That’s not completely true. There are definitely some advantages to being the only show in town vs being the second or third pro team in a larger city assuming you have the facilities, etc to put your earning potential on par with those teams if everything else was equal.
One of the best posts in this thread. Describes in a nutshell why it is so important for OKC’s franchise to be operating out of one of the league’s most team revenue-focused buildings, with long-term ability to be adapted for future types of revenue streams when they inevitably emerge (requires roominess). Paycom is NOT such a building; in fact it’s the exact opposite.

I know it’s difficult for some to wrap their heads around - or perhaps they just don’t care - but an NBA franchise is profoundly expensive to operate, and said costs continuously spiral. How much will it cost to operate 10 years from now? 20?

Within the last week I was told by someone who is incredibly well-connected - not team-involved, but someone whose name would be recognized by literally every poster in this forum - that his understanding was that in 15 years the Thunder’s ownership has yet to take ANY distribution. Meaning, like I’ve said here before, that likely the only significant profit they’ve experienced was in equity growth (which has admittedly been significant). Fortunately though, those guys are clearly well-off outside of the Thunder, and not dependent upon team revenues for their own incomes. I also doubt they’ve lost significant money, or we would have surely heard about it.

But as team and league costs inevitably spiral, Paycom will eventually take them into the red, and THAT’S when ownership churn and relocations happen.

Like it or not, if we wish to retain our status as a major league franchise hosting city, we can’t afford to leave this team in possibly the smallest, least adaptable building in the league. We are a marginal NBA market economically, and we must acknowledge this and work to counteract the issue.

This week, vote yes.

Also really quickly wanted to share this opinion piece published yesterday in The Oklahoman (https://www.oklahoman.com/story/opinion/2023/12/08/opinion-okc-thunder-nba-arena-continues-momentum-opinion-mayor-david-holt/71850946007/), and written by the council members who voted in support of the arena, explaining their motivations for doing so (shared with permission):



Mayor, councilmembers: Keeping OKC 'big league' is critical to our city's aspirations

David Holt, Bradley Carter, James Cooper, Barbara Peck, Todd Stone, Matt Hinkle and Mark Stonecipher

Guest columnists

Thirty years ago next week, Oklahoma City’s modern renaissance began when the people of Oklahoma City approved the original MAPS.

There are at least two reasons for our city’s success these last three decades:

1. A city that continues to invest in itself is a city that will grow and thrive.

2. A city that works together will get things done.

The seven of us are not all registered with the same political party. We live all across the city. We have very different backgrounds and perspectives. We are different generations. But, each of us voted to send this proposal to the voters on Tuesday. We each have different reasons for doing so. Our thoughts about this proposal are as unique as our wards and our constituents. Some of us like different aspects of the proposal a lot more than others. All of us accept that outcomes are never just as we want them to be. But, we each recognize that keeping Oklahoma City “big league” is critical to realizing the aspirations we each have for our great city.

The seven of us recognize that we have a sacred trust. We know that selfless public servants sat in these seats for a century before us, and we hope that our successors judge that we also took seriously the obligation to leave things better than we found them.

One of the legacies left to us has been a century-long commitment to a competitive downtown arena. Our predecessors sent proposals for new arenas to the voters in 1927, 1962, and 1993. They recognized — as we do — that the city’s arena is an economic engine and a centerpiece of our city’s quality of life.

The proposal on the ballot Tuesday secures that economic impact for another 30+ years, beyond 2050. And, it doesn’t raise the tax rate above its current level.

And yes, we consider it self-evident that the Thunder have dramatically changed the city. Becoming a big league city created opportunities for our city we could have never imagined. We don’t want to lose that, but the Thunder’s original lease has expired, and a new arena guarantees a new long term relationship.

We also don’t want to miss out on concerts and other shows that should be in OKC. Every concert that goes to a smaller market in our region (like Tulsa) is usually the result of having an arena that is too small by square footage and has serious technical challenges that make it difficult to load in the big shows. We’ve been here before, and when our arenas became obsolete in the past — like in 1962 and 1993 — we reinvested.

Each of us believes in the important work our city government does to support people at all socioeconomic levels and across the city. We recognize we jeopardize those efforts if we don’t have this economic engine providing the tax dollars that make this work possible.

Though not all of us voted for the Council’s Community Benefits Agreement resolution highlighting the needs of future workers at the new arena, we all believe that the jobs at the new arena can provide economic opportunity for all our residents.

Additionally, we value the philanthropy that has come with the Thunder, and we love the way the Thunder unites our city. We can hardly imagine Oklahoma City without the Thunder, and we are excited that we have the opportunity to keep them without raising taxes.

