It seems that UWM opposes taking down the UWM arena, of course.
Which raises the question of an out clause in the lease with UWM. Anyone know if the lease has an out clause or cheap buyout?
I am assuming that it must or UWM would have already raised this issue and claimed some big damage number if the arena is taken down.
Anyway, a new article basically says that UWM and some Buck's officials met. The Bucks are not sure where they are building it yet. UWM wants the arena to stay and all 300 UWM students that care are going to protest before a game Wednesday (most of Milwaukee and UWM people have no clue if or when there is a game and if it is Wednesday and if it is on campus or at the arena, is my editorial contribution here).
http://www.bizjournals.com/milwaukee/news/2014/11/17/uwm-officials-meet-with-bucks-president-feigin.html
https://www.youtube.com/v/u06DpcFXc4U
I'd ask Fran.....
Screw moving to the new arena. Let's stay in the BC and in 30 years proudly put our name on it, then fight like hell to keep Marquette Arena when someone tries to discard the remaining rubble.
It appears Fran will have a nice view of the demolition ;D
Doesn't the MECCA play a role in our ability to host NCAA tournament events? For a city to qualify, there has to be a certain number of practice facilities within X miles of the main venue.
I believe the MECCA is in that mix. Perhaps the Kern Center could step in. The Kern is a very nice facility.
Saw an interview on the evening news with Frank Gimble who heads the organization that runs the Arena and Milwaukee Theatre. He said that the Bucks would have to commit to replacing the MECCA with a similar facility in order for them to get the land the MECCA currently sits on.
Quote from: ChuckyChip on November 17, 2014, 06:49:26 PM
Saw an interview on the evening news with Frank Gimble who heads the organization that runs the Arena and Milwaukee Theatre. He said that the Bucks would have to commit to replacing the MECCA with a similar facility in order for them to get the land the MECCA currently sits on.
Build a new arena for UMW basketball? That's quite a demand. May as well shoot for the sky, Frank. After all, those 30 UWM fans who attend games deserve the very best.
Frank Gimbel is a buffoon. If this thing gets derailed to keep the f**king MECCA around then Milwaukee gets what it deserves.
They can use the Rec Center...should be no problem to roll out a few rows of bleachers, unless they have a legitimate reason to need five seats for every fan who shows up.
If this stuff continues, I wonder how long those two NY billionaires will dick around with Milwaukee's small time politics. At some point, their patience will run out.
If things don't work out with Milwaukee, I know the NBA can buy back the team. But if the NY owners demonstrate they've done all they can, would the NBA work out a deal that lets them keep the team and move it to another city?
UWM left the MECCA a few years ago to play their games on campus for awhile before returning. Now all of a sudden the place is so impotant they're making demands like this?
I can understand the appeal of having a legit arena to play for a D-1 school, but its a short-term fix anyways. They should use their leverage to try to weasel their way into the new arena for a 'Nova like schedule and try to negotiate a 6-year home and home with MU as part of each schools lease agreement. It allows them to save face for a few years while they rebuild their program and hopefully a new on campus arena they would need to build anyways. It would also put a big-time school on their schedule. MU wants this done and may be willing to do the home and home if they get the right lease package.
UWM acts like they have have a new home and all 3 basketball clubs are supporting the endeavor. As much as no one cares cares about UWM on a game to game basis, they do have a ton of alumni in the city that pretend to care about where they play. It's a win pretty much for everyone.
That's actually a good idea for UWM. Play 4 or 5 games in the new arena and the rest at the Klotschke, at least for a few years.
I was once in a meeting as a younger lad with Mr. Gimbel and our AD. Let's just say I was very proud how our AD handled him. It was a teaching moment and it was something to behold. Can't believe FG is still hanging around because that meeting was probably 16 or 17 years ago and he seemed old then.
