ADVERTISEMENT

If Tyra wants to gain supporters...

There are 70 corporate suites and more than ten thousand lower arena seats in Bailout Arena, half of which are in "club" sections.

At Freedom Hall a decade ago, there were about one-third that number of suites and ZERO club seats.

That supply has increased at a rate that is waaaaaaaaay ahead of corporate demand. They'd be having trouble with lagging demand even if the basketball program was sailing along smoothly. Now we need an NBA franchise to compete against?...
 
Wait a sec, wasn't this tried before? An ABA team when players and tickets were MUCH cheaper? How did that end in 1975?
 
  • Like
Reactions: zipp
Tyra lost me today, btw, with some of his statements. He's not a fighter.
 
This is interesting, I thought the Louisville metropolis had grown enough to easily handle a NBA franchise without killing interest in the UL basketball program.

I'm originally from Jeffersonville and I remember when Jeff was MUCH smaller than it currently is. I'll bet the population of Jeff has tripled since 1990 and there's a bunch of UL fans on that side of the river.

It's hard for me to sit here and believe that a pro team would destroy UL basketball. Is there any proof that UL would nosedive from a pro team, or is this just people committed to being nothing more than a college town?
NBA sucks. Go away!
 
Zipp, do you ever seen a time when the Yum will not be a drain on tax-payer money? Any chance the city of Louisville will ever consider some of the underused facilities like Louisville Gardens being renovated for upscale condos/apartments or commercial property?
 
Zipp, do you ever seen a time when the Yum will not be a drain on tax-payer money? Any chance the city of Louisville will ever consider some of the underused facilities like Louisville Gardens being renovated for upscale condos/apartments or commercial property?
The short answer is "no" to your first question... Dating back to 2012, the arena has never earned more than 28% of its operating and financing expenses in the form of true operating revenues. The huge difference (to 100%) has been bridged by the City's subsidy, the TIF, and a depletion of cash reserves. And that percentage has been relatively flat despite all of the glowing press releases about attendance records and new concerts and events in recent years.

Your question is IMO highly relevant regardless of what annual reports show in the way of profit and loss. By my calculation, the arena will finally show a breakeven year in 2018 (reported mid-2019). In that same year, the TIF and subsidy will amount to three-fourths of the revenue pie. If the arena generated more operating revenue, that $24 million annually would be put to other uses by the City and State. They would keep their money. As long as that amount of public sector funding exists, there will be a strong interest by politicians to secure other private sources of revenue like an NBA franchise. A reported "profit" by the arena doesn't really tell the story.

From a financial standpoint, there will always be an interest locally in an NBA franchise. The only dynamics changing that would be the age of the arena and the distance between competitive cities and Louisville, e.g., Louisville vs. Las Vegas. Cities like Vegas are moving away from us in a competition for a franchise. And in another ten years, an NBA owner is gonna want a new arena here. Only when the effort is hopeless will the locals give up the fight...
 
Thanks Zipp for the response. What a white elephant. So your were opposed to building downtown or just the funding behind the current site? Did you want built on campus relying on private donations?
 
Thanks Zipp for the response. What a white elephant. So your were opposed to building downtown or just the funding behind the current site? Did you want built on campus relying on private donations?
Working from memory, the cost for an arena at the KFEC was around $150 million. That cost difference ($200+ million) would have reduced the debt service by $10-15 million annually. And it would have put the State on the hook for any deficiency in revenue. That was in reality what the City and State could have afforded and what was financially justified.

An on-campus arena was about the same cost and would have been state-managed as well. The financials would have been comparable.

Jurich trying to defend U of L's side of the Bailout Arena agreement in the end helped cost him his job. If you were a downtown arena proponent, you did your part to trade Jurich for that arena. You better like it a lot...
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT