Happy Friday! There’s nothing in the latest batch of stadium and arena news that can quite compete with the European and North/Central American soccer federations vowing to start boycotting FIFA events as soon as this September if FIFA sells operating rights to the World Cup to Jared Kushner’s brother, but it was still a pretty eventful week:
- The staredown between Portland officials and Trail Blazers owner Tom Dundon continues, with Blazers president of business operations Dewayne Hankins showing up to a city council hearing just to say that the team won’t engage in any lease talks, or even tell the city what the team owners would spend the city’s $120 million in tax money on, unless the city first gives up its right to sue the Blazers for failure to maintain their arena as a “first-class” facility. Mayor Keith Wilson replied that while the city isn’t planning to sue, “there is simply no good reason to amend those agreements unless and until we reach a new long-term lease and commitment” — i.e., we’re not putting our gun down first. “I think the distance between the Blazers and the city is pretty significant,’’ added city council president Jamie Dunphy. The next step, Willamette Week reports, is that the council “must approve a preliminary term sheet for the deal by Aug. 12,” but that’s not really true: The council will meet then to vote on a term sheet, but can always vote no, or delay the vote entirely. The Athletic gets it closer, with “if an agreement isn’t forged, the concern is that the Blazers will lose the funding and perhaps begin looking for another city in which to play,” but fails to mention Dundon’s contractual agreement that he “shall not relocate or seek to relocate the playing site” of Blazers home games until his lease expires in 2030 or face a court injunction. So, staredown — we’ll find out if either Wilson or Hankins practiced their skills at a secret mountaintop monastery in somewhere like Nepal or Tibet.
- Speaking of impasses, Hillsborough County chair Ken Hagan says he won’t have the county vote on a new Rays stadium agreement until the Tampa city council first does so, declaring, “Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.” Tampa councilmembers are still balking at the $180 million in tax money they’re being asked to spend on a new stadium complex, but, Hagan says, “There’s a path to carve them out of the financial framework, but that would cost the Rays more money.” Uh, yeah, that’s kind of the whole idea? After meeting with Rays CEO Ken Babby, swing vote Bill Carlson has made noise of late about shuffling around money from several Community Redevelopment Agencies (Florida’s version of TIFs) in some way that would allegedly not cost anybody anything, but until he lets us have a peek at his perpetual motion machine, it’s hard to say if that’s a viable option.
- The Kansas City Planning Commission will hold another public hearing on a proposed Royals stadium next Wednesday, at least until this one gets shut down for the public shouting too much and not listening enough.
- Athletics owner John Fisher has applied for permits to build the parking garage and utility plant at his planned Las Vegas stadium that casino developer Bally’s was originally going to build but then bailed on. This could add as much as another $100 million to Fisher’s costs; if you had money on “John Fisher burns through all of his family’s money in order to move his team to a much smaller market” on Kalshi, looks like you’re going to be a winner!
- “We’re projecting an economic impact between $250 to $430 million” from LeBron James signing with the Philadelphia 76ers, said John Boyd, principal of a Philadelphia corporate site selection firm, who clearly needs to read up on his LeBronconomics.
- One Cleveland Browns fan reports that when his dad found out his late uncle “had something like $35 in a bank account” that was set to go to the state’s unclaimed funds pool, the bank official “couldn’t get another word out before he said, ‘Send me the paperwork. I’ll be goddamned if Jimmy Haslam gets it.'”
- 51.3% of Kansas City area restaurants reported a decrease in both foot traffic and revenue during the city’s recent World Cup matches, while only 10.3% reported an increase. “The streets are quiet, restaurants are empty, and foot traffic is far below expectations,” reported one downtown cafe owner.
- J.C. Bradbury has a new FAQ up on stadium economics, drawn from his upcoming book This One Will Be Different, bookmark it now!
While funny (and perhaps deserved), teasing an owner (Fisher) about losing their own money building a stadium seems antithetical to what you’re trying to do here.
