RebKell's Junkie Boards
Board Junkies Forums
 
Log in Register FAQ Memberlist Search RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index

No expansion, it appears; relocation?
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index » WNBA
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
tfan



Joined: 31 May 2010
Posts: 8118



Back to top
PostPosted: 01/27/20 3:09 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

toad455 wrote:


reposting a 6-year-old article... Come on! If Lacob really wanted a WNBA team it would have happened already. All he has to do is ask and he'd get one.


Haven’t you long been one of the “San Francisco is next, will it be expansion or relocation?” folks?

Lacob says in the article and elsewhere that he’d buy the Sparks, otherwise getting a team will be after the arena is finished. The arena just opened in September so the clock for “he’d have it by now” didn’t start ticking until then.


ClayK



Joined: 11 Oct 2005
Posts: 10546



Back to top
PostPosted: 01/27/20 10:52 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

tfan wrote:
toad455 wrote:


reposting a 6-year-old article... Come on! If Lacob really wanted a WNBA team it would have happened already. All he has to do is ask and he'd get one.


Haven’t you long been one of the “San Francisco is next, will it be expansion or relocation?” folks?

Lacob says in the article and elsewhere that he’d buy the Sparks, otherwise getting a team will be after the arena is finished. The arena just opened in September so the clock for “he’d have it by now” didn’t start ticking until then.


My guess, based on nothing, is that Lacob was hoping to get a relocation for free, thus getting an existing roster rather than expansion dregs. And the collapse of the Warriors, plus the nightmare of getting to Chase, haven't helped.



_________________
Oṃ Tāre Tuttāre Ture Svāhā
tfan



Joined: 31 May 2010
Posts: 8118



Back to top
PostPosted: 01/27/20 8:44 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

ClayK wrote:
, plus the nightmare of getting to Chase, haven't helped.


According to the ESPN attendance figures,

http://www.espn.com/nba/attendance

the Warriors are selling out every game (although they also claim some teams have attendance larger than capacity). If so, I doubt Lacob cares about any difficulty fans have getting there. He knew when he decided to leave an arena with ample parking, a dedicated freeway exit, and a BART station, for one which had none of that, that it would be much harder for fans to get to the game. But apparently a new arena and close-by restaurants trumps ease of getting there for most fans. Or alternatively, they will still show up even if you make it harder to do so.


ClayK



Joined: 11 Oct 2005
Posts: 10546



Back to top
PostPosted: 01/28/20 9:59 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

tfan wrote:
ClayK wrote:
, plus the nightmare of getting to Chase, haven't helped.


According to the ESPN attendance figures,

http://www.espn.com/nba/attendance

the Warriors are selling out every game (although they also claim some teams have attendance larger than capacity). If so, I doubt Lacob cares about any difficulty fans have getting there. He knew when he decided to leave an arena with ample parking, a dedicated freeway exit, and a BART station, for one which had none of that, that it would be much harder for fans to get to the game. But apparently a new arena and close-by restaurants trumps ease of getting there for most fans. Or alternatively, they will still show up even if you make it harder to do so.


As always, attendance is tickets sold, and the Warriors had something like 20,000 people on the waiting list for season tickets last year, so the place will always "sell out."

My in-laws, who live across the Bay from SF, have had season tickets for nearly 30 years and decided to keep them. Getting there is truly a nightmare, and parking is very expensive. Public transit is difficult, especially after the game.

The ticket resale market, which was very, very strong, has collapsed, so my in-laws can't fund their tickets that way any more.

The bottom line: Attendance will slowly erode, especially as the core of the team ages, and unless traffic patterns improve, it will be easier for most concert-goers to get to the Oakland Coliseum and the SAP in San Jose (or whatever it's called now). It will be very interesting to see how all this plays out, as SF itself is a relatively small city and though the arena is nice, it's still just an arena.



_________________
Oṃ Tāre Tuttāre Ture Svāhā
Randy



Joined: 08 Oct 2011
Posts: 10419



Back to top
PostPosted: 01/28/20 10:45 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

ClayK can you explain what they were thinking in deciding to build their new arena in a location with such poor access?



