New Downtown Arena

[PokeFromOk]

the owners don't want the team to move from OKC ..

Agree, these owners do not want the team to move. But, if there are potential issues with their long-term investment over revenue concerns they can and would at least consider selling their investment.

[PokeFromOk]

^

Not ignoring anything.

Please show me a deal for another NBA arena where a City provided anywhere near in $1 billion in public funding. Nothing is even close.

Each deal is unique, this situation is unique. Benchmarks are helpful at times, but this isn't an easy situation to benchmark. We have the Thunder due to a unique circumstance.

[April in the Plaza]

While this may be true, the risk reward for this not passing is extraordinary.

Do the owners have all the leverage? Absolutely. Is there anything we can do about that? No.

There are no "second chances" at these things. No magical better deal is just going to appear (from okc). Who it will appear from is 10+ other markets that want an NBA team and may already have the necessary arena. Offers to buy the team will flood in just as the league expansion windfall hits. Jumps in team valuations will never be stronger.

So I ask again, is the risk worth the reward? We can be the next major city and continue growing, or another Louisville or Wichita or Columbus.

And if you have an issue with an extension of a 1c penny tax while we are one of the least tax burdened states thats just on you (not you specifically pete, in general). I can guarantee you the public outcry will be far louder once sale rumors hit news cycles and billionaires are lining up with offers. But hey - if you want to stick it to these ultra wealthy individuals then go for it. It will only hurt us more at the end of the day.

Columbus has NHL, MLS, a world class university, and has been growing faster than OKC (on a total GDP basis) since the Thunder arrived in OKC.

[PokeFromOk]

The NBA hates moving teams. Last time was Seattle 15 years ago. And that was mainly about Seattle having stadium fatigue from building a new baseball stadium, football stadium, and overhaul of Key arena in the previous decade-ish. Plus Howard Schultz decided the Key Arean makeover was inferior after 6 years and decided to bail.

The NBA worked overtime to keep the Kings in Sacramento, the Hornets in Charlotte and the Pelicans in New Orleans. They need teams in different cities. They like, and have been very successful, being the only game in town.

If it was so easy to sell and move a team, then the Thunder ownership would sell today for $4 billion to one of the expansion groups who would then move to the Gold Mine Towns of Seattle or Las Vegas, as Bill Simmons would have you believe.

If you think the NBA would rather have a team in OKC over Vegas right now then you aren't paying attention to the what is currently happening and the potential dollars. The NBA is placing the new mid-season tournament in Vegas and has made summer league in Vegas a revenue generator. Also, Las Vegas is primed and ready for a team (likely through expansion but could also take an existing team), so much so that LeBron and others have already voiced interest in ownership because everyone is acutely aware of how much money will be made by having a team in Vegas.

[PoliSciGuy]

Each deal is unique, this situation is unique. Benchmarks are helpful at times, but this isn't an easy situation to benchmark. We have the Thunder due to a unique circumstance.

Just because it's "unique" (which is itself debatable) doesn't mean that we have to take whatever sort of deal was opaquely agreed to behind closed doors. The team is asking for an historic amount of public money with 0 transparency or details. The skepticism here is entirely warranted.

[shai2022]

Just because it's "unique" (which is itself debatable) doesn't mean that we have to take whatever sort of deal was opaquely agreed to behind closed doors. The team is asking for an historic amount of public money with 0 transparency or details. The skepticism here is entirely warranted.

I don't disagree necessarily that skepticism is warranted... I think people are simply underrating the risks if this not passing first go around and overvaluing their idea of a "better deal". The owners were never going to pay for 100% of this, not 50%, not 20%. So say they offered up 100m instead of 50m? What about 200m? Would the public funding 900m vs 750m really change your stance on this? There is absolutely nothing stopping them from exploring their options and finding a WAY better deal for themselves than this would be (whether they sell or simply move the team). There is a new NBA ready arena just a couple hundred miles north in KC and you know they are salivating over this.

[chssooner]

Imagine people complaining this much about something that will increase tourism, sales and hotel/motel tax revenue, and keep OKC on people's minds because of the continuance of a tax, not even a new one. That's my biggest thing. If this was a new tax, sure, I could grt being upset. But it isn't.

