The 76ers have plan in place for a new arena slated 10 years from now. OKC needs to get on the ball:

https://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/34274259/philadelphia-76ers-13-billion-project-calls-downtown-arena-2031-32

There's will be privately-funded. Kinda nice to have developers in your ownership group, not just oil and gas people used to government handouts.

Doesn't change that OKC needs a new arena, but still kinda sucks.

There's will be privately-funded. Kinda nice to have developers in your ownership group, not just oil and gas people used to government handouts.

Doesn't change that OKC needs a new arena, but still kinda sucks.

Privately funded was the way the new Seattle facility was funded as well. Something for the voters to consider when being approached for bankrolling this.

Privately funded was the way the new Seattle facility was funded as well. Something for the voters to consider wben being approached for bankrolling this.
I fall under that category of average taxpayer on this question, in that I have zero interest in arena sports, have set foot in the old arena just once, rarely go downtown, yet based on everything I've read on this thread I would vote for a tax increase to build a new arena. Sounds like it really is an economic driver for OKC and the state as a whole.

I fall under that category of average taxpayer on this question, in that I have zero interest in arena sports, have set foot in the old arena just once, rarely go downtown, yet based on everything I've read on this thread I would vote for a tax increase to build a new arena. Sounds like it really is an economic driver for OKC and the state as a whole.

Exactly. Which is where I fall. I would love a partnership between city and team, though. But I doubt it will happen. But a new arena would greatly benefit the city, and the state.

There's will be privately-funded. Kinda nice to have developers in your ownership group, not just oil and gas people used to government handouts.

Doesn't change that OKC needs a new arena, but still kinda sucks.

I thought our ownership group was developers. Not sure who in oil and gas is still in the ownership group?

I thought our ownership group was developers. Not sure who in oil and gas is still in the ownership group?

I was thinking of the original ownership group. Clay Bennett is the main person involved with the ownership group.

I mean, Kaiser-Francis Oil Company (George Kaiser) and Balon Corporation (Jay Scaramucci) are still in the energy sector last time I checked, and most of the guys in that ownership group surely have O&G interests in their respective portfolios. But it definitely is more industry-diverse than it was at the beginning.

I mean, Kaiser-Francis Oil Company (George Kaiser) and Balon Corporation (Jay Scaramucci) are still in the energy sector last time I checked, and most of the guys in that ownership group surely have O&G interests in their respective portfolios. But it definitely is more industry-diverse than it was at the beginning.

Kaiser also owns Bank of Oklahoma and invests in all kinds of things including buildings .. when he bought tom wards thunder stake the ownership collective wealth went up by about 10 billion

https://www.nba.com/sixers/news/76ers-announce-new-arena-development

"The new, privately-funded arena is anticipated to cost approximately $1.3 billion. The arena will provide $1.9 billion in overall economic output during construction and $400 million annually upon opening to support Philadelphia's long-term economic growth and sustainability."

I fall under that category of average taxpayer on this question, in that I have zero interest in arena sports, have set foot in the old arena just once, rarely go downtown, yet based on everything I've read on this thread I would vote for a tax increase to build a new arena. Sounds like it really is an economic driver for OKC and the state as a whole.
I am of the opinion that some study of how other NBA/NHL arenas are not only financied but what other costs are incured as well. While we see the numbers on economic impact we don't see numbers on the opportunity costs and increased costs to the tax payers such as cop overtime, increased infrastructure costs, etc.
Costs as well as benefits need to be part of the discussion.

Realize we all would like for Oklahoma City's new arena with the Thunder as the anchor tenant to be privately funded. How realistic will that happen.

Seattle is home to more billionaires than any other city. A total of eight billionaires live in Seattle with a combined net worth of $252.2 billion. That's 57.19 billion more than Oklahoma GDP.

Seattle's MSA population is 4,102,400 vs our State population 4,000,953 (2022 est.,). Is it fair to compare Oklahoma City to Seattle, a city that is more of an outlier. Now you know why they call Seattle the 'Emerald City.'

There's only a hand full of cities with privately funded arenas.

^ Wouldn't the assets of the ownership groups be more relevant to the discussion than GDP, population, etc.?
It would appear the general population in OKC would be less wealthy incurring this debt.

