New Stadium Imminent?

[MUSF]

Exactly how I view it.  I'm fine with stadiums, pro sports, etc, but at what cost, what options, etc.  What's the plan, who is paying, who benefits, who doesn't benefit (opportunity costs), etc.  Agree, its not complicated.....politics makes it very complicated.

Yup, the argument that publicly funded arenas for pro sports franchises benefit the city and the people isn't universally applicable. You can't just plop an arena anywhere in a city and see a guaranteed return on the investment. It has to be tied to a broader development plan to be beneficial.

[Canned Goods n Ammo]

When you're playing with other people's money, you ought to be able to demonstrate the positive return you're going to give them. So far no one from the NBA/Bucks/MMAC has done that.

THIS. So much of THIS.

[Groin_pull]

THIS. So much of THIS.

Once again, you won't have to pay for a new arena. So don't sweat it. Too many forces are at work to make sure it doesn't happen.

Ladies and gentlemen, your Seattle Bucks.....

[Canned Goods n Ammo]

Once again, you won't have to pay for a new arena. So don't sweat it. Too many forces are at work to make sure it doesn't happen.

Ladies and gentlemen, your Seattle Bucks.....

Why is it so complicated for tax payers to want to see how the investment will work?

If they can show me that it's good for the city, I'm on board.

[Let's Go Warriors]

Once again, you won't have to pay for a new arena. So don't sweat it. Too many forces are at work to make sure it doesn't happen.

Ladies and gentlemen, your Seattle Bucks.....

Not sure MU isnt better off without the Bucks...

[ChicosBailBonds]

Ok...see Seattle Supersonics.  Or New Jersey Nets.  Or Los Angeles Rams.  All moved from antiquated arenas.  All became better franchises after the move.

The Marlins have royally ticked off the fan base by twice building World Series winners and then doing massive salary dumps that landed the team in the cellar.  I think that's a different set of circumstances, even with the new stadium.

The Raiders moved, too, did they get better?  Cowboys moved from one stadium to another....not better.  I think you are associating way too much with the movement and success...it's not that simple.  The Boston Red Sox play in arguably the most antiquated stadium in baseball...they seem to be doing just fine.  

So many variables that you are ignoring.  By the way, the Rams may be moving again, so not a franchise I would use in your examples.  

[ThatDude]

What does the mayor of Milwaukee think about this situation?

[humanlung]

1) The Milwaukee County pension plan
2) Not one but two sewage plants built on the waterfront
3) A deep tunnel sewage system
4) A parking garage and Milwaukee transit system bus maintenance facility built on lakefront property near Summerfest
5) A convention center that was under-sized and non-competitive from the day it was designed
6) The Northwest Highway debacle
7) Turning down the old Northwest Air when they wanted Milwaukee as the hub

ALL of these were BIG $$$$ decisions that the local government screwed up in epic fashion, costing us untold amounts of money.  Finding the money for Miller Park was at least a "push" and I am sure a new arena would be the same.  I'll take that at this point.

And AGAIN, it's about more that $$$ in my opinion.

Guns,  I posted this a few pages ago - decisions made by our politicians that were horrific wastes of money or "investment" decisions that were so short-sighted that it would wind up costing us tens, in not hundreds, of millions of dollars over time.  How much economic benefit do you think being a major airline hub would have been?  How about NOT permanently impairing entire areas of the (should be high value) lakefront and riverfront with sewage treatment facilities?  

If we are going to talk about ROI, I submit that you are putting entirely too much faith in the ability of politicians/bureaucrats to make moderately decent (at best) decisions.  

One thing I had forgotten...what is the ROI on Summerfest grounds?  The city gets about $1.4 million in rent annually for prime lakefront acreage.  That is a paltry sum compared to what could come in if the entire area were redeveloped.  Will redevelopment ever happen?  No way, not a chance.  Waaaaay to much is brought into the local economy from the festivals.

Remarkably, the same argument for a new arena...  

[humanlung]

The Raiders moved, too, did they get better?  Cowboys moved from one stadium to another....not better.  I think you are associating way too much with the movement and success...it's not that simple.  The Boston Red Sox play in arguably the most antiquated stadium in baseball...they seem to be doing just fine.  

So many variables that you are ignoring.  By the way, the Rams may be moving again, so not a franchise I would use in your examples.  

You are right, although I would argue Al Davis was capable of overcoming any possible advantage given to his team.  I am not saying a new arena is a cure-all.  I am saying that for some franchises, it has made a huge difference.  Of course this isn't universally applicable, I know that.  I just know what happened here with the Brewers.

