Paycom Center (formerly Chesapeake Arena)

[USSOklahoma]

Doubt if they will leak any plans until they are ready to more forward.

The ownership group and the city are in a good position to dictate what both groups want in terms of the arena's design and amenities to make this NBA specific and more concourse space. Selling this for voter approval $500 million (bonds or MAPS 4 extension) since the original plans proposed for the DT arena was to lure an NHL expansion franchise.

Paycom Center could be used more in conjunction with the new convention center and minor league ice hockey (?) to cater to groups in the 5,000 - 15,000 range.

The 4 square block site of Prairie Surf Media will save the city roughly $175 million in site acquisition and prep work--cost
for most new arenas just to lay the foundation.

OKC should aim to build a top five NBA facility on this site.

.

I would imagine the paycom would come down when the new area is built and they’d build some sort of “thunder alley” mixed use area with big screens and bars like ballpark village by Busch Stadium in St Louis or a small LA Live by Staples Center with some parking or something

[JDSooners]

Yay for cupholders! I've spilt one too many beers sitting under my seat over the years!

But what's the size of the cup holder? There's nothing more annoying then not being able to fit a 32 Oz collectors cup in the cup holder

[April in the Plaza]

Doubt if they will leak any plans until they are ready to more forward.

The ownership group and the city are in a good position to dictate what both groups want in terms of the arena's design and amenities to make this NBA specific and more concourse space. Selling this for voter approval $500 million (bonds or MAPS 4 extension) since the original plans proposed for the DT arena was to lure an NHL expansion franchise.

Paycom Center could be used more in conjunction with the new convention center and minor league ice hockey (?) to cater to groups in the 5,000 - 15,000 range.

The 4 square block site of Prairie Surf Media will save the city roughly $175 million in site acquisition and prep work--cost
for most new arenas just to lay the foundation.

OKC should aim to build a top five NBA facility on this site.

.

Getting into that category would take easily $1.5B, at minimum. Just don’t see that happening, at this point in the fed cycle, unless the ownership group decides to chip in some very big capital.

[Laramie]

With that timeline, hopefully bond funding would allow it to be constructed once approved and not wait to start until the $600 MM is in the bank. Because if it's funded through a MAPS type initiative, couldn't that take the time to completion out 10+ years? I'm just worried that, in the meantime, Paycom gets neglected. Or, maybe they are wanting to "tank" the arena, too, to get support for a new one. lol



Man, the price tags on those two examples are very far apart. $411 MM (in "2020 dollars", according to wiki) for Capitol One and $1.2 Billion for Fiserv. I'm assuming the Fiserv costs included some surrounding development?

I also think the Cox site can even better leverage the entertainment assets in Bricktown than Paycom currently does, if the design is conscious of it. Obviously, that's a challenge with the tracks being a physical divider. But, if properly integrated with the Santa Fe hub and into bricktown, it could have some nice benefits. If it interacts well with Myriad Gardens on one side and Santa Fe / Bricktown on the other, it would hopefully be more of a bridge between the two instead of the barrier on all sides that the cox site has been for 50 years.

Make a correction on Fiserv Forum, Milwaukee, it did include a surrounding development. The arena and parking garage cost $524 million--included--$250 million from taxpayers in various forms, $174 million from the team's owners and $100 million from former Sen. Herb Kohl.

It will be of interest to see what the combination of the $70 million put on pause and the 4-square block Prairie Surf Media site will
yield toward a new arena; $350 million (new funds), $70 million = ($420 million) and the site should make our new NBA arena better than 23 of the current 29 NBA arenas.

.

[chssooner]

I hate that we aren't expecting any capital inflow from the owners. Pathetic how our super-wealthy here don't care at all about this, except to milk the taxpayers as much as possible.

[Rover]

I hate that we aren't expecting any capital inflow from the owners. Pathetic how our super-wealthy here don't care at all about this, except to milk the taxpayers as much as possible.

Cynical and bitter much?

[chssooner]

Cynical and bitter much?

I just know how much the city has put into the Paycom, and not had a dime of help from the owners of the NBA team most of these improvements were for. I hope I am proven wrong, but I think the owners will put a tin bit in (less than 4%)

[MooreOrLess]

Cynical and bitter much?