I mean, better that he lose his money than that taxpayers lose theirs, sure. (Though Nevada is going to lose about $600m on this as well.) But noting that building a $2B stadium in what will be MLB’s smallest media market by far is kinda dumb isn’t just LOLing, it’s also important to note that in many if not most cases, relocating just to get a new stadium isn’t in anyone’s interest, not even team owners’. (Very much cf. Tom Dundon.)
Do you have a source for data on the size of “media markets.”
I’m just interested. I’ve seen lists of metro areas and so forth but I am curious about how media markets are estimated.
It’s the number of households with TVs. Not sure hiw exactly Nielsen tracks it, but they have several decades of experience doing so.
That stat always sounds like something from the 1950’s. Like there are a significant number of households without TVs today.
True, Keith, things have changed.
I know Nielsen makes efforts to track things like streaming, but you wonder how effective any ratings service can be when you can watch what we used to call “tv” on everything from computers to wristwatches these days, and do so on demand, by downloading to a device and watching hours or days later etc.
I would still put my money on them to find a way to more accurately account for “non standard” tv viewing than anyone else.
How accurate they can be I do not know…
Nielsen’s methodology is all proprietary, so no way for us to know. But since it’s what media companies use to set ad rates, it kind if doesn’t matter – regardless of how accurate it is, Nielsen market size determines how much local media revenue you can get, which is what matters. (Except in the NFL, but nobody should be using media market size numbers to talk about the NFL.)
I don’t know what the revenue splits are for subscription fees vs advertising in the current world of “broadcasting”, I have to admit I was thinking in terms potential local viewership (which is still, more often than not, paid). In most places that’s gonna be the number of folks with internet access. More or less everybody.
Nielsen does try to count viewers of any particular bit of content, TV and streaming. And I guess they may combine their samples with the “number of households” to extrapolate total eyeballs. But it’s probably easier to just ask the RSN or streaming service “Hey, how many people watch each game?”
In the end, what really counts in a situation like moving the A’s is how many “tickets” (real and virtual) will the metropolitan area purchase? Figuring that out has to be a whole lot more complex than counting TV homes.
Las Vegas is about the size of Charlotte or Nashville, however the latter are surrounded by other medium size cities like Greensboro and Huntsville. Las Vegas is surrounded by nothing but Mojave green rattlesnakes. Nashville and Charlotte have diversified economies, Vegas is sinking like a brick with an entertainment only economy.
It is interesting that the Vegas MSA is pretty much equal to Pittsburgh and bigger than that of Cincinnati, Kansas City, Nashville, Cleveland and Milwaukee. I wouldn’t have guessed they’d be that far up the list.
But, as you say, you have to take local economics into account.
This was the only source I could find that has actual numbers as opposed to just a ranking.
https://www.sportsbusinessjournal.com/Articles/2025/09/29/us-media-market-rankings-bay-area-passes-boston-strong-growth-for-austin-west-palm-beach-okc/
Vegas is 42nd. Other lists have them higher.
But Vegas is growing. Or, at least, it has been recently. Some of the other cities without NBA teams
– Pittsburgh, St Louis, Cincinnati – are not growing or growing as fast.
Well, it certainly seems like Fisher is “doing it”.
Roof trusses being installed. The Bally’s infrastructure supposedly funded and soon to be under construction.
https://www.mlb.com/athletics/las-vegas-ballpark/construction-cam
He’s spending an awful lot of money just to perpetuate his $60-80m annual small market revenue sharing check.
But with the exception of $400m+ in public money, he’s spending his own cash to do it. It makes no sense from a business POV, but I will give him credit for spending his own money.
IMO, Fisher is trying to slowly make just enough visible progress to get to the point where someone will put up the money to finish the ballpark
It might take a year longer than projected, but he’ll get some more money from the state and county and MLB will loan him the rest interest free or at a very low rate of interest. MLB will do this just to finally stop playing 81 MLB games a year in a small outdoor minor league park at which Sunday’s temperature during a 1 pm ballgame will be over 100 degrees Fahrenheit.
