What about?

BawLa

BawLa

Starter
#1
#1
I don't spend any time in this arena section of the Kings board. Frankly I find it to be depressing. However I was reading an article about the 49ers looking at building their new stadium in Santa Clara. In the article, the mayor of Santa Clara talks about how they have been looking for some alternative use for the Great America Theme Park area and so I ask: is there any chance the Kings could move there?

Mods: I apologize if this has been brought up before.
 
VF21

VF21

Super Moderator Emeritus
SME
#2
#2
Last time I checked, the Great America Theme Park area doesn't have an arena. ;)

I don't think Santa Clara could support an NBA team, and I'm pretty sure the Maloofs wouldn't consider moving the team to a place without an arena in place or the means to fund one. IF they eventually leave Sacramento, it will be for a place with MORE going for it.
 
Last edited:
G

greypoupon

Prospect
#3
#3
BawLa said:
is there any chance the Kings could move there?
Mods: I apologize if this has been brought up before.
Click to expand...
A better question would be to ask the 49ers and A's how they're managing to complete their new stadiums without public funds. They found a way to get it done. The chances of a publicly funded stadium/arena initiative passing in the Bay Area is even smaller than of that happening in Sac County, but they managed to find another way to get it done. Ask them how they're doing it.
 
Warhawk

Warhawk

Give blood and save a life!
Staff member
#4
#4
greypoupon said:
A better question would be to ask the 49ers and A's how they're managing to complete their new stadiums without public funds. They found a way to get it done. The chances of a publicly funded stadium/arena initiative passing in the Bay Area is even smaller than of that happening in Sac County, but they managed to find another way to get it done. Ask them how they're doing it.
Click to expand...
OK, once again:

They are completrely different sports in different markets. Everything from revenue sharing to type of facility is completely different. They are in no way comparable.

How's that?
 
G

greypoupon

Prospect
#5
#5
Warhawk said:
OK, once again:

They are completrely different sports in different markets. Everything from revenue sharing to type of facility is completely different. They are in no way comparable.

How's that?
Click to expand...
The type of facility is irrelevant. If something costs $500 million to build, it's $500 million. Doesn't matter if it's outdoor baseball or indoor basketball. The developer doesn't care what they build as long as they get paid.

I don't know how revenue sharing is going to affect the financing. Is the NBA's system of revenue sharing less sophisticated than that of NFL or MLB?

It would be pretty sad if David Stern's sophisticated system of parity is less sophisticated than that of a poorly run MLB. I don't know the systems, so if you could elaborate, I'd be pleased to know. Is the NFL or MLB financing them?

I'm just asking where the A's and Niners are getting their finances. 100% of that private funding is going to come from the fact that they're in the Bay Area? Are their respective leagues going to chip in and help. I'm not criticizing, I'd just like to know more details.
 
VF21

VF21

Super Moderator Emeritus
SME
#6
#6
If you want more details about the A's and 49ers, you should probably be checking out an A's or 49ers board.

;)
 
G

greypoupon

Prospect
#7
#7
VF21 said:
If you want more details about the A's and 49ers, you should probably be checking out an A's or 49ers board.

;)
Click to expand...
I don't think it's that off topic and I'm not specifically talking about those two teams. I'm just asking why certain pro sports franchises are able to secure private financing while others aren't. What are the factors in play when it comes to garnering private financers?

I think that's a valid topic to this particular board and I was simply wondering if anybody had more specific answers, because there seems to be a good amount of knowledge on these boards about the subject of a new arena.

EDIT: And I think this is an important topic because if you're not able to secure private financing, you need to be able to EXPLAIN why you can't, because voters are always going to be pointing at the arenas/stadiums that are privately financed and asking "Hey, why can't you guys do it like them?" You need to be able to explain and communicate that when you're going to ask for public funds. JMO.
 
Last edited:
bibbinator

bibbinator

Bench
#8
#8
One question the Maloofs have to answer is how much having the best home court advantage in the NBA is worth.

Sacramento is a very special place because it is the capitol of California, a major world economy on its own (top 10 last I heard). That means it's loaded with state workers. There are certain negative stereotypes about state workers, which are probably true for the mind numbed DMV clerks, but the ones I know at state agencies are intelligent and dedicated to serving their state and community.

These people largely come from working class families, have often served in the military, and appreciate good team work. They are excellent sports fans if offered a good product.

The Maloofs are great owners, but they are not entirely responsible for the support Sac gives the Kings. The Kings-Sacramento relationship is a special one (someone could write a great book about it if it hasn't been done yet). Quantified, it means that a given roster based in Sac wins more than that same roster anywhere else. The Maloofs should take into account the value of this relationship when calculating the cost and benefits of moving.
 
VF21

VF21

Super Moderator Emeritus
SME
#9
#9
greypoupon - All I'm saying is that you might get better information about that financing if you checked on those sites. You're talking about MLB and the NFL, both of which are substantially different than the NBA...

Hopefully, someone here will have the answers you're seeking, however.

:)
 
G

greypoupon

Prospect
#10
#10
VF21 said:
greypoupon - All I'm saying is that you might get better information about that financing if you checked on those sites. You're talking about MLB and the NFL, both of which are substantially different than the NBA...

Hopefully, someone here will have the answers you're seeking, however.

