Also, keep in mind the opportunity costs involved. Imagine what OKC could do with $1b invested in education and infrastructure instead of investing in a noncompetitive sports team that plays only 41 games at home. Oklahoma just lost out on Tesla and Panasonic investing here. Being an attractive draw for companies is a much more sustainable way of growth and ROI than giving Chet Holmgren a better court.

Also keep in mind that the State needs to invest $1 billion of its $2 billion 'nest egg' it has in relations to the Panasonic Plant we didn't get.

Also, keep in mind the opportunity costs involved. Imagine what OKC could do with $1b invested in education and infrastructure instead of investing in a noncompetitive sports team that plays only 41 games at home. Oklahoma just lost out on Tesla and Panasonic investing here. Being an attractive draw for companies is a much more sustainable way of growth and ROI than giving Chet Holmgren a better court.

That's a very dishonest oversimplification. It's not like the team has been "noncompetitive" for it's much of it's time here and it's more likely than not that they'll be competitive again within the next 2 seasons. They've been in the playoffs all but the three seasons that they've been intentionally bad to build the roster (08-09, 20-21, 21-22) and were only one spot out of the playoffs despite 3/4 of the team being injured in 14-15. Making the playoffs 10 out of 14 seasons and having a realistic shot at winning a title 5 of the 10 playoff runs is hardly noncompetitive.

Link doesn't work...

Pete, you're correct on this. " If we took out a $1 billion bond for a new arena, we would have a lessened ability to do the same for future public projects. "

Imagine a $1 billion arena in downtown OKC.

Like the Fiserv Forum downtown Milwaukee? It would be sweet if OKC landed something like that.

the Fiserv Forum is a work of art at 1.2 billion!

$1 billion would get you a domed football stadium with a retractable roof in OKC. OKC doesn't need that right now. Making the one major-league sports team happy and building a decent soccer complex are much higher priorities IMO.

I'm curious, other than maybe more electronics for fans, what else might the Thunder management want in an arena (understand, I am out of town and have not had the pleasure of entering Paycom Arena).

A nice new arena is going to approach 1 billion dollars. The last time an arena was under a billion was Little Caesars Arena in 2017 and that would be 988 million dollars today.

A nice new arena is going to approach 1 billion dollars. The last time an arena was under a billion was Little Caesars Arena in 2017 and that would be 988 million dollars today.

That is in bigger cities with bigger city pricing, labor and land.

That is in bigger cities with bigger city pricing, labor and land.

Yeah, because Milwaukee and bankruptcy Detroit are super, super expensive. It will cost between $750 million to $1 billion for a top-notch arena.

That is in bigger cities with bigger city pricing, labor and land.

Milwaukee is similar to OKC as far as population and OKC has way more land

Milwaukee is the only major city in the state, after Milwaukee is Madison and the even smaller less populated Green Bay has an NFL team

That is in bigger cities with bigger city pricing, labor and land.

That’s not even considering by the time they actually begin building in the future prices will probably be even higher.

The closest equivalent for a “cheaper” arena is the Golden 1 Center in Sacramento at 558 million but that was almost a decade ago.

It is not the 1990s. Any new arena will be built on cheap land in the suburbs.

T-mobile arena in Vegas cost $375 million with Vegas prices. With inflation, OKC could build a new one today for $500mm.

Milwaukee is a growing and much more urban oriented city than OKC and downtown prices are far higher. You will likely have union labor influence which will raise construction costs there.

As for Detroit, the arena cost also included parking garages.

One way or the other, it will be very expensive but planning should start well ahead of when a new arena would actually be built which would be more expensive inclusive of inflation.

It is not the 1990s. Any new arena will be built on cheap land in the suburbs.

that is not true at all, again look at milwaukee and san francisco and probably a lot of other cities

Out of 32 NFL teams only 10 NFL teams play their home games in a suburb of the city they represent. NY Giants/Jets don't even play in NY they play in New Jersey

can't find anything about NBA, MLS, NHL

Now would be the time to consider building a complex that would house a 20,000 seat NBA arena and a 20,000 seat outdoor MLS style soccer stadium.