I don't think it's bitter to be upset that the city is socializing the super wealthy owners of the Thunder with public funds

[Rover]

I don't think it's bitter to be upset that the city is socializing the super wealthy owners of the Thunder with public funds

Socialize wealthy owners. LOL.

There is no wonder that this state has struggled just to be below average economically, socially, culturally and educationally. There is huge resentment of success in this state.

[Jersey Boss]

Let 'em eat cake, eh?

[Soonerinfiniti]

I've heard that the Sistine Chapel exhibit is outstanding. You listen to headphones on an app and see life size panels. Something you would never get to see, even at the Vatican.

[CitySooner]

Socialize wealthy owners. LOL.

There is no wonder that this state has struggled just to be below average economically, socially, culturally and educationally. There is huge resentment of success in this state.

There is a ton of truth to this, but no one will want to admit it. Even if the owners dumped a bunch of money into the project - people would still find a way to badmouth them. Completely mind-boggling.

[Jersey Boss]

^ Wrong thread. Exhibit is not at Paycom

[chestercheetah]

The NBA Thunder franchise has an impact on this state as a whole; especially the two largest Oklahoma City-Tulsa media markets. IIRC there were 2,500 - 4,000 season ticket holders from the Tulsa MSA.

Tax payers who are going to foot the bill for the arena if bonds (September 2027 extension) and/or possibly an extension of MAPS funds used to finance the venue are primarily from the OKC area. Already have $70 million (growing interest) on pause. Also President's Biden's infrastructure bill may have funds for which cities qualify.

The Cox Convention Center site, if selected will save OKC at least $150 million on land and parking (950 spaces underneath; $300 million for a new arena total investment $520 million = $300 million bonds, $150 million Cox site & $70 million MAPS 4 funds on pause growing interest could be used to finance by extending the bonds for 3 years or more without extending MAPS 4 funds. We're going to be given a new life line to get this done right.

My preference is a blueprint similar to Capital One Center, Washington D. C., 20,000 seats. We can partisan off 1.500 seats if we don't need to use the full arena.

This sounds like a good plan. Prairie Surf may not think so lol.

[Rover]

Let 'em eat cake, eh?

Lol. Talk about apples and oranges.

[OKC Guy]

Lets look at this another way. We gave Costco $3m to build their northside store. When lookimg at the cost Costco invested thats a small percentage in comparision. IÂ’ve read about many projects here questioning us giving incentive money to help a new company come here. But the amounts we gave for various projects is small as a percentage of what the company is investing.

Now lets use same reasoning for Thunder. Why are taxpayers paying a manority of it? Whether money comes from fed or local we all pay taxes its still our money being spent not the owners. If the bulk of our other money awards are say 10% of their investment then we should use same percentage on Thunder and owners pay the rest. Thunder is still a business and their value appreciates every year. Although its not money in bank until sold it is real money thru appreciation. If they sold team they bank every cent not us. Look at what they paid and what their value is now. Its appreciated over $1b since then.

Imagine if we used that Thunder money as enticements to get new bisinesses to move here. $500m of taxpayer money would be a lot of new businesses to potentially sway. And our current arena is fine for where we stand in NBA circles. WeÂ’ve already invested lots of tax money into it now again? Will we pay Costco more money to rebuild their store in 20 years?

[BoulderSooner]

Lets look at this another way. We gave Costco $3m to build their northside store. When lookimg at the cost Costco invested thats a small percentage in comparision. IÂ’ve read about many projects here questioning us giving incentive money to help a new company come here. But the amounts we gave for various projects is small as a percentage of what the company is investing.

Now lets use same reasoning for Thunder. Why are taxpayers paying a manority of it? Whether money comes from fed or local we all pay taxes its still our money being spent not the owners. If the bulk of our other money awards are say 10% of their investment then we should use same percentage on Thunder and owners pay the rest. Thunder is still a business and their value appreciates every year. Although its not money in bank until sold it is real money thru appreciation. If they sold team they bank every cent not us. Look at what they paid and what their value is now. Its appreciated over $1b since then.

Imagine if we used that Thunder money as enticements to get new bisinesses to move here. $500m of taxpayer money would be a lot of new businesses to potentially sway. And our current arena is fine for where we stand in NBA circles. WeÂ’ve already invested lots of tax money into it now again? Will we pay Costco more money to rebuild their store in 20 years?

the thunder don't own the arena OKC does okc is building an arena for itself ... period .... because having concerts and events is good for OKC ..

