Convention Center

[Rover]

And which of those are replacing non-obsolete arenas in the same city?

I've noticed you never lose an argument, you just change the definitions. :-)

[Just the facts]

I've noticed you never lose an argument, you just change the definitions. :-)

or.... you can try reading what I wrote, not what you assume I wrote.

I am going to go out on a limb and say that the period in American life where new arenas were built to replace out-dated arenas (not old - just functionally obsolete) is over.

I just think we are entering a period in history where people are going to prefer nostalgia, history, and place over 'new and shinny'. Now if a team owner wants to build his own arena - all bets are off.

[BoulderSooner]

or.... you can try reading what I wrote, not what you assume I wrote.



I just think we are entering a period in history where people are going to prefer nostalgia, history, and place over 'new and shinny'. Now if a team owner wants to build his own arena - all bets are off.

there is no "nostalgia, history, and place" to a 20 year old or 30 year old arena were not talking about Wrigley field here

[CaptDave]

there is no "nostalgia, history, and place" to a 20 year old or 30 year old arena were not talking about Wrigley field here

I think a strong argument could be made that if Wrigley had been built 20 years ago, people would want to implode it and replace it with new and shiny. You have to give a place time to become nostalgic and most sports venues built recently will never get the chance.

[Just the facts]

I think people are mistaking each individual city replace their obsolete arena with the same city replacing arenas on a continual basis. Yes, 25 (or whatever number you want it be) cities have replaced their arenas, but no single city has done it more than once in the last 20 years. Seattle has come closer than anyone - and even they haven't done it. However, when they rebuild Key Arena they built a functionally obsolete building - it only had 4 luxury suites. Their issue was timing as it was built just before the trend went from individual seats to corporate suites. So unless someone comes up with a second major shift in who buys tickets the current crop of arenas should last a long long time.

[Rover]

or.... you can try reading what I wrote, not what you assume I wrote.



I just think we are entering a period in history where people are going to prefer nostalgia, history, and place over 'new and shinny'. Now if a team owner wants to build his own arena - all bets are off.

While you wax nostalgic, there is real data which disputes your observation. Here is an excerpt from a fairly recent New York Times article disputing this "new era" you are pronouncing.

"2010 census figures show that during the past decade just 8.6 percent of the population growth in metropolitan areas with more than a million people took place in city cores. The rest took place in the suburbs, which are home to more than 6 in 10 Americans.

The 8.6 percent is even lower than in the 1990s when the figure was 15.1 percent. New York City did better than the national average, getting 29 percent of the growth in the metropolitan area, but that was down from 46 percent in the 1990s. Of the 51 metropolitan areas with more than 1 million residents, only three — Boston, Providence, and Oklahoma City — saw their core cities grow faster than their suburbs. And the growth is hardly the mono-dimensional suburbia of hoary stereotype."

Now, the good news is that OKC was an anomaly. We should be proud of that.

[hoya]

It's not just about a new arena. It's about the teams being profitable. Teams that are making lots of money are happy. Good relationships between the city and their team keep new arena dscussions from becoming a problem.

We have heard the first whispers about new arena construction to replace the Ford Center (or whatever you want to call it) already, mostly by the media. There is an expectation that it will happen. The Ford Center was built very inexpensively and we got huge value for our money. The time will come when we have to shell out a lot more cash. And with the amount of money and exposure that the Thunder bring to the city, I don't have a problem with that. They should have a quality arena to call home. It needn't drip with luxury, but if they are legitimately falling behind other teams, we should step up and support them. You don't want the relationship between the city and the team to become toxic. Right now we have a great relationship, and I think if that continues, there won't be any problem with getting public support when the time comes for a new arena.

Perhaps an update to the building will be sufficient. Maybe we can dump another $150M into it and make it the equal of some of the nicest in the NBA. I don't know, I'm not an architect from the future. Certainly I'd prefer that that building stick around and develop a sense of history. Hopefully in 50 years, the Thunder are still playing there and it is one of the most celebrated arenas in the country. Who knows. But right now I've prepared myself that we'll be asked to fund a new one by around 2030.

