New Downtown Arena

[Laramie]

I’d love to work with you on your next home build. I’ll need $600k before starting any design work. When can you have the initial payment ready?

Voolah

[BoulderSooner]

Why didn’t Clay Bennett come with a plan like he did in Renton? He committed $100M in that case toward a $500M arena at the time. Why wasn’t that same path followed in our case?

where are you seeing that he committed 100 m to that ??

[citywokchinesefood]

where are you seeing that he committed 100 m to that ??

https://archive.seattletimes.com/arc...sonicsqampa18m

Q: How much would taxpayers pay?

A: Bennett wants $300 million in state-authorized taxes, all collected only in King County. The remaining $200 million-plus in costs would be split between team owners and the city of Renton. Bennett has talked about a team contribution of $100 million but has promised nothing, and Renton officials say they don't know how much the city could pay. The arena construction also would be exempted from state and local sales and excise taxes.

Gotta level up your google fu my friend

[Mountaingoat]

Maybe OKC should build a duplicate of The Sphere in Vegas, then the arena could morph into any architectural design you want?

[April in the Plaza]

Why didn’t Clay Bennett come with a plan like he did in Renton? He committed $100M in that case toward a $500M arena at the time. Why wasn’t that same path followed in our case?

Damn, that would be like $150 Million adjusted for inflation.

[Dob Hooligan]

I guess the question is "what are you wanting to arrive to?"

I have no interest in ever visiting or knowing more about Indianapolis, Jacksonville, Cleveland, Sacramento, Baltimore. I'm substantially interested in the prospects of visiting Hartford, Santa Fe, Salem, Paso Robles, Boise, Birmingham, Virginia Beach. I'd bet most of us could make a list of "Big 4" league cities that are a complete yawn and fill a must-see list with cities that would be happy with just a minor league team.

Is it just pure name recognition that determines we've arrived?

I agree that few things come close to the reach: I'd argue ACL and SxSW do more for Austin than the Thunder does for OKC, Disney obviously does circles around every sports franchise in the world, and if Boston had to choose between the Marathon and the Celtics, it would be a hotly debated topic. Perhaps the Thunder are our easiest ticket to being on people's radar, but this idea that there's no path without it and that we're not already on the path is just not based in truth. It's an expedient argument for why we must vote yes or the sky will fall.

Seems to me that you are making cultural arguments. I'm afraid I don't know what ACL is (other than a knee ligament), but I'm sure it and SxSW are quite popular in their areas of interest. Boston Marathon would never engage in a choice discussion. They would lose.

But, the choices aren't necessary. And the cultural arguments they bring. The arena is worth the cost to the city, IMO. For the overall entertainment value it will bring to the city.

I have followed pro sports business, relocations and stadia arguments as a hobby for over 40 years. As a rule, cities never regret keeping a team. Cities always regret losing a team.

And...I don't think the Thunder will sell or leave if they lose this vote. The NBA has changed their approach after the Seattle move and force a long and difficult negotiation before letting anyone move. The Sacramento Kings arena deal took about 10 years. It went through Mayor Kevin Johnson (a former NBA and Kings player) getting involved and bounced from office from unrelated issues, the Maloof family owners losing the team in the great recession, and flat out telling multi billionaire Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer that he could not move the team to Seattle if he bought them. Regardless of how he got an arena built in Seattle.

Also, the NBA is not going to let a team relocate to any potential expansion market. Expansion fees pay everyone in the league ownership. Relocations pay next to nothing.

I am 100% in favor of the new arena as it is currently proposed.

[BoulderSooner]

Also, the NBA is not going to let a team relocate to any potential expansion market. Expansion fees pay everyone in the league ownership. Relocations pay next to nothing.

as the raiders showed (more then once) Leagues can't really stop teams from moving at all ..

[SouthOKC]

as the raiders showed (more then once) Leagues can't really stop teams from moving at all ..

I did see that the NHL was attempting to instate a clause that would prevent the Coyotes from moving had their proposal passed in Tempe. I’m curious if that’s actually enforceable and if the NBA would do something like that in OKCs case?

[jedicurt]

I did see that the NHL was attempting to instate a clause that would prevent the Coyotes from moving had their proposal passed in Tempe.

well not exactly. it was that had the proposal pass in Tempe, if the league was to contribute any funds, the ownership would be required to stay for 10 years in Tempe, or else repay the league for the contributed funds. Remember that when the NHL took ownership for a short time after the Coyotes Bankruptcy, they actually threatened to move the team to Winnipeg in 2013, if Glendale didn't allow them to sign a long term lease (that was then voided two years later after new ownership took control of the team).

so their clause was never to prevent movement of the team, but to incentivize the owners to not move the team, or else have to pay back money that the league was going to have to put into Tempe Arena

[SouthOKC]

Damn, that would be like $150 Million adjusted for inflation.

