Seattle area: NBA/NHL arena

[old_smithy]

Originally Posted by LCIII

Yes they would have to address the parking issue, but I said that to begin with. They should really build a massive parking garage for the stadiums to share. Just bite the damn bullet and solve the problem once and for all. Lots of old short buildings in the area that could surely be purchased and flattened to make way for just such a project.

That one got me laughing. I can't imagine professional sports teams sharing anything that produces an additional revenue stream for them. One of my beefs about the whole "replace one Kingdome with two separate stadiums" saga, was that the county lost all the parking revenue and both the Seahawks and the Mariners got new garages out of the deal. Now the teams collect the parking revenue. And this has become an important revenue stream for them.

In the last week there have been two media articles about stadium parking. The North Lot development at CLink Field fell into place because the developer had to "replace" the parking spaces that were on the site. The cost was over $10 million. First and Goal will be the owner of the replacement spaces.

Over at the Mariners parking garage, a clause was inserted into a recently passed bill that allows the Mariner's to charge a 12.5% parking tax and prevents the city of Seatle from collecting the 10% parking tax it has been collecting on those same spaces. At least one City councilmember claims to have been caught off gaurd by this.

The hockey folks may be different; but I can't see the football or baseball teams agreeing to any shared parking revenue scheme.

[LCIII]

By don't the football and soccer remastered already share parking space? Surely some arrangement could be reached that would benefit all parties. Is Safeco not part of the same Stadium Authority that CenturyLink is?

[Sounder]

Originally Posted by mhays

So you're part of the spin. I get it.

No, you don't get it. It is not my fault you are ignorant about regional economic impact statements that do in fact account for where the money comes from!


Do you understand that a large chunk of NBA and NHL revenues come from national and international media and merchandise revenues? So even if 100% of the fans came from the city of Seattle, the city is still a huge net winner. Not only does the area gain the additional wealth from media, merchandising, revenue sharing, etc., they also benefit from the economic multipliers of such!

Go ahead and keep throwing out that silly neighborhood canard, anyone with a brain can see you are other extremely ignorant or a partisan propagandist.

[mSeattle]

Wait, we have 3 professional teams already. What will another one do that 3 can't do already? Any more and they'll really be a cohort of mass distraction, and wasted time and money.

[Sounder]

The prospective arena locations mentioned before are:

• Key Arena site, Seattle Center
• Memorial Stadium site, Seattle Center
• Pier 46, which is near SAFECO Field & C Link Field (major pipedream)
• Sabey site (former Assoc. Grocers distribution center at south end of Boeing Field)
• Bellevue Safeway Distribution Center site
• Renton landing
• Muckleshoot land in Auburn next to Emerald Downs
• Tacoma Dome remodel

If the proposal passes as is, it will raise around $150,000,000. The site of the arena will depend on where the rest of the money comes from. I think this is why it favors the Bellevue location. Unless Steve Ballmer is extremely charitable, I don't see Seattle ponying up the necessary funds to get it done at Seattle Center. Private investors could make more money in the burbs on a larger plot of land. Plus places like Bellevue and Renton may be more tempted to sweeten the pot than Seattle would.

The prospective Bellevue location is adjacent to the prospective light rail line, near downtown Bellevue, and near the junction of two major freeways. It is about as good a "suburban" location you could get.

[Sounder]

Originally Posted by mSeattle

Wait, we have 3 professional teams already. What will another one do that 3 can't do already? Any more and they'll really be a cohort of mass distraction, and wasted time and money.

Nonsense. I hate soccer and I hate the loser ownership of the Mariners. I only follow the Seahawks and really, really, really, really, really want my Supersonics back.

[mhays]

Originally Posted by Sounder

No, you don't get it. It is not my fault you are ignorant about regional economic impact statements that do in fact account for where the money comes from!

Do you understand that a large chunk of NBA and NHL revenues come from national and international media and merchandise revenues? So even if 100% of the fans came from the city of Seattle, the city is still a huge net winner. Not only does the area gain the additional wealth from media, merchandising, revenue sharing, etc., they also benefit from the economic multipliers of such!