OKC has $105 million budgeted for Paycom Center and $37 million for the soccer stadium in MAPS 4. Tackle two birds with one stone.

Think about the temporary & full time jobs it will generate for the area.

It is not the 1990s. Any new arena will be built on cheap land in the suburbs.

lol what are you talking about. The trend has been building downtown over the suburbs for 20 plus years now.

I will stop comparing OKC to Dallas.

I will stop comparing OKC to Dallas.

We’re building an NBA Arena…where is the American Airlines Center in Dallas?

Me thinks The Myriad, cough cough oh sorry, the so called movie studio may be getting a second look as a potential new arena site......

Hanging out in Arlington. There is a huge amounts of stadiums here.

Hanging out in Arlington. There is a huge amounts of stadiums here.

the Mavericks play downtown dallas you are talking about the cowboys and the rangers stadiums. I was working a 100% travel IT contract for siemens in arlington for a couple years and you could see the Choctaw Stadium from the siemens offices.

You know what? Globe Life Field replaced the Choctaw stadium and the old stadium is still used today.

OKC could definitely keep the paycom and build a new arena

I will stop comparing OKC to Dallas.

If you’re referring to the Cowboys and Rangers playing in Arlington, then yes, that isn’t an apt comparison. Even with the uniqueness of the metroplex having two large cities 30 miles apart and the respective stadiums being in Arlington, midway between Dallas and Ft. Worth with plenty of land to fit the large footprint of NFL and MLB stadiums, the Mavericks have an arena in downtown Dallas that is just a little older than the Paycom Center. I’m not sure how serious he is, but Mark Cuban (owner of the Mavericks) has already started indicating he thinks the Mavericks will be in a new arena by 2031 and the expectation is the arena would be built on the other side of I-35 where Cuban owns property. So even with the Dallas comparison, it’s still not true that the trend is to build NBA/NHL arenas on cheap land in the suburbs.

Hanging out in Arlington. There is a huge amounts of stadiums here.

Do you see an NBA/NHL arena in Arlington?

I think we make decisions based on financial realities.

I am skeptic. I just think the next arena will be between OKC and Edmond. Prove me wrong.

Hanging out in Arlington. There is a huge amounts of stadiums here.

Let me know when an NBA arena is built in the suburbs. Hasn't been one in decades, and Detroit moved from the suburbs to downtown. Apples and oranges. Harder to build huge stadiums in cramped downtowns.

Again,

BTW saw this in this mornings Oklahoman (07-15-2022):

The project would be built on the former Interstate 40 easement between Oklahoma City Boulevard and the arena. Designs submitted by Bockus Payne Architecture show a development with significantly more street presence than the first renderings submitted earlier this year.

They are more further along with drafts for this project than Holt talked about in the 'State of the City Address.'

Doubt if it will be in Edmond.

Maybe memorial road.

I don't see Edmond coughing up $1b to have it in their city limits, and OKC is trying to revitalize downtown, I don't see them taking the Thunder away from Bricktown/Omni area, wouldn't make any sense

Actually, this study (https://scholarworks.uark.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1000&context=econuht) (link now fixed) does precisely that and finds little macroeconomic benefit for the Thunder coming to OKC (or any significant cost felt by Seattle for the Sonics leaving).

The study (https://www.researchgate.net/publication/355133656_Thunder_Up_The_Taxes) you mentioned in an earlier post a few pages earlier also analyzes the arrival of a new team (the Thunder) to a city that hadn't had a pro sports team previously (OKC). Again, that study finds a significantly positive uptick in tax revenue following the arrival of the Thunder.

It appears that the current study you reference actually finds something similar. OKC revenue jumps the year after the Thunder came to town, while Seattle revenue dipped after the team left.

I don't really see how citing these studies is helping your argument.

Again,

BTW saw this in this mornings Oklahoman (07-15-2022):

The project would be built on the former Interstate 40 easement between Oklahoma City Boulevard and the arena. Designs submitted by Bockus Payne Architecture show a development with significantly more street presence than the first renderings submitted earlier this year.

They are more further along with drafts for this project than Holt talked about in the 'State of the City Address.'

Doubt if it will be in Edmond.