:)
Click to expand...
I will indeed go check around and see how they're doing it.

The only point I'm trying to make is that arena proponents SHOULD be able to explain why they can't get private financing. They SHOULD be able to explain why it's different between the NBA and NFL/MLB.

In my own naive knowledge, I don't why there would be a big difference between NBA, NFL and MLB when it comes to stadium financing. I'm sure there is a difference.

To the general public, a stadium is a stadium. They're not going to care that it's NFL, NBA or MLB. They just know that it's a venue that houses a for profit business. And they're going to want to know why certain teams ask them to pay to have them built while others don't. People who are asking for taxpayer money should be able to answer those questions.

You need to have a more detailed answer for these people than just "Well, you see, it's the NBA. It's different."
 
Last edited:
Warhawk

Warhawk

Give blood and save a life!
Staff member
#11
#11
greypoupon said:
I'm just asking where the A's and Niners are getting their finances. 100% of that private funding is going to come from the fact that they're in the Bay Area? Are their respective leagues going to chip in and help. I'm not criticizing, I'd just like to know more details.
Click to expand...
To a large extent, yes.

The economics of corporate sponsorship and luxury box sales are completely different for teams in areas like NY, SF, and LA vs. a Sacramento, San Antonio, Indy, Memphis, and Portland.

This point has been repeated over and over in the news, etc., ad nauseum.

Hence the reason cities like this largely rely on public $$$ to finance the arenas. Hence the reason this deal was structured similarly to many of those.

Sorry if I sound snippy, but some of us are tired of answering the same questions over and over when they've already been addressed previously at some point....
 
G

greypoupon

Prospect
#12
#12
Warhawk said:
To a large extent, yes.

The economics of corporate sponsorship and luxury box sales are completely different for teams in areas like NY, SF, and LA vs. a Sacramento, San Antonio, Indy, Memphis, and Portland.

This point has been repeated over and over in the news, etc., ad nauseum.

Hence the reason cities like this largely rely on public $$$ to finance the arenas. Hence the reason this deal was structured similarly to many of those.

Sorry if I sound snippy, but some of us are tired of answering the same questions over and over when they've already been addressed previously at some point....
Click to expand...
I don't think you sound snippy and thanks for answering. I'd like to spend more time looking at the details of luxury box revenues and things as such, though I really don't know how much of an NBA/MLB/NFL issue it is (as some others have pointed out) so much as it's simply a small market vs. big market issue.

Regardless of the reasons, I think these are things that should be pointed out more by the pro-arena campaign. The reasons they need to be publicly financed have been poorly comminicated in their campaigns, IMO.
 
Warhawk

Warhawk

Give blood and save a life!
Staff member
#13
#13
greypoupon said:
I don't think you sound snippy and thanks for answering. I'd like to spend more time looking at the details of luxury box revenues and things as such, though I really don't know how much of an NBA/MLB/NFL issue it is (as some others have pointed out) so much as it's simply a small market vs. big market issue.

Regardless of the reasons, I think these are things that should be pointed out more by the pro-arena campaign. The reasons they need to be publicly financed have been poorly comminicated in their campaigns, IMO.
Click to expand...
Well, the TV contracts, etc, are different for the different sports, I believe, having an impact on the revenue streams for the different sports, for instance. I am by no means very knowledgable about most of these things, but something to look into if you so desire.
 
J

JB_kings

Starter
#14
#14
From what I've heard, the 49ers are having a hard time getting anything done in SF. There is no deal for them and they are exploring moving to Santa Clara or LA. The A's have been looking for years and had a number of failures. This one is getting done because CISCO is partnering with Lew Wolff to develop land already owned by CISCO. The problem is Sacramento doesn't have a private company that has this kind of profile and resources.
The thing is that even a team with the legacy of the 49ers and A's are struggling to get new facilities and in each case are including other business opportunities as part of their development plans. Plus they also have the benefit of working with a MUCH larger market than Sacramento.
 
kennadog

kennadog

Dog On It!
#15
#15
JB_kings said:
From what I've heard, the 49ers are having a hard time getting anything done in SF. There is no deal for them and they are exploring moving to Santa Clara or LA. The A's have been looking for years and had a number of failures. This one is getting done because CISCO is partnering with Lew Wolff to develop land already owned by CISCO. The problem is Sacramento doesn't have a private company that has this kind of profile and resources.
The thing is that even a team with the legacy of the 49ers and A's are struggling to get new facilities and in each case are including other business opportunities as part of their development plans. Plus they also have the benefit of working with a MUCH larger market than Sacramento.
Click to expand...
Exactly. And the 49er's have no arena deal as far as I know. They just ended negotiations with SF.

I'm too tired to explain the myriad of reasons why arena financing in the NBA is almost never privately financed, but I've bored people to tears in here already. And numerous times. Suffice it to say, that the 6th richest man in the world (Paul Allen), who makes the Maloofs look middle class, financed the rehabilitation of the Rose Garden privately. The arena ownership went bankrupt, because not enough revenue was generated to pay the debt service. That is the bottom line problem.

Could you pay a mortgage on a house that exceeded your net income? That's what some people seem to think the Maloofs should do to build an arena. Go out and get a loan that is more than the franchise can pay for.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.