Most people don't understand niche marketing. They look at markets as being one monolithic structure. Even within poor or declining markets are growing and profitable niches. The key to success here is building a flexible facility that can adapt to niches in convention markets and to market smartly. If we can market to cutting edge requirements we will be successful financially and will create a public use space available to serve local requirements. So, to me, the issue isn't to have or not have a cc, but rather is it designed to meet OUR needs and to be flexible for change. That and the location issue.

What would be OKCs convention niche? Is there enough of the niche market that if we captured 100% of it would bost Cox attendance by 300%?

Of course there is. Just because you aren't aware doesn't mean it doesn't exist and people don't know how to market to it.

Of course there is. Just because you aren't aware doesn't mean it doesn't exist and people don't know how to market to it.

And what would that niche be - oil and gas conventions? Does anyone know the average annual attendance of COX conventions (not including hockey games)?

Of course there is. Just because you aren't aware doesn't mean it doesn't exist and people don't know how to market to it.


And what would that niche be - oil and gas conventions? Does anyone know the average annual attendance of COX conventions (not including hockey games)?


What would be OKCs convention niche? Is there enough of the niche market that if we captured 100% of it would bost Cox attendance by 300%?

This is why I was wondering aloud earlier if one or more of the energy companies has plans to start some kind of oil/gas/energy convention for independent producers. Some of you folks in the industry please chime in if there is such a thing presently because I have no idea, but think OKC could be a natural location for such an annual event. Larry Nichols' involvement on the CC subcommittee is what started me thinking about this type of event specifically. He is influential enough to bring about things of this nature and he has an excellent track record of positive work for OKC.

Personally I would like to see OKC become even more of an "energy capitol" than it is presently. Our locally based energy companies certainly have the wherewithal to pull off something big in this regard. I assume there are some events in Houston but thought maybe they would be dominated by the Exxons and Valeros of the energy sector. OKC has a large number of independents that could be influential enough to bring that entire sector together. Is there another city with 4 independent producers of the size we have in Devon, Continental, Sand Ridge, and Chesapeake?

Also, what about biotech events? With OU's purchase of Presbyterian Health Foundation I think we could see an increase in bio tech focused events at a new CC. We also have a relatively robust aerospace industry in OK, but I think maybe other locations have those type of conventions locked up.

I am trying to come up with potential recurring events of sufficient magnitude a $250 - $400 million investment in a CC and hotel could be justified. I am not wild about the designated location, but I am trying to be positive about the possible benefits a new CC might bring to our city.

With what visitors? How is this tied to a tourism or visitor study that shows how/why people do or could come to OKC? We're probably going to get more out of the fairgrounds improvements, much cheaper, than the CC project in all honesty. The fairgrounds is a legitimate success that is existing we can reasonably assume is stable enough to build on and make even more competitive.

The business community downtown is booming. But is a convention center the only way in which we can facilitate business visitors??? What else, outside the box, could we do for business visitors with $250 MILLION??? What about a medical mart, or an energy mart, modeled after several of the new medical marts...or a huge, massive tech/research incubator, or something like that. I think there is a lot we could do with $250 million that would realistically improve our business climate, if that $250 million must be tied to something for business visitors.


a robot mart. dude we could make OKC the robot capitol of north america. But on a serious not $250 million spent on public transportation would go very far.

But on a serious note $250 million spent on public transportation would go very far.

Can you imagine what kind of streetcar system OKC could put in for $380 million. On second thought, don't think about it.

Can you imagine what kind of streetcar system OKC could put in for $380 million. On second thought, don't think about it.

Hurts my head.....

Or 250 million for the worlds largest bar, dry cleaners, and Walgreens. That's what some people think drives the economy and urban development.

Can you imagine what kind of streetcar system OKC could put in for $380 million. On second thought, don't think about it.

Yeah and at the price we probably would have gotten federal funding to because the street car actually would have went some where.