We respect those who disagree with details of this proposal, and we share many of their goals. But, we have studied this issue for nearly two years and accept that perfection is simply not attainable.

In the end, each vote we will cast Tuesday counts the same as yours. Ultimately, this choice is up to you. Every major initiative of the last 30 years faced the voters. We wouldn’t have it any other way. We ask that you let your voice be heard Tuesday. We will see you at the polls.

David Holt is mayor of Oklahoma City. Bradley Carter, Ward 1; James Cooper, Ward 2; Barbara Peck, Ward 3; Todd Stone, Ward 4; Matt Hinkle, Ward 5; and Mark Stonecipher, Ward 8; serve on the Oklahoma City Council.

We’re simply not on the same playing field with most of the rest of the league. It’s the reason many of the anti-arena “studies” don’t hold water in this case; they’re apples and oranges comparison. Sure, many other cities could more easily afford a major hit like a team leaving; ESPECIALLY ones who have a wealth of OTHER teams.

When the SuperSonics left Seattle it was of course an incredible bummer for Sonics fans, but probably didn’t cause THAT much of a ripple in their national reputation or local economy…they have a wealth of other options and offerings. Chicago could lose the White Sox, and while Sox fans would be crushed, the rest of the world would likely barely notice, including even a lot of other Chicago sports fan.

We don’t have that luxury. A better comparison for OKC might be Green Bay, Wisconsin or Buffalo, New York. Pull the Packers out of Green Bay or the Bills out of Buffalo and see how THOSE towns do.

The fact that this type of nuance isn’t acknowledged in any way by the “studies say” cohort tells me that they aren’t inclined to reflection.

We’re simply not on the same playing field with most of the rest of the league. It’s the reason many of the anti-arena “studies” don’t hold water in this case; they’re apples and oranges comparison. Sure, many other cities could more easily afford a major hit like a team leaving; ESPECIALLY ones who have a wealth of OTHER teams.

When the SuperSonics left Seattle it was of course an incredible bummer for Sonics fans, but probably didn’t cause THAT much of a ripple in their national reputation or local economy…they have a wealth of other options and offerings. Chicago could lose the White Sox, and while Sox fans would be crushed, the rest of the world would likely barely notice, including even a lot of other Chicago sports fan.

We don’t have that luxury. A better comparison for OKC might be Green Bay, Wisconsin or Buffalo, New York. Pull the Packers out of Green Bay or the Bills out of Buffalo and see how THOSE towns do.

The fact that this type of nuance isn’t acknowledged in any way by the “studies say” cohort tells me that they aren’t inclined to reflection.

Yeah that

Haha, the NBA, by most rights, has no business in OKC. We are too small of a market. Most of the markets smaller are relocations (coincidence, I think not). This is a flawed idea that the league will want to keep a team in a far-below middle of the road market...

We’re so lucky to have the nba.

Shooting down an arena with the bet “they won’t relocate” is akin to putting your net worth on green at the roulette table. It might work, but probably won’t.

JoBeth and Cooper aren’t far off ideologically but I respect the hell out of Cooper for being the sharp operator. JoBeth would be better off running a non profit.

MAPS 4 addressed human related capital improvement needs of our city:


$154 million - Parks
$118 million - Youth Centers
$97 million - Transit
$96.5 million - Sidewalks, bike lanes, trails and streetlights
$82 million - Fairgrounds Coliseum
$76.7 million - Innovation District
$55.7 million - Homelessness
$44.6 million - Mental Health and Addiction
$42 million - Family Justice Center operated by Palomar
$41 million - Multipurpose Stadium
$32.8 million - Beautification
$31.7 million - Senior Wellness Centers
$17.1 million - Clara Luper Civil Rights Center
$1.1 billion - Grand Total


Some of these projects are under construction with 75% scheduled to begin 2024 - 2029. IMO we are addressing the
needs of our less fortunate people,

Compared to the 1970s (50 years ago), I'm seeing the results of MAPS projects improve our city by big leaps--each including
the City's capital improvements infrastructure (Convention Center, Scissortail Park, DT arena, Civic Center Music Hall and new FG arena (uc). Now we have a 605 rm luxury hotel.

Approve the new arena to take on the challenges of our city's future.

We’re simply not on the same playing field with most of the rest of the league. It’s the reason many of the anti-arena “studies” don’t hold water in this case; they’re apples and oranges comparison. Sure, many other cities could more easily afford a major hit like a team leaving; ESPECIALLY ones who have a wealth of OTHER teams.