I'm sure the Omni is reliant on that proximity as well, especially with the upper floors being catered to NBA player height.

players still take a vehicle from the omni to the peake for games .. they don't walk .. so that won't really be a consideration ..

Good article in this morning Oklahoman by Barry Tramel:

On most any issue, New York can tell the Knickerbockers to jump in the East River, knowing the Knicks are not leaving Madison Square Garden. But if Salt Lake City ever plays hardball with the Jazz, Utah could be out of the major-league business. The Seattle Jazz, anyone?.--Oklahoman, July 20, 2022

Thunder still has the leverage on the city. Bennett rarely has used it; I actually can’t think of a single example. And maybe he never would. Still, when Holt announced last week that the city was beginning to make plans to replace Paycom Center with a new downtown arena for the Thunder and major concerts and major conventions, some were shellshocked.--Oklahoman, July 20, 2022


# # #

Memphis Grizzlies, MSA: 1.33 million
FedExForum (Investment: $250 million) Capacity 17,794

Milwaukee Bucks, MSA: 1.56 million
Fiserv Forum (Investment: $1.2 billion) Capacity 17,385

New Orleans Pelicans, MSA: 1.26 million
Smoothie King Center (Investment: $114 million) Capacity 16,867

Utah Jazz: MSA: 1.26 million
Vivint Arena (Investment: $218 million) Capacity 18,307

Oklahoma City Thunder, MSA 1.44 million
Paycom Center (Investment: $192 million Capacity 18,203

What should we consider in planning a new arena for Thunder, major concerts & conventions?
It would also be informative to see the lease terms for these facilities and compare to the Thunder lease.

Just a sample of some NBA 5 small market lease agreements. Curiosity got the best of me, you won't believe this (LOL)

Memphis - Grizzlies franchise is staying in the Tennessee city through 2029 under a new lease agreement with Shelby County.

That’s good news for Grizzlies’ customers but it might not be the best news for Shelby County residents as the county will be sending a check to Grizzlies ownership annually as a thanks for staying in town. Shelby County’s payment for 2023 will be nearly $2 million. The payment increases to nearly five million dollars annually and by the end of the lease agreement the Grizzlies ownership will get $6.3 million annually. Grizzlies ownership could get as much as $44.8 million.

Oklahoma City - Thunder pay $1,640,000 in annual Arena Rent ($40,000 per game) for forty-one (41) regular
season NBA home games.

Milwaukee - RENT:
“ArenaCo shall pay to the District an annual rental fee for each Operating Year (the “Annual Fee”).
The Annual Fee shall equal (x) for the first Operating Year, $1,000,000 and (y) for each subsequent
Operating Year, the Annual Fee for the immediately prior Operating Year increased by the Annual
Adjustment for such subsequent Operating Year.” Section 4.1, page 28.

So far, our ownership group appears to be paying a 'good share' in rent compared to Memphis & Milwaukee. Let this sleeping dog lie.

Larry: I agree with you except for the following - Paycomm should be retained and can serve as the potential NHL/EHL Hockey venue, since it was already built to serve that purpose/desire. Let's not compound costs by building the new arena to serve dual sport purpose, we're an NBA city and should remain so. IF we get NHL then we can always refurb Paycomm if necessary, again, which would be far cheaper than the added cost of a dual purpose new arena.

I'm actually liking this idea of using the Cox/Myriad site (over my preferred choice of the Farmers Market) considering the connections to Bricktown, CC/Omni, and the CBD and as others have mentioned, the city already owning the Cox site and the very real opportunity to redevelop most of the site encapsulating the arena; OKC's version of LA Live. We should just build it big enough to be retrofitted as NBA specs change (like your mention of the Delta Center/Vivint). It's really a no-brainer, esp as Pete mentions the CBD can expand around the Myriad site to the west when necessary.

I'm excited!

EDIT: PLEASE!!! No to the skywalk. ...


Oklahoma City should consider a new arena $600 million price tag on the Cox site with an NBA basketball seating capacity of 19,200.

NHL ice hockey seating capacity 18,400. Footage: 800 total square feet range.

Equipped to handle concerts: 15,000 - 20,000 configuration.

Access connection to the Oklahoma City Convention Center & Omni Hotel via skywalk.

Financed by bonds and an extension of MAPS 4: Completion Target: 2027

players still take a vehicle from the omni to the peake for games .. they don't walk .. so that won't really be a consideration ..

that's mainly for security and to keep the team together if I had to guess, and less to do with players not wanting or being able to walk less than a block from Omni to the arena across the street. And surely some players do cross the street to practice or during times when it's not too busy. I've had a meal next to numerous players (Beiz came in and sat right next to my table) and entertainers (Toby Keith) during my random visits to OKC and Omni's Bob's Steakhouse. On one visit, Westbrook and I shook hands as I was walking to my gate at OKC and he was getting off his commercial flight.

This interaction and the fact that it is happening in OKC in the first place, has been priceless - again, perhaps another difficult to place non-economic benefit of having the OKC Thunder.

Berry's "this is a high rent district with the like of NYC, LA, Chicago but without Austin, St Louis, Tampa, San Diego. You wanna play in this neighborhood? You gotta pay"

You want the status of having a franchise with youngest audience and fastest growing TV revenues? Pay up boys.

Berry's "this is a high rent district with the like of NYC, LA, Chicago but without Austin, St Louis, Tampa, San Diego. You wanna play in this neighborhood? You gotta pay"

You want the status of having a franchise with youngest audience and fastest growing TV revenues? Pay up boys.

Thank you, my friend.

Final 'No' to skyvalk, Hot Rod & Jersey Boss--I'll move on...

^ Wouldn't the assets of the ownership groups be more relevant to the discussion than GDP, population, etc.?
It would appear the general population in OKC would be less wealthy incurring this debt.

Why not...

These owners will not own the new Oklahoma City arena. Why should the owners put their 'line of credit' on an arena that will mainly benefit Oklahoma City. The 41 dates the Thunder use the arena represents less than half the dates the arena will be booked annually. They pay $1.6 million annually in rent.

We should be 'thankful' they are paying a good share of rent and not using leverage like Memphis Grizzlies franchise and receiving $2 million to keep the team in their city.

Privately funded was the way the new Seattle facility was funded as well. Something for the voters to consider when being approached for bankrolling this.

The wealth capacity of Seattle FAR exceeds that of Oklahoma City and I dare say Oklahoma. I don' t understand why almost anyone would not invest via bond issue or temporary sales tax to build an arena that adequately reflects the ongoing growth and vibrancy of OKC. The Thunder are well worth the investment IMO

Will pandemic cause problems repaying FedExForum debt?
Updated: 6:20 PM CDT July 9, 2020 (2 years ago) https://www.localmemphis.com/article/money/will-pandemic-cause-money-problems-to-pay-fedexforum-debt/522-a359da12-c0cf-46cd-aa6e-0c06567fecfc

It was built at a cost of $250 million and is owned by the City of Memphis; naming rights were purchased by one of Memphis's best-known businesses, FedEx, for $92 million.

.

There's will be privately-funded. Kinda nice to have developers in your ownership group, not just oil and gas people used to government handouts.

Doesn't change that OKC needs a new arena, but still kinda sucks.
What’s amazing about this comment is that it totally ignores the huge tax breaks given to commercial real estate owners, not to mention concessions different taxing entities provide. To single out O&G ignores the huge corporate welfare culture that exists in other economic segments.

Philadelphia 76ers' $1.3 billion project calls for downtown arena by 2031-32 -


https://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/34274259/philadelphia-76ers-13-billion-project-calls-downtown-arena-2031-32

Ten year's down the road, but it sounds like 100 percent privately funded.

As far as a budget for the new arena, the bare-bones, much smaller Fairgrounds Arena will be over $100 million.

And the city already owns the land, they don't have to add parking, some of the infrastructure is already in place, and the plans are already completed.

The Thunder are well worth the investment IMO

I would love to see the actual numbers that back this up.

Paycom is a good facility for events, concerts and other things. The Thunder are the only force demanding a new arena. I highly doubt they will create $1b worth of economic activity to justify the cost, especially in comparison to $1b instead being spent on infrastructre or education or local mental/physical health initiatives or law enforcement or basically any other civic institution.

I would love to see the actual numbers that back this up.

Paycom is a good facility for events, concerts and other things. The Thunder are the only force demanding a new arena. I highly doubt they will create $1b worth of economic activity to justify the cost, especially in comparison to $1b instead being spent on infrastructre or education or local mental/physical health initiatives or law enforcement or basically any other civic institution.

the city doesn't spend money on education ...

Why not...

These owners will not own the new Oklahoma City arena. Why should the owners put their 'line of credit' on an arena that will mainly benefit Oklahoma City. The 41 dates the Thunder use the arena represents less than half the dates the arena will be booked annually. They pay $1.6 million annually in rent.

We should be 'thankful' they are paying a good share of rent and not using leverage like Memphis Grizzlies franchise and receiving $2 million to keep the team in their city.

Did Memphis also give the Grizzlies naming rights money, concession money for all other events. There is more to the lease than just rent money.

I would love to see the actual numbers that back this up.

Paycom is a good facility for events, concerts and other things. The Thunder are the only force demanding a new arena. I highly doubt they will create $1b worth of economic activity to justify the cost, especially in comparison to $1b instead being spent on infrastructre or education or local mental/physical health initiatives or law enforcement or basically any other civic institution.

There is a lot of positive intangibles gained. For 9 months out of the year OKC is splashed not just in a national sense but international too. That was a rarity 13 years ago and prior. In 2012, I watched a Thunder / Lakers playoff game on a cruise ship in the middle of the Mediterranean Sea.

There is a lot of positive intangibles gained. For 9 months out of the year OKC is splashed not just in a national sense but international too. That was a rarity 13 years ago and prior. In 2012, I watched a Thunder / Lakers playoff game on a cruise ship in the middle of the Mediterranean Sea.

Intangibles aren't numbers, and if we're going to invest a billion dollars I want actual RoI, not warm fuzzy feelings. We can't even get local "splash" judging by the tepid attendance numbers, let alone international splash.

Did Memphis also give the Grizzlies naming rights money, concession money for all other events. There is more to the lease than just rent money.

IDK, Honestly, concerning the $92 million in naming rights have no idea who received that money. Memphis owes $150 million on an arena that originally cost $250 million where they broke ground in 2002.

Intangibles aren't numbers, and if we're going to invest a billion dollars I want actual RoI, not warm fuzzy feelings. We can't even get local "splash" judging by the tepid attendance numbers, let alone international splash.

We get it, you are vehemently opposed to a new arena. Even when other cities are doing it, replacing arenas bigger and better than ours. I don't care if ours is "young". It is tiny, grungy, bare bones, and OKC needs a better representation of itself (unless you think OKC is tiny, grungy, and bare bones, in which case OKC shouldn't try to improve). I know local bars downtown and in Bricktown benefit greatly after and before games, same with hotels. There is just legitimately no way to get you your definitive proof, so we might as well stand pat and let the Thunder leave, and then see what impact than has on local bars and downtown hotels.

We get it, you are vehemently opposed to a new arena. Even when other cities are doing it, replacing arenas bigger and better than ours. I don't care if ours is "young". It is tiny, grungy, bare bones, and OKC needs a better representation of itself (unless you think OKC is tiny, grungy, and bare bones, in which case OKC shouldn't try to improve). I know local bars downtown and in Bricktown benefit greatly after and before games, same with hotels. There is just legitimately no way to get you your definitive proof, so we might as well stand pat and let the Thunder leave, and then see what impact than has on local bars and downtown hotels.

Please don't put words in my mouth, thanks. I would love a new arena, I just don't want to use public funds for it, like they're doing in Philadelphia. If you know that hotels and bars see an impact of the Thunder, then where is that data? How do you know, beyond anecdotes? And are those hotels/bars similarly full after concerts and other events at Paycom, or is it simply a Thunder-driven thing?

Again, if the Thunder leaving is going to decimate our downtown nightlife, then it should be easy to see the impact of the Thunder's presence in data. Some posts here make it sound like the Thunder are the only thing keeping downtown alive, yet if you go down to Bricktown on away games or in the offseason, it's still humming pretty darned well. We also have a new convention center that can bring in a lot of people from out of state and into those same hotels and restaurants. I don't see what's so unreasonable for wanting to see the financials here before giving multi-millionaires a blank check of public funds when those funds can address so many other issues facing our city.

We get it, you are vehemently opposed to a new arena. Even when other cities are doing it, replacing arenas bigger and better than ours. I don't care if ours is "young". It is tiny, grungy, bare bones, and OKC needs a better representation of itself (unless you think OKC is tiny, grungy, and bare bones, in which case OKC shouldn't try to improve). I know local bars downtown and in Bricktown benefit greatly after and before games, same with hotels. There is just legitimately no way to get you your definitive proof, so we might as well stand pat and let the Thunder leave, and then see what impact than has on local bars and downtown hotels.

+1

OKC isn’t an established global city like Philadelphia. Go to any social media website and type in #OKC and it’s almost all exclusively buzz around the Thunder. That means big exposure and it does help with the city image. I don’t remember downtown being anywhere near as vibrant as it currently is or was before the Thunder moved here. There’s plenty of other cities willing to play ball with 1+ billion dollar arena price tag. I’m pretty confident that most people will support this anyways and there’s always nay sayers like you who can’t see the bigger picture so time will tell I guess.

Count me in as someone who thinks OKC will be in the midst of one of its biggest infrastructure investments in history during this decade. MAPS 4, the new toll roads, several massive ODOT projects, a new metro rail/BRT network, new county jail, the biggest GoBond in history, and now a new NBL arena. It can be done. OKC has been ambitious with its public works projects in the past and now its time to exceed those previous ambitions.

The arguments for a big-league team and a new arena are always much more based on emotion and the city's self-esteem rather than hard financial data.

I never, ever trust those calculations anyway. They are always made by people who have already decided they want something, so they can put any wild assumptions into a spreadsheet and then talk about huge economic impact as if it's hard data. I used to be a management consultant and know exactly how this game is played: you are hired to provide 'objective' and professional analysis and are basically told the desired answer and then work backward from there.


There is no way a new arena isn't going to happen. The mayor himself spent a ton of time on this subject at his State of the City address, the Oklahoman has already written four or five articles about how this has to happen (nevermind the Thunder are one of their biggest advertisers and the job security and prestige of the authors are very intertwined with the Thunder staying).


Don't forget, Holt wrote a book called "Big League City: Oklahoma City's Rise to the NBA". You don't think he's been working his tail off behind the scenes for some time to come up with a deal to keep the Thunder happy? He's basically staked his entire career and political life on the Thunder, something the ownership knows better than anyone.

This is the very first line from that book: "The arrival of major league sports in Oklahoma City was the most significant positive development in the city's history since the Land Run of 1889."


The way things work in Oklahoma City, I am 100% sure there will be a very carefully orchestrated campaign to give citizens the illusion they have a say in all this, then the Thunder will get exactly what they want and taxpayers will foot the bill.


I'm not saying a new arena shouldn't be built, just pointing out the big decisions have already been made. This is the OKC way.

^
Mick Cornett also wrote a brook: The Next American City.

https://ic.od-cdn.com/resize?type=auto&url=%2FImageType-100%2F1191-1%2F%257B2A081332-28FB-4F41-9FDE-E5BC185808B7%257DImg100.jpg&stripmeta=true&width=220

Don't run the risk of losing Oklahoma's only major professional sports franchise. BTW hope the city will ask the State of Oklahoma if they can chip in some dollars to help build the new arena once we determine specifications and cost estimates.

^
Mick Cornett also wrote a brook: The Next American City.

https://ic.od-cdn.com/resize?type=auto&url=%2FImageType-100%2F1191-1%2F%257B2A081332-28FB-4F41-9FDE-E5BC185808B7%257DImg100.jpg&stripmeta=true&width=220

Don't run the risk of losing Oklahoma's only major professional sports franchise. BTW hope the city will ask the State of Oklahoma if they can chip in some dollars to help build the new arena once we determine specifications and cost estimates.

Don't get me wrong Laramie. I am not against a new arena per se. I just want to see the best deal for all the users and payers. A study of peer cities is a starting point. The city needs to strike a better bargain as far as the revenue for the city. The arena needs to be used more as well. I don't know if they pay all the dates they block or just game days.

^

Don't run the risk of losing Oklahoma's only major professional sports franchise.

Why? What are the financial implications of doing so? What are the concrete stakes here?

Don't get me wrong Laramie. I am not against a new arena per se. I just want to see the best deal for all the users and payers. A study of peer cities is a starting point. The city needs to strike a better bargain as far as the revenue for the city. The arena needs to be used more as well. I don't know if they pay all the dates they block or just game days.

