Yeah we know you said "almost". But it's not "almost" similar. It is not at all similar. ;-)

One newspaper buy the naming right to an arena in another newspapers primary service area is not similar? The St. Petersburg Times cover Tampa about as much as the Dallas Morning News covers OKC. If it wasn't for sports teams you would not find the word 'Tampa' in the St Pete Times unless it a national news item. You guys see Tampa and St. Pete as the same place because they are next to each other on a map, but that is not how the people who live there feel about it and it certainly isn't how to the two newspaper operate. On a side not, the St Petersburg Times is not a 'local' paper in the traditional sense of the word - they are their own media conglomerant with bureau offices (just like CBS, NBC, ABC, FOX, and the New York Times). Like the New York Times, they offer a subscription service to other newspapers. For example, the Oklahoman does not have a bureau office in Norman. Stories about Norman that appear in the Oklahoman are written by people who work in OKC.

FWIW, and perhaps it's been closed, but for a spell at least the DO did have a Norman office, staff, and a specific Norman section. I don't take the DO and have neither clue nor memory when the office closed, or even if it has closed. I view the newsok site frequently but pay little attention to how it is organized

When I read stories that take place in Norman, they are written by people that work in the north OKC office. The St Pete Times doesn't work that way. They have bureau offices, they even have one in Tampa. They also have them in Land o Lakes, Miami, and Tallahassee. I think they closed their Washington D.C. office. If the St Pete Times has a story about Tampa it is written in their Tampa bureau and sent to St. Pete.

The Pre Paid Legal Arena?

The Pre Paid Legal Arena?

No, they just got bought by a private equity firm.

No, they just got bought by a private equity firm.

I didn't hear that. Hmmm...

I didn't hear that. Hmmm...

http://online.wsj.com/article/BT-CO-20110131-709968.html



Pre-Paid Legal Services Inc. (PPD) has agreed to be bought by New York-based private-equity firm MidOcean Partners LLP for $650 million.

Shares jumped 9.5% to $65.97 in recent premarket trading, compared with the $66.50 offer price--a level the stock last saw in September.

The provider of legal services enables access to legal counsel through so-called legal expense plans for a monthly fee. In October, it had said it was evaluating options including a sale of the company after receiving a $592 million bid from a "well-known private equity firm."

The deal is expected to close by July 31. MidOcean is focused on the middle market, targeting sectors such as consumer and leisure, business and financial services, media and communications and industrials.

One newspaper buy the naming right to an arena in another newspapers primary service area is not similar? The St. Petersburg Times cover Tampa about as much as the Dallas Morning News covers OKC. If it wasn't for sports teams you would not find the word 'Tampa' in the St Pete Times unless it a national news item.

Very crafty (and dishonest) choice of words. No. The relationship of the St. Petersburg Times to Tampa is not at all similar to the relationship of the Dallas Morning News to OKC. The St. Petersburg Times is widely available by subscription and newsrack sales in Tampa. You cannot get a daily subscription delivery of the DMN in OKC. Tampa is part of the St. Petersburg Times' news coverage area. Not so OKC with re: DMN. Whatever the feelings between Tampa and St. Pete, the Times obviously is making a strong play for the whole Tampa-St. Pete market. The same cannot be said for the DMN with re: the OKC market. In fact, a few years back, the DMN withdrew from the OKC market.

And you have exposed your own dishonesty by stating in this post that the St. Petersburg Times does not cover Tampa, and telling us in a later post that the St. Petersburg Times has a bureau in Tampa. Which is it Kerry? If they don't cover Tampa, why would they maintain a bureau there? (and a very cursory look at today's paper on their website (www.tampabay.com) shows many mentions of Tampa, and not just in sports stories.)

Maybe you're right Oil Capitol. I lived in Tampa for 8 years and you could not get the St Pete Times delivered in Hillsborough County. We moved about a year after they bought the arena naming rights so maybe that was part of their strategy to move into the Tampa market. I can tell you this though - people in Tampa were ticked off when St Pete Times bought the rights.

Any updates with arena naming rights?

My guess is we won't hear anything until playoff time or after the renovations are complete

I thought the MidFirst thing was a done deal months ago.

