http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51sYGSaAWbL._SX331_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg


It's a tale that begins with a refreshingly frank admission by Holt that before passage of the Metropolitan Area Projects initiative in 1993, “living in Oklahoma City kind of sucked.” Holt then credits former Mayor Andy Coats with introducing the idea of investing in the city in the 1980s, followed by successor Ron Norick's successful launch of the MAPS effort, which created the funding and plan for a ballpark, canal, library, renovated convention center and music hall, and yes, an arena.

Oklahoma City, once considered too small a market to be a serious contender for an NBA team, was at first seen as the good guy in this story as it came to the rescue of the New Orleans Hornets. But Oklahoma City was quickly cast into a two-act play that pit it as the aggressor with NBA fans in New Orleans, to where the Hornets eventually returned, and in Seattle, where fans of the Sonics remain bitter over the loss of their team.

New book details Oklahoma City's rise to 'big league' status | News OK (http://newsok.com/article/3669052)

I actually got a copy of this somewhere signed by the author. I good read for those interested in the city.

It was a terrific read, and I think it was pretty honest too.

Just as an aside...

David Holt is actually Oklahoma State Senator David Holt...the senator who introduced a bill last week to lessen regulation and raise the loan amounts for sleezy payday loan outfits. There was so much social media outrage, he pulled the bill on Thursday. Interestingly, he works for Hall Capital Partners - one of Hall's zillion spin-offs.

Just as an aside...

David Holt is actually Oklahoma State Senator David Holt...the senator who introduced a bill last week to lessen regulation and raise the loan amounts for sleezy payday loan outfits. There was so much social media outrage, he pulled the bill on Thursday. Interestingly, he works for Hall Capital Partners - one of Hall's zillion spin-offs.

How are David Holt's political actions or employer relevant to a thread discussing a book he wrote on the NBA in OKC?

How are David Holt's political actions or employer relevant to a thread discussing a book he wrote on the NBA in OKC?

Phi, That's why I said, "Just as an aside..."


a·side
əˈsīd
1. A remark that is not directly related to the main topic of discussion.
2. A temporary departure from a main theme or topic, especially a parenthetical comment or remark; short digression.


I thought others might find it interesting that this four-year-old book was mentioned here the same week David Holt (as Senator) was in the news for the crazy bill I mentioned. An aside...that's all.

Phi, That's why I said, "Just as an aside..."

a·side
əˈsīd
1. A remark that is not directly related to the main topic of discussion.
2. A temporary departure from a main theme or topic, especially a parenthetical comment or remark; short digression.


I thought others might find it interesting that this four-year-old book was mentioned here the same week David Holt (as Senator) was in the news for the crazy bill I mentioned. An aside...that's all.

Yes, I am aware of what an aside is, but thanks for the definition...it just seemed like an odd attempt to politicize a completely non-political conversation about a book.

Let's be real, the entity responsible for our beloved OKC Thunder is the greed of Howard Schultz.

Let's be real, the entity responsible for our beloved OKC Thunder is the greed of Howard Schultz.

Seriously? This is kind of the epitome of an Ignorant statement.

Shultz may have been a fool for buying the team in the first place with the terms of their lease but after losing money and facing cash calls for 10 straight years including a year with a deep playoff run, calling selling the team greed is just silly...

Schultz could have sold the team to someone local but lit on Bennett's very generous offer like a crow to a shiny object. People in Seattle were calling Bennett a ignorant hick for way overpaying they said for the team. So yes, it was Schultz's greed, a man who couldn't spend all his money in a 1,000 lifetimes, responsible for the OKC Thunder.

Schultz could have sold the team to someone local but lit on Bennett's very generous offer like a crow to a shiny object. People in Seattle were calling Bennett a ignorant hick for way overpaying they said for the team. So yes, it was Schultz's greed, a man who couldn't spend all his money in a 1,000 lifetimes, responsible for the OKC Thunder.

It is interesting how many people act like he was the sole owner of the team, he only owned around 30% of the team. It was still pretty feasible for others to halt the sale, especially how frequently sports teams are comprised almost entirely of local owners.

It is interesting how many people act like he was the sole owner of the team, he only owned around 30% of the team. It was still pretty feasible for others to halt the sale, especially how frequently sports teams are comprised almost entirely of local owners.

Wasn't he majority owner?

Regardless, this sentiment only enhances our argument when Seattleites feel the need to criticize us. It was Schultz and no one forced him or the ownership group to sell.
It's clear Schultz was cashing out.

The NBA wanted a new arena in Seattle or was moving the team. Seattle wasn't willing to do that. NBA liked OKC from the Hornets and we had a willing buyer's group

Wasn't he majority owner?

Regardless, this sentiment only enhances our argument when Seattleites feel the need to criticize us. It was Schultz and no one forced him or the ownership group to sell.
It's clear Schultz was cashing out.

He had the largest share of any single owner, similar to Aubrey did with the Thunder, though he still only had around 30% but also filled the roll Bennett does as the face of the ownership group. It has been a while but I want to say the group also had it set up so it took some sort of super majority to either sell entirely or move.