When the SuperSonics left Seattle it was of course an incredible bummer for Sonics fans, but probably didnÂ’t cause THAT much of a ripple in their national reputation or local economyÂ…they have a wealth of other options and offerings. Chicago could lose the White Sox, and while Sox fans would be crushed, the rest of the world would likely barely notice, including even a lot of other Chicago sports fan.

We donÂ’t have that luxury. A better comparison for OKC might be Green Bay, Wisconsin or Buffalo, New York. Pull the Packers out of Green Bay or the Bills out of Buffalo and see how THOSE towns do.

The fact that this type of nuance isn’t acknowledged in any way by the “studies say” cohort tells me that they aren’t inclined to reflection.

Totally agree. This is the most relevant point. Seattle losing the Sonics is not the same as OKC losing the Thunder. Seattle was an ascending economic powerhouse when the Sonics left in 2007, and it still had the Mariners and the Seahawks to satiate the desire for major league sports.

OKC does not have a burgeoning tech sector or other industry to make us indifferent to the loss of a major league sports franchise. If we did, we would probably be talking about adding another franchise right now, not potentially losing our only one. By my estimation, OKC would be the smallest US metro area by GDP to lose a major sports franchise since the year 2000. This also means we do not have the leverage to get a "better deal." I would rather get a worse deal than Milwaukee than take the chance of becoming Louisville or Birmingham. We simply cannot risk it.

https://www.statista.com/statistics/248083/real-gross-domestic-product-gdp-of-the-united-states-by-metropolitan-area/

Saying this "isn't a tax increase" is like saying the purchase of a new car doesn't cost more as long as the payment stays the same. Completely ignore extending the payments by 6 years ��

Billionaire team owners need to pony up more than a measly 5%. Reject this deal, team owners need to come back with a better offer.

www.buyyourownarena.com

Saying this "isn't a tax increase" is like saying the purchase of a new car doesn't cost more as long as the payment stays the same. Completely ignore extending the payments by 6 years ��

Billionaire team owners need to pony up more than a measly 5%. Reject this deal, team owners need to come back with a better offer.

www.buyyourownarena.com (http://www.buyyourownarena.com)

lol. It’s quite literally not an increase.

Saying this "isn't a tax increase" is like saying the purchase of a new car doesn't cost more as long as the payment stays the same. Completely ignore extending the payments by 6 years ��

Billionaire team owners need to pony up more than a measly 5%. Reject this deal, team owners need to come back with a better offer.

www.buyyourownarena.com

Yikes- I not no smart person, but I know that increase and continuation have different meanings. Duuuuuuh

Saying this "isn't a tax increase" is like saying the purchase of a new car doesn't cost more as long as the payment stays the same. Completely ignore extending the payments by 6 years ��

Billionaire team owners need to pony up more than a measly 5%. Reject this deal, team owners need to come back with a better offer.

www.buyyourownarena.com

What are these "other options" we supposedly have that aren't presented? (Besides, you know, potentially losing the Thunder, etc).

Also, "every resident will owe at least $1200" (emphasis mine) is being calculated... how? That is almost the $900M divided by the population of OKC. How does that account for all the sales tax paid by non-residents? What weight is that being given?

Ah... there it is at the bottom. "Paid for by Oklahoma Progress Now". That explains a lot of the tenuous relationship to facts and evidence presented...

Saying this "isn't a tax increase" is like saying the purchase of a new car doesn't cost more as long as the payment stays the same. Completely ignore extending the payments by 6 years ��

Billionaire team owners need to pony up more than a measly 5%. Reject this deal, team owners need to come back with a better offer.

www.buyyourownarena.com (http://www.buyyourownarena.com)

yeah it’s definitely not an increase and the billionaires are giving $50 million for something they won’t own.

What are these "other options" we supposedly have that aren't presented? (Besides, you know, potentially losing the Thunder, etc).

Also, "every resident will owe at least $1200" (emphasis mine) is being calculated... how? That is almost the $900M divided by the population of OKC. How does that account for all the sales tax paid by non-residents? What weight is that being given?

Ah... there it is at the bottom. "Paid for by Oklahoma Progress Now". That explains a lot of the tenuous relationship to facts and evidence presented...

There are a lot of inbreds whose parents are siblings who think ONLY those who live in OKC will pay this tax. Not everyone who buys something or visits OKC. But like I said, their parents are siblings, and it has affected their comprehension.

There are a lot of inbreds whose parents are siblings who think ONLY those who live in OKC will pay this tax. Not everyone who buys something or visits OKC. But like I said, their parents are siblings, and it has affected their comprehension.
lol

Expectations from the ownership IIRC was to obtain a franchise for Oklahoma; they weren't that concerned b/c they could use the franchise as a tax write off. The goal at the time the Hornets were here was too break-even (12,500) average attendance.
OKC-NOLA Hornets attendance in the Ford Center: 2005-06 (18,168) and 2007-08 (17,833).

