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

[source?]

One more point; I was under the impression that the contract signed by Kohl and the new owners required both parties to put money towards the arena. I could be wrong, but that was the impression I got.

[Spotcheck Billy]

both are , Kohl = $100mm, new ownership = $150mm

[source?]

both are , Kohl = $100mm, new ownership = $150mm

That's pretty much what I thought. This was a response to CBB saying the owners are making poor business decisions. They got a steal on an NBA team, they will recoup everything they spend when they sell, in the mean time they get to brag about owning an NBA team.

[MuMark]

Things change....Brewers were in the same boat until Miller Park was built and Selig sold the team.

This is a good deal for the city and the state. You lose the Bucks you lose millions in tax revenue and the prestige of having an NBA team. Add to that the millions that the public will have to pay for maintenance on the Bradley center. http://www.bizjournals.com/milwaukee/news/2014/04/17/bmo-harris-bradley-center-will-need-100m-over-next.html?page=all

[ChicosBailBonds]

Sacramento seceded from California? WHo knew?

Thank you for the clarification.  Oh how I wish Sacramento would secede. 

Staples Center privately built.  New football stadiums for L.A. all privately financed depending on the deal.  Stub Hub Center in Carson, privately built.  Etc, etc.   

[ChicosBailBonds]

As did Santa Clara, which took out a $850 million loan to build Levi's Stadium.
And San Diego, which pitched in $300 million to help build Petco Park.

Ironic you bring up Petco Park and how that was sold in as TAX FREE to the taxpayer.  Ooops.

http://www.sandiegoreader.com/news/2015/feb/12/ticker-taxpayers-271-million-petco-hook/#

[ChicosBailBonds]

That's pretty much what I thought. This was a response to CBB saying the owners are making poor business decisions. They got a steal on an NBA team, they will recoup everything they spend when they sell, in the mean time they get to brag about owning an NBA team.

If that's the case, that they were required to put that money toward it, that makes sense.  If they weren't required to, then I wouldn't understand what their incentive is to put a single dime into this.  Appreciate the clarification if true.

[Pakuni]

Ironic you bring up Petco Park and how that was sold in as TAX FREE to the taxpayer.  Ooops.

http://www.sandiegoreader.com/news/2015/feb/12/ticker-taxpayers-271-million-petco-hook/#

True, but that's the result of shenanigans by your state lawmakers, not anything the city or developers did.

[ChicosBailBonds]

These are billionaires....they don't spend $550 mil(plus whatever running the team for a number of years costs them) to make $25 mil (less whatever they spent running the team).  Hell it might come out negative running a team for 4 years while lobbying for a fully funded stadium to only get $25 mil on the deal

Understood, but if you can get the city \ state to pay for it and then in 5 to 10 years sell it for a $1 billion, you're doing fantastic with no risk at all o your part.

Sounds like from the last post, people are saying they were required to invest a certain amount, and that changes things...if true.

[ChicosBailBonds]

True, but that's the result of shenanigans by your state lawmakers, not anything the city or developers did.

Yes....shenanigans by gov't....exactly.  Crapping on the taxpayers....exactly.  Not fulfilling promises....exactly.   Misforecasting revenues....exactly.  I wouldn't let the city or developers off the hook, either. 

"The deal was supposed to pay for itself."   Sound familiar? 


http://www.voiceofsandiego.org/topics/land-use/city-promised-new-money-would-pay-for-ballpark-it-cant-prove-it-does/

[source?]

If that's the case, that they were required to put that money toward it, that makes sense.  If they weren't required to, then I wouldn't understand what their incentive is to put a single dime into this.  Appreciate the clarification if true.

I believe that's what the contract was. I don't have time to research it at the moment, have a meeting with a client in 15 minutes. I am 100% sure that Kohl put a lot of controls in the contract to try and keep them in town. I'm pretty sure that selling them below market value with the caveat that they would contribute to a new arena was one of them. I'll try to dig something up later.

[Pakuni]

Yes....shenanigans by gov't....exactly.  Crapping on the taxpayers....exactly.  Not fulfilling promises....exactly.   Misforecasting revenues....exactly.  I wouldn't let the city or developers off the hook, either. 

"The deal was supposed to pay for itself."   Sound familiar? 


http://www.voiceofsandiego.org/topics/land-use/city-promised-new-money-would-pay-for-ballpark-it-cant-prove-it-does/

You're not being completely honest here. When they made those promises, the city of San Diego and stadium developers couldn't have reasonably known that some 12 years after they reached a deal, state legislators would come along and essentially change the law that made the deal possible in a blatant money grab, could they?

[ChicosBailBonds]

You're not being completely honest here. When they made those promises, the city of San Diego and stadium developers couldn't have reasonably known that some 12 years after they reached a deal, state legislators would come along and essentially change the law that made the deal possible in a blatant money grab, could they?

With the way California is operated, they sure should have.  They should have protections built in for the taxpayer to understand the risks, which they didn't.  Certainly their overinflated revenue numbers were off, which is absolutely not surprising for a gov't entity.  They use the rosiest of rosy figures to sell this crap to the public, and then say oops later. 

[zrjones13]

Nope, I don't watch it.  Had a polite conversation with one of Adam Silver's deputies about it yesterday at the World Sports Congress.

I said good, not NBA playoff eligible.  They have a losing record, I don't equate that to "good".  I don't think the Celtics are good, 6 games under, but they are in the playoffs number 7 spot.  Out here in the west, you don't even sniff the playoffs unless you're like 5 games over .500.  By good, I mean how good the Bucks were back in the day good. 

