|
|||||
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|||||
 |
Yormark Provides Details on Arena Design…and New Practice FacilityJune 15, 2009, 8:13 amBefore flying off to China Saturday, Brett Yormark provided Sports Business Journal with details on the new Barclays Center design…and a Brooklyn practice facility. The design includes a tighter seating bowl entered from street level, a mix of large and “mini-suites”, more in-house TV feeds, and plenty of natural light, said Yormark. Bottom line: “the building is now going to evoke Brooklyn like never before.”  Nets’ arena vision: ‘Brooklyn brand’ - Don Muret - Sports Business Journal Excerpts: Sports Business Journal on New Arena Design - Don Muret - Sports Business JournalPosted in Brooklyn Move; Marketing; Ratner, Bruce; Yormark, Brett | 46 Comments » |
|
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.  46 Responses to “Yormark Provides Details on Arena Design…and New Practice Facility” | |
June 15th, 2009 at 9:33 am
Great News!
I thought I saw a glass ceiling in the photo of the model design? It doesn’t seem like such a warehouse design as we thought.
Ratner seems committed to opening for 2011 season, which would mean serious work to begin this fall.
For once could we have a story about Barclays without someone mentioning Newark or The Rock! The only reason to bring up Newark now is if it is necessary to have some 2011 preseason games there or if arena isn’t quite ready for opening day, Nov. 2011.
June 15th, 2009 at 10:17 am
I’m beginning to wonder if this Senate coup in Albany is going to somehow delay this project even further. No one seems to be in charge up there, and with a divided electorate, and one senator now hedging, will it mean that certain statewide issues are put on the backburner (or tabled altogether)? I guess it remains to be seen, but these are politicians, so I wouldn’t put anything past them.
June 15th, 2009 at 10:29 am
What I expect at the end of the month…and I am just speculating:
–a big blowout announcement with images not just of the Barclays Center but one or two surrounding buildings designed by other well known architects. Ratner has used three of the biggest on his projects: Cesar Pelli, the World Financial Center and MetroTech, Renzo Piano at the New York Times building, and David Childs, also at MetroTech. To assuage and persuade architect critics, expect some new hip architect to be part of the mix.
–details on the practice facility for downtown Brooklyn. The SBJ article says Ratner is “building” the facility although that has to be news to everyone, including the critics. Ratner does own a lot of property in the area but outside the footprint of Atlantic Yards. Some of it has approvals for additional construction. Ellerbe Becket designed the Cavs practice facility…in the Cleveland ‘burbs. http://www.ellerbebecket.com/expertise/project/2_270/Cleveland_Clinic_Courts.html
–Another sponsor or two, including one from China.
They have to go on the p.r. offensive after last week. Some indications that they have already begun, but they haven’t been that successful lately. We shall see.
June 15th, 2009 at 10:31 am
@Morpheus
You do realize that this project was approved more than two years ago, don’t you? Who is going to pull the plug on this? What power does the Senate, which is in disarray, have to change things? Why speculate on something you admittedly know so little about?
June 15th, 2009 at 10:52 am
Jesus NI, take it easy!
I was just thinking out loud. Last time I checked, this was a blog, not an editorial review.
June 15th, 2009 at 11:11 am
Perhaps I was too strong, but I am getting just a bit tired of people speculating on roadblocks that just don’t exist.
June 15th, 2009 at 11:40 am
“Ratner has used three of the biggest on his projects: Cesar Pelli, the World Financial Center and MetroTech, Renzo Piano at the New York Times building, and David Childs, also at MetroTech.”
–Are you sure? Do you have a citation on Pelli at the WFC and Childs designing (rather than just being announced) at MetroTech?
June 15th, 2009 at 11:42 am
I for one, can not wait until we move to Brooklyn. And I think the chaos in Albany will have no impact on this arena – if anything may help get it done -as they need to create jobs.
June 15th, 2009 at 11:49 am
I’m sure you can find them, Normie. I did. Shouldn’t you be writing about this on your own site…rather than battling some octogenarian? How many hits you get a week, Normie? We get more than a million.