When it became evident that OKC far exceeded expectations, the ownership took on a more positive attitude toward the community support. It included long range goals for the NBA in OKC.

Memphis: Memphis gets $350M in state funds for facilities 10.11.2023.

MEMPHIS, Tenn. — The city now has a $350 million state grant for sports facility improvements like for FedExForum, Simmons Bank Liberty Stadium or any City of Memphis-owned stadium.

“We’ve gotten the check, it’s in a bank account,” Mayor Jim Strickland said.

State OKs $350M for Memphis sports arena upgrades
But, in a resolution accepting the grant presented to the city council Tuesday, it does not allocate any specific amount of money to each stadium. As of now, it’s unclear when a deal allocating the acquired $350 million from the state will be fully hashed out...

Would have been nice if OKC could have received some help or commitment from our state.

Expectations from the ownership IIRC was to obtain a franchise for Oklahoma; they weren't that concerned b/c they could use the franchise as a tax write off. The goal at the time the Hornets were here was too break-even (12,500) average attendance.
OKC-NOLA Hornets attendance in the Ford Center: 2005-06 (18,168) and 2007-08 (17,833).

When it became evident that OKC far exceeded expectations, the ownership took on a more positive attitude toward the community support. It included long range goals for the NBA in OKC.

Memphis: Memphis gets $350M in state funds for facilities 10.11.2023.

MEMPHIS, Tenn. — The city now has a $350 million state grant for sports facility improvements like for FedExForum, Simmons Bank Liberty Stadium or any City of Memphis-owned stadium.

“We’ve gotten the check, it’s in a bank account,” Mayor Jim Strickland said.

State OKs $350M for Memphis sports arena upgrades
But, in a resolution accepting the grant presented to the city council Tuesday, it does not allocate any specific amount of money to each stadium. As of now, it’s unclear when a deal allocating the acquired $350 million from the state will be fully hashed out...

Would have been nice if OKC could have received some help or commitment from our state.

Milwaukee had a similar deal structure. Most of these small market cities end up getting a pretty sizable state contribution unless they have a mayor who likes to play hero ball.

I moved here in 2012. Came from a city where the nearest pro team was 2 1/2 hours away. IT SUCKED not having a pro team that wasn't in your city or even your state.. Sure you could follow them but getting to games and parking and even just getting tickets was a pain. Do we really want to all become Dallas Mavericks fans? It just won't be the same.

Milwaukee had a similar deal structure. Most of these small market cities end up getting a pretty sizable state contribution unless they have a mayor who likes to play hero ball.

What a spin. Lol

Milwaukee also has baseball. Milwaukee is only an hour and a half and a train ride from Chicago so I've never really liked that comparison.

If we lose our well-established high profile NBA franchise; then our only campaign to remain Big League will be to solicit the NHL Phoenix Coyotes to play in the Paycom Center once the Thunder leaves.

OKC's NBA team evaluation $3.05 billion. Our local ownership group invested $350 million in the NBA Supersonics to bring Big League sports to our city.

Closes franchises to OKC: Dallas Mavericks,, Houston Rockets, San Antonio Spurs, Denver Nuggets, Memphis Grizzlies & Phoenix Suns.

Plan II if arena vote fails . . .

Arizonia Coyotes team evaluation $675 million. Our only chance of remain Big League will be to go after the NHL Coyotes; whose owner in not local; we would still need to build an NHL specification arena more viable than Paycom Center.

Closes franchises to OKC: Dallas Stars, St. Louis Blues, Colorado Avalanche, Nashville Predators and Las Vegas Golden Knights.

Personally, IDK the NHL's policy off hand; but I wish there were some way our city could partner with Tulsa (BOK Center) to bring the NHL Coyotes to Oklahoma with half the games in Tulsa and half in OKC. Maybe if we included 20/21 NHL games in the proposed new arena we could have both NBA and NHL. Afterall, OKC-TUL are considered the same sports TV market.

Forgive me guys, I don't want to lose our Thunder and since we're going to need a new DT arena, just trying to think outside the box.

I don’t see pro sports coming back if this vote fails and the Thunder leave.

^^^^^^^
Someone who gets it.

Possibly a dumb question, but is there legit concern on the part of people who might know that this thing *could* fail?

I'd normally expect this to pass something like 70-30, but some recent TV comments and appearances by Mayor Holt and others sure make me wonder if there is legit concern it might not pass.