It is used about 100 nights a year. Can't force concerts or events to come here. OKC has a guaranteed 41 dates a year, with 18,000 people each night. Guaranteed. But, OKC can't force concert promoters to bring a concert here. So it is used as the market allows. The acoustics being garbage in there don't help OKC's case for more big-name concerts. Notice no rock or metal shows come in (not everyone's cup of team, but more inclined to go to arenas with good acoustics).

It is used about 100 nights a year. Can't force concerts or events to come here. OKC has a guaranteed 41 dates a year, with 18,000 people each night. Guaranteed. But, OKC can't force concert promoters to bring a concert here. So it is used as the market allows. The acoustics being garbage in there don't help OKC's case for more big-name concerts. Notice no rock or metal shows come in (not everyone's cup of team, but more inclined to go to arenas with good acoustics).

Acoustics, thank you chssooner, one of the many reasons why you want to consider replacing Paycom Center. Are the big concerts skipping over OKC for better concert equipped arenas like AA Dallas, Dixies Forth Worth and BOK Tulsa.

Investing more money into Paycom... These are major concerns about building a new arena going forward; can't have fan friendly amenities if the concert experience is spoiled by bad acoustics.

When it's all said and done, Paycom may be ripe for a 'AA' or 'AAA' ice hockey franchise and rodeos. A 'pause' on MAPS 4 funds targeting Paycom are justified by Mayor Holt and the City Council.

There's will be privately-funded. Kinda nice to have developers in your ownership group, not just oil and gas people used to government handouts.

Doesn't change that OKC needs a new arena, but still kinda sucks.

1) it’s not just oil and gas people in the group, in fact most of them are not.
2) What kind of government hand outs do you think we get?

Intangibles aren't numbers, and if we're going to invest a billion dollars I want actual RoI, not warm fuzzy feelings. We can't even get local "splash" judging by the tepid attendance numbers, let alone international splash.

That is just a stupid take from someone who is completely against doing the same thing every other city has to keep their team. What was OKC known for before the Thunder? If you don’t think the positive publicity is a massive net positive for the city, you’re just blinded by your own bias.

That is just a stupid take from someone who is completely against doing the same thing every other city has to keep their team. What was OKC known for before the Thunder? If you don’t think the positive publicity is a massive net positive for the city, you’re just blinded by your own bias.

C’mon Clay, knock it off - he’s going to think we have two accounts.

That is just a stupid take from someone who is completely against doing the same thing every other city has to keep their team. What was OKC known for before the Thunder? If you don’t think the positive publicity is a massive net positive for the city, you’re just blinded by your own bias.

If the Thunder *is* a massive net positive worth a billion dollars, then show me the data to back such a statement up. That’s all I’m asking for here.

Edit: \/\/\/ I'm not calling anyone a liar, or stupid. I am merely asking what data they're using when they say that there's been a significant impact. If you say there are scads of studies on this about the Thunder, can you post them?

If the Thunder *is* a massive net positive worth a billion dollars, then show me the data to back such a statement up. That’s all I’m asking for here.

So, you wanna play the "link or you're a liar" game? I think everyone knows there are scads of studies and position papers arguing both sides of the issue. I would suggest the popularity of these arenas suggest that their forces have put together a better and more compelling argument on a regular basis. And I don't believe it is because "people are stupid".

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hco68JuzkD0



Cleveland, OH
NBA Basketball capacity: 19,432
60 reimagined suites
Ice hockey: 9,447 (expandable to 18,926)
Construction: Broke ground April 27, 1992
Opened October 17, 1994 Construction cost $100 million
Renovation: 2019 - $185 million
Total investment '22 dollars $385 million = $205/$185 million + $183/$100 million

Oklahoma City new arena


Using Cleveland's RM arena blueprint.
OKC should expect to pay:
$400 - $425 million (City-owned land)
18,900 - 19,100 seating capacity
60 - 65 luxury suites - 16-20 seats per suit
800,000 square footage

It is used about 100 nights a year. Can't force concerts or events to come here. OKC has a guaranteed 41 dates a year, with 18,000 people each night. Guaranteed. But, OKC can't force concert promoters to bring a concert here. So it is used as the market allows. The acoustics being garbage in there don't help OKC's case for more big-name concerts. Notice no rock or metal shows come in (not everyone's cup of team, but more inclined to go to arenas with good acoustics).

upcoming:
Judas Priest / Queensryche 11/20
Greta Van Fleet 11/04
Pearl Jam (multiple times) 09/20
My Chemical Romance 08/20

