An article in the Oklahoman behind the paywall states the Thunder proposed going first in MAPS 4. Would like to know more of the plans here.

I watched the MAPS 4 board meeting yesterday and there was no mention of project order/priority.

Almost all of the 16 approved projects have made their pitch and almost all want to be first in line.

In the end, I believe the major and the main project manager from ADG will decide on the schedule.

I watched the MAPS 4 board meeting yesterday and there was no mention of project order/priority.

Almost all of the 16 approved projects have made their pitch and almost all want to be first in line.

In the end, I believe the major and the main project manager from ADG will decide on the schedule.

Thanks for the sanity Pete.

You are pretty astute, so..... what is your opinion of what the approximate order of priority of projects should be? Then forecast what you think it will wind up actually being.

Thanks.

And, Pete, have you ever thought about running for Mayor or council? You could bring a real sense of pragmatism and sensibility to our civic leadership.

Personally, I believe the new animal shelter should go first. The current facility is a disaster and they are having to euthanize far too many animals.

However, I'm very sure the Fairgrounds Arena and CHK Arena will be very near the front simply because of the power and influence of the people involved in those projects.

Personally, I believe the new animal shelter should go first. The current facility is a disaster and they are having to euthanize far too many animals.

However, I'm very sure the Fairgrounds Arena and CHK Arena will be very near the front simply because of the power and influence of the people involved in those projects.

And the rest of the question? When can we see you run?

And the rest of the question? When can we see you run?

I briefly considered it when Ed Shadid said he was going to step down, as I live in Ward 2.

But I was happy to see James Cooper step forward and he's doing a great job for this ward and for the city as a whole.

I feel like I can be of better service to the city as a journalist.

I think there is a pretty direct solution here. might be a little complex, but doable:

Let the Thunder pay for the construction up front and reimburse them at the back end of the MAPS revenue term. The Thunder would generate revenue more quickly than any placement that isn't first. And that could offset the cost of borrowing. This is the only MAPS funded Chesapeake arena work for the next 8 years.

I recall Devon did something like with Project 180. They paid to finish more quickly in advance of their property taxes, or something like that.

I think there is a pretty direct solution here. might be a little complex, but doable:

Let the Thunder pay for the construction up front and reimburse them at the back end of the MAPS revenue term. The Thunder would generate revenue more quickly than any placement that isn't first. And that could offset the cost of borrowing. This is the only MAPS funded Chesapeake arena work for the next 8 years.

I recall Devon did something like with Project 180. They paid to finish more quickly in advance of their property taxes, or something like that.

Devon loaned the money to the city so the work could be done before they moved into their new building.

And, they charged interest.

Devon loaned the money to the city so the work could be done before they moved into their new building.

And, they charged interest.

Yes. And I'm not suggesting anything is done at zero interest, or anything like that. But, a money making, private business could be seen as a responsible partner to the city if they pay to be in the front of the line to get something done to city property that makes them more money more quickly.

Yes. And I'm not suggesting anything is done at zero interest, or anything like that. But, a money making, private business could be seen as a responsible partner to the city if they pay to be in the front of the line to get something done to city property that makes them more money more quickly.

You mean "corruption"? Ha.

Actually, you're kind of making a case for doing all this with bonds, instead. Rates are low, construction would be much sooner, and it would move the return up in the timeline.

But, the debt free pay-as-you-go model of MAPS is a firmly established selling point and has been politically well accepted.. So, I think we're always going to have to be patient with it.

You mean "corruption"? Ha.

Actually, you're kind of making a case for doing all this with bonds, instead. Rates are low, construction would be much sooner, and it would move the return up in the timeline.

But, the debt free pay-as-you-go model of MAPS is a firmly established selling point and has been politically well accepted.. So, I think we're always going to have to be patient with it.

I would think bonds paid back by a dedicated already assured source would come with an extremely low interest rate. Given the present value of money it might be worth the juice.

I would think bonds paid back by a dedicated already assured source would come with an extremely low interest rate. Given the present value of money it might be worth the juice.

