New Downtown Arena

[Teo9969]

i agree with this ..


and you keep bring up the team leaving with a 25 year lease in place .... that has never happened ANY WHERE >>

I don't need precedent. All I can do is assure you that the buy out will not be high enough to prevent an over-zealous out of state owner to leave "po-dunk" OKC for wherever. Given the way we took the team away from Seattle, it would not be at all surprising for someone to do it, in part, in retaliation to our getting the team so long ago.

If you told me tomorrow that the lease buy out were structured something like before 2030 @ $350M, 2030-2035 @ $300M, 2035-2040 @ $250M, and $200M to end of lease, I'd vote yes in a heartbeat.

[PhiAlpha]

I don't need precedent. All I can do is assure you that the buy out will not be high enough to prevent an over-zealous out of state owner to leave "po-dunk" OKC for wherever. Given the way we took the team away from Seattle, it would not be at all surprising for someone to do it, in part, in retaliation to our getting the team so long ago.

If you told me tomorrow that the lease buy out were structured something like before 2030 @ $350M, 2030-2035 @ $300M, 2035-2040 @ $250M, and $200M to end of lease, I'd vote yes in a heartbeat.

Again, find an example of a team breaking a lease and leaving a city, that approved and built one of the most expensive arenas in the league, before the end of the first lease term.

[Teo9969]

What numbers are you using to estimate that it will break even over 25 years?

I did some math up thread and it's very inexact. I recognize that part of the money that comes in because of the Thunder just walks out the door if they leave. Based on Forbes and a few other napkin math things, $50M/year imported value seems like the minimum annual impact of the Thunder (of course about 60% belongs to state of OK, but that's still money that would vanish overnight).

So after 25 years and inflating the numbers let's say annual totals of $35M state + $25M OKC = $875M state and $625M OKC during 25 years of impact.

[Teo9969]

Again, find an example of a team breaking a lease and leaving a city, that approved and built one of the most expensive arenas in the league, before the end of the first lease term.

There is not an example of that. It has never happened. I'm not willing to bet a billion dollars that it won't though.

[goldenHurricane22]

Is there any indication there will be publicly available polling on this before the vote? I'd also be curious to see how the demographics break down.

I myself am still mulling it over, but being in my 20's, that does start tilt the cost-to-benefit ratio more in my favor (in other words, pay for it sooner, as costs will likely only trend upwards, and then I get the decades ahead to use the new arena, compared to waiting another 20+ years). And if this does help keep the Thunder here until at least the 2050's, then that means I'd get to experience being able to raise kids (knock on wood) and bring them to games and hopefully make some good memories for them. Now, if the opportunity cost is worth it to the city at large (i.e. what would happen if we put those hundreds of millions to other public projects instead) is what I'm still deciding on. It has been useful to see other people's take on this.

[PhiAlpha]

There is not an example of that. It had never happened. I'm not willing to bet a billion dollars that it won't though.

[Teo9969]

[BoulderSooner]

I don't need precedent. All I can do is assure you that the buy out will not be high enough to prevent an over-zealous out of state owner to leave "po-dunk" OKC for wherever. Given the way we took the team away from Seattle, it would not be at all surprising for someone to do it, in part, in retaliation to our getting the team so long ago.

If you told me tomorrow that the lease buy out were structured something like before 2030 @ $350M, 2030-2035 @ $300M, 2035-2040 @ $250M, and $200M to end of lease, I'd vote yes in a heartbeat.

in seattle there was NO buyout built into the lease ... for the Thunder there was not a buyout built into the last lease ..

there likely won't be a buy out in this lease ..

[thunderupokc]

How about the Arcadia Thunder?

Let’s fix up the round barn and get it NBA ready!

Seriously if this doesn’t pass I would think PBC LLC would entertain options in Edmond or NE OK County or possibly even the UNP development in Norman—that would certainly solve the OU arena problem also

I am torn—partial yes and partial no so honestly at the moment I will abstain in December unless the deal improves

But I see the side of Holt & ownership—the arena will belong to OKC not the team so why should the team pony up more?

Stanley Draper would certainly be proud of this process tho no doubt about it—and if we had the old Oklahoman regime we would be flooded with 3 editorials a day saying take the deal!