_________________
#NADF
ClayK



Joined: 11 Oct 2005
Posts: 10546



Back to top
PostPosted: 01/28/20 5:04 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

SF is where the money is, and there was no major arena there. Since they started the process, traffic has gotten much, much worse all around the Bay.

It's a nice facility, and it's always advantageous for an NBA team to own its arena, so it's probably still a good investment. And if the Warriors are really good, which they might be for a year or two, it will be a great investment.



_________________
Oṃ Tāre Tuttāre Ture Svāhā
awhom111



Joined: 19 Nov 2014
Posts: 2757



Back to top
PostPosted: 01/28/20 9:52 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Randy wrote:
ClayK can you explain what they were thinking in deciding to build their new arena in a location with such poor access?


The new Warriors owners quickly identified the benefits of having an arena that they would own. Before it opened, San Francisco was the biggest city in the country and possibly the world without an arena of any kind. Based on the non-basketball stuff they booked immediately, there was plenty of demand right away.

The first location they picked was public land and lots of people were opposed to it even though it would have been a great place for one and more accessible for pretty much everyone. Then they found private land, which also ended up being a massive political conflict between various rich people in the city.

More than half of San Francisco has no convenient access to a freeway. The fastest I could get there is still slower than it would take me to get to Stanford on a typical day even though Palo Alto is more than 40 miles away and the arena is only about 7 miles away. The original location would have been near BART, which would have made it convenient for the entire East Bay as well as the upper half of San Mateo County. The Giants stadium is also far from BART, but they have less of a fanbase in the East Bay due to the A's while the Warriors used to have about 40% of their attendance from there. Their stadium is closer to Caltrain, which is the only public transportation available from Silicon Valley all the way up to San Francisco. Either location is about equally convenient from the North Bay. The first location would have been more convenient by public transportation or driving for pretty much everyone in San Francisco. They could have created more space for parking, which might have been nice, but wanted to use the remaining space for more revenue-generating opportunities.
tfan



Joined: 31 May 2010
Posts: 8118



Back to top
PostPosted: 01/29/20 12:45 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Randy wrote:
ClayK can you explain what they were thinking in deciding to build their new arena in a location with such poor access?


It is difficult to find space for a new arena and adequate parking in our major wall-to-wall developed metro areas. And not every city wants one. But at the same time, owners and fans feel that older arenas must be abandoned for newer ones - even though arenas don't wear out - so it has to take place. However, the well-heeled fans want them to be in an area where they have lots of great choices to eat/drink before/after the game/concert. That is, crowded urban areas, which makes it even more difficult to find a spot. So the rich owners will take what they can get in terms of location. It is not unprecedented to build an arena or stadium that does not have enough parking for attendees. The San Francisco 49ers stadium is like that. Businesses in the area have chosen to rent out their parking lots (no idea how that can work on Monday/Thursday night games which the 49ers originally weren't supposed to play, but have) and the amusement park next door whose former "overflow parking lot" the stadium is built on, agreed to close on game days and allow their parking lot to be used.

The Warriors arena originally had a location which may have had ample parking, but a former San Francisco mayor led a fight to keep it out of there. But the current arena has a light rail line that stops right in front of it which would connect people to BART or the train station (which Google Maps says is a 17 minute walk away).

And the truth is, in terms of auto access, any place in the Bay Area is terrible on a weeknight if you want fans from all over to come, and weekends also have traffic jams. And yet, Google, Adobe, et al continue to request and be granted permission to continue to build more facilities. People will complain about traffic, but not complain about development. For some reason they can't make the connection.