Since they finally took down the ford center letters I would bet the new signage will be going up sooner rather than later.

Since they finally took down the ford center letters I would bet the new signage will be going up sooner rather than later.

I doubt it, since no longer getting $$ from Ford, no reason to keep the letters up there. Just probably got aroud to it.

Ice-cold, I don't think you're understanding the topic. Supposively a NEW sponsor has been signed (rumored to be Midfirst), and everyone is wondering why it hasn't been announced and new signage put up.

Since they finally took down the ford center letters I would bet the new signage will be going up sooner rather than later.

Those have been off for months!!!

Ice-cold, I don't think you're understanding the topic. Supposively a NEW sponsor has been signed (rumored to be Midfirst), and everyone is wondering why it hasn't been announced and new signage put up.

Metro, I understand the topic. Have been following this thread for awhile. Thats why I stated that taking off the Ford letters probably had nothing to do with a new sponser. I too thought the Ford letters have been off for awhile but since Snow suggested that they were just coming off I was stating that if that were true that it probably had nothing to do with something new going up.

They've been off the building for months...in fact i think most of (if not all) of the nba season.

I'm beginning to think there won't be any announcements until the new entrance is completed.

As previously stated, it's a done deal. Midfirst Bank Center. Not sure why the continued discussion on the issue.

As previously stated, it's a done deal. Midfirst Bank Center. Not sure why the continued discussion on the issue.

Because there are no giant letters spelling out MidFirst Bank Center on the side.

BTW - I watch the Phoenix feed for last night's game and MidFirst bank is giving out 10,000 door prizes at the next Suns game. It seemed weird that a company whose CEO owns the Thunder is a marketing partner with another NBA team.

http://www.nba.com/suns/news/midfirst_release_091020.html


MidFirst Bank becomes Official Bank of the Phoenix Suns
Suns Announce Partnership With MidFirst Bank

Updated: Nov. 10, 2009

The Phoenix Suns announced today a new partnership with MidFirst Bank to become the Official Bank of the Phoenix Suns. As part of the partnership, MidFirst bank will offer customers an exclusive Suns MidFirst Bank Visa® Check Card.

Hmmm, interesting, but Chesapeake Energy got trademark status for the name "Chesapeake Arena". Wonder if this means anything.

http://www.trademarkia.com/chesapeake-arena-85249842.html

Because there are no giant letters spelling out MidFirst Bank Center on the side.

BTW - I watch the Phoenix feed for last night's game and MidFirst bank is giving out 10,000 door prizes at the next Suns game. It seemed weird that a company whose CEO owns the Thunder is a marketing partner with another NBA team.

http://www.nba.com/suns/news/midfirst_release_091020.html

Phoenix is the other big market MidFirst operates in. I think it's just OK and AZ, though I'm not absolutely sure on that.

edit: Just checked Bloomberg Business and it says:
"MidFirst Bank provides commercial, trust, private and personal banking, and mortgage banking products and services in Oklahoma City, Tulsa, Western Oklahoma, and Phoenix."
http://investing.businessweek.com/research/stocks/private/snapshot.asp?privcapId=3073993

I think it was last year when MidFirst purchased a Phoenix area bank that was going belly up fast.

Interesting find on Chesapeake. Perhaps that'll put this to rest finally.

I think it was last year when MidFirst purchased a Phoenix area bank that was going belly up fast.

Interesting find on Chesapeake. Perhaps that'll put this to rest finally.

No way would that fly with the CEO having an ownership stake. CHK is a public corporation. MidFirst is private and the CEO can do what he wants to pad his own personal business interests. Try that with CHK now - especially now - and see what CHK stockholders have to say. No way. If he has the chutzpah to try it, more power to him, but I doubt that even AM has that much. Not to mention it stirring up those SEC investigators who probably have a permanent desk setup just for CHK.

No way would that fly with the CEO having an ownership stake. CHK is a public corporation. MidFirst is private and the CEO can do what he wants to pad his own personal business interests. Try that with CHK now - especially now - and see what CHK stockholders have to say. No way. If he has the chutzpah to try it, more power to him, but I doubt that even AM has that much. Not to mention it stirring up those SEC investigators who probably have a permanent desk setup just for CHK.
... and the backlash on all the advertising Chesapeake already does and has since that group had the Hornets began when?