Speaking of Fran, UW-milwaukee and the arena.....some pretty funny stuff here.
http://uwmfreak.proboards.com/thread/6739/chancellor-steps-defend-panther-arena
Yeah, they really need the space.
https://mobile.twitter.com/MKEPanthers/status/534515535506317312/photos
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B2r7CHdIEAEPpMq.jpg)
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on November 17, 2014, 09:04:20 PM
Speaking of Fran, UW-milwaukee and the arena.....some pretty funny stuff here.
http://uwmfreak.proboards.com/thread/6739/chancellor-steps-defend-panther-arena
Loved the quote about us getting 10K sometimes for conference games.
Quote from: Groin_pull on November 17, 2014, 07:10:15 PM
If this stuff continues, I wonder how long those two NY billionaires will dick around with Milwaukee's small time politics. At some point, their patience will run out.
If things don't work out with Milwaukee, I know the NBA can buy back the team. But if the NY owners demonstrate they've done all they can, would the NBA work out a deal that lets them keep the team and move it to another city?
I think the Bucks owners will take a pragmatic approach, if they can't get their top choice they will try for the second and so on. They pretty much have the money part worked out. They won't take a risk on being able to keep the franchise. There are too many other rich guys who want one and will pay top dollar to the NBA if the league repossesses the franchise rights to Milwaukee.
Quote from: Groin_pull on November 17, 2014, 07:10:15 PM
move it to another city?
(https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRludjBO8oPbls5GFq0jqYDJhKb-PeDaBXQJ2kzp8Ej-lthy97kmg)
If UW-M wants to stay downtown, why not the MSOE gym? Probably could pay to put a Panther logo in the corner....
Quote from: Aughnanure on November 17, 2014, 09:25:24 PM
Yeah, they really need the space.
https://mobile.twitter.com/MKEPanthers/status/534515535506317312/photos
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B2r7CHdIEAEPpMq.jpg)
Quote from: keefe on November 18, 2014, 01:36:27 AM
(https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRludjBO8oPbls5GFq0jqYDJhKb-PeDaBXQJ2kzp8Ej-lthy97kmg)
You've got the idea. And don't forget about Vegas. After Silver's speech, gambling is no longer shunned. Off the top of my head, I'd say Seattle, Las Vegas, San Jose, Kansas City, Louisville, and Anaheim are all fighting for a seat at the table...in that order. Probably room for just one.
I think UWM's objection to the Cell being torn down has little to do with their lease and much more to do with their naming rights. It's not that often that the stars align so as to allow a middle-tier DI commuter school the opportunity for naming rights on an arena with a semblance of utility. They found something here that they know they'll never find again, and understandably, they want to hang on to it.
Every lease has a condemnation clause that gives the landlord an out... UWM isn't going to be able to win that fight if that's the path the WCD and/or City elects to pursue. It may, on the other hand, have a fight on its hands regarding the naming rights (though most likely, their damages will be capped at the amount they've already paid for the rights).
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on November 17, 2014, 09:04:20 PM
Speaking of Fran, UW-milwaukee and the arena.....some pretty funny stuff here.
http://uwmfreak.proboards.com/thread/6739/chancellor-steps-defend-panther-arena
Wait a second.... UWM has their own minor-league version of Scoop on the interwebs?!?
Leave it to Chicos to have found that one.
Quote from: Benny B on November 18, 2014, 08:55:25 AM
I think UWM's objection to the Cell being torn down has little to do with their lease and much more to do with their naming rights. It's not that often that the stars align so as to allow a middle-tier DI commuter school the opportunity for naming rights on an arena with a semblance of utility. They found something here that they know they'll never find again, and understandably, they want to hang on to it.
Every lease has a condemnation clause that gives the landlord an out... UWM isn't going to be able to win that fight if that's the path the WCD and/or City elects to pursue. It may, on the other hand, have a fight on its hands regarding the naming rights (though most likely, their damages will be capped at the amount they've already paid for the rights).
Good point on the condemnation clause.
