Print Story: Sonics ownership group adds 4 members on Yahoo! News (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061015/ap_on_sp_bk_ne/bkn_supersonics_ownership&printer=1;_ylt=ApvDKoqwdSoHeOOMwh_M47ce_7QF;_ylu=X 3oDMTA3MXN1bHE0BHNlYwN0bWE)-

Sinces it's all OKC guys, they have to be pretty confident the team will be coming to OK in the near future.

Sure hope so.

I don't mean to throw rain on Okc's parade, certainly not since it's my parade, too, but ... it's easy to get caught up in the hype of roller coaster "sound bites", interpreting them in Okc's most favorable light, as I certainly did last year ... Berry Trammel has forever lost any credibility with me (for example ... remember the several things that he said last season that proved to be altogether false) ... so, I pause, and remember, not only last season's hyperbole and the hopes that were spawned by them, but also that all of these Okc Soncis investors are "businessmen" ... and that they invest their money TO MAKE money. They are not, I think, making gratituous and benevelont contributions to Oklahoma City on the expectations that the Sonics will become an Oklahoma City franchise. They are investing millions of dollars because they expect a monetary payoff, which is not a criticism since they are business people who intend/hope to make money by their investments. Sure, if Washington doesn't fess up, the team MAY wind up here, but, that's still a BIG IF, I think.

I'd be more than thrilled if these guys had a parocrhial altruistic motive (i.e., an NBA team winds up in OKC), and it may be that they do ... but none of these investors have publically said that ... and the "group" itself has not said that ... so I think that it's a serious mistake (emotionally speaking) to impliedly put words in their mouths, the hopes of small fry like me notwithstanding.

All I'm saying is ... it might be best for your (my) emotional system just to watch and wait, and don't get your (my) hopes up too high. There will be plenty of time for celebration if and when the Bennett endeavor results in the conclusion that we all hope that it will.

Hope springs eternal.

Have to agree with Doug..This is far from a done deal...They are still telling Seattle their main goal is keeping the team in the Seattle area and are looking for areas to build a new arena

I'm sure they would much rather move the team here, but there are still many hurdles to get over before that happens

Have to agree with Doug..This is far from a done deal...They are still telling Seattle their main goal is keeping the team in the Seattle area and are looking for areas to build a new arena

I'm sure they would much rather move the team here, but there are still many hurdles to get over before that happens

They are saying that so that we Seattleites won't revolt against the Sonics. They want to make money until they can move the team to OKC. I am extremely confident that OKC will be getting the Sonics - its just a matter of "when?

2007 or 2008 is most likely"

Doug, everything you said echos my thoughts.. I think we all learned a lot last year regarding 'doublespeak' from the powers that be..

This season, I rebelled and didn't get tickets to the Hornets.. but as soon as I saw the hightlights of the first pre-season game.. I couldn't take it! So, I got tickets. sigh..what can I say? I'm going to miss them so much.

But, the Sonics are an intriguing possibility... I just won't get my hopes up, yet.

but hot rod...What happens if a suburb gets a deal done to build a new arena up there...No way Stern pulls them out of that much larger market if something gets done

Doug, everything you said echos my thoughts.. I think we all learned a lot last year regarding 'doublespeak' from the powers that be..

This season, I rebelled and didn't get tickets to the Hornets.. but as soon as I saw the hightlights of the first pre-season game.. I couldn't take it! So, I got tickets. sigh..what can I say? I'm going to miss them so much.

But, the Sonics are an intriguing possibility... I just won't get my hopes up, yet.
Hi, Delicous!

I've read your hundreds of posts here and at the local Hornets talk site, and I KNOW, yes, I KNOW, that you are as much of a "hooked" Okc Hornets/NBA fan as any can be! I'm also in your class, the class of October 2005 (1st preseason games).

So, if you've not bought season tickets and still want to go the games ... not to worry, you can. I didn't have season tickets last season and still made 29 games. This season, I've made 2 preseason games (kinda blah comapared to last year) and have tickets (as we speak .. this will expand) for 6 other regular season games ... and the rest will follow. I'll make at least 29-30 games this year on a pay-as-you-go basis. I say this only to let you know that you will be able to find tickets if you want to go.