This truly is the OKC way and it really is quite a package overall—I agree with those that say there is no comparison to our situation due to the way we got the Thunder in the first place—another only in OKC event

We are special and unique as a city from birth to bust to MAPS—why not (as Russ would say) just embrace it?

Now I am talking myself into voting for it even tho I haven’t attended a game since before COVID

[Teo9969]

in seattle there was NO buyout built into the lease ... for the Thunder there was not a buyout built into the last lease ..

there likely won't be a buy out in this lease ..

I know. I suspect all we're getting out of this from the team is the $50M and a verbal commitment to staying along with a lease that will pay OKC under $100M.

Maybe we make $300M revenue (not profit) in Thunder concessions over 25 years and bring in another $100M of revenue from additional entertainment "above and beyond" what we could bring to Paycom.

The city is carrying 100% of the risk here. All I can say is I hope it works out if everyone else votes yes. If anything goes wrong, it will set this city back by more than a decade and will likely kill any future tax increase initiatives from point of failure forward for another 15+ years

[BoulderSooner]

I know. I suspect all we're getting out of this from the team is the $50M and a verbal commitment to staying along with a lease that will pay OKC under $100M.

Maybe we make $300M revenue (not profit) in Thunder concessions over 25 years and bring in another $100M of revenue from additional entertainment "above and beyond" what we could bring to Paycom.

The city is carrying 100% of the risk here. All I can say is I hope it works out if everyone else votes yes. If anything goes wrong, it will set this city back by more than a decade and will likely kill any future tax increase initiatives from point of failure forward for another 15+ years

the city has 0.00% of risk here ..

for point of comparison the orlando magic pay 1 mil a year in rent period that doesn't go up at all over 25 years ..

the thunder will pay over 3 mil a year

[Rover]

Forbes listed OKC as having an operating income of 129 million in 2022. Higher than Denver, Atlanta, Phoenix, Miami, etc. This ownership group isn’t broke.

Here's the comparative revenue: https://www.statista.com/statistics/...teams-in-2010/

And no one claims they are broke. Is that the criteria?

It's time this board admit how small this city thinks. We talk and talk about wanting great things but are only willing to support just okay things. Maybe it is time we just admit to being mediocre in what we do here.

It seems every great city I go to has great public buildings and facilities that have been built over time. Here, we don't support things other than the basic utilitarian standards and it is reflected in our minimalistic approach to architecture and design, as well as the ameneties of our public facilities. The first chance we have to actually make a statement and it sounds like we are throwing up on ourselves. Maybe we deserve the reputation we have to the rest of the world who doesn't think OKC even deserves something like pro sports.

[CaptDave]

The mindset reminds me of the old 'Oklahoma is OK' license plates....not good, not great, but meh - ok.

[HOT ROD]

As someone who lived in Seattle through all of that back in the day and an expat from OKC, I truly believe that Bennett DID try to negotiate in good faith. They didn't want to uproot the Sonics, they wanted the New Orleans team OR an expansion. I can guarantee you if Bennett were able to get Seattle to build a new arena, the NBA would have expanded and teams would have been awarded to Oklahoma City and Vancouver. OKC had already saved the NBA once with the hosting of the Hornets, IF Bennett could have saved the NBA in Seattle?? OMG - he would have been awarded a team and the NBA would be at the magic 32 teams.

That didn't happen, very much due to the hurdles and roadblocks that Seattle, King County, and Washington put in place to prohibit public funding of a new arena. Period. There were COUNTLESS groups assembled that attempted to FORCE the OKC ownership to being locked into KeyArena, or else. I recall I-91, which is a citizen initiative that prohibited public funding of stadiums in King County. NOBODY here thought Bennett would move the team, so even FANS were suckered into the bullying that Clay had to put up with.

I, being from OKC, knew and told everybody that the Sonics were history. I knew OKC wanted a team and since the state/city/county didn't want to play - I knew they'd figure out a way to move. The question was if they had to play out the 2-years or move early. MOST here thought they'd have to play out and in doing so they'd LOSE so much money that they'd force to sell. That's why the seats were not filled during the 2007-2008 season. It was a gamble that the SOS, government agencies, and likely Schultz himself had tried since NOBODY here ever thought the team would move - just somebody else own it.