It probably would be worth it.

At the same time, doing it the way we do it kind of takes the pressure off of bond measures to pay for general infrastructure maintenance and improvements. Basically, we finance the house, but we have to save up for our toys.

I would think bonds paid back by a dedicated already assured source would come with an extremely low interest rate. Given the present value of money it might be worth the juice.

The city does it all the time for other big capital projects, in much larger amounts.

And our excellent credit rating (something they are always crowing about) means you get the lowest possible rates.

I will never understand for the life of me understand why the city felt the need to bend over and pay for Billionaire's improvements to their Arena. It is nuts. Do they think that these owners would have sold or moved their team to a different city?

I will never understand for the life of me understand why the city felt the need to bend over and pay for Billionaire's improvements to their Arena. It is nuts. Do they think that these owners would have sold or moved their team to a different city?

because the billionaire doesn't own the arena? the city does????

I will never understand for the life of me understand why the city felt the need to bend over and pay for Billionaire's improvements to their Arena. It is nuts. Do they think that these owners would have sold or moved their team to a different city?

it is a city owned building these improvements are for all events in the building ... they will be great for those with seats in the upper deck ... . they also make this building viable for decades to come ..

I will never understand for the life of me understand why the city felt the need to bend over and pay for Billionaire's improvements to their Arena. It is nuts. Do they think that these owners would have sold or moved their team to a different city?

Well, that's exactly the recipe and exactly how we got the team in the first place.

The argument for billionaire owners paying for arena renovations holds essentially no weight in small markets due to lack of leverage. I agree with Kevin it's exactly how we got the team and that was in Seattle with much more wealth/leverage to go around. In this case, the improvements touch essentially every part of the arena that is used for multiple purposes outside of basketball, it's a no-brainer to me. Obviously, there will always be other needs in the community but that's the beauty of MAPS having numerous projects.

The Chesapeake Energy Arena is owned by our city with the Thunder as anchor tenant.

When we agreed to the relocation of the Seattle Supersonics franchise owned by Oklahoma businessmen, The Professional Basketball Club, LLC, an arena and a practice facility (both owned by the city) were apart of the total package agreed to in the relocation agreement.


In anticipation of the team’s arrival, Oklahoma City voters last month approved a $121 million sales-tax package to renovate the city’s Ford Center arena and build an NBA practice facility.--Seattle Times, April 18, 2008. https://www.seattletimes.com/sports/nba-approves-sonics-move-to-oklahoma-city/

If we want to continue to support an NBA franchise in our city, we need to maintain a viable NBA arena. If not, Tulsa would gladly welcome the NBA to the BOK Center in Tulsa.

Austin and Kansas City are hungry for more pro sports too^^

I kinda feel bad because I suggested last week that Thunder ownership be good city fathers and volunteer to pay for their improvements up front. It was reported that they wanted to be first in line for MAPS money, and I am of the opinion that a win-win would be the Thunder paying for the improvements now, with the understanding they will get their money at the end of the 8 year MAPS tax extension. The clear advantage for the Thunder is that they will get increased revenue (and profit) from the Chesapeake upgrades the moment they are completed.

Let's say the MAPS revenue dedicated to the arena is 2 years out of 8. And the Thunder pay and build now, with the understanding they get repaid in years 7 and 8. Then it looks to me that they will get enhanced revenue (and profit) in years 3-4-5-6. Looks to me that the simple explanation would be that the interest rate paid on the expansion cost by the Thunder would be about 6% a year, and the increased profit would be larger than that dollar amount.

As we get into the weeds, it might be suggested that the borrowed amount might constrict the Thunder's overall borrowing ability (debt ratio). I don't think that is the case, and I think that there are tax deductions and/or credits that will offset the costs.

A win-win. It allows great things to be done for OKC on the social services area now that might have to wait on the Thunder otherwise. That is the act of good city fathers.

