Arco's flaws have Kings calling foul

[LMM]

http://www.sacbee.com/content/sports/basketball/kings/story/12974792p-13821810c.html

Arco's flaws have Kings calling foul
By Terri Hardy -- Bee Staff Writer
Published 2:15 am PDT Sunday, May 29, 2005

Cheap folding chairs and an absence of lockers give the visitors' locker room at Arco Arena a shabby look. The Kings' locker room, while much nicer, is still spartan compared with those of other NBA teams

Sacramento Bee/Hector Amezcua

Eric Cameron has watched the Sacramento Kings play basketball in Arco Arena for 16 of his 21 years. The Arco experience is so much a part of his life that he says games are more like family reunions than sporting events.

So Cameron, like many others around Sacramento, has reservations when he hears talk of the Kings needing a new arena, one that would actually replace his beloved Arco. Standing at a concessions stand at a Kings playoff game last month, he expressed his doubts about the need for something new.

"I'm really happy with what we have here; it's a real family environment," said Cameron, of Sacramento. "I guess there are some issues, but I don't see what's beyond these halls. And really, the main thing is the game."

Up on the fourth level, where the sound of the sellout crowd swells and reverberates, Lilly Smith of Roseville shouts that she thinks Arco's just fine, thank you very much. "They say it's old and dilapidated," Smith said, looking around her at the cheering crowd, the hip-hop dancers and flames shooting from above the shot clock. "I just don't see that."

Cameron and Smith personify the public relations hurdle facing any effort to build a new arena in Sacramento. After more than two years of arena discussions, many of even the most stalwart fans still don't see any reason to replace Arco.

Bobby Hernreich, a minority owner for the Kings, acknowledges that such fans present a ticklish situation for the organization. How do they honor the iconic stature that Arco carries in the community while at the same time pushing for a state-of-the-art facility?

"The public likes Arco; it's familiar and it brings them closer to the action, " Hernreich said. "But the truth is, Arco is impractical. A 450,000-square-foot arena in this day and age doesn't work. The optimum size is almost twice as big."

City Councilman Ray Tretheway said he, too, knows fans love Arco's intimacy and acoustics. But Tretheway has had a look at the facility behind the scenes and offers a blunt assessment.

"It's a dump," Tretheway said.

If public opinion polls, conventional wisdom and the fan on the street are to be trusted, the Kings have yet to make their case for a new arena. That Hernreich, a bona fide Kings insider, is leading the latest public relations push indicates Kings owners Joe and Gavin Maloof have reached the same conclusion.

For more than two years, as the controversy over a new basketball arena has raged, the Kings have let others - including Mayor Heather Fargo, businessman Tony Giannoni, the Sacramento Metropolitan Chamber of Commerce and Sacramento County Sheriff Lou Blanas - lead the public push for a new arena. But one after another, those efforts have failed. Now, the Kings are pushing the agenda themselves and starting at square one.

Maloof Sports and Entertainment has spent around $10 million on repairs and improvements to Arco, including upgrading audiovisual and concessions equipment, said spokeswoman Sonja Brown. They also built a new $9.1 million practice facility for the Kings.

But this Band-Aid approach can continue only a few more years, Hernreich said. Compared to modern arenas, he said, the facility is small, the layout awkward, the seats uncomfortable and poorly placed, the concourses narrow, the kitchen too cramped, the amenities too few - problems he argues can't be fixed with piecemeal renovations.

He invited several reporters and editors from The Bee for a recent tour of Arco. The group was led by Brad Schrock and George Heinlein of Kansas City-based 360 Architects firm, a company specializing in the design of sports complexes. The firm was commissioned by the Kings early this year to conduct a study of Arco's maintenance needs over the next five years. The report has not yet been completed.

"There is no doubt in my mind that Arco Arena should be replaced - renovating this arena is simply not in the cards," Heinlein said. "My personal feeling is that the useful life of this building as an NBA-caliber arena is no more than four or five years."

The idea for the maintenance report came from NBA Commissioner David Stern, said the Kings' Brown. Stern has said several times that Arco soon will be obsolete, and that the Kings need a state-of-the-art arena if they're to stay in Sacramento.

"He pointed out that we would need to provide this information to the public and to politicians when they asked why Arco needed to be replaced," Brown said.