Fritter girl should get the credit for Midfirst rumor, she was dropping hints months ago and I guessed it. Check the original thread in the Thunder section.

Would that be the same Fritter Girl who assured us that Hertz was buying the Devon building?

No way would that fly with the CEO having an ownership stake. CHK is a public corporation. MidFirst is private and the CEO can do what he wants to pad his own personal business interests. Try that with CHK now - especially now - and see what CHK stockholders have to say. No way. If he has the chutzpah to try it, more power to him, but I doubt that even AM has that much. Not to mention it stirring up those SEC investigators who probably have a permanent desk setup just for CHK.

Name me a corporation with naming rights that isn't a public corp? Let's see...American Airlines, Pepsi, AT&T, United, Prudential, Staples, Sprint, etc. etc. They're all public companies. There are probably some private sponsorships out there, but not many.

I doubt Chesapeake would go file for a US trademark for the name "Chesapeake Arena" for no reason.

Again, the link that they obtained trademark status for the name:
http://www.trademarkia.com/chesapeake-arena-85249842.html

Name me a corporation with naming rights that isn't a public corp? Let's see...American Airlines, Pepsi, AT&T, United, Prudential, Staples, Sprint, etc. etc. They're all public companies. There are probably some private sponsorships out there, but not many.

I doubt Chesapeake would go file for a US trademark for the name "Chesapeake Arena" for no reason.

Again, the link that they obtained trademark status for the name:
http://www.trademarkia.com/chesapeake-arena-85249842.html

Patrick, You misunderstood. It's not that CHK is public. It's that CHK is public and the CEO of said company is an owner of the basketball team which gets the money directly by selling the naming rights.

As for marketing CHK at Thunder events, etc., that's a far cry from the Thunder owners (yes, including Aubrey McClendon) receiving the proceeds of the naming rights (since the city ceded to them that giveaway). AM would basically be giving CHK money to himself - in a way that's probably a bit too direct to escape SEC scrutiny.

Makes since, Mike. I still think it's Midfirst Bank, but I just find it odd that Chesapeake would go obtain a patented US trademark for the name "Chesapeake Arena" if they weren't planning on using that title for something.

Makes since, Mike. I still think it's Midfirst Bank, but I just find it odd that Chesapeake would go obtain a patented US trademark for the name "Chesapeake Arena" if they weren't planning on using that title for something.

I agree it's very bizarre. The CHK legal department and the whole bit. Maybe AM does have the chutzpah to try.

Especially given the fact that they registered it so recently.

Name me a corporation with naming rights that isn't a public corp? Let's see...American Airlines, Pepsi, AT&T, United, Prudential, Staples, Sprint, etc. etc. They're all public companies. There are probably some private sponsorships out there, but not many.

I doubt Chesapeake would go file for a US trademark for the name "Chesapeake Arena" for no reason.

Again, the link that they obtained trademark status for the name:
http://www.trademarkia.com/chesapeake-arena-85249842.html

Quoted from post on previous page:
" Re: New Arena Name
As previously stated, it's a done deal. Midfirst Bank Center. Not sure why the continued discussion on the issue."

Quoted from post on previous page:
" Re: New Arena Name
As previously stated, it's a done deal. Midfirst Bank Center. Not sure why the continued discussion on the issue."

So why are there no letters on the building spelling out 'MidFirst Bank Center'?

Makes since, Mike. I still think it's Midfirst Bank, but I just find it odd that Chesapeake would go obtain a patented US trademark for the name "Chesapeake Arena" if they weren't planning on using that title for something.

Maybe they will use it once OU builds a new arena in Norman... :Smiley247

So why are there no letters on the building spelling out 'MidFirst Bank Center'?

My theory as I stated earlier is that they want a pretty completed building to associate their name with. The problem with this theory is that it just sounds crazy that they would sign a contract a year and a half in advance.

Another theory is that they want to wait to see how the NBA labor negotiations go. Don't want to associate their name with an Arena that will be empty half the time next season.

