Bucks arena

[BrewCity83]

I'd be fine with continuing the Miller Park sales tax for a new arena, too.  But you'd be hard pressed to find any polititians around here that will back that.

[GGGG]

As I have stated in previous posts, the main reason the Bucks can't make money is because they put an inferior product on the court for a small market.  Another reason is that even if they had success filling the BMO Harris Bradley Center, the negotiated television contract is, of course, not competitive with larger markets, nor will it ever be.  The real problem with the NBA is the lack of revenue sharing.  If they moved to the NFL model, I think that we wouldn't be talking about teams having to fold or move every couple of years... meaning stability.

Since 1985, there has only been three NBA relocations.  Griz to Memphis...Hornets to NO...Supersonics to OKC.  (I'm not counting the Nets to Brooklyn since they simply relocated within the same market.)

The NFL has had four during that same timeframe.  Raiders to Oakland, Rams to St. Louis, Cardinals to Phoenix and Oilers to Tennessee. 

And yeah the NFL ones were all before the year 2000, but one of the reasons teams moved is because cities built stadiums and tried to attract the teams to move.  But tell me now, what non-NFL city has an NFL ready stadium available?  Or even one in the works?  I mean even the threat of a potential one in LA has gotten all sorts of cities, states, etc. to spring for new or renovated stadiums.

The NBA has seen such recent movement because cities have built NBA-ready arenas. 

[Canned Goods n Ammo]

http://www.databasebasketball.com/teams/teamatt.htm?tm=mil&lg=n

You may not care about the Bucks because you are like most fans... Band-wagoners.  If you look at the last season the Bucks were successful (2000-2001), you can see that they drew on average 18,178 fans per game.  The maximum capacity at the BMO Harris Bradley center is listed at 18,717 fans.   This means that when the Bucks were successful, they filled their arena 97.1% full.  Not too bad.  Since that season, the Bucks haven't had better than 89.9% of capacity per game ('03-'04 season).  That is painful, but as a Bucks fan, the most difficult thing for me is watching the team have no clear goal other than being completely mediocre every year.  The management has been guiding a rudderless boat since 2002-2003 when they traded Ray Allen for a song.

As I have stated in previous posts, the main reason the Bucks can't make money is because they put an inferior product on the court for a small market.  Another reason is that even if they had success filling the BMO Harris Bradley Center, the negotiated television contract is, of course, not competitive with larger markets, nor will it ever be.  The real problem with the NBA is the lack of revenue sharing.  If they moved to the NFL model, I think that we wouldn't be talking about teams having to fold or move every couple of years... meaning stability.

One solution that the Bucks have to solving the cash flow issue is to build a new publicly funded arena... something the city doesn't seem to keen on doing.  While the BMO BC doesn't seem too old to many people (built in 1989), remember that it is 25 years old (older than the average college grad by 3 years!), and one of the oldest and smallest arenas in the NBA. 

If something isn't done by the time the current contract runs out in 2017 the Bucks are likely gone.  I understand the knee jerk reaction of people not wanting to pay for another new arena while the current one seems to be in fine operation.  But economically speaking, the Bucks won't be in Milwaukee without a new arena.  In the last decade or so the model for teams is to maximize revenue streams.  The Bucks are already doing the best they can with the facility as it exists.  The real question is who should pay for this arena.  Personally, I have no problem continuing the Miller Park sales tax that is currently financing the new ball park in the valley.  If estimates are correct, Miller Park will be paid off somewhere between 2016-2020.  If the sales tax is simply carried over to finance part or all of a new arena I doubt most people will notice.  I know there will always be people who are staunchly against the public finance of a private business (like most sports teams), but a new arena could also be partially funded by private investors.  Why not allow private investors contribute money, and share in the profits (as a percent of their contribution) that the new arena will surely generate (As an example, the BMO BC is financially solvent).  Alternatively, the arena could be funded entirely by private funds as some suggest.

You are correct. I don't care about the Bucks because I'm not from WI. I have no allegiance to them, and they are bad at basketball.

Can they attract fans? Yes.

