Wweek.com - Portland Must Confront the Real Danger of Losing the Blazers

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
Natebishop3 said:
The Pelicans make sense..... I don't understand why Minnesota is doing so badly. They have a good team.
Click to expand...

I think that the fact they made 1 playoff appearance between 2004 and 2020 didn't help.

16 years of mediocrity is not the same as 3-4 years that Portland has had. They've missed the playoffs 23 out of 37 years, and have been abysmal in a lot of that time.
 
I'm just guessing, but maybe some of the teams at the bottom of the list dont own their arena so they don't get revenue from food and beverage sales etc.
 
BBert said:
I was adding on to what you suggested.

I believe the Oregon Building Codes Division takes a percentage of local building permit fees, which the local jurisdictions forward to the state. I believe it's typically around 12 percent?

Although, perhaps if no fees are collected the state doesn't get anything?
Click to expand...

you're right....the state assesses a surcharge on permits. But again, I wasn't thinking of waived permit fees. I was thinking of fast-tracking the permit process. But maybe even that's not feasible since there would be a massive amount of fire and health safety concerns for a new arena
 
BoBoBREWSKI said:
I'm just guessing, but maybe some of the teams at the bottom of the list dont own their arena so they don't get revenue from food and beverage sales etc.
Click to expand...

Could be. I would also guess a lot of it has to do with population bases (tho the Clippers kinda are the flaw in that theory...but I suspect their # had many reasons why).
 
julius said:
https://www.statista.com/statistics/193704/revenue-of-national-basketball-association-teams-in-2010/

Notice what team isn't at the bottom. Granted, it's last year, but the team was a dumpster fire but still had revenue better than 11 other teams. Including teams that had *significantly* better seasons.

That doesn't sound like a team the league would want to move.
Click to expand...

you're protesting too much...and I'm thinking a new owner might not view the situation like you do

for that listing to have any weight we'd need to see the same ranking for the 3 or 4 years before the Sonics moved. Was Seattle last in revenue or more middle of the pack?
 
Last edited:
wizenheimer said:
you're protesting too much...and I'm thinking a new owner might now view the situation like you do

for that listing to have any weight we'd need to see the same ranking for the 3 or 4 years before the Sonics moved. Was Seattle last in revenue or more middle of the pack?
Click to expand...


granted, it's AI but

Precise revenue figures for the Seattle SuperSonics in 2007 are difficult to find, as detailed financial information for individual NBA teams from that period isn't publicly available. However, some details can be inferred from broader trends and available information:
  • Financial Challenges: The Seattle SuperSonics, under previous ownership, had reportedly been experiencing financial losses, accumulating over $60 million in debt since their purchase for $200 million five years prior. This was a major factor in the team's sale in 2006 to a group led by Clay Bennett.
  • League Revenue: The NBA league revenue as a whole was expected to reach $3.5 billion in the 2007-08 season. The NBA's previous media rights deal, signed in 2007, was worth $930 million per year. Individual teams, including the SuperSonics, would receive a share of this national revenue, estimated to be around $30 million per team in 2012, according to the Sports Business Journal.
  • Operating Income and Revenue Sharing: In 2007, the average NBA franchise generated an operating profit of $6.9 million. However, this figure likely varied significantly across teams, particularly for teams in smaller markets like Seattle. In 2008, the NBA increased its revenue sharing by 63%, with the goal of helping smaller markets become more profitable.
  • Attendance and Local Revenue: The KeyArena, where the SuperSonics played, saw an attendance of 547,556 for the 2007-08 season, placing them 28th out of 30 teams in the league. The arena reportedly lost $1.5 million in 2005 when the Sonics played there.
While specific revenue figures for the 2007 Seattle SuperSonics remain unknown, it's clear that the franchise faced financial difficulties that contributed to its eventual relocation.
Click to expand...

The Sonics situation was monumentally different than the situation the Blazers are in. One major difference is the net worth of the owner of the Sonics at the time vs the value of the Blazers now (and any potential owner).

Hell, the networth of Schultz *now* is less than the team is worth.
 
julius said:
granted, it's AI but



The Sonics situation was monumentally different than the situation the Blazers are in. One major difference is the net worth of the owner of the Sonics at the time vs the value of the Blazers now (and any potential owner).

Hell, the networth of Schultz *now* is less than the team is worth.
Click to expand...

I remember that about 25 NBA teams were "losing money" back then, including Portland. Accounting 101 and all the associated tricks. Kind of funny how the revenue and profit projections always took big dives heading into new CBA negotiations with the Player's Union.

besides all that, you showed a graph where Portland ranked around 20th in revenue. You seemed to be assuming that a new owner would look at that and say to himself that 10 teams were worse. But I'm inclined to think he'd say "damn, 20 teams were better"
 
wizenheimer said:
I remember that about 25 NBA teams were "losing money" back then, including Portland. Accounting 101 and all the associated tricks. Kind of funny how the revenue and profit projections always took big dives heading into new CBA negotiations with the Player's Union.

besides all that, you showed a graph where Portland ranked around 20th in revenue. You seemed to be assuming that a new owner would look at that and say to himself that 10 teams were worse. But I'm inclined to think he'd say "damn, 20 teams were better"
Click to expand...

