longer GM for whatever reason.

Can you imagine any attractive GM candidate coming here without a total changeover in ownership?

Let's look at the history of GMs under the ASG:

Billy Knight - Hired to run the team but when he makes a trade approved by ownership that one owner doesn't like that owner sues the team and ties his hands in free agency for years. After that owner is outsted, he tells the remaining ownership repeatedly that he needs to fire Mike Woodson. They block him and refuse. Eventually he resigns over not being allowed to do his job.

Rick Sund - He is a puppet for Gearon Jr.

Danny Ferry - Given freedom to actually run operations but then it comes out that Gearon writes a charged poison pen letter in an effort to get him fired.

Wow.

Who are you going to get to step into a position where the last few GMs have either been actively undermined by ownership or acted as a puppet? This ownership group's dysfunction is not going to let us land a GM that anyone else wants.

As long as the other members of the ownership group is around - we are doomed.

The entire group must go - too much infighting and hurt feelings and wanting to be the mouth piece.

Unless the new owner is a friend of Gearon, how can he trust he won't undermine him as well.

Edited September 11, 2014 by JayBirdHawk

[AHF]

The only GM that Gearon has supported has been the puppet.  He blocked BK from having the coach of his choice and went after Ferry when Levenson and Ferry minimized Gearon's influence.

[Guest]

In all seriousness, this has now gone on since the A$G has been on the scene.  Stern basically stayed out of it and we're now in what year 12 or so of this nonsense.  IIRC, during the initial legal conflicts, he basically said the Hawks have fielded a decent team despite the turmoil so there was no need for him to do anything.  Am I remember that correctly?

 

Fast forward to now and the infighting has cost the league an owner and is yet another pock mark in the wake of the Sterling drama.

 

Can the league continue to ignore this ridiculousness just because we're not a flagship franchise?  Is there any way we can collectively voice our displeasure to anyone who actually has the power to effect change?  Serious question because they clearly don't recognize that the level of dysfunction in ownership leads to a disillusionment among the fanbase (IMHO).

[Jody23]

Thru the Woj piece, the NBA was trying to put the truth out there about Gearon and his role in this. Remember, they are leading the search for a new owner. Things always have a way of coming back on you and I see that happening with Gearon. The NBA won't let him get control and will probaly make sure he stays in the minority with absolutely no say so on basketball operations.

Edited September 11, 2014 by Jody23

[Jody23]

Levenson controls the sale. Not the NBA.

Levenson does not fully control this process. He will not be allowed to just hand pick who he sales to just like Sterling wasn't able to. In an interview, Koonin stated that the NBA was taking a lead role in finding a new owner as the Board of Governors will have to approve any sale.

[AHF]

Levenson does not fully control this process. He will not be allowed to just hand pick who he sales to just like Sterling wasn't able to. In an interview, Koonin stated that the NBA was taking a lead role in finding a new owner as the Board of Governors will have to approve any sale.

 

There is a huge difference between Levenson and Sterling.

 

Sterling was declared incompetent by his trustee and the trust was the owner of the team.  Because he was incompetent, his wife was able to move forward hand-in-hand with the NBA.

 

Levenson isn't incompetent and will control the process on his end.

 

The NBA's Board of Governors must approve in either case.

[Jody23]

There is a huge difference between Levenson and Sterling.

Sterling was declared incompetent by his trustee and the trust was the owner of the team. Because he was incompetent, his wife was able to move forward hand-in-hand with the NBA.

Levenson isn't incompetent and will control the process on his end.

The NBA's Board of Governors must approve in either case.

I get that. But the point I'm making is that the NBA will be heavily involved in the process and will have approval authority in the end. Levenson doesn't totally control this.

[Randy]

To complicate matters more, it is unclear whether the whole team is for sale, or just Levenson's 30% "controlling interest."  I'm guessing its only the later.  I would guess further that some bidder(s) might offer to buy out everyone as part of their deal.  Maybe they can make Gearon and offer he can't refuse.  But we may be stuck with Gearon for a long time, esp. if the new owner isn't someone with really big pile of money and a pretty strong will. And recall what happened when Belkin was bought out - either they couldn't find anyone, or the remaining owners had a right of first refusal.  In either case, they got into that deal where they had to have a valuation done on the team and that created the whole court dramedy.  So it may all happen again. 

Edited September 11, 2014 by Randy

[AHF]

To complicate matters more, it is unclear whether the whole team is for sale, or just Levenson's 30% "controlling interest."  I'm guessing its only the later.  I would guess further that some bidder(s) might offer to buy out everyone as part of their deal.  Maybe they can make Gearon and offer he can't refuse.  But we may be stuck with Gearon for a long time, esp. if the new owner isn't someone with really big pile of money and a pretty strong will. And recall what happened when Belkin was bought out - either they couldn't find anyone, or the remaining owners had a right of first refusal.  In either case, they got into that deal where they had to have a valuation done on the team and that created the whole court dramedy.  So it may all happen again. 

