Oklahoma City could become New Orleans Hornets home for upcoming NBA season

By John Rohde
The Oklahoman

Oklahoma City is among the cities which could become home to the New Orleans Hornets for the upcoming NBA season, according to sources in Oklahoma City and national reports on Fox Sports Radio.
The Hornets’ possible move, due to the destruction left behind by Hurricane Katrina, is in the exploratory stage, pending discussions with officials from New Orleans, the Hornets and the NBA.

Oklahoma City mayor Mick Cornett did not return phone calls Thursday.

Baton Rogue, La., is another possibility, according to the New York Times. The city is home to Louisiana State University’s Pete Maravich Assembly Center, which holds 14,164. Houston and Dallas, already home to NBA teams, have offered to host the Hornets, according to the Dallas Morning News.

If the Hornets were to relocate to the Ford Center (capacity 18,567), even on a temporary basis, it would give Oklahoma City a unique opportunity to evaluate the feasibility of a major-pro franchise existing locally - and at no financial risk.

“We would get a chance to look at something we’ve always wanted to get a look at,” said Tim Brassfield, president of the All Sports Association, which stages the All-College Tournament inside the Ford Center.

Nine potential conflicts exist because the Oklahoma City Blazers 2005-2006 hockey schedule already has been set. The Blazers are the Ford Center’s primary tenant, but would agree to play in the Myriad when there is a conflict.

Blazers chief executive officer Brad Lund also could not be reached for comment.

Oklahoma City previously has explored luring an NBA franchise, most recently in the early 1990s, but never has become a serious contender.

In January 1997, Oklahoma City was one of nine cities to formally appear before the NHL Board of Governors in New York City in hopes of being granted an expansion franchise.

Those franchises were given to the Nashville Predators, Atlanta Thrashers, Minnesota Wild and Columbus Blue Jackets.

The chaos left by Hurricane Katrina is expected to force permanent moves for the Hornets and the NFL New Orleans Saints.

The Hornets play their home games in New Orleans Arena across the street from the Superdome, which suffered heavy damage during the storm while being used as a shelter.

Strong rumors are swirling the Saints might never play again in New Orleans and will relocate to Los Angeles as early as next season.

Similar rumors are beginning to swirl about permanently relocating the Hornets, a franchise that began in Charlotte, N.C., in 1988 and relocated to New Orleans prior to the 2002-2003 season.

Even if the Superdome and New Orleans Arena are functional, it’s unlikely either team would be financially solvent for several years while the city is being rebuilt.

The Saints have since moved into a hotel in San Antonio and will practice in the Alamodome in preparation of their season-opener on Sept. 11 at Carolina.

Members of the Hornets’ staff have relocated to Houston and are working out of Toyota Center.

The Hornets’ first preseason game is schedule for Oct. 13 in Denver. The Ford Center is scheduled to host an NBA exhibition Oct. 17 between Seattle and Houston.

The Hornets’ 82-game regular season schedule begins Nov. 2 at Cleveland. Two days later, the Hornets play Sacramento in their first home game - wherever their home might be.


- wow I can't say howmuch this excites me. I know I would definantly attend many many games if they relocated here. This could definatly put OKC on the map for professional sports. Hope we get it.

As much as I would hate benefiting at the expense of someone else, this would provide an very unique opportunity to show what we can do as major league city. I'm all for it, even it's temporary.

Congrats.

Best wishes from Tulsa.

I too am saddened by the circumstances behind this possible opportunity. However, I still do not believe that OKC will ever be a major league sports city. Especially with the way ticket prices are.

In my opinion, the people of OKC simply do not, and will not, want to pay the current prices of a major league ticket, whether it be for hockey or basketball.

I would simply hate to get the franchise, and then have it move out of here after the owners see that the attendance would just not be the same due to ticket prices.

I too am saddened by the circumstances behind this possible opportunity. However, I still do not believe that OKC will ever be a major league sports city. Especially with the way ticket prices are.

In my opinion, the people of OKC simply do not, and will not, want to pay the current prices of a major league ticket, whether it be for hockey or basketball.

I would simply hate to get the franchise, and then have it move out of here after the owners see that the attendance would just not be the same due to ticket prices.

I look forward to being able to say those imortal words... "I told you so."

The circumstances behind the move are tragic, yes, however, I DO think Oklahoma Cit will support the team, and support it big time. Afterall, OU sells out all the time. OSU sells out all the time (or close to it). The Blazers draw well. The Yarddawgz (yuch on that name) sell well. And when an exebition game is played here, guess what... IT SELLS OUT!