Quoted from post on previous page:
" Re: New Arena Name
As previously stated, it's a done deal. Midfirst Bank Center. Not sure why the continued discussion on the issue."

I retract my statement, now knowing about the recent application for trademark status for "Chesapeake Arena." I'm still not sure though. It seems this tilts things in favor of the name being Chesapeake Arena, but we'll see. I find it interesting that domains for MidfirstBankCenter.com, MidfirstCenter.com, MidfirstArena.com, etc. as well as ChesapeakeArena.com are all parked. But, anyone can do that, to try to make money by reselling the domain later, and it costs next to nothing to register a domain.

Proceeds from the naming rights goes to the owners and not the city??? Whhhhaaaat? I missed that little factoid somewhere. OK so now I'm thinking some of the cost of arena improvements should be shared with the owners from now on.

Proceeds from the naming rights goes to the owners and not the city??? Whhhhaaaat? I missed that little factoid somewhere. OK so now I'm thinking some of the cost of arena improvements should be shared with the owners from now on.

The City gets the first $470,000 each year for naming rights. That is how much the City was able to get before the Thunder arrived. The owners spend their money on the players and team.

The City gets the first $470,000 each year for naming rights. That is how much the City was able to get before the Thunder arrived. The owners spend their money on the players and team.

The $470,000 is peanuts...call it a commission...after what the Professional Basketball Club of Oklahoma, LLC will rake in. I love all the basketball and the excitement of the Thunder, but I am very much opposed to absurd salaries for 21 -25 year old kids that are paid for by equally absurd ticket prices. Though, OKC is better than most at offering affordable packages.

As for the naming rights going to the owners and they will, "spend their money on the players and their team," well...it's all six of one, half dozen of the other. The money goes to PBC, LLC and that's the bottom line that rubs many the wrong way. I know all the rationalizations, but in my opinion, it's wrong.

Several excellent books on this subject:
http://www.amazon.com/Bad-Sports-Owners-Ruining-Games/dp/1416554750
http://www.amazon.com/Field-Schemes-Stadium-Swindle-Expanded/dp/0803260164
http://www.amazon.com/Sports-Jobs-Taxes-Economic-Stadiums/dp/0815761112/
http://www.amazon.com/Public-Dollars-Private-Stadiums-Building/dp/0813533430

Mike, I might feel the same way, if we didn't happily accept the fact that the PBC spent $425 million to bring a team to OKC. No one is suggesting the city or we as citizens pay them for the expenses associated with the purchase of the team or their moving expenses. There are plenty of teams that lose money, and there's no reason to think that when our team begins a losing skid (which will happen...it's the nature of sports teams) the Thunder won't lose money hand over fist too. So I see it as allowing the ownership group to use the fat years to save for the lean years. As I've said, I consider it a partnership in which we both give something and we both get something.

The $470,000 is peanuts...call it a commission...after what the Professional Basketball Club of Oklahoma, LLC will rake in. I love all the basketball and the excitement of the Thunder, but I am very much opposed to absurd salaries for 21 -25 year old kids that are paid for by equally absurd ticket prices. Though, OKC is better than most at offering affordable packages.

As for the naming rights going to the owners and they will, "spend their money on the players and their team," well...it's all six of one, half dozen of the other. The money goes to PBC, LLC and that's the bottom line that rubs many the wrong way. I know all the rationalizations, but in my opinion, it's wrong.

Several excellent books on this subject:
http://www.amazon.com/Bad-Sports-Owners-Ruining-Games/dp/1416554750
http://www.amazon.com/Field-Schemes-Stadium-Swindle-Expanded/dp/0803260164
http://www.amazon.com/Sports-Jobs-Taxes-Economic-Stadiums/dp/0815761112/
http://www.amazon.com/Public-Dollars-Private-Stadiums-Building/dp/0813533430

Yeah, but I've never spent more then $20 on a Thunder ticket if it wasn't a gift from my parents or friends. Usually I can get tickets off a scalper for $10.

