KCRag Forum

Maitre D wrote: then why did LIEweke offer the pens & preds 1/2 ownership of the operating rights to SC if a pro team isn't necessary?


it'snot alwasy about what someone says, powercat.  you need to look beyond press releases and quotes.

To get the teams here. Uphill battle pulling established franchises.

Because people do want a team here...in no way do I think AEG would sign up an arena and not make money w/o a team....knowing that getting a team is not a guarantee.  They are smarter than that.

aknowledgeableperson wrote: That contradicts their stance taken when the SC was announced.  They said the arena is financially feasible without a major tenant.

Just because it's "financially feasible", doesn't mean it couldn't me much better with a tenant.

We need a tenant at that arena.  Not so much for the arena itself, but for P&L district.  I have a hard time seeing restaurants staying in business without something going on at that arena a few times a week vs just a few times a month.

The P&L will make plenty of money to stay around w/o a major tenant....they would make more with a anchor tenant obviously, and helps the spin off business...so yeah I'd like to see an anchor tenant for the team itself and it's benefit to the surrounding areas....but I don't think the P&L will fail w/o an anchor tenant.

KCPowercat wrote: The P&L will make plenty of money to stay around w/o a major tenant....they would make more with a anchor tenant obviously, and helps the spin off business...so yeah I'd like to see an anchor tenant for the team itself and it's benefit to the surrounding areas....but I don't think the P&L will fail w/o an anchor tenant.

I don't think it will fail, I just don't think it will reach its potential.  I think it will pretty much stay the way it is (mostly night clubs) and will not only have a hard time attracting retail, but existing places, especially dining establishments, will have a real hard time.

The Theaters should help a ton along with the midland, but a tenant at the sprint center would really help out.  Too bad we missed the 90's/00's urban condo boom, because that would have helped as well.

I think it will turn out ok, but we might have been a few years too late and so it might take 5-6 years to reach where I thought we would be in 2009.

I think without tenants, the bloom will wear off the rose sooner than it would with teams. The novelty and newness of the arena facilities will keep good acts here and keep butts in the seats for 3-5 years, but eventually you will need an anchor tenant to keep people coming back.

LA Kings or New Orleans Hornets, one of the two will be here within 2 years.

That is my thinking. Absurd as it may sound.

Weren't the Kings ours in the first place.  They should come 'home'

You are confused with the Sacramento Kings (NBA)

I'm talking about the LA Kings (NHL)

I see.  That's right, they have the Lakers in LA...I'm not too into sports.

NDTeve wrote: To get the teams here. Uphill battle pulling established franchises.

True but that doesn't really answer the question why he was trying to get them here.   

GRID wrote: Just because it's "financially feasible", doesn't mean it couldn't me much better with a tenant.

We need a tenant at that arena.  Not so much for the arena itself, but for P&L district.  I have a hard time seeing restaurants staying in business without something going on at that arena a few times a week vs just a few times a month.

You can have 140 dates with a team or without a team.  What difference does that make?

Maitre D wrote: True but that doesn't really answer the question why he was trying to get them here.     

Why wouldn't we try to get a team?

$62.5 million opposed to $42.5 Million gives a good reason why they want a team......

NDTeve wrote: Why wouldn't we try to get a team?

Again, not the point.  KC wants one, but LIEweke said it's fine if we don't have one.



Then he turned around and basically sold the farm to get one in here.  So what he says and what he does, don't align.

The money from Sprint for naming rights goes to debt service, not to AEG's pockets.  Long-term suite rentals though is a different story along with some of the advertising in the arena.  Team = higher rates and fees.  NO Team = lower rates and fees.  It is quite possible though a team could share in some of those revenues and may negate some of advantage of higher fees and rates.

AEG does have an exclusive for a three year period to recruit a team so maybe the city has a fee payment to it if AEG gets a team here.

We've been over this dozens of times, and nobody can tell what AEG gets from SprexTel.    It's 40M with no tenant, and 62.5M with one.  But we have no idea if that money is going to AEG or the bond service.  I'm almost postiive it's going to AEG.



Why would AEG put 50M down on the ownership rights, if they dind't have the SprexTel income stream (2-3M bucks/year) coming in?  They make operating profits yes, but they need the SprexTel money as well.



At any rate, KCMO will cough up more dough if a team moves.  Rumors were that if the Pens moved, a 20M hockey practice facility would've been built by KCMO.  Which is not a bad use of money actually.

GRID wrote: Just because it's "financially feasible", doesn't mean it couldn't me much better with a tenant.

We need a tenant at that arena.  Not so much for the arena itself, but for P&L district.  I have a hard time seeing restaurants staying in business without something going on at that arena a few times a week vs just a few times a month.

This raises a question we were debating in my office the other day.  Wasn't the business model for the P&L district developed before the arena ballot issue was passed?  Did P&L consider the arena in their revenue projections or was that deal done before the arena was a blip on the radar?  Just trying to remember the chronological order of downtown development.

P&L would have likely moved forward with or w/out the arena.

Separately, the arena is mostly funded by the rental/hotel tax and if I recall, a Star article a few weeks ago said the tax collections are exceeding expectations.

For a poor economy, both P&L and the arena are doing well.

Tina Turner show easily biggest for AEG/Sprint since Garth (Perez blogging about it, rave reviews for her killing the performance, Oprah + Michelle Obama in attendance, etc.). Hopefully the show next week sells out on the strength of opening night.

Hard to argue against the arena when AEG puts together this sort of event that puts your city out there in addition to potentially drawing concert goers from 3+ hours away (no shows in StL, Nebraska or Oklahoma-- but I bet tour is extended).