I kinda feel bad because I suggested last week that Thunder ownership be good city fathers and volunteer to pay for their improvements up front. It was reported that they wanted to be first in line for MAPS money, and I am of the opinion that a win-win would be the Thunder paying for the improvements now, with the understanding they will get their money at the end of the 8 year MAPS tax extension. The clear advantage for the Thunder is that they will get increased revenue (and profit) from the Chesapeake upgrades the moment they are completed.

Let's say the MAPS revenue dedicated to the arena is 2 years out of 8. And the Thunder pay and build now, with the understanding they get repaid in years 7 and 8. Then it looks to me that they will get enhanced revenue (and profit) in years 3-4-5-6. Looks to me that the simple explanation would be that the interest rate paid on the expansion cost by the Thunder would be about 6% a year, and the increased profit would be larger than that dollar amount.

As we get into the weeds, it might be suggested that the borrowed amount might constrict the Thunder's overall borrowing ability (debt ratio). I don't think that is the case, and I think that there are tax deductions and/or credits that will offset the costs.

A win-win. It allows great things to be done for OKC on the social services area now that might have to wait on the Thunder otherwise. That is the act of good city fathers.

Are they paying market rates for improvements of that? The answer is likely no and no.

The Peake is the city's main arena; economic Impact of no fans at Thunder games https://www.newson6.com/story/5fdab52eedcd8d3535fa76cc/economic-impact-of-no-fans-at-thunder-games-

Are they paying market rates for improvements of that? The answer is likely no and no.
Nor should they. For every home game, the Thunder generates millions in economic impact for the city. Add to the fact the way they have catapulted OKC's national and local perception, they should receive a generous deal. It's smart business, and I can only imagine that the deal is structured similar to any other NBA teams in other cities.

Does anyone have any idea what the Thunder pays in rent for CHK Arena? And does it go up if we pour in millions for improvements that mostly are for their benefit.

Dont forget that we dont charge sales taxes on their tickets and Thunder recieved Quality Jobs Act money too.

Rent

The Thunder pay$1,640,000 in annual Arena Rent ($40,000 per game) for forty-one (41) regular season NBA home games. Additional Rent of $40,000 is to be paid for each preseason and postseason home game. Rent is subject to periodic CPI adjustments, capped at 3% annually. The Thunder also pay an annual Practice Facility Rent of $100,000.

Have no idea if the rent/lease agreement goes up; that will be decided in the next renewal agreement.

Link: https://law.marquette.edu/assets/sports-law/pdf/lease-summary-oklahoma-city-thunder.pdf

https://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/thunderalley121919c.jpg

MAPS 4 proposal for Chesapeake would prolong life of arena, backers say


An estimated $115 million would go toward Chesapeake and the Thunder’s practice facility in northwest Oklahoma City. If sales tax revenue meets projections, the arena would receive about $104 million, with the rest going to the practice facility.


• An expansion of the 300 seating level, known as Loud City, to give the upper deck fans
some of the same amenities as those below, mostly more space to congregate and some
sit-down dining options. More restrooms and elevators are part of the plan.

• An outdoor patio on the second level.

• Replacing all the original seats on every level.

• Installing a new scoreboard with a 34-foot by 19-foot video board. The video board
in place is 20 feet by 10 feet. Video monitors would be placed above seating tunnels.



A better Loud City https://stories.usatodaynetwork.com/maps4/maps-4-proposal-for-chesapeake-would-prolong-life-of-arena/

Wish they'd paint the roof or spruce it up a bit. It always looked terrible on the aerial shots during NBA telecasts (especially when we used to be televised nationally).

When is Chesapeake's contract with the arena naming rights up?
I believe they signed a 12 year deal back in 2010?

Surely it will be something else soon.

The naming rights deal is currently scheduled to expire after the 2022-23 season.

Tom & Judy Love owners of Love's Travel Stops & Country Stores will be in a position to bid on the new naming rights. They paid $10 million for the small yellow NBA patch; so they may have what it takes for arena naming rights--stay tuned.

There is nothing small about that heinous Loves patch.

Hope everyone likes yellow, if Loves ends up buying the naming rights.