So, go KARRIED, GO!

These guys aren't stupid. This is great investment for anyone. As it is now it looks like they will either 1) have a brand new state of the art arena in a top 15 market, at which time they can operate it successfully or sell it for a profit or 2) move their team to a proven NBA market where they can operate it successfully in their home city.

It's still a possibility that Oklahoma City doesn't have a team in 5 years, but the truth is that we are closer than we ever have been. At this time last year, we had never been taken seriously for major league sports. Now we are. No doubt we have elevated ourselves above many markets of the same size (and maybe even some larger ones as far as the NBA is concerned). But the truth is that it is a zero sum game and not every city that can support a team gets a team, but that's good. The NBA provides a boost to the city's image only if it is an exclusive club. If they saturated the market just to satiate cities that wanted a team, it suddenly wouldn't be worth having.

but hot rod...What happens if a suburb gets a deal done to build a new arena up there...No way Stern pulls them out of that much larger market if something gets done

Easy, you make some great points that would be true under a normal situation - BUT consider this

1) regardless if a suburb pulls a deal, its already the responsibility of the region to support the team - which we AREN'T doing. It doesnt matter whether the arena is in Downtown Seattle or suburban Renton - will the larger metro area of Seattle-Tacoma-Bremerton CSA support a team and make it financially viable? That's the question that STERN and Bennet will have to consider as THAT is the business issue with significantly more weight than "just" having a presence in a major market.

2) Seattle will NOT rebuild the Key Arena. That is in effect a done deal - whether or not the initiative we will vote on (I forget the number) will pass or not.
a) the initiative says, if Seattle builds an arena the new ownership group would be required to give a ROI to the city of Seattle. That is bull****, (excuse my french), no other team has this and no other group would be dumb enough to sign such an agreement if it passes.
b) even if the initative passes, dont look for Bennet to agree to that. There is NO WAY an ownership group would guarantee a positive return to the city when in fact most business ventures result in a loss. The initiative does not make any provision for a loss - its just something some idiot citizen group opposed to infrastructure investment is cooking up to pave the way for an easy exit of the Sonics.
c) yet another spin on this is - the initative might pass because of the "fan factor" - that Sonics fans will vote yes thinking it WILL guarantee a team stay when in fact it will only hasten their move to OKC.
d) if the initiative doesn't pass - then its business as usual - which means Seattle wont build it nor will the State chip in.

So, I ask you - why would Renton or some other suburb step in now to build a multi (hundred) million dollar arena for a "foreign" ownership group when the team currently doesn't get very much support or profit? Why didn't the suburbs do this when local ownership was there - and had been trying to keep the team here for some 4 years???????

I think the Seattle area is more behind the Seahawks and Mariners as our markee franchises - the Sonics are history, only a novelty of the past.

And I just dont believe they are worth saving. Most up here agree with me.

So for these reasons, its a no-win situation for Seattle and the Sonics. The ONLY saviour is for some billionaire on the Eastside to build an arena somewhere - which dont hold your breath because they should have done it when local ownership was crying for investment. Why would they do it now??

:fighting2

I agree with BDP, it may not happen immediate (mostly because Bennet doesn't want to make waves - "why do Oklahoman's always do this?? How come if it were someone from KC or Vegas or anywhere else, the team would have already moved - no question; but because its OK - well, we do want to ruffle any feathers????") Bennet gave them a year, and realistically - if the initiative does not pass which i predict, then actually there would JUST be two more months due to the legislature's retreat from the halls of governance.

I predict

1) the initiative will not pass - most Seattleites have apathy toward the Sonics and will not vote to give them a handout regardless of the promise for a ROI (which is also a stupid thing)
2) the city and state will wash their hands of the Sonics in November and begin negotiations with Bennet concerning the lease
3) Bennet will decide that the Seattle area does not want the team, and in operating in good faith - he has no choice but to buy out the lease for two years and move the team to Oklahoma City for the 2007-2008 season provided the Hornets do in fact return to New Orleans full-time.