To go a step further you could say he was willing to cover 20% of the total budget in Renton (along with renderings). In the case of Oklahoma City I believe we’re at a static $50M number with a open ended budget that I personally don’t believe will come in under $1.5B for the build alone. So as the cost of the arena climbs the ownership’s percentage of contributions become less.

Personally, I’m not so fixated on the cost as much as what we’re getting for our money. I would like to know if we’re getting just an arena or a world class interactive venue. With construction costs like they are at the moment there is no way to really gauge what they have planned.

[PhiAlpha]

Why didn’t Clay Bennett come with a plan like he did in Renton? He committed $100M in that case toward a $500M arena at the time. Why wasn’t that same path followed in our case?

Because they knew there was no way in hell that one would pass lol.

[SouthOKC]

Because they knew there was no way in hell that one would pass lol.

So you’re saying the guy we’re partnering with and funding 95% of arena for didn’t have pure motives?

I wonder if these savvy businessmen might try to employ similar tactics in OKC?

[chssooner]

What people forget is, Seattle has multiple other pro teams. OKC is the only game in town. True businessmen know how to play with and use leverage. That's what happened here. OKC has no leverage in this. Seattle did. Sure, the Sonics left. But it didn't impact them, hardly at all. Because they have the Seahawks and Mariners. And Microsoft and Amazon and 100s of other huge companies up there. Guess what OKC has? None of that! We have a nice downtown park.

[Jersey Boss]

as the raiders showed (more then once) Leagues can't really stop teams from moving at all ..

Except when they do. See post #2328 and Sacremento ownership stopped from relocating Kings to Seattle.

[chssooner]

Except when they do. See post #2328 and Sacremento ownership stopped from relocating Kings to Seattle.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sacram...ation_attempts

Not really the same scenario. The Maloofs couldn't afford to run the team anymore in Sacramento, Not the same scenario at all. The mayor of Sacramento was a former NBA player, and used that, as well as another Sacramento billionaire to help convince the owners not to move. The Kings also never put a new arena option in front of voters or on the table.

Does OKC have these same pluses on their side? No. The Thunder are putting an effort in front of voters to build a new arena, which, if it does not pass, will be used aas evidence to the Board of Governors that the city doesn't support the team, the exact same way it as used to get the Thunder. Sacramento Kings have been there a lot longer than the Thunder have been here.

If you are banking on the NBA blocking the move, you will be gravely, gravely mistaken.

[SouthOKC]

What people forget is, Seattle has multiple other pro teams. OKC is the only game in town. True businessmen know how to play with and use leverage. That's what happened here. OKC has no leverage in this. Seattle did. Sure, the Sonics left. But it didn't impact them, hardly at all. Because they have the Seahawks and Mariners. And Microsoft and Amazon and 100s of other huge companies up there. Guess what OKC has? None of that! We have a nice downtown park.

I certainly didn’t forget that and fully understand we have zero leverage.

It feels like we’re stuck in a crappy but fortunate situation, if that makes sense. I’m just disappointed with the chosen path to get this pushed through. It feels like they had 10+ years to formulate a plan and they decided on nearly zero transparency and riding off the success of MAPS. I feel like they should’ve had more faith in the voters of Oklahoma City and created a partnership versus a scenario where they use the Mayor to threaten losing the team and sticking the tax payers with a $300M+ interest payment that could’ve been avoided.

However, I believe that’s the best course if you want to contribute nothing materially toward the financial burden and still maintain a ton of control over the design outcome.

[chssooner]

I certainly didn’t forget that and fully understand we have zero leverage.

It feels like we’re stuck in a crappy but fortunate situation, if that makes sense. I’m just disappointed with the chosen path to get this pushed through. It feels like they had 10+ years to formulate a plan and they decided on nearly zero transparency and riding off the success of MAPS. I feel like they should’ve had more faith in the voters of Oklahoma City and created a partnership versus a scenario where they use the Mayor to threaten losing the team and sticking the tax payers with a $300M+ interest payment that could’ve been avoided.

However, I believe that’s the best course if you want to contribute nothing materially toward the financial burden and still maintain a ton of control over the design outcome.

Oh, I agree. I wish our owners were more altruistic. It sucks that we are being fed a crap sandwich. It is unfortunately necessary to vote yes. Losing the Thunder would be very detrimental to OKC's image. Stealing a team, then losing it 15 years alter? Would be a very bad look.

Plus, a new arena is needed. The Paycom Center was a barebones build in 2002. Hard to add anything else, and can't fix the dock issues and logistical issues that keep OKC from having major concerts. The big stage and design shows go to Tulsa (see Bieber and Bad Bunny and U2 and others).

[April in the Plaza]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sacram...ation_attempts

Not really the same scenario. The Maloofs couldn't afford to run the team anymore in Sacramento, Not the same scenario at all. The mayor of Sacramento was a former NBA player, and used that, as well as another Sacramento billionaire to help convince the owners not to move. The Kings also never put a new arena option in front of voters or on the table.

