1
[Seattle Times] 15 years after moving Sonics, now it’s the Thunder asking for publicly funded arena
(www.seattletimes.com)
this post was submitted on 20 Oct 2023
1 points (100.0% liked)
NBA - Main
12 readers
2 users here now
Game analysis, highlights and everything else that is happening in the NBA.
founded 11 months ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
To me it’s pretty simple. If the city pays for it then the city should get a portion of the stadiums profits until the money is paid back.
The city owns the stadium and the Thunder pay a lease to the city to use it. All stadium profit/revenue goes directly to the city. It is publicly owned
Except the Thunder, like many teams, get a sweetheart lease deal. The last one had them paying 1.6 million a year with the team keeping the naming rights. How does this come close to being a good investment?
One economic impact study pegs the direct annual economic impact of the Thunder at $600 million and 3,000 jobs. Additionally, since the Thunder’s arrival just 15 years ago, the City’s GDP has grown 62 percent. And since 2008, Oklahoma City has moved from America’s 31st-largest to its 20th-largest City.
Does the study attribute all of OKC's growth to the stadium?
They are the 46th largest media market. They were the 45th largest market when they moved from Seattle. City size itself doesn't really matter.
That’s a fair point!
Is that the study from the Mayor's press release? I have three guesses as to who paid for it
Thunder fans are hilarious