Now, what if the Hornets do NOT return full time in 2007?? I predict that actually - the 2007-2008 season the Hornets will want to split the home games (no more than half in NO) then move perm in 2008-2009. Why else would there be a provision for a third year in OKC in the concession agreement, in which OKC receive considerably more than what the Hornets were willing to give. Most business decisions (and legal ones) require both sides to receive "consideration." Clearly, OKC's consideration was dollars. I bet the Hornet's consideration was the third year option.

So that being said, i will revise 3) into 3a)

3a) due to the Hornets remaining in OKC for the 2007-2008 season, Bennet announces the buy-out of the Sonics/Storm lease in Key Arena will take place effective 2009 - at which time the team will relocate to Oklahoma City's Ford Center. Also, OKC will build the necessary improvements to the Ford Center as well as a neighbourhood practice facility in midtown (hopefully in conjunction with OCU). This will give OKC two years to implement improvements and planning necessary to "embrace" the two franchises, including hotel rooms downtown, the maturation of Bricktown, the evolution of Deep Duece, Triangle and Flatiron, AAlley, midtown, and Westown as the NEW urban districts.

Ford Center will be booked year round with pro basketball and concerts - so improvements will be needed for the Cox Arena, Fairgrounds Arena, and Lloyd Noble to support additional large scale events. This all will feed a growing tourism/entertainment economy that is on the verge of complete success and profit for all involved that should mean positive reinvestment in OKC as well as positive press in the international media!! (which is what OKC is ultimately looking for).

hot rod...You definitely have a better grasp on the situation being up there....I hope most everyone up there does agree with you...We will gladly take them

I seem to remember that a gentleman named Evans was listed as a partner when this group first made the news. I believe that he was the former president of Dobson that had left them and bought a company in Florida and moved the headquarters to OKC. If this is true, did he drop out or was he just fronting for the Dobson that was just named as one of the partners?

These guys, wherever they are from (and, certianly it's not a coincidence that they are all from Okc), are business men ... their purpose is to make money. If the Seattle area ponies up with the stated requirements, Bennett's group will make more money there (I'd suppose) than they would in Okc. If Seattle doesn't, the team can come here and still be successful.

I'm still guessing that the far northwest will want to keep this team of 40 years ... and will do what is necessary ... but I'll be a happy guy to be mistaken about that!

These guys, wherever they are from (and, certianly it's not a coincidence that they are all from Okc), are business men ... their purpose is to make money. If the Seattle area ponies up with the stated requirements, Bennett's group will make more money there (I'd suppose) than they would in Okc. If Seattle doesn't, the team can come here and still be successful.

I'm still guessing that the far northwest will want to keep this team of 40 years ... and will do what is necessary ... but I'll be a happy guy to be mistaken about that!

Doug, Im not so sure.

The Seattle/Tacoma area does have a larger metro market but the concatchment markets are pretty similarly sized. With some creative marketing and cable deals, OKC can certainly have similar concatchment.

Also, the cost of living up here is considerably more expensive than in OKC. So the cost of building an arena up here (not to even mention buy a house) would be at least five fold what it is in OKC.

In finality, Seattle is suffering from infrastructure neglect. Its not that we dont have it, but that which we do have needs to be replaced. See, unlike OKC, we only have ONE N-S freeway through the city of Seattle (named I-5) and due to geography it is max'd out. There is a secondary highway on the west side of downtown Seattle known as "Alaska Way Viaduct" - Im sure you all will begin to hear more about local Seattle politics as they will be the reasons you all will GET the Sonics (sorry to hijack the forum).

See the next post for editorial on this.

But due to these circumstances, ticket prices are higher and yes you should be able to fill a new arena here but the costs of running an org here usually make a team not as profitable as it would be in OKC, as everything would be more expensive and tix prices wouldn't be that much higher than in OKC to offset the difference.

Ill leave it at that for now, consider the next post for some more Seattle insight.

Ok, now for some more insight.

I mentioned earlier that not only is it more expensive to have an operation in Seattle vs OKC but also here it is much more political. We are suffering from some infrastructure neglect issues - only a couple of which I will highlight below.

Once you finish reading, you will see that we have much bigger issues to solve than worrying about a basketball team that is a "has-been" at best.