I do want to see the lease agreement. If OKC gets to keep revenue from all events not Thunder-related, then it will help OKC greatly (which is what their current lease is). OKC will experience an increase in shows and events, just like Fort Worth has with their arena. I'm not saying this is the best deal ever for OKC, but it isn't the worst, by any means.

All that to say, I will be voting yes, because of the long-term benefits this will have for OKC.

[OKC_Chipper]

For those of you who think the ownership group will come back to the negotiating table. It’s this or nothing.

“OKC will not get a better deal than what’s currently on the table. In fact, that would result in a bidding war where other cities across the country can present the Thunder with proposals. The price would then go up for OKC to retain the team.”

https://x.com/gabeikard/status/17027...kYw9MU0WDC2nVg

[BoulderSooner]

Imagine people complaining this much about something that will increase tourism, sales and hotel/motel tax revenue, and keep OKC on people's minds because of the continuance of a tax, not even a new one. That's my biggest thing. If this was a new tax, sure, I could grt being upset. But it isn't.

I do want to see the lease agreement. If OKC gets to keep revenue from all events not Thunder-related, then it will help OKC greatly (which is what their current lease is). OKC will experience an increase in shows and events, just like Fort Worth has with their arena. I'm not saying this is the best deal ever for OKC, but it isn't the worst, by any means.

All that to say, I will be voting yes, because of the long-term benefits this will have for OKC.

the mayor has now said on twitter that the new lease will be consistent with the current thunder lease just much longer ..

[PoliSciGuy]

For those of you who think the ownership group will come back to the negotiating table. It’s this or nothing.

“OKC will not get a better deal than what’s currently on the table. In fact, that would result in a bidding war where other cities across the country can present the Thunder with proposals. The price would then go up for OKC to retain the team.”

https://x.com/gabeikard/status/17027...kYw9MU0WDC2nVg

This is called "posturing" and is a common tactic in negotiation. Besides, I have been told many times in this thread how great and devoted this ownership is to this city so I'm sure it's just a bluff. It's not like they're greedy.

[shai2022]

It may be posturing but it's also factual...

[Jake]

We’ll be paying more than Buffalo has to pay for their new 63,000 seat NFL stadium. What a disaster haha

[Laramie]

Any vote for a new arena will also be a vote to keep the Thunder.

We're going to need to replace Paycom Arena, so why not go ahead and build a new arena now while we have an anchor tenant committed to being here until 2050 if we build.

You can bet that if this arena is voted down, the franchise will be sold, relocated and probably not asked to pay a dime toward relocation fees. Seattle, Las Vegas and Louisville are licking their apoco-lips.

Build an arena that will be a centerpiece in our city; a venue capable of attracting NCAA Wrestling finals, Women's Basketball & Volleyball finals and Men's BB quarterfinals. More events we are able to secure, the more hotels we will attract with some current potential expansions.

[chssooner]

We’ll be paying more than Buffalo has to pay for their new 63,000 seat NFL stadium. What a disaster haha

Yeah, instead, people in Brooklyn will be paying for a stadium they won't be withing 5 hours of. Ever. We aren't getting the state involved in paying for this like the Bills are.

[Jake]

Yeah, instead, people in Brooklyn will be paying for a stadium they won't be withing 5 hours of. Ever. We aren't getting the state involved in paying for this like the Bills are.

This is a horrible deal regardless. The citizens are paying the full brunt of this. Ownership is giving less than what the Bengals did for Paul Brown Stadium and that’s considered one of the worst stadium deals ever. We can only hope the Thunder don’t have a “state of the art” clause like they have. Not like they’d ever share it with the public, anyway.

[FighttheGoodFight]

For those of you who think the ownership group will come back to the negotiating table. It’s this or nothing.

“OKC will not get a better deal than what’s currently on the table. In fact, that would result in a bidding war where other cities across the country can present the Thunder with proposals. The price would then go up for OKC to retain the team.”

https://x.com/gabeikard/status/17027...kYw9MU0WDC2nVg

Isn't Gabe married to the daughter of a Thunder owner?