So. What if the Hornets play here and then relocate again. It is the best test we could have short of a permanant franchise. Plus, it benefits the city. Ownership is already in place, no other investment required, sponsorship already in place. This could draw from hundreds of miles. Fans from Charlotte and New Orleans will come here to watch their team. Yes, Charlotte has a new team (no way was it deserved), however, some people still support the original. Plus. Since Oklahoma City has no real risk in this (the risk is New Orleans), it is a great move. Well... I need a minor correction. The ABA has approved a replacement franchise for Oklahoma City, and that franchise may need to be placed on hold. If the Hornets are NOT successful here, that is a risk I am willing to take. Risk a major league franchise being successful here or tell the league "thanks but no thanks, we would rather have a minor league here." Humm. That should be obvious. Turning down the Hornets would be like someone buying a lottery ticket and telling the lottery commision "no thanks. I would rather have my dollar back."

Take it now and call it a test market. If we decline this offer (if we DO get it) we will once again be known as a laughing stock. Personally, I do not want to be known as the city who turned down a free NBA franchise.

I just wonder if it will be known as the Oklahoma City Hornets.

Congrats.

Best wishes from Tulsa.

I think it's early for any congratulations, but thank you. And if they do spend some time in Oklahoma, you're more than welcome to come and I can introduce you into the non-redneck aspect of bricktown and beyond.


I look forward to being able to say those imortal words... "I told you so."

You told us that a natural disaster would destroy a city allowing OKC to be in the running to host its displaced NBA team? Man, you're good. :)


As much as I would hate benefiting at the expense of someone else, this would provide an very unique opportunity to show what we can do as major league city. I'm all for it, even it's temporary.

I agree. It would be a great litmus test for the city. Dallas, Houston and Baton Rouge have also offered and if a permanent list is considered several cities without teams will joining the list. Baton Rouge looks like the most natural choice, but major league sports have struggled in LA recently and Baton Rouge will also be feeling the effects of the hurricane. Dallas and Houston have great facilities, but they would be competing with the home teams for ticket sales. OKC seems like a good choice to me from that list. I think that it would be good exposure for the city no matter what. I, too, hope that we would be able to sell out games and worry about ticket prices (the exhibition game in October is $35-$60 for 100 level seats), but I bet many do not even realize that OKC could host an NBA team.


In my opinion, the people of OKC simply do not, and will not, want to pay the current prices of a major league ticket, whether it be for hockey or basketball.

Considering the exhibition game averages around $37, you may have a point. It's about 5 weeks away and there are still many seats available (granted, OKC is a slow ticket sale market). Good seats cost the same or more than an OU ticket and there will be more than 3 times the amount of games (but also 1/4 the seats for a sell out).

Hopefully, we'll get the chance to find out.


I just wonder if it will be known as the Oklahoma City Hornets.

If a temporary relationship surfaces, I would hope it would still be called the New Orleans Hornets out of deference to the situation. If a permanent relationship surfaces, I think it should be a state team for market purposes, and again keep the mascot out of deference, making it the Oklahoma Hornets.

In the end, this would be a unique opportunity to have a shot to show that OKC can overcome some of its marketing demographics and show support for a major league team. But I think we should always be respectful and mindful of how it happened.

I look forward to being able to say those imortal words... "I told you so."

The circumstances behind the move are tragic, yes, however, I DO think Oklahoma Cit will support the team, and support it big time. Afterall, OU sells out all the time. OSU sells out all the time (or close to it). The Blazers draw well. The Yarddawgz (yuch on that name) sell well. And when an exebition game is played here, guess what... IT SELLS OUT!

So. What if the Hornets play here and then relocate again. It is the best test we could have short of a permanant franchise. Plus, it benefits the city. Ownership is already in place, no other investment required, sponsorship already in place. This could draw from hundreds of miles. Fans from Charlotte and New Orleans will come here to watch their team. Yes, Charlotte has a new team (no way was it deserved), however, some people still support the original. Plus. Since Oklahoma City has no real risk in this (the risk is New Orleans), it is a great move. Well... I need a minor correction. The ABA has approved a replacement franchise for Oklahoma City, and that franchise may need to be placed on hold. If the Hornets are NOT successful here, that is a risk I am willing to take. Risk a major league franchise being successful here or tell the league "thanks but no thanks, we would rather have a minor league here." Humm. That should be obvious. Turning down the Hornets would be like someone buying a lottery ticket and telling the lottery commision "no thanks. I would rather have my dollar back."

Take it now and call it a test market. If we decline this offer (if we DO get it) we will once again be known as a laughing stock. Personally, I do not want to be known as the city who turned down a free NBA franchise.

I just wonder if it will be known as the Oklahoma City Hornets.

Perhaps I should have clarified my statement a bit more.

I'm all for taking this opportunity and seeing how OKC does. We have nothing to lose.

I just do not see citizens paying the prices a major league tickets runs nowadays.