As it relates to all those who want to see an ROI on a new arena...  Please show me the impact on ROI from removing the Bucks from the area.  As CIO ("I" for investment, not information), I know ROI.  I want to see you quantify the impact on ALL the area establishments that will NOT have clients coming in for drinks, dinner, parking, etc...  Then, please calculate the multiplier effect that is caused from the absence of money that service workers, owners, etc... would have earned that would have gone into other establishments and services they would have utilized and consumed...

This isn't simple math, people.  Depending on the viewpoint, a person can make EITHER side of this argument fit their viewpoint.  Even with the best of unbiased intensions, the math is incredibly difficult to do and based on assumptions that are nearly unknowable.

Again, this isn't about ROI alone.  It's about quality of life and how we fell about/others look at our city.  I remember the pre-Kohl days when the Bucks were good.  This city CAN and WILL support a successful NBA franchise - I have seen it happen.  It just needs something to cheer for once in a while.     

[Canned Goods n Ammo]

Guns,  I posted this a few pages ago - decisions made by our politicians that were horrific wastes of money or "investment" decisions that were so short-sighted that it would wind up costing us tens, in not hundreds, of millions of dollars over time.  How much economic benefit do you think being a major airline hub would have been?  How about NOT permanently impairing entire areas of the (should be high value) lakefront and riverfront with sewage treatment facilities?  

If we are going to talk about ROI, I submit that you are putting entirely too much faith in the ability of politicians/bureaucrats to make moderately decent (at best) decisions.  

One thing I had forgotten...what is the ROI on Summerfest grounds?  The city gets about $1.4 million in rent annually for prime lakefront acreage.  That is a paltry sum compared to what could come in if the entire area were redeveloped.  Will redevelopment ever happen?  No way, not a chance.  Waaaaay to much is brought into the local economy from the festivals.

Remarkably, the same argument for a new arena...  

Right, city politics, capital expenditures and infrastructure are not entirely about ROI.

However, if we are handing out 300million, I think it's at least a (large) consideration.

In no particular order:

1. ROI (short and long term)
2. Opportunity Cost
3. Impact of them leaving
4. Civil impact (short and long term)

As far as past performance predicting future performance, the Bucks have been bad for a long time. Even with a new building, they will be bad. I don't think a bad basketball team in a nice arena is going to help civic pride and/or make a large economic impact.

[Benny B]

Guns,  I posted this a few pages ago - decisions made by our politicians that were horrific wastes of money or "investment" decisions that were so short-sighted that it would wind up costing us tens, in not hundreds, of millions of dollars over time.  How much economic benefit do you think being a major airline hub would have been?  How about NOT permanently impairing entire areas of the (should be high value) lakefront and riverfront with sewage treatment facilities?  

If we are going to talk about ROI, I submit that you are putting entirely too much faith in the ability of politicians/bureaucrats to make moderately decent (at best) decisions.  

One thing I had forgotten...what is the ROI on Summerfest grounds?  The city gets about $1.4 million in rent annually for prime lakefront acreage.  That is a paltry sum compared to what could come in if the entire area were redeveloped.  Will redevelopment ever happen?  No way, not a chance.  Waaaaay to much is brought into the local economy from the festivals.

Remarkably, the same argument for a new arena...  

It's the same argument on the surface...

I forget the number, but I recall Rick Schlesinger saying a couple years ago that the Brewers track sales by zip code and that 25-30% of their tickets were being sold to people outside the 5-county area.  I would suspect Summerfest is probably around that same percentage, maybe even a bit higher.  Even so, those two alone account for 3.5M tickets annually (2.7M for Brewers, 800k for Summerfest), ergo nearly a million "visits" to the city of Milwaukee from people outside the 5-county area.  Let's say that 10% of those people were coming to Milwaukee any way and decided to attend a game/concert while they were here, another 5% are no-shows, and 50% don't spend another dime during their visit.  You still have 350,000 visits (net 10%) from people who are actually making an "economic impact" in the area that is directly attributable to the Brewers and/or Summerfest.

The problem with your argument is that even if the Bucks sold out all 41 games (41 x 19,000), they would have to "net 45%" to have the same economic impact on the city as the Brewers and Summerfest (presuming, of course, that Brewer fans, Bucks fans and Summerfest-goers spend about the same amount of money on average, which I would say is probably pretty darn close); however, I would suspect the Bucks sell less than 10% of their tickets outside the 5-county area... even if they netted that full 10% (78,000 visits), that's still less than economic impact of Summerfest alone.

