What’s the ACTUAL cost of losing the team versus the cost of paying for the arena and making whatever other accommodations Dundon will require to keep it in Portland? That data should be relatively straightforward and available. Report on that and I’ll be interested in this saga; otherwise, it seems like lots of unnecessary gum rattling and hand-wringing.
The City of Portland should not tell this carpet bagger to get lost because it will damage its reputation? Au contraire, amigo. It will enhance its reputation. This jerk reminds me of a former owner of the Los Angeles Clippers, Donald Sterling. He of "sterling" character who was a disgrace. Professional sport is a business and should be treated as such. If a deal works for both sides, do it. If not, dump it!!
Exactly... these things are just the numbers. It is exactly the same reason OSU and WSU were left out when the PAC12 split up: their eyeballs were the least in the PAC12. Dundon has zero sentiment for the Blazers (which is the argument for keeping ownership local). If you think about it, the fact Portland EVER got a franchise is amazing as in 1970 it was a much smaller market than today
If I was Dundon I would take the Blazers to Nashville. In a heartbeat. It’s the 26th largest TV market in nation and growing (up almost 1% per year), and pro business. While the city of Portland is 23rd largest and shrinking (down almost -3% per year), and negative to business. PDX isn’t coming back without a shock. The patient needs that wake up, badly, and losing Trailblazers is probably what needs to happen.
How do you put a cost on losing a franchise that has been part of my life for 56 years? I moved away from Oregon years ago but the Blazers have always been my one team to cheer for.
That team went away in the 90’s courtesy of the Jailblazers. Not even remotely what they were for the first 20 years. Hit the bricks. Bring in an NHL franchise
JC-- What has the Blazer ownership/mgmt or team done over the years to endear themselves to the NBA Commissioner, such that he would take the extraordinary step of intervening, with other owners support? Some good cities with good history have lost teams in the past.....as a wonderful follow of you says, "...just sayin'...."
If only it were that simple. Lots of "players" in the drama, each with their own agendas and motives. Thinking a simple solution lies on a spreadsheet won't cut it--although for the key player, Dundon, that appears to be his sole focus. Seems like you're saying "hey, if he can make more money moving the team, good for him--it is all about the 'bottom line.'" No, it really is much, much more than that.
Sorry, it isn't. How do you think guys like Dundon got to be guys like Dundon. They're driven. They're driven by accomplishment and return on investment. The idea of let's just do something nice for the people of this city is ludicrous.
Just watched Episode 10, Season 3 of Ted Lasso (one of the best shows ever). A billionaire meets with a half-dozen other billionaire futbol team owners to convince them to create a super-league that would price their average fans out, shutting them out from the teams they'd lived-and-died for all their lives. Richmond owner Rebecca gives an amazing speech that shreds the sociopath greedheads. It is inspired, and worth finding on Google. I have only pity for those who put money/profits ahead of people. Jesus didn't, and I don't.
I also can't disagree. Some psychological maladies, especially intertwining fear and avarice and lack of empathy, e.g., are very hard to overcome indeed.
Oh, it should be noted that altruism does not necessitate "suicide." Check the clip from Ted Lasso. None of the billionaire club owners gave their lives, they just had food thrown at them. Small price for continuing to provide endless enjoyment (and, yes, frustration) to their teams' innumerable fans.
Interestingly, for Durkheim the opposite of altruistic suicide was ego suicide, where a non-integrated (into society) person commits suicide, probably out of despair. That is not what we're talking about here. Here the opposite of socially sacrificing for the good of all is the sociopathic pursuit of personal gain with absolutely no regard for the consequence on others. Both Dundon and his choice of politicians to support personify that.
My study of sociology (including Durkheim) is four decades past, so I had to look it up. I much prefer "suicidal altruism" to "greed-driven sociopathy," or even Tragedy of the Commons. It should be pointed out that Christ's sacrifice would also be called "social altruism," so I'm in good company. Thanks for the reference. "Suicidal altruism (more formally known as altruistic suicide) is the deliberate sacrifice of one’s life for the perceived benefit of others or for a larger social cause. Pioneered by sociologist Émile Durkheim, it occurs when an individual's bond to their group, tradition, or belief system entirely overshadows their instinct for self-preservation."
