Paycom Center (formerly Chesapeake Arena)

[Rover]

Not necessarily. It is okay to have nice things for no other reason than having nice things and I would be fine with an addition to the current facility especially when tied to real limitations on attracting other performances.

If sufficient loading dock space is a problem there is plenty of room to add more. If more space is needed for pre/post event activities there is plenty of room to add it.

As for this proposal, if the Thunder didn't exist what improvements would be needed? Let the City pay for those. For improvements that primarily benefit the Thunder, let them pay for that. If in X years they decide to walk away ftom their investment then that is a business decision for them to make. It certainly doesn't stop them from telling the taxpayers to do that be imploding the current arena.

If the Thunder want to build a giant mixed use complex, there is vacant land right across the street.

And it seems to me the proposal WILL include a private portion from the Thunder ownership, though I’m sure you’ll say it isn’t enough.

[caaokc]

Anyone have an idea of how much Thunder ownership is chipping in?

[Pete]

Anyone have an idea of how much Thunder ownership is chipping in?

We don't know any details at this point.

I imagine we'll get very broad strokes from the mayor in July, and then in the fall there will be a campaign with the particulars for a December vote.

[PhiAlpha]

Yes, other cities don't value pro sports teams, which is why all of them gladly pay for arenas and stadiums over and over again.

This is the way pro sports work. It's okay to not like that system but it's absurd to try and denigrate OKC for following common practice.

And we’ve seen first hand what happens when a city decides not to pay for an arena….which is the only reason we have a team in the first place.

[PoliSciGuy]

Yes, other cities don't value pro sports teams, which is why all of them gladly pay for arenas and stadiums over and over again.

This is becoming increasingly untrue. Tempe just voted to not fund a new stadium for the Coyotes. Oakland refused to meet the A's demands for massive funding for a new stadium and now the A's are having a hard time securing public funding for a move to Vegas. San Diego rejected funding a new stadium for the Chargers. Milwaukee just a couple weeks ago rejected putting more money in the Brewers' stadium.

Cities all over the US are becoming much more aware of the fact that public money for stadiums is an economically losing proposition, as countless studies show:

https://econreview.berkeley.edu/the-...profit-margin/

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/...093/cep/byi033

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers....act_id=4022547

It is not absurd to try to hold OKC to that standard or to decry the lost opportunity cost that the money being thrown at the Paycom Center could be much better utilized towards countless other issues this city faces.

[PhiAlpha]

I guess OKC still has a long way to go in the self-esteem category if the value of the City still hinges on a professional sports team. I was sort of thinking we had moved beyond that but I guess not.

Anyhow, like I said, I'm well aware I'm in the minority.

Man I wish all of us pathetic, corporation worshiping Okies had the kind of self esteem and self respect that the utopian urban oasis of Oakland does. It’s so much better off now without the 3 teams it just lost.

[PhiAlpha]

This is becoming increasingly untrue. Tempe just voted to not fund a new stadium for the Coyotes. Oakland refused to meet the A's demands for massive funding for a new stadium and now the A's are having a hard time securing public funding for a move to Vegas. San Diego rejected funding a new stadium for the Chargers. Milwaukee just a couple weeks ago rejected putting more money in the Brewers' stadium.

Cities all over the US are becoming much more aware of the fact that public money for stadiums is an economically losing proposition, as countless studies show:

https://econreview.berkeley.edu/the-...profit-margin/

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/...093/cep/byi033

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers....act_id=4022547

It is not absurd to try to hold OKC to that standard or to decry the lost opportunity cost that the money being thrown at the Paycom Center could be much better utilized towards countless other issues this city faces.

And how many of those cities lost or are in the middle of losing those teams? Oakland has done it 3 times.

[PoliSciGuy]

So they lost their teams....yet they continue to do just fine. San Diego seems to be a decent place, the Phoenix metro area will survive not having a hockey team, Oakland can pour the $200m the A's wanted into other projects... Believe it or not, cities keep existing and even grow without a pro sports team or two. Economically, investing in these arenas at the expense of shoring up other areas just makes no sense.

[PhiAlpha]

So they lost their teams....yet they continue to do just fine. San Diego seems to be a decent place, the Phoenix metro area will survive not having a hockey team, Oakland can pour the $200m the A's wanted into other projects... Believe it or not, cities keep existing and even grow without a pro sports team or two. Economically, investing in these arenas at the expense of shoring up other areas just makes no sense.

Sure and all of them have a little more going on amenities-wise than OKC does.

People who don’t care that much about sports don’t care about losing the teams. You’ve made it clear that you’re one of those people.

[Just the facts]

Sure and all of them have a little more going on amenities-wise than OKC does.

People who don’t care that much about sports don’t care about losing the teams. You’ve made it clear that you’re one of those people.

How many amenities could OKC build for $1 billion?

[PoliSciGuy]

...Oakland has more amenities than OKC?

