The "newspaper" Tulsa Beacon had an editorial last week that said "told you so", that the Honeymoon was over for the BOK and arena was on the verge of failure since the Talons were supposed to be leaving Tulsa.
http://www.tulsabeacon.com/?p=2889
So in the week since they posted that article the Talons have said they are not leaving, The BOK was selected as an NCAA site, the WNBA visited again working on a franchise here and now the league offices for Arena Football might be moving to Tulsa in addition to the Talons not moving.
http://www.tulsaworld.com/sportsextra/article.aspx?subjectid=407&articleid=20090924_407_0_Anewar111314
That's a big burrito of fail you gathered up this week Mr Biggs.
Quote from: swake on September 24, 2009, 04:54:38 PM
The "newspaper" Tulsa Beacon had an editorial last week that said "told you so", that the Honeymoon was over for the BOK and arena was on the verge of failure since the Talons were supposed to be leaving Tulsa.
http://www.tulsabeacon.com/?p=2889
So in the week since they posted that article the Talons have said they are not leaving, The BOK was selected as an NCAA site, the WNBA visited again working on a franchise here and now the league offices for Arena Football might be moving to Tulsa in addition to the Talons not moving.
http://www.tulsaworld.com/sportsextra/article.aspx?subjectid=407&articleid=20090924_407_0_Anewar111314
That's a big burrito of fail you gathered up this week Mr Biggs.
Maybe, but over the long term those funds could have been allocated to cultivate more activity not trying to keep up with the Jonses.... Some of us know this year was a breakout for the BOK....the soon to be loss leader for our city.
Quote from: FOTD on September 24, 2009, 05:28:13 PM
the BOK....the soon to be loss leader for our city.
Are you saying ticket prices are going to be dropping??
Who actually reads the Tulsa Beacon?
Let's look at those economics again, shall we?
$200+million overhead not counted in profit statements.
A $1.5 million profit on $200 million investment doesn't bode well for the long term. In twenty years, even at the current rate (which will be hard to maintain) is $30 million ROI. Investors typically expect their ROI to double every 10 years, 200%, at least. That's 400% over 20 years. BOInc Arena comes in at 15% at the current rate in 20 years. That's a whopping 0.75% Annual ROI. Even my bank savings account is doing better than that.
Now, that doesn't account for all the Hotel/Mutli-Faceted development in the area.
Wait a minute....
Quote from: SXSW on September 24, 2009, 11:41:48 PM
Who actually reads the Tulsa Beacon?
Swake, at least.
Quote from: SXSW on September 24, 2009, 11:41:48 PM
Who actually reads the Tulsa Beacon?
There's a tulsa beacon?
Quote from: custosnox on September 25, 2009, 01:29:23 AM
There's a tulsa beacon?
Petty's has some tasty Tulsa bacon.
Quote from: custosnox on September 25, 2009, 01:29:23 AM
There's a tulsa beacon?
Bright light on the top of Turkey Mountain.
Quote from: Wrinkle on September 24, 2009, 11:54:56 PM
Let's look at those economics again, shall we?
$200+million overhead not counted in profit statements.
A $1.5 million profit on $200 million investment doesn't bode well for the long term. In twenty years, even at the current rate (which will be hard to maintain) is $30 million ROI. Investors typically expect their ROI to double every 10 years, 200%, at least. That's 400% over 20 years. BOInc Arena comes in at 15% at the current rate in 20 years. That's a whopping 0.75% Annual ROI. Even my bank savings account is doing better than that.
Now, that doesn't account for all the Hotel/Mutli-Faceted development in the area.
Wait a minute....
All fine and good standards for private enterprise. Government is not expected to turn a significant profit. The whole purpose of arenas, ball parks, etc. are to enhance the quality of life and attract tourism dollars to an area, not to be a central cash cow for the city or county.
Quote from: Wrinkle on September 24, 2009, 11:54:56 PM
Let's look at those economics again, shall we?
$200+million overhead not counted in profit statements.
A $1.5 million profit on $200 million investment doesn't bode well for the long term. In twenty years, even at the current rate (which will be hard to maintain) is $30 million ROI. Investors typically expect their ROI to double every 10 years, 200%, at least. That's 400% over 20 years. BOInc Arena comes in at 15% at the current rate in 20 years. That's a whopping 0.75% Annual ROI. Even my bank savings account is doing better than that.
Now, that doesn't account for all the Hotel/Mutli-Faceted development in the area.
Wait a minute....
So this 1.5 million profit is just from the Arena itself, not increases in sales tax in the area, etc. I figure the impact of the Arena is a little tough to judge with the economy.
Quote from: Conan71 on September 25, 2009, 09:24:32 AM
All fine and good standards for private enterprise. Government is not expected to turn a significant profit. The whole purpose of arenas, ball parks, etc. are to enhance the quality of life and attract tourism dollars to an area, not to be a central cash cow for the city or county.
How do you feel about Medicare, the US Postal System, and saving banksters?
