Has the owners not been from OKC, this would be a mute point. As much as I would love for this to be a winning proposition, it will never work out. There is a reason that pro-sports have not relocated to Oklahoma in the past. One (with all due respect) other than gambling, a small surge in oil production and Sonic, there is no industry in OKC. With this told, there is a significant decrease in average income across the board in all aspects. It takes money-a hell of alot of money, to be a season ticket holder or just a once a month spectator. This move will be great for a couple of years and attendace will be up...slowly attendance will dwindle due to losing seasons and the team will relocate again by 2015 or be outright sold. Like I said, I would love nothing more than for OK to have the ability to accomodate a pro team but I dont see it happening. Please hold your tomato's and crude remarks about my mother and look at the internet and compare demographic numbers against other cities that have pro teams...and if you still don't believe me about cost, go to a Mavericks game....and bring about $350 if you want to have a beer and a dog.

This wasn't the only time the Mayor said it. Also think it was mentioned by the Chamber. Don't remember at anytime them clarifying it to mean Bigger names (what acts haven't we gotten)? What acts would we get or lose if we didn't have improved bathrooms and the other non-NBA specific amenities? The only reason we got acts we didn't get at the old Myriad was seating capacity. Artists and concert promoters are primarily interested in the amenities for the artist and seating capacity fot ticket sales.

(http://www.okcchamber.com/page.asp?atomid=1777 ) Mayor Cornett: “This investment will not only help us attract our own NBA franchise, but also will make us more desirable for BIGGER and better concerts, special events and conventions.” How is this going to bring anything bigger? The seating capacity is actually going to go DOWN a little (by about 300 seats). The only thing that brought big name concerts that hadn’t before the Ford Center was built was the limited seating of the Myriad (around 15,000 if I remember correctly). The Ford Center seats approximately 20,000 (for concerts). Conventions? Thought that was what the Cox CONVENTION Center was for.

"From the team's perspective, it makes more economic sense to upgradge seats near the court, than to add additional seats in the upper levels." What the heck does the team care...they aren't paying for it (the taxpayers stuck themselves with the bill. The NBAs business model is broken if the taxpayers have to make them viable...maybe they should look at wal-mart a little more closely

Major league sports in general, and the NBA in particular, don't currently use the Wal-Mart business model. If you increase seating capacity from 18,000 to 20,000, the most of the additional seats aren't going to be the ones on the lower level that will be selling for $150; they will more likely be in the $20-$30 range. From the team's perspective, it makes more economic sense to upgradge seats near the court, than to add additional seats in the upper levels. As to attracting bigger events, I'm not familiar with the particular quote your referring to, but I suspect that the Mayor may have been talking about drawing concerts featuring bigger names (i.e. better known and more popular artists) rather than just to the size of the crowds.

if it is the amenities, how will the Ford compare to others then?

Ok, if the important thing is premium seating, how much of that can OKC really support? Does it make much sense to go after a few premium seats or make it up in volume with more seats (think wal-mart). The mayor has said we need the improvements to get BIGGER and better concerts (how can you get BIGGER anything if you don't increase capacity? The mayor has also said after the improvements we will be a top-tier arena, yet when you look at capacity, the Ford is currently #14 but will drop to #21

Dang! Aren't there some OSU fans around to bash Jenni for telling the truth about why Bobby Reid lost his starting job? What's wrong with you, Pokefans? Giving up the fight before the end of time? Quitters!

Larry, the Ford Center is about average for an NBA arena in seating capacity, but capacity really isn't the issue. The important thing is premium seating. Team owners don't want a stadium or arena that is so large that they can't draw sellout or near sellout crowds on a regular basis. Keep in mind that the new Charlotte arena actually has a smaller capacity that the old one. Ditto for Ford Field in Detroit, which has fewer seats than the old Silverdome.

Which players are buying houses? Since most of the coaching staff are only contract through this year i doubt any of them are buying a house in OKC. With coaches not lasting much more than 2 or 3 years with a tean and given the housing market being as bad as it is, why would they buy a house in OKC. You can not compare Football to the NBA, most NFL (and college) games are on weekend and don't require taking time off work. NBA games during the week (some week 2 or 3 games) require taking days off work if your going to travel and stay over night. Of the 20% of season tickets bought by people in Tulsa, how many were bought by corporations (I question that number because the majority of the tickets for the Hornet games were bought by the Sonics ownership group and given away free - according to the NBA)? How many people in OKC have season ticket to the Mavericks? The sonics have fans that travel form Eastern Washington to attend games and most of them split the tickets with someione on the west side of the state because of travel and hotel costs. Factor in high gass cost, higher airfare and cost of hotel, most will come see a game on the weekend but not buy season tickets. Plus now factor in if they have a loosing season (like this year) alot of season ticket holder wont travel to watch a team this bad. Relying on the team to increase tourism is risky at best. The ownership group will be demanding a new arena in five years, The ford center with the upgrades won't make enough money and they will ask for more revenue from the city.

