If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Yahoo)   Seattle city council votes to back plan for new NBA arena, also pass resolution to point and laugh at the OKC Thunder for losing to the Miami Heat   (news.yahoo.com) divider line 35
    More: Followup, Seattle City Council, Oklahoma City Thunder, National Basketball Association, Seattle, nba arenas, Seattle SuperSonics, Mayor Mike McGinn, professional sports teams  
•       •       •

301 clicks; posted to Sports » on 25 Sep 2012 at 8:33 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



35 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2012-09-25 08:34:07 AM
Take the Bobcats, please.
 
2012-09-25 08:47:52 AM
farking city governments never farking learn. Enjoy subsidising your new billionaire Seattle taxpayers.
 
2012-09-25 08:49:01 AM
Next, Seattle city council votes to hire NFL replacement refs as permanent.
 
2012-09-25 09:33:29 AM
They can fill the arena with butthurt.
 
2012-09-25 09:41:30 AM
The Sacramento Kings of Seattle.
 
2012-09-25 09:50:57 AM
 
2012-09-25 09:51:23 AM
jerseychaser.com
 
2012-09-25 10:00:20 AM
Fark basketball. Do not want.
 
2012-09-25 10:00:51 AM
They're coming to Virginia Beach, according to politicians there.

I mean, when I think basketball, first thing that comes to mind is.....Virginia Beach.
 
2012-09-25 10:04:24 AM

soopey: Maybe the Seattle Oilers?

TSN: Oilers brass visits Seattle arena


It's a bluff.
 
2012-09-25 10:08:05 AM

Decillion: It's a bluff.


It may be, but that asshole is still hoping to screw Edmonton one way or another. Here's hoping they don't give in to his greed.
 
2012-09-25 10:19:12 AM

swahnhennessy: Decillion: It's a bluff.

It may be, but that asshole is still hoping to screw Edmonton one way or another. Here's hoping they don't give in to his greed.


Eh, it's a once a generation thing if you only have one team. There are always protests against supporting arenas or getting the Olympics. Are things really better in a noticeable way for cities that said no? Are cities that said yes going to drown? Maybe Glendale for the Coyotes and Athens after the Olympics. But look at Seattle. After all the heartache they are going to do it anyways less than a decade later.
 
2012-09-25 10:23:56 AM

soopey: Maybe the Seattle Oilers?

TSN: Oilers brass visits Seattle arena


For the record: I want to play the Oilers, I don't want them to move here.
 
2012-09-25 10:24:00 AM

El Brujo: Fark basketball. Do not want.


Oh grow up. You will fund some whiny billionairre, you'll bring a bunch of tall guys to town who feel it's too strenuous to pass or drive the lane and create high percentage shots, so they'll just heave up 20 footers off the front of the rim. No one will be covering them and they won't cover anyone else, which is why the league made zone defense practically legal. Those guys won't like their multimillion dollar contracts and they'll complain about it and talk about needing to feed their familes. Now pony up.
 
2012-09-25 10:26:53 AM

MFAWG: soopey: Maybe the Seattle Oilers?

TSN: Oilers brass visits Seattle arena

For the record: I want to play the Oilers, I don't want them to move here.


Remember when no one wanted to play the Oilers or the Islanders?
 
2012-09-25 10:28:34 AM
Live in Oklahoma still never been to a game.

If we had a train from Tulsa to okc, then I would go, but drunk driving on I-44 can only be gotten away with 2-300 times before they finally catch you.
 
2012-09-25 10:31:24 AM

Nana's Vibrator: MFAWG: soopey: Maybe the Seattle Oilers?

TSN: Oilers brass visits Seattle arena

For the record: I want to play the Oilers, I don't want them to move here.

Remember when no one wanted to play the Oilers or the Islanders?


I am that old, yes.
 
2012-09-25 10:32:34 AM
This is all well and good, I guess, but I don't think people want to hear Seattle talk about sports for a while after last night.
 
182
2012-09-25 10:34:06 AM

js34603: They can fill the arena with butthurt.


this.
 
2012-09-25 10:52:30 AM

error 303:


What a coont.
 