Then why would someone spend 4.5 billion to buy a team that 20 teams were better than?
 
julius said:
When was the last time a franchise was bought and moved, that was valued at 4.5+ billion.

As with the other answer, I'll wait for this one off air too.
Click to expand...

that's a loopy question because it's all relative. The value escalates every year. I bought an F-350 Power Stroke in 2000 for 30K. Same pickup would be 110K now. If I bought a new one I'd move it all the time. And yeah, that's a wisecrack.

I wonder what the Chargers were worth before they moved to LA compared to now. The Chargers were worth 2.3B in their last year in San Diego (2016) and they had 574M in revenue. They were worth 5.8B last season. And since the Blazers don't own the Moda, whatever value the team has is almost all due to being one of 30 NBA teams. If the Blazers have X value in Portland they will almost certainly have similar value in Vegas because they'd still be 1 of 30

I have also noticed that you have increased the value to 4.5B. We don't know yet what it will be sold for. Might be 4.5B; might be less

for what it's worth, I don't think the Blazers will move. But the odds are certainly higher now than they were when PA died
 
There’s no reason to move the blazers when they already plan two expansion teams. Blazers are a model of success with the fan base and city support. They’re not moving. They will sell for more than a lot of folks predict though. I don’t think they brought back Dame just to move him again either. Dame is the face of Portland sports. We just got a WNBA franchise. Nothing about selling the team hints at moving the team
 
Last edited:
blazerkor said:
https://www.portland.gov/mayor/keit...-governor-kotek-issue-joint-letter-supporting

I don't know if this is good or bad but it sure puts their asses on the line if we lose our team.
Click to expand...

putting all their chips on a renovation of the Moda without knowing if a renovation will do the trick

besides that, by all accounts it would require a major renovation and that would shut down the Moda for at least one season, probably two. Where do the Blazers play while the Moda is being renovated? And why would a new owner sign up for that?

don't get me wrong: if the city and the state want to play a little hardball on this, they would have some generic justification. It could be argued that pro-sports owners have accumulated too much leverage over cities and states. So, drawing a line could be justified. But it could also be greatly increasing the odds of a Blazer exit

a new arena would cost 1-2B. A major renovation might cost close to that. If you amortized the cost of 1B over 30 years, including debt service of bonding, I'd wonder how that cost would compare to lost revenue if the team leaves?
 
I read that a new arena will cost the city 400 million.
 
julius said:
Then why would someone spend 4.5 billion to buy a team that 20 teams were better than?
Click to expand...
Would you be sad if they left? There is your answer. I’d love to have the A’s, Jets or Coyotes, who are all shit franchises in Portland
 
wizenheimer said:
that's a loopy question because it's all relative. The value escalates every year. I bought an F-350 Power Stroke in 2000 for 30K. Same pickup would be 110K now. If I bought a new one I'd move it all the time. And yeah, that's a wisecrack.

I wonder what the Chargers were worth before they moved to LA compared to now. The Chargers were worth 2.3B in their last year in San Diego (2016) and they had 574M in revenue. They were worth 5.8B last season. And since the Blazers don't own the Moda, whatever value the team has is almost all due to being one of 30 NBA teams. If the Blazers have X value in Portland they will almost certainly have similar value in Vegas because they'd still be 1 of 30

I have also noticed that you have increased the value to 4.5B. We don't know yet what it will be sold for. Might be 4.5B; might be less

for what it's worth, I don't think the Blazers will move. But the odds are certainly higher now than they were when PA died
Click to expand...

Chargers werent sold, and didn't have to pay for their new arena and don't make as much money off the stadium because they're not the main tenant.
 
Mediocre Man said:
Would you be sad if they left? There is your answer. I’d love to have the A’s, Jets or Coyotes, who are all shit franchises in Portland
Click to expand...

I wouldn't want any of those over the Blazers.
 
riverman said:
I read that a new arena will cost the city 400 million.
Click to expand...

I don't know where you read that, but there's no way a new arena would come that cheap

now, that may be the city's share of a 1.5B arena cost. If somebody is willing to pay 4B for a team, they would probably be willing to add another billion for a new arena; especially if they were getting the full impact of a depreciation schedule
 
wizenheimer said:
I don't know where you read that, but there's no way a new arena would come that cheap

now, that may be the city's share of a 1.5B arena cost. If somebody is willing to pay 4B for a team, they would probably be willing to add another billion for a new arena; especially if they were getting the full impact of a depreciation schedule
Click to expand...
Ron Wyden's team
 
Ripcity4life77 said:
Why even link this garbage -- this just fuels the silly people who believe this garbage might really happen. Linking this is like feeding the trolls and only thing I want to do to these type of trolls is slap them silly and hope they come to the reality they are stupid. -- period
Click to expand...
You’re so worked up about this that you want to “SLAP” somebody over it. #DeepBreaths
 
Mediocre Man said:
Not over them. But if the NFL came knocking, people would love them. Any of them
Click to expand...

What's your point?

No one said anything about another city not wanting a team
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top