[Rover]

Duplicate

[hoya]

While you wax nostalgic, there is real data which disputes your observation. Here is an excerpt from a fairly recent New York Times article disputing this "new era" you are pronouncing.

"2010 census figures show that during the past decade just 8.6 percent of the population growth in metropolitan areas with more than a million people took place in city cores. The rest took place in the suburbs, which are home to more than 6 in 10 Americans.

The 8.6 percent is even lower than in the 1990s when the figure was 15.1 percent. New York City did better than the national average, getting 29 percent of the growth in the metropolitan area, but that was down from 46 percent in the 1990s. Of the 51 metropolitan areas with more than 1 million residents, only three — Boston, Providence, and Oklahoma City — saw their core cities grow faster than their suburbs. And the growth is hardly the mono-dimensional suburbia of hoary stereotype."

Now, the good news is that OKC was an anomaly. We should be proud of that.

That's actually great news for us. Of course, our core is growing faster in part because it started out so small. If you have one person living downtown and then two more move in, you'll have a 300% increase. It hasn't taken a lot in terms of real numbers for our downtown to grow by a large percentage. Of course, for the first time in decades we're getting real urban neighborhoods and hopefully this trend will continue.

[warreng88]

I think people are mistaking each individual city replace their obsolete arena with the same city replacing arenas on a continual basis. Yes, 25 (or whatever number you want it be) cities have replaced their arenas, but no single city has done it more than once in the last 20 years. Seattle has come closer than anyone - and even they haven't done it. However, when they rebuild Key Arena they built a functionally obsolete building - it only had 4 luxury suites. Their issue was timing as it was built just before the trend went from individual seats to corporate suites. So unless someone comes up with a second major shift in who buys tickets the current crop of arenas should last a long long time.

I think something you HAVE to take into consideration is that technology is advancing so much quicker now than it has in the last 25 years. Not just TV's and general electronics, but the technology to build an arena faster and with different materials than years ago. And, that technology will only advance more. Who knows what will be in arenas in 10 years? 3-D TV's in suites? Personal TV's as headrests in the seats in front of you?

[Just the facts]

Who knows what will be in arenas in 10 years? 3-D TV's in suites? Personal TV's as headrests in the seats in front of you?

All of which can be put it in the arena right now. You don't need to build a new arena to do those items. The shift from revenue being generated from individual seats to corporate sales was a one time shift - and every city had to do it. It isn't much different than Y2K where every company had to upgrade, but they only had to do it once. Of course, the tech industry thought companies would do it ever 3 years but we see how that worked out for them.

Of course, we are talking about something that won't happen in another 15 years anyhow so I am content to wait and see while you guys think I am crazy. Meanwhile, let's get back to building a new convention center.

[BoulderSooner]

All of which can be put it in the arena right now. You don't need to build a new arena to do those items. The shift from revenue being generated from individual seats to corporate sales was a one time shift - and every city had to do it. It isn't much different than Y2K where every company had to upgrade, but they only had to do it once. Of course, the tech industry thought companies would do it ever 3 years but we see how that worked out for them.

Of course, we are talking about something that won't happen in another 15 years anyhow so I am content to wait and see while you guys think I am crazy. Meanwhile, let's get back to building a new convention center.

our arena currently doesn't have all the amenities that you would want .. it is a top 50% arena ... but it will continue to fall down the list and OKC will need a new arena by 2030

[Bellaboo]

Just to keep up with the Jones's. An example is the new score board that Houston unveiled this year at the Toyota Center. It's twice the size of ours, plus it has the current player stats, Not just the players number, points scored and fouls.

When our scoreboard was new 5 years ago, it was considered top of the line in the NBA, not so much any more.

[hoya]

Yeah but that can be upgraded. You don't need a new building for a new scoreboard. It's a question of whether the current building will become inadequate because of its structure.

[Just the facts]

Yeah but that can be upgraded. You don't need a new building for a new scoreboard. It's a question of whether the current building will become inadequate because of its structure.

^ This.

An example is the new score board that Houston unveiled this year at the Toyota Center

They didn't build a new Toyota Center just to put the new scoreboard in and OKC won't either.