2012-09-25 11:12:26 AM

Nana's Vibrator: Oh grow up. You will fund some whiny billionairre, you'll bring a bunch of tall guys to town who feel it's too strenuous to pass or drive the lane and create high percentage shots, so they'll just heave up 20 footers off the front of the rim. No one will be covering them and they won't cover anyone else, which is why the league made zone defense practically legal. Those guys won't like their multimillion dollar contracts and they'll complain about it and talk about needing to feed their familes. Now pony up.


Remember kids:

National Basketball Association changes officiating to protect star players and decrease physical contact, designed to foster an increase in scoring, forcing teams to field faster players using more complex defensive schemes: LOL NO ONE IN THE NBA PLAY'S DEFENSE WAS SOOO MUCH HARDER 20 YEAR'S AGO
National Football League changes officiating to protect quarterbacks and decrease physical contact for receivers, designed to foster an increase in scoring, forcing teams to field faster players using more complex defensive schemes: WHAR IN THA GOLDEN AGE OF QUARTERBACK'S MAN THESE GUYS R SOO GUD
 
2012-09-25 11:26:00 AM
My issue with this is the proposed location. Traffic in that area is already a clusterf*ck.
 
2012-09-25 11:41:03 AM
Fark Seattle
 
2012-09-25 11:58:52 AM
Chris Hansen?

www.worldnewsinn.com
 
2012-09-25 12:40:13 PM
I'm going to laugh my ass off if they end up with the Kings. That would be like getting dumped by your girlfriend and then picking up a case of ebola on the rebound.
 
2012-09-25 12:45:04 PM

drewogatory: farking city governments never farking learn. Enjoy subsidising your new billionaire Seattle taxpayers.


You know how I know you have no idea what the terms of the deal are?

This is a ridiculously favorable deal for the city, and only a short-sighted idiot would oppose it.
 
2012-09-25 01:21:16 PM

Falin: how I know you have no idea what the terms of the deal are?

This is a ridiculously favorable deal for the city, and only a short-sighted idiot would oppose it.


Short sighted idiot here. The only deal favorable enough is this one - "You want an arena for your for-profit professional sports team? Go ahead - it's a free country. Building permits are down at the DPD. Good luck with your venture." I await the inevitable lawsuits. If this deal indeed satisfies I91 then go ahead I guess but I sort of doubt it.
 
2012-09-25 01:42:54 PM

Dookie-chute: Fark Seattle


Well f*ck you too, little lady.
 
2012-09-25 02:17:29 PM
Because any other team woul have beaten Miami in a series, amirite?
 
2012-09-25 02:58:54 PM

JohnBigBootay: Falin: how I know you have no idea what the terms of the deal are?

This is a ridiculously favorable deal for the city, and only a short-sighted idiot would oppose it.

Short sighted idiot here. The only deal favorable enough is this one - "You want an arena for your for-profit professional sports team? Go ahead - it's a free country. Building permits are down at the DPD. Good luck with your venture." I await the inevitable lawsuits. If this deal indeed satisfies I91 then go ahead I guess but I sort of doubt it.


It already satisfies I-91. It's already been vetted.

It's not a taxpayer funded subsidy for a professional franchise for two reasons:

1. It's not taxpayer funded. It's bonded. There's a difference.
2. It's not a subsidy for a professional franchise, because the city actually owns the building, NOT Chris Hanson or whatever franchise he ends up owning.

The deal is basically this.

1. Chris Hanson comes in and buys a whole ton of land with his own money. This has already been done.
2. Chris Hanson offers up a big pile of his own money (close to $300 million in the deal on paper, PLUS he's personally on the hook for ALL cost overruns).
3. The city puts up a $200 million bond that is paid off with interest by revenue from the building itself. There is NO TAX MONEY involved with this process. This revenue includes rent that the franchises Hanson himself owns will pay to use the facility... NBA, and possibly NHL.
4. After the building is completed, THE CITY owns it. Not Chris Hanson. Hanson still owns the land it's on, but the city owns the building itself. Hanson gave the city a $290 million gift.
5. Chris Hanson personally pays for the renovation of Key Arena so it's suitable to play temporary games in while the arena is being built, then pays for it to be renovated again into whatever venue it ends up being after the arena is done. The city still owns Key Arena.
6. Hanson also partially funds the effort to improve the transportation infrastructure around SODO, something that has been sorely needed anyways and the city has been dropping the ball on for close to a decade. The rest of that funding doesn't come from taxpayer money either, but also comes from the revenues of the new arena.
7. Unclear on this, but it's possible that Hanson will be required to buy the building back from the city after a number of years for the same cost that the city bonded in the first place, $200 million.