That was in reference to the proposed Thunder Alley development which is now on hold.

That was in reference to the proposed Thunder Alley development which is now on hold.

My bad, thanks, for the correction, Pete.

I am skeptic. I just think the next arena will be between OKC and Edmond. Prove me wrong.

You're also blatantly wrong based on nearly every NBA arena built over the last 20 years.

Seems that there is a pretty cheap piece of land (because it’s owned by the city) right across from Paycom. And reality is that there’s a ton of relatively inexpensive land near downtown

Absolutely no way this doesn’t get built downtown.

Will say this for Edmond, it has the potential to be competitive with Norman--OKC's largest suburb.

You're also blatantly wrong based on nearly every NBA arena built over the last 20 years.

Seems that there is a pretty cheap piece of land (because it’s owned by the city) right across from Paycom. And reality is that there’s a ton of relatively inexpensive land near downtown

Absolutely no way this doesn’t get built downtown.
I’m pretty sure this person is trolling.

He is not trolling. There is some open land in downtown. Maybe a theatre in the round.

Bricktown merchants will welcome the news of a new downtown arena.

It is funny that Oklahoma gas and electric owns that land.

He is not trolling. There is some open land in downtown. Maybe a theatre in the round.
When you’re making ridiculous claims like suggesting this be built in the suburbs and then posters refuting it by showing almost every new NBA arena has been built in the city cores, not in the suburbs as you suggest, and then you go on to say things like “prove me wrong” and “it can go on memorial,” it’s hard to take you serious. OKC probably has some of the cheapest, most abundant land downtown of any major city.

Furthermore, I’ll humor your for the sake of argument but it isn’t up to use to prove you wrong on a claim you made. That’s on you to prove you’re right. But with that said, I guarantee you this will end up in downtown and time will prove one of us right or wrong. If this isn’t built downtown than that’ll be a huge mistake.

And why are you speaking about yourself in third person?

I am just spitting out opinions.

Here are my thoughts:

1) yes we knew this day was coming and necessary now given the timeline involved with the funding source. The city will have to detertmine the cost-to-benefit of A) retrofit Paycomm, B) rebuild on Paycomm site (letting Tulsa temporarily host the team, ala Tacoma did for the Sonics), C) build on Cox site, or D) build on some other site. The important thing is - it MUST be downtown and part of a bigger master vision; which I've been advising OKC to develop for a long time

2) people keep talking about the cost and that for OKC to keep up we need $1B. I disagree. Cost of land and cost in general is lower in OKC compared to just about every NBA city; so the comps based on cost don't exactly equate. I think the issue is the size of the building, OKC built small - this will need to change. But still OKC should be able to get a 750K building for less than $1B, relax folks - this isn't SF or even MKE.

3) like it or not, OKC is trapped in this position. If OKC doesn't vote yes then it's no different than the NYMBIES of Seattle; which just so happened to had other teams unlike OKC. If the vote is no, the OKC can say goodbye to major league sports forever.

4) the vote will be YES regardless, hopefully the city does its diligence and the NBA/team come up with a design to stand the test of time this go around. I don't hear Chicago having rumblings about United Center, which could be refurbished so many times over and over if necessary. We need to think along those lines, build a shell to stand time where the inside can be repurposed over time to keep up.

5) and to me this is most important - the CITY needs more say/control on the next building. OKC is building a new arena to NBA luxury specs but the NBA team is a tenant and CANT control all of the dates. We need a building that gets used, to help with the cost of construction. I know OKC built in the exclusivity agreement for Paycomm since it was our first try into the major leagues; this can't be repeated. The team needs to be the anchor tenant, yes. But the city needs more out of the building than just 41-50 game nights per year.


The ONLY loser in all of this arena discussion will be transit. OKC likely wont have the appetite now to finish MAPS 4 collections + collect for a Paycomm replacement AND also finish building its mass rapid transit. Therefore, transit needs to move to a regional operation where it can pursue its own funding mechanisms (like the gas tax, property tax). This needs to be done asap, otherwise - kiss most of the transit expansion goodbye or at least until after the arena is built (which would be pathetic in my opinion).