Does OKC have these same pluses on their side? No. The Thunder are putting an effort in front of voters to build a new arena, which, if it does not pass, will be used aas evidence to the Board of Governors that the city doesn't support the team, the exact same way it as used to get the Thunder. Sacramento Kings have been there a lot longer than the Thunder have been here.

If you are banking on the NBA blocking the move, you will be gravely, gravely mistaken.

There’s a big difference, though, between blocking the move and telling the stakeholders to take another crack at a revised deal.

The State should absolutely be chipping in 300 or 400 million, and they almost certainly would in a 2024 revision. No reason for OKC Taxpayers to eat 100% of a **** Sandwich.

The deal we have right now feels like hero ball is being played - on the part of Holt and The Chamber. They should have asked The State for some help, but refused to do so for legacy purposes.

[chssooner]

There’s a big difference, though, between blocking the move and telling the stakeholders to take another crack at a revised deal.

The State should absolutely be chipping in 300 or 400 million, and they almost certainly would in a 2024 revision. No reason for OKC Taxpayers to eat 100% of a **** Sandwich.

The deal we have right now feels like hero ball is being played - on the part of Holt and The Chamber. They should have asked The State for some help, but refused to do so for legacy purposes.

Holt knows it wouldn't fly. No way the state would help. They don't want to find education, let alone an arena in OKC. We know how rural-centric the Oklahoma legislature is, and how Tulsa-centric our governor is. No way this would pass at the state level. OKC is thriving without any help from the state who keeps shipping quality jobs to Tulsa, because the governor is pro-Tulsa. No way he would sign something benefitting mostly OKC.

[Dob Hooligan]

Respectfully...

The NBA isn't the NFL, and we have no idea how their bylaws and rules are written.

The NBA has run the tightest ship in Major Sports for 40 years. I can't imagine they will break ranks now.

The NBA is not going to give up an expansion market. Take Seattle, Las Vegas and Louisville off the table.

Now, where is the Thunder going to go?

[citywokchinesefood]

Respectfully...

The NBA isn't the NFL, and we have no idea how their bylaws and rules are written.

The NBA has run the tightest ship in Major Sports for 40 years. I can't imagine they will break ranks now.

The NBA is not going to give up an expansion market. Take Seattle, Las Vegas and Louisville off the table.

Now, where is the Thunder going to go?

OKC being moved absolutely does not mean they give up an expansion market. OKC -> Seattle, the Supersonics return as an exciting young team to a city that has been dying to have Basketball return. The Las Vegas expansion franchise is an obvious no brainer and the second team could be more than a dozen other markets many of which have nicer arenas that are ready to go. We do not have the leverage as a city, and we especially don't have the leverage as a state or metro. The state will not pay for a dime of construction costs. No other city in the metro can even think about trying to fund an arena project at this scale.

[BDP]

Respectfully...

The NBA isn't the NFL, and we have no idea how their bylaws and rules are written.

The NBA has run the tightest ship in Major Sports for 40 years. I can't imagine they will break ranks now.

The NBA is not going to give up an expansion market. Take Seattle, Las Vegas and Louisville off the table.

Now, where is the Thunder going to go?

This is in context of expansion, but I imagine any of these cities would love to add an NBA team via relocation as well:

https://sports.betmgm.com/en/blog/nb...-without-team/

[Bill Robertson]

This is in context of expansion, but I imagine any of these cities would love to add an NBA team via relocation as well:

https://sports.betmgm.com/en/blog/nb...-without-team/

Vegas always seems to be able to pull off (buy) anything they want. I would think they would drool over getting a young, almost ready to compete team with a plan to get the rest of the way there vs getting an expansion team they have to build from the ground up. If the Thunder was offered I bet Vegas would work like crazy to figure out how to get them if they wanted to. Plus the value of the Thunder would increase quite a bit the moment the papers were signed.

[Dob Hooligan]

This is in context of expansion, but I imagine any of these cities would love to add an NBA team via relocation as well:

https://sports.betmgm.com/en/blog/nb...-without-team/

With the exception of Hartford-New Haven, every city listed has either direct NHL and/or 2 other league competition. Hartford is considered too close to Boston for a BIG 4 team. At least, it always has been, and was when the Whalers left for Raleigh in the late 1990s. Finding an arena that will provide a better stream than OKC already has is almost impossible if the city has an NHL tenant already. Add in competition from MLB or the NFL and the population base that can fund the NBA is slim. Next to none.

Then you have to figure out if the no league city has an unleased arena that could make more money than OKC already does. Again-next to none IMO.

[Anonymous.]

First game of the season is tonight in Chicago. I will be watching on Bally. I wonder if we will see YES campaign ads? Deadline for voter registration is November 17, so if they want to capture first-time voters - season start is a good time.