Wow- Supersonics leaving Seattle.

[SeattleUte]

As for Paul Allen, comparing how he and Bill Gates have spent their billions is an interesting contrast. Paul Allen is a big adolescent near as I can tell. The world wouldn't miss him, unlike Bill Gates.

[SeattleUte]

As for Paul Allen, comparing how he and Bill Gates have spent their billions is an interesting contrast. Isn't I(?

[8ballrollin]

Originally Posted by SeattleUte

What's more critical to our civic culture, great public schools or an NBA franchse? Seattle schools are not exemplary. How about we improve our schools before we start writing seven figure checks to the likes of Howard Schultz.
Did you know evey time there's a big rain storm raw sewage overflows into Puget Sound? How about we fix that first?

I threw in Benaroya just as a jab to elicit a response.

I've work with SPS as a client for several years, so I've seen what budget shortfalls have done to their staff. You'll get no argument from me on schools vs. teams. But hear me out on this...

Sports teams are a regional asset not just the cities’. People travel from Vancouver, BC, Spokane, and Portland to see games in Seattle (NFL, NBA, MLB). 2.6M people went to games last year at Safeco - and that was for a crappy team.

Seattle is the center of the NW. The center of Seattle is the Seattle Center. The central tenet of the Seattle Center was the Sonics. Now they're gone.

Because teams are a regional resource, the city itself shouldn't support the burden of public funding (which other cities and owners have shown isn't always needed). Safeco and Quest are subsidized by a hotel and car rental tax – which is mostly paid by tourists and business travelers. If the state extended this tax for several more years, it could have paid for part of a new arena or a renovated Key (with private funds making up the other half).

What pissed me off at that a-hole from OK is he wouldn't even consider a renovated Key as an option. The state wouldn't vote on the tax extension and mayor didn't try to broker the sale from Howard to local ownership two years ago. They all suck.

And I do think it's a loss to the city and region. Maybe not to the symphony crowd, but other parts of town, i.e. Rainer Valley knew and paid attention to the starting five at the Key.

[SeattleUte]

Originally Posted by 8ballrollin

I threw in Benaroya just as a jab to elicit a response.

I've work with SPS as a client for several years, so I've seen what budget shortfalls have done to their staff. You'll get no argument from me on schools vs. teams. But hear me out on this...

Sports teams are a regional asset not just the cities’. People travel from Vancouver, BC, Spokane, and Portland to see games in Seattle (NFL, NBA, MLB). 2.6M people went to games last year at Safeco - and that was for a crappy team.

Seattle is the center of the NW. The center of Seattle is the Seattle Center. The central tenet of the Seattle Center was the Sonics. Now they're gone.

Because teams are a regional resource, the city itself shouldn't support the burden of public funding (which other cities and owners have shown isn't always needed). Safeco and Quest are subsidized by a hotel and car rental tax – which is mostly paid by tourists and business travelers. If the state extended this tax for several more years, it could have paid for part of a new arena or a renovated Key (with private funds making up the other half).

What pissed me off at that a-hole from OK is he wouldn't even consider a renovated Key as an option. The state wouldn't vote on the tax extension and mayor didn't try to broker the sale from Howard to local ownership two years ago. They all suck.

And I do think it's a loss to the city and region. Maybe not to the symphony crowd, but other parts of town, i.e. Rainer Valley knew and paid attention to the starting five at the Key.

Bennett is the problem but you really can't blame him. He married into his dough, and he's having a grand old time spending his daddy in law's billions. The guy gave Schultz an offer he couldn't refuse, so you can't really blame Schultz. Then Bennett spent like drunken sailor and even deliberately ran the team into the ground and lost money to get them out of Seattle. But he was like a fish out of water here, and he seems like a case of arrested development. He seemed so infantile in those emails.

Doofus Clay Bennett from Okie City meets the City of Seattle. A perfect storm. We couldn't stand each other. He made us despise the Sonics. Check some of my posts from when he bought the team years ago (I know there's one on Utefans) and you'll see I knew then it was over. I said, Seattle says to the Sonics, shove it! (Mpfunk would remember.)