Schultz' agreement with Bennett was a promise that he'd pursue an arena deal for the next year. Just one year. Bennett did that. Then when the gut punch came from the horrible 2007-2008 attendance; Bennett negotiated with Seattle on the $45 million way out of the lease early and the team was approved and then MOVED to Seattle. All of the SoS folks and fans were shocked that the city settled and let the team go; THAT is what people here are pissed about - Bennett is just the scapegoat; but why would he keep a team here?

I know Aubrey and many other OKC investors WANTED a team, and they may have become part of the group with the intentions of owning a team, but they WERENT formed to buy and move the Sonics. That idea came much later.

Now as to the current situation. It should not be forgotten what Bennett and OKC ownership had to go through to purchase and move the franchise. I think the amount they paid is more than what OKC and the residents have paid for the Ford Center, upgrading it into the current Paycom Center, and both practice facilities all combined. Im not saying the ownership shouldn't contribute more, hopefully they will cover more than just the interest on the line of credit (I'd like to hear they will cover cost overruns too rather than the usual economizing scale backs that OKC does with MAPS). But we need to be clear on what they have done and not get lost on the investment they made, in 2006-7 dollars mind you, of north of $400 million.

[BoulderSooner]

As someone who lived in Seattle through all of that back in the day and an expat from OKC, I truly believe that Bennett DID try to negotiate in good faith. They didn't want to uproot the Sonics, they wanted the New Orleans team OR an expansion. I can guarantee you if Bennett were able to get Seattle to build a new arena, the NBA would have expanded and teams would have been awarded to Oklahoma City and Vancouver. OKC had already saved the NBA once with the hosting of the Hornets, IF Bennett could have saved the NBA in Seattle?? OMG - he would have been awarded a team and the NBA would be at the magic 32 teams.

That didn't happen, very much due to the hurdles and roadblocks that Seattle, King County, and Washington put in place to prohibit public funding of a new arena. Period. There were COUNTLESS groups assembled that attempted to FORCE the OKC ownership to being locked into KeyArena, or else. I recall I-91, which is a citizen initiative that prohibited public funding of stadiums in King County. NOBODY here thought Bennett would move the team, so even FANS were suckered into the bullying that Clay had to put up with.

I, being from OKC, knew and told everybody that the Sonics were history. I knew OKC wanted a team and since the state/city/county didn't want to play - I knew they'd figure out a way to move. The question was if they had to play out the 2-years or move early. MOST here thought they'd have to play out and in doing so they'd LOSE so much money that they'd force to sell. That's why the seats were not filled during the 2007-2008 season. It was a gamble that the SOS, government agencies, and likely Schultz himself had tried since NOBODY here ever thought the team would move - just somebody else own it.

Schultz' agreement with Bennett was a promise that he'd pursue an arena deal for the next year. Just one year. Bennett did that. Then when the gut punch came from the horrible 2007-2008 attendance; Bennett negotiated with Seattle on the $45 million way out of the lease early and the team was approved and then MOVED to Seattle. All of the SoS folks and fans were shocked that the city settled and let the team go; THAT is what people here are pissed about - Bennett is just the scapegoat; but why would he keep a team here?

I know Aubrey and many other OKC investors WANTED a team, and they may have become part of the group with the intentions of owning a team, but they WERENT formed to buy and move the Sonics. That idea came much later.

Now as to the current situation. It should not be forgotten what Bennett and OKC ownership had to go through to purchase and move the franchise. I think the amount they paid is more than what OKC and the residents have paid for the Ford Center, upgrading it into the current Paycom Center, and both practice facilities all combined. Im not saying the ownership shouldn't contribute more, hopefully they will cover more than just the interest on the line of credit (I'd like to hear they will cover cost overruns too rather than the usual economizing scale backs that OKC does with MAPS). But we need to be clear on what they have done and not get lost on the investment they made, in 2006-7 dollars mind you, of north of $400 million.

well said

[caaokc]

I still think this passes but I think it’ll be closer than expected.

[Jake]

Here's the comparative revenue: https://www.statista.com/statistics/...teams-in-2010/

And no one claims they are broke. Is that the criteria?

It's time this board admit how small this city thinks. We talk and talk about wanting great things but are only willing to support just okay things. Maybe it is time we just admit to being mediocre in what we do here.

