Paycom Center (formerly Chesapeake Arena)

[Pete]

It's important to point out that this is possible because that Arena was built with bigger "Back stage" staging. A new OKC arena should be able to do more also.

That arena actually opened in 1999, a couple of years before Paycom.

I'm sure best practices for multi-purpose arenas have only improved.

[chssooner]

That arena actually opened in 1999, a couple of years before Paycom.

I'm sure best practices for multi-purpose arenas have only improved.

I hope so. The Ford Center was a.very, VERY bare bones build-out. The new arena needs to be state of the art.

[BDP]

It's important to point out that this is possible because that Arena was built with bigger "Back stage" staging. A new OKC arena should be able to do more also.

Exactly.

More than just being a nice new place for the Thunder to play, it should be able to handle that type of schedule, especially given the price tag that will come with a new arena.

IMO, that's the real justification for breaking new ground.

Obviously, this isn't LA, but if hundreds of millions of dollars are to be spent, we don't want a venue that is turning down bookings because of logistics.

[April in the Plaza]

So is this the new stadium going to be MAPS 5 or a separate deal altogether?

[Just the facts]

Am I the only one that doesn't see this happening? We are talking $1 to 1.5 billion to essentially get some more loading docks. Meanwhile, there is entire strip of unused land right next to the arena and right across the street from it.

[BoulderSooner]

Am I the only one that doesn't see this happening? We are talking $1 to 1.5 billion to essentially get some more loading docks. Meanwhile, there is entire strip of unused land right next to the arena and right across the street from it.

a new arena is 100% going to happen and the vote will about 99% pass with 55+ % of the vote .. at about 750+ mil of public money

[April in the Plaza]

Am I the only one that doesn't see this happening? We are talking $1 to 1.5 billion to essentially get some more loading docks. Meanwhile, there is entire strip of unused land right next to the arena and right across the street from it.

I'm thinking it will be more like "Fiserv Forum meets OAK OKC."

The whole powerblock will be dense AF, and there will be a lot of mixed uses. Could definitely be a McCormick & Schmick's and an Orange Julius that sneak in there, if Clay plays his cards right.

[Just the facts]

If loading docks is the issue there is more than enough room for expansion at the current location and it will cost a fraction of the price of a new arena.

[caaokc]

If loading docks is the issue there is more than enough room for expansion at the current location and it won't cost a fraction of the price of a new arena.

That doesn’t change the fact that it’s the smallest arena by square footage.

[Just the facts]

That doesn’t change the fact that it’s the smallest arena by square footage.

Explain to me the significance of the sq footage. The basketball court is the same size.

[jdross1982]

Explain to me the significance of the sq footage. The basketball court is the same size.

More sq footage, the more restaurants, shops, concessions, overall more revenue. More before and after experiences that will only draw more fans. It is a huge deal and not simply fixed by adding more loading docks. That is only 1 piece of the puzzle and sq ft is a large portion of the rest of the pieces along with actually building an NBA quality arena.

[Just the facts]

More sq footage, the more restaurants, shops, concessions, overall more revenue. More before and after experiences that will only draw more fans. It is a huge deal and not simply fixed by adding more loading docks. That is only 1 piece of the puzzle and sq ft is a large portion of the rest of the pieces along with actually building an NBA quality arena.

So if the current building was expanded over the current and new loading docks with new space added along Oklahoma Ave wouldn't that accomplish the same thing? The current location is not short on space.

[chssooner]

So if the current building was expanded over the current and new loading docks with new space added along Oklahoma Ave wouldn't that accomplish the same thing? The current location is not short on space.

Cost-benefit, my man. Paycom is a bare-bones arena. It was not built as an NBA arena in 2002. The concourses are narrow, compared to other arenas. The concession apace is lacking. The backstage and staging areas are super small, hence why a lot of concerts go to Tulsa over OKC. It is basically at max capacity for expansion, unless you do an MSG-level gutting (guess what that cost?).

So a new arena can solve every single one of those problems.

[Just the facts]

Is that worth not only the $1 billion in new spending but also throwing away the money already spent?

Anyhow, I recognize I'm in the minority on the subject on OKCTalk but I suspect this isn't going to be an easy sell to the general public. Don't be surprised if OKC pulls a Nashville and approve taxpayer subsidies despite overwhelming public disapproval.

[chssooner]

Is that worth not only the $1 billion in new spending but also throwing away the money already spent?