June 15th, 2009 at 11:57 am
NI, you’re bluffing.
June 15th, 2009 at 12:00 pm
Well, Normie, I am sure you will come back with an annotated, 5,000 word post suggesting that while it is possible indeed that Pelli and Childs were involved, there is no conclusive proof either way, that being your “wudda cudda shudda” style.
NYMEX, Normie, NYMEX.
June 15th, 2009 at 12:39 pm
haha. nice work NI
June 15th, 2009 at 12:50 pm
One million hits!!
Jeez, enable a Nets chat already, not feelin the messageboard.
Al Ianazzone already writes columns for YES and the Record, maybe he should think about coming over to this side…
June 15th, 2009 at 12:53 pm
To extend what I have said on the previous entry about them moving to Brooklyn, it won’t be the end of the world for Brookly if this doesn’t get built. If anyone has been following other projects, then they will know that Brooklyn is already going to have a new tallest even without Miss Brooklyn being built, and that is 111 Lawrence Street aka The Brooklyner, though I still think that even that one should have been better designed if it’s going to be the new tallest for the borough. The only difference between that and Miss Brooklyn was at least The Brooklyner was designed in the heart of downtown Brooklyn where Miss Brooklyn is not, though I will admit that neither is the WSB, but it’s not that far from downtown. Another thing is that Clarret Group, who are the developers of The Brooklyner, didn’t abuse eminent domain to acquire the property needed to build it and pay for it themselves unlike what FCR is doing for Miss Brooklyn, the arena, and the rest of the plan. Now we know difference between the new tallest buildings being planned.
June 15th, 2009 at 1:04 pm
There is no eminent domain abuse. The courts have decided that, state and federal.
Why not mention Ratner’s building on DeKalb that just topped off?
June 15th, 2009 at 1:11 pm
The eminent domain abuse is being reffered to what Ratner has being using as a fear tactic to get the majority of thos living in the planned footprint to sell to him hence forcing them to sell or else. Those who haven’t already sold to him or refuse to do so would lose their property via eminent domain to him, which is why they are going to the courts to begin with. In other words, Ratner is sort of saying, “Either way, I will get your property one way or another.” The reason I made that comparison was to show who was complying with the laws for their project and who wasn’t, which is pretty much obvious.
June 15th, 2009 at 1:22 pm
That is pure baloney. Fear tactics? He paid those people two and three times the market value of their properties. I am very willing for him to come to my house and scare me with those figures.
June 15th, 2009 at 1:23 pm
“You do realize that this project was approved more than two years ago, don’t you? Who is going to pull the plug on this? What power does the Senate, which is in disarray, have to change things? Why speculate on something you admittedly know so little about?”
here is what the Senate has to do with it. the project will require a new unanimous vote by the Public Authorities Control Board. that board is made up of Silver, Paterson and ?
that’s what the Senate turmoil has to do with it.
June 15th, 2009 at 1:25 pm
netsdaily has more fans than the Nets?! that is funny.
June 15th, 2009 at 1:39 pm
Those people are morons if they don’t take the money. Real Estate prices are going to continue to tumble, why not take the cash and get a new place? I do not understand the opposition.
June 15th, 2009 at 2:05 pm
To the extent we can filter out the wheat from the chaff (or the BS), here is the way things look, through the prism of reality:
1. The only thing that could possibly derail Brooklyn at this point would be the inability for Ratner to close on financing. Truthfully, none of us know enough facts about any existing financing agreements, or potential financing agreements, or, for that matter, what the economic climate will be regading financing in the next three or four months. The one thing we do know is that groundbreaking will have to occurr before 1/1/10, because if it doesn’t, Ratner will be unable to use tax free bonds;
2. If Brooklyn collapses because of the inability to secure financing, the team would be sold, either to the Devils ownership (or parnership including Devil’s owneship), or to a group that would move the team out of the metroploitan area;
3. That as much as I would love to see the team in Newark because as I look out of my office window, I see the Rock right accross the street, the Nets could not exist as tenants of the Devils. The only way for a professional team to be financially viable today is for the team to own the venue in which it plays; and
4. There is tremendous political will to get Brooklyn done. That political will can’t, in and of itself, secure the necessary financing, but it will help
June 15th, 2009 at 3:43 pm
Great post aymesq.