[MooreOrLess]

Socialize wealthy owners. LOL.

There is no wonder that this state has struggled just to be below average economically, socially, culturally and educationally. There is huge resentment of success in this state.

I'm fine with people being successful. Giving those successful people public money that can be used elsewhere (such as on education and culture, as you pointed out) is what I have an issue with. It's odd to argue that the reason Oklahoma is behind other states is that we don't give rich people enough public funds.

[OKC Guy]

the thunder don't own the arena OKC does okc is building an arena for itself ... period .... because having concerts and events is good for OKC ..

Using your words the current arena is perfect for concerts and events. The only reason a new one is being discussed is for the Thunder, lets be honest here.

Since taxpayers foot 90% or more of arena cost (I think thats the rough figures but they could change or be off) yet team owners make millions if not billions from team valuations increasing - and yet when has a sold team paid back the city for even some of their investment. Teams use failure to build new arenas as a threat to leave as well.

I propose a new model. If OKC taxpayers foot the bill to build a new arena then we do a valuation of the team the 2 prior years of the new arena opening. If that average is $1.5b then we use that as a base. Then later on if the team ownership (more than 49.9%) changes hands we do a new 2 year valuation of the 2 prior years to selling. Lets just say in 2034 the ownership changes hands and the 2 year valuation average is $3.1b, thats our sold baseline.

What I propose is that OKC gets 50% of the increased valuation. In this scenario OKC would get half of $1.6b by the selling owners, so weÂ’d get $800m. We can then place that money in some type of trust to be used for a future arena or major modifications. The then new owner would not be on any hook unless we build another one way down the road.

My take is if we are going to invest so much tax money only to see owners make bank on valuation increases (and new arenas always super size new valuations) then the taxpayers should share in the extra value we added. This would satisfy any taxpayer about spending money knowing we have an investment and might help gain support for the tax and team as well. Current owners still make out due to the increased valuations more than cover what they pay us out if sold. Without a new arena their valuation still goes up but not nearly as much. And this clause protects taxpayers in case owner/s sells team and its moved.

[HOT ROD]

didn't the thunder ownership group pay some $360m to purchase the team and $40m+ to the city of Seattle to move them in summer 2008, well before 2012 lease with them was over? NONE of that money came from OKC or the state. Also consider that MOST of the thunder ownership also put up big bucks to get the Oklahoma City Hornets and host them from 2005-2007.

I'm not saying the ownership group shouldn't contribute to the new arena; but I did want to note that they aren't exactly skating by on socialist handouts from OKC either. And as was noted, OKC owns the facility not the ownership (they pay rent).

Lets look at this another way. We gave Costco $3m to build their northside store. When lookimg at the cost Costco invested thats a small percentage in comparision. IÂ’ve read about many projects here questioning us giving incentive money to help a new company come here. But the amounts we gave for various projects is small as a percentage of what the company is investing.

Now lets use same reasoning for Thunder. Why are taxpayers paying a manority of it? Whether money comes from fed or local we all pay taxes its still our money being spent not the owners. If the bulk of our other money awards are say 10% of their investment then we should use same percentage on Thunder and owners pay the rest. Thunder is still a business and their value appreciates every year. Although its not money in bank until sold it is real money thru appreciation. If they sold team they bank every cent not us. Look at what they paid and what their value is now. Its appreciated over $1b since then.

Imagine if we used that Thunder money as enticements to get new bisinesses to move here. $500m of taxpayer money would be a lot of new businesses to potentially sway. And our current arena is fine for where we stand in NBA circles. WeÂ’ve already invested lots of tax money into it now again? Will we pay Costco more money to rebuild their store in 20 years?

[HOT ROD]

This sounds like a good plan. Prairie Surf may not think so lol.

Prarie Surf leases the myriad and know their time will be over. This was an incubator deal that if successful would create a new industry sector in OKC. One would only assume that when OKC no longer renews their lease that Prarrie Surf will find other digs or build new, purpose-built facilities.

[Bellaboo]

IIRC, Prarie Surf has been mentioned on a possible location in Strawberry Fields ?

[BoulderSooner]

Using your words the current arena is perfect for concerts and events. The only reason a new one is being discussed is for the Thunder, lets be honest here.

