Bucks to unveil $500 million stadium plan just north of BC

[Canned Goods n Ammo]

Like I said, the Blackhawks won't let Milwaukee get an NHL team.  Let's not waste precious internet space talking about something that isn't going to happen.

I believe that was under the old ownership, not the current ownership. Blackhawks fans, feel free to correct me.

Also, again, if pro franchises are that beneficial to Milwaukee, then Milwaukee/Wisco shouldn't let the Wurtz family get in the way.

Appeal to the NHL franchise in the worst situation. Give them a great deal with the new arena. Give them the same loan and/or tax benefits that the Bucks are receiving. Make it so appealing that they cannot possibly say no. Make them take on the NHL and the Wurtz family.

I'm not saying it's a sure thing, but it's certainly worth a shot. We shouldn't let what happened in 1988 dictate what is happening now. For instance, the BC didn't drive much economic development. But, the new arena could generate 500M in economic development.
 

[Canned Goods n Ammo]

Also don't forget law of diminishing returns and how big the entertainment revenue pie is.  Economics don't work that way....."we have a really successful car dealership here, lets open 8 more and we'll make millions more"

Ah ha, not THAT is a legitimate concern.

However, we'd be doubling the amount of people and nights the facilities are used. While add a NHL franchise wouldn't DOUBLE the impact of the arena, we still only have to pay for the arena once, right?

We get twice as many events at the new facility, and a roster full of millionaires moving to Wisconsin.

Same cost, 1.5 times the benefit?

[Herman Cain]

The real problem here is that the NBA is the party insisting on the new arena. My take is that the our politicians should bring some resolutions forward challenging the NBA anti trust exemption. The NBA would back down quickly if that was the case.

The other strategy is to tell the Bucks owners , no, I am sorry we will not pay for your new arena. These guys have their ego tied up in this and will not want to lose the franchise because they couldn't pony up. Bad for their financial reputations, which are built on that they are supposedly big money guys (even though they use OPM).

At the end of the day I want the Bucks to stay, and if there are some modest municipal concessions necessary, like floating a tax exempt bond with dedicated funding for payments, I could go along with that.  Any thing else needs to be tied to new actual construction and development.

[Juan Anderson's Mixtape]

Ammo, you have yet to mention anything about the article I linked.  Read that and give me your thoughts.  Please try to stay on topic and not muddy the waters with a hypothetical NHL tangent.  Thanks.

[Canned Goods n Ammo]

Ammo, you have yet to mention anything about the article I linked.  Read that and give me your thoughts.  Please try to stay on topic and not muddy the waters with a hypothetical NHL tangent.  Thanks.

I read the article.

It doesn't really include enough details/footnotes/independent sources for me to really comment.

EXAMPLE:

"$150 million dollars will generate $750 million dollars in additional investment from the private sector and create thousands of jobs, while doing nothing will cause the Milwaukee Bucks to leave Wisconsin and cost the state more than $730 million in lost tax revenue."

How do they come up with $750m? Is the $730M lost income taxes, because I don't believe the Bucks are going to pay any property taxes.

And, if I'm doing this correctly, this means that keeping the Bucks is really worth $1.480BILLION? (potential revenue and lost revenue?)

[mu03eng]

Ah ha, not THAT is a legitimate concern.

However, we'd be doubling the amount of people and nights the facilities are used. While add a NHL franchise wouldn't DOUBLE the impact of the arena, we still only have to pay for the arena once, right?

We get twice as many events at the new facility, and a roster full of millionaires moving to Wisconsin.

Same cost, 1.5 times the benefit?

One fixed cost is the same(stadium) all the incidental costs would be incurred for the NHL team(concessions, ticket takers, maintenance, clean-up etc).  If my business is open from 8AM to 8PM and I generate $1000 in revenue a day, if I stay open 8PM to 8AM as well....my costs are the same nominally but I guarantee I'm not generating $1000 of revenue in that 2nd 12 hour segment.

Again, doubling the opportunities to have someone buy a ticket for an NHL/NBA team doesn't guarantee there is double the demand.  Don't know what the Admirals draw but I can't imagine that going from a minor league team to an NHL team will mean significant more ticket sales.

[Canned Goods n Ammo]

One fixed cost is the same(stadium) all the incidental costs would be incurred for the NHL team(concessions, ticket takers, maintenance, clean-up etc).  If my business is open from 8AM to 8PM and I generate $1000 in revenue a day, if I stay open 8PM to 8AM as well....my costs are the same nominally but I guarantee I'm not generating $1000 of revenue in that 2nd 12 hour segment.