Yes, people do pay the high prices for an OU/OSU football game. But keep in mind that there are only 12 of those games per year. With major league hockey and basketball, there are at least 82 games (for bball anyway) per season. At $30-$40 (and higher) per ticket, it's going to real tough for a major league franchise to be successful, consistently.

IMO, I believe the biggest draw to the Blazers is the low tickets prices. That's part of the reason I go - it's cheap entertainment that I can take the whole family to. And because it's cheap entertainment, I can afford to go multiple times per year. If a major league team came to OKC, I could only afford 1, maybe 2, games per season.

"If a temporary relationship surfaces, I would hope it would still be called the New Orleans Hornets out of deference to the situation. If a permanent relationship surfaces, I think it should be a state team for market purposes, and again keep the mascot out of deference, making it the Oklahoma Hornets."

Here is a suggestion. The New Orleans-Oklahoma City Hornets. Or The New Orleans Hornets of Oklahoma City.

To our friends who currently live, or have lived, in a major league city, could you provide us with some examples of ticket prices?

Perhaps I should have clarified my statement a bit more.

I'm all for taking this opportunity and seeing how OKC does. We have nothing to lose.

I just do not see citizens paying the prices a major league tickets runs nowadays.

Yes, people do pay the high prices for an OU/OSU football game. But keep in mind that there are only 12 of those games per year. With major league hockey and basketball, there are at least 82 games (for bball anyway) per season. At $30-$40 (and higher) per ticket, it's going to real tough for a major league franchise to be successful, consistently.

IMO, I believe the biggest draw to the Blazers is the low tickets prices. That's part of the reason I go - it's cheap entertainment that I can take the whole family to. And because it's cheap entertainment, I can afford to go multiple times per year. If a major league team came to OKC, I could only afford 1, maybe 2, games per season.

And I stand behind my posts that say Oklahoma City CAN support a major league. "Ever" is not here yet. So, how can anyone say Oklahoma City will "never" get a major league franchise? (retorical question)

They can say that it won't for the same reason you can say that it will - it's our opinion. And quite honestly, I THINK it's the opinion of many many others around the city and nation - OKC is a minor league city. It's citizens just will not support the higher ticket prices a major league franchise will bring. (again, my opinion)

Let me ask you this...will YOU support a major league team? If so, by what means - season tickets, 1 game per season, 2 games per season, etc? I'm just curious. You're a part of OKC - what part do you plan on playing in a major league franchise's success?

I already know what I can or cannot do. I know that I cannot support the higher prices. That doesn't mean I don't want to see a franchise fail.

OK. Basketball. Season tickets. Baseball. Season Tickets. Hockey. Season Tickets. Football. I am not a fan.

Regardless of my personaly support, even if I never attended a single game, I would still be in favor of a major league team here because I know the market demographics can support it.

I suggest we take the Hornets as a test. If they are the lowest in attendance by a VERY wide margin, then maybe I will change my opinion... About the NBA. We have not had a major league franchise. Research says we can support it. Our size (including outlining areas as far as Wichita) says we can support it.

If I were on the council, you can bet your bottom dollar I would be lobbying VERY hard for major league sports here. Because I KNOW it will work. We may have the oportunity to prove it once and for all.

Reports today are saying that the Hornets may play a few games this year in Austin at the start of the season, the Arena in N.O. sustained little damage, and the team may relocate permanently to Kansas City at a later date to the new Sprint Arena.

Sorry.

Reports today are saying that the Hornets may play a few games this year in Austin at the start of the season, the Arena in N.O. sustained little damage, and the team may relocate permanently to Kansas City at a later date to the new Sprint Arena.

Sorry.

The key word here is "may." That does not eliminate Oklahoma City.

OK. Basketball. Season tickets. Baseball. Season Tickets. Hockey. Season Tickets. Football. I am not a fan.

Regardless of my personaly support, even if I never attended a single game, I would still be in favor of a major league team here because I know the market demographics can support it.

I suggest we take the Hornets as a test. If they are the lowest in attendance by a VERY wide margin, then maybe I will change my opinion... About the NBA. We have not had a major league franchise. Research says we can support it. Our size (including outlining areas as far as Wichita) says we can support it.

If I were on the council, you can bet your bottom dollar I would be lobbying VERY hard for major league sports here. Because I KNOW it will work. We may have the oportunity to prove it once and for all.

Thank you for that clarification on your participation. I appreciate that. However, I think you would be in the minority. We're not talking cheap, Blazer/Yard Dawgz-like prices here.

I too agree that we need to take the Hornets as a test. I think what the research is lacking is what the people would actually do when it comes to ticket prices. I have no doubt that the city of OKC, size wise, could handle a franchise - although I do fear the potential parking nightmare. I just do not believe that the average Joe citizen of OKC, of which there are many, will consistently pay the higher ticket prices that a major league franchise brings.

The key word here is "may." That does not eliminate Oklahoma City.