Those that want the Nets in NJ instead of Brooklyn clearly care more about their “state pride” than the franchise (even though the move totals about 15 miles).
I will not comment on the Brooklyn-based critics except to say that they have been offered very fair compensation and 50 people trying to dictate the situation for everyone else seems pretty darn selfish at the end of the day.
June 15th, 2009 at 4:33 pm
Is it just me, or has Brett aged 30 years from the previous image usually associated with his articles???
June 15th, 2009 at 4:38 pm
“The one thing we do know is that groundbreaking will have to occurr before 1/1/10, because if it doesn’t, Ratner will be unable to use tax free bonds;”
incorrect. The bond has to be ISSUEDD prior to the end of 2009, or Ratner loses the exemption. the milestone is not the groundbreaking.
you had better hope that it is not actually a groundbreaking that needs ot occur prior to 1/1/2010 because if that is the requirement for the exempt bond, that is an impossibility.
June 15th, 2009 at 5:27 pm
I can understand the side of the people who own the property. Some of those people’s homes may have sentimental value to them, they just dont wanna move or whatever their reason is. If the property is theirs and they refuse to sell it then so be it. That’s why its THEIR property who are we to say they should leave so we can have a new arena. That’s like me coming to your house, kicking your door in and saying i’ll pay you $10 a day for a sleep study and i just go sleep in your bed. Would you say it was ok because I’m fairly compensating you at $300 a month for your bed and its benefiting others? I doubt it. Just my personal opinion on that aspect of this whole thing. Some posters act like people who want to keep their homes are villains.
June 15th, 2009 at 7:16 pm
And some people don’t understand that this isn’t the first time this has ever happened.
Again, of the 9 plaintiffs in the suit (down from an original 13) most are companies or partnerships and there are only 35 people living in the footprint. That’s not my number. That’s Daniel Goldstein’s number. 35 people in 22 acres…in New York City.
This is New York and in New York, things change. The city is interested in doing this–and continues to support this–because it believes it needs a new central business district so it can continue to compete with other cities, whether it’s Dubai or London or Shanghai. And with the vast transit infrastructure beneath Atlantic Yards, there is no better place. It’s the third biggest transit hub in New York.
June 15th, 2009 at 8:25 pm
“That is pure baloney. Fear tactics? He paid those people two and three times the market value of their properties. I am very willing for him to come to my house and scare me with those figures.”
Those who did sell to Ratner were either scared about the use of eminent, which can sell them under the value of the market, or hardly knew about what he was going to build. My point about mentioning eminent domain abuse is mainly that he can force them out by the government evicting them if they refuse to give to him directly. Why should they be forced to sell to him when they don’t intend to in the first place? What part of my property isn’t for sale was not understood? If someone chooses not to sell their property to a developer, then the deal is pretty much off. I can see that some would just accept it, but I will not, because it’s my property, and there is no For Sale sign, which is the same with these people. As for those 35 people mentioned by Goldstein, it wasn’t 35 people living there before this occurred as Ratner and his supporters spin it. Another thing is that it’s not just white people, because I saw Brooklyn Boondoggle and some of this living in the footprint who didn’t sell happens to be Hispanic. That leads me to some other questions. Why didn’t Ratner think about building this before many of the buildings there were rennovated not too long ago? Why should those that just moved there within the last decade be forced to move out? Even if they would be promised to be relocated in the affordable section of the project, where will they be living until it’s completed?
June 15th, 2009 at 8:26 pm
Net Income,
Who are you and what is your obsession with the Ratner side? Every FAN who opposes the move is the current Nets fan base that would like to keep the team in an accessible area to them. I get that skepticism against this getting done has been excessive, but 15 miles through New York City might as well be another galaxy driving-wise and not much better through NJ-Manhattan-Brooklyn transit. If anybody on this site is about NYC, THATS WHAT THE KNICKS ARE FOR!!!