Here are my thoughts:

1) yes we knew this day was coming and necessary now given the timeline involved with the funding source. The city will have to detertmine the cost-to-benefit of A) retrofit Paycomm, B) rebuild on Paycomm site (letting Tulsa temporarily host the team, ala Tacoma did for the Sonics), C) build on Cox site, or D) build on some other site. The important thing is - it MUST be downtown and part of a bigger master vision; which I've been advising OKC to develop for a long time

2) people keep talking about the cost and that for OKC to keep up we need $1B. I disagree. Cost of land and cost in general is lower in OKC compared to just about every NBA city; so the comps based on cost don't exactly equate. I think the issue is the size of the building, OKC built small - this will need to change. But still OKC should be able to get a 750K building for less than $1B, relax folks - this isn't SF or even MKE.

3) like it or not, OKC is trapped in this position. If OKC doesn't vote yes then it's no different than the NYMBIES of Seattle; which just so happened to had other teams unlike OKC. If the vote is no, the OKC can say goodbye to major league sports forever.

4) the vote will be YES regardless, hopefully the city does its diligence and the NBA/team come up with a design to stand the test of time this go around. I don't hear Chicago having rumblings about United Center, which could be refurbished so many times over and over if necessary. We need to think along those lines, build a shell to stand time where the inside can be repurposed over time to keep up.

5) and to me this is most important - the CITY needs more say/control on the next building. OKC is building a new arena to NBA luxury specs but the NBA team is a tenant and CANT control all of the dates. We need a building that gets used, to help with the cost of construction. I know OKC built in the exclusivity agreement for Paycomm since it was our first try into the major leagues; this can't be repeated. The team needs to be the anchor tenant, yes. But the city needs more out of the building than just 41-50 game nights per year.


The ONLY loser in all of this arena discussion will be transit. OKC likely wont have the appetite now to finish MAPS 4 collections + collect for a Paycomm replacement AND also finish building its mass rapid transit. Therefore, transit needs to move to a regional operation where it can pursue its own funding mechanisms (like the gas tax, property tax). This needs to be done asap, otherwise - kiss most of the transit expansion goodbye or at least until after the arena is built (which would be pathetic in my opinion).

Are you just trying to sound smart here? OKC has control of the arena. It gets 30-40 concerts a year, 10-15 other events a year, and the Thunder make diddly on those dates. It is used well over 100 nights a year. OKC has always owned the arena, hence why they have had to foot the bill on improvements. That will be the same way for the next arena. Not sure what you mean by "Exclusivity agreement". The Thunder have no control over their own dates anyway, as those are set by TV contracts and the NBA. Like, they have ZERO say if they play in OKC on December 14th or November 8th or March 30th. They have 41 dates that arenas are contractually obligated to hold NBA games in the arena. Nothing the city, state, US Government, Russian Military, or OKC Thunder ownership can do about them. They can ask, but the NBA can tell them to piss off, if they feel inclined.

Here are my thoughts:

1) yes we knew this day was coming and necessary now given the timeline involved with the funding source. The city will have to determine the cost-to-benefit of A) retrofit Paycomm, B) rebuild on Paycomm site (letting Tulsa temporarily host the team, ala Tacoma did for the Sonics), C) build on Cox site, or D) build on some other site. The important thing is - it MUST be downtown and part of a bigger master vision; which I've been advising OKC to develop for a long time

2) people keep talking about the cost and that for OKC to keep up we need $1B. I disagree. Cost of land and cost in general is lower in OKC compared to just about every NBA city; so the comps based on cost don't exactly equate. I think the issue is the size of the building, OKC built small - this will need to change. But still OKC should be able to get a 750K building for less than $1B, relax folks - this isn't SF or even MKE.

3) like it or not, OKC is trapped in this position. If OKC doesn't vote yes then it's no different than the NYMBIES of Seattle; which just so happened to had other teams unlike OKC. If the vote is no, the OKC can say goodbye to major league sports forever.

4) the vote will be YES regardless, hopefully the city does its diligence and the NBA/team come up with a design to stand the test of time this go around. I don't hear Chicago having rumblings about United Center, which could be refurbished so many times over and over if necessary. We need to think along those lines, build a shell to stand time where the inside can be repurposed over time to keep up.