Again, doubling the opportunities to have someone buy a ticket for an NHL/NBA team doesn't guarantee there is double the demand.  Don't know what the Admirals draw but I can't imagine that going from a minor league team to an NHL team will mean significant more ticket sales.

You're right, but like I said, let's split the difference.

Instead of 18,000 people 41 nights per year, let's say both teams have to "share" more fans.

14,000 for 82 nights per year isn't twice as many, but it's a lot more than only have 1 team.

Plus, Jock income tax will help pay for all of it. NHL franchise salary floor is $51M. How much income tax is that going to generate per season?

[kmwtrucks]

The problem with the NHL is: Las vegas, Seattle and Quebec city are going to get franchises.  probably 2 new  and one is moved.  From the below.  After that I'm thinking the NHL sits tight for a 5 years.  Vegas and QB are building Stadiums now. Seattle is getting closer to a new stadium and is a much better market then MKE.

Arizona Coyotes   13,345   -3.1%   77.9%
Carolina Hurricanes   12,594   -18.7%   67.4%
Florida Panthers   11,265   -20.5%   66.1%

[mu03eng]

You're right, but like I said, let's split the difference.

Instead of 18,000 people 41 nights per year, let's say both teams have to "share" more fans.

14,000 for 82 nights per year isn't twice as many, but it's a lot more than only have 1 team.

Plus, Jock income tax will help pay for all of it. NHL franchise salary floor is $51M. How much income tax is that going to generate per season?

I just don't think we have the population to support 3 major sports teams plus all other entertainment venues that we have.

One could argue we already support 3(Packers, Brewers, Bucks) and adding an NHL team would make it 4.  We would be the smallest city to support 3 teams if you ignore the Packers (1.4mil to Cleveland's 1.7mil).  The smallest 4 team city is MSP at 2.77mil.

Just not enough population to support that kind of volume
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_American_and_Canadian_cities_by_number_of_major_professional_sports_franchises

[MU Fan in Connecticut]

The problem with the NHL is: Las vegas, Seattle and Quebec city are going to get franchises.  probably 2 new  and one is moved.  From the below.  After that I'm thinking the NHL sits tight for a 5 years.  Vegas and QB are building Stadiums now. Seattle is getting closer to a new stadium and is a much better market then MKE.

Arizona Coyotes   13,345   -3.1%   77.9%
Carolina Hurricanes   12,594   -18.7%   67.4%
Florida Panthers   11,265   -20.5%   66.1%

And Hartford is working on what is essentially a complete rebuild of the XL Center, is a bigger TV market than Milwaukee with no professional team competition and boasts some of the largest TV ratings for the NHL. 
From what I read too, the NHL rightfully wants in Seattle, is high on Vegas for some reason and Quebec is building an NHL ready arena.

[ChitownSpaceForRent]

Lets get one thing straight, the NHL will not give Milwaukee a team any time in the near future. They want to go back to Canada so you if they do move the Coyotes it would be to Quebec first and probably Seattle or Hartford next.

[Juan Anderson's Mixtape]

Ammo, thanks for the response.  I believe that $730 million is over a 30 year period, and yes, it is mostly and perhaps entirely from income taxes.

Several of the questions are based off of a plan Scott Fitzgerald has floated.  To better educate yourself see:

http://www.bizjournals.com/milwaukee/news/2015/04/10/public-funding-deal-for-bucks-arena-could-get-done.html?page=all

One highlight from this article:

"Abele's office had said Thursday that Fitzgerald's proposal to potentially borrow from the Wisconsin Board of Commissioners of Public Lands "is a viable and creative strategy."
Fitzgerald said he feels confident the majority of Republicans will support a plan he is advancing with Assembly Speaker Robin Vos (R-Rochester) to attain $150 million in state funding for the arena through the state Board of Commissioners of Public Lands.
The public agency has about $1 billion in assets and makes loans for local projects. The state would pay back the principal plus 3.75 percent interest with the proceeds going to public education, Fitzgerald said.
“I think we have a plan that really works for everybody,” Fitzgerald said. “We’ve just got to continue to massage it and get everybody to the right place. We’re waiting for the city to come up with their piece.”
Fitzgerald said his proposal would be “somewhat revenue-neutral” for the state budget. Because of that, he believes legislators from out-state, who are neutral at best on public funding for the arena project, would support his plan."

The MMAC poll mentions aspects of this proposal and the results show consistent statewide support.  Truthfully I'm a skeptic of the ancillary benefits of new stadiums and think financial impact numbers are often inflated and overhyped.  It's like sprinkles on a sundae...sure the sprinkles would be nice but I'm much more concerned about the sundae.  To me the sundae looks appealing.

