Kohl/Arena Discussion Page 71 - Study Released

Shinyhubcaps · Post #681 » by **Shinyhubcaps** » Thu Nov 29, 2012 12:51 am

KeyRabbit wrote:Buy more lottery tickets. Win all of them.

Seriously, Bucks need an owner more than an arena. As the owner, you can break even for several years until you get a new arena, assuming it ever happens. You could also choose to be more vocal and proactive about it as the owner (but not the other way around as the arena-buyer).

trwi7 · Post #682 » by **trwi7** » Thu Nov 29, 2012 11:56 pm

http://media2.620wtmj.com/WAN/112912_kirchen.mp3

Post #683 » by **paulpressey25** » Fri Nov 30, 2012 1:35 am

Good link Twirl. For those that don't want to listen to the whole thing, they are talking about gearing up for local Milwaukee support and a Milwaukee County tax. Said some people went to OKC recently to study their arena. (cue jokes about sending Kohl there to study how to run a team)

Scott Walker was on the big show on WSSP this afternoon. Starts at about the ten minute mark.

http://podcast.sportsradio1250.com/wssp2/3759897.mp3

Sparky and crew tried to lobby him for a Bucks arena. Walker doesn't seem like he wants to touch it politically. Said he doesn't think the Bucks have the broad support of the Brewers or Packers. Also said he liked the fact the Packers did a referendum for their improvements the first go around and used their stock money for the second go around.

He seemed to indicate he'd be fine if this was approved via referendum. Also said it is incumbent on the Bucks to broaden their attendance base to have a chance of getting something done.

Post #684 » by **paulpressey25** » Fri Nov 30, 2012 1:40 am

Twirls link also has in it the disclosure that Sheehy, Barrett, the Marcus folks, etc. all went to OKC to study how they did it. This is big news that these guys are involved. They obviously know downtown MKE continues to implode if they lose the Bucks.

Key thing to OKC was 1% sales tax. Said they got it approved because the tax was used for broad based downtown development and not just an arena to lure an NBA team.

BUCKnation · Post #685 » by **BUCKnation** » Fri Nov 30, 2012 1:47 am

The Bucks definitely need stop marketing themselves as just a Milwaukee team. They can easily pick up the youth fan base across the state if they marketed them better. It would obviously be easier if they had a very, very good player on the team, but I still think they could do a much better job.

JayMKE · Post #686 » by **JayMKE** » Fri Nov 30, 2012 2:06 am

BUCKnation wrote:The Bucks definitely need stop marketing themselves as just a Milwaukee team. They can easily pick up the youth fan base across the state if they marketed them better. It would obviously be easier if they had a very, very good player on the team, but I still think they could do a much better job.

The only way that's going to happen is if this team has a superstar that people are actually interested in seeing. People aren't going to ever care about a middling boring team with no real future when there are teams like the Packers and Brewers to follow instead.

WEFFPIM · Post #687 » by **WEFFPIM** » Fri Nov 30, 2012 2:07 am

paulpressey25 wrote:Good link Twirl. For those that don't want to listen to the whole thing, they are talking about gearing up for local Milwaukee support and a Milwaukee County tax. Said some people went to OKC recently to study their arena. (cue jokes about sending Kohl there to study how to run a team)

Scott Walker was on the big show on WSSP this afternoon. Starts at about the ten minute mark.

http://podcast.sportsradio1250.com/wssp2/3759897.mp3

Sparky and crew tried to lobby him for a Bucks arena. Walker doesn't seem like he wants to touch it politically. Said he doesn't think the Bucks have the broad support of the Brewers or Packers. Also said he liked the fact the Packers did a referendum for their improvements the first go around and used their stock money for the second go around.

He seemed to indicate he'd be fine if this was approved via referendum. Also said it is incumbent on the Bucks to broaden their attendance base to have a chance of getting something done.

Yes, because the Packers' stock money isn't public money.

BUCKnation · Post #688 » by **BUCKnation** » Fri Nov 30, 2012 2:10 am

JayMKE wrote:
BUCKnation wrote:The Bucks definitely need stop marketing themselves as just a Milwaukee team. They can easily pick up the youth fan base across the state if they marketed them better. It would obviously be easier if they had a very, very good player on the team, but I still think they could do a much better job.

The only way that's going to happen is if this team has a superstar that people are actually interested in seeing. People aren't going to ever care about a middling boring team with no real future when there are teams like the Packers and Brewers to follow instead.

Like I said, it would be very easy to build a fan base around a superstar. This is a nice young core, but it is missing one elite guy to really get people excited.

Shinyhubcaps · Post #689 » by **Shinyhubcaps** » Fri Nov 30, 2012 2:31 am

Yes, there are lots of reasons why the Bucks don't have the support that the Brewers or Packers do, including winning, star power, and their marketing efforts. But if tax dollars are used, the conversation should be about revitalizing the whole downtown, and not just where the Bucks play. Milwaukee needs to stop thinking small. A referendum would probably decrease the chances of this getting passed.

Post #690 » by **ReasonablySober** » Fri Nov 30, 2012 2:34 am

Used to have a different opinion, but after the horror stories from the last year or so I've changed my mind. If professional teams want new facilities, they can fit the bill. In the case of the Bucks alone you can point to hundreds of millions of dollars wasted on terrible players that could have gone towards a new arena. Kohl's been lighting money on fire for decades.

LUKE23 · Post #691 » by **LUKE23** » Fri Nov 30, 2012 2:37 am

One less Jake Voskuhl signing per year = $75 million in Kohl's tenure.

Shinyhubcaps · Post #692 » by **Shinyhubcaps** » Fri Nov 30, 2012 2:49 am

It's not Kohl's responsibility to revitalize the whole aging downtown, though. It's to have a place for his team to play. If it were only the Bucks playing there, it would be different. We have college hoops, arena football, hockey, pro wrestling, rock concerts, ice dancing, truck rallies, and other races in which Kohl has no horses.