[April in the Plaza]

Isn't Gabe married to the daughter of a Thunder owner?

That’s correct. He’s trying to save Bill Cameron a few million for sure.

[Teo9969]

Listen, if little changes between now and the vote, I will vote "No", because the only thing that has been sold here is fear and hope. These are bad reasons to tie down over a billion dollars of public funds.

If it doesn't pass, it serves Mayor Holt right. If it does pass, then I'm not going to bemoan the vote, I'm going to hope that what is presented ends up being a tenable deal in the long run and then I'm going to hope PBC does not sell to any sort of majority to out of state ownership.

Assuming the team stays for 25 years, this will end up being a break even situation financially, but it will come at a cost of other public works projects. If they leave before 20, or bend us over on the lease, this is an unmitigated disaster.

The city also should be dangling the deal in front of the state given that the Thunder is generating at least $30M+ annually for the state. $150M would be a fair ask from the state.

[PhiAlpha]

This is called "posturing" and is a common tactic in negotiation. Besides, I have been told many times in this thread how great and devoted this ownership is to this city so I'm sure it's just a bluff. It's not like they're greedy.

It may be posturing but it also is logically what’s going to happen if it fails. Doesn’t mean they’ll sell the team to the highest bidder or that the team will move…but if this fails, they will be fielding offers from anyone and everyone who wants a team.

[chssooner]

It's obvious that people are Gibraltar on this, and no one will change their minds unless the Thunder pay for more than 40% of the arena. Going from 5% to 40% will never happen, just like people like PoliSci will never be in support of the city paying for an arena.

[PhiAlpha]

Listen, if little changes between now and the vote, I will vote "No", because the only thing that has been sold here is fear and hope. These are bad reasons to tie down over a billion dollars of public funds.

If it doesn't pass, it serves Mayor Holt right. If it does pass, then I'm not going to bemoan the vote, I'm going to hope that what is presented ends up being a tenable deal in the long run and then I'm going to hope PBC does not sell to any sort of majority to out of state ownership.

Assuming the team stays for 25 years, this will end up being a break even situation financially, but it will come at a cost of other public works projects. If they leave before 20, or bend us over on the lease, this is an unmitigated disaster.

The city also should be dangling the deal in front of the state given that the Thunder is generating at least $30M+ annually for the state. $150M would be a fair ask from the state.

What numbers are you using to estimate that it will break even over 25 years?

[PhiAlpha]

That’s correct. He’s trying to save Bill Cameron a few million for sure.

That’s not really fair. He’s been a massive fan of the team for most of his life and before he married his wife. He might just like the proposal or not to open the chance that the team might leave…which are the prevailing thoughts of those here who have indicated that they’ll vote yes.

[Laramie]

What are we're going to do when the franchise up and leaves. We won't have an anchor tenant and there won't be any need to build a new arena.

Our city will lose its biggest 'quality of life' attractions that receives national attention during the NBA season. IMO would be equivalent to losing the WCWS event. We expanded HOF stadium--now the most expensive and largest Softball park in the World.

We lost the NFR because the Myriad's 11,200 were inadequate and LV arena seated 16,000; let's keep our Thunder. One of five small markets (Milwaukee (MLB, NBA), OKC, Memphis, New Orleans (NFL, NBA) and Salt Lake City).

[BoulderSooner]

This is a horrible deal regardless. The citizens are paying the full brunt of this. Ownership is giving less than what the Bengals did for Paul Brown Stadium and that’s considered one of the worst stadium deals ever. We can only hope the Thunder don’t have a “state of the art” clause like they have. Not like they’d ever share it with the public, anyway.

football stadiums used 16-20 times a year vs arenas used 150 times a year are not comparable ..

[PoliSciGuy]

It's obvious that people are Gibraltar on this, and no one will change their minds unless the Thunder pay for more than 40% of the arena. Going from 5% to 40% will never happen, just like people like PoliSci will never be in support of the city paying for an arena.

Please don't try to speak for me, thanks. If ownership pitched in at levels similar to other NBA teams I'd be much more amenable to this.