Go ahead and keep throwing out that silly neighborhood canard, anyone with a brain can see you are other extremely ignorant or a partisan propagandist.

Anyone with a brain can see major fallacies in your argument:

1. Broadcasting and shared revenues go to the team owners, not the taxpayers. And much of it never touches the local economy.

2. Even a major revenue flow will typically be dwarfed by whatever public subsidy is involved with a new stadium or arena, if the public pays a large share.

3. You still haven't addressed the gross vs. net difference issue with ticket sales, food sales, etc., from locals vs. visitors. Plus the effect of people who stay away due to events.

You've been the resident right wing apologist on SSC for many years, and your methods on sprawl seem to be in play on sports team impacts. I say that as a supporter of sports teams. Not buying your spin.

[Sounder]

Your entire argument is based upon the assumption that if a new arena (or ballpark or stadium) isn't built, the team will stay in the market and play in the older venue or build one privately. As we have seen with the Sonics, this is not how it usually plays out.

Right now an NBA fan in Seattle has to take their dollars elsewhere to see NBA. So right now we have a net NBA leakage. We are in the red. Understand so far? Sure it is a tiny number in the grand scheme of tghings, but still we are losing $.

With an NBA franchise the reverse is true as we attract folks from other areas. So right there that is a net win as we stop the local leakage and then attract outsiders to boot.

1. Broadcasting and shared revenues go to the team owners, not the taxpayers. And much of it never touches the local economy.

The money goes to the team owners who then pay players and employee salaries and wages, and taxes too. Again, you didn't think this through now, did you? Then there are the economic multipliers you fail to acknowledge too. Again, it is proven fact that Seahawks and Mariners, even back in the cruddy Kingdome, were a mega boon the regional economy. I am sure the Conway study is available from UW libraries; read it or continue to be arrogantly ignorant about this topic. You've been the resident closed minded loud mouth here at SSC for years, I am sick or your ignorance and slander.

[mSeattle]

Sounder, these things are rackets. They're designed to make you think you feel good or that you're advancing as a city/metro while they siphon you. Three is enough. Support local basketball (Huskies, Redhawks), no new arena or racketeers needed..

[Sounder]

Originally Posted by mSeattle

Sounder, these things are rackets. They're designed to make you think you feel good or that you're advancing as a city/metro while they siphon you.

So is public art and most mass transit.

I want my Sonics back. The funding proposal (read article in post #1 of this thread please) is totally reasonable as the general public pays ZERO percent. How is that a racket?

[Under The Clouds]

I don't like the idea of a tax only targeting pro athletes, but in any case I'd rather new tax revenues from any source go to things we are currently underfunding, like our university system, which has had to absorb severe cuts over the past decade. I believe that making college less affordable, due to large tuition increases, and less available, due to cuts or stagnation in the number of funded student openings, will hurt this state to an extent far, far greater than any marginal benefits we might receive from funding a new arena.

On another note, the NBA is a mess right now. A prospective owner should have his head examined, given the lousy economic model. Many teams are losing money and are attempting to extort their respective cities into ponying up for a new arena. Seattle would merely be a strawman in this effort. If David Stern's league can succeed longterm in cities like Oklahoma City, New Orleans, Sacramento, or Memphis, then I'll tip my cap, but I'm skeptical of that happening. Let these cities get stuck with the bill for a new arena every 20-25 years, or let the NBA move to even more marginal markets. I'll take Seattle or Vancouver's prospects for the rest of the 21st Century over any of the aforementioned cities, gladly.

[Darkhyperchaos]

Originally Posted by mSeattle

Three is enough. Support local basketball (Huskies, Redhawks), no new arena or racketeers needed..

Tell that to the well over a million people who would attend the NBA/NHL games in one year alone.

Just because you have certain opinions on this proposal doesn't mean that the population wouldn't attend, if not sellout both the NBA and NHL games.

I highly doubt attendance for either sport would be any kind of an issue if Seattle does indeed get an NBA/NHL arena. With that said, how can anyone say three is enough if there would be obvious demand. Not to mention the boost of the local economy and culture.