[MU111]

With regard to NHL expansion in Milwaukee:

The Milwaukee-Racine-Waukesha CSA total personal income (TPI) currently stands at $94 billion.  It takes $104 billion TPI to support an MLB team, $45 billion to support an NBA team, and $15 billion to support an NHL team.  We're already over-saturated due to the fact that we're $54 billion in TPI short of the $149 billion ideally needed to support the two teams we already have.  The only way Milwaukee could make a good case for a new team at this point would be if one of the current ones left the city.

Here's the study for anyone interested:
http://www.bizjournals.com/bizjournals/news/2015/04/09/sportmain.html

[ChicosBailBonds]

I read the article.

It doesn't really include enough details/footnotes/independent sources for me to really comment.

EXAMPLE:

"$150 million dollars will generate $750 million dollars in additional investment from the private sector and create thousands of jobs, while doing nothing will cause the Milwaukee Bucks to leave Wisconsin and cost the state more than $730 million in lost tax revenue."

Was there some fine print that said this was paid for by Eslen and Lasry, LLC?

 

[Litehouse]

NHL in Milwaukee would be bad for MU.  It would put us further down the priority list for dates at the new Arena, and it would draw away interest from casual sports fans.  Our corporate season ticket holders would decrease, and casual fans that are just looking for something fun to do every now and then would likely pick NHL over NCAA basketball.  Plus, we would get even less coverage on the local media, pushed further down the sports page, mentioned less in the sports highlight shows, and probably get even worse radio broadcast coverage.

[ChicosBailBonds]

Bruce Murphy is a solid reporter.

No reason not to believe you....if that is the case, the people are getting fleeced.  The Bucks aren't having to do much for quite the gravy train ride.

[ChicosBailBonds]

NHL in Milwaukee would be bad for MU.  It would put us further down the priority list for dates at the new Arena, and it would draw away interest from casual sports fans.  Our corporate season ticket holders would decrease, and casual fans that are just looking for something fun to do every now and then would likely pick NHL over NCAA basketball.  Plus, we would get even less coverage on the local media, pushed further down the sports page, mentioned less in the sports highlight shows, and probably get even worse radio broadcast coverage.

How about a compromise...a NHL team and we kick the Bucks to Seattle?  That way we are the only basketball in town while the beautiful game of hockey (not minor league) is brought to Milwaukee.   

[Spotcheck Billy]

How about a compromise...a NHL team and we kick the Bucks to Seattle?  That way we are the only basketball in town while the beautiful game of hockey (not minor league) is brought to Milwaukee.   

the plus to that is the Bradley Center can serve both just fine

[ChitownSpaceForRent]

How about a compromise...a NHL team and we kick the Bucks to Seattle?  That way we are the only basketball in town while the beautiful game of hockey (not minor league) is brought to Milwaukee.   

Honestly not a terrible idea, although id venture a guess saying that the Bucks would probably make a lot more money.

[Groin_pull]

I must be in the minority. Get rid of an NBA team to make room for an NHL team? 

[Litehouse]

No way I'd trade.  I have no interest in the NHL at all.

[ChicosBailBonds]

I must be in the minority. Get rid of an NBA team to make room for an NHL team?  

I'm in the minority, but I can't stand the NBA and love the NHL.  I like the NHL prima donnas 100X over the NBA prima donnas.

[ChitownSpaceForRent]

I'm in the minority, but I can't stand the NBA and love the NHL.  I like the NHL prima donnas 100X over the NBA prima donnas.

I can only think of one legit NHL prima donna and thats Crosby. Then you have players like Sean Avery and Raffi Torres. But agree with the general sentiment, love the NHL not so much the NBA.

[Nukem2]

I'm in the minority, but I can't stand the NBA and love the NHL.  I like the NHL prima donnas 100X over the NBA prima donnas.

NHL is an acquired taste not shared by many.  Boring, just like soccer.  Lots of wasted energy with no results.  Peculiar games.

[ChicosBailBonds]

NHL is an acquired taste not shared by many.  Boring, just like soccer.  Lots of wasted energy with no results.  Peculiar games.

Some will argue that, though most of those people I don't think even understand the skill it takes just to skate before having the hand-eye coordination of what they need to do with a stick and a 3 inch puck that can travel 100mph an hour, all while other guys on the ice are trying to lay you out. 

I find the NBA to be somewhat the opposite.  Lots of results, but boring because it is too easy.  50% of shots go in, effort in parts of the game is not there until later in the game (my perception).  In hockey, I know for that 1 minute shift they are busting tail because they are so gassed when they come off.

To each their own.