Wow! Why so aggressive? Lol We are in agreement here, though the Coliseum has been owned by the city for quite some time. The Moda Center has only been owned by the city since 2024. My statement stands on fact. Perhaps if you re-read the article you would understand that.
What’s the benefit that the team sold the arena to the city? Why couldn’t they just do the same agreement themselves on remodeling the arena? What’s the difference
If we're talking about the trust then they did liquidate an asset and did something charitable at the same time. They gave the city a really good deal which could be looked at as charitable towards the city but part of that had to do with the team getting a good deal on the lease for home games from now until 2030, even an extension for more years if the team wants and the city uses some of the profits they get from owning the buildings to do upkeep and upgrading. It makes sense when you stop looking at what we have as an ownership group because they aren't and look at them as a group managing a huge trust because that's all they are. The question that brings up is why hasn't the team been sold yet but most of us have been asking that one for a while now.
This has been my thought as well. The only benefit I can see is if the Rose Garden adds complexity to the sale of the team to people who don't want to be in Portland. Except, it now puts the city in the arena business. So when the team decides they need a new arena they may have more leverage demanding the city make them one or they'll leave. Otherwise it just doesn't seem to make sense. Owning the asset should make for a higher sale price.
I would bet that it also gives a new owner a little more flexibility to building a new arena if and when the team is sold and it's deemed necessary. That way, the new owner doesn't then own a mostly empty unused arena in addition to a new one that they've spent hundreds of millions on. And it gives the city a chance to potentially invite another team to play in Portland without having to compete directly with the Blazers for dates, etc. Not that I think any of this will necessarily happen, but I think that's far more likely to be the reason instead of secretly setting it up so the team can be easier to move (and yes I know you aren't suggesting that).
Most NBA teams don't actually own their own arenas (this might be a little outdated, but the point remains). Approx 21 teams don't own their own arena, and of the 9 that are left, 8 own it. Chicago, Denver, Warriors, Clippers, Knicks, Wizards, Jazz and Raptors. Arena Team(s) Owner State Farm Arena Atlanta Hawks City of Atlanta and Fulton County TD Garden Boston Celtics Delaware North Companies Barclays Center Brooklyn Nets State of New York Spectrum Center Charlotte Hornets City of Charlotte United Center Chicago Bulls Chicago Bulls/Blackhawks Rocket Mortgage FieldHouse Cleveland Cavaliers City of Cleveland and Cuyahoga County American Airlines Center Dallas Mavericks City of Dallas Ball Arena Denver Nuggets Kroenke Sports & Entertainment* Little Caesars Arena Detroit Pistons City of Detroit Chase Center Golden State Warriors Golden State Warriors Toyota Center Houston Rockets City of Houston and Harris County Bankers Life Fieldhouse Indiana Pacers City of Indianapolis Staples Center Los Angeles Lakers Anschutz Entertainment Group Intuit Dome Los Angeles Clippers Steve Ballmer (Murphy's Bowl, LLC) FedExForum Memphis Grizzlies City of Memphis American Airlines Arena Miami Heat Miami-Dade County Fiserv Forum Milwaukee Bucks State of Wisconsin Target Center Minnesota Timberwolves City of Minneapolis Smoothie King Center New Orleans Pelicans State of Louisiana Madison Square Garden New York Knicks Madison Square Garden Entertainment Chesapeake Energy Arena Oklahoma City Thunder City of Oklahoma City Amway Center Orlando Magic City of Orlando Wells Fargo Center Philadelphia 76ers Comcast Spectacor* PHX Arena Phoenix Suns City of Phoenix Moda Center Portland Trail Blazers Vulcan Inc.* (changed to City of Portland) Golden 1 Center Sacramento Kings City of Sacramento AT&T Center San Antonio Spurs Bexar County Scotiabank Arena Toronto Raptors Maple Leaf Sports Entertainment* Vivint Smart Home Arena Utah Jazz Ryan Smith* Capital One Arena Washington Wizards Monumental Sports & Entertainment*
How many of these teams inherited their arena? I can see why it would be expensive to buy or build your own arena (And why that would make a partnership with the city appealing). There's no need to buy or build an arena here.
There's also no need for a new team ownership to come in and buy an arena that they plan on replacing anyways. If the RG was like 5 or 10 years old, that'd be one thing. But it's 30 years old and eventually (even as much as they've kept it up), it will need to be replaced. If I'm a billionaire, I wouldn't want to buy an arena I plan on replacing. Either because you'd be spending money to just have an empty arena (like the Memorial Coliseum basically is), OR spends money to buy it, play in it for a while, only to tear it down after you build a new one. Why not just buy the team, and use the stadium until you can build one you want for yourself? The city benefits because they can have other events there that won't have to compete with the Blazers schedule, and the Blazers would have an arena that they could 100% dedicate to themselves. And since we're talking about an ownership group that would probably be worth multiple billions, they would probably like to control their own stituation. And like I said, 70% of the league uses this model, why is it an issue for us?
Doesn't have to be in Portland. And there are spaces, they're just occupied by other places right now.
For why the Sonics left? Scenarios are completely different. As for why they don't have a new NBA arena? Again, different scenarios. The magically found the room for the Seahawks and Mariners, and in a scenario where a billionaire comes in an buys a team and wants to build a new arena for a basketball team, they'd find the room. Not sure how the Seattle situation bears any kind of connection to whatever this is about.
One major difference is (for a future arena), the baseball group trying to build a stadium here doesn't already have an established place to play (the Moda). New Blazer owners could wait it out, and find a location in the metro area and build a new stadium. Also, an NBA arena has a significantly smaller footprint than an MLB one does, so a new ownership group wouldn't have to find as large of an area to build. Also, a place like Lloyd Center would be perfect for a new arena, since it's close to transit, is turning into a ghost town, and an NBA arena wouldn't have to take up the entire space like an MLB stadium would. And it could be done while the team still plays here and is in the Moda.
Awesome. I'm truly glad that you're comfortable with it. Having the team and stadium tied together as an asset offered an additional measure of security. It was another step that would have to be dealt with to move the team, and gave ownership less leverage over the city (when the ownership group demands the city build a new arena or the team will move).
Did you not see where 70% of the league doesn't own their arena?? The Trail Blazers have considered extending their lease at the Moda Center in Portland, Oregon. While an extension would not prevent the team from leaving, the team would need to return any fees and taxes they received from the city if they leave in 2030. The league is not going to let a franchise move that has been stable for the vast majority of it's existence. Nor will someone pay 3-4 billion dollars just to move the team. IF the team was doing this to sabotage the fanbase and create an opening for it, why the fuck would they sign a 5 year lease extension? Who knows what it's gonna be like in 5 years ffs, and why would the team be willing to invest in a g-league team, renovate the practice facility, make it easier for the RQ and Moda to be fixed up, go out of their way to make it easier (logistically) for fans to watch games on OTA TV (even if not everyone can get the channel) just to up and sell the team to someone who would move the team? You honestly think the league wants to set that precedent *again*? Especially considering the Sonics move was significantly different than any scenario here (Key Arena was small, and even after the renovations it had in the late 90's/early 2000's, was considered a bad arena for the NBA, whereas the Moda is still among the better arenas in the league, despite "not having major renovations" for most of it's time). The Sonics sold for 350 million dollars. The Blazers would probably sell for 10 times that. That's a LOT of money just to move a team, in a league that knows that they made a mistake moving the Sonics and bent over backwards to keep the Kings in Sacramento, and the Clippers in LA. Swear to god some of you guys are paranoid too much.
None of that makes anything I've said less true. Never once did I predict they will leave. You are overreacting.