[BoulderSooner]

Yeah but that can be upgraded. You don't need a new building for a new scoreboard. It's a question of whether the current building will become inadequate because of its structure.

also the okc metro population will continue to increase .. with both people and corporations ... i would expect the next okc arena to have double the suites and about 5 more bar/ restaurants in addition to about 1,500- 2k more seats

[Just the facts]

also the okc metro population will continue to increase .. with both people and corporations ... i would expect the next okc arena to have double the suites and about 5 more bar/ restaurants in addition to about 1,500- 2k more seats

or.... they can raise the price. One of the biggest mistakes in all of sports management is over-building the seating demand.

[warreng88]

It's all about making sure supply meets the demand. The demand is very high for tickets right now because the Thunder are one of the best teams in the NBA and people can get Loud City tickets for as low as $10/each. That is $410 for the entire season. If you build an arena for 22,000 people and they five great seasons followed by four miserable seasons (like the Detroit Pistons) then you have a half empty arena where you could have spent less and built it for 18,000 (18,203 for the Thunder) and it wouldn't have looked less than half empty. I would hate to see our arena 10 years down the road look dead because we had a few bad seasons. The top arenas in the NBA in terms of capacity are Pistons (22,076), Chicago (20,916), Cleveland (20,562), 76ers (20,444) and Wizards (20,278). Only one of those teams is in the playoffs this year.

[Richard at Remax]

The Barclays center and proposed Golden State arenas both have significantly smaller seating capacity for the population they are surrounded with

[Just the facts]

You only have to look at Major League Baseball to see that the ownership groups understand it now. All the new baseball stadiums have greatly reduced seating capacity and even the RedHawks covered up a few thousand seats. The conventional wisdom used to be that you build for maximum demand - lest you have to turn someone away and you forever lost that ticket sale. Now they understand the value of limiting capacity and how that spurs demand and drives up ticket prices so that over the course of a facilities lifetime you can remove the boom and bust cycle excessive seating capacity creates. Very few things create profit like scarcity does, especially when it is in demand.

Scarcity Principle

http://www.investopedia.com/terms/s/...-principle.asp

[hoya]

I do believe that we will have to build a new arena. This is not based upon any knowledge of engineering or architecture, but rather on the idea that there will be some sort of upgrade that is needed in the future that was not foreseen when we built it. We got an incredible bargain on the Ford Center and my general belief that you get what you pay for makes me think we must have cut some corners somewhere. I may be wrong. I'd like to be wrong. But in terms of problems facing the city, this is like paying for your hot wife's new boob job. "Honey, I wish my boobs were bigger. What do you think?" It's a good problem to have.

[Rover]

Scarcity doesn't create demand.....that is ludicrous. Scarcity MAY raise prices if the demand is present. There is also such a thing as elasticity of demand. Platitudes and more platitudes.

[Just the facts]

Scarcity doesn't create demand.....that is ludicrous. Scarcity MAY raise prices if the demand is present. There is also such a thing as elasticity of demand. Platitudes and more platitudes.

I saw that 'error' right after I posted it and corrected it - however, please explain precious metals demand without factoring scarcity into the equation (or for that matter, the Samsung tablet after they lost their Apple lawsuit). Also, elasticity of demand is not a straight line; it is a curve. Finally, I am not a Keynesian so his interpretation of the 'laws of supply and demand' don't matter as much to me.

I think perhaps we need a new thread.

[hoya]

Perhaps it is better to say that an 18,000 seat arena has certain advantages over a 25,000 seat arena.

1) It is easier to fill, which creates the appearance of desirability.
2) It is cheaper to build and maintain.

Rather than constructing an arena that allows for maximum profit during the up-times, perhaps you could build one that is profitable even in the down-times. "We'll never lose money on this" rather than "we'll make a lot that one year in ten when everything is perfect".

[Just the facts]

Perhaps it is better to say that an 18,000 seat arena has certain advantages over a 25,000 seat arena.

1) It is easier to fill, which creates the appearance of desirability.
2) It is cheaper to build and maintain.

Rather than constructing an arena that allows for maximum profit during the up-times, perhaps you could build one that is profitable even in the down-times. "We'll never lose money on this" rather than "we'll make a lot that one year in ten when everything is perfect".

Yep.