It seems the Trail Blazers no longer want to be in Portland, but why has the NBA lost interest in the city? The NBA allowed the team to be sold to this guy.
I’m surprised the NBA isn’t more cautious given their recent track record.
The last three NBA relocations haven’t gone well, the Sonics’ move being the most notable, with Memphis and New Orleans also struggling in recent years. The players don’t even enjoy playing in those two cities.
You’re assuming that the NBA was thinking “This guy will move the Trail Blazers out of Portland” and not “This guy will use the threat of moving the Trail Blazers to enrich the NBA collectively by $600m.”
True.
However, the NBA has shown other cities much more leniency. From the two examples mentioned earlier (Memphis and New Orleans), plus Minnesota, which also has an older arena than Portland, there’s been far less pressure applied.
The NBA has several teams in worse situations than Portland.
On top of that, they’ve already tapped into the emergency backup markets with St. Louis and Kansas City, which is all over the news here in St. Louis.
St. Louis is a bad bet for the NBA. It is too small for two winter teams, and if the NBA team is bad, as many small market teams are, it will be a disaster. Kansas City, without an NHL team, is the better bet.
First off, I hope the Blazers stay in Portland.
Also, the St. Louis metro area is about the same size as the Denver metro, which has all four major teams. STL is nearly three times the size of New Orleans, which has an NBA team, and larger than Cleveland, which has three sports teams.
The St. Louis media market, which is what matters, is about two-thirds the size of Denver’s, and pretty close to Cleveland’s:
https://ustvdb.com/seasons/2024-25/markets/
You are correct that it’s kind of silly for New Orleans to have an NBA team, though.
Unless you’re a basketball historian, few people today remember the St. Louis Hawks.
The real issue with St. Louis isn’t TV markets. St. Louis is a mostly poor and black city surrounded by mostly affluent and white suburbs on both sides of the Mississippi River. Combined with the ultra-MAGA politics in the region, STL is a no-go for any pro sports entrepreneur.
If KC had a bigger population, NBA would be a no-brainer. However, it would be a crowded sports market and the Royals situation is still unresolved.
St. Louis doesn’t have NFL team but it would to crowded with an NBA team too.
The Kansas City MO/KS area building 3 new major league sports stadiums simultaneously would be amazing. Future civilizations will conclude this was the great epicenter of an early 21st century religious revival, a Cahokia of the modern age.
“We believe the use of each specific site at the Kay-Henge Archeological Complex was based around the solstices and position of the sun,” Paleontologist Gork Mm-Gorkbite said. “Motivated by worship of the terrestrial God-King Dun Dun and High Priests Clar-Hon and Sher-Mon, tens of thousands would gather in these now empty fields. They would even pay a share of their harvest for the right to sit in the same position every week!”
To be fair, as long as you are not Donald Sterling, I think the NBA is going to allow you to buy a team if you are able.
Dundon was the high bidder.
The other owners may not want to set a precedent whereby prospective owners are judged by any other consideration.
The NBA forgot that the guy who moved the Sonics from Seattle to Dopelahoma City made his money rigging oil and gas bids, was indicted and drove his car into a concrete wall at 90mph instead of going to his Federal arraignment.
One of my pet peeves for years was that NBA sportswriters seemed to have no idea who Aubrey McClendon was and even less interest in finding out.
The “success” of expansion and relocated franchises is no longer contingent on how much money the team and the market generate for the league; judgments are now based on whether the market is willing to publicly fund a second round of huge subsidies for a new or renovated venue.
Strictly on that metric, the Sonics relocation to OKC can be considered a resounding success; the constantly terrific on-court product helped to generate support for the second arena windfall, but it arrived nevertheless. If Memphis and/or New Orleans decide to stump up another round of subsidies, the NBA might be willing to disregard the obvious shortcomings and demographic realities of those two tiny markets (both of which have stagnant or shrinking populations across their metro areas).