I would rather see the $380 million go towards a football stadium on the Cotton Mill site, It would get more use than a convention center (just my 2 cents).

I would rather see the $380 million go towards a football stadium on the Cotton Mill site, It would get more use than a convention center (just my 2 cents).

About 8 times a year?

I would rather see the $380 million go towards a football stadium on the Cotton Mill site, It would get more use than a convention center (just my 2 cents).

You wouldn't get much of a stadium, if you remember, they wanted in excess off 100 million for the site alone...

I would rather see the $380 million go towards a football stadium on the Cotton Mill site, It would get more use than a convention center (just my 2 cents).

There is no need for a football stadium. At all. Expanding the sreetcar would be my vote if we could redirect the money.

There is no need for a football stadium. At all. Expanding the sreetcar would be my vote if we could redirect the money.

Thank you. People who are wanting a football stadium are not living in the real world. OKC will never have an NFL team. Ever. First, Jerry Jones would make sure that would never happen since a lot of OKC residents are Dallas Cowboys fans. Second, having an NFL team would take away from the money that goes towards OU and OSU football. All the bandwagon fans that just want to cheer for a football team will end up cheering for the NFL team rather than the college teams. Kind of like what is happening with the Thunder and OSU and OU basketball fans. (Not that OU fans cared about their basketball team anyway, but I digress).

Investing the $380 million towards anything but an NFL stadium would be a much better idea.

Thank you. People who are wanting a football stadium are not living in the real world. OKC will never have an NFL team. Ever. First, Jerry Jones would make sure that would never happen since a lot of OKC residents are Dallas Cowboys fans. Second, having an NFL team would take away from the money that goes towards OU and OSU football. All the bandwagon fans that just want to cheer for a football team will end up cheering for the NFL team rather than the college teams. Kind of like what is happening with the Thunder and OSU and OU basketball fans. (Not that OU fans cared about their basketball team anyway, but I digress).

Investing the $380 million towards anything but an NFL stadium would be a much better idea.

Simply put...that is an incredibly silly notion.

If OKC continues to outpace the rest of the country in growth, know that every amenity possible will eventually be made to the residents of the city. Never is far too strong of a word.

I'm not defending spending $380M on an NFL stadium. I think the earliest OKC could support another pro team, if the city continues to grow at the pace it is growing now (~2% annually), is somewhere between 2040 and 2050. But that's a whole lot different than never.

Simply put...that is an incredibly silly notion.

If OKC continues to outpace the rest of the country in growth, know that every amenity possible will eventually be made to the residents of the city. Never is far too strong of a word.

I'm not defending spending $380M on an NFL stadium. I think the earliest OKC could support another pro team, if the city continues to grow at the pace it is growing now (~2% annually), is somewhere between 2040 and 2050. But that's a whole lot different than never.

You're right. I shouldn't have put never. But it will be an incredibly long time (decades and decades) before OKC gets an NFL team, if ever. LA doesn't even have an NFL team. OKC, with it's proximity to Dallas, is going to be overlooked for a long time when it comes to NFL expansion (as it should). Plus, the cost of an NFL stadium is going to be a lot more than $380 million. Somewhere around $500 million - $1 billion would be more appropriate. And I just don't see taxpayers wanting to pay that much money when it could be used elsewhere.

You're right. I shouldn't have put never. But it will be an incredibly long time (decades and decades) before OKC gets an NFL team, if ever. LA doesn't even have an NFL team. OKC, with it's proximity to Dallas, is going to be overlooked for a long time when it comes to NFL expansion (as it should). Plus, the cost of an NFL stadium is going to be a lot more than $380 million. Somewhere around $500 million - $1 billion would be more appropriate. And I just don't see taxpayers wanting to pay that much money when it could be used elsewhere.

With 10% of the Top 100 MSAs actually losing population and only 14% outgrowing OKC...if that trend continues (and seeing how the economy is not recovering, this seems likely), then OKC may be able to support a team within 30 years...the planning for making that happen means that it's on the table as a possibility in about 20/25 years. That's not that far away.