Strip away the action on the court, the roar of the fans, the pyrotechnics, the glitter, the Kings dogs and the T-shirt stands, and the core reality of Arco is a 16-year-old building, the second oldest unrenovated arena in the NBA.

In assessing the arena, 360 Architects compared Arco with four sports complexes built in recent years: Charlotte Arena in North Carolina (scheduled to open this fall); FedEx Forum in Memphis, Tenn. (2004); Toyota Center in Houston (2003); and SBC Center in San Antonio (2002). Their numbers show Arco falls behind the newer arenas in overall space, amenities and revenue-generating features.

From a player's perspective, Arco would be considered spartan, Heinlein said: Home locker rooms in state-of-the-art facilities can be more than triple the size of the Kings' and far more luxurious. The Kings' changing area offers just the basics.

The locker room for visiting teams at Arco is downright shabby: The furniture consists of folding chairs, many patched with duct tape. There are no lockers: Players use a line of hooks, each labeled with masking tape scrawled with a player number.

continued in the next post.

 

[LMM]

continuation..

While fans might love Arco, they would find that modern facilities offer far more amenities, according to the architects. They're more like upscale shopping plazas, with an array of stores, a wide choice of restaurants and hopping after-hours clubs.

To speed customers through food lines, new arenas have a cash register for every 100 to 111 seats, according to 360's comparison. At Arco, the ratio is 1-to-307. Arco has fewer suites than state-of-the-art arenas and no high-priced club seats. It also lags in restroom capacity.

Recently, USA Today sportswriter Greg Boeck traveled to all 29 NBA venues, rating them for fan friendliness. Arco ranked No. 8 overall, a high score boosted by fan involvement. Boeck found lots of problems with the facility itself, including long concession lines, minimal fan amenities and hard upper deck seats.

Said Boeck: "Kings fans love their team and raise the roof cheering, which is good because the older arena, built in the mid-1980s, provides little to cheer about."

There's one eight-burner stove in the kitchen. While the newer arenas have several wide concourses, Arco has one relatively narrow passage, made more cramped by portable food and souvenir booths.

Arco's auditorium design is also obsolete, Heinlein and Schrock said. Sight lines for lower-level seats are often obscured because the rise between one row and the next is not high enough. There's less seating for disabled people than would be required in a new arena.

But much of what the comparison shows lacking at Arco involves operational elements - and the Kings' bottom line.

Modern arenas can be used for multiple sports and entertainment events, ensuring the facilities are year-round money-makers. Schrock, of 360, said rapid changeovers are the "lifeblood" of an arena, allowing more events and more revenue.

Arco's "completely outdated" ice system requires two days to make a sheet of ice, Schrock said. That's made it impossible to lure a hockey team and difficult to hold ice-related events, according to John Thomas, president of Maloof Sports and Entertainment.

While 16 years wouldn't be considered a life span for most buildings, in Arco's case, the problem is exacerbated by what wasn't included when it was built in the first place, the architects said. Arco's price tag in 1988 was $40 million. The other two arenas that opened that year were more costly: Bradley Center, home of the Milwaukee Bucks, was $90 million; and The Palace of Auburn Hills, home of the Detroit Pistons, cost $70 million, according to a report commissioned by the Sacramento Metropolitan Chamber of Commerce last year.

Since then, the Pistons have poured millions more into The Palace, adding space and amenities; under way now is a $20 million project to provide a courtside lounge, new entrance, more retail space and an expanded concourse.

It was The Palace, with its 180 luxury suites and 6,000 club seats, that spawned an era of bigger, better and pricier arenas, according to Dennis Howard, professor of sports finance at the University of Oregon Warsaw Sports Marketing Center. The Pistons pre-sold the seats, raking in "tens of millions each year," Howard said.

"I call it the Palace revolt," Howard said. "Every other owner saw what Detroit did and wanted their own fully loaded venue."

The Charlotte arena, built around the same time, had only 12 luxury suites and "was economically obsolete the minute it was built," Howard said. This year, the team is closing that arena and moving to a new one.

Howard said the average modern arena has more than 80 luxury suites and thousands of club seats. Between 1985 and 1994, the average arena (in 2003 dollars) cost $150 million. By comparison, arenas built between 1995 and 2003 cost an average of $223 million (in 2003 dollars).