If Seattle gets an expansion team as Adam Silver has promised Seattle, the NBA won’t need Portland anymore. Portland basketball fans, unfortunately will drive to Seattle for NBA games. Just as so many do to see NFL, MLB, and NHL games. Adam Silver won’t do anything to stop Dundon from moving the Blazers. Jody Allen sold us out for an extra $250 million to a Texas sized jackass with an ego the size of Russia.
I agree with most of what you said. Silver doesn't have the authority to stop an owner from moving. Influence other owners? Maybe. But he works for the owners and they will make the decision regarding Dundon. No owner is going to give the commissioner the power to destroy their own franchise.
Yes, I agree Jody Allen stuck it to the franchise--she has no interest in anything but the biggest price and that remaining 20% ownership was absolutely brilliant. Have you seen the valuation increases of major sports franchises? I'm sure you have.
As for Dundon, I don't see him the way you do. I see him as a hard-nosed, smart, visionary, profit-driven businessman with a sense of urgency. Everything Portland and Oregon officials are not.
I appreciate your comment. I really hope city hall and Tom Dundon can find some common ground on the Moda Center. My gut tells me no. I’m hoping I’m wrong.
And yes, Jody Allen made both a brilliant as well as a curious move with the 20% stake. As far as how quickly professional sports teams can appreciate in value, look at Paul Allen. He bought the Blazers in 1988 for $70 million and his sister sold it $4.25 billion in 2026. Thats a hell of an ROI. Mr. Allen did well with the Blazer investment.
Meaning Oakland served the Warriors and A's for decades and city leadership did a tonne to keep them on the East Bay - to no avail. Portland seems fait accompli to suffer the same fate.
Since Silver works for Dunden, et.al., how can he force him to do anything? Would need weight and support of other owners I suspect.
Think Allen chose Dunden’s group because they needed her $ and thus retain 20% ownership?🤔Lots of moving parts here. All I know is I want Dunden out of town.😏 Preferably without the Blazers.🤞
No owner is going to give Silver the authority to prevent a move. The owners, collectively will decide that because they also do not ever want to be in the position of a single pencil neck commissioner determining their franchise's future.
As I have no dog in this skirmish, I hesitate to comment. I just would like to see the NBA, owners, and the inept City of Portland all part ways, and take their baggage with them.
then my friend and hero John wouldn't have to waste any more time on this crowd. Just sayin', Charlie
I thought Berger's comments about Portland's self-made reputation as a city for investment were instructive. Canzano also grimaced when Berger shot down Portland as a MLB city, but I think Berger has Portland scoped out pretty accurately. Pride in our home doesn't always allow us to see what others see when analyzing us.
Portland has a well-deserved reputation for being one of the worst investment regions in America. You're right--when you sit in the middle of the boiling water it's hard to know that you're about cooked.
Dundon has less than zero interest in having the Blazers remain in Portland. It's possible that he has never even been to Portland before this, and he certainly hasn't shown any evidence that he wants to establish a presence here. So far, everything he's done is straight out of the Clay Bennett play book.
I'm less certain about where he might move them. Nashville is more likely to get the Grizzlies than the Blazers., and it seems like that city has its eye more on MLB.
I still think he wants to get the team to Raleigh. Though smaller, that Research Triangle SMSA has a younger, more affluent demographic and it's growing.
He already has a favorable arena deal in place. Lenovo Center is currently undergoing a $300 million renovation and it's already set up for basketball.
Great post. You made this point which is excellent: "I still think he wants to get the team to Raleigh. Though smaller, that Research Triangle SMSA has a younger, more affluent demographic and it's growing."
In other words, Raleigh is everything Portland is not--visionary, smart, energetic and exciting.
Portland is already 23rd TV market in country in 2025, which reflects a -3% in households vs previous year. The city of Portland is slipping. And won’t hit rock bottom until Blazers leave and the electorate makes it majority National Socialists on the city council (almost there, w/ 5 out 12 socialists, already). Still some nice spots in PDX, but the local government is a joke.
They need to do whatever is necessary to keep the blazers in Portland. It will never pencil directly for the tax payers as a return on the 600m. It will revitalize the whole area
and bring in new businesses and tax revenue streams. The other option is to have a decaying arena with no tenant and watch Portland move closer to becoming Oakland.
Jody Allen was under no obligation to sell the Trail Blazers to a Portland friendly owner. As trustee of Paul Allen’s estate, she had a fiduciary duty to maximize the value of the sale for the estate’s beneficiaries. If Paul Allen had wanted the team to remain in Portland regardless of price, he could have explicitly included that instruction in his estate plan.