The City gets the first $470,000 each year for naming rights. That is how much the City was able to get before the Thunder arrived. The owners spend their money on the players and team.
Not exactly. Under the Ford naming rights deal, the City was getting $100K/year MORE than what the Team is "allowing" us to keep getting. And that $100K/year has to go into the fund for future improvements 9the only dedicated funding source). Given the avg cost of $20M/year on improvements, the City is coming up abput $19.5M/year short on the deal.


Mike, I might feel the same way, if we didn't happily accept the fact that the PBC spent $425 million to bring a team to OKC. No one is suggesting the city or we as citizens pay them for the expenses associated with the purchase of the team or their moving expenses. There are plenty of teams that lose money, and there's no reason to think that when our team begins a losing skid (which will happen...it's the nature of sports teams) the Thunder won't lose money hand over fist too. So I see it as allowing the ownership group to use the fat years to save for the lean years. As I've said, I consider it a partnership in which we both give something and we both get something.

Again, there are so many things wrong with this post, I won't answer them in detail again. Here is the latest on the profitability of the Thunder (thus further blowing any idea that being a small market team requires public subsidy just for the team to survive here goes against ALL of the evidence gathered during our 2 years with the Hornets (where they didn't get near the concessions that the Thunder got, and STILL made a profit (to the point, the City got to split in the profits). While some other teams have a broken business model, the Thunder is not one of them (and most NBA teams show a profit according to Forbes).

THUNDER RECOGNIZED (Oklahoman 3/30/11)


Fast Company Magazine listed the Thunder at No. 6 on its list of "The 10 Most Innovative Companies in Sports."

“For proving that market size doesn't matter,” the publication stated. “Following a nasty arena dispute between the Seattle SuperSonic owners and city leaders, the franchise relocated in 2008 to Oklahoma City, the NBA's smallest market (1.2 million people) and third smallest TV market. It ranks in the top 15 in overall attendance and is one of the most profitable small-market teams in any sport, worth an estimated $329 million, 18th in the league, according to Forbes.

Larry. You're looking at three years. And you're looking at "worth", which is meaningless. The Thunder were in the playoffs last year. They will be in the playoffs this year. That's why they're so profitable. Winning, playoff money and great financial support from their city are the ONLY ways a small market team can make money. When we start losing, which we will because all teams cycle, the team will go into the red. Again....and again....and again: We don't have the sponsorship money and television contract money that allow teams in larger cities to coast through the lean years when their teams are bad. We don't have enough population to keep an arena full when the team is bad. So we as a city have to be there to support our team financially through the lean years. Seattle is the perfect case in point. A bad contract and a few losing seasons put the team into a downward financial spiral that ultimately led to the team being sold and leaving Seattle. The very same thing is happening in Sacramento right now. They were the small market media darlings 10 years ago, and now the Maloofs have to move because they desperately need the $70 million loan they're getting for moving. Even that won't give them enough to pay Sacramento back for the $79 million loan the city gave them. You're looking at three years and projecting for 20, and that's dangerous in the professional sports business.

Forbes estimates of "worth" too are just fluff. They go up and down as teams win and lose and as their playoff appearances come and go. If you follow them over the years, you'll find that the teams that are worth more are either in big markets or in the playoffs. We're the media darlings right now because we've got an appealing team, an appealing fan base and the new hasn't worn off us. The media is fickle and that can change in a heartbeat.

It's not my fault they have only been here for 3 seasons. I work with the data given. I am including all 5 years of OKC's experience with the NBA. Not all of those years were "winning" seasons (unless you have a Charlie Sheen outlook). What were the OKC Hornets and the Thunder records again? To refresh our memory:

Hornets 2005-06: 38W/44L = PROFIT
Hornets 2006-07: 39W/43L = PROFIT
Thunder 2008-09: 23W/59L = PROFIT (Team's consultant "conservative" estimate just under $10/year)
Thunder 2009-10: 50W/32L = HIGHER PROFIT
Thunder 2010-11 (ongoing): 23W/59L = EVEN HIGHER PROFIT (Forbes: "operating profit at $22.6 million – up 6.3% and 78%, respectively, from the previous year.")