Howard and other experts interviewed acknowledged there's a cycle at work, an upward spiral of palatial facilities fueled by pressure to keep up with other cities and the revenues other teams are generating.

What's less clear is how much fans benefit.

Fans generally like the fancy digs and extensive eating options, said Michael Mondello, a professor of finance and economics in Florida State University's sports management department. Usually there's a spike in attendance after a new arena is built.

More money and better facilities also can help lure better players, which in turn can be a fan draw, Howard said.

But the most "splendiferous" amenities - such as private clubs and concourses - affect only the highest-paying customers, he said.

And, in general, said both professors, the real benefit of the fully loaded arena is to a team's bottom line.

For example, while ticket revenue for general seating is shared between the home team and the visiting team, the cash from luxury suites and club seats stays with the home team, Mondello said.

In discussions about replacing Arco, the Kings owners have said they want an "NBA standard" venue with wider seats and more shopping and dining options. They propose more seats - 18,000 from 17,317 - as well as 5,000 club or VIP seats and at least 55 luxury suites. They've indicated they think a new facility would cost about $400 million.

Whether fans see the need or not, the issue isn't going away, according to Chamber of Commerce President Matt Mahood. A chamber-led panel concluded last year that Arco has five years of useful life remaining. Mahood said that message has yet to be absorbed by the public.
"Maloof Sports has done such a great job of customer service that any problems with Arco are hidden pretty well," Mahood said.

But gloss and customer service won't change the operational issues at Arco, Mahood said, and won't stop the clock ticking. And while he believes the Kings don't want to leave Sacramento, he doesn't know if they'll have much of a choice.

"The Kings have become one of our best marketing pieces," Mahood said. "If the team leaves ... the region's self-image will be set back 20 years."

Cameron, the Kings fan, said despite his allegiance to Arco, he's open to being convinced there's a need that he doesn't see. If the team's owners say they can't stay in Sacramento unless Arco is replaced, he said, then somehow, a new arena should be built. "If there are problems with Arco, then they just need to be right in our face and say (a new arena) is a great thing," Cameron said. "It's not going to hit home until people from the organization talk to the fans."

 

[JB_kings]

If the team's owners say they can't stay in Sacramento unless Arco is replaced, he said, then somehow, a new arena should be built.

Somebody should point out David Stern's "no arena-no team" comments in this article to Cameron.

 

[1kingzfan]

Finally, a piece that attempts to educate the public on WHY a new arena is needed. This issue was glossed over previously, and things jumped right past that and into "how much will it cost?"

However, I will say, that what comes across in this article, as for the general reasons for NEEDING a new arena, the explanations look to be grouped into three areas:

1) Better fan experience (more diverse experience, comfier seats, wider concourses, less waiting in line, more urinals per 1,000 patrons, etc)
2) More revenue for owners (More overall seats, more suites, club seats, more retail establishments, etc)
3) Greater operational functionality (better kitchen facilities, better locker room facilities, etc)

The "obsolescence" claims don't appear to be tied to the arena will fall down in 5 years or it will be impossible to stage NBA games there in 5 years.

The fundamental premise appears to be "keeping up with the NBA Joneses", based on what has been presented. So, if the fans are willing to forego #1, and #3 is merely niceties that will make things easier to run or better for employees and players (and perhaps keep operating costs down a bit in the long run with some new things), the bottom line TRULY becomes the BOTTOM LINE (#2) for our owners.

Obviously, Hardy's piece must be considered surficial for now, but the above is what I took away from it. Is there more? I hope so.

The community should have been sold on WHY long before the cost ever came into play in discussions.

 

[VF21]

Obviously, Hardy's piece must be considered surficial for now, but the above is what I took away from it. Is there more? I hope so.

The community should have been sold on WHY long before the cost ever came into play in discussions.

Excellent article. I disagree that it's superficial. I think it's laying the foundation for further reports and it's beneficial in that it gives people a basic for further discussion. Just like infants have to crawl before they can walk, I think this piece does a good job of at least getting the door open for further in-depth analyis.