Quote from: Trogdor on September 25, 2009, 09:29:03 AM
So this 1.5 million profit is just from the Arena itself, not increases in sales tax in the area, etc. I figure the impact of the Arena is a little tough to judge with the economy.
Correct. $1.5M profit year one when people like Wrinkle said it would operate at a loss every year, especially the first.
Quote from: FOTD on September 25, 2009, 10:07:28 AM
How do you feel about Medicare, the US Postal System, and saving banksters?
????
(http://thenewheretics.files.wordpress.com/2009/04/apples2oranges.jpg)
Quote from: Conan71 on September 25, 2009, 12:48:39 PM
????
(http://thenewheretics.files.wordpress.com/2009/04/apples2oranges.jpg)
Apples and oranges throw off a significant profit?
It's not apples and oranges....it's what can government provide it's citizens that will cost and often lose money. You seem to favor entertainment over the support systems. Curious.
Those really are apples and oranges examples. You are trying to lump in two federally-provided government assistance programs along with an on-going business enterprise (mail service) then compare them to a municipal project designed to generate commerce via:
A 2.5 year construction project (or however long the project was) which helped circulate money into the local and regional economy through productivity, not an entitlement
-and-
it will ostensibly be a lure for tourism dollars for the city as a whole for years to come.
It's not an equal comparison other than the governemnt takes from one place and spends in another, then, yes, those are all from the same basket of apples.
Quote from: sgrizzle on September 25, 2009, 10:39:24 AM
Correct. $1.5M profit year one when people like Wrinkle said it would operate at a loss every year, especially the first.
You'd be miss-quoting me if you said that.
I don't think anyone ever thought it'd not show a profit the first year, unless, of course, one included the actual cost of the facility in the figures.
If I decide to run a bus line and someone provided me, free of charge, a set of buses, paved roads to everywhere with shelters, insurance and fuel, I too would have no trouble showing a profit. And, I don't even know how to drive a bus.
Now, more to the point, a 0.75% ROI evaporates pretty quickly if the current level of activity cannot be maintained.
In a few years, it'll become just another arena, vying for acts which will then want to go to newer arenas first. But, even if the Eagles played there every Friday night, sooner or later, the market is gone. People have only so many entertainment dollars to spend. And, a large majority of the region cannot even afford to attend at all (Eagles basic ticket was like $93).
Once it's equilibrium is achieved, it's _expected_ this will become a loss leader. The boost in activity promoting adjacent sales and/or development is the intent. Whether or not it will pay for itself in that regard remains a question. But, you can bet, politics will enter the picture with the current leader weighing how much citizens are willing to allow.
The reality is that few really oppose the arena, by itself. As I've always contended, it's the way it happened, not the result. Of course, it could've been sited better, too. But, that didn't jive with the plan.
Quote from: Conan71 on September 25, 2009, 09:24:32 AM
All fine and good standards for private enterprise. Government is not expected to turn a significant profit. The whole purpose of arenas, ball parks, etc. are to enhance the quality of life and attract tourism dollars to an area, not to be a central cash cow for the city or county.
I agree completely.
The only point I was trying to make was that any 'profit' is ficticious.
In this case, however, I fully expect it to be sold to private interests shortly after Tulsan's finish paying for it. Cash cow to the city, without a vote.
At least it will be sold. Not like the incinerator which was just given away.
Quote from: Trogdor on September 25, 2009, 09:29:03 AM
So this 1.5 million profit is just from the Arena itself, not increases in sales tax in the area, etc. I figure the impact of the Arena is a little tough to judge with the economy.
It's not hard to judge at all. Sales Tax revenue has fallen about 10% since the arena opened. Much of that is attributed to the economy in general. But, fact remains, the arena provided no real boost when it began operations.
Quote from: sgrizzle on September 25, 2009, 10:39:24 AM
Correct. $1.5M profit year one when people like Wrinkle said it would operate at a loss every year, especially the first.
No one saw that the Ford Center was going to be closed for concerts during the BOK's first year either. You have to admit that this helped the BOK achieve such a grand 1st year.
Quote from: MDepr2007 on September 26, 2009, 09:15:49 AM
No one saw that the Ford Center was going to be closed for concerts during the BOK's first year either. You have to admit that this helped the BOK achieve such a grand 1st year.
It's only been closed this summer, for most of the year the Ford Center was open.
To answer the basic question:
No, you won't get a retraction from Charlie Biggs. He's a staunch evangelical who believes he's on the side of God. Therefore, if you're against Biggs, you're against God. This moral certainty is what's stupid and what's scary about the guy.
Quote from: swake on September 26, 2009, 09:53:41 AM
It's only been closed this summer, for most of the year the Ford Center was open.
Open but to what?
They closed on 4-11-2009 but what concerts have been there since Sept 2008.
Sept. 2008 = Santana
Oct 2008= Neil Diamond
Nov. 2008= Coldplay & Trans-Siberian Orchestra
Dec. 2008 = Cirque du Soleil
Jan. 2009 = none
Feb. 2009 = none
March 2009 = none
Granted that their NBA team has alot to do with it because of their play dates now but no one saw that coming either. If OKC hadn't gotten the NBA team, would the BOK have been a success as it is now?
Quote from: rwarn17588 on September 26, 2009, 11:47:34 AM
To answer the basic question:
No, you won't get a retraction from Charlie Biggs. He's a staunch evangelical who believes he's on the side of God. Therefore, if you're against Biggs, you're against God. This moral certainty is what's stupid and what's scary about the guy.
He's more of providing what the readers want to hear than what is true vs the TW providing their beliefs over what is true
Quote from: Wrinkle on September 25, 2009, 01:53:08 PM
At least it will be sold. Not like the incinerator which was just given away.
If we really wanted it back, we could do so.
Eminent Domain?
Quote from: patric on September 26, 2009, 01:08:30 PM
If we really wanted it back, we could do so.
Eminent Domain?
Don't want it back (incinerator). Not only would it cost too much, it's bad for our air. And, poorly sited, immediately west of the core city, along the upstream flow of weather.
That'd be like taking our drinking water just downstream from the sewage plant.
It was a mistake from the outset in almost every way. No reason to repeat history. In fact, our codes and/or Fed regs should shut it down completely. We could bronze it, provide tours as the biggest boondogle in Tulsa history. Of course, that may now be debatable with the addition of the ballpark to the nominees list. But, the ballpark, so far, has only cost 1/3rd that of the incinerator.
Quote from: MDepr2007 on September 26, 2009, 12:46:21 PM
If OKC hadn't gotten the NBA team, would the BOK have been a success as it is now?
And if a frog had wings, it wouldn't whomp his butt every time it jumped.
The fact remains that the BOK Center is a success -- period.
Quote from: MDepr2007 on September 26, 2009, 12:50:05 PM
He's more of providing what the readers want to hear than what is true vs the TW providing their beliefs over what is true
It sounds like shadows swiped your computer.
Quote from: rwarn17588 on September 26, 2009, 02:54:40 PM
And if a frog had wings, it wouldn't whomp his butt every time it jumped.
The fact remains that the BOK Center is a success -- period.
Thanks to those that invested in the NBA and the citizens of OKC.
Show me an arena on the scale of the Bok thats failed......
How many people lose sleep waiting for the Broken Arrow Expressway to turn a profit? All those governemnt subsidies, and they just keep sinking millions more tax dollars into it year after year.... I wonder how many cumulative millions (billions?) we've spent on it since it's inception...just trying to keep it from falling apart?
A unique and beautiful arena? The chance to see world-class acts in our hometown? Attracting tourists and tourism dollars from around the nation/world? Helping Tulsans get some civic pride?
Priceless.
Here's the deal, and it's a real shocker:
Arena's are not a free-enterprise proposition.
Tulsa is blessed with several very nice free enterprise venues: the Reynolds Center, Skelly Field, the Maybe Center, the Spirit Event Center . . . among others of smaller size (Brady, Caine's). Which is great. I prefer free enterprise to government any day of the week. But no arena of note in the United States built in the last ~50 years is a product of free enterprise. It no longer happens. OKC has an NBA team because they played the game better than Seattle. Dallas has the super bowl because they spent a gazzilion dollars to get it. The game has been changed. As much as I dislike this, there it is.
Our choice was either to play the game or not. Failure to play the game leaves Tulsa further down the rung of third class cities lacking a significant venue. We loose out on entertainment, conventions, tourism, and the possibility of hosting major events (C-USA, NCAA, and more to come).
I agree that the projections of massive economic development are voodoo economics. The arena circulates a large amount of wealth, but I'll guess that nearly as much money leaves Tulsa as is drawn into Tulsa (Tulsans money leaving with acts that otherwise would have been spent locally, BUT Tulsans' money staying and other peoples money coming that otherwise would have been spent elsewhere). But the government should not provide services, venues, or community assets with an eye solely on profit.
The quality of life aspect of having a major arena should not be lost. Like quality museums, River Parks, good roads, or even good schools . . . in and of itself it probably isn't going to drawn people (and thereby business) to Tulsa. But it is another piece of the puzzle.
Additionally, the ancillary economic benefits have been notable. We have quietly landed new conventions. Two significant basketball tournaments. Talk of a WNBA team (say what you will, but it is hard to see how that would be bad for Tulsa). And possibly a new league office moving to Tulsa. And that's just what my outsider-not-paying-attention self can note.
At the end of the day Tulsa is better off with the new arena than without it. You can continue to predict doom and gloom, but to-date that simply is not true. Tulsa decided to play the game, but on our own rules. We catered to what we perceived as a need in the community along the industry lines that would yield the greatest results. The first year of the arena has been an amazing success, beyond predictions. To claim that the arena has been a disaster at this point simply doesn't make sense.
Quote from: cannon_fodder on September 28, 2009, 09:53:02 AM
Talk of a WNBA team (say what you will, but it is hard to see how that would be bad for Tulsa).
Possibly catching the gay, remember?