If you owned an NBA team, which would you chose?

Kansas City

If you owned an NBA team, which would you chose?

That is a loaded question. What do you think I would say?

That is a loaded question. What do you think I would say?
Austin?

http://www.okctalk.com/images/Smailies%2001-28-08/tweeted.gif

What do you think I would say?

Maybe. But it is THE question. It's the ONLY one that matters.

If you really have a study that suggests we can support a major league team, can we see it? I don't mean your research and intuition, but a real comparative and comprehensive study. You keep alluding to it, but we never see it. I think we would all get excited and get behind it if there was such data. If you were on the council, you would need such a study to sell the city to an owner.

KC can obviously can make stronger arguments than OKC in terms of major league viability. KC is already a major league city. Austin is a lot closer in demographics to us though. If OKC could prove viability though, it has an advantage of no competition. Austin is the same way.

I have no doubt that the city of OKC, size wise, could handle a franchise - although I do fear the potential parking nightmare.

Parking nightmare? We have events bigger than NBA games all the time, sometimes more than one on top of another and we handle the parking fine. A concert holds more than an NBA game. It has been shown that parking can support simultaneous events at both Ford Center and the Myriad. One of our advantages is the plethora of parking downtown, especially in relation to several attractions. Park once and you can eat, go to the game, and celebrate afterwards all within a few blocks.

Have you ever gone to a major league event where the stadium is in the middle of one huge parking lot in the suburbs? THAT is a parking nightmare.

"We have events bigger than NBA games all the time, sometimes more than one on top of another and we handle the parking fine. A concert holds more than an NBA game. "

...And they cost more. Plus, they are as frequent as an NBA game (taking in to consideration the season)

Kansas City

Is that a done deal?

This just in:

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=2149549

Updated: Sep. 2, 2005, 12:06 PM ET
Hornets to open camp at Air Force AcademyESPN.com news services


NEW ORLEANS -- The New Orleans Hornets will hold at least the first two weeks of this year's training camp at the Air Force Academy in Colorado Springs, Colo., general manager Allan Bristow said.

The NBA team opens its preseason schedule Oct. 13 at Denver's Pepsi Center against the Denver Nuggets.

"As of right now, that's our only option," Bristow said Thursday from his vacation home in Marco Island, Fla. "We'll look for others. But right now that seems to be the best."

Bristow said no decision had been made on where the team would play its home games following the devastation to New Orleans brought by Hurricane Katrina.

All of the team's players and employees have been accounted for and are safe, but family members of several team employees are still unaccounted for, Bristow said.

"There's just no communication," Bristow said. "It's very tough."

On Wednesday, some members of the team's front office relocated to Houston and were working out of the Toyota Center as guests of the Rockets.

The NBA has sent a memo to teams telling them to prepare for the possible relocation of the Hornets.

"Even if the arena is operable, it still may be impossible to play games in New Orleans for some time," NBA deputy commissioner Russ Granik wrote in the e-mail message, a copy of which was obtained by The New York Times.

Officials have estimated that it could take months to pump all of the water out of New Orleans.

Oklahoma City is willing to host the team this season, Mick Cornett said Friday. The team opens its preseason schedule Oct. 13 at Denver's Pepsi Center against the Denver Nuggets.

Cornett said that the first choice for the Hornets would obviously be to find someplace in Louisiana to play their season, but he said that since Oklahoma City has an NBA-quality arena, the Ford Center, that does not now have a major league tenant, this could be an option.

"We could be the temporary home for the team and we're available if that makes sense to the city of New Orleans," Cornett said.

Baton Rouge, La., could be a strong option as a temporary location for the Hornets. The city is home to Louisiana State University's Pete Maravich Assembly Center, which holds 14,164.

Hornets general manager Allan Bristow said no decision had been made on where the team would play its home games.

Here's the Jazz ticket schedule:

http://www.nba.com/media/jazz/0506seatingchart.gif

Here is their schedule:

Jazz 2005-6 Schedule (http://www.nba.com/jazz/schedule/)

From that I count 41 home games (I could be off by a few). That would make season tickets cost the following outside of the first 5 rows:

Lower Bowl:
$3,485
$3,362
$2,952
$2,788
$1,517

Upper Bowl:
$1,107
$738
$574
$410
$205

That's per seat.

Does anyone remember that when the Hornets were relocating from Charlotte, they were supposed to visit OKC on September 11, 2001?? Because of the cancellation of air traffic that day, George Shinn and Company never set foot in OKC and instead chose New Orleans. As for the ability of OKC to support a team, if New Orleans could do it, so can this city. Their income situation wasn't much different than our city. I also believe that OKC is in the best position facility-wise to immediately take the franchise. This city has been underrated for too long, it's time to prove the naysayers wrong.