Bad Midget · Post #693 » by **Bad Midget** » Fri Nov 30, 2012 3:50 am

We're still paying for Miller Park here in MKE county, likely for another decade. I love the stadium, but it was (and still is) a gross misuse of taxpayer money. The Bucks are no different. If millionaires and giant corporations can't afford to pay for a stadium themselves, they should move somewhere else. Asking the public to foot the bill, especially in times like these, is a travesty.

Post #694 » by **paulpressey25** » Fri Nov 30, 2012 4:09 am

One other thing from the Walker interview. He seemed to hint that Brewer games were more affordable which thus brings the Brewers more public support since families can afford to go to Brewer games. That is complete nonsense and a meme that has been allowed to get out there with no basis in fact.

The Bucks are offering tickets almost for free this year. Last night they had a buy one get one free. Here's a tweet from a few minutes ago.

Milwaukee Bucks ‏@Bucks
Hey students, take a study break! Text RECESS to 55678 to join the Student Rush Program & get info on $10 tickets to all remaining games!

I remember back ten years ago when the Brewers sucked. Homer would ask why the Brewers couldn't draw anyone. Callers would always tell Homer ticket prices to Brewer games were too high. And then Homer would find some deal for $5 tickets in about two seconds. As he always said, it wasn't that the ticket prices were too high. The problem is that the product sucked and that you couldn't give the tickets away for free.

Sparky and Romy tried to explain to Walker that the Brewers were in the same straights as the Bucks year ago but Walker wasn't having any of it. People's memories are short regarding those 5,000 attendance nights even at Miller Park around 2002 or so.

Shinyhubcaps · Post #695 » by **Shinyhubcaps** » Fri Nov 30, 2012 4:36 am

Bad Midget wrote:We're still paying for Miller Park here in MKE county, likely for another decade. I love the stadium, but it was (and still is) a gross misuse of taxpayer money. The Bucks are no different. If millionaires and giant corporations can't afford to pay for a stadium themselves, they should move somewhere else. Asking the public to foot the bill, especially in times like these, is a travesty.

I'm stingy and conservative but I wouldn't call $50/year a gross misuse of taxpayer money. I've reaped more than that monetary amount of benefits of having a Major League team in my city.

InsideOut · Post #696 » by **InsideOut** » Fri Nov 30, 2012 4:43 am

It's hard to get my head around the idea of constructing a new building for a team nobody wants to watch. Against the Knicks the place just looked empty. If you build Yugo's and nobody wants to drive them do you build a new factory to assemble them in or do you first make changes and build a car people actually want to own? I realize it has been beat to death around here but fans would rather watch a crap team with a couple of top 5 picks develop than year after year after year of the same mediocrity. Just look how attendance jumped in Boguts rookie year. The Bucks were coming off a bad season but people showed up because they were excited again. Please just sell the team Herb.

The Bucks need to take the approach that the new building isn't for them but for the city of Milwaukee and it will host a college team, NCAA tournament games, concerts and the other stuff that was mentioned. If it is sold as a new home for the Bucks the odds are slim to none with slim having just left the building.

stevescheffler06 · Post #697 » by **stevescheffler06** » Fri Nov 30, 2012 5:11 am

Much the way that being mediocre killed fan interest in Seattle before they were taken to OKC, the yearly battle for 16th place has ruined the Bucks for this town. People keep saying that having Kohl own the team keeps them here, but at this point I think it's just prolonging the inevitible. Without a winning product, or even the hope of one, nobody will ever care about this team again. I just wish that Kohl wasn't so remarkably oblivious to this.

Post #698 » by **MickeyDavis** » Fri Nov 30, 2012 1:07 pm

http://www.bizjournals.com/milwaukee/ne ... built.html

Thunder Muscle · Post #699 » by **Thunder Muscle** » Fri Nov 30, 2012 1:15 pm

InsideOut wrote:It's hard to get my head around the idea of constructing a new building for a team nobody wants to watch.

I don't buy into that 100% b/c I believe if there was a "consistent" solid product on the court that people will show. The Brewers were dead in the water in the late 90's/early 2000's with dismal attendance but once they started winning AND got some marketable stars (Braun, Fielder, Hardy at the time) the people came back in droves. I think the fan base for the Bucks can be won back with winning and somehow getting 1 star player to market around. I wish Brandon Jennings would be more consistent b/c he had the potential to be that special player after that 55 point game, but I feel the window is starting to close on that.

Post #700 » by **paulpressey25** » Fri Nov 30, 2012 1:41 pm

InsideOut wrote:It's hard to get my head around the idea of constructing a new building for a team nobody wants to watch.

I think these guys know that they would be building the stadium for a new owner like Herbert V. Kohler or the like. Kohl doesn't necessarily have the liquid cash to make a large seed donation to this without actually selling the Bucks.

The three big questions are:

a) Herb Kohl. Can't have the Bucks with him. Can't have them without him. So has his 38-win strategy the past decade killed off the Bucks ability to have enough goodwill in the community to get this done on their end?

b) It sounds like their strategy will be a special Milwaukee County tax increase. Can this tax increase be approved by the County Board or would it need to go to a referendum? Will the State allow Milwaukee County to have a tax like this or would they attempt to block it?

c) Will the City's political and business leaders be effective in getting this accomplished or will they fail? The fact that Barrett and some big hitters like Grunau and Marcus family are in on this tells me that they all think this is a major priority for the City and that if the Bucks leave town, turn out the lights on downtown Milwaukee. Now granted some of these business guys have self interest in this from gaining construction contracts. But the fact they are all on board tells me they know how serious this is.