Since taxpayers foot 90% or more of arena cost (I think thats the rough figures but they could change or be off) yet team owners make millions if not billions from team valuations increasing - and yet when has a sold team paid back the city for even some of their investment. Teams use failure to build new arenas as a threat to leave as well.

I propose a new model. If OKC taxpayers foot the bill to build a new arena then we do a valuation of the team the 2 prior years of the new arena opening. If that average is $1.5b then we use that as a base. Then later on if the team ownership (more than 49.9%) changes hands we do a new 2 year valuation of the 2 prior years to selling. Lets just say in 2034 the ownership changes hands and the 2 year valuation average is $3.1b, thats our sold baseline.

What I propose is that OKC gets 50% of the increased valuation. In this scenario OKC would get half of $1.6b by the selling owners, so weÂ’d get $800m. We can then place that money in some type of trust to be used for a future arena or major modifications. The then new owner would not be on any hook unless we build another one way down the road.

My take is if we are going to invest so much tax money only to see owners make bank on valuation increases (and new arenas always super size new valuations) then the taxpayers should share in the extra value we added. This would satisfy any taxpayer about spending money knowing we have an investment and might help gain support for the tax and team as well. Current owners still make out due to the increased valuations more than cover what they pay us out if sold. Without a new arena their valuation still goes up but not nearly as much. And this clause protects taxpayers in case owner/s sells team and its moved.

lol if you don't think the Thunder bring value to OKC then oppose the new arena .... the Thunder games are some of the events i am talking about .... there are 30 of these in the world and OKC is in the club ........ we don't have to be ..

[Rover]

Using your words the current arena is perfect for concerts and events. The only reason a new one is being discussed is for the Thunder, lets be honest here.

Since taxpayers foot 90% or more of arena cost (I think thats the rough figures but they could change or be off) yet team owners make millions if not billions from team valuations increasing - and yet when has a sold team paid back the city for even some of their investment. Teams use failure to build new arenas as a threat to leave as well.

I propose a new model. If OKC taxpayers foot the bill to build a new arena then we do a valuation of the team the 2 prior years of the new arena opening. If that average is $1.5b then we use that as a base. Then later on if the team ownership (more than 49.9%) changes hands we do a new 2 year valuation of the 2 prior years to selling. Lets just say in 2034 the ownership changes hands and the 2 year valuation average is $3.1b, thats our sold baseline.

What I propose is that OKC gets 50% of the increased valuation. In this scenario OKC would get half of $1.6b by the selling owners, so weÂ’d get $800m. We can then place that money in some type of trust to be used for a future arena or major modifications. The then new owner would not be on any hook unless we build another one way down the road.

My take is if we are going to invest so much tax money only to see owners make bank on valuation increases (and new arenas always super size new valuations) then the taxpayers should share in the extra value we added. This would satisfy any taxpayer about spending money knowing we have an investment and might help gain support for the tax and team as well. Current owners still make out due to the increased valuations more than cover what they pay us out if sold. Without a new arena their valuation still goes up but not nearly as much. And this clause protects taxpayers in case owner/s sells team and its moved.

Why worry. Since you think the arena is so valuable, I’m sure if the Thunder left there would be so many other world class organizations move to fill it up. The Thunder doesn’t bring value to OKC anyway, right? And we would still have the asset which is really their value driver right? Lol

[Laramie]

Hometown owners make a big difference because they are invested in the city in which they live.

The owners have not publicly threatened to sell or move. If they did want to sell, I can think of a few places off the top of my head that
would love to be in OKC's position like Austin, Virginia Beach-Norfolk, Louisville, Richmond & Tulsa (Cities wanting to crack into the big leagues) and others like San Diego (MLB Padres) & St. Louis (MLB Cardinals), who want to add one more big league franchise to their portfolio.

Ownership's investment in a new arena would signal their commitment to long term viability of the franchise, it's not paramount. A new arena will be owned by the City for as long as it remains. Our Thunder CEO Clay Bennett has a grown son named Graham Bennett and two grown daughters Christine & Mollie. This franchise could be in OKC for another 20-30 years if handed down to his children if they wanted to embrace that mantle. Now let's not forget that their are other owners besides the CEO who have vested interest as well.

Our market current has 1.5 million (700,000 city)--projected to reach 1.7 million come 2030 and 2 million in 2040; that could change dramatically as the city evolves.