Bucks announced today per MJS. So three more years in the BC.
Still will be done before DePaul's arena.
Only in Milwaukee. Really is sad it takes so long to get things moving in this city.
Chicago is worse, believe me. Wait and see. The DePaul arena, which was announced and confirmed way before the new Bucks arena was, will open afterwards.
Quote from: GoldenWarrior11 on October 28, 2015, 09:47:40 AM
Chicago is worse, believe me. Wait and see. The DePaul arena, which was announced and confirmed way before the new Bucks arena was, will open afterwards.
If the new Chicago arena was housing our NBA team, it would have a little higher priority than DePaul basketball and would stick closer to schedule, IMO.
Will the Zoo interchange be done by then or will they announce they are redoing it again then
Quote from: Goose on October 28, 2015, 09:24:39 AM
Only in Milwaukee. Really is sad it takes so long to get things moving in this city.
Sorry, but not even close to being a unique Milwaukee thing. The DePaul arena, the Vikings stadium, plenty of other examples.
Quote from: Goose on October 28, 2015, 09:24:39 AM
Only in Milwaukee. Really is sad it takes so long to get things moving in this city.
Huh?
It's only a $500M - $1B facility, it shouldn't take that much longer than a house to construct.
Quote from: GooooMarquette on October 28, 2015, 10:40:39 AM
Sorry, but not even close to being a unique Milwaukee thing. The DePaul arena, the Vikings stadium, plenty of other examples.
Definitely less "zoning and convenience fees" in the process when compared to a Chicago building.
Quote from: JakeBarnes on October 28, 2015, 12:06:43 PM
Definitely less "zoning and convenience fees" in the process when compared to a Chicago building.
Still plenty of red tape that needs to get cut. It's a sad reality but there's no avoiding it anywhere else.
Quote from: Goose on October 28, 2015, 09:24:39 AM
Only in Milwaukee. Really is sad it takes so long to get things moving in this city.
Said by people that have no idea what they're talking about.
Quote from: GooooMarquette on October 28, 2015, 10:40:39 AM
Sorry, but not even close to being a unique Milwaukee thing. The DePaul arena, the Vikings stadium, plenty of other examples.
Don't you know that construction, weather changes are unique to only the city you live in? These things never happen anywhere else.
Quote from: PTM on October 28, 2015, 01:49:03 PM
Said by people that have no idea what they're talking about.
What? What city/state wouldn't JUMP at the chance to spend $250M for young men to dribble leather balls and throw them through hoops.
Quote from: WI_inferiority_complexes on October 28, 2015, 09:56:33 AM
If the new Chicago arena was housing our NBA team, it would have a little higher priority than DePaul basketball and would stick closer to schedule, IMO.
(http://38.media.tumblr.com/bf0223bd967f9d9352ae643a9f449068/tumblr_n4031x8Ac81s1v6uho2_250.gif)
Worth noting that the Reinsdorf/Wirtz partnership trying to get a new arena built was formed in 1988, construction didn't begin until 1992 and the United Center didn't open until the 1994-95 season. There, the city only contributed infrastructure costs, and it still took 4 years just to break ground.
Quote from: GoldenWarrior11 on October 28, 2015, 09:47:40 AM
Chicago is worse, believe me. Wait and see. The DePaul arena, which was announced and confirmed way before the new Bucks arena was, will open afterwards.
I can't believe this is true. When I was at McCormick for a show in September the entire area was already chained off and they had started clearing space. That's pretty significantly ahead of where the Bucks arena is right now.
This was kind of expected. They obviously wanted the JS building originally and needed to push the arena through using the NBA's deadline of '17. Now that they have the money, the league will be more lenient about the timeline. The average citizen wouldn't have understood the why the NBA deadline of '17 was important if all the plans were going for a stadium in '18. Now that they have the money, they can push back the timeline and make sure this is done right.
I'm ok with it as a citizen and a fan. Another year of useful life squeezed out of the BC, cheap seats the next 2 years, and an arena that isn't rushed.
I'm just curious on how the funding is impacted if the stadium is delayed. I assume it was primarily connected to revenue from player's income versus revenue from the stadium. I would think 8 months of debt service would be saved as well unless loans were already taken out.
Sticking with only in Milwaukee. DePaul getting new arena vs NBA team moving are apples and oranges. For this to drag out this long is a joke. Like it or not Milwaukee needs the Bucks and downtown really needs the Bucks.
The debt is coming though bonds sold by the Wisconsin Center District. Those haven't been sold yet nor will they be until the Bucks sign a lease.
Quote from: Goose on October 30, 2015, 02:46:33 PM
Sticking with only in Milwaukee. DePaul getting new arena vs NBA team moving are apples and oranges. For this to drag out this long is a joke. Like it or not Milwaukee needs the Bucks and downtown really needs the Bucks.
The Bucks aren't going anywhere.
Quote from: Goose on October 30, 2015, 02:46:33 PM
Sticking with only in Milwaukee. DePaul getting new arena vs NBA team moving are apples and oranges. For this to drag out this long is a joke. Like it or not Milwaukee needs the Bucks and downtown really needs the Bucks.
Can you explain yourself some more? The state/city is perfectly fine with the Bradley Center for another year of functionality. The Bucks know they are getting their arena and want to do it right. The only one pissed off would be the NBA since their timeline gets pushed back. The main thing is the NBA won't buy back the team if the stadium is half built come 2017. There was plenty of speculation that this was the original plan since it is very hard to build a new arena in less than 2 years in a cold-weather city. 3 out of the last 4 NBA arenas built took over 2 years. Barclays was the only one under 2 years. Add in the land they are building on is pretty messed up, I think a longer timeline is more realistic.