Some players are buying houses, and the coaches and staff certainly will. Byron Scott currently owns two houses in OKC right now (could he be hoping to move back?). And perhaps in Seattle people from out of town don't go to NBA games, but in Oklahoma they do. 20% of Hornets season tickets were bought by people from Tulsa, and we had season ticket holders from Wichita and Kansas City, KS as well. People from all over the state went to games here. First of all, we are used to traveling to sporting events, as people from all over the state go to Sooners and Cowboys games, as well as Dallas Cowboys and even Mavericks games. Second of all, we have fewer recreational options in Oklahoma, so people are more tuned in to those available. We would have no other professional teams to divert cash as well. Your data is based on a different market and culture. You forgot to read Zimbalist's report on Western professional team markets that are more than 200 miles away from other cities with professional teams.

Jill again you have no clue. Player aren't buying houses in the local market, rent. With trades, and unlikely hood any player will last more then 4 years in a city, they buy homes in other coties and rent in the cities they play in. Cars are now becoming part of their contract. The team will provide a car for the player during the season. The team calls up a dealership and promises so many appearances by the player inexchange for the car. No money changes hands no sales tax or vichle tax. As far as people from out of town buying season tickets and staying in hotel, won't happen. Fans do that for football not basketball. There are 43 games and they are during the week and weekends most people can not take that time off work, unless they are retired. Add to the cost of hotel;s, food, travel, and season tickets very few people can afford to spend that kind of money. You will pick up some people on the weekends. You will also see the request for a new arena within 5 years (during that time the team will loose money), they will need revenue for parking, increase in seating, and more public dollars. Just like every other NBA team. As for more events, well they will need to keep dates open for play off games (up to about 20 dates. Most of that 70 million payroll you are talking about is player and coaches, again most of that won't be spent in oKC. Most of the jobs they create are low paying and internships. Like food vendors, ticket salepeople and office staff. Some of which they will bring with them from Seattle. Enjoy the first 5 years of your team the nightmares just beginning!

The owners have the option of extending the lease for 15 more years after the initial lease. While I would be thrilled to see the Ford last 30 years, it just won't happen (certainly without a few more $100+ million upgrade or complete new arena). My initial thought s on this is the Ford wasn't obsolete, but after looking at the NBA Database on this site and the articles pointing out all of the sold-out concerts/events we have had over the 5past 5 years and the numerous sell-out and near capacity crowds we had for the Hornets (a temporary team) I have been convinced that the Ford IS obsolete and needs to be replaced or upgraded where it really matters. As I have pointed out before we have already outgrown the Ford, we need more seating and we aren't getting any.

The length of the lease has no bearing in reality in how long the Ford is going to "last" before another arena is demanded..a new building will mean a new lease (that is what they are demanding in Seattle...same owners, they WILL do it here too).

I would think at the bare MINIMUM, any NBA/NHL/NFL city should be getting at least a minimum of $1 million NET directly from the team...not the overflow "economic impact" (usually gross not net numbers that are overly inflated) that never seem to materialize. I am talking about hard, spendable cash coming into the City (the City Manager says we are looking at MAYBE $150 thousand). The City is literally giving away at least $4 million a year in the naming rights alone. Insanity!

It will have to be 15 years, mickey, as that is the duration of the lease. I would expect the city would need to be starting to think about a new arena in 15 years, with completion estimated in the 18 to 20 year range. And Larry, I agree that on paper the deal isn't lucrative for the city. But, if we'd fixed up the arena and didn't have a team, we'd have even less to show for it. Of course I've been saying all along that I think most of the benefits to having a team are intangible. There are a few obvious ones. First of all, the city needs to resume charging sales tax on ticket sales. Second of all, we will have added a payroll to OKC of somewhere over $70 million, the recipients of which will be paying state income tax, local property taxes and sales tax. The city will benefit from more Big Twelve tournaments, which I believe we will now stand a stronger chance of getting. Again, with an NBA team you hope you will have the opportunity to host playoff games and you dream of hosting an NBA Finals. I am sure we again will have season ticket holders and game attenders from Tulsa and other cities in OKC, as well as a few from Wichita, and some of them will stay in our hotels and eat in our restaurants, or perhaps come up for a weekend game and shop in the city. We will reap the benefits of being featured on television and in newspapers around the country, I believe. And, remember, we just fixed up the Civic Center for over $50 million, and we're not getting significant from the orchestra, the ballet or traveling Broadway shows. Far less, in fact. Again, this is something that enhances our quality of life in the city.

