Clippers Might Relocate... To Inglewood (UPDATE: And A New Logo To Go With It)

wco81 · Post #41 » by **wco81** » Sat Jul 29, 2017 1:44 am

FWIW, I heard that MSG is one of the only concert venue operators who try to run venues to best showcase music.

They choose arenas, often older ones, which have the best acoustics and sight lines.

But of course they're going to feel threatened by a new arena which could try to compete with them for concerts.

JGOJustin · Post #42 » by **JGOJustin** » Sat Jul 29, 2017 8:45 pm

Ranma wrote:I have to say that Inglewood's handling of matters is really shady. I want our own arena but I've already had some concerns over the surrounding area and the logistics it would entail. In any case, I hope something can be worked out amicably and legally where the Clippers buy out the Forum to move forward with the project.

Read on Twitter

Unless Inglewood or LAC backs out, the project will get done. It'll get ugly though. Only so much Dolan and MSG can do if Inglewood unanimously approved of the project.

Ranma · Post #43 » by **Ranma** » Sun Aug 13, 2017 5:47 pm

Read on Twitter

Quake Griffin · Post #44 » by **Quake Griffin** » Sun Aug 13, 2017 8:52 pm

"fair market value"

lol

wco81 · Post #45 » by **wco81** » Mon Aug 14, 2017 12:06 am

Well these days, residential properties on Zillow in some areas could be pretty high.

But doubtful they will use Zillow numbers or recent sale comps to determine what they call FMV.

I wonder if the people displaced by eminent domain have ever organized to protest or try to arrange a boycott. Of course eminent domain is often for public works like freeways and other civil infrastructure built and owned by government entities.

Now that I think of it, I'm not aware of too many cases of eminent domain being used for privately-owned properties. When the 49ers built Levis Stadium up here a few years ago, there were some complaints from an amusement park, which used a lot of the land near the new stadium for customer parking. But I don't think it was some big protracted dispute.

For the Warriors' new arena, there were some community groups who didn't want the traffic and other issues of a giant stadium in what was a fairly deserted and underdeveloped area. There was a lawsuit and it delayed the start of construction by at least a year. But I don't think they displaced any other property owners for what will be a privately-owned facility.

There was a nearby hospital and some kind of corporate campus nearby and those people also expressed concerns about traffic and so on.

Can the existing property owners in Inglewood organize to try to get a better deal? What might happen is some law firm gathers them up for some kind of litigation threat and extract more money, most of which will go to the lawyers.

Ranma · Post #46 » by **Ranma** » Mon Aug 14, 2017 8:24 pm

Read on Twitter

Ranma · Post #47 » by **Ranma** » Wed Aug 16, 2017 6:03 pm

Read on Twitter

Ranma · Post #48 » by **Ranma** » Wed Aug 23, 2017 9:56 pm

Read on Twitter

Ranma · Post #49 » by **Ranma** » Thu Sep 7, 2017 7:06 pm

While this is happening at Staples Center, we can expect this type of move for the Inglewood arena. For all the talk of not caring about the Lakers, we sure do copy a lot of what they do whether it is currently sharing an arena, hiring their former GM, or trying to capitalize on the "be seen" mentality of celebrities and deep-pocketed wannabes with premium-priced courtside seating.

Of course, it's likely just the sign of the times, though I personally wish that we could return to a more intimate, affordable, and family-friendly setting in a meat-and-potatoes fashion. I'm all for technology enhancing the experience but the sideshow attractions and white noise distractions of today's sports venues really bother me, but it's the nature of business in this society preoccupied with consumption.

Similar to the Dodgers' controversial trade for high-salaried players Adrian Gonzalez, Josh Beckett, and Carl Crawford to signify to fans the willingness to spend in the post-McCourt era of stinginess in order to secure that sweetheart TV-cable deal, which currently leaves a significant portion of Los Angeles residents without access to the Dodgers' televised broadcasts, I think this move is part of others to come that will be argued to be justified in allowing us to pursue star free agents.

Read on Twitter

Darren Rovell, ESPN.com (9/7/17)

"It's extremely rare to have space like this open in any arena" Clippers president Gillian Zucker said. "What we did here was create new beachfront property."

Zucker said current courtside ticket holders will have the first shot on getting the seats before the team opens it to the general marketplace.

The potential buyer?