If you all remember the I-680 freeway in Oakland it is a double decker freeway which fell onto itself during the last SFO bay earthquake. Well, Alaska Way is similarly designed and carries a magnitude of cars from West Seattle into downtown. And, during OUR last earthquake the freeway suffered MAJOR damage but it didnt fail. However, the freeway is a ticking time bomb, any day now and it could fall over!!!

So there is a major need to replace it. "now we go back to cost of living exchanges" because in order for us to replace our downtown 2ndary freeway, we would have to shell out at least $2.8 Billion minimum, yes that's Billion for the segment that is the same length as OKC's $395M I-40 Crosstown. See the difference?

And the preferred choice is to replace it with a now $4Billion tunnel - to create an urban park connecting downtown with the waterfront. See, we want to be like Vancouver - and it costs major bucks to fix our mistakes.

Hmm, one freeway replacement $2.8B-$4B+ dollars OR $500M on a new stadium for a team that sucks who has an owner from out-of-town. Oh, and we have another freeway to replace, the WA 520 bridge, which is another $2B or so. I'd estimate in good faith, we have some $30B worth of infrastructure replacements needed in Seattle alone (not the metro area) that must be addressed. Add in the rest of the metro, and it moves up to $50B or more.

Hmm, $50B just to survive OR $500M for a new arena for a team that sucks that now has an owner from out-of-town. Seattle people are smart enough to make the correct decision and I can guarantee you that we are ready to say goodbye to the Sonics.

If the big one - 9.0 earthquake were to happen today/tomorrow, we'd be sitting ducks. If Mount Rainier were to do the Mt. Saint Helen's thing and blow his top tomorrow - Seattle would be a third world country like that!

$50B does not sound like that much money when you consider the alternative AND it certainly makes a new arena not only unlikely but also a very stupid option.

I hope that helps - and yes, this opinion above is shared by MOST people here. (only the NBA fans here are having heartburn about the Sonics and OKC; and in reality they only care that Seattle has A team, not necessarily the Sonics).

Most of us say, get on with it - move to OKC!!.

Landing the Sonics would be an amazing coup for Oklahoma City. Just having an NBA team playing as many home games as they do (and consistently selling out the Ford Center) brings lots of people downtown and could encourage more businesses to open, especially in Bricktown. It also says to the nation that OKC is a major league city and should be treated that way.

If they kept the whole Sonics theme and colors, it would be cool to see the Ford Center exterior bathed in green light during game nights as well as some of the tallest downtown buildings. We always complain about the crappy skyline lighting, this is an opportunity to change that and show mutual support for the NBA team.

That is a great idea BG, although I suspect that the Sonics will change their name once they move to the city.

But nonetheless, I think the city should encourage more "big time" showcasing like what you suggest. That certainly has a big city feel to it and imagine that on national television - certainly would improve the image if there are any further doubters out there about OKC.

Interesting development:


Seattle voters reject sports subsidies

By The Associated Press


SEATTLE -- Seattle voters approved a ballot initiative that would prohibit the city from giving city tax dollars to professional sports teams unless the money is in the form of a loan.
The Seattle SuperSonics' new Oklahoma-based owners say the vote results won't send them out of Washington.

"The team fully intends to honor its lease at KeyArena until 2010 and then hopes to relocate to a new facility outside of Seattle, but within King County," Clayton Bennett, chairman of ownership group, said in a statement.

Chris Van Dyk, who headed the Initiative 91 campaign, said he felt the vote in the Seattle makes it unlikely that any sports team tax subsidy would make its way through the Legislature. And, "on the outside chance that one did, we would work to block it," he said.

The initiative was launched early this year after the previous owners of the Sonics and the WNBA Storm increased demands for a better lease and an arena remodel.

I smell a pending franchise swap with George Shinn.

Sonics

Owner: Vote leaves Seattle in the dust on arena
By Stuart Eskenazi

Seattle Times staff reporter


Seattle voters stood up and cheered a ballot measure that would restrict public financing for a new or improved arena for the Sonics and Storm — rousing Clayton Bennett to declare that Seattle has gone to the back of the line as a potential long-term home for the professional basketball teams.

"The passage of Initiative 91 makes it much more difficult to build a multipurpose arena to serve as the new home for the Sonics within the city of Seattle," said Bennett, who heads the Oklahoma-based ownership group for the teams.