I'd rather have the Sonics than not, for the right price. I used to be season ticket holder, and went on my firm's tickets after that a number of time. But whether the Sups are a resource or a liability depends on how much it costs. This is not baseball or the NFL.

If they're a regional asset maybe you should swallow your pride and become a Blazers fan, eh?

[TripletDaddy]

Originally Posted by SeattleUte

Prove it. I doubt the Lakers receive not a penny of taxpayer susidy, which is the norm in the NBA. Is LA's owner just big hearted?

Maybe LA is different but you know I'm right as to every other or virtually every other team. Bennett's team moving to Oklahoma had nothing to do with capitalism. You must have learned your econ from Karl Marx.

Why would the Lakers receive any money for the Staples Center? The Lakers are just a tenant, like the Clippers.

The Staples Center was built by the owner of the LA Kings (Ed Roski), Anshutz Entertainment Group, and Rupert Murdoch/Fox.

AEG was involved because it was angling to develop more land in the blocks surrounding Staples.....that development has recently come to fruition in the form of the Nokia Theater, across the street from Staples.

Fox bailed out when Rupert decided to buy DirecTV...several years ago, Fox sold its 40% share in Staples to AEG. It also freed up cash by selling the Dodgers, I believe.

Now Anshutz is the majority owner. I dont think the Lakers own any of the Staples Center.

Look, here is the deal....your premise was wrong. You were wrong about who owns the Staples Center (even a basic google search would have answered your question), you were way off on Kobe's salary (again, a basic google search would answer that in less than 1 minute), and you were wrong about how the building was financed. Your entire premise was sloppy and poorly-researched.

Now you are retreating, leaving yourself a little wiggle room by allowing that every team in the NBA other than the Lakers operates this way. Your entire post is based on a short internet blurb which, not coincidentally, doesnt list any specific teams, either.

Now if you have had enough being bent over the barrel, please use lube next time because this go-round was not enjoyable for me. I prefer a little challenge in my men. Take your weak WNBA game somewhere else.

PS Happy 4th of July to you and your family!

[SeattleUte]

Originally Posted by TripletDaddy

Why would the Lakers receive any money for the Staples Center? The Lakers are just a tenant, like the Clippers.

The Staples Center was built by the owner of the LA Kings (Ed Roski), Anshutz Entertainment Group, and Rupert Murdoch/Fox.

AEG was involved because it was angling to develop more land in the blocks surrounding Staples.....that development has recently come to fruition in the form of the Nokia Theater, across the street from Staples.

Fox bailed out when Rupert decided to buy DirecTV...several years ago, Fox sold its 40% share in Staples to AEG. It also freed up cash by selling the Dodgers, I believe.

Now Anshutz is the majority owner. I dont think the Lakers own any of the Staples Center.

Look, here is the deal....your premise was wrong. You were wrong about who owns the Staples Center (even a basic google search would have answered your question), you were way off on Kobe's salary (again, a basic google search would answer that in less than 1 minute), and you were wrong about how the building was financed. Your entire premise was sloppy and poorly-researched.

Now you are retreating, leaving yourself a little wiggle room by allowing that every team in the NBA other than the Lakers operates this way. Your entire post is based on a short internet blurb which, not coincidentally, doesnt list any specific teams, either.

Now if you have had enough being bent over the barrel, please use lube next time because this go-round was not enjoyable for me. I prefer a little challenge in my men. Take your weak WNBA game somewhere else.

PS Happy 4th of July to you and your family!

So neither the City nor the Lakers don't own the Staples Center. But somebody was subsidized by taxpayers in order to enable them to in turn susidize the lakers. For one thing, the muni bonds are tax exempt, which means the interest rate on the arena financing is way below market. I'm sure that's not all. Your post evinces deep involvement by LA taxpayers.