Where is the downside to dragging this on and making sure it gets done right? I think everyone pretty much agrees this is getting done and will be a project focused on the next 2 decades. It's just an extra 8 months of finalizing plans and closing on developments around the arena.
The NBA isn't really upset either. They were playing the bad cop to the Bucks good cop the entire time. They don't really care if it is opened in 2017 or 18.
Quote from: spartan3186 on October 30, 2015, 01:01:05 PM
I can't believe this is true. When I was at McCormick for a show in September the entire area was already chained off and they had started clearing space. That's pretty significantly ahead of where the Bucks arena is right now.
Dunno about that. The Bucks arena space is already pretty cleared out.
Also, the DePaul arena was announced 3 years ago.
Quote from: Brewtown Andy on November 01, 2015, 01:35:39 AM
Dunno about that. The Bucks arena space is already pretty cleared out.
Also, the DePaul arena was announced 3 years ago.
Plus the State of Illinois doesn't have a budget. It is issuing IOU's after $650 to $100 million Powerball winners.
Quote from: Dr. Blackheart on November 01, 2015, 09:32:14 AM
Plus the State of Illinois doesn't have a budget. It is issuing IOU's after $650 to $100 million Powerball winners.
The DePaul arena has no bearing on the Illinois budget.
Quote from: martyconlonontherun on October 30, 2015, 02:32:30 PM
This was kind of expected. They obviously wanted the JS building originally and needed to push the arena through using the NBA's deadline of '17. Now that they have the money, the league will be more lenient about the timeline. The average citizen wouldn't have understood the why the NBA deadline of '17 was important if all the plans were going for a stadium in '18. Now that they have the money, they can push back the timeline and make sure this is done right.
I'm ok with it as a citizen and a fan. Another year of useful life squeezed out of the BC, cheap seats the next 2 years, and an arena that isn't rushed.
I'm just curious on how the funding is impacted if the stadium is delayed. I assume it was primarily connected to revenue from player's income versus revenue from the stadium. I would think 8 months of debt service would be saved as well unless loans were already taken out.
Very well said.
Quote from: PTM on November 01, 2015, 02:03:38 PM
The DePaul arena has no bearing on the Illinois budget.
Except that the Govenor has equal say on the Board with the Mayor but not Madigan who controls the unions who are building it (and the state budget). Rauner knows this is his pinch point with Mikey. He will delay this for as long as he can.
http://www.mpea.com
Quote from: Dr. Blackheart on November 01, 2015, 05:05:31 PM
Except that the Govenor has equal say on the Board with the Mayor but not Madigan who controls the unions who are building it (and the state budget). Rauner knows this is his pinch point with Mikey. He will delay this for as long as he can.
http://www.mpea.com
Except it has no bearing on the Illinois budget.
It may be a bargaining chip for Bruce, but it has no bearing on the Illinois budget.
Quote from: PTM on November 01, 2015, 07:16:17 PM
Except it has no bearing on the Illinois budget.
It may be a bargaining chip for Bruce, but it has no bearing on the Illinois budget.
But it does as the state secures the McPier bonds, which due to the budget impasse just led to a downgrade after a missed $21 million bond payment.
QuoteThe revelation that McPier's debt was so closely tied to the state appropriations process led Standard & Poor's and Fitch Ratings to reduce the agency's bond rating by seven and four notches, respectively. The downgrade killed the deal with Citibank, although the financial institution was willing to issue a new loan with less advantageous terms to McPier. Instead, the agency opted to sell the bonds immediately to secure financing for the hotel.
A McPier spokeswoman issued a statement noting that the agency "is pleased with the results" of today's sale, citing demand for the securities. "The $153 million raised in the transaction completes the funding for our hotel project," the statement said.
But ratings agencies are unlikely to restore McPier's pristine rating for its long-term debt, which stands at nearly $3.5 billion. While the state fixed this year's problem through a bill that appropriated the funding, the move covers only the current fiscal year.
"Although the statutory construct and bond document provisions historically have insulated these monthly payments to the authority—and ultimately debt service payments—from the budget and liquidity pressures occurring at the state level, we now believe this structure is vulnerable to those pressures as they play out in the state budget and appropriations process," S&P wrote in a ratings report earlier this week.
http://www.chicagobusiness.com/article/20150916/NEWS09/150919890/mcpier-pays-a-premium-on-bond-sale-after-credit-ratings-downgrade
Quote from: Dr. Blackheart on November 01, 2015, 07:55:37 PM
But it does as the state secures the McPier bonds, which due to the budget impasse just led to a downgrade after a missed $21 million bond payment.
http://www.chicagobusiness.com/article/20150916/NEWS09/150919890/mcpier-pays-a-premium-on-bond-sale-after-credit-ratings-downgrade
Grasping at straws. This arena has nothing to do with the Illinois budget.
Quote from: PTM on November 02, 2015, 10:41:56 AM
Grasping at straws. This arena has nothing to do with the Illinois budget.
Except for the bond trust lack of payment and the downgraded S&P bond rating, yes, grasping. Dec. 15 is the next deadline. While McPier has the $$, they don't have authority to hit their long term financing obligations that, by law, requires the state to back financially. Like you, I think this issue will get remediated, but unlike you it seems, I think that it will be with politics and delays.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/politics/ct-mcpier-debt-downgrade-met-0805-20150805-story.html