And has the City of Portland retained an experienced professional negotiator? Right now, they appear to be reacting to every move Dundon makes instead of setting the agenda themselves. Their next move seems fairly obvious, yet they haven’t made it. It looks like they’re playing defense while Dundon is controlling the negotiation and the narrative too.
Feels like the JV team trying to play a game with the varsity team with the expected result.
Age old debate on if it is an advantage or disadvantage to speak first and I’ve never let that determine how I negotiate. I’ve always tried to understand what the other persons goals were, stated what mine are and then tried to reach an agreement that satisfied both parties. And sometimes there isn’t a solution and you shake hands and walk away.
Seattle (SuperSonics, 2008→OKC): Balked at a $300M KeyArena fix; team left. Took 18 years and a $1.15B arena rebuild (Climate Pledge Arena) to land the Kraken and now a shot at NBA expansion — paid far more later than the original ask.
• St. Louis (Rams, 2016→LA): Wouldn’t upgrade the Edward Jones Dome to NFL standards; team left for LA. City sued and won a $790M settlement (~$280M to the city), but still has no NFL team nine years on — money went to budget gaps, not sports.
• Oakland (Warriors, Raiders, A’s — all left 2019–2024): Lost all three tenants rather than reinvest in the Coliseum. Ended up selling its ownership stake (~$105M+) just to cover budget shortfalls and pay off old debt; site is now slated for housing/redevelopment, not a new venue.
• Hartford (Whalers, 1997→Carolina) & Quebec City (Nordiques, 1995→Colorado): Both skipped arena investment, both still have no NHL team decades later — no do-over available.
• Bottom line: Declining to fund the venue almost always costs more later (lawsuit payouts, bigger eventual rebuilds, lost leverage) — and getting a team back is the exception, not the rule.
Several of those areas cited are a little off. The St. Louis stadium met NFL standards. What is didn't meet was a clause between the city and the team owner that the stadium had to be maintained as one of the top 8 stadiums in the league. Stan Kroenke was looking for an excuse to get back to LA. He found it as new stadiums were built that were better, causing the ranking of the EJ Dome to slip.
Way off on the Oakland situation. The Warriors wanted to build a new arena in SF to get closer to their fan base west of the bay. Oakland was willing to build new stadiums for both the A's and Raiders, but A's owner John Fisher wanted a big mixed use real estate development. He tried and failed to get it done on any of several other sites (Fremont, Laney College, Howard Terminal).
He jumped at what looked like that opportunity in Las Vegas, but that ended up being narrowed down after he committed to the move. The fact that Fisher got control of the Colisuem site squeezed out the Raiders, who would have gone for a new football only stadium elsewhere on that site.
The stories regarding the moves of both Hartford and Quebec City are complex and have little to do with arena investment by the cities involved. The Nordiques' move had more to do with a weakening Canadian dollar, which necessitated a sale to a new owner--one whose intent was to move the team. Quebec City built a new arena shortly after the team moved. Hartford's move had to do with the State of Connecticut not wanting to subsidize a team that wasn't winning and had declining attendance.
The Los Angeles NFL stadium was built with private money. LA tax payers told the NFL carpet baggers to get lost for years. The baggers finally caved. Most municipalities in our country "survive" without a professional sports franchise. The cost of serving the debt incurred to satisfy a bagger equals out the financial gain from hosting one.
Great post. Oakland lost the Seals (NHL), too. And when you thought it couldn’t get any worse, Oakland lost In-N-Out Burger. First ever to close. Portland’s on that trajectory.
Portland owns the arena. They wanted it. They need to pay for the renovation. Pretty simple. For proud Oregonians it's a tough pill to swallow but Portland as a city is not a pro sports city. They couldn't even keep a minor league baseball team. The city government will never do what it takes, the same as it takes in every pro sports city, to keep the Blazers. They are gone at the first opportunity. The difference between this and the Sacramento situation is they had a former NBA all-star as their mayor and they did everything they needed to do. There was no justification for the Kings to move. PDX will provide Dundon with every reason he needs to justify moving the team.