Yes, they have a young core, which I think will not be here for the longhaul, that was my point.  I don't see Milwaukee being a magnet city for players, but happy to be proven wrong.

Well they have a really good start on a good team and Giannis and Carter Williams are on rookie contracts for two years after this, and Parker has three left.  After the rookie deals expire then they become restricted free agents where the bucks can match so they wouldn't have a choice to leave for 6-7 years. The brewers have proven that players will stay in Milwaukee if the teams are good.

[ChicosBailBonds]

Well they have a really good start on a good team and Giannis and Carter Williams are on rookie contracts for two years after this, and Parker has three left.  After the rookie deals expire then they become restricted free agents where the bucks can match so they wouldn't have a choice to leave for 6-7 years. The brewers have proven that players will stay in Milwaukee if the teams are good.

I hope you are right, but I have my doubts.  In my view the Brewers have lost plenty of talented players, but again hope it works out.  I also think you're selling yourself short on what is good.  The Bucks record now is "good" in relation to a terrible last decade plus.  It is not good in comparison to other good teams or even the bar set by the Bucks back in the day.  Going through Milwaukee back in the day was a tough tough game and I'd expect them to win 50+ games every year with the occasional 60+ seasons.  In the last 28 years, the Bucks have hit 50 wins one time.  That is incredible.  Only surpassed .500 9 times in those 28 years and only once in the last 12 years.

[zrjones13]

I hope you are right, but I have my doubts.  In my view the Brewers have lost plenty of talented players, but again hope it works out.  I also think you're selling yourself short on what is good.  The Bucks record now is "good" in relation to a terrible last decade plus.  It is not good in comparison to other good teams or even the bar set by the Bucks back in the day.  Going through Milwaukee back in the day was a tough tough game and I'd expect them to win 50+ games every year with the occasional 60+ seasons.  In the last 28 years, the Bucks have hit 50 wins one time.  That is incredible.  Only surpassed .500 9 times in those 28 years and only once in the last 12 years.

I should say promising instead of good.  Being in a small market your always going to have a tough time retaining all your talent you need to make tough choices.  Part of the problem recently is the bucks haven't drafted well.  Look since 2000-2011 there is bust after bust not a single max value player they drafted , in a small market you have to draft well and hope the player has loyalty. 

[MuMark]

Huge difference between baseball and basketball. In baseball if a small market player wants top dollar he has to leave. In the NBA players can actually benefit financially by staying and all teams are limited by the cap in some shape or form. Kevin Durrant just said he wants to finish his career in OKC. Small market....

http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/12596449/kevin-durant-says-love-stick-oklahoma-city-thunder-whole-career

So as long as you can pay them and build a good team around them you should be able to keep your stars if they like your team and organization.

Bucks are off to a great start with Giannis and Parker. They both have said they want to be with the Bucks long term.

[ChicosBailBonds]

Huge difference between baseball and basketball. In baseball if a small market player wants top dollar he has to leave. In the NBA players can actually benefit financially by staying and all teams are limited by the cap in some shape or form. Kevin Durrant just said he wants to finish his career in OKC. Small market....

http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/12596449/kevin-durant-says-love-stick-oklahoma-city-thunder-whole-career

So as long as you can pay them and build a good team around them you should be able to keep your stars if they like your team and organization.

Bucks are off to a great start with Giannis and Parker. They both have said they want to be with the Bucks long term.

Hope you are right, I'll believe when it happens.

[mu-rara]

Huge difference between baseball and basketball. In baseball if a small market player wants top dollar he has to leave. In the NBA players can actually benefit financially by staying and all teams are limited by the cap in some shape or form. Kevin Durrant just said he wants to finish his career in OKC. Small market....

http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/12596449/kevin-durant-says-love-stick-oklahoma-city-thunder-whole-career

So as long as you can pay them and build a good team around them you should be able to keep your stars if they like your team and organization.

Bucks are off to a great start with Giannis and Parker. They both have said they want to be with the Bucks long term.

Agreed.  Green Bay was a hell hole until Ron Wolf came and upgraded the organization.  If you're treated professionally and pay is in the range you can be competitive.

[Canned Goods n Ammo]

The Bucks being good should have nothing to do with this equation.

Too many variables.

The plan is either good, or it's bad.

If we are depending upon a professional sports franchise to win in order to make a plan economically viable, then the plan is already doomed.

[brewcity77]

The Bucks being good should have nothing to do with this equation.

Too many variables.

The plan is either good, or it's bad.

If we are depending upon a professional sports franchise to win in order to make a plan economically viable, then the plan is already doomed.

Agreed. I think the Bucks have a real shot to be good, but I'm not looking at that as the payoff whatsoever. My hope is that keeping the Bucks (good or bad) is just a bonus to a plan that could really help stimulate downtown.

[ChicosBailBonds]

Public support for state funding in a turd bowl

http://www.bizjournals.com/milwaukee/news/2015/04/16/overwhelming-thumbs-down-from-voters-on-150m-in.html

[mu_hilltopper]

Public support for state funding in a turd bowl

http://www.bizjournals.com/milwaukee/news/2015/04/16/overwhelming-thumbs-down-from-voters-on-150m-in.html

The sad part is that even if 95% of the public disapproved .. it wouldn't matter.  The pols aren't accountable, they all have safe seats.

[brewcity77]

Love to hear how those poll questions were worded. Guessing probably a simple "do you support using tax dollars to pay for the new arena?"

[MuMark]

http://www.bizjournals.com/milwaukee/blog/2015/04/joint-finance-co-chair-nygren-tom-barrett-needs-to.html?ana=twt