"While Seattle will now be relegated to a second-tier status, we will continue to seek other sites within King County," Bennett said. "Other cities in King County have expressed great interest in becoming the new home of the Sonics."

Bennett said the team will honor its lease at KeyArena, which expires in 2010, "and then hopes to relocate to a new facility outside of Seattle but within King County."

Chris Van Dyk, the Bainbridge Island-based organizer of Citizens for More Important Things, said although the measure was limited to Seattle, its impact will be felt regionally and statewide. Rather than re-focusing elsewhere in King County, Van Dyk thinks the new owners should work to build a new arena without tax subsidies.

Voters were approving the initiative by a 3-to-1 ratio. It requires the city to receive a "fair value" cash profit — no less than the rate of return on a 30-year U.S. Treasury Bond, which is about 5 percent currently — in return for services or real estate it provides professional sports franchises.

But I-91 would not necessarily stop a new arena deal for the Sonics and Storm from being made. I-91 does not restrict spending county or state taxes on an arena in Seattle — the tax model used to build Safeco and Qwest fields. And it has no legal effect on what suburban locations might offer the new team owners.

"If Mr. Bennett thinks for one moment that a vote like this in the city of Seattle will encourage state legislators to fund tax subsidies for a professional sports team anywhere in Washington state, he is dead wrong," Van Dyk said. "Nothing will go forward with tax subsidies of any significant amount in the state of Washington."

Van Dyk said his group would mount a statewide initiative to repeal any subsidized professional sports arena in Washington, if necessary.
Ralph Morton, executive director of the Seattle Sports Commission, predicted that political leaders who understand the economic benefits of a professional sports franchise would not be deterred.

It seems like Van Dyk might be the most popular Washingtonian here in Okie land!!...Keep up the good work Chris :tiphat:

Looks like Clay & Co. have their out!

Seems like a pretty strong mandate from the proletariate that anyone who spends tax dollars of any sort on pro sports teams is going be met with some harsh political consequences.

I'm not so sure. The Bennett group has been making a lot of noise down there re staying. It may be primarily to protect their short term interests, but they might also really be looking to develop something outside of the County. Time will tell I suppose.

okay, so now that seattle is out of the way, when will we know whats going to happen, or the next date something will happen (or fail to happen) in the suburbs?

Bennett said that he wanted a new facility deal within 12 months, and this was about 3 months ago.

He also had said that he was striving for a 15 to 30 acre new site with 'significant' taxpayer money approved only by the legislature, not the general voting public (for obvious reasons).

It's hard to imagine that he'll get anywhere close to what he's asking for, and perhaps that's the whole point.

The Seattle Times: Local News: New owner of Sonics cool to arena vote (http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2003336900_bennett02m.html)

Malibu, according to what I read earlier, the 12 month period actually started to run once the ownership was transferred, so, actually, Seattle gets 2-3 months on top of the 12, starting from mid-July (I think that's when the announcement was made).

I'm not so sure. The Bennett group has been making a lot of noise down there re staying. It may be primarily to protect their short term interests, but they might also really be looking to develop something outside of the County. Time will tell I suppose.

They are looking to protect their interests. If they announce tough luck, then lots of ticket holders will flee, leaving Bennet with an empty old stadium in downtown Seattle.

As for the King County interest, it will NOT happen.

1) The whole project is dependent upon State funding. It is highly likely that the state will continue its current stance, which is NO SUPPORT for the SONICS.

2) We will pass an initiative similar to the Seattle I-91, that will block funding at the state level; should Bennet or the chair of "ways and means of wa" try to introduce a "save our sonics" campaign. It would also be extended to King county level.

3) Nobody here is gonna fully fund the project (privately).

Bennet is not stupid enough to fund it himself - Seattle is not that much of a gold mine, trust me. Like was said earlier, we have given Bennet his "way out". I suspect he will do a "good faith" effort at the state and county - which we will block at that time. Once that happens, look for him to negotiate out of Key Arena and move the team to OKC once the Hornets return to NO (If they still are).

This could mean that OKC could have the Sonics/Storm as early as the 2008-2009 season. Pro Basketball all year in a FULL Ford Center!!! :congrats:

Hot Rod... I so hope you are correct!!!! Go Sonics!