Possibly a dumb question, but is there legit concern on the part of people who might know that this thing *could* fail?

I'd normally expect this to pass something like 70-30, but some recent TV comments and appearances by Mayor Holt and others sure make me wonder if there is legit concern it might not pass.

I don't think this will fail but I'd be shocked if it passed with anything close to 70% of the vote.

It’s polling favorably, but the question is whether or not yes votes are as motivated to drive to the polls as are the no votes. Personally I won’t feel good about it until it’s in the books.

I don’t see pro sports coming back if this vote fails and the Thunder leave.

This is correct.

I think there are a lot of people who simply don't understand that it takes incentives to get meaningful resources to this city - people, businesses, brands, etc. This is not a destination. Recruiting human capital to this city is a major challenge.

Our brand as a city has been massively improved by the presence of the Thunder and by MAPS - by public investments.

There are too many people who are simply not bright enough to understand that the business decision to bring the franchise to Oklahoma City was essentially an angel investment in the city. The franchise could easily increase its value by moving to Nashville right now.

We will receive and deserve total ignominy if this vote fails.

This is correct.

I think there are a lot of people who simply don't understand that it takes incentives to get meaningful resources to this city - people, businesses, brands, etc. This is not a destination. Recruiting human capital to this city is a major challenge.

Our brand as a city has been massively improved by the presence of the Thunder and by MAPS - by public investments.

There are too many people who are simply not bright enough to understand that the business decision to bring the franchise to Oklahoma City was essentially an angel investment in the city. The franchise could easily increase its value by moving to Nashville right now.

We will receive and deserve total ignominy if this vote fails.

The pro arena side have been doing a great job showing OKC and Oklahoma's weaknesses. I don't know if we're going to get another hit from the NBA bong 10-20 years from now when inflation makes whatever exit penalty that gets agreed upon not seem so bad to future owners. Like I said several posts up, this should be seen a warning. We may not always be able to buy ourselves "Big League Status". With said, I would still vote yes.

This is correct.

I think there are a lot of people who simply don't understand that it takes incentives to get meaningful resources to this city - people, businesses, brands, etc. This is not a destination. Recruiting human capital to this city is a major challenge.

Our brand as a city has been massively improved by the presence of the Thunder and by MAPS - by public investments.

There are too many people who are simply not bright enough to understand that the business decision to bring the franchise to Oklahoma City was essentially an angel investment in the city. The franchise could easily increase its value by moving to Nashville right now.

We will receive and deserve total ignominy if this vote fails.
Great post; nails it. The last line is true and powerful. If we bungle this opportunity we will be consigned to the dustbin from a national perspective, ESPECIALLY among sports media and sports followers. All of whom will be more than happy to give OKC permanent punchline and cautionary tale status.

This is correct.

I think there are a lot of people who simply don't understand that it takes incentives to get meaningful resources to this city - people, businesses, brands, etc. This is not a destination. Recruiting human capital to this city is a major challenge.

Our brand as a city has been massively improved by the presence of the Thunder and by MAPS - by public investments.

There are too many people who are simply not bright enough to understand that the business decision to bring the franchise to Oklahoma City was essentially an angel investment in the city. The franchise could easily increase its value by moving to Nashville right now.

We will receive and deserve total ignominy if this vote fails.

Wonder how many restaurants and bars in bricktown/downtown survive if they leave? During the pandemic remember hearing a lot of them struggling not only because of the pandemic itself obviously but the fact there weren't home thunder games for a season. Obviously most places have never recovered to pre-pandemic levels and I would assume most random weeknight business comes from people attending events like the thunder games. Feel like a lot of "No" voters are going to come to realize in a few years they wouldn't have voted no if they realized all of the collateral damage that would come.

It’s polling favorably, but the question is whether or not yes votes are as motivated to drive to the polls as are the no votes. Personally I won’t feel good about it until it’s in the books.

Well that's what led me to even ask the question. The tenor of some of the ads plus some live interviews with Holt implied a sense of urgency I didn't expect at all. I'm sure they're doing their internal polling and have a good sense of the direction things are going, but it seems to be the public "reaction" in terms of advertising direction on the pro side seems to be much more cautionary than I ever would have expected.

I think a 60/40 pass rate is probably where things are going right now. I *know* nothing, to be clear, but I've seen enough of these kinds of votes to kinda gauge how each side is going, and purely the reactions from the pro-arena side make me wonder what they may be seeing from their own data. It may be nothing more than a "get out the vote" issue. I honestly didn't realize there was truly organized opposition until I saw the guy on the news this morning.