Summerfest and the Brewers have drawing power outside the 5-county area, that's why you can make the economic impact argument for the Brewers and Summerfest.  The Bucks simply do not have that kind of draw... and it's unlikely that they ever will.  Growing up just north of Madison, before the age of 18 I went with my family to at least 20 Brewer games, maybe a dozen Packer games, a half dozen Bucky football games, Summerfest twice, and Wrestlefest '88.  Not once did we ever consider going to a Bucks game.  And by the way, all of those games were attended in the 80's and early 90's when the Badgers, Packers and Brewers sucked rhino.

A new arena might help the Bucks sell 750k tickets annually, but if nearly all of those tickets are being bought by people in the 5-county area (who would likely spend that money locally anyway), I can't see where the city or metro area is ever going to reap the benefit of their $300M investment.

[Aughnanure]

Not sure MU isnt better off without the Bucks...

Been thinking this exact same thing. Louisville and I think Creighton benefit from being the only show in town. Marquette will become THE basketball team of Milwaukee by default.

[MUfan12]

Don't care.

I want to get drunk in a nicer building, and I think that taxpayers should help pay for that since I didn't use up their resources sending me to University.

Shut down public transportation if they have to, I don't use it anyway.

YES. Skat for Mayor!

[MUfan12]

Been thinking this exact same thing. Louisville and I think Creighton benefit from being the only show in town. Marquette will become THE basketball team of Milwaukee by default.

'cept they won't, because of UW.

[Canned Goods n Ammo]

You are right, although I would argue Al Davis was capable of overcoming any possible advantage given to his team.  I am not saying a new arena is a cure-all.  I am saying that for some franchises, it has made a huge difference.  Of course this isn't universally applicable, I know that.  I just know what happened here with the Brewers.

As it relates to all those who want to see an ROI on a new arena...  Please show me the impact on ROI from removing the Bucks from the area.  As CIO ("I" for investment, not information), I know ROI.  I want to see you quantify the impact on ALL the area establishments that will NOT have clients coming in for drinks, dinner, parking, etc...  Then, please calculate the multiplier effect that is caused from the absence of money that service workers, owners, etc... would have earned that would have gone into other establishments and services they would have utilized and consumed...

This isn't simple math, people.  Depending on the viewpoint, a person can make EITHER side of this argument fit their viewpoint.  Even with the best of unbiased intensions, the math is incredibly difficult to do and based on assumptions that are nearly unknowable.

Again, this isn't about ROI alone.  It's about quality of life and how we fell about/others look at our city.  I remember the pre-Kohl days when the Bucks were good.  This city CAN and WILL support a successful NBA franchise - I have seen it happen.  It just needs something to cheer for once in a while.     

I agree, the ROI of them leaving needs to be examined as well. It absolutely needs to be considered. The BC is a sunk cost, so let's get real about the cost of the arena vs the cost of them leaving.

But, if you know ROI, you know that saying "It's about quality of life and how we fell about/others look at our city." isn't a good enough reason to spend 300million, right? Maybe 50mil, maybe 100mil... but it's not good enough to just write a check and say "it is what it is".

You want to improve the quality of life in Milwaukee, find ways to stimulate growth and middle class jobs. Don't worry about creating more bartending and waitress jobs around the arena. Every/any city does that, and they call it "growth". Stupid. The pro sports gravy train will stop at some point.

It's not sustainable. You can't keep spending $300million-500million every 25 years to keep a bunch of restaurants in business downtown and keep calling it "growth".

You want to make a real economic impact? Find something cutting edge that you can get on before any other city. Create the next silicone valley. Incubate businesses/ideas/talent. Make Milwaukee a must-go for entrepreneurs between 25 and 45. Create unique living spaces and work spaces. Develop programs with local colleges for young, talented people. Work with Madison/UWM/Marq./Whitewater/etc.

Spend money of recruiting/developing and retaining young talent. Don't blow money trying to retain a broken business model that you'll have to repeatedly subsidize to keep happy.  

[kmwtrucks]

On day one 2 people offered to foot 40% of the bill.  That is more then likely going up from there.  For all you people that want them to leave Milwaukee (which is bad for the city, Bad for MU) where would you be comfortable at?  2/3 private 1/3 public?  The Bucks and the bradley center generate some amount of Tax's either through Ticket sales or rents or or people spending money in the area )hotels, resturants, ETC.  Everybody is so down on this.  I on the other hand think that the fact that the 1st day they offered to pay 40% of the cost that it will end up gettting done at some % of public and private funding.