I am sure that FCR could have made a proposal with a historic Newark business tower, 1st class housing, and a gentrification of Newark to make it the first city that makes NJ money instead of loses it. That would never happen because NJ is a joke to everyone in NYC.
Maybe I am crazy for supporting DDDB and other anti-Ratner websites despite the fact I think they should take Ratners dirty money and be done with it, but the NETS ARE NEW JERSEYS TEAM. Why cant we maintain pride in that.
June 15th, 2009 at 10:33 pm
NJ fans who oppose the move appear very selfish to me. The team cannot thrive in NJ whether it’s IZOD or The Rock. Sports teams need to own their own arena, which the Nets can do 15 miles from IZOD and open revenue streams never available in NJ.
Yet “NJ pride” makes these “fans” want the Nets to stay in Jersey and rot. Did New Yorkers cry when the Giants and Jets went to the Meadowlands? Of course not, they just took a 30 minute ride to support their team.
And to hear NJ fans talk about eminent domain, which they never cared about once through the years except when it means “losing” their beloved Nets.
You can’t make this stuff up.
June 16th, 2009 at 12:51 am
Just because it isnt the first time something has happened doesnt always make it a good thing.
June 16th, 2009 at 8:02 am
@ aymesq I thought your post said it all. @ NJ NETS I am a Nets fan, I live in NJ and understand that moving to Brooklyn adds a backwards jettison to go see my team play. But the reality of pro sports and entertainment is that it is a BUSINESS!! Most of the people here in NJ dont scream for a move to the Rock as a business move as whats best for a Sports franchise its all about an emotional response…you cant take my toy away. Come on, Ive said it a million times you dont leave renting in one building to go rent in another building. I would love to go to the Rock and watch our Nets play hop on Rt 280 go eat 15 minutes BAM watch some ball. Go to work in the city leave the car at Penn Station take the train to the city come back by train meet my boys at the game do a good meal watch the game walk down tp Penn Station, get the car, ride home SWEET!!!! But the reality is we would be a renting IT DOESNT WORK!!!!!
What I am asking is for all of us Nets fans on this site (that actually go to games and pay money!!!) To think like a business person. Lets talk smartly about whats best for the franchise, our entertainment dollars and long term investment in the team.
June 16th, 2009 at 8:15 am
Good call Big Ed. The critics on the board from NJ are acting like spoiled children who don’t want to share their favorite toy and using the guise of eminent domain to justify their argument. I can guarantee that they never cared about eminent domain until it affected their beloved Nets.
The critics from Brooklyn at least have a true moral argument but NI said it well. It is now about 30 people that have been offered multiples of fair market value standing in the way of a project that affects hundreds of thousands of people, if not millions. They obviously have the right to fight the Nets move but, being a real Nets fan, I am glad that their fight will end soon.
June 16th, 2009 at 9:16 am
@David
You are obviously the biggest Nets fan on this board. Congratulations and hopefully we will all see your light.
June 16th, 2009 at 9:28 am
@Trenton…
Thanks but no thanks. I simply realize that the Nets have a better financial future in Brooklyn than NJ. It really does not take a genius to do the math.
And I don’t rally around a cause that I never cared about to justify my position. Maybe the Nets should just move to Trenton. It worked for the Thunder.
June 16th, 2009 at 9:52 am
Here’s the reality. It’s not New Jerseys team it’s Ratner’s team who choose to play in NJ and who now wants to play in Brooklyn. I live in NY and probably travel as long as most to get to the games I attend. I will support this team no matter where they play, as long as I can drive to the game and hope they make the best financial decisions possible so they have the money to sign players it takes to win. People who care about where the Nets play despite whats best for the team, are not fans and should just go watch their local college team play if they like the game.
June 16th, 2009 at 9:56 am
@libigman:
Well said. It would be different if they were moving out of the area but they are not. And why wouldn’t you want your favorite team to have the best economics possible?
