What are your thoughts on possibly aquiring the Milwaukee Bucks?

[elkotronics]

I'm all eyes and ears as I get set ta pack for Kansas. I'll follow the New World Order Sonic's from afar like the Seahawk's. Oh - lest I forget that "other" major league team in town, the Mariner's. I still say let's trade the entire Mariner team ta New Orleans for their Pelican NBA team.

Then somebody told me Seattle is bonkers over this sport called...soccer, too?

[Jumpindogs]

Originally Posted by pnwguy2

There is another story today (7/7/15) in the P.I. about the Bucks moving to Seattle. Apparently the Bucks are dragging their feet in negotiating a new arena, and the NBA does not think their current arena is up to league standards. Sound familiar?

I am not going to get too excited about this, as we have been led down this road before. However, it indeed would be poetic justice after the Pilots moved to Milwaukee after just one year in Seattle in 1969.

The story today speaks of the urgency of this in Milwaukee, and they want to solve it in months, or even weeks, or...

Well, we shall see how it plays out.

It's not the Bucks that are dragging their feet. People holler no way are they gonna subsidize those rich NBA players and owners, etc. (or just any rich person since being rich nowadays is so despised) by building a new arena...which we do desperately need in Milwaukee and which would generate all kinds of profitable business for the city...yet they fail to do the simple math that clearly demonstrates that the income tax revenue loss sustained if the Bucks move outta Milwaukee is much greater than any proposed subsidy over the long term. And they get that deer in the headlights look instead of understanding that the "jock tax" could take a huge bite out of the arena cost. Yes that tax revenue would be "stolen" from it's current recipient programs but since it's gonna be lost if we lose the Bucks then it doesn't matter. And keeping the Bucks will eventually refill those coffers. I am not a Bucks fan and I am a fiscal conservative but I shake my head at the shortsightedness of my fellow taxpayers on this issue.

For a detailed treatment of the issue: Milwaukee Bucks Arena FAQ: The who, what, where, when and how (much) of building a new home for the Bucks - Brew Hoop

[CrazyDonkey]

Looks to me like the owners are demanding that the taxpayers bend over and smile. It isn't just the taxes they'll be paying (or services they won't be receiving) - they'll also be carrying most of the risk if the new arena isn't profitable. The owner, on the other hand, has pledged only $100 million (out of a $400-500 million price tag) - they're guaranteed to at least get their money back if the league buys back the franchise.

[Blutbad]

Originally Posted by elkotronics

I'm all eyes and ears as I get set ta pack for Kansas. I'll follow the New World Order Sonic's from afar like the Seahawk's. Oh - lest I forget that "other" major league team in town, the Mariner's. I still say let's trade the entire Mariner team ta New Orleans for their Pelican NBA team.

Then somebody told me Seattle is bonkers over this sport called...soccer, too?

If it's basketball you crave, then Lawrence, Kansas wouldn't be such a bad destination. Those Jayhawks have been looking pretty good on their way to the gold medal game of the World University Games.

[Jumpindogs]

Originally Posted by CrazyDonkey

Looks to me like the owners are demanding that the taxpayers bend over and smile. It isn't just the taxes they'll be paying (or services they won't be receiving) - they'll also be carrying most of the risk if the new arena isn't profitable. The owner, on the other hand, has pledged only $100 million (out of a $400-500 million price tag) - they're guaranteed to at least get their money back if the league buys back the franchise.

I get the risk thing. But the strong feeling is that the new arena will undoubtedly be profitable since the reason many entertainers, conventions and the like pass Milwaukee by is because we don't have an updated facility. Many current arena renters would likely use the new arena in addition to all the others that consider Milwaukee now but instead choose Chicago because our dated facilities don't meet their needs. Chicago is a great place to visit but Milwaukee is an awesome lakefront, arts and dining experience at a lower cost with way less traffic.

We are gonna lose those services...or figure out another way to pay for them...either way. Via the jock tax if we build or by losing the Bucks if we don't.

Miller Park has been an undeniable success and that facility is used for non-Brewers events far less than a new arena would be. Not saying the two are comparable but MP's success does bode well for Milwaukee's ability to forge a successful public-private partnership on a profitable expenditure.

The economics of Miller Park

All that said, maybe my hubby won't be too disappointed if we lose the Bucks to Seattle since we are retiring to Sequim in a few years.

[elkotronics]

If it's basketball you crave, then Lawrence, Kansas wouldn't be such a bad destination. Those Jayhawks have been looking pretty good on their way to the gold medal game of the World University Games.

Blutbad - indeed, and my new job will give me all the weekends off. So Mrs. elkotronics and I can go see a Jayhawks game sometime. Maybe.

She hates sports. With a passion!

[Botev1912]

Originally Posted by elkotronics

Then somebody told me Seattle is bonkers over this sport called...soccer, too?

it's called football, but that's a different story

[elkotronics]

You're right...and it's the biggest sport for popularity worldwide.

[509]

Originally Posted by Jumpindogs

I get the risk thing. But the strong feeling is that the new arena will undoubtedly be profitable since the reason many entertainers, conventions and the like pass Milwaukee by is because we don't have an updated facility. Many current arena renters would likely use the new arena in addition to all the others that consider Milwaukee now but instead choose Chicago because our dated facilities don't meet their needs. Chicago is a great place to visit but Milwaukee is an awesome lakefront, arts and dining experience at a lower cost with way less traffic.

We are gonna lose those services...or figure out another way to pay for them...either way. Via the jock tax if we build or by losing the Bucks if we don't.

Miller Park has been an undeniable success and that facility is used for non-Brewers events far less than a new arena would be. Not saying the two are comparable but MP's success does bode well for Milwaukee's ability to forge a successful public-private partnership on a profitable expenditure.

The economics of Miller Park

All that said, maybe my hubby won't be too disappointed if we lose the Bucks to Seattle since we are retiring to Sequim in a few years.

That is NOT an economic analysis. It is just accounting. There is a difference.

There has NEVER been a economic analysis that shows public stadiums generating an economic benefit to the community over the costs of building.

The real issue is whether GOVERNMENT should be involved in partnerships with private companies for private gain?? Isn't that the definition of corruption??