[mSeattle]

Originally Posted by Sounder

So is public art and most mass transit.

I want my Sonics back. The funding proposal (read article in post #1 of this thread please) is totally reasonable as the general public pays ZERO percent. How is that a racket?

Your Sonics are in Oklahoma, they want you there.

[Under The Clouds]

Originally Posted by Darkhyperchaos

Tell that to the well over a million people who would attend the NBA/NHL games in one year alone.

That's exactly what the voters of Seattle did, by rejecting the measure to fund a renovation of Key Arena. It failed by a 70-30% split. Not even close. If the state, or Bellevue, or whoever wants to fund a new arena, that's their choice to make. The voters of Seattle have said "No," decisively.

[mSeattle]

Pro sports stadiums don't bolster local economies, scholars say
http://news.illinois.edu/news/04/1117stadiums.html

Those stadiums sit empty far more than they're active. Key Arena seems to fit big concerts well enough.

[pwalker]

Originally Posted by Under The Clouds

That's exactly what the voters of Seattle did, by rejecting the measure to fund a renovation of Key Arena. It failed by a 70-30% split. Not even close. If the state, or Bellevue, or whoever wants to fund a new arena, that's their choice to make. The voters of Seattle have said "No," decisively.

I'm not sure this vote meant really anything, other than they were tired of expanding Key Arena. At some point, Key Arena is not "expandable".

Perhaps there are other Seattle sites that can take on a new arena, but I would challenge others to tell me where this would be.

I am all for suburbs proposing their plans, and frankly, being outside the city is not a deathnell. I think Bellevue could win here. Like many other metros, a suburban location could work. Bellevue is not just a suburb anymore, it is a city in its own right. I can see a new arena in Bellevue that serves both the NBA and NHL. I believe this will happen in the next 2-3 years.

[Under The Clouds]

Originally Posted by pwalker

I'm not sure this vote meant really anything, other than they were tired of expanding Key Arena. At some point, Key Arena is not "expandable".

Perhaps there are other Seattle sites that can take on a new arena, but I would challenge others to tell me where this would be.

I am all for suburbs proposing their plans, and frankly, being outside the city is not a deathnell. I think Bellevue could win here. Like many other metros, a suburban location could work. Bellevue is not just a suburb anymore, it is a city in its own right. I can see a new arena in Bellevue that serves both the NBA and NHL. I believe this will happen in the next 2-3 years.

I disagree that the vote was mainly about concerns over expanding Key Arena. That wasn't even on the radar. I heard the arguments from the very passionate opponents. It was focused on the Sonics, and whether "Millionaire Players" should have their playground subsidized by the public. I disagreed with most of the rhetoric, and actually voted for the tax (I didn't want to see Key Arena sit empty, or lose the Sonics), but there is NO willingness to use public funds towards any sports complex. I'm absolutely confident there will be neither an effort led by city officials nor a grassroots effort to build a new arena.

[pwalker]

Originally Posted by Under The Clouds

I disagree that the vote was mainly about concerns over expanding Key Arena. That wasn't even on the radar. I heard the arguments from the very passionate opponents. It was focused on the Sonics, and whether "Millionaire Players" should have their playground subsidized by the public. I disagreed with most of the rhetoric, and actually voted for the tax (I didn't want to see Key Arena sit empty, or lose the Sonics), but there is NO willingness to use public funds towards any sports complex. I'm absolutely confident there will be neither an effort led by city officials nor a grassroots effort to build a new arena.

So, in essence, you agree with me that suburbs may be the best chance.

[Under The Clouds]

I think the burbs are the only chance, and that the arena would have to be privately financed. Even there, I think it's extraordinarily unlikely that Olympia would pass legislation funding a portion of a new arena, let alone the whole thing. The economic climate is too bleak, and even in good times there are a sizeable contingent opposed to public funding of pro sports facilities just on principle. I think the best a private arena group could hope for would be that a municipality or county would agree to fund road/transit/parking improvements in support of a privately-funded arena.

[GarfieldPark]

...