Some past ones off the top of my head:
Guns N Roses
Bob Segar
Tom Petty
Foo FIghters
Motley Crue
Hinder
Kid Rock
Bon Jovi
Disturbed
All American Rejects
Aerosmith
Red Hot Chili Peppers
Tool

If they can fill an arena, most bands aren't going to dodge a venue based on its acoustics. With in ear monitoring and advances in front of house processing, the bands will never know if the sound out front sucks. For all shows of that size and bigger, where you sit makes a huge difference. Nothing can control a room of that size and get direct sound to every seat. I've never seen an arena show that sounded good above the 100s and even down low can be spotty. And walk around any venue bigger than a club and where you are standing makes a huge difference. The best sounding arena show I have ever been to was at Paycom, actually. The Stevie Wonder show had like 30 people on stage with dozens of open mics and it sounded like a theater from the 15th row. But again, at that distance, you're hearing the sound first from the arrays. The father away you get, you're hearing some reflections first.

All that being said, a new arena should definitely care about acoustics. It's just that, with good equipment and some time, a good engineer can take the room out of the equation for a lot of the audience, but can never do it for all of the audience especially in any room the size of your typical arena bowl. I have heard good shows and bad shows at Paycom. Just depended on my seats and the engineer,

upcoming:
Judas Priest / Queensryche 11/20
Greta Van Fleet 11/04
Pearl Jam (multiple times) 09/20
My Chemical Romance 08/20

Some past ones off the top of my head:
Guns N Roses
Bob Segar
Tom Petty
Foo FIghters
Motley Crue
Hinder
Kid Rock
Bon Jovi
Disturbed
All American Rejects
Aerosmith
Red Hot Chili Peppers
Tool

If they can fill an arena, most bands aren't going to dodge a venue based on its acoustics. With in ear monitoring and advances in front of house processing, the bands will never know if the sound out front sucks. For all shows of that size and bigger, where you sit makes a huge difference. Nothing can control a room of that size and get direct sound to every seat. I've never seen an arena show that sounded good above the 100s and even down low can be spotty. And walk around any venue bigger than a club and where you are standing makes a huge difference. The best sounding arena show I have ever been to was at Paycom, actually. The Stevie Wonder show had like 30 people on stage with dozens of open mics and it sounded like a theater from the 15th row. But again, at that distance, you're hearing the sound first from the arrays. The father away you get, you're hearing some reflections first.

All that being said, a new arena should definitely care about acoustics. It's just that, with good equipment and some time, a good engineer can take the room out of the equation for a lot of the audience, but can never do it for all of the audience especially in any room the size of your typical arena bowl. I have heard good shows and bad shows at Paycom. Just depended on my seats and the engineer,
Your past list is easily many times longer than that. Lots of older bands, county and Christian pop/rock bands have played there over the years. I would bet the wife and I have been to at least twice the number of concerts listed.

Your past list is easily many times longer than that. Lots of older bands, county and Christian pop/rock bands have played there over the years. I would bet the wife and I have been to at least twice the number of concerts listed.

Yeah, especially if you include those genres and go back to the Ford Center days (some of those may have been from that era) and it def sounded worse back then, both the room and technology that was used.

...The best sounding arena show I have ever been to was at Paycom, actually. The Stevie Wonder show had like 30 people on stage with dozens of open mics and it sounded like a theater from the 15th row. But again, at that distance, you're hearing the sound first from the arrays. The father away you get, you're hearing some reflections first....

We were one level up from the floor for Stevie, can't remember which row and too lazy to get my ticket stubs out, and I was impressed with how it sounded (and I've been to hundreds of shows in dozens of all different sized spaces all over the country, so I know how things should sound).