Of course the Lakers aren't paying a fair rental rate, a high enough rate to enable the owners of the arena to retire any debt and otherwise amortize cost of the building and make a profit absent taxpayer subsidy. That's how it works in the real world.

[TripletDaddy]

Originally Posted by SeattleUte

So neither the City nor the Lakers don't own the Staples Center. But somebody was subsidized by taxpayers in order to enable them to in turn susidize the lakers. For one thing, the muni bonds are tax exempt, which means the interest rate on the arena financing is way below market. I'm sure that's not all. Your post evinces deep involvement by LA taxpayers.

Of course the Lakers aren't paying a fair rental rate, a high enough rate to enable the owners of the arena to retire any debt and otherwise amortize cost of the building and make a profit absent taxpayer subsidy. That's how it works in the real world.

I already told you that the land was, in part, paid for by muni bonds. Your response was that muni bonds were not subsidies, but financing (with which I agree).

Now you are asserting that muni bonds are indicative of deep local taxpayer involvement.

So that brings us back to my question....if someone is a tenant...a renter....on land that was in part financed by muni bonds, you are claiming that taxpayers subsidize that person's salary? How so?

You are all over the map and going in the wrong direction. Now you cannot even cover your tracks coherently because you are blatantly contradicting your own posts.

UtahDan's smart list is getting shorter by the minute.

[mpfunk]

Originally Posted by cougjunkie

Ian Furness was solid here in Utah, but for some reason I thought he went to Portland and not Seattle.

Regardless the Sonics moving is a travesty imo.

I also suspect that DDD shed a tear when the Raiders moved to Oakland.

He did go to Portland initially. He had a radio show with Jason Scucanek (however the hell you spell his name). He left for Seattle about two years ago.

[8ballrollin]

Originally Posted by TripletDaddy

I happily embrace the Sonics departure. This is capitalism and the free market working at its finest.

Any of you so-called fiscal conservatives out there who are opposed to an owner moving his business wherever he sees fit are really liberals in disguise.

Seattle had its chance to keep the team. They were too cheap to pay the price. So they lose.

Tough luck.

Maybe next time they won't be so cheap.

Kudos to the OKC Sonics and best of luck to them in the future.

Seattle's chance to keep the team ended the day Schultz sold it. Period.

The NBA said yesterday the Key can work as an NBA arena – if it's renovated. This was NOT an option with the OK group. When they bought the team they said so - give us $500M (for a building) or we're gone. Ballmer said he'd personally pay $350M to upgrade the Key, if he could buy the franchise. They were offered free land and didn't care. They were never going to stay.

The Sonics were gone once that asshat Schultz sold the team.

“This is… the free market working at its finest”

So Ballmer can start a team, build his own arena, sign free agents and compete for a NBA title next year? After all it's an free market, right?

I tuned into OK sports radio today and they were so stoked to have the NBA that all of the calls and topics were about OU football.

FYI, the NBA team in OKC will not be called the Sonics.

[TripletDaddy]

Originally Posted by 8ballrollin

Seattle's chance to keep the team ended the day Schultz sold it. Period.

The NBA said yesterday the Key can work as an NBA arena – if it's renovated. This was NOT an option with the OK group. When they bought the team they said so - give us $500M (for a building) or we're gone. Ballmer said he'd personally pay $350M to upgrade the Key, if he could buy the franchise. They were offered free land and didn't care. They were never going to stay.

The Sonics were gone once that asshat Schultz sold the team.



So Ballmer can start a team, build his own arena, sign free agents and compete for a NBA title next year? After all it's an free market, right?

I tuned into OK sports radio today and they were so stoked to have the NBA that all of the calls and topics were about OU football.

FYI, the NBA team in OKC will not be called the Sonics.

Lost in your response is an admission that if Seattle wasnt so cheap, they would still have the Sonics.

Also, why is it the NBA's fault that a private owner sells his team to another private investor and that investor wants to move it? Stop intruding on someone's self-owned business. If he wants to buy it and move it to OKC, then what is the problem? Even if people are talking about the Sooners on the radio?

Free market at its finest.