WNBA 09



Joined: 26 Jun 2009
Posts: 9937
Location: Dallas , Texas


Back to top
PostPosted: 01/31/20 9:20 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

WNBAPA had a meeting in Toronto yesterday and not with the league officials..... hmmmm Question



_________________
3-Time WNBA Champion-3-Time National Champion-4-Time Olympic Champion....And Yes DT "We Got Confeti" lol
toad455



Joined: 16 Nov 2005
Posts: 22169



Back to top
PostPosted: 07/21/20 8:16 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

The NWSL just announced an expansion team coming to Los Angeles for 2022. Team will be called Angel City FC. Lots of big names attached to the team. Why can't the WNBA get an investment group with so names like this for an expansion team?

https://www.nwslsoccer.com/news/article/national-womens-soccer-league-awards-expansion-team-rights-to-los-angeles

Quote:
Led by consortium President Julie Uhrman, the founding investor group includes Serena Williams and daughter, Alexis Olympia Ohanian, Jr., actors Uzo Aduba, Jessica Chastain, America Ferrera, Jennifer Garner, and Eva Longoria, late night talk show host Lilly Singh, former US Women’s National Team players including twelve representing Southern California including Julie Foudy, Mia Hamm, Rachel Buehler, Shannon Boxx, Amanda Cromwell, Lorrie Fair Allen, Ronnie Fair Sullins, Joy Fawcett, Angela Hucles, Shannon MacMillan, Tisha Venturini Hoch, and Saskia Webber, two-time Olympic Gold Medalist and FIFA World Cup Champions Lauren Cheney Holiday and Abby Wambach, author and activist Glennon Doyle, Netflix VP Original Content Cindy Holland, tech entrepreneur and filmmaker Casey Neistat, Founding Board Member of Baby2Baby, Sabina Nathanson, Media Executive David Nathanson, Baby2Baby Co-President Norah Weinstein, and Bad Robot President and COO Brian Weinstein.



_________________
LET'S GO LIBERTY!!!!!!

Twitter: @TBRBWAY
Stormeo



Joined: 14 Jul 2019
Posts: 1648
Location: Seattle, WA


Back to top
PostPosted: 07/21/20 12:25 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

toad455 wrote:
The NWSL just announced an expansion team coming to Los Angeles for 2022. Team will be called Angel City FC. Lots of big names attached to the team. Why can't the WNBA get an investment group with so names like this for an expansion team?


It appears that women’s soccer in this country is seeing a similar level-up that women’s basketball came across in the mid- to late-90s, albeit in different cultural dynamics (third wave of feminism, etc.). Hopefully for their sake they can sustain the wave they’re riding on a bit better than women’s basketball did at that time (imo).



_________________
Man, f*** all this f***ing horsesh*t (no, yeah, for sure [RIP RBG])
WNBA 09



Joined: 26 Jun 2009
Posts: 9937
Location: Dallas , Texas


Back to top
PostPosted: 07/21/20 3:05 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Stormeo wrote:
toad455 wrote:
The NWSL just announced an expansion team coming to Los Angeles for 2022. Team will be called Angel City FC. Lots of big names attached to the team. Why can't the WNBA get an investment group with so names like this for an expansion team?


It appears that women’s soccer in this country is seeing a similar level-up that women’s basketball came across in the mid- to late-90s, albeit in different cultural dynamics (third wave of feminism, etc.). Hopefully for their sake they can sustain the wave they’re riding on a bit better than women’s basketball did at that time (imo).


I don't think so , the only team profiting in that league has been the Portland thorns at this moment so id say they were about even .



_________________
3-Time WNBA Champion-3-Time National Champion-4-Time Olympic Champion....And Yes DT "We Got Confeti" lol
Randy



Joined: 08 Oct 2011
Posts: 10419



Back to top
PostPosted: 07/21/20 3:12 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought the NWSL was far behind the WNBA is fan attendance, TV ratings, and player pay.


WNBA 09



Joined: 26 Jun 2009
Posts: 9937
Location: Dallas , Texas


Back to top
PostPosted: 07/21/20 6:14 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Randy wrote:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought the NWSL was far behind the WNBA is fan attendance, TV ratings, and player pay.


I don’t think your wrong .....but I’m not a fact checker like others.



_________________
3-Time WNBA Champion-3-Time National Champion-4-Time Olympic Champion....And Yes DT "We Got Confeti" lol
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index » WNBA All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3
Page 3 of 3

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB 2.0.17 © 2001- 2004 phpBB Group
phpBB Template by Vjacheslav Trushkin