Is the fanbase big enough and passionate enough that the thought of losing the Bucks is going to cause a lot of angst throughout the state? Probably not.

IF a public investment makes logical sense, then I'm all for it. I'm not really interested in the Brewers, but I recognize the value of 81 home games per year, plus other events at Miller Park.

If Herb just wants to be more profitable, then no, I'm not in favor of it. The NBA has a shitty business model that makes it hard for small market teams to be profitable. Then, as you correctly state, the owners come looking for $ from the city.

I know I won't feel the tax increase... so in reality, I'm apathetic. But, if you are asking me if it's a good idea... no, I don't think it's a good idea.

If there is a mix of private and public funds and it's structured properly, I can see how it would work. If it's simply the city building a new venue on the taxpayers dime... I don't think that will work.

[ChicosBailBonds]

One solution that the Bucks have to solving the cash flow issue is to build a new publicly funded arena... something the city doesn't seem to keen on doing.  While the BMO BC doesn't seem too old to many people (built in 1989), remember that it is 25 years old (older than the average college grad by 3 years!), and one of the oldest and smallest arenas in the NBA. 

The BC has the 18th largest seating capacity of any NBA arena.  Pretty close to the middle and a stone's throw from a few arenas ahead of it.

I get the age thing, but one of th things that pisses people off is arenas used to last 50 years, now we literally have arenas replaced sometimes within 15 years and 25 years is considered ancient.  That is a collossal waste of tax payer money...usually.  If someone wants to pony up private funds to replace it and make a go, by all means.

By the way, I was absolutely floored when you said you were willing to extend a tax for another purpose.   

[Benny B]

I would still like to know what MU's position is on the "downtown arena" initiative... it would seem that theirs would be the second-loudest voice calling for this, but so far, I've heard crickets.

[Hards Alumni]

The BC has the 18th largest seating capacity of any NBA arena.  Pretty close to the middle and a stone's throw from a few arenas ahead of it.

I get the age thing, but one of th things that pisses people off is arenas used to last 50 years, now we literally have arenas replaced sometimes within 15 years and 25 years is considered ancient.  That is a collossal waste of tax payer money...usually.  If someone wants to pony up private funds to replace it and make a go, by all means.

By the way, I was absolutely floored when you said you were willing to extend a tax for another purpose.   

Realistically, it is the same purpose.  And it isn't a burden on people.  0.1% sales tax is reasonable... but I understand your butterflies when you noticed that someone you call a liberal thinks it is great to extend taxes.  Must have just made your day.  

[ChicosBailBonds]

Realistically, it is the same purpose.  And it isn't a burden on people.  0.1% sales tax is reasonable... but I understand your butterflies when you noticed that someone you call a liberal thinks it is great to extend taxes.  Must have just made your day.  

I always like it when other people spend other people's money and compound it by saying it won't be a burden.  That's always cool.  It's .1% here, 5% here, 8% here, etc, etc.  But don't worry, it won't have a burden....just trust us and all the wise decisions we've made in the past.

[Hards Alumni]

I always like it when other people spend other people's money and compound it by saying it won't be a burden.  That's always cool.  It's .1% here, 5% here, 8% here, etc, etc.  But don't worry, it won't have a burden....just trust us and all the wise decisions we've made in the past.

The implication being that Miller Park was a unwise decision?

[real chili 83]

It's a broken model only for the billionaire owners who are tightwads.

Guys like Mark Cuban, who get pleasure out of owning a franchise and want to make it the best, look at it as a loss-leader. If they make money, great. If not, well, they can't take it with them, anyway.

I used to laugh my arse off every time I read that the Twins "couldn't afford" to pay such-and-such player or "couldn't afford" to compete with the best teams. Carl Pohlad was one of the 50 richest men in the world. He could have "afforded" to do anything he wanted to do -- including put a retractable dome on the new Minny ballpark. He chose to be a tightwad right till the end.

People wonder why athletes will hold out for a $109 million contract when they would have been perfectly set for life making "only" $80 million. Well, if they don't get it, the owners just keep it locked in their safes. It's not like bad teams lower ticket prices!