With 10% of the Top 100 MSAs actually losing population and only 14% outgrowing OKC...if that trend continues (and seeing how the economy is not recovering, this seems likely), then OKC may be able to support a team within 30 years...the planning for making that happen means that it's on the table as a possibility in about 20/25 years. That's not that far away.

I still don't see it happening. With the people who have power in Oklahoma being OU/OSU grads, they know an NFL team is going to take money away from their university. Basketball was different because that's not the big sport in this state. Plus, Jerry Jones has a lot more power than Mark Cuban (Cuban was one of two owners who opposed the Thunder's move from Seattle. Just like Jerry would opposed an NFL team coming to OKC).

I still don't see it happening. With the people who have power in Oklahoma being OU/OSU grads, they know an NFL team is going to take money away from their university. Basketball was different because that's not the big sport in this state. Plus, Jerry Jones has a lot more power than Mark Cuban (Cuban was one of two owners who opposed the Thunder's move from Seattle. Just like Jerry would opposed an NFL team coming to OKC).

Jerry will be dead by then. The high growth rate for OKC is not just birthrate...it's people moving from other parts of the state/country and these people won't really care about OU/OSU. When you're a city of 2.5M you can afford several pro-sports franchises and still maintain your passion for your college teams. Furthermore, NFL/NCAAFB don't conflict the same way NBA/NCAABB do. Games are never on the same day. Games are far less frequent. Games rarely happen on weeknights.

As far as corporate sponsorship, sponsoring pro teams is just advertising. Sponsoring college teams is a tax write-off...so I assure you corporate support would not wane for the universities.

I think the arguments against OKC getting an NFL team are sensationalized without really taking into consideration the paradigm that would have to be in place for it to actually be a possibility. If OKC had the business infrastructure (say 4 - 6 more fortune 500 companies), I'd be willing to bet OKC could support an NFL team today.

OKC probably won't be getting an NFL franchise anytime soon, but you never know. I think if we were to build a stadium where the cotton mill is now, it would be a multipurpose facility that would be built bare-bones, like the Ford Center was. While the goal would be an NFL team, we'd try to attract Major League Soccer, and would probably host the Chesapeake Natural Gas Bowl or something. We'd build it big, simple, and with lots of room to expand if an NFL team ever became a possibility. While I don't think it's likely any time soon, remember that if it's for MAPS 4, that's probably around 2020 or so before we vote on it, and we probably wouldn't start building it until 2028 or so, and completion by 2030. That'd be over 20 years of solid support for the Thunder, and other leagues could start to consider us without people thinking they are crazy.

The reason L.A. doesn't have an NFL team is because the people in that city don't want one. It's the second largest city in the country, and every team not named the New York Giants or New York Jets is located in a smaller market than L.A.

Jerry will be dead by then. The high growth rate for OKC is not just birthrate...it's people moving from other parts of the state/country and these people won't really care about OU/OSU. When you're a city of 2.5M you can afford several pro-sports franchises and still maintain your passion for your college teams. Furthermore, NFL/NCAAFB don't conflict the same way NBA/NCAABB do. Games are never on the same day. Games are far less frequent. Games rarely happen on weeknights.

As far as corporate sponsorship, sponsoring pro teams is just advertising. Sponsoring college teams is a tax write-off...so I assure you corporate support would not wane for the universities.

I think the arguments against OKC getting an NFL team are sensationalized without really taking into consideration the paradigm that would have to be in place for it to actually be a possibility. If OKC had the business infrastructure (say 4 - 6 more fortune 500 companies), I'd be willing to bet OKC could support an NFL team today.

You could also say the arguments for OKC getting an NFL team are sensationalized. Our city would need to double to reach 2.5 million. Also, you said games are never on the same day, which is true. But how many people do you think are going to spend all day in Norman/Stillwater on Saturday then do the same thing on Sunday in OKC? Not very many. That's also a lot of discretionary income for most households. People are going to pick one or the other. Most won't do both. Look at what has happened to OSU/OU basketball. Interest has waned and so has attendance. I've known many families who have dropped their OSU/OU football tickets so they can add Thunder tickets. This would only get worse for an NFL team.

And yes, Jerry Jones will be dead by then. But he'll have a successor, and that person is going to have a lot of power also. When you are the owner of the most valuable NFL franchise and third most valuable sports franchise in the world, you can throw your weight around.

With 10% of the Top 100 MSAs actually losing population and only 14% outgrowing OKC...if that trend continues (and seeing how the economy is not recovering, this seems likely), then OKC may be able to support a team within 30 years...the planning for making that happen means that it's on the table as a possibility in about 20/25 years. That's not that far away.

I have a feeling that $380 million could be spent better and faster toward a streetcar system now rather than waiting for your eventual 30 year mark.

Regardless of whether people here want a convention center, it is one of the MAPS projects and someone undoubtedly voted for it. It's no more fair to take the CC money and give it to the streetcar than to do the reverse.

Very true betts. Other than the location, my primary concern is we don't build a barely adequate, large CC. IMO we should build a very nice CC of the "right size". Extremely well done small - medium size is preferable to large and obviously cheap. Trouble is I haven't a clue how to determine what "right size" is for OKC and the realistic expectations of future convention business. Can anyone predict with any degree of accuracy what future OKC convention volume might be? This is why I am almost sure there is an "energy mart" of some sort coming in the future sponsored by our "Big 4" independent producers. It could justify the expense of a large CC beyond honoring the MAPS3 vote results.

You could also say the arguments for OKC getting an NFL team are sensationalized. Our city would need to double to reach 2.5 million. Also, you said games are never on the same day, which is true. But how many people do you think are going to spend all day in Norman/Stillwater on Saturday then do the same thing on Sunday in OKC? Not very many. That's also a lot of discretionary income for most households.


Population and other sporting event spending certainly play a part. Also a large part of it is corporate advertising dollars and TV market. Two things that OKC lacks in the regard for a successful football franchise

Population and other sporting event spending certainly play a part. Also a large part of it is corporate advertising dollars and TV market. Two things that OKC lacks in the regard for a successful football franchise

Yes, this too.

OKC probably won't be getting an NFL franchise anytime soon, but you never know. I think if we were to build a stadium where the cotton mill is now, it would be a multipurpose facility that would be built bare-bones, like the Ford Center was. While the goal would be an NFL team, we'd try to attract Major League Soccer, and would probably host the Chesapeake Natural Gas Bowl or something. We'd build it big, simple, and with lots of room to expand if an NFL team ever became a possibility. While I don't think it's likely any time soon, remember that if it's for MAPS 4, that's probably around 2020 or so before we vote on it, and we probably wouldn't start building it until 2028 or so, and completion by 2030. That'd be over 20 years of solid support for the Thunder, and other leagues could start to consider us without people thinking they are crazy.

The reason L.A. doesn't have an NFL team is because the people in that city don't want one. It's the second largest city in the country, and every team not named the New York Giants or New York Jets is located in a smaller market than L.A.

And why hasn't San Antonio gotten a team yet? they did exactly this, and are still looking for a team some 15 years later

And why hasn't San Antonio gotten a team yet? they did exactly this, and are still looking for a team some 15 years later

Bingo

Just go down the list of cities that host bowl games.

CaptDave; "right size" is whatever it takes to get us firmly into the Tier 2 status. One of the problems is one of the experts they had come in to talk about their needs indicated that what we are building will just meet what their current requirements are, much less what those requirements will be when it finally gets built. She said their needs were a small convention. Even the Council is aware of this and are thinking we are building it too small. At least one Councilman said as much and the rest of the Council chuckled in agreement. In other words, we are going to have a functional C.C. when it opens but it will already be too small and the immediate need to somehow fund the expansion (Phase 2). Then there is still the unfunded most likely taxpayer subsidized C.C. hotel (est @ $50 million). And even with Phase 2, by the time it is funded and completed, yet again it will probably be too small. Vicious cycle.

I still don't see it happening. With the people who have power in Oklahoma being OU/OSU grads, they know an NFL team is going to take money away from their university. Basketball was different because that's not the big sport in this state. Plus, Jerry Jones has a lot more power than Mark Cuban (Cuban was one of two owners who opposed the Thunder's move from Seattle. Just like Jerry would opposed an NFL team coming to OKC).

i don't think it is going to happen in my life time ......


but all it would take is one billionaire to buy the team and want to move it to OKC ..... Al davis showed that when he moved the raiders back to oakland ... the nfl sued to stop him and he won ....

MAPS 3 polls showed immense popular support for an NFL stadium. Most people didn't think we could get the NBA, but we did. Now I know that the barriers to getting an NFL team are larger than the NBA. We certainly don't have a good chance of getting one now, but who knows what will be the case in 30 years? Hell I'll be just about able to collect social security by that point in time. Kids who are graduating from high school today will be running for President. It's a long time away, and a little dreaming doesn't hurt.

The one problem I think we've started running into with MAPS is that it's generally been targeted towards fairly low-cost, high-value projects, and now people think everything should be built through MAPS. We invested in a whole bunch of fairly inexpensive (relatively) quality of life upgrades. Our NBA arena cost about a third of what most NBA arenas cost. We built a very nice minor league ballpark. We're buying up salvage yards and turning them into a nice downtown park. We're going to put in a nice little streetcar. These kinds of developments have been very popular and quite successful. But when you start talking large convention centers, NFL stadiums, commuter rail, and other BIG projects, you're looking at spending more than MAPS 3's entire budget for just one thing. I'm not sure if the city is ready to support such massive projects.

I think what we have now is "just right." I don't want the NFL.

I'd say go after MLB or MLS if anything. I just don't think the NFL is anything we need to go after.

I view the NFL as the ultimate feather in our cap, if we can get them and support them. It's proof that the city has stepped up to the next tier. While I love having the Thunder, the actual quality of life increase from having a dozen millionaire basketball players living here isn't all that impressive. If you are not a basketball fan, having the team here means very little to you. The benefit is that the rest of the country, and much of the world now recognizes OKC as a pro sports town. The benefit is the good publicity they bring to the city. An NFL team would be the same.

Having the Oklahoma City Cougars (or whatever) playing in an arena downtown against the Dallas Cowboys would be cool as hell, and would draw lots of national attention to our city. You have to be at a certain level of development to support the NFL, so it's basically proof that we got there.

i don't think it is going to happen in my life time ......


but all it would take is one billionaire to buy the team and want to move it to OKC ..... Al davis showed that when he moved the raiders back to oakland ... the nfl sued to stop him and he won ....

Actually Al Davis sued the NFL in 1980 (not the other way around) to move the team to LA from Oakland... and he won in 1982, and moved the team in 1983... the Lawsuit in the mid 90's was right around the time that Al was looking to get a new stadium in LA (before the team moved back to Oakland) and Al sued the NFL again when they were talking about expansion into LA, and Al said that he had an exclusive right to be the only team in LA, and this law suit he lost, and shortly their after his stadium deal fell apart, and shortly after that he moved the team back to Oakland.

I have a feeling that $380 million could be spent better and faster toward a streetcar system now rather than waiting for your eventual 30 year mark.

I'd have spent every penny of MAPS 3 on the street car...but that's just me.

I'd have spent every penny of MAPS 3 on the street car...but that's just me.

I think JusttheFacts would have too, and (in my mind) it begs the time-machine question: If you pump $380M on the street car or other CBD-centric (but not fully contained in the CBD) modern mass transit, what would the future hold? Would it generate a better Core (and stifle the sprawl) and increase property tax revenue to the point where, in 25 - 30 years, we would be able to build a fully funded NFL stadium when the time was right? or what if we had such a vibrant, growing city (not some checkerboard with surface parking lots filling in one of the colors) thanks to the transit investment that some business man or woman would be willing to go halvsies with us? It's all speculation. for me, and certainly that's putting all the eggs in one basket ...

I think what we have now is "just right." I don't want the NFL.

I'd say go after MLB or MLS if anything. I just don't think the NFL is anything we need to go after.

Spartan, you're still just po'd because we didn't get a LFL (Lingerie Football League) team. LOL

Spartan, you're still just po'd because we didn't get a LFL (Lingerie Football League) team. LOL

I'm still PO'd about that... have any of you been to an LFL game... it's not the sexy sport people think it is. These girls are playing tackle football with virtually no pads... you hardly notice the lingerie by the end of the game with all the bruises they have on their bodies. I went with a guy i used to work with who played for a season in the NFL back in the early 80's with the bills (well, three games, but still, he was there dang it) and he said that he wouldn't be out there playing with as few pads as these girls were wearing. it's a rough, brutal, and beautiful sport

Spartan, you're still just po'd because we didn't get a LFL (Lingerie Football League) team. LOL

Pfft... Absolutely.

I'm pissed about it too. One of the most dissapointing and emberessing moments of my life as an Oklahoman was the day we rejected the LFL.

MAPS 3 polls showed immense popular support for an NFL stadium. ...

While it did get more suggestions than the NBA, it didn't exactly garner "immense popular support" and have to remember they lumped Football & Soccer into one category. Just like they lumped all Transit together, we don't know the individual breakdown. This is how many times it was suggested out of 2,747.

Interesting note is that the suggestion site was up for something like 3 months, didn't have to be an OKC resident (they got responses from several states & countries)

City of Oklahoma City | MAPS 3 survey results (http://www.okc.gov/about_okc/maps_3_survey.html)

40 Major league Sports/NBA Practice Facility
65 Football or Soccer Stadium
668 Transit (light rail, streetcars, etc.)


________________________


The one problem I think we've started running into with MAPS is that it's generally been targeted towards fairly low-cost, high-value projects, and now people think everything should be built through MAPS. We invested in a whole bunch of fairly inexpensive (relatively) quality of life upgrades. Our NBA arena cost about a third of what most NBA arenas cost. We built a very nice minor league ballpark. We're buying up salvage yards and turning them into a nice downtown park. We're going to put in a nice little streetcar. These kinds of developments have been very popular and quite successful. But when you start talking large convention centers, NFL stadiums, commuter rail, and other BIG projects, you're looking at spending more than MAPS 3's entire budget for just one thing. I'm not sure if the city is ready to support such massive projects.

Genrally true. The budget just for the MAPS 3 Convention Center is more than what voters were told all 9 of the original MAPS projects were going to cost together. But I would say that if the support is really there (like it was for Transit), folks will vote for it even if it does have a big price tag attached.

MAPS 3 polls showed immense popular support for an NFL stadium.

Until we pay a half billion dollars and a NFL team never comes. I think a lot of people in the survey are assuming it would be easy to get a team after a stadium was built.

I'd have spent every penny of MAPS 3 on the street car...but that's just me.

Since this thread for some reason has no L I K E option...."like"

Until we pay a half billion dollars and a NFL team never comes. I think a lot of people in the survey are assuming it would be easy to get a team after a stadium was built.

"The median income for a household in the city was $43,798, and the median income for a family was $54,721. The per capita income for the city was $25,042." <----on the Oklahoma City Wikipedia page.

Sorry, but it's going to take paychecks a lot higher than this to support an NFL team. We need more big time corporate headquarters in downtown. I think 3-4 Forbes 100s would help. The Oklahoma 'Field of Dreams' mentality of "If we build it (through MAPS #) they will come" doesn't mean anything is going to ever come to fruition.

I'm still PO'd about that... have any of you been to an LFL game... it's not the sexy sport people think it is. These girls are playing tackle football with virtually no pads... you hardly notice the lingerie by the end of the game with all the bruises they have on their bodies. I went with a guy i used to work with who played for a season in the NFL back in the early 80's with the bills (well, three games, but still, he was there dang it) and he said that he wouldn't be out there playing with as few pads as these girls were wearing. it's a rough, brutal, and beautiful sport

This is my last post on this because it's very off topic but they get bruises in the most attractive places. LOL

Good article by Steve:

Plans move ahead for OKC convention center, hotel despite collapse in national market | Oklahoman.com (http://www.oklahoman.com/article/3727550?access=534822b65bd18d6b40a3ab7f59ce30c3)

Reading about Conventions, Sports & Leisure (the consultants to OKC) brought to mind the Upton Sinclair quote: “It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it.”

The reality is the people of OKC were misled by the Chamber of Commerce and their support for a new convention center. The numbers simply do not add up. It would take a 900% increase in out-of-state conventions to reach the numbers the Chamber used to get the Convention Center on the list - 900%. Go look at the convention calendars in the states around Oklahoma as see how many of those conventions would consider OKC. I don't care how good we make it, OKC will NEVER, I repeat NEVER, host the Texas State Educators Conference or the Austin City-wide Yard Sale. The vast vast vast majority of all convention center uses are for local and state events. OKC would still land those if all we had are tents.

Now having said all that, I still support a new convention center because the land the Cox is on is more valuable than 20 years’ worth of conventions. Which makes their current choice of sites (the old Ford dealership) even more stupid. MAPS was supposed to encourage private development, not take the best parcels of land from private developers.

The reality is the people of OKC were misled by the Chamber of Commerce and their support for a new convention center. The numbers simply do not add up. It would take a 900% increase in out-of-state conventions to reach the numbers the Chamber used to get the Convention Center on the list - 900%. Go look at the convention calendars in the states around Oklahoma as see how many of those conventions would consider OKC. I don't care how good we make it, OKC will NEVER, I repeat NEVER, host the Texas State Educators Conference or the Austin City-wide Yard Sale. The vast vast vast majority of all convention center uses are for local and state events. OKC would still land those if all we had are tents.

Now having said all that, I still support a new convention center because the land the Cox is on is more valuable than 20 years’ worth of conventions. Which makes their current choice of sites (the old Ford dealership) even more stupid. MAPS was supposed to encourage private development, not take the best parcels of land from private developers.

If private developers were to pay the price the owners are asking for the property, what type of development would assure them of recovering their investment in the property. If the city does not buy it you are probably looking at no change to the parking lot that it will become for the next 25-50 years unless the owners dramatically reduce their asking price. By the way, the owners are sellers, not developers.

If private developers were to pay the price the owners are asking for the property, what type of development would assure them of recovering their investment in the property. If the city does not buy it you are probably looking at no change to the parking lot that it will become for the next 25-50 years unless the owners dramatically reduce their asking price. By the way, the owners are sellers, not developers.

How much are the owners asking for the land?

The reality is the people of OKC were misled by the Chamber of Commerce and their support for a new convention center. The numbers simply do not add up. It would take a 900% increase in out-of-state conventions to reach the numbers the Chamber used to get the Convention Center on the list - 900%. Go look at the convention calendars in the states around Oklahoma as see how many of those conventions would consider OKC. I don't care how good we make it, OKC will NEVER, I repeat NEVER, host the Texas State Educators Conference or the Austin City-wide Yard Sale. The vast vast vast majority of all convention center uses are for local and state events. OKC would still land those if all we had are tents.

Now having said all that, I still support a new convention center because the land the Cox is on is more valuable than 20 years’ worth of conventions. Which makes their current choice of sites (the old Ford dealership) even more stupid. MAPS was supposed to encourage private development, not take the best parcels of land from private developers.

Exactly. From the article:

"...projecting annual increases of about 3 percent in the convention business."""

This is a HUGE difference between the 3-fold (300%) increase the same consultants promised the chamber and even further away from the 9-fold increase required in out-of-area growth that the Chamber admitted after the vote passed (when they were arguing to get the C.C. pushed up in the timeline. The Chamber also lied when they said that by moving it up, it would be open and all of that increased business would result in increased tax collections for whatever MAPS 3 projects got pushed behind the C.C. Problem is, if the C.C. opens on schedule (historically, highly unlikely). It will be months AFTER the MAPS 3 tax ends. Not one penny in extra revenue will be raised for those other projects due to the C.C. the money "extra" they will get is the built in inflation factor calculated from the mid-point of the MAPS 3 timelines.



If private developers were to pay the price the owners are asking for the property, what type of development would assure them of recovering their investment in the property. If the city does not buy it you are probably looking at no change to the parking lot that it will become for the next 25-50 years unless the owners dramatically reduce their asking price. By the way, the owners are sellers, not developers.
According to the City's Core to Shore report, the City envisioned that land to be redeveloped into a multi-purpose. Timeframe unknown. However, that land is situated between the public-financed Myriad Gardens and MAPS 3 park. I think there is little argument that the highest and best use for it is something other than a C.C. Well, except the the C.C. advocates...

You are presuming that if the City doesn't build something there, then no one will. Maybe. Maybe not. Just like when folks agreed to the Devon tif and the forfeiture of the money schools etc would normally get from the rise in property taxes for something like 20 years, presumes that if Devon wasn't allowed to build on that specific spot, that Devon wouldn't have built the tower on another piece of property or that no one else would ever develop it.

False presumptions.

I wonder if Convention Sports and Leisure has ever come back with an analysis that said "don't build".

I wonder if Convention Sports and Leisure has ever come back with an analysis that said "don't build".

Who would hire them for the next study if they did?

No. The Boston Globe did an amazing exposé on that.

The CC is a demonstrably bad idea.

Would it require a vote of the people to change from an all new convention center to spending part of the funds remodeling/expanding the rest of the incomparable Myriad and allocating the other part to the streetcar/mass transit/sidewalks? Maybe not legally, but politically it would seem like a good idea. I just hate the idea of building an albatross in the middle of downtown that has no demonstrable business purpose. The convention business is a dying business. If Chicago, etc. can't get the remaining few national conventions, how do we expect to?

No vote of the people needed, but it wouldn't be a bad idea.

This is the turd in the MAPS punchbowl, if they build this boondoggle the MAPS brand will be tarnished, fix it now, use money for update or better projects and MAPS votes can live on. Online version of the story up now. Plans move ahead for convention center, hotel despite collapse in national market | NewsOK.com (http://newsok.com/article/3727526)

And this needed to be moved to the front of the line of MAPS 3.... Why??

My biggest fear is that is goes so over budget that the rest of the projects -- all more important IMO -- get short-changed or even cut.

And this needed to be moved to the front of the line of MAPS 3.... Why??

So it can be open before the market goes away completely?

To address a couple of points.

Convention business is not dying. It has experienced a slow down like EVERY thing else associated with the economy, and it will make a comeback.
We have NO idea what the economy is going to be like in 7 years. Why not be well prepared in case it does rebound?
OKC has been praised by forging ahead through the recession while other cities are being stagnant. This area is no exception.

Everyone that voted YES for MAPS 3 years ago next month KNEW that a Convention Center was the centerpiece of this whole project.
To remove this measure is essentially a slap in the face to the voters.
That's why people like Ed Shadid need to respect what has already passed and get involved heavily "If" or "When" a future MAPS vote comes up.

I know a Convention Center is not a "sexy" public works project, but I understand the need for a new one.
This is just one of those things we will be happy we did it when we look back on it.. Like everything else associated with MAPS we did