What do you think the average attendance would be if the Hornets played OKC this season? The average for the 41 home games this past season in New Orleans was 14,221.

Initially=capacity

By season's end = less than 10,000

Are you saying that the season average will be less than 10,000 or just the last part of the season?

The Hornets largest crowd was 17,623. They only broke the 17,000 mark for the first game. It claims that Arena capacity is 18,000. That still smacks the attendance numbers from the last few years of operation in Charlotte.

Both

I think some of you guys may be jumping the gun a little. This would just be a temporary situation, until order is restored in New Orleans. It would be similar to the current deal the New Orleans Saints have with San Antonio at the Alamo Dome. They're only playing in San Antonio for a year, and then will return to New Orleans when the city returns to normacy.

We would only be getting the team for a year. Regardless of how well they did here, they WILL return to New Orleans once the city returns to normacy.

Although there is NOT a chance of stealing the Hornets from New Orleans, this still gives OKC a good opportunnity to see if it can support an NBA team. If we support it well, there might be a chance that the NBA could give some seriuos consideration to granting us an NBA franchise. Plus if one does well here, Funk may see the incentive to invest in an NBA team for the city.

Like anything it depends on the quality of the team. You can be in New York, have a crappy team, and you're not going to draw well. There are only a few perputual losers than can draw well and those are usually in baseball.

I would think a good idea in OKC would be to more evenly distribute the ticket prices and bring the high and low ticket closer together. I don't know if we'd sell all of the $100 tickets every game, but we could probabaly always sell $15 tickets. So maybe take the top tier down a bit and bring the bottom tier up a bit to compensate.

Guy's, Utah's prices might not be good to compare to.

San Antonio's ticket prices range from $9.50 to $120. We could afford that.

http://www.nba.com/spurs/tickets/arena.html

The offer by the city of Oklahoma City is now all over the networks and the internet. So, even if we do not get the team, we have gained an enormous amout of very positive publicity from this.

By the way. We are one of the closest major cities with no NBA team to New Orleans and have one of the largest arenas in the nation. So, that makes it an attractive offer.

Let's look at some other nearby teams.

Dallas Maverick's: Range from $10 to $240

http://www.nba.com/mavericks/arena/arena_pricing.html


Houston Rockets: Range from $9 to $185

http://www.nba.com/media/rockets/0506FSmap.pdf

Guy's, Utah's prices might not be good to compare to.

San Antonio's ticket prices range from $9.50 to $120. We could afford that.

Why is Utah a bad comparison????

At $10 to $95, Utah's are cheaper (you can get $5 season tickets, too), so we're going t afford that before San Antonio prices. I picked them simply because they're a small market (granted, with a much higher median income) and we had mentioned them before.

Last time I checked, NBA Commisioner David Stern said that the NBA will not be expanding. The only way for us to get a team ANYWHERE..is if another team is to relocate.

The only way for us to get a team ANYWHERE..is if another team is to relocate.

That's what we're talking about.

Whereever they play their games, attendence is likely to suffer after the initial newness wears off.

Typically, these teams have thousands that renew their season tickets and sell many more well in advance.


I hope OKC gets at least some of the games.

If I owened the Hornets, I'd give several non-NBA cities a bunch of games in order to get the best attendance and revenues.

Then, they can decide where they want to go permanently.

Looks at an illustrastion of the SBC Center in Houston, I really don't see much difference between the Ford Center and the SBC Center.

http://www.eventseats.com/houstonrockets/

I would think a good idea in OKC would be to more evenly distribute the ticket prices and bring the high and low ticket closer together. I don't know if we'd sell all of the $100 tickets every game, but we could probabaly always sell $15 tickets. So maybe take the top tier down a bit and bring the bottom tier up a bit to compensate.

Good suggestion, BDP. There are some creative ways to generate suite and ticket sales -- how about making it easier for groups and/or businesses to co-lease a suite? How about making lease terms shorter? How about offering 10, 20, 30, or 40-game packages? How about targeting smaller businesses, churches, and neighborhoods with more block ticket options? Or farther-away communities like Blanchard, Guthrie, and Shawnee with weekend ticket packages? For a major league team to be successful, they would have to work hard to attract multiple-ticket buyers, because it will be more expensive than most any other entertainment option in OKC.

Why is Utah a bad comparison????

At $10 to $95, Utah's are cheaper (you can get $5 season tickets, too), so we're going t afford that before San Antonio prices. I picked them simply because they're a small market (granted, with a much higher median income) and we had mentioned them before.

Whoops, I was looking at VIP Prices for Utah.

It's nice to see this headline on the home page of Yahoo...in their News Section:

"Okla. City Mayor Offers to Host Hornets "

For a major league team to be successful, they would have to work hard to attract multiple-ticket buyers, because it will be more expensive than any other entertainment option in OKC.