You guys are just beginning to understand. What do you think will happen in 5 years when Bennett comes to the City and says they need to make more money and they need that new 500 million dollar one they wanted the State of Washington to build them? Otherwise they are moving to Las Vegas or San Jose or San Diego Or Paris or Berlin or wherever. Welcome to the never ending carousel, the one you can't get off unless you're thrown off.

Larry, your right that the lease doesn't make financial sense for the city if you factor in the renovation costs that will be paid for from the extension of the MAPS tax. The way I see it, though, is that we would probably have to fix up the Ford Center in a few years anyway just to keep it on par with new arenas being built by other cities in the region (Tulsa, Omaha, Kansas City, etc). However, I would have preferred to see the team pay more rent for the pracitce facility.

Will be the first to admit, VERY shocked they didn't get the "Master Tenant Lease" that was foreshadowed in earlier statements by Bennett and even this paper admitted they would probably get (the day after the vote). Also, VERY surprised that the terms of the lease have been made public.
_________________________________________________________________
"Oklahoma City would keep revenues from other events at the Ford Center, including concerts, Big 12, or NCAA basketball tournaments and other events." And it looks like we are getting a fair deal on the Food and Beverage part of the agreement. At least they got these parts right...Congratulations!
_________________________________________________________________
Lets see....$100,000 a year rent for an NBA EXCLUSIVE use building costing $21 million = 210 years to break even. You read that correctly, that's 210 YEARS to pay for the practice facility alone. Yep, sounds like its fair to the team all right, but is it a "good deal for the City"? What is the City Manager smoking?
_________________________________________________________________

"The agreement also calls for the team to pay $409,000 annually for naming rights to the Ford Center"
_________________________________________________________________

Memphis (a slightly smaller TV market) got $90 million for naming rights in a 20 yr. deal ($4.5 million a year) so the City is losing roughly $4 million a year on naming rights alone. Makes sense doesn't it? The Team gets the excess money from the naming rights to a building they don't own. The fact they don't own the building and are "just" tenants is very important (since it was used as an argument for them not paying for any of the improvements). Yep, sounds like its fair to the team all right, but is it a "good deal for the City"?
_________________________________________________________________
"Arena rent: $40,000 per game ($28,000 per game for game day expenses plus $12,000 per game in additional rent). Inflation adjustments would be made beginning in year six of the agreement."
_________________________________________________________________
AFTER GAME DAY EXPENSES the City only gets $12,000 per game times 43 games = $516, 000 a year divided into $100 million in NBA improvements = 193.8 YEARS (not accounting for inflation adjustments and the City does get to keep the revenue from other events). Yep, still sounds fair to the team.
_________________________________________________________________
"That's an example of where we were trying to ensure that there was kind of a break-even philosophy on our behalf,” Mayor Mick Cornett said. "The most important thing to us is where we are at the end of the deal, and we think we'll be in a break-even position.” and
_________________________________________________________________
"Oklahoma City Manager Jim Couch said the city expects to at least break even financially on the deal and could generate as much as $150,000 in additional revenue."
_________________________________________________________________
Break even? How? Maybe break even in 200 years, but we could have paid for the improvements with the naming rights alone. Instead we are giving them away to the team at an annual LOSS of $4 million a year (not $150,000 in additional revenue)? Why aren't we looking to make something off the deal? The only way we are going to break even under this lease is if the Ford center lasts for another 200 years (highly unlikely) or the Sonics opt out after six years (if certain attendance benchmarks aren't met) where they have to pay for the improvements. Of course they will go to court to get out of that (just as they are in court in Seattle now).
_________________________________________________________________
I admit math is not my strong suit, but did the calculations 5 times just to make sure I didn't mess it up (still a possibility though). Does ANYONE want to explain how this makes any financial sense (as the Mayor and City Manager are suggesting).