I hope UWM doesn't mock this up so much that it costs Milwaukee the franchise, given that this arena will largely be paid for by public funds. But, if UWM does muck this up enough and the arena ends up at 4th and Wisconsin attached to the Grand Avenue (or what's left of it), that would be a win for Marquette.
From this summer... it sounds like both sides have an out if the arena gets knocked down.
http://www.jsonline.com/blogs/sports/265537621.html
I struggle to see how the Sprint Center in KC offers much more than the BC to an NBA team. Maybe there's an ownership group in KC that would overpay to move the Bucks there, and the temporary excitement would draw more fans, but otherwise it just seemed like a newer version of the BC. I could understand Louisville's arena offering more, or the new place in Vegas and the dreamed up arena plans in Seattle, but the Sprint Center didn't seem like it offered more revenue generating opportunities than the BC when I was there for the CBE a few years ago.
They can't play in the BC? An 85% empty arena versus a 70% empty arena?
Quote from: Litehouse on November 18, 2014, 09:12:21 AM
I struggle to see how the Sprint Center in KC offers much more than the BC to an NBA team. Maybe there's an ownership group in KC that would overpay to move the Bucks there, and the temporary excitement would draw more fans, but otherwise it just seemed like a newer version of the BC. I could understand Louisville's arena offering more, or the new place in Vegas and the dreamed up arena plans in Seattle, but the Sprint Center didn't seem like it offered more revenue generating opportunities than the BC when I was there for the CBE a few years ago.
What are you talking about? It's a much better arena than the Bradley, so much better. You don't notice the revenue generating opportunities because they're things like expanded club seats.
Regardless, it isn't going to be KC. KC's chance was the move from Seattle that went to Oklahoma City because the owner is an OK native.
That's a fair point. I wasn't on the club level, just sitting behind the basket on the lower level.
Quote from: Litehouse on November 18, 2014, 09:22:31 AM
That's a fair point. I wasn't on the club level, just sitting behind the basket on the lower level.
Club level is great, and the lower bowl dwarfs the upper level. More revenue to be had with those seats. It's a really nice venue.
That's true too, the lower level there was much larger than the BC. Thanks for enlightening me, back to bashing UWM...
They still haven't even sold out their home game against Madison. I just checked and tickets are still available.
Quote from: Litehouse on November 18, 2014, 09:34:39 AM
That's true too, the lower level there was much larger than the BC. Thanks for enlightening me, back to bashing UWM...
Yeah man, they suck right?
My favorite line on that UWM forum was that guy who said we were scared because UWM is a sleeping giant that's waking up since they have made 4 ncaa appearances now.
Quote from: BagpipingBoxer on November 18, 2014, 10:31:57 AM
My favorite line on that UWM forum was that guy who said we were scared because UWM is a sleeping giant that's waking up since they have made 4 ncaa appearances now.
My favorite part was the listing of NIT appearances on their header. "A sleeping giant" doesn't list NIT or first round (still don't agree with round of 64 being second round) tournament exits.
Truthfully, does MU have ANY influence on this whole arena issue?
If I'm looking at it objectively, I really doubt that they do.
This is about NBA $ and politics.
MU might get asked "Do you like this idea?", but I have a feeling it's more of a courtesy than an actual partnership with the Bucks.
Quote from: Canned Goods n Ammo on November 18, 2014, 10:41:37 AM
Truthfully, does MU have ANY influence on this whole arena issue?
If I'm looking at it objectively, I really doubt that they do.
This is about NBA $ and politics.
MU might get asked "Do you like this idea?", but I have a feeling it's more of a courtesy than an actual partnership with the Bucks.
I'm sure we will chip in some small amount of money and have input into our locker room design, placement, and other amenities to make it actually feel like our home arena but I doubt we will have much say in what site they select to build it.
