Yes and they are as scummy as the timeshare companies.
https://www.aarp.org/money/scams-fra...hare-exit.html
Yes and they are as scummy as the timeshare companies.
https://www.aarp.org/money/scams-fra...hare-exit.html
The new arena still boosts the value of the franchise significantly and they get the ticket sales and a substantial cut of the concessions/merchandise, etc. The new arena will absolutely be a massive money making venue for the Thunder ownership, even though they don't own it. In fact, owning the arena itself is a net loss for the city, as the current Paycom data shows.
7pm needs to get here - feeling anxious!
A few pages back I broke it down, but that is highly unlikely based on the last 30 years of big 4 relocation history. The average age of the stadium/arena for the last 16 times a franchise has moved is 31.5 years.
Again, there are reasonable arguments against this, you’ve made a few of them, but the team relocating in under 20-25 years into a lease on a brand new purpose built arena isn’t one of them. If this is approved they will be here until at least 2050 barring a massive implosion and sustained downturn of the local economy. And frankly it would be difficult for me to envision the league allowing a team to leave if the city has consistently supported spending large sums of public funds on the team especially when that includes recently approving a $1 billion new arena.
If this fails because "I don't want to support a bunch of rich guys" this will happen.
The rich guys make multiple times what they paid for the team when they sell it to someone who moves it somewhere else. So they make a killing and no longer have whatever headaches come with owning an NBA franchise.
They win.
All of the money coming into the city coffers and the worldwide notability OKC has gained by having an NBA team is gone.
OKC loses.
So this not passing is a ridiculous option to keep from "supporting" the rich guys. It's cutting off your nose to spite your face.
I definitely agree that it's not likely, and despite my badmouthing of ownership I genuinely believe they are approaching this in good faith with the intent of honoring the lease and the time. I just wanted to caution against viewing this as a guarantee that they're here until 2050. New ownership, local or national economic dynamics or other things could make moving before then enticing, even with a significant fine.
Just voted no on the east side. An incredibly low turn out though. Only 140 people had voted as we all know the vote was scheduled in December for a reason.
Just voted Yes at the buzzer lol
And Here. We. Goooooooooo.
Arena vote 'Yes' leads 68% (3,766) to 32% (1,781) early results from KFOR-TV - 7:10 p.m.
Here is the live polling straight from the Oklahoma State Election board: https://results.okelections.us/OKER/?elecDate=20231212
You will need to click on the "Local" tab for the OKC Arena Proposition.
Things can change, but those early and absentee results sure are promising! Especially considering this is a low turnout election. It's not like we'll see another 500,000 votes.
The county data I mentioned must’ve been an error because it’s gone entirely now
Put the ponies in the barn. This one is over. Yes wins.
Yes is going to win.
Now get pumped for the world class arena we’re about to embark on building.
Using the same accounting method, parks are a net loss, public transportation investments are a net loss, investment in Olympic events are (will be) a net loss, etc.
Under that accounting, Paycom data doesn't show grossly more of a net loss than most any other civic operations.
It does show more revenue, though.
Good job, OKC! Better shows, concerts, and most importantly Thunder basketball for far into the future.
Duplicate
There are currently 17 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 17 guests)
Bookmarks