That's definately key. Say you went with $35 medicore season tickets for your family of four. That'd be $5740, net of Nacho Costs. Now, many families might drop that over the course of entertianing their family for 5 months, but that's a big bill all at once. Selling those season tickets and boxes is integral to the success of an organization.

BTW, Hornets tickets were selling for $20 to $350.

http://www.nba.com/hornets/tickets/seasontix_0405.html

Hmmmm...it may end up being a permanent move. If that's true, both the Saints and Hornets may want out of the state of Louisiana completely, which helps our chances at landing the Hornets.
Check this out.
-----------
"New Orleans market no longer viable
Saints, Hornets may have to find other permanent home in near future

The last thing that should be on anyone's mind in New Orleans is the future of the city's NFL franchise. But at some point, National Football League Commissioner Paul Tagliabue, along with his owners, Louisiana elected officials and Saints owner Tom Benson will have to decide what to do with the team.

Understand this, Louisiana was already paying to keep Benson and the Saints in town. Benson cut a nine-year deal with then-Louisiana Gov. Mike Foster that required the state to pay $186.5 million between 2002 and 2010 to keep the Saints playing in the Superdome.

Louisiana was able to cobble together enough money in 2002 and 2003; those payments were $12 and $13 million, but struggled to meet 2004 and 2005 commitments. Gov. Foster and the two state houses agreed to pay Benson from a tourist tax fund. But, New Orleans saw tourism drop after the 9-11 terrorist attacks and Louisiana officials have borrowed from other sources to make payments.

Benson is owed more than $130 million under the terms of the agreement.

Benson's team is committed to playing in New Orleans through the 2006 season as state officials found enough money to give him his $15 million stipend in July. Had the state defaulted, Benson could have started looking for a new city in September and be in a new city in 2006.

At this point, the city of New Orleans and the state of Louisiana has to secure the city, provide essential services and protect its population. The health and welfare of the population is paramount.

That is what government is supposed to do.

But this recovery is going to be a long, long process. It will be years before New Orleans and southern Louisiana along with Gulf Coast Mississippi will be economically viable.

That's also Benson's market.

It also happens to be George Shinn's market for his NBA Hornets. The Hornets were not selling many tickets last year and get state handouts. The Milwaukee Brewers' Triple A Zephyrs also wanted tax breaks and handouts.

Benson was having trouble selling tickets for the 2005 season; he didn't like the Superdome and with all the problems that structure is having, and it's unlikely the facility is in any shape to events in the near future.

Benson wanted a new stadium. Its not going to happen.


But there is far more to a franchise than a stadium. A franchise needs corporate support and government support. There is absolutely no way to judge whether New Orleans will even have an economy. Will people stay in New Orleans and rebuild or will they move away and start new lives? And even if people stay, will there be jobs for them? Virtually everything in New Orleans will have to be rebuilt starting with infrastructure.

The city has lived off tourism dollars. Tourists are not going to be going to New Orleans for a long time.

Benson once looked into building a stadium in Mississippi. That won't happen because Biloxi and Gulfport need to be rebuilt.

Benson's customers simply don't have the money for football at this point.

Benson in the past has said he wanted to stay in New Orleans. Benson has his car dealerships in the city, but he also has car dealerships in San Antonio where the empty Alamodome sits. The NFL wants to put a team in Los Angeles by 2009 and Birmingham, Ala., officials have made noises about building a football facility.

At some point, the NFL will have to make a decision on the future of its New Orleans franchise. Now is not that time. But at this junction, it appears the New Orleans market is no longer a viable NFL or and NBA market.

Should we go after the Saints instead? He He!

Na. With OU football strong here, I don't think we could support NFL. Plus we don't have a stadium for it. But, they could play at Memorial Stadium for awhile while we pass a MAPS program to pay for a new domed stadium.

Should we go after the Saints instead? He He!

Na. With OU football strong here, I don't think we could support NFL. Plus we don't have a stadium for it. But, they could play at Memorial Stadium for awhile while we pass a MAPS program to pay for a new domed stadium.

Although many here, Patrick included know, part of my platform is for a domed NFL stadium as part of MAPS III. We could have it up and running in two years after passage and regulatory approvals. Yes. Play in Tulsa for a couple of years.

When communities get an expansion or relocation, there has to be a period of time to effectively market the team and have ticket sales. That is really the only concern for OKC is the time to show this is a good market. It's a bit of a rush with regards to the Hornets showing up all of a sudden with virtually no time to get ticket sales where they need to be or being able to formulate a good marketing strategy. However, since it will be for an entire season, we will probably have a clearer picture halfway through the season provided the team relocates here.

Although many here, Patrick included know, part of my platform is for a domed NFL stadium as part of MAPS III. We could have it up and running in two years after passage and regulatory approvals. Yes. Play in Tulsa for a couple of years.