Hope everyone likes yellow, if Loves ends up buying the naming rights.

They are going to have to compete with Velveeta. I have on good authority they intend to purchase the naming rights and call it the Liquid Gold Thunderdome.

They are going to have to compete with Velveeta. I have on good authority they intend to purchase the naming rights and call it the Liquid Gold Thunderdome.

Wow!

That sounds like when Louisville built their new arena (KFC Yum Center) and KFC first submitted 'naming rights' to call it The KFC Bucket...

Wow!

That sounds like when Louisville built their new arena (KFC Yum Center) and KFC first submitted 'naming rights' to call it The KFC Bucket...

I think it is quite clear that the source of your story is flawed....please note that it is Yum! Brands. And the name Yum! must have the exclamation point...!... The Yum! Brands lineup today is Taco Bell, Pizza Hut, KFC and WingStreet, plus a couple other small concepts.

Now, to get to the naming of Chesapeake Energy Arena; I'm guessing that Love's gets their money's worth through the uniform logo, and the better arena sponsor is Paycom.

Flawed or whatever, I definitely remember the proposal at the time. Posters were laughing and making jokes about an arena that resembled a big ole greasy bucket of fried chicken--with red & white strips.

However, I like your Paycom idea and hopes it comes to fruition.

Paycom Palace . . . on the Prairie

My money is on Tom & Judy Love presenting the winning bid on naming rights.
.

Flawed or whatever, I definitely remember the proposal at the time. Posters were laughing and making jokes about an arena that resembled a big ole greasy bucket of fried chicken--with red & white strips.

However, I like your Paycom idea and hopes it comes to fruition.

Paycom Palace . . . on the Prairie

My money is on Tom & Judy Love presenting the winning bid on naming rights.
.

Paycom Palace is something a Boomer would come up with, its just not hip. Kids these days want names that have some meme potential. The bigger the meme the better the name for the arena. You wont see Paycom palace trend on twitter, but Liquid Gold Thunderdome already has in connection to the naming rights coming up with Velveetas official twitter account tweeting at players and fans. Give the people what they want and you will instantly making that Arena more iconic.

16730

Paycom Palace is something a Boomer would come up with, its just not hip. Kids these days want names that have some meme potential. The bigger the meme the better the name for the arena. You wont see Paycom palace trend on twitter, but Liquid Gold Thunderdome already has in connection to the naming rights coming up with Velveetas official twitter account tweeting at players and fans. Give the people what they want and you will instantly making that Arena more iconic.

This is pretty good point. Meme culture is the move. I do like the Velveeta thing, just because of how hilarious it is. But I do wonder, is there any connection whatsoever with Kraft Foods and OKC/OK?

https://www.okctalk.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=16730&d=1614289142
Great pic, OkieBerto

There are a lot of Oklahoma casinos who participate in Thunder sponsorships and ads who might be interested in the bidding process. Let's not rule out WinStar World Casino or many of the local casinos in our area.

16730

lmao.

Nicknamed, the Looooove Shack.

Cool article about the Velveeta thing. Mayor tweeted about it.

https://theathletic.com/2445846/2021/03/15/cheesy-money-a-conversation-with-velveetas-john-sabine-the-voice-of-the-strangest-brand-on-nba-twitter/

Thunder Plans Transition to New Arena Naming Rights Partner (https://www.nba.com/thunder/corporatenews/naming-rights-210420)

OKLAHOMA CITY, April 20, 2021- The Oklahoma City Thunder is in the process of working to secure a new naming rights partner for Chesapeake Energy Arena, the team announced today. Chesapeake Energy Corporation has informed the Thunder that as part of its recently completed restructuring, it is terminating its arena naming rights agreement with the team, effective immediately. The original 12-year agreement was announced in 2011. The Thunder is now focused on identifying a new long-term naming rights partner. In the interim, the building will continue to be called Chesapeake Energy Arena.