According to Sid, who was a close, personal friend of Carl, he did take it with him.

[ChicosBailBonds]

The implication being that Miller Park was a unwise decision?

Pay for it without the public money, that is a wiser decision.


On a related note....am boy am I STUNNED to hear this.   


Gov. Dayton Admits Gambling Has Not Worked For Stadium Funding

Published September 13, 2013

The state of Minnesota's "attempt to use electronic gambling in bars as a Vikings stadium revenue source has proven to be a bust," and Gov. Mark Dayton "admits as much" in a Minnesota Public Radio News report. Dayton said that "multiple mistakes caused the first year to be rocky and produce far less money than expected." Minnesota "has now shifted to back-up funding sources for its share" of the $975M venue (AP, 9/13). Dayton: "There were multiple errors made, and in hindsight, obviously we were terribly wrong. But everything, as far as I know, was done in good faith" (MINNESOTA.PUBLICRADIO.org, 9/13).

Meanwhile, the Minnesota Sports Facilities Authority will hold a Friday afternoon press conference at the Metrodome to release findings of an "extensive legal and financial audit" of Viking owners Zygi and Mark Wilf (STARTRIBUNE.com, 9/13).

[muwarrior69]

The BC has the 18th largest seating capacity of any NBA arena.  Pretty close to the middle and a stone's throw from a few arenas ahead of it.

I get the age thing, but one of th things that pisses people off is arenas used to last 50 years, now we literally have arenas replaced sometimes within 15 years and 25 years is considered ancient.  That is a collossal waste of tax payer money...usually.  If someone wants to pony up private funds to replace it and make a go, by all means.

By the way, I was absolutely floored when you said you were willing to extend a tax for another purpose.   

It amazes me that Dodger Stadium is the 2nd oldest ball park in the National League and to me an East Coaster it still looks like a fine venue to me. I can remember when Shea opened in 1964 which lead to all the other cookie cutter stadiums being built in that era. I think a lot of the new football and baseball stadiums built in the last 20 years was due in part to baseball and football no longer wanting to share the same venue.
But your right the life of a venue has shrunk dramatically albeit Chicago and Boston.

[Jay Bee]

Meanwhile, the Minnesota Sports Facilities Authority will hold a Friday afternoon press conference at the Metrodome to release findings of an "extensive legal and financial audit" of Viking owners Zygi and Mark Wilf (STARTRIBUNE.com, 9/13).

BTW, the findings were released (well, except numbers which they refused to disclose.. smh). There most certainly was not a financial audit done, although some of the agreed upon procedures performed were good to do. I think at the end of the day the state, league, taxpayers, etc. are all still going forward based largely on the representations from the Wilfs.

Squirmy? Not at this point, but the wonderful findings from the "extension legal and financial audit" don't do much to quell my concerns, personally. 

[Brewtown Andy]

I would still like to know what MU's position is on the "downtown arena" initiative... it would seem that theirs would be the second-loudest voice calling for this, but so far, I've heard crickets.

Based on number of events per year, the Admirals would be the second loudest.

I would figure that MU would be in favor of a new Bucks arena being built downtown as opposed to anywhere else, given how awesome DePaul's student attendance is.

[Marqus Howard]

http://bizjournals.com/milwaukee/blog/2013/09/milwaukee-needs-a-new-arena-nbas.html?page=all&r=full

[Chili]

Based on number of events per year, the Admirals would be the second loudest.

I would figure that MU would be in favor of a new Bucks arena being built downtown as opposed to anywhere else, given how awesome DePaul's student attendance is.

Last years total attendance numbers:

Marquette (16 games) - 242,205, 15,135 ave
Admirals (38 games) - 213,700, 6,623 ave

MU is the #2 tenant as it's a major sport, not minor.

[Brewtown Andy]

Last years total attendance numbers:

Marquette (16 games) - 242,205, 15,135 ave
Admirals (38 games) - 213,700, 6,623 ave

MU is the #2 tenant as it's a major sport, not minor.

Like I said, just based on the number of dates using the building.