:Smiley181

new orleans was a poor city and seemed to struggle with the hornets. we are also a pretty poor city. could we support the team even if was temporary? if they came and we showed the nba that we could support the team wouldnt or couldnt we rely on corporation buying season tickets, ecspecially the more expensive ones? not just business in okc but im sure businesses in tulsa would be interested too.

If we can't support it we can't support it, but we'll never know if we don't give it a try.

What other cities are in the Running for the team?

That's definately key. Say you went with $35 medicore season tickets for your family of four. That'd be $5740, net of Nacho Costs. Now, many families might drop that over the course of entertianing their family for 5 months, but that's a big bill all at once. Selling those season tickets and boxes is integral to the success of an organization.

BTW, Hornets tickets were selling for $20 to $350.

http://www.nba.com/hornets/tickets/seasontix_0405.html

That is my thinking exactly. Spread over a period of time, a family could possibly afford that. But all it once is asking a lot.

Although many here, Patrick included know, part of my platform is for a domed NFL stadium as part of MAPS III. We could have it up and running in two years after passage and regulatory approvals. Yes. Play in Tulsa for a couple of years.

mranderson,

First off, it was nice meeting you last evening. Sorry we couldn't have stayed longer.

I wanted to bring up something that we briefly spoke about at the game last night.

You mentioned how astonished you were that there wasn't a bigger crowd at the ballpark last night when all it took was a bottle of water to get in FREE. (we even mentioned how a 1-liter of Ozarka water is only $0.79 right now) If people aren't going to go to a free baseball game, to see a team that has made the playoffs, do you think they are going to shell out much more for a major league team?

PLease do not get me wrong here....I hope wholeheartedly that I'm wrong. I hope that we get the opportunity and I hope that it succeeds. But after the newness wears off, I just do not see the team consistently making money. I guess I'm just tired of all the other failed attempts in bringing, and/or maintaining, sports teams to OKC (Calvary, Wranglers, NHL, etc).

OKC is headed in the right direction, I truly believe that. But I believe that there is still a lot of work to be done. The cost of living here is low and incomes are lower to match, that's why, IMO, the cheaper sports entertainment (Blazers, Yard Dawgs and Redhawks) are so popular.

mranderson,

First off, it was nice meeting you last evening. Sorry we couldn't have stayed longer.

I wanted to bring up something that we briefly spoke about at the game last night.

You mentioned how astonished you were that there wasn't a bigger crowd at the ballpark last night when all it took was a bottle of water to get in FREE. (we even mentioned how a 1-liter of Ozarka water is only $0.79 right now) If people aren't going to go to a free baseball game, to see a team that has made the playoffs, do you think they are going to shell out much more for a major league team?

PLease do not get me wrong here....I hope wholeheartedly that I'm wrong. I hope that we get the opportunity and I hope that it succeeds. But after the newness wears off, I just do not see the team consistently making money. I guess I'm just tired of all the other failed attempts in bringing, and/or maintaining, sports teams to OKC (Calvary, Wranglers, NHL, etc).

OKC is headed in the right direction, I truly believe that. But I believe that there is still a lot of work to be done. The cost of living here is low and incomes are lower to match, that's why, IMO, the cheaper sports entertainment (Blazers, Yard Dawgs and Redhawks) are so popular.

It was my pleasure meeting you. I enjoyed the evening.

Yes. I remember the quote on the water. However, baseball is the least popular sport in Oklahoma City, so it really is not a fair comparison.

The Cavalry failed because the owners failed to promote the team like the Blazers and the RedHawks are promoted. That would not happen with a major league franchise. The Wranglers failed because the team lost enough money to fill that U-Haul truck near the water drop area at SBC stadium. The move to Oklahoma City was gradually paying off, however, the league forclosed on the franchise, thus reposessing it. They operated it during the last year. The league said it was one of the highest drawing teams in the history of the AFL. They did not want to contract the team, however, it was because of outstanding debt caused in Portland. We (Oklahoma City) were proving we could support a major league franchise, but the cards were on the table before they moved here. No matter where they moved, the team would have been contracted. We were one of four franchises to be lost, so it was not lack of support. The NHL let St Paul counter-offer but did not let Oklahoma City counter-offer to be awarded the franchise. So, once again, it was not the fault of the city. That was the first time Oklahoma City has applied for a major league franchise, and we would have been selected had it not been for the unfairness of St Paul's counter-offer. No other city was allowed a counter-offer. For this city to be in the finals in their first attempt is, to me, success. We have proven we can be a contender.

The fact some teams have folded and we were sucker punched by the NHL is not really a good barometer to gauge the probability of success.

I have no doubt a major league franchise will be welcome with open arms and be fully supported. Will it sell out every game? No. Who does? Will it lose money in the beginning? Yes. I know of no buisness that does not lose money for a few years before showing a profit.