It seems like every week Pete is posting about some new amenity or attraction opening up in the OKC area, be it the Andretti Go Kart facility, the massive Okana resort, the expansion of the zoo, etc. And if amenities are an issue, we can use some of the funds we'd waste on Paycom and further expand offerings along the waterfront or up in the Adventure District.

OKC would survive just fine without the Thunder, and will continue to grow. Heck, investing that money in better infrastructure or infill or housing would be a better ROI than trying to keep the Thunder here. Businesses and people aren't moving here to watch SGA in person (though he's definitely fun to watch).

[PhiAlpha]

...Oakland has more amenities than OKC?

It seems like every week Pete is posting about some new amenity or attraction opening up in the OKC area, be it the Andretti Go Kart facility, the massive Okana resort, the expansion of the zoo, etc. And if amenities are an issue, we can use some of the funds we'd waste on Paycom and further expand offerings along the waterfront or up in the Adventure District.

OKC would survive just fine without the Thunder, and will continue to grow. Heck, investing that money in better infrastructure or infill or housing would be a better ROI than trying to keep the Thunder here. Businesses and people aren't moving here to watch SGA in person (though he's definitely fun to watch).

Oakland is close to San Francisco, the ocean, mountains, etc…yes it absolutely does.

we get it. You two don’t enjoy sports. Fortunately you’re not the ones making the decisions. Hell Kerry doesn’t even live here anymore.

[Jersey Boss]

And we’ve seen first hand what happens when a city decides not to pay for an arena….which is the only reason we have a team in the first place.

It is not binary choice of either or. Only 4 NBA teams including the Thunder play in arenas 100% financed by the public.

[PhiAlpha]

It is not binary choice of either or. Only 4 NBA teams including the Thunder play in arenas 100% financed by the public.

I agree with you. I think the thunder should put some money into it but going full stop the other direction and acting like it’s some corporate scam if they don’t pay for 100% of it is ridiculous.

[Jersey Boss]

I agree with you. I think the thunder should put some money into it but going full stop the other direction and acting like they should pay for 100% of it is ridiculous.

SLC a similar NBA market as OKC play in an arena funded publicly 18% .

[PoliSciGuy]

Oakland is close to San Francisco, the ocean, mountains, etc…yes it absolutely does.

we get it. You two don’t enjoy sports. Fortunately you’re not the ones making the decisions. Hell Kerry doesn’t even live here anymore.

I love sports, I'm a huge baseball fan and love taking my boys to Thunder games. I even literally said in the post you quoted that I really like watching SGA in person. That doesn't mean that I want the city to make a terrible monetary decision just so I can continue to do so.

[PhiAlpha]

SLC a similar NBA market as OKC play in an arena funded publicly 18% .

I think that definitely helps set the precedent for getting them to chip in. I wondered what other small market single team cities had done.

[BoulderSooner]

ask arlington if they think paying for sports facilities is worth it ??

or Cobb county georgia ??

[Jersey Boss]

I think that definitely helps set the precedent for getting them to chip in. I wondered what other small market single team cities had done.

At Phoenix.gov is where I got my info. Go to the site and search "NBA Arenas" and it will take you to a pdf with a listing breakdown of teams, arenas, and source of funding for said arenas.

[Just the facts]

The arena in Salt Lake City is privately owned by Ryan Smith, part owner of the Jazz.

[Just the facts]

If the owners do kick in money lets hope it in't like the sham Devon pulled by loaning the money to the City and then getting paid back by TIF funds with interest.

[PhiAlpha]

I love sports, I'm a huge baseball fan and love taking my boys to Thunder games. I even literally said in the post you quoted that I really like watching SGA in person. That doesn't mean that I want the city to make a terrible monetary decision just so I can continue to do so.

If you’re so concerned with forcing the owners of the team to pay for 100% of the building that you would rather let the thunder walk than have some public funding be used then it doesn’t matter how much you enjoy watching SGA…you aren’t much of a sports person.

[PoliSciGuy]

If you’re so concerned with forcing the owners of the team to pay for 100% of the building that you would rather let the thunder walk than have some public funding be used then it doesn’t matter how much you enjoy watching SGA…you aren’t much of a sports person.

I'd be ok with some funding, like Swake's 18% find seems reasonable. But believe it or not, someone can be a sports fan while also having strong principles about not giving public money to incredibly wealthy individuals.

[PhiAlpha]

If the owners do kick in money lets hope it in't like the sham Devon pulled by loaning the money to the City and then getting paid back by TIF funds with interest.

Yes because the end result of a completely remade park that went from being constantly empty to packed on a daily basis and the massive investment that turned two 30 year parking lots into their headquarters wasn’t worth it at all.

[PhiAlpha]

I'd be ok with some funding, like Swake's 18% find seems reasonable. But believe it or not, someone can be a sports fan while also having strong principles about not giving public money to incredibly wealthy individuals.

For all bookings…what percentage of the time is the arena used by the thunder vs other events?

No…you’re not much of a sports fan if you’re willing to allow your “strong principles” to kill off the only professional franchise we’ll ever have.