I know we saw The Rolling Stones; Kiss; and Shania Twain

July 2, 2008, NBA - Oklahoma City
Appreciation Month

The Professional Basketball Club, LLC
The PBC owns NBA Oklahoma City Thunder & NBADL Oklahoma City Blue.

https://cdn.nba.com/teams/uploads/sites/1610612760/2021/12/bennett-ownership-2122.jpg?imwidth=250&imheight=314 https://cdn.nba.com/teams/uploads/sites/1610612760/2021/12/kaiser-ownership-2122.jpg?imwidth=250&imheight=314
Clayton I. Bennett, Chairman, - George Kaizer, BOK Financial

https://cdn.nba.com/teams/uploads/sites/1610612760/2021/12/records-ownership-2122.jpg?imwidth=250&imheight=314 https://cdn.nba.com/teams/uploads/sites/1610612760/2021/12/cameron-ownership-2122.jpg?imwidth=250&imheight=314
G. Jeffrey Records, Jr., MidFirst Bank - William M. Cameron, American Fidelity Assurance Company

https://cdn.nba.com/teams/uploads/sites/1610612760/2021/12/howard-ownership-2122.jpg?imwidth=250&imheight=314 https://cdn.nba.com/teams/uploads/sites/1610612760/2021/12/scaramucci-ownership-2122.jpg?imwidth=250&imheight=314
Robert E. Howard II, Howard Investments - Jay Scaramucci, Balon Corporation

https://cdn.nba.com/teams/uploads/sites/1610612760/2021/12/dobson-ownership-2122.jpg?imwidth=250&imheight=314
Everett R. Dobson, Dobson Partnerships

https://i.insider.com/4f8f0e736bb3f7215e00003e?width=600&format=jpeg&auto=webp
July 14, 1959 - March 2, 2016

Thank you, for bringing the NBA to OKC

LOL what? What on earth makes you think this ownership group won’t be back in another 30 years demanding a new stadium?

Then you build an icon, a building with architectural value. Something that would make it very hard to tear down and replace.

Then you build an icon, a building with architectural value. Something that would make it very hard to tear down and replace.

Agree, Swake...


https://images.fineartamerica.com/images-medium-large-5/neon-night-bok-center-tulsa-oklahoma-gregory-ballos.jpg

Andplusalso, 30 years for arenas is about right, nowadays.

The BOK has an interesting facade and all, but it's basically the Ford/Peak/Pay on more like the original scale (before the additions). They didn't create some innovative new design. They, like OKC, used a standard bowl and entrance concept. I'm not downing it or anything because I do think they gave themselves a nice facility. But is it one that someone is going to come back in 40 years and not want to tear down for the next thing? No, i dont think that will be the case. It's not something historic, it's pretty cookie cutter market entry.

There are some far more interesting ones in the NBA right now. The Fiserv/State Farm/Rocket Mortage/AA(Miami). But even these are just arneas that will get dozed at some point. Madison Square Garden is one of the few examples of something that's got real sticking power, but because of its history. Nothing anyone else is building (or has in the last 30 years) is in that category.

17583

The BOK has an interesting facade and all, but it's basically the Ford/Peak/Pay on more like the original scale (before the additions). They didn't create some innovative new design. They, like OKC, used a standard bowl and entrance concept. I'm not downing it or anything because I do think they gave themselves a nice facility. But is it one that someone is going to come back in 40 years and not want to tear down for the next thing? No, i dont think that will be the case. It's not something historic, it's pretty cookie cutter market entry.

There are some far more interesting ones in the NBA right now. The Fiserv/State Farm/Rocket Mortage/AA(Miami). But even these are just arneas that will get dozed at some point. Madison Square Garden is one of the few examples of something that's got real sticking power, but because of its history. Nothing anyone else is building (or has in the last 30 years) is in that category.

17583

MSG will be getting replaced soon, as well.

MSG will be getting replaced soon, as well.

in the next 20 years it just recently completed a renovation .. which cost over 1 billion dollars ..

You guys wanting a 20,000+ seats in the new arena are just setting yourselves up for disappointment.

This isn't 1985, and # of seats isn't how they measure quality anymore. There is no chance the new arena has 20k or above. Zip, Zero, Nada. Not to mention 22,500 would be 10% bigger than the largest arena in the NBA. That's not happening in one of the smallest markets.

LCA in Detroit came out larger because of the Red Wings, not the Pistons. (Who then ripped out all the red seats because it looked bad on camera when the arena was never full)

Last 12 years of new arenas

Chase Center Golden State Warriors 18,064 2019
Fiserv Forum Milwaukee Bucks 17,500 2018
Little Caesars Arena Detroit Pistons 20,332 2017
Golden 1 Center Sacramento Kings 17,583 2016
Barclays Center Brooklyn Nets 17,732 2012
Amway Center Orlando Magic 18,846 2010

Most like is 17,500 to 18,500.