Quote from: MUMonster03 on November 18, 2014, 10:45:09 AM
I'm sure we will chip in some small amount of money and have input into our locker room design, placement, and other amenities to make it actually feel like our home arena but I doubt we will have much say in what site they select to build it.
oh, well yes, I suppose MU will be involved a little in the design.
I guess I'm talking "big picture" stuff.
The UWM message board implies that somehow MU is behind the scenes participating in this whole new arena plan. I suspect MU has very little influence on this situation.
Ironically, I think the UWM guys are overrating MU's influence and power.
Naming rights of 300K to 350K. and rental of 10-15K per game when you include the tickets fee. If MKE holds up the stadium because of that REV then they are idiots. Gimble is probably just saying that so if its possible to get a 2nd stadium out of the bucks owners better to ask for it now. With what UWM pays you are talking about about 500K in REV per year. How can anybody justify spending 50 mil on new 8000 stadium that generates 500K in rent.
Quote from: Canned Goods n Ammo on November 18, 2014, 10:41:37 AM
Truthfully, does MU have ANY influence on this whole arena issue?
If I'm looking at it objectively, I really doubt that they do.
This is about NBA $ and politics.
MU might get asked "Do you like this idea?", but I have a feeling it's more of a courtesy than an actual partnership with the Bucks.
I'm sure we do. I doubt it'll be very public but between dick strong and the university's commitment to Bball im sure we'll have plenty of say behind the scenes while letting this be the Bucks big project publicly.
Quote from: kmwtrucks on November 18, 2014, 11:05:33 AM
Naming rights of 300K to 350K. and rental of 10-15K per game when you include the tickets fee. If MKE holds up the stadium because of that REV then they are idiots. Gimble is probably just saying that so if its possible to get a 2nd stadium out of the bucks owners better to ask for it now. With what UWM pays you are talking about about 500K in REV per year. How can anybody justify spending 50 mil on new 8000 stadium that generates 500K in rent.
Why would the new Bucks owners agree to build UWM a new arena? At some point, these NYC billionaires will say..."Screw this, we've tried to make it work here in Mayberry. Let's start working the NBA so we can keep the team and move it somewhere else."
Fran's taking it pretty well over there:
"You can't "value your relationship" and simultaneously gut our program and thwart our institution. The Bucks are on notice; if they decide to move ahead to try to destroy the Panther Arena, every stakeholder in the University needs to "value" his or her relationship with the Bucks in EXACTLY the same way -- by doing everything possible to make them fail in every way possible."
http://uwmfreak.proboards.com/thread/6739/chancellor-steps-defend-panther-arena?page=8
Im selfish. I couldnt care less if the Cell is torn down. But obviously, im slightly biased.
Quote from: BagpipingBoxer on November 18, 2014, 11:07:08 AM
I'm sure we do. I doubt it'll be very public but between dick strong and the university's commitment to Bball im sure we'll have plenty of say behind the scenes while letting this be the Bucks big project publicly.
Why?
Is MU going to contribute significant cash? If they are, then yes, MU will have some say.
If not, MU is waaaaay down the list of contributing opinions.
Quote from: Aughnanure on November 18, 2014, 12:42:34 PM
Fran's taking it pretty well over there:
"You can't "value your relationship" and simultaneously gut our program and thwart our institution. The Bucks are on notice; if they decide to move ahead to try to destroy the Panther Arena, every stakeholder in the University needs to "value" his or her relationship with the Bucks in EXACTLY the same way -- by doing everything possible to make them fail in every way possible."
http://uwmfreak.proboards.com/thread/6739/chancellor-steps-defend-panther-arena?page=8
Wow. That's tough talk for a fan base that could fit in a phone booth.