If the Hornets move here, even for one year, it will give the city a chance to prove we can be a major league city.

I may be pessimistic in a lot of areas, however, when it comes to sports franchises, air travel, probability of business success, and some other areas, I am quite opomistic. I also use a vast knowlege of business taught by my dad. That give me an insight most people do not have.

I wouldn't go so far as to say Oklahoma City is a pretty poor city. Our demographics have transformed quite a bit over the last five years, in about every aspect. We still do have a lower income average than many other cities, but the gap is disappearing.

To say Oklahoma City cannot support a franchise is playing dead. We'll never show this country what we're made of in terms of pro sports if we continue to pity our own city. Whether or not Salt Lake City's median income is higher than Oklahoma City's is not the point. Utah is still a rural and relatively poor state, still ranking in the bottom five in terms of per capita income. So is Louisiana. They both support major league franchise teams.

San Antonio has also been a relatively poor city. But with Austin nearby, the south-central region of Texas has remained a viable market for San Antonio's NBA team.

But all of that is beside the point. When Oklahoma City began landing big name concerts here in 2002, people came from all over to pay exuberantly high ticket prices for concerts. They'll do the same for NBA tickets. Especially if it's in Oklahoma.

We can say Oklahoma City can't support this... Oklahoma City can't support that. The day there IS a pro team in Oklahoma, is the day our attitudes will do a 180. Think about that.

In the mean time, with high gas prices, will ANY team in this country see a drop in attendance? It's possible.

Whether or not Salt Lake City's median income is higher than Oklahoma City's is not the point.

Median income is a big point in considerations. Whether we want it to be or not, owners look at it.


They both support major league franchise teams.

LA subsidizes their teams. Should we?


When Oklahoma City began landing big name concerts here in 2002, people came from all over to pay exuberantly high ticket prices for concerts.

This is a good point. We have drawn from major markets for concerts. But we won't draw from other markets that have teams (KC or Dallas, for example) except when we are playing their teams. Sports teams are a localized product by nature. Also, we have had some people paying $100 for a handful of concerts a year, but will they do that for 41 events in five months? I know we haven't had 41 concerts of over 15k people in a year, yet, let alone in 5 months. That would be the same as having about 100 concerts of 15k plus.

While it doesn't mean we can't do it, a major league sports venture is not on par with anything we have done before. While our concert support has been very good, it is not really the same thing as filling the venue 41 times a year for the same product.


We can say Oklahoma City can't support this... Oklahoma City can't support that. The day there IS a pro team in Oklahoma, is the day our attitudes will do a 180. Think about that.

When Oklahoma has a successful pro team, there will be no use for a debate at all. However, just saying that we can support it, doesn't make it so, either. I would be much more comfortable with the idea if there was more money in OK. Supporting a major league team is not on par with anything we have done so far, concerts or otherwise.

And I'm not saying it is impossible. I think you put a good team here and it will have some success. I think it is very possible for OKC to go against market indicators and overcome some of its demographics to support a major league team. It has happened elsewhere, but it would require some faith on the part of the owners, no matter how much we fluff the numbers. The Hornets situation is a good one for us, because we can offer a turnkey solution for the owners. Our infrastructure for an NBA teams is there and just waiting for someone to use it. That fact alone is the biggest thing working in our favor, and mitigates our shortcomings in other areas. It makes it a very low risk proposition for an owner, especially in the short term.

If the Hornets owners want an easy source of cash flow with no commitment for the 2005-2006 season OKC is a great choice. It would then be up to Oklahoma to show that it's ready to support such a venture.

Basically, what I am saying, and what I've been saying all along, is that Oklahoma can do this, but it is still a hard sell compared to other potential markets.

The naysayers will always say OKC can't have this and that, can't support this and that. I say let's give it a shot, and if it doesn't work, then people can gripe. Unless we make an attempt to host an NBA team, how will we ever know if OKC can support one?

I say let's give it a shot, and if it doesn't work, then people can gripe. Unless we make an attempt to host an NBA team, how will we ever know if OKC can support one?

You're forgetting that the naysayers and the dreamers don't make the decision. The city doesn't even make the final decision. It is simply a business decision that is made by the owners. The owners are not going to just say, "hey, how do we know if OKC can't support it unless we try?". They are going to try and minimize their risk. They do this with prudent research and negotiation. It is not a question of faith or a measurement of people's belief in the city. It's simply an economic question. The fact is that we have given it a shot and are giving it a shot. People are trying to make this happen. There are reasons that we haven’t gotten a team to this point, and they have nothing to do with the naysayers.

You also have to realize that if a team is brought in before the city can support it and it fails, that will move the city down the list the next time it’s up for consideration, even if the other numbers look better at that time.