OT Sacramento looking to finance new arena; UPD NBA rejects relocation to Seattle bid
View Single Post
03-15-2013, 10:01 PM
Join Date: Oct 2006
Originally Posted by
The way I see it, it is probably not a good idea for government to be in the arena ownership business---you cannot derive property tax revenue from such an arena. If the city were to grant a master lease to a private operator, which would put the property on the tax rolls, that is something I could agree with (the Verizon Center is owned by the owner of the Caps and Wizards, but the land under the arena is municipally-owned). That will also be the case with the new Warriors arena.
BTW, Sleep Train Arena is 25 years old - Oracle Arena is 47 years old.
They can be in the arena ownership business as long as they are the only game in town and are running it properly. If it was Phoenix/Glendale where there is another arena competing with you, I'd agree but this isn't the case. They can profit off of this venture in this market.
Sleep Train may only be 25 years old but the original investment in the arena was poor to put it lightly and Oracle was not only invested into better for the time, it was also remodeled. It cost 40 million in 1986-88 to build Arco. It cost 25 mil in 1964-66 to build Oracle. That poor investment into Arco is why it needs to be redone and why nobody save for some concerts and the WWE wants to do events there but are still willing to go to Oakland.
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by Pinkfloyd