5) and to me this is most important - the CITY needs more say/control on the next building. OKC is building a new arena to NBA luxury specs but the NBA team is a tenant and CANT control all of the dates. We need a building that gets used, to help with the cost of construction. I know OKC built in the exclusivity agreement for Paycomm since it was our first try into the major leagues; this can't be repeated. The team needs to be the anchor tenant, yes. But the city needs more out of the building than just 41-50 game nights per year.


The ONLY loser in all of this arena discussion will be transit. OKC likely wont have the appetite now to finish MAPS 4 collections + collect for a Paycomm replacement AND also finish building its mass rapid transit. Therefore, transit needs to move to a regional operation where it can pursue its own funding mechanisms (like the gas tax, property tax). This needs to be done asap, otherwise - kiss most of the transit expansion goodbye or at least until after the arena is built (which would be pathetic in my opinion).

Bingo Hot Rod, You nailed it. Look for a new arena to cost under $500 M and over $425 M--will be State-of-the-Art, 75-100 luxury suites.

These red squares represent the current footprint of Paycom Center.

The new arena would need to be larger, but this at least shows how a new facility might fit on various sites.

HTTP://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/arena071522a.jpg

Across the street, west of Paycom Center.

The more I think about this, it almost has to be the old Cox site.

The city already owns that land, it's just about the right size and it's still close to downtown, all the hotels and the convention center.

It's not only the cost savings in buying the land (which would be 10's of millions just in itself) but also the ability to completely control it; not have to go through the legal mess that comes with eminent domain; being able to gain access to it at any time. I'm sure they could preserve a big chunk of the underground parking which would be a great amenity for the arena and also minimize the need for yet more structured parking.

The size of the parcel would allow for all types of commercial uses around it, which is important due to the proximity to the Myriad Gardens and the CBD. I could see them having indoor/outdoor levels with bars and restaurants facing the park.



There is really no way to build it to the west without closing Harvey and preserving that 'spine' has always been prominent in city planning (and the reason the Devon Rotunda is located where is).

Also, that land between the parks should have a higher and better use than just another super block with a monolithic building.

What are they asking for the COOP these days?

It's the legit are ideal space from the perspective of future expansion. Someone also pointed out that if we put the MAPS stadium out there, they could share parking.

It's worth the city just getting this site out of the hands of the current owners so it can be part of any Master Plan we put together. If you told me we were going to use the MAPS 4 funds for the sole purpose of buying the land, remediating and maybe getting an initial parking garage, I'd be ecstatic. Honestly the 2 stadiums could definitely share amenities.

I really hope the site between the Myriad and Scissortail isn’t it. That should be a mixed use development with a pedestrian Paseo connecting the two parks.

Will Prairie Surf build a new studio from scratch?

I think with Prairie Surf Studios already established in the old Cox Center, just west of the current location makes more sense, especially since the building is set to be larger. Harvey could be turned into an underground access for teams and freight. After that, tear down the old peake (my heart is gonna hurt on that one) and redevelop that to mixed development.

This could also be a great opportunity to make it more garden themed since it will be between the Myriad and Scissortail.

I could be wrong.

Isn't the plan for Prairie Surf to eventually move?

When I spoke to the co-CEO of prairie a few months ago after a talk he gave he said they were actively looking for replacement sites for when their five year lease was up and that everything was on the table (location wise, funding wise, etc).

Isn't the plan for Prairie Surf to eventually move?

The better question is where to? They have until 2026 to find out when, plenty of time to accumulate funds forba relocation.

Isn't the plan for Prairie Surf to eventually move?

I do recall someone posting on here that Prairie Surf were going to eventually build their own studio.

So, as soon as they move out; demolition of the Cox Convention Center could begin. Salvage and reinforce as much of the underground parking as possible.

Paycom Center could be used (reconfigured) for concerts, conventions with new OKC Convention Center and 'AA' level ice hockey (15,152 capacity) and the New NBA Oklahoma City Arena used for NBA basketball, NCAA basketball playoff sites which should boost our level of level of hotel room nights revenue.