“As we move toward a transition to a new naming rights partner for our arena, we would like to recognize our extraordinary history with Chesapeake Energy,” said Clayton I. Bennett, chairman of the Oklahoma City Thunder. “For a decade, the arena has proudly bore its name and we thank Chesapeake, one of our founding partners, for its loyal support and partnership.

Love's Arena? Paycom Arena?

Yet another Aubrey McClendon megalomaniacal folly.

What on earth was a wholesale energy company doing spending millions on something like this? And for 12 freaking years?

It never made any sense.

That is wild, terminating with a single year left on the contract? Why not sever this agreement back 3 or 4 years ago? Nope, let's do it with 1 remaining, lol.

That is wild, terminating with a single year left on the contract? Why not sever this agreement back 3 or 4 years ago? Nope, let's do it with 1 remaining, lol.

They may have needed the bankruptcy to break the contract.

That is wild, terminating with a single year left on the contract? Why not sever this agreement back 3 or 4 years ago? Nope, let's do it with 1 remaining, lol.

I would be willing to bet that the buyout to terminate the contract any earlier exceeded the cost to continue it until this year.

My money is on: “The Loves Shack”

They may have needed the bankruptcy to break the contract.

or this

I would be willing to bet that the buyout to terminate the contract any earlier exceeded the cost to continue it until this year.

My money is on: “The Loves Shack”

that's a good one... but if Hobby Lobby decides to get in this business... i'm okay with the "Hob Lob Arena"

My money is on: “The Loves Shack”
Would be perfect, lol

That is wild, terminating with a single year left on the contract? Why not sever this agreement back 3 or 4 years ago? Nope, let's do it with 1 remaining, lol.

it may not have had an out until this time ..

would think Paycom is the leader in the clubhouse

Judy Love is a staple at the Thunder Home games. My money would be on Loves to secure naming rights as it is something they are very passionate about.

The other outlier I could see would be the Chickasaws, but who knows with the gaming right thing going on with the governor.

Yet another Aubrey McClendon megalomaniacal folly.

What on earth was a wholesale energy company doing spending millions on something like this? And for 12 freaking years?


It never made any sense.


Heaven forbid a local company be a partner with a local sports team. Should Enable, Continental and Devon pull all of their signage from in the Arena? Who exactly do you want to advertise with the team? Always easy to pile on Aubrey Mcclendon.

Heaven forbid a local company be a partner with a local sports team. Should Enable, Continental and Devon pull all of their signage from in the Arena? Who exactly do you want to advertise with the team? Always easy to pile on Aubrey Mcclendon.

Signage vs. a multi-million dollar, 12-year contract for naming rights are not remotely the same thing.

What possible business benefit would come close to justifying Chesapeake's obligation? They don't even market to end consumers.

Signage vs. a multi-million dollar, 12-year contract for naming rights are not remotely the same thing.

What possible business benefit would come close to justifying Chesapeake's obligation? They don't even market to end consumers.
What possible business benefit do Continental, Devon and Enable get from signage in the arena? I’m sure there’s a contract length and financial obligation associated with those as well.

I think Chipper's point is that Enable, Continental, and Devon are in exactly the same boat as CHK as far as type of company, but are just paying less (and getting less exposure). Maybe at a certain dollar amount it becomes unacceptable, but I think saying that they are not remotely the same thing is wrong.

What possible business benefit do Continental, Devon and Enable get from signage in the arena? I’m sure there’s a contract length and financial obligation associated with those as well.

There is one thing to provide a small amount of support; local companies do that in a variety of ways all the time.

We are talking about a 12-year contract for naming rights for an NBA arena. The sum total of their obligation was $42.5 million while the company was losing billions -- from the time this contract was signed until their last reported earnings, they have lost over $89 billion.

There is one thing to provide a small amount of support; local companies do that in a variety of ways all the time.

We are talking about a 12-year contract for naming rights for an NBA arena. The sum total of their obligation was $42.5 million while the company was losing billions.

I agree small amount for signage and local support could be seen as a way to promote company for hiring purposes. Name recognition and image of support. But I agree you don’t need full on arena name to do that. Simple logo on screens and promotions in arena are most that are needed