Great post; nails it. The last line is true and powerful. If we bungle this opportunity we will be consigned to the dustbin from a national perspective, ESPECIALLY among sports media and sports followers. All of whom will be more than happy to give OKC permanent punchline and cautionary tale status.

Agree 100% - Nothing like Oklahoma City being on the brunt end of a joke; it won't be pleasant.

Well that's what led me to even ask the question. The tenor of some of the ads plus some live interviews with Holt implied a sense of urgency I didn't expect at all. I'm sure they're doing their internal polling and have a good sense of the direction things are going, but it seems to be the public "reaction" in terms of advertising direction on the pro side seems to be much more cautionary than I ever would have expected.

I think a 60/40 pass rate is probably where things are going right now. I *know* nothing, to be clear, but I've seen enough of these kinds of votes to kinda gauge how each side is going, and purely the reactions from the pro-arena side make me wonder what they may be seeing from their own data. It may be nothing more than a "get out the vote" issue. I honestly didn't realize there was truly organized opposition until I saw the guy on the news this morning.

I've been sensing the same thing, although I typically always have a big bout of nervousness immediately before elections. More and more people I know from across the spectrum are coming out against this thing (for both misguided and real reasons, IMO), and the advertising blitz and tenor from the campaign/mayor has been a bit more urgent than I anticipated. If yard signs could vote—which they famously do not—I'd feel very confident in its passage, but among actual voters... I'm not so sure.

I have no idea how it’s gonna go, if I had to guess, yes will pass with 52-55 percent

Well that's what led me to even ask the question. The tenor of some of the ads plus some live interviews with Holt implied a sense of urgency I didn't expect at all. I'm sure they're doing their internal polling and have a good sense of the direction things are going, but it seems to be the public "reaction" in terms of advertising direction on the pro side seems to be much more cautionary than I ever would have expected.

I think a 60/40 pass rate is probably where things are going right now. I *know* nothing, to be clear, but I've seen enough of these kinds of votes to kinda gauge how each side is going, and purely the reactions from the pro-arena side make me wonder what they may be seeing from their own data. It may be nothing more than a "get out the vote" issue. I honestly didn't realize there was truly organized opposition until I saw the guy on the news this morning.

As a seasoned, former campaign operative, I can confidently tell you nothing in the ads or PR campaign indicates the "yes" side is worried. This campaign is very typical. Refer to my earlier post on this topic when people were freaking out that they had not yet seen ads for the "yes" side and it's going exactly as I predicted it would. With that said, even though they are not worried, they also aren't complacent. As any good campaign does, they are going to act as if this thing could come down to one vote, even if their polling tells them they are in good position. That means a flood of phone calls and text messages today and tomorrow, as well as people working the streets tomorrow. When you have polling showing you with a 60-40 lead (not saying that's what the polling says), you don't pack up and go to sleep ( though we can point to a very prominent example of this happening ~7 years ago); you keep with the strategy and push hard right until 7 pm.

.

Thunder to Oklahoma City



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e7R5xxDy3QU

I've been pretty nervous about this thing passing. To be clear, I don't have any real insight. This is entirely anecdotal. But the general response I see online (even to an extent on this forum) has been pretty negative with, I think, some shortsighted if well intentioned opinions. In real life, an unfortunately large percentage of people I know have either been ignorant of the vote or been against (again, with well intentioned but short sighted opinions). I've been pretty successful convincing the people I know in real life to vote yes, but I don't have that big of a reach lol

Milwaukee is only an hour and a half and a train ride from Chicago so I've never really liked that comparison.

It also doesn't make sense to compare the deals either. The state didn't just hand Milwaukee free state money for the arena. Much of that contribution is paid for by a special tax district around the arena. So, most of the sales tax revenue generated closest to the arena actually goes to the state and the Wisconsin Center District, not the city of Milwaukee.


The Milwaukee BucksÂ’ playoff run paid off in big bucks for state and local governments, which scored about $3 million in taxes from the teamÂ’s NBA championship, according to a Milwaukee Magazine analysis.

Almost all of that tax revenue went to the state and the Wisconsin Center District, which raked in more than $1 million each. By contrast, none of those tax dollars went to the City of Milwaukee – which shouldered much of the public safety costs for the Bucks-in-Six victory parade through downtown and the Deer District celebration – while less than $200,000 wound up in Milwaukee County coffers.

https://www.milwaukeemag.com/where-did-the-playoffs-pay-off-go-it-wasnt-to-the-city/

Every deal is different and people really shouldn't take the upfront numbers at face value. Basically, if there is another deal proposed when this fails that involves other revenue sources, no one should expect that everything else would be the same and that the other sources are not going to recoup that contribution through arena operations or through tax districts that divert sales tax away from the city. The would be more unprecedented than a city paying for its own arena. Even SoFi Stadium has tax breaks mechanisms with the city of Inglewood for certain aspects of the project.