OKC should have the new Fairgrounds Coliseum (FC) completed; by then, hotel room nights revenue used to build the new FC can be given back to the city as revenue to fund the new NBA arena.

Channel 6 - Tulsa reports (December 14th 2021): https://www.newson6.com/story/61b93ca042c8650bf7102664/construction-of-new-okc-fairgrounds-coliseum-expected-to-start-next-year?fbclid=IwAR1EUjC0PL971SOE7M3dGL2DZGis437l5qjB n6B_VAdzPoLj9xgpN1Kg_E4

Most of the coliseum’s construction will be funded by the voter-approved MAPS 4 measure, which will provide roughly $63 million. Another $25 million will come from city hotel tax revenues “already earmarked for fairgrounds improvements,” according to the city website and $9 million in MAPS 3 surplus funds.

MAPS 3 surplus funds will aid in additional capital improvements:


Other projects that will be aided by the MAPS 3 surplus will be the allocation of $9 million to the Fairgrounds Coliseum approved in December as part of MAPS 4.

Link: OKC VeloCity MAPS 3 surplus; https://www.velocityokc.com/blog/inside-okc/maps-3-surplus-funds-will-aid-in-additional-capital-improvements/?back=super_blog

…Also, regarding Paycom: my gut says that we’ll have to replace that building before another 20 years elapses. I’d expect us to be on that path within the next decade, in fact.

Prescient post I made weeks ago. To be fair, might’ve been more than just my gut.

https://oklahoman-ok.newsmemory.com/eebrowser/ipad/html5.check.22033014/ajax-request.php?action=loadImage&pSetup=oklahoman&type=printImage&issue=20220716&filename=N1F1ZEVVN0xQaFp0aGo0czRmSG5ZNTFIbjVaL1FhY UN3SXJReFlVckpvRTRSWmpnSGVNVHA1eGFCYXFCTE9BbA==&images=pag_11_0%2C160%2C501%2C72%2C860-0%20pag_11_1%2C232%2C501%2C72%2C860-0%20pag_11_2%2C304%2C501%2C72%2C860-0%20pag_11_3%2C160%2C587%2C72%2C890-0%20pag_11_4%2C232%2C587%2C72%2C890-0%20pag_11_5%2C304%2C587%2C72%2C890-0%20&medDpi=204&pageW=609&pageH=513



Pete's assessment (Post #2321) on the current super block Cox Convention Center site now home to Prairie Surf Studios (2020 five year lease) appears to be the most economical option. The four block site used for construction the Myriad Convention Center in 1969 was financed by a bond issue. The city currently owns this site.

It seems more economical to demolish the old Cox Convention Center site, salvage the underground parking. The site has more than enough room to build a new NBA/NHL regulation arena.

The Cox Convention Center's arena still has 11 miles of pipe used for ice making equipment still underneath.

Also, give it up to Urbanized, your 'gut feeling' may be coming to fruition.

When I spoke to the co-CEO of prairie a few months ago after a talk he gave he said they were actively looking for replacement sites for when their five year lease was up and that everything was on the table (location wise, funding wise, etc).

They could look at the old cotton mill site. Lots of room for building outdoor sets, storage, etc. Start the clean up now. Could even build movie themed commercial development around them that could double as street locations to shoot from with taller downtown in the background.

Bob Howard isn't even one of the 4 biggest owners. And of those owners (Bennett, McClendon Estate, Records & Kaiser) I've been told only Records & Kaiser are strong enough financially to weather the poor attendance and no playoff money much longer.

This doesn’t seem correct. OKC makes a boatload just from revenue sharing, right?

Also, that land between the parks should have a higher and better use than just another super block with a monolithic building.

Why can’t arenas be designed to have more active uses outside of games/events? For example, why couldn’t a sports bar in the arena open to the street and have regular hours? They’d just have to lock doors to arena access. During game days/events those places are just open to ticket holders with access only inside the arena. I get there are some complications, but I’ve never understood why arenas have to be dead outside of events.

^

I know the Thunder owners want a more interactive and mixed-use experience around the arena; that was the whole idea behind Thunder Alley which is now on hold.