It seems every great city I go to has great public buildings and facilities that have been built over time. Here, we don't support things other than the basic utilitarian standards and it is reflected in our minimalistic approach to architecture and design, as well as the ameneties of our public facilities. The first chance we have to actually make a statement and it sounds like we are throwing up on ourselves. Maybe we deserve the reputation we have to the rest of the world who doesn't think OKC even deserves something like pro sports.

Sounds an awful lot like you were defending the owners for not pitching in more for the arena relative to other cities because they didn’t have enough money. Then you created a straw man argument that the reason people on here are hesitant about the price tag are because we don’t have have high enough goals.

[Laramie]

Thank you HotRod, not only well said but a masterpiece.

[BoulderSooner]

Sounds an awful lot like you were defending the owners for not pitching in more for the arena relative to other cities because they didn’t have enough money. Then you created a straw man argument that the reason people on here are hesitant about the price tag are because we don’t have have high enough goals.

other cities have completely different lease models then we do .. it is apples to oranges except for orlando and memphis

[Teo9969]

Here's the comparative revenue: https://www.statista.com/statistics/...teams-in-2010/

And no one claims they are broke. Is that the criteria?

It's time this board admit how small this city thinks. We talk and talk about wanting great things but are only willing to support just okay things. Maybe it is time we just admit to being mediocre in what we do here.

It seems every great city I go to has great public buildings and facilities that have been built over time. Here, we don't support things other than the basic utilitarian standards and it is reflected in our minimalistic approach to architecture and design, as well as the ameneties of our public facilities. The first chance we have to actually make a statement and it sounds like we are throwing up on ourselves. Maybe we deserve the reputation we have to the rest of the world who doesn't think OKC even deserves something like pro sports.

How's Seabiscuit? I'm sure the view from up there is riveting.

[April in the Plaza]

I still think this passes but I think it’ll be closer than expected.

It’s just a very tough time to ask The City for $1B plus.

A lot of folks out there working two jobs, just trying to stay afloat amidst this historic inflation.

[Rover]

It’s just a very tough time to ask The City for $1B plus.

A lot of folks out there working two jobs, just trying to stay afloat amidst this historic inflation.

This isn’t near historic inflation. You must be too young to know.

[Rover]

Sounds an awful lot like you were defending the owners for not pitching in more for the arena relative to other cities because they didn’t have enough money. Then you created a straw man argument that the reason people on here are hesitant about the price tag are because we don’t have have high enough goals.

Then you didn’t comprehend what I wrote.

[SouthOKC]

Mayor Holt laid it out perfectly on sports radio.
There is only a small segment of the population that’s going to vote. Within that segment you have 20% that will vote “no” regardless of the amount, deal structure, etc… because that’s who those people are and it’s pretty evident by the comments who that is on this board. There is 20% of the population that will vote “yes” regardless of the deal.
His campaign is working to try and reach that 60% that would like some additional details.

Why anyone who loves OKC would vote “no” is beyond my understanding. It’s a $.01 sales tax that nobody misses or even thinks about for something transformative in a city our size. If the city owns the arena I could care less about any of the remaining details. My hope is that the total price tag exceeds $1.5B and we get a development that includes shopping, restaurants, and more to create an amazing modern town square.

[PoliSciGuy]

Mayor Holt laid it out perfectly on sports radio.
There is only a small segment of the population that’s going to vote. Within that segment you have 20% that will vote “no” regardless of the amount, deal structure, etc… because that’s who those people are and it’s pretty evident by the comments who that is on this board. There is 20% of the population that will vote “yes” regardless of the deal.
His campaign is working to try and reach that 60% that would like some additional details.

Why anyone who loves OKC would vote “no” is beyond my understanding. It’s a $.01 sales tax that nobody misses or even thinks about for something transformative in a city our size. If the city owns the arena I could care less about any of the remaining details. My hope is that the total price tag exceeds $1.5B and we get a development that includes shopping, restaurants, and more to create an amazing modern town square.

It’s too bad that people can’t even (or don’t want to try to) understand the opposition. That lack of curiosity or empathy is probably why our politics writ large is so toxic. I may be a no but I at least understand the arguments of the yes crowd and agree that some of them are compelling, just not enough to overcome my concerns.

Let me try to help you understand. Can you identify a single example in recent history where a new NBA arena was “transformative” for a city?