If Oklahoma City can get the Thunder owners to write a bigger check and / or the state to contribute without anything else being changed in this proposal, it would probably be the best deal ever in which the municipality was involved. From what I've seen / heard, though, even that would not change most of the the No vote anyway, because the Thunder would still be benefiting from a new arena in some way.

If the Chamber member companies can turn out their employees to vote, it will pass. If they can’t, then it could be a narrow defeat. MAPS 3 passed with 54%, MAPS 4 passed with 72%.

Agree 100% - Nothing like Oklahoma City being on the brunt end of a joke; it won't be pleasant.

When the Thunder moved to OKC, there was only one no vote of the 29 other team owners and that was from Mark Cuban, in which he was protecting his Mavericks interest.
His statement was 'We don't need a Dustbowl' team.

Now that's perception.

When the Thunder moved to OKC, there was only one no vote of the 29 other team owners and that was from Mark Cuban, in which he was protecting his Mavericks interest.
His statement was 'We don't need a Dustbowl' team.

Now that's perception.

Those would be great shirts to have!
Ment apparel if you are on here- get to making them!

When the Thunder moved to OKC, there was only one no vote of the 29 other team owners and that was from Mark Cuban, in which he was protecting his Mavericks interest.
His statement was 'We don't need a Dustbowl' team.

Now that's perception.

There were 2 no. Paul Allen of Portland was the other.

Mark Cuban said "We don't need a Dustbowl Division. We will have OKC, Memphis, Dallas, San Antonio and Houston all together." I think he left New Orleans out.

I am voting yes. I wish the owners were putting up more, but a good friend who is a major insider told me unequivocally that if this doesn’t pass, The Thunder are gone.

So, I understand people’s trepidations, but losing the Thunder would be a death blow.

I am voting yes. I wish the owners were putting up more, but a good friend who is a major insider told me unequivocally that if this doesn’t pass, The Thunder are gone.

So, I understand people’s trepidations, but losing the Thunder would be a death blow.

It is a touchy and avoided topic according to my friend who works in customer service for the Thunder. Management has been really stressed, supposedly. I can't imagine how much pressure there is right now for everyone involved.

I am voting yes. I wish the owners were putting up more, but a good friend who is a major insider told me unequivocally that if this doesn’t pass, The Thunder are gone.

So, I understand people’s trepidations, but losing the Thunder would be a death blow.

It’s a true case of “F around, find out” for the people who love the Thunder or having professional sports in general but are voting no.

It’s pretty simple: If you think the Thunder are valuable to the community and want them to stay, vote yes. Your principles and hate for rich people aren’t going to keep the team here.

There were 2 no. Paul Allen of Portland was the other.


his was at least defensible .. because he was (RIP) also the owner of the Seattle SeaHawks ..

As a seasoned, former campaign operative, I can confidently tell you nothing in the ads or PR campaign indicates the "yes" side is worried. This campaign is very typical. Refer to my earlier post on this topic when people were freaking out that they had not yet seen ads for the "yes" side and it's going exactly as I predicted it would. With that said, even though they are not worried, they also aren't complacent. As any good campaign does, they are going to act as if this thing could come down to one vote, even if their polling tells them they are in good position. That means a flood of phone calls and text messages today and tomorrow, as well as people working the streets tomorrow. When you have polling showing you with a 60-40 lead (not saying that's what the polling says), you don't pack up and go to sleep ( though we can point to a very prominent example of this happening ~7 years ago); you keep with the strategy and push hard right until 7 pm.

Well, that's good to know. Holt just seemed very nervous (my observation) in a recent local interview on the subject. Good to hear that may be purely perception on my part.

Well, that's good to know. Holt just seemed very nervous (my observation) in a recent local interview on the subject. Good to hear that may be purely perception on my part.

LOL. NEVER have seen an interview where Holt was nervous (about anything, actually. He's a cool customer. He does his homework first so he doesn't speak unprepared.

his was at least defensible .. because he was (RIP) also the owner of the Seattle SeaHawks ..

Yes. No doubt. And he also was losing his closest opponent. I just now figured out that two of the three teams in the PNW moved within 10 years, or so. Also made Portland's closest opponent in the Bay Area.

I also understood Mark Cuban's vote. Be hard to give up his biggest secondary market, as I think OKC was.

Well, that's good to know. Holt just seemed very nervous (my observation) in a recent local interview on the subject. Good to hear that may be purely perception on my part.