 

The valuation drama won't happen.  That was part of the process for a forced buyout.

 

You are right, though, that only Levenson's share in the team is up for sale.  It isn't a controlling interest.  I am crossing my fingers and hoping that some bidder(s) offer to buy everyone out, though.  If I had the money I don't think that I would buy into this team without getting >50% interest.

[AHF]

Update:  According to David Aldridge, Levenson's group is actually now the majority owner of the team.

 

http://www.nba.com/2014/news/features/david_aldridge/09/11/aldridge-danny-ferry-atlanta-hawks-situation-bruce-levenson-racism/index.html

 

 

The lawsuit by former co-owner Steve Belkin in 2006 against his partners temporarily made Levenson and Gearon bedfellows, but after they bought out Belkin and his 30 percent of the team (leaving Levenson, according to a source, with something approaching 60 percent of the franchise), the era of good feeling ended.

Edited September 11, 2014 by AHF

[AHF]

Thanks, @hawksfanatic.  That was the first I had heard of Levenson have a majority position.  Too bad it is, in fact, wrong.

[lethalweapon3]

Tweet Added - Refresh Page to see it live!

If you don't see the Tweet here AFTER REFRESHING PAGE, then it wasn't entered correctly. Please edit and try again.

Important: If the Tweet doesn't load, please refresh the page before editing the Tweet as it may need to refresh to parse properly

 

Tweet Added - Refresh Page to see it live!

If you don't see the Tweet here AFTER REFRESHING PAGE, then it wasn't entered correctly. Please edit and try again.

Important: If the Tweet doesn't load, please refresh the page before editing the Tweet as it may need to refresh to parse properly

 

Tweet Added - Refresh Page to see it live!

If you don't see the Tweet here AFTER REFRESHING PAGE, then it wasn't entered correctly. Please edit and try again.

Important: If the Tweet doesn't load, please refresh the page before editing the Tweet as it may need to refresh to parse properly

 

I know many of us are insisting that Everyone Must Go, yet I wonder what folks feel about Ruthie Seydel keeping a share.

 

Yes, he still has the Thrashers albatross around his neck. Yet, he's got strong ATL roots and doesn't seem to be enmeshed in racial animosity the way Levenson found himself. Plus I think he and his wife Laura Turner Seydel are the last tie-ins to the Turner clan. Is Beau Turner still around for this mess?

 

Laura and Rutherford have been using Philips as part of their ongoing promotional platform for eco-friendliness, and I could see it being tough to let that go, particularly if Ruthie is also selling off the arena operating rights that really make them money.

 

If the league could get Gearon and the entire DC contingent (Peskowitz and Foreman and whoever else) to flip, I think I'd be fine with Seydel sticking around, so long as whatever major buyer joins in immediately winds up with a majority share.

 

~lw3

[Randy]

I had been confused about how much Levenson owns (rumored to be 30%) and how he has a controlling interest with less than 50%.  I looked up controlling interest and it seems like this may well be a situation where there is a majority of "voting shares" vs. total shares.  You could more than half of the voting shares if enough of the shares are non-voting.  So this large group of owners may have split it up so that some guys just participate in the financial gains and losses of the team (usually losses until they sell which they hope to be a gain) while others actually run the show.  And there may be reasons why they want it that way (tax implications is the first thing that comes to mind, but that's beyond my realm to even guess.) Anyway, everything I have read says Levenson has a "controlling interest" so if he sells that whoever take overs would seem to be in charge. 

[AHF]

I had been confused about how much Levenson owns (rumored to be 30%) and how he has a controlling interest with less than 50%.  I looked up controlling interest and it seems like this may well be a situation where there is a majority of "voting shares" vs. total shares.  You could more than half of the voting shares if enough of the shares are non-voting.  So this large group of owners may have split it up so that some guys just participate in the financial gains and losses of the team (usually losses until they sell which they hope to be a gain) while others actually run the show.  And there may be reasons why they want it that way (tax implications is the first thing that comes to mind, but that's beyond my realm to even guess.) Anyway, everything I have read says Levenson has a "controlling interest" so if he sells that whoever take overs would seem to be in charge. 

 

hawksfanatic pointed out earlier that Levenson doesn't have a controlling interest by himself.  It is in combination with other owners (the DC contingent) that he wielded majority control after Gearon was pulled from the frontman role.

[Randy]

Thanks for clearing that up.  So is the whole DC block going to sell?  Or do we even know that?

[AHF]

Thanks for clearing that up.  So is the whole DC block going to sell?  Or do we even know that?

 

The only indication we have so far is that Levenson is going to sell.  Beyond that, it is unclear.  If I was a prospective owner, I would try to buy everyone of these #$*#&$ out and clean house.  Otherwise, you are inheriting damaged goods.