[Aughnanure]

The Raiders moved, too, did they get better?  Cowboys moved from one stadium to another....not better.  I think you are associating way too much with the movement and success...it's not that simple.  The Boston Red Sox play in arguably the most antiquated stadium in baseball...they seem to be doing just fine.  

So many variables that you are ignoring.  By the way, the Rams may be moving again, so not a franchise I would use in your examples.  

And the new owners are largely credited with refurbishing that stadium and enabling that stadium to make as much extra money as possible (Green Monster seats, club seats, concourses, etc).

Overall I don't necessarily disagree with the point, but teams being able to milk as much money out of their fans during games is very very important, especially for smaller franchises.

[Aughnanure]

'cept they won't, because of UW.

And Louisville and UK. And Creighton and Nebraska? I think you're more likely to see casual fans jump the bandwagon.

[Benny B]

You want to make a real economic impact? Find something cutting edge that you can get on before any other city. Create the next silicone valley. Incubate businesses/ideas/talent. Make Milwaukee a must-go for entrepreneurs between 25 and 45. Create unique living spaces and work spaces. Develop programs with local colleges for young, talented people. Work with Madison/UWM/Marq./Whitewater/etc.

I think they're using saline mostly, these days.  But I like where you're heading with this.

[Aughnanure]

You want to make a real economic impact? Find something cutting edge that you can get on before any other city. Create the next silicone valley. Incubate businesses/ideas/talent. Make Milwaukee a must-go for entrepreneurs between 25 and 45. Create unique living spaces and work spaces. Develop programs with local colleges for young, talented people. Work with Madison/UWM/Marq./Whitewater/etc.

This is an even bigger pipe dream than the Bucks winning an NBA championship.

[ChicosBailBonds]

'cept they won't, because of UW.

UW is still 80 miles to the west, that issue exists today except it is MU, UW and the Bucks.  Now you're eliminating one.  Basically, if you want to attend a high level basketball game in person in the city, you have two choices today, maybe 3 when UW-milwaukee is decent.   Now that number is taken down one.

I know people will argue how beneficial it is to have NBA guys around.  Maybe.  Though plenty of top tier programs that don't have a NBA team within 100+ miles or more that seem to do just fine as well.  That same UW-madison would make that list.  So would Duke, UNC, Louisville, Florida, etc.  The reverse is also true.  If having a NBA franchise in the city is so beneficial to a college program, why isn't Utah, Miami U, Cleveland State, Houston, SMU and TCU, USC, Detroit, DePaul, Northwestern, etc, etc not better college programs over the long haul.  Seems to me, people might make that association a little bit too casually.

[GOO]

200M, plus 50M to 100M in naming rights and minority investors, etc.  150M to 200M from taxpayers.
This will get done. At those numbers, I'm for it as well.

MU makes more money since there will be more lower seats available.

As a fan, I'm looking forward to a well designed arena with better site lines and seating.

[humanlung]

I think they're using saline mostly, these days.  But I like where you're heading with this.

I nominate this for non-basketball post of the year.

[ChicosBailBonds]

You want to make a real economic impact? Find something cutting edge that you can get on before any other city. Create the next silicone valley. Incubate businesses/ideas/talent. Make Milwaukee a must-go for entrepreneurs between 25 and 45. Create unique living spaces and work spaces. Develop programs with local colleges for young, talented people. Work with Madison/UWM/Marq./Whitewater/etc.

Spend money of recruiting/developing and retaining young talent. Don't blow money trying to retain a broken business model that you'll have to repeatedly subsidize to keep happy.  

Unless you can put Milwaukee under a glass dome, I think the weather is always going to make that difficult.  It's certainly a great think to strive for, to become the next Hollywood, or Silicon Valley, or Research Triangle, but it seems to me that usually those areas have either geography and\or climate that helps draw in the talent pool to make it happen in the first place, or a by product of.

[Canned Goods n Ammo]

This is an even bigger pipe dream than the Bucks winning an NBA championship.

You're right.

But, if we are talking about opportunity costs, if we are talking about quality of life, if we are talking about future economic impact, let's really talk about it.

I know "joe-6pack" who listens to 1250WSSP isn't going to understand investing in emerging technologies and incubation programs... but surely some of the smart guys on this board understand.

We aren't some yokel voters, and we aren't politicians pimping for votes.

Silicone Valley! I stand by my statement. In fact, I rub my face all over this statement.