To be clear, I have no idea how tomorrow will go (I don't have access to the internal polling and, despite my circle being 99% in favor, I know not to trust that as an indicator). I'm just saying the "yes" campaign is running a standard campaign and nothing they are doing indicates they are worried. There would be certain language in their mail and TV ads, as well as the specific aggressive tactics, I'd expect to see if they were worried.

Turnout is going to be VERY low, so that makes it much more difficult to predict the outcome.

I have been checking out social media on this hot issue a lot over the last couple days. It seems the YES campaign has been targeting twitter (X) threads that mention the arena deal. I am not sure how exactly the algorithm works in showing me whatever ads, but every single thread I view where someone is talking about the OKC arena deal, there is a paid ad for voting YES.

Also wanted to note something interesting in case people here don't frequent reddit. The general NBA subreddit (not the Thunder specific sub) is overwhelmingly against the vote.

Saying this "isn't a tax increase" is like saying the purchase of a new car doesn't cost more as long as the payment stays the same. Completely ignore extending the payments by 6 years ��

Billionaire team owners need to pony up more than a measly 5%. Reject this deal, team owners need to come back with a better offer.

www.buyyourownarena.com

This is just quite simply one of the dumbest analogies I think I've ever heard. Like it was 2 hours ago I read it and I'm still kind of mystified by it.

This is just quite simply one of the dumbest analogies I think I've ever heard. Like it was 2 hours ago I read it and I'm still kind of mystified by it.

The only thing you left out was: “Everyone in this thread is now dumber for having read it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.”

Also wanted to note something interesting in case people here don't frequent reddit. The general NBA subreddit (not the Thunder specific sub) is overwhelmingly against the vote.

Out of curiosity, why is that? Is it the terms of the deal people think are bad, or some sort of sentiment against the Thunder staying in OKC? (I barely frequent reddit and never venture into the NBA subs, so I have no idea what sort of discussion goes on there). Do you get a sense that many of the posters are local?

Out of curiosity, why is that? Is it the terms of the deal people think are bad, or some sort of sentiment against the Thunder staying in OKC? (I barely frequent reddit and never venture into the NBA subs, so I have no idea what sort of discussion goes on there). Do you get a sense that many of the posters are local?

That the deal is bad. A lot of comments wondering what's wrong with the arena. Pointing out other teams where ownership has paid more.

The OKC subreddit also seems mostly either against it or just done with the whole thing.

OKC is not big enough to survive losing the Thunder. We don't have enough going for us, and the QOL rankings OKC has worked hard to improve to even average levels, will drop like the Titanic.

The main NBA subreddit is exactly what it sounds like. Fans of the NBA. Obviously most users there are fans of a specific team, sometimes multiple. So speaking on relativity, there is very few Thunder fans in comparison to say the LA teams, Heat, or Warriors, etc. So definitely not local sentiment, but it is interesting to see the thoughts of other NBA fans. Many of them are saying the same things as people here, the deal is bad - stop giving free money to billionaires.

Tinfoil hat: You can set yourself a "flair" in that subreddit which indicates which team you're a fan of (including teams that do not currently exist). That being said, the amount of Seattle Supersonics flairs that are really enjoying this vote debate is wild. In fact, the trolling is almost convincing me that the NO campaign is somehow being funded by Seattle based operations. That is super tinfoil hat, I know - but it is wild to see how many Supersonics fans actually think they can get their team back.

For anyone that is not really a close follower of Thunder/NBA. To put into perspective how valuable OKC is right now in terms of team assets + future assets. Literally everyone wants to be in the Thunder's position. There is billionaires out there that would love to simply buy their way into multiple championship contention seasons by way of this arena vote. This team will be running the league the next decade.

his was at least defensible .. because he was (RIP) also the owner of the Seattle SeaHawks ..

Trailblazers, but they had a friendly NW rivalry. Solidarity vote

Out of curiosity, why is that? Is it the terms of the deal people think are bad, or some sort of sentiment against the Thunder staying in OKC? (I barely frequent reddit and never venture into the NBA subs, so I have no idea what sort of discussion goes on there). Do you get a sense that many of the posters are local?

Here’s the Reddit post to see for yourself:
https://www.reddit.com/r/nba/comments/18fkdpc/espn_oklahoma_city_voters_mull_tax_to_build_900m/

Trailblazers, but they had a friendly NW rivalry. Solidarity vote

no Paul allen owned both the trailblazers (portland) and the Seattle Seahawks (NFL ) that is why he voted no he owned a team in seattle .. his sister is the exec and trustee of his estate which STILL owns the blazers and the seahawks ..