SNPA wrote:Cactus Jack wrote:SNPA wrote:Why does the league want that?
Why does the league want Seattle back? There are numerous reasons. Some of which are fairly obvious to the average person.
The league has been waiting for a group to emerge that would produce a new world class arena. This has been the case for some time. Previously, Seattle did not have an adequate arena. Not until now.
What makes that different than another group that has a world class arena, or a locked in plan for one?
And I have not followed all the domestic developments in Seattle since the Kings saga, is this a tax payer funded arena (in part or full)?
The city is at the top of the list due to economics. It's a city with an already strong built-in following. Along with political backing.
The arena is privately financed.
No, the league doesn't care if an arena is publicly/privately financed. That's ultimately up to the owner(s). It is not a deterrent. Contrary to what you might think. The latest example is that of the Warriors. A new arena in SF, which was itself privately financed. This is becoming more of a trend.
As a Sacramento fan, I'm sure you're well aware of the politics involved. The city was on the verge of losing it's team, had they not come forward with plans to build an arena. Good for Sacramento.
But, I can assure you, that the lack of public funding is/will not be an issue.