I've heard for years about the lack of amenities in the visitor's locker room but that is just pathetic. No wonder teams like the Mavericks celebrate so much when they win at Arco. It's almost as though they're motivated to play harder because of the insulting conditions they face when they first arrive. Make it a little more visitor-friendly and you remove some of the motivation.

Whether fans see the need or not, the issue isn't going away, according to Chamber of Commerce President Matt Mahood. A chamber-led panel concluded last year that Arco has five years of useful life remaining. Mahood said that message has yet to be absorbed by the public.

"Maloof Sports has done such a great job of customer service that any problems with Arco are hidden pretty well," Mahood said.

I'd like to see the report by that panel and learn what they considered in their estimation of five years of useful life remaining in the arena. I think it's something the public needs to know, too, so they can better realize that the idea of a new arena isn't just something concocted by the Maloofs to further line their pockets.

Bottom line for me is that I'm glad to finally see the local newspaper doing what a newspaper should be doing. This article - and the one by Kreidler about tickets - are informative and allow the reader to get a better grasp of the situation at hand so they can ask better questions before making an INFORMED decision. Way to go, Sacramento Bee.

 

[hoopsfan]

"Excellent article. I disagree that it's superficial."

No VF...he said surficial.

 

[VF21]

I know - I was being diplomatic.

 

[SacTownKid]

I think I have a way to make everything better at ARCO without dishing out tons of cash.

1) Fans eat before the game
2) Bring pillows for the hard seats
3) Learn to hold in your pee

And in a way to improve the opposing teams locker room, I say provide coloring books, puzzles, and lincoln logs. This way they will be distracted from the dungeon like surroundings.

 

[VF21]

Those might work.

In addition, however, you might want to add:

4)Issue plastic coverings if the weather report looks like rain. (If they have enough of those trash bags like they gave to Jerome James, those could probably do...)

 

[SacTownKid]

Those might work.

In addition, however, you might want to add:

4)Issue plastic coverings if the weather report looks like rain. (If they have enough of those trash bags like they gave to Jerome James, those could probably do...)

Thanks I forgot to cover that one.

 

[1kingzfan]

Excellent article. I disagree that it's superficial. I think it's laying the foundation for further reports and it's beneficial in that it gives people a basic for further discussion.

You disagreed with me but made the same point. The article touched on the surface, and hopefully more education is coming soon.


No VF...he said surficial.

I know - I was being diplomatic.

About what? Superficial and surficial have shades of different meanings.

Surficial was the word I meant, so that's what I used.

Just being diplomatic.

 

[hoopsfan]

Those might work.

In addition, however, you might want to add:

4)Issue plastic coverings if the weather report looks like rain. (If they have enough of those trash bags like they gave to Jerome James, those could probably do...)

I should have known.

 

[VF21]

You disagreed with me but made the same point. The article touched on the surface, and hopefully more education is coming soon.


No VF...he said surficial.

Quote:
I know - I was being diplomatic.


About what? Superficial and surficial have shades of different meanings.

Surficial was the word I meant, so that's what I used.

Just being diplomatic.

Just being diplomatic or pompous?


Sorry, they seem to have shades of different meanings.



Whatever, 1kingzfan.

Your term is generally used to apply to discussions of geology. I assumed - silly me - therefore you had simply made a typing error. Sorry if your feathers are all ruffled.

 

[1kingzfan]

Sorry if your feathers are all ruffled.

Not ruffled in any way. Just making a correction...diplomatically.

 

[VF21]

1kingzfan - Correction acknowledged.

Humble apology made...diplomatically.



I don't know why I'm arguing with you. We're on the same side of the fence on this...

God, I hate TDOS!!!

 

[Bibby_Is_Clutch]

Thats a pretty crappy looking locker room. Geeze!

 

[6th]

I don't know why I'm arguing with you. We're on the same side of the fence on this...

God, I hate TDOS!!!

For you two............habit?

 

[1kingzfan]

My biggest concern about the "initial" Bee piece on education on the "why" issue is that it kinda led me (anyway) by the nose to that the facility was still usable well into the future, but it just does not compare to most others in the league, could be a helluva lot better for the fans, players, and staff with additional amenities, and the Maloofs can make more money (via mostly more suites and club seats) with a new facility.

I hope there is more...