I'm not against the old Fred Jones lots, but the city has already made it clear they want to keep Harvey open, which is the main way to get from the CBD and Myriad Gardens to Scissortail Park and the river beyond.

Wouldn't be the end of the world if the arena goes there, but you know the current owners are going to do something great (collectively, they've done the best urban development in town and on a large scale) so I'd rather see the arena replace the aging concrete monolith that is the old Cox Center. I also think that site would drive more people to Bricktown, a place where a massive amount of public and private dollars have been spent.

Using the Cox site would also be much cheaper for the city and citizens who will be footing the bill.


Either one of those sites would make a lot of sense. I'd be shocked if it went to the Producers Coop or Strawberry Fields and I sure hope that doesn't happen.

Why can’t arenas be designed to have more active uses outside of games/events? For example, why couldn’t a sports bar in the arena open to the street and have regular hours? They’d just have to lock doors to arena access. During game days/events those places are just open to ticket holders with access only inside the arena. I get there are some complications, but I’ve never understood why arenas have to be dead outside of events.
One of the challenges is that there are too many entities that get a cut of every food and beverage item sold, which drives prices up beyond market rate for non-game days. In other words, when a hot dog is sold at the arena a portion of that revenue goes to the F&B operator, ASM (operator of the building), but also to the team and to the City.

If you buy a beer you get yet another fee added to that. In the case of Paycom, just the City of OKC gets 14.99% of liquor sales. Why 14.99%, you may ask? Because ABLE requires any entity receiving 15% of revenue from any liquor license in Oklahoma to be listed as an owner on the license application, and the City of OKC by charter cannot be in the business of liquor sales.

That multi-layer revenue payout is why prices are higher than a hot dog sold down the street. We accept it when we are at the game, because we are a captive audience and because we expect it. But if you walk into the same place for lunch on a Tuesday you are probably going to turn on your heel when you see the prices.

A good example of this is when Hideaway had a window at the Bricktown Ballpark. They tried like hell to have that window open to serve on non-game days, and succeeded for a year or two. But the RedHawks’ cut of the action drove pizzas up to like $25/pie, and this was in the early-mid aughts. It was unsustainable.

All of that said, that could surely be dealt with as part of an agreement where someone agrees to take less contract fee on non-game days. I also believe the idea behind the new and improved Thunder Alley was to have at least some of their storefronts open throughout the week. I think what you are describing is likely the new frontier of arenas (and already exists in some places). I suspect this level of year-around, street-level engagement will be a part of the new arena’s plans, and that added revenue stream is probably one of the things they are after and will be a part of the new NBA arena standard.

Using the Cox site would also be much cheaper for the city and citizens who will be footing the bill.


+1
Seems to be the most economical and logical and replaces a very dated/boring building that has served its purpose well.

Not sure what you do with the existing Paycom Center? Could it be developed into a venue for the convention center similar to what Fort Worth has at their Convention Center?

If the Big12 basketball tournaments could make their way back to OKC, the men and women's tourney's across the street seemed like a unique offering.

^

I know the Thunder owners want a more interactive and mixed-use experience around the arena; that was the whole idea behind Thunder Alley which is now on hold.

I'm not against the old Fred Jones lots, but the city has already made it clear they want to keep Harvey open, which is the main way to get from the CBD and Myriad Gardens to Scissortail Park and the river beyond.

Wouldn't be the end of the world if the arena goes there, but you know the current owners are going to do something great (collectively, they've done the best urban development in town and on a large scale) so I'd rather see the arena replace the aging concrete monolith that is the old Cox Center. I also think that site would drive more people to Bricktown, a place where a massive amount of public and private dollars have been spent.

Using the Cox site would also be much cheaper for the city and citizens who will be footing the bill.


Either one of those sites would make a lot of sense. I'd be shocked if it went to the Producers Coop or Strawberry Fields and I sure hope that doesn't happen.
Agreed. It’s almost certain to be the former Cox center site, barring an unforeseen development of some nature. My gut tells me that is what the City is already anticipating. It also explains why the Prarie Surf lease happened the way that it did. PSM created a solid placeholder that could help establish and nurture a new economic driver in the city, but the plan for some time was to preserve that site for the inevitable arena replacement.