Granted they had the novelty/newness factor but even after 5 years average ticket sales/sellouts have been consistent (good years and bad). With the second winning season, the number of sellouts is higher. Hmmm, did they ever sell all of the season tickets last year or this year? Last I heard, they hadn't (and that's during winning/playoff seasons). Last season, the last report was they were 1,200 tickets shy. Can't recall if a figure was even released this year (just that it hadn't been reached). Depending on how far they get in the playoffs, hopefully they will return to a 7,000+ waiting list again. Of course, if there is a substantial waiting list, then there will be a logical need for a new, bigger arena (even though a bigger arena certainly wasn't needed for the Sonic's, and they demanded a new one there). But I digress. My point is, we should have waited until "all the data was in" to see if there really was a NEED for the concessions the City made. So far all of the available data indicates there is absolutely no NEED for the subsidy. They are doing just fine. If you don't think so, please present the data that shows otherwise for THIS team.

To those that argue that the team deserves the naming rights money because they are the ones bringing the "value" with them by being the tenant. Consider this. Would you expect Kevin Durant to give the money from his "seven-year, $60 million endorsement deal with Nike" back to the Thunder/NBA? After all if it wasn't for the NBA, his endorsement would be considerably less. To be fair, the Team/NBA will allow him to keep whatever he was earning on his own, as a non-pro player.

What Betts said

To get back to the thread topic, the Thunder's profit doesn't even include the naming rights money (since that hasn't been officially arranged/announced yet). By the Team's own consultants would be worth another $90M or so.

I'm going to throw a theory out that hasn't been discussed yet.

It's quite likely the BUILDING, will be named Midfirst Bank Center and the ARENA (the inside), be named Chesapeake arena. This is quite common and is my guess. Stockholders have little to do with this decision, we are talking chump change for CHK.

Remember the story? During the seven fat years, grain was stored in anticipation of the seven lean years they knew were to come. There will be lean years. You cannot assume sellouts and playoff appearances will continue indefinitely. That's pretty similar to what the people overpaying for houses five years ago thought and look where that got them.

We have no idea how much any of the owners had to borrow to buy this team. They still haven't made enough money to break even on the moving and lease buyout expenses. Get yourself worked up to oppose the next arena proposal in 20 years, because we know its coming.

I'm going to throw a theory out that hasn't been discussed yet.

It's quite likely the BUILDING, will be named Midfirst Bank Center and the ARENA (the inside), be named Chesapeake arena. This is quite common and is my guess. Stockholders have little to do with this decision, we are talking chump change for CHK.

The arena is the building, sometimes the court has a separate name.

How about MidFirst Bank Center with Mathis Brothers court

I just find it odd that Chesapeake would go obtain a patented US trademark for the name "Chesapeake Arena" if they weren't planning on using that title for something.

Maybe it's something in Fort Worth. :-/

Maybe it's something in Fort Worth. :-/

Yes....exactly. I don't know why some of you are assuming that Chesapeake would only buy naming rights for an arena in OKC. They operate in several other states, particularly Texas, Virginia, and West Virginia. They could be trying to name an arena in any of those locations.

It's quite likely the BUILDING, will be named Midfirst Bank Center and the ARENA (the inside), be named Chesapeake arena. This is quite common and is my guess.

Never heard of such a thing...

So, you know what all this means?

No "DelRancho Dome" !!!!!!!

I am crushed!


Chris
www.radiookc.com

Never heard of such a thing...

happens quite often, building named something then the inside (arena and/ or floor), named something else. It's done on the pro and college level, OSU plays on the the Eddie Sutton floor at Gallagher Iba arena.

Yeah I've seen ____ Stadium/____ Field and ____ Center/____ Floor, but not where the building and arena are seperately named. Certainly not in a case like ours where the arena is all the building consists of.

The Gaylord Family--Oklahoma Memorial Stadium/ Owen Field.

...


Yeah I've seen ____ Stadium/____ Field

So, did the Thunder pay the city this year even though they didn't collect on a naming rights deal from anyone?

It gets really tiring when people who don't understand risk and reward, who don't pony up to build anything, continuously resent those who do and maybe even make a profit at it. We could still be the one pony town that some would prefer and let all those damn millionaires leave town. Then maybe certain conspiracy theorists would be happy.