Herb Kohl says it's time for a replacement for the BC

[Hoopaloop]

Every study done on the BC says that it is financially unsuitable for an NBA franchise.

Can you link to those studies?

No doubt it is probably the weakest NBA arena.

Sacramento, Detroit, New Orleans, etc beg to differ

[Spotcheck Billy]

#2 If it's only 10cents on a $100, and if there are a lot of people that want a new arena, then hold a fundraiser like PBS and have people call in pledges. If the big fans donated $100, surely that would make up for somebody like me that doesn't really want to pay for it.

maybe like the old 45 "Let's keep the Bucks in Milwaukee" from 1985? I still have 2 copies of that, I googled for images and there is actually one on ebay right now: http://www.ebay.com/itm/Keep-Bucks-Milwaukee-Old-Style-Booze-Bros-7-45-rpm-/370606087773

if that sells for $30 I'm gonna sell mine which I thought were worthless novelties LOL

[Hards Alumni]

You're right, and I understand that but there are some problems for me:

#1 As it stands, most municipalities (city, state, fed.) are already overspending. I don't like tacking on more spending, even if it is generally seen as inconsequential. Instead of having politicians working out stadium deals, tell them to get to work on creating more efficient programs and policies that will actually help people.

#2 If it's only 10cents on a $100, and if there are a lot of people that want a new arena, then hold a fundraiser like PBS and have people call in pledges. If the big fans donated $100, surely that would make up for somebody like me that doesn't really want to pay for it.

#3 I realize #2 probably wouldn't work, and that's exactly my point.

#4 Cities/states fund plenty of buildings and items that don't make money (museums, historical society, libraries, etc.). However, those generally aren't private entities with poor business models that have $300 dollar buildings constructed for them.

#1 is totally a matter of opinion.

#2 is totally unrealistic

#3 I get your point.

#4  I understand, but it isn't as if they just give the building to the teams... its a publicly owned building.

personal opinion; a great deal of Herbie's popularity is due to buying the Bucks to 'keep them in Milwaukee'.  His burning desire to own a sports team may stem from his association with Bud Selig (college roomates) and Bud's former ownership of the Brewers.  He has proven himself inept, as has Bucks hierarchy at talent selection/team building/management.  A change of ownership might be the best thing for the Bucks-could result in better teams, crowds, revenues, etc all at the BC.

Totally agree, with the caveat being that the team is kept in Milwaukee.

Can you link to those studies?


Sacramento, Detroit, New Orleans, etc beg to differ

New Orleans can complain all they want since they have the Superdome sitting next door to their arena... I've been to the Pistons home court, and it is far better then the BC... Sacremento has a legit beef, and I expect them to be on the move very soon.  Which is too bad because they have some pretty loyal fans, who have a terrible team/front office... sort of like Milwaukee.



When all is said and done, Mr. Kohl has said they he plans to contribute, "not an insignificant amount" towards a new facility. Which is something not a lot of owners can say.

http://www.jsonline.com/sports/kohls-commitment-is-significant-db59ins-150218605.html

[Canned Goods n Ammo]

#1 is totally a matter of opinion.
Well, the budgets aren't really balanced as it stands, and costs to provide some public services are going up, therefore, inmho, we are spending too much. I'm not some lunatic uber-conservative I'm just looking at the economic basics of where we are as a country.

#2 is totally unrealistic
It is unrealistic, but it's basically what the Packers just did with the stock plan. If there is a demand, it can be done.

#3 I get your point.

#4  I understand, but it isn't as if they just give the building to the teams... its a publicly owned building.

Publicly owned, but it doesn't generate revenue for the city. It generates revenue for the Bucks. If the city could truly own it, and attempt to generate revenue with it, then I think I could get on board.

[Hards Alumni]

Imagine your text here 2002MUalum

Yes, but the Bucks would pay to use the building.

I would go into the budget thing with you, but I guess there is a time and place for that.

[SaintPaulWarrior]

And I saw a reference somewhere to $150 million pricetag!!  The BC itself was $90 million in the late 1980s.  Shake hands with $350-$400 million before you make it sexy.

XCEL Energy Center in St. Paul was built for $130 million in 2000 about $180 million in today's dollars.  ESPN named it the top sports venue in the country in 2004.  I have no idea about the cost but $400 million seems a little more than sexy.

[Canned Goods n Ammo]

Yes, but the Bucks would pay to use the building.

I would go into the budget thing with you, but I guess there is a time and place for that.

I was under the impression when these arenas are built, the teams essentially get to use the building for free or at "cost", and get to keep all of the additional revenue.

Am I wrong? Would the Bucks pay a significant amount for the lease? Does anybody know?

[SaintPaulWarrior]

I was under the impression when these arenas are built, the teams essentially get to use the building for free or at "cost", and get to keep all of the additional revenue.

Am I wrong? Would the Bucks pay a significant amount for the lease? Does anybody know?

I can only bring up the Wild because of first hand knowledge.  The Wild pay $3.5 million in annual rent on a 25 year lease with the city.  They also have to pay annual payments towards property taxes, etc.  These payments started at $2.5 million and escalate to $6 million a year during the 25 year lease term.  The Wild get all the money from the naming rights to offset a portion of these payments.

[Canned Goods n Ammo]

I can only bring up the Wild because of first hand knowledge.  The Wild pay $3.5 million in annual rent on a 25 year lease with the city.  They also have to pay annual payments towards property taxes, etc.  These payments started at $2.5 million and escalate to $6 million a year during the 25 year lease term.  The Wild get all the money from the naming rights to offset a portion of these payments.

Cool. Thanks.

That's not insignificant as it would be over 100million over the course of 25years.

Definitely more than I thought they paid.

[Hoopaloop]

Yes, but the Bucks would pay to use the building.

I would go into the budget thing with you, but I guess there is a time and place for that.

Maybe they will pay to use the building.  There are a number of teams that do not pay rent and are given that benefit to stay in a city or entice them to come to a city.


Charlotte Bobcats do not pay rent.  The Vikings haven't for the last 9 years.  The Penguins were offered rent free to move to Kansas City.  The Columbus Blue Jackets do not pay rent


http://www.wfae.org/wfae/stat_search.cfm?id=8485&action=display

http://bloguin.com/puckdrunklove/2012-articles/march/public-ownership-of-nationwide-arena-keeps-blue-jackets-in-columbus.html

http://sports.espn.go.com/nhl/news/story?id=2720130

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vikings_Stadium


http://www.bluestemprairie.com/bluestemprairie/2012/04/emo-senator-mike-parry-thinks-free-rent-for-wilfs-hypothetical-soccer-team-is-awesome-.html


By the way, does this 1986 article about building the Bradley Center sound familiar?   

http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1368&dat=19860618&id=5KpRAAAAIBAJ&sjid=sBIEAAAAIBAJ&pg=4854,3410975

[Hoopaloop]

Someone please cite the "economic" studies for and against publicly financed stadia.

Not studies, but articles debating the merits, also a full video story done on Cleveland which I find to be quite similar to Milwaukee in size, geographic location (upper midwest), etc.


http://video.foxbusiness.com/v/4116336/economist-no-economic-benefits-to-new-stadiums/


http://articles.herald-mail.com/2012-04-07/news/31306509_1_economic-impact-multiuse-stadium-minor-league-stadiums


http://www.brookings.edu/articles/1997/summer_taxes_noll.aspx

[warthog-driver]

The OKC Thunder will always have good attendance because it is the only show in town.

Just wait until they start losing...