Wait…I forgot…it’s Jersey pride!!!
June 16th, 2009 at 10:01 am
@David
Just because my username is Trenton does not mean i live there, nor do i have to support anyting that goes on there. And the mere fact that you bring up the Thunder is laughable.
And its not like NJ was a disaster like Vancouver, the Nets have been in NJ for over 25 years, and if they went to Newark it would be another 25. For competing with NYC, Philly and Boston I think thats a pretty legitimate franchise.
June 16th, 2009 at 10:54 am
@ Trenton
To be a financial success, a sports franchise needs to own the building (and sell out playoff games). No one can argue that the Nets will not be in a better financial position as well as be a better FA attraction in Brooklyn.
Then why wouldn’t you root for what gives the Nets the best chance to win a title? I don’t get it.
At least the Thunder have won some Minor League championships.
June 16th, 2009 at 11:07 am
They might be better financially because everything will be new, but whos to say the fan’s won’t get tired of the Nets if they don’t perform well and go back to the Knicks. If that happens, whos to say the Nets won’t go into dept and not be able to profit after the move.
Its very legitimate to believe that 90% of NY basketball fans root for the Knicks. If the Nets go to BK they aren’t guaranteed to sell out anything. Nothing is guaranteed to thrive once they move to Brooklyn. I get what you are saying but it is all pure speculation. I’m sure the Grizzlies thought they would thrive in Vancouver, thats why they went there. I’m sure The hornets thought Charlotte was great so they started there, left and now have a new franchise which is not exactly racking up the dough for that econonmy.
And Brooklyn/NYC isn’t exactly the mecca of luxury living for every individual player in the NBA. If that was the case, the Knicks would be bringing in a lot of better players than Jerome James, Jamal Crawford, etc.
Nets in Brooklyn does not mean an NBA title.
June 16th, 2009 at 11:21 am
@ Trenton
The financial difference between owning the arena and renting is huge and is not dependent on whether every game is a sellout.
To think the Nets are better positioned renting in NJ than owning an arena in Brooklyn is ridiculous. Why do you think Forbes magazine said the value of the franchise will go way up if they move to Brooklyn? Maybe because they will make more money.
Please put your NJ pride aside for a minute and think about what is best for the basketball team.
June 16th, 2009 at 11:43 am
Why should I care whats best for a basketball team if they don’t care about NJ fans???
Honestly, if they were to pack up, move to BK, sign Lebron and run everything through him, and win a championship I would probably stop watching basketball out of disgust for what the franchise had become.
Nice name drop with Forbes magazine, they are the authority on everything and they have a crystal ball.
June 16th, 2009 at 11:55 am
@ Trenton
You just answered your own question. You’d rather be a lottery team in NJ than a championship team 15 miles away.
We now know all we need to know about you being a “Nets fan.” I guess NY fans shouldn’t root for the Jets or Giants based on your brilliant logic.
June 16th, 2009 at 12:06 pm
@David
I’m just gonna stop cause this is turning lame. You cannot compare the Giants and Jets to the Nets. They are named NY and have always been in NY (for all I know, I could care less cause I hate both teams.)
No offesnse, but I’ve been posting here for a lot longer than you, so I’m sure if anyone would actually care to read our debate, they would say, “Oh, that’s Trenton, not surprising, who is David and why is he arguing with him?”
June 16th, 2009 at 12:07 pm
ah, I meant they are named NY and have always been in NJ
I failed. I’m done.
June 16th, 2009 at 12:12 pm
@ Trenton
I respect your right to an opinion…that’s what makes this country great.
FYI – Giants and Jets have not always been in NJ.
June 16th, 2009 at 12:48 pm
at Net Income –
why havent you responded to the question posed by NJNET to you at 8:26 last night? This is what we all want to know on this site – why are you obsessed with Ratner’s cause. You already explained you don’t work for him, so why are you so opposed to those of us that are actual New Jersey Nets fans and want our team to stay in New Jersey? Please let us know once and for all.