Quote from: Aughnanure on November 18, 2014, 12:42:34 PM
Fran's taking it pretty well over there:
"You can't "value your relationship" and simultaneously gut our program and thwart our institution. The Bucks are on notice; if they decide to move ahead to try to destroy the Panther Arena, every stakeholder in the University needs to "value" his or her relationship with the Bucks in EXACTLY the same way -- by doing everything possible to make them fail in every way possible."
http://uwmfreak.proboards.com/thread/6739/chancellor-steps-defend-panther-arena?page=8
This is entertaining as hell.
from an article Sept. 25:
QuoteIn June, UWM signed a 10-year partnership with the Wisconsin Center District that included the renaming of the arena. The university has an opt-out clause should community leaders selected the site for a new arena.
http://www.jsonline.com/news/milwaukee/gimbel-calls-new-arena-proposal-unworkable-b99359051z1-277076421.html
Were there any pictures of the student protest about tearing down the Arena? ::)
Total attendance, per the boxscore: 1,917
http://scores.espn.go.com/ncb/boxscore?gameId=400597795
I'm not a mathmetician, but that crowd looks closer to 191.7 than 1,917. As mentioned before, UWM left the Arena two years ago, now it suddenly has transformed into some sacred land?? Just give them 2 home games at the new place and call it even.
Protest is schedule for tomorrow night before the UWM-IUPUI game, not last night. I look forward to the coverage on the 10:00 news.
I don't blame them for being pissed off.
We would be pissed off too.
But, they also shouldn't project/contort/twist themselves into all sorts of knots trying to climb the moral high ground on how everybody is out to screw UWM.
This is $. Period.
Nobody is out to screw UWM, but right now, they don't generate much revenue, so they aren't a priority.
Maybe the new arena could take Bucks/MU/Admirals/UWM. But, UWM might be last in the pecking order unless they can draw more than the Admirals, or if they are willing to pay a significant premium to rent the building.
Quote from: Canned Goods n Ammo on November 18, 2014, 03:04:12 PM
I don't blame them for being pissed off.
We would be pissed off too.
But, they also shouldn't project/contort/twist themselves into all sorts of knots trying to climb the moral high ground on how everybody is out to screw UWM.
This is $. Period.
Nobody is out to screw UWM, but right now, they don't generate much revenue, so they aren't a priority.
Maybe the new arena could take Bucks/MU/Admirals/UWM. But, UWM might be last in the pecking order unless they can draw more than the Admirals, or if they are willing to pay a significant premium to rent the building.
Might???
One could say that Frank Gimbel and UWM have been taking advantage of the tax payers with the current agreement. New seats, new scoreboard, costing millions... all for a sub-par lease arrangement that can't make good business sense. I don't know but I'd like to see the income versus expenses for the arena including the millions in capital improvements recently completed and contemplated. I'm sure if UWM and Frank Gimbel push back hard enough, these will be all over the news.
I guess if I was UWM and was given a sweetheart deal, I might make some noise as well.
Question, did Frank Gimbel see this coming and gave UWM the lease to make it more difficult to allow the Bucks to take down the arena. I doubt it, but it is a curious lease arrangement to take place at a time when everyone knows the Bucks were looking at building an arena.
Quote from: MUfan12 on November 18, 2014, 09:11:02 AM
From this summer... it sounds like both sides have an out if the arena gets knocked down.
http://www.jsonline.com/blogs/sports/265537621.html
Thanks!
Quote from: Michael Kenyon on November 18, 2014, 02:32:23 PM
from an article Sept. 25:
http://www.jsonline.com/news/milwaukee/gimbel-calls-new-arena-proposal-unworkable-b99359051z1-277076421.html
So they signed a contract knowing this could happen and now are "Shocked! Shocked!" that it might actually happen?
Does that about cover it?
I don't think I saw it in the articles, but does UWM get to keep concession revenue? or does the arena keep that?
There's an argument to be made that Milwaukee needs a smaller arena for smaller events that are better served by the MECCA than the BC, and that we should keep the MECCA around for that reason. This could be for concerts, the Wave, motorcross, the circus, etc. that are a better fit in the MECCA. Gimbel should be making that argument, not saying UWM needs a new arena, because they clearly don't.