Earlier today, the Washington State legislature announced it will not vote on whether or not to fund a $500 million dollar sports arena in the greater Seattle area virtually assuring that the 2007 to 2008 season will be the final season the Super Sonics spend in the pacific northwest.
The decision is a bit shocking because the legislature is not even going to discuss the possibility of funding the sports center which the team wanted a $300 million commitment from the state, $100 million from the city it chose, Renton, and the team would pay $100 million. Perhaps this decision to not even talk about the stadium in legislature is a result that the last two times the citizens of King County voted whether or not to build a new baseball stadium, then football stadium, King County voted both measures down. But the legislature decided the state could not survive economically with a professional baseball and football team, so the citizens of King County, after voting to not pay for new stadiums, was forced to pay in order to build two new stadiums.
The county is still paying off these stadiums which are owned by the teams, not the county, or the city of Seattle and thus no profit from any part of the stadiums are passed on to the people paying for the structures. Huge taxes on restaurants and hotels are driving up prices, especially in down town Seattle and thus driving away tourism and business to other areas close by like Portland, Oregon and Vancouver, B.C.
But the ultimate question is if Seattle can survive without a professional basketball team. To be honest, the city has hardly had a basketball team that plays at any professional level for a few years. The Sonics are currently 31-50, the 5th worst team in the NBA and the only positive aspect about that stat is that they have an improved chance at a higher draft pick. But more importantly, Seattle is not a sports city. Look at the attendance records of Seattle teams when they are not playing well. Support for the Seahawks has been horrible up until the last four years, the Mariners only sell out games when they have a winning record, which is hardly ever recently, and the Sonics cannot even draw big crowds when top teams come to town. Remember in the early 1990s when Los Angeles, the second biggest city in the country, had both of its football teams move away? People said Los Angeles would suffer without an NFL team and would quickly acquire a team. We are still waiting for that to happen.
When the Sonics were sold to owners from Oklahoma, a city that was looking for an NBA team, the city new the Sonics wouldn't be around for long. So, to the Sonics, it has been fun and we'll see you in Oklahoma.
Great, wouldn't that just be fitting if the Sonics get lucky in the draft lottery, are able to draft Durant/Oden and then move away after next season? Befitting of a Seattle sports team (no love!!).
This is very true, I was thinking how it would be without the Sonics myself and as it stands I never go to a game unless it's free and god tickets. Personally I like having a basketball team hear because I enjoy basketball, but as you said Seattle is really a bandwagon fan base that only attends if we're winning, which rarely if ever happens. Considering that I grew up with the Sonics it will be sad to see them go, even though I pretty much only know Ray Allen and Luke, but it will also be sad that I wouldn't be able to take my kid to a pro-basketball game. As you can tell I'm still debating it in my mind, but as it stands now it doesn't look like we'll be loosing much.
The NBA needs to figure out the revenue model for franchises. They will continue to lose their fanbase and lose out on revenue opportunities if large markets like Seattle chase teams away.
The taxes that would be in place to fund the arena are far from huge (about 50cents on a $100 meal for restaurants) and the tourist industry as come forwarded saying that they in fact support the building of the arena based on the taxing structure. These funds would not to towards other efforts like many say they should, such as schools and road repairs, because once the tax strings are finished paying for the current two stadiums (which are being paid off earlier than expected) then they will end. Tourist taxes are almost always used for building infrastructure much like this arena. The funding for the stadium would just be a continuation of how things currently are. Although civic money would go towards building the arena, it has been shown through economic models and in other cities that the economic benefits (creation of hotels and restaurants as well as other events that will be held in the arena) start to help the city within the first five years. It is a shame that they city and county were not able to work out a deal when the issue was simply remodeling the key arena which could have brought much needed business into the dying Seattle Center. The city of Seattle has shown that they are in fact fantastic sports fans as the Mariners and Seahawks have had some of the highest attendances over the last decade. All it takes is a good ownership, one who is willing to invest the time and money into its product so that its product is worth our time and money. Majority owner Clay Bennett has been a part of previous championship contenders and there is no reason to think he can't build one here in Seattle.
I think it would have been a far greater shame for King County voters to once again pay for something that 1) they didn't vote for 2) had nothing to do with running into the ground and 3) would bring very little jobs (mostly low wage food service jobs) to the center. If the Sonics don't win and management doesn't find a way to make that happen, that is a problem that management must finance or cut their losses. We don't seem to bail out the arts centers at the same rate we are willing to bail out corporate sports management, who make untold sums of money over the arts. Remember, that's what the over-priced tickets and beer are supposed to do-make money for the corporation. If they can't even be trusted to put together a proposal for a private corporate lender, why should tax payers take this burden on, even at a micro level to the individual? I think local tax payers are fed up with the principal more than the actual cost.
We had to close public schools last year to save money, and I just don't think that the cost-benefit analysis of keeping the Sonics here at our expense is worth it. Good management is essential, and the Sonics won't be the first or last team to leave their native city (or go under completely) when bad management is in control.
Taxes are for three primary things: defense, education and necessary social programs, and transportation (ha!). Seattle has a million worthwhile tourist attractions. At this point, we need to prioritize. I said this elsewhere: at this point, the Sonics are like the employee who comes in late, never delivers quality work and then whines when their office is too small or they make too little money.
You're in Easy Mode. If you prefer, you can use XHTML Mode instead. |