"The seats can be seen on television, so it can be for someone who wants to be seen. It is, after all, Hollywood," Zucker said. "Companies, agencies or just a hardcore fan who wants to get closer."

LA Clippers Add 'Star Courtside' Seating Next to Benches

Ranma · Post #50 » by **Ranma** » Fri Sep 8, 2017 7:21 pm

Read on Twitter

Ranma · Post #51 » by **Ranma** » Sat Sep 9, 2017 1:11 am

Read on Twitter

Forte IV · Post #52 » by **Forte IV** » Sat Sep 9, 2017 4:50 am

Can someone explain what this all means?

Ranma · Post #53 » by **Ranma** » Sat Sep 9, 2017 5:42 am

From my understanding, the CEQA bill was supposed to reduce the amount of time to file a lawsuit based on the environmental review of the construction project of the Clippers' Inglewood arena. This would have fast-tracked the project and limited the opportunity to delay construction with less time for lawsuits to arise from environmental review and such.

The Clippers are arguing that they are not against the actual environmental review, but want to limit the opportunity for "frivolous" lawsuits aimed at delaying the planned construction.

I found it suspect that Inglewood's mayor would sign off on the initiative behind closed doors while his office has been reluctant to provide public record of the project for the sake of transparency. Also, it was shady to try to associate this CEQA bill with LA's Olympics bid when that campaign wants to disassociate itself from this proposal since it has nothing to do with it.

Like I've said, I want the Clippers to get their own arena as much as anybody, but to engage in deceitful practices is not the way I want to go about it. The last time we rushed through a project, we got the awful logo re-design and ugly uniforms.

esqtvd · Post #54 » by **esqtvd** » Sun Sep 10, 2017 6:45 am

out of towner Ballmer just doesn't have the juice

Read on Twitter

Ranma · Post #55 » by **Ranma** » Tue Sep 12, 2017 6:43 pm

Read on Twitter

Spoiler:

esqtvd · Post #56 » by **esqtvd** » Wed Sep 13, 2017 6:55 am

Ballmer has no idea what he's dealing with

these aren't even the big guns
just some footsoldiers

he better learn how to play ball
with California's Tammany Hall

Wammy Giveaway · Post #57 » by **Wammy Giveaway** » Wed Sep 13, 2017 5:43 pm

This is definitely the work of the Lakers. By impeding the new Clippers building with this legal mumbo jumbo, they could force Ballmer's hand into relocating the Clippers to Seattle and resurrecting the Supersonics. They'd rather have the Supersonics back than the Clippers, who are still trying to figure out what kind of team they are now that they've lost Chris Paul. The Knicks are also at play here since the Forum is owned by MSG, friends with James Dolan.

If one more team gets involved in stopping the move to Inglewood - say, the Warriors - we could have a full "Die Clippers Die" movement. And it would take winning a championship for the Clippers to stay in Los Angeles.

nickhx2 · Post #58 » by **nickhx2** » Wed Sep 13, 2017 5:55 pm

Akklaim1 · Post #59 » by **Akklaim1** » Wed Sep 13, 2017 6:54 pm

I wouldn't be shocked if the Lakers are somehow involved with this halt. There are logical reasons.

Ranma · Post #60 » by **Ranma** » Thu Sep 14, 2017 3:12 am

Yeah, I wouldn't be shocked either if the Lakers were involved in the efforts to stall or stop the Clippers' arena project. Even with the advantages the Lakers have, the Clippers pose a viable threat since we're also a free-agent destination and finally making progress towards being a first-rate run organization. A state-of-the-art venue sharing the same neighborhood as the much hyped L.A. football stadium will attract players and fans once it is completed.

The battle for Los Angeles is not just about the NFL's Rams and Chargers but also extends to the NBA's Clippers and Lakers. However, the Clippers are not in any realistic danger of leaving the L.A. market. Seattle is a far-fetched pipedream until expansion happens. Sacramento is the best chance for relocating an existing NBA franchise for a Sonics rebirth but that is unlikely to occur as well.

I'm not really concerned with delaying the Clippers' arena project as I want things done the right way so that Inglewood residents and the state of California will realize benefits and not be harmed by rubber-stamping it through the normal channels. I do hope to see Ballmer's real-estate-development company, Murphy's Bowl LLC, eventually reach an agreement with Madison Square Garden Company to buy the land the Forum currently sits on, though. Maybe once the Clippers' arena project is approved and seen as an inevitability, MSGC will cave and cut their losses.