Anyhow, I recognize I'm in the minority on the subject on OKCTalk but I suspect this isn't going to be an easy sell to the general public. Don't be surprised if OKC pulls a Nashville and approve taxpayer subsidies despite overwhelming public disapproval.

Again, you are way off. The city has supported the Thunder at every turn, and will again.

[Anonymous.]

The problem isn't the loading docks only. The place needs more and better suites, better concession setup, attached hotel. The modern NBA arena has tons of highroller amenities, and Paycom just can't work to fit all those things.

[OkieinGeorgia]

Is that worth not only the $1 billion in new spending but also throwing away the money already spent?

Anyhow, I recognize I'm in the minority on the subject on OKCTalk but I suspect this isn't going to be an easy sell to the general public. Don't be surprised if OKC pulls a Nashville and approve taxpayer subsidies despite overwhelming public disapproval.

You sound exactly like Seattle Sonics fans with regards to the Key Arena. How'd that work out for them? lol. It's the cost of doing business now. And, there isn't really any argument about the impact the Thunder has had on OKC over the last decade. Not building a more competitive arena for a small market team that has shown it's always going to do what is necessary to give the city a team competitive at the highest levels would be pure folly.

[Pete]

And it's not just about a much better arena, it's about the opportunity to develop something special and cool all around it on the Cox site.

That old Thunder Alley project was unimpressive because they had so little space to work with.


This will be a public vote and it will pass overwhelmingly.

[FighttheGoodFight]

I would love to see the games broadcasted OTA (over the air) in Oklahoma area. I think if the public helps fund it we should be able to get the games on OTA. I know media rights for games are complicated but the Suns are the first to try this out.

[BDP]

Is that worth not only the $1 billion in new spending but also throwing away the money already spent?

I guess that depends on how much stock you put in economic impact studies.

Estimates for the economic impact of Thunder home games are generally in the 1.3 to 1.6 million range. That would come to about 800 million to a little over a billion in impact over the last 15 years the team has been in OKC. And that's just for the thunder.

Add in all the other shows and events that use the facility, and the impact would be well over a billion dollars over that time. From that perspective it's not throwing away money as much as it is re-investing it.

[Rover]

Explain to me the significance of the sq footage. The basketball court is the same size.

Hey, just have them play at one of the outdoor courts. It's the same size and has two baskets ... and WAY cheaper. LOL. And it would make OKC look SO responsible and cool. Who needs public buildings or things that can showcase the city? Cheap and utilitarian is the way to go. Nothing says OKC better than a little outdated public venue.

[BDP]

"I think you'll find that's the exact same measurements as our gym back in Hickory."

[Laramie]

Cost-benefit, my man. Paycom is a bare-bones arena. It was not built as an NBA arena in 2002. The concourses are narrow, compared to other arenas. The concession apace is lacking. The backstage and staging areas are super small, hence why a lot of concerts go to Tulsa over OKC. It is basically at max capacity for expansion, unless you do an MSG-level gutting (guess what that cost?).

So a new arena can solve every single one of those problems.

^ ^ ^ Definitely a bare bones when built. It would look like a 'Frankenstein Project' if you tried to expand it--wouldn't be cost efficient to attempt to expand it because you couldn't take out major walls and beams support without causing structural concerns with the arena.

A new arena on the 4 square block super site with room to sell parcels of that development site. Sure there's the cost of demolition and rebuilding the underground parking, let's get this right. A new state-of-the-art arena will cost anywhere from $750 million to $1.2 billion on city owned land. We want to have one of the best venues in the country.

[Jersey Boss]

You sound exactly like Seattle Sonics fans with regards to the Key Arena. How'd that work out for them? lol. It's the cost of doing business now. And, there isn't really any argument about the impact the Thunder has had on OKC over the last decade. Not building a more competitive arena for a small market team that has shown it's always going to do what is necessary to give the city a team competitive at the highest levels would be pure folly.

It worked out quite well for the Seattle taxpayers and those opposed to welfare for deep pocketed owners.
Seattle will have a $1.15 B facility that was privately financed, a new successful NHL franchise as well as the next NBA expansion team.

[chssooner]

It worked out quite well for the Seattle taxpayers and those opposed to welfare for deep pocketed owners.
Seattle will have a $1.15 B facility that was privately financed, a new successful NHL franchise as well as the next NBA expansion team.

Comparing Seattle to OKC isn't a fair comparison.

And it took them losing a team to get that level of investment. If you want OKC to lose the Thunder in order to get that level of buy-in, then by all means, vote no.