That's the deal. Saying no to this is saying no to free money, and a large amount of pocketed revenue for the city over the long term with as close to zero risk as realistically possible.

But this is Seattle, a city that has shown time and time again that it is completely incapable of thinking in the long term. Especially when it comes to money.
 
2012-09-25 03:46:53 PM
Falin: That does sound like a great deal. I knew it was low-risk, but didn't realize how low-risk.
 
2012-09-25 08:03:43 PM

drewogatory: farking city governments never farking learn. Enjoy subsidising your new billionaire Seattle taxpayers.


It isn't subsidized by taxpayer funds, twatwaffle. Research and reading comprehension. Not yours.

Congrats to the fans in Seattle. You got farked the first time, looks like city leadership learned their lesson.
 
2012-09-25 10:20:58 PM

Falin: It's not a taxpayer funded subsidy for a professional franchise for two reasons:

1. It's not taxpayer funded. It's bonded. There's a difference. . . .


"It's not beer, it's a microbrew pale ale. There's a difference." Look, I'm not saying this isn't a serious improvement on the usual deals that come up in these circumstances, in much the same way your microbrew pale ale would kick the arse of Miller Light, but bonds are a type of funding, not something fundamentally different. It's still the city allocating money to the benefit of a professional sports team it could have put towards something else. If they can raise bond money for this, they could raise it for any other kind of infrastructure improvement; more to the point, after this, they'll have a harder time raising bond money for other things because of the greater amount of debt already on the city's books.

Did the council members voting for and against at least have the decency to campaign on this? Do they have local referendums in Seattle?

Oh, and if the arena winds up serving decent pale ales instead of American pisswater, I'll withdraw my objections. Some things are more important than money.
 
Slu
2012-09-25 10:44:20 PM

Nana's Vibrator: MFAWG: soopey: Maybe the Seattle Oilers?

TSN: Oilers brass visits Seattle arena

For the record: I want to play the Oilers, I don't want them to move here.

Remember when no one wanted to play the Oilers or the Islanders?


I loved hockey in those days. I was also 10 though, so it is probably all nostalgia.
 
2012-09-26 02:33:18 AM

caira: Falin: It's not a taxpayer funded subsidy for a professional franchise for two reasons:

1. It's not taxpayer funded. It's bonded. There's a difference. . . .

"It's not beer, it's a microbrew pale ale. There's a difference." Look, I'm not saying this isn't a serious improvement on the usual deals that come up in these circumstances, in much the same way your microbrew pale ale would kick the arse of Miller Light, but bonds are a type of funding, not something fundamentally different. It's still the city allocating money to the benefit of a professional sports team it could have put towards something else. If they can raise bond money for this, they could raise it for any other kind of infrastructure improvement; more to the point, after this, they'll have a harder time raising bond money for other things because of the greater amount of debt already on the city's books.

Did the council members voting for and against at least have the decency to campaign on this? Do they have local referendums in Seattle?

Oh, and if the arena winds up serving decent pale ales instead of American pisswater, I'll withdraw my objections. Some things are more important than money.


I don't know what Seattle's local economy is like right now, but it doesn't seem like a terrible idea to issue bonds for a big public works project in the middle of a recession / quasi recession. Especially when things look like they're going to get worse before they get better, there's a revenue stream projected, and it's not going to kill anyone like most of the public works around nowadays (military).

What I don't understand is what the motivation for the owner is. It can't be as sweet as it sounds in the post above; there must be a catch somewhere.

/generally opposes all city-funded stadiums
 
Displayed 35 of 35 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report