The local community will likely need to hear something like one of more of the following before the required voting numbers agree to foot some or all of the bill (or NONE of it, in the case of a deal with only hotel and rental car tax hikes):

a) A structural engineer says the building will fall down in 5 years
b) Stern says the NBA will not allow a team to be housed in a substandard facility
c) The Maloofs just come out and say "we're outta here" without it.

 

[VF21]

For you two............habit?

I blame it all on hoopsfan. She did it on purpose. Typical evil Laker fan trick to sidetrack legitimate discussion by loyal Kings fans.

 

[1kingzfan]

For you two............habit?

Stuff-stirrer!!!!!

 

[VF21]

My biggest concern about the "initial" Bee piece on education on the "why" issue is that it kinda led me (anyway) by the nose to that the facility was still usable well into the future, but it just does not compare to most others in the league, could be a helluva lot better for the fans, players, and staff with additional amenities, and the Maloofs can make more money (via mostly more suites and club seats) with a new facility.

I hope there is more...

The local community will likely need to hear something like one of more of the following before the required voting numbers agree to foot some or all of the bill (or NONE of it, in the case of a deal with only hotel and rental car tax hikes):

a) A structural engineer says the building will fall down in 5 years
b) Stern says the NBA will not allow a team to be housed in a substandard facility
c) The Maloofs just come out and say "we're outta here" without it.

My semi-educated guess is that this piece is just the tip of the iceberg. There have been some changes in editorial personnel at the Bee and I've noticed a subtle shift towards a more non-biased discussion of the Maloofs, the arena, etc. I hope it's a sign of many more articles to come that will actually do what a newspaper should do - present the facts and allow the reader to draw informed conclusions.

But I'm probably expecting way too much.

 

[1kingzfan]

I hope it's a sign of many more articles to come that will actually do what a newspaper should do - present the facts and allow the reader to draw informed conclusions.

But I'm probably expecting way too much.

I have the same hope, but as long as some of the writers are paid to editorialize and need to be somewhat "popular" in order to keep their jobs, we will still see garbage being spewed forth and lame attempts at tainting public opinion.

I really think some of these columnists "get off" on that tainting thing-y....

So I guess I also have your same expectation.

 

[Bricklayer]

a) A structural engineer says the building will fall down in 5 years
b) Stern says the NBA will not allow a team to be housed in a substandard facility
c) The Maloofs just come out and say "we're outta here" without it.

That's just setting the standard too high. Realsitically nobody lives in a home until it actually falls down around their ears, nor do people accept substandard housing if they are offered a much better place to live for free. If the above is really the standrad the Sacto fans/population is waiting for, they'll still be waiting at the point the Kings are putting towels in the locker room in their brand new arena in K.C. Sadly seemingly the only way to get everyone's attention is for the Maloofs to just say "we're going to leave", and by that point the water will so tainted that the fans seem likely to respond with "go ahead" while acusing them of being bullies and ingrates.

 

[hoopsfan]

I blame it all on hoopsfan. She did it on purpose. Typical evil Laker fan trick to sidetrack legitimate discussion by loyal Kings fans.

...and 1Kingzfan....I'M the "stuff-stirer"!! It's what evil Laker fans do.

 

[6th]

Bwahahahaha!! I should have known that VF's little comment wouldn't get past ya.

 

[hoopsfan]

Nothing gets past me!!

 

[VF21]

Just giving credit where credit is due, dear hoopsfan.

 

[hoopsfan]

Thank you much VF...gotta keep my evil Laker fan tricks ready at all times!

 

[loopymitch]

Uh oh hoopsy now I'm scared lol
Anyway I had no idea Arco was THAT bad. Duct tape??? Now that's crazy.
From what I hear and read though, the atmosphere is unrivaled, I guess we can't have both. Bigger does not always mean better in this case.
If Charlotte can do it so can Sac. I've been to Charlotte and they don't deserve a new arena.

 

[Warhawk]

There are things not mentioned in the article that also come into play. Things like building maintenance, which only increases as a building gets older (and watching team owners trying to fix roof leaks during a game does not inspire the league to hold All-Star games in the venue). Things like the outdated arena requires longer to change from one event to the next (monster trucks to ice skating to concerts to NBA games to the circus, for instance), requiring that not all available days be used for events but for switching between events.

Just 2 examples off the top of my head....

The building needs to be replaced, and soon.