Portland has Ron Wyden, who’s friends with Silver and also happens to be the biggest basketball fan in Congress. Wyden also experience dealing with unethical people in the business world, such as when he subpoenaed and interrogated the tobacco CEOs in the nineties. I don’t think he’s intimidated by a guy like Dundon and will call him out if he’s in fact not acting in good faith.
If being a "pro sports city" means subsidizing a private business entity with tax payer money, count me out. The City of Portland should buy the Blazers if that is what you want.
There is precedent. The State of Oregon "owns" the University of Oregon whose football team is a professional enterprise. Ask Dillon Gabriel.
That's exactly what it takes to have a pro franchise in your city for one of the 4 major pro leagues, NFL, MLB, NBA or NHL. You and I may not like it, but that's just the way it is, everywhere. I don't believe Portland will do that. Not agreeing or disagreeing, just how politics play out in Portland. That's why the Blazers are gone.
I agree. Regardless of the Blazers, COP needs to invest in the facility that is owned by the City. The request for Portland is 120 million dollars. Which is a bargain to maintain and update a city-owned facility. The largest portion is from the state and is partially based on taxes from athletes (and others). If the Blazers leave, there goes that funding source.
It seems that Dundon can get what he wants which clearly seems to be moving the team just by basically refusing to negotiate with the city. This just doesn’t look like it is going to end well for Portland. The city may own part of this debacle but it’s tough to do a deal with someone who isn’t bargaining in good faith.
" Said Silver: “I was hoping more progress would have been made by now on that agreement. It seems to have gone off track in various ways.”" Silver reportedly gets paid $40-50M a year. He has every incentive to make sure transfers of ownership go well for key markets. Portland is not a huge market, but it is 41st in America (I guess that leaves 10 markets that are larger, however). Why isn't Silver getting the city and Dundon together in a meeting to hammer all of this out? That would be the adult thing to do.
His predecessor sure got involved in these matters - first in paving the road for the Sonics to move to OKC, then blocking their return years later by preventing the sale of the Kings to a would-be owner who planned to move them to Seattle.
If the City deems it vital to keep the Blazers, call his bluff. Give him everything he wants for an extended lease of __ years. Then he'll reveal his true motive to stay or go, and we can end this drama.
What’s the ACTUAL cost of losing the team versus the cost of paying for the arena and making whatever other accommodations Dundon will require to keep it in Portland? That data should be relatively straightforward and available. Report on that and I’ll be interested in this saga; otherwise, it seems like lots of unnecessary gum rattling and hand-wringing.
What is the institutional and reputational loss to the city and the region? It’s massive.
I hate the idea of subsidizing such a jerk, but Dundon has all the leverage and he knows it.
Let me see if I understand what you are saying.
The City of Portland should not tell this carpet bagger to get lost because it will damage its reputation? Au contraire, amigo. It will enhance its reputation. This jerk reminds me of a former owner of the Los Angeles Clippers, Donald Sterling. He of "sterling" character who was a disgrace. Professional sport is a business and should be treated as such. If a deal works for both sides, do it. If not, dump it!!
I don’t think the city should just give away the farm, so to speak, but I think the cost/benefit analysis has to go beyond dollars and cents.
Here’s a great interview with Tim Boyle, who comes to a similar conclusion. I’d love to hear John have him on the show.
https://www.bizjournals.com/portland/news/2026/07/15/columbia-ceo-tim-boyle-moda-center-portland.html
Exactly... these things are just the numbers. It is exactly the same reason OSU and WSU were left out when the PAC12 split up: their eyeballs were the least in the PAC12. Dundon has zero sentiment for the Blazers (which is the argument for keeping ownership local). If you think about it, the fact Portland EVER got a franchise is amazing as in 1970 it was a much smaller market than today
If I was Dundon I would take the Blazers to Nashville. In a heartbeat. It’s the 26th largest TV market in nation and growing (up almost 1% per year), and pro business. While the city of Portland is 23rd largest and shrinking (down almost -3% per year), and negative to business. PDX isn’t coming back without a shock. The patient needs that wake up, badly, and losing Trailblazers is probably what needs to happen.
Multiple shocks might be required. This patient is just about flat-lining
“their eyeballs were the least in the Pac-12”
On an objective level, this was not the case.
In 2023, OSU was 20th in FBS for average viewership, WSU was 43rd (with a losing record) https://medium.com/run-it-back-with-zach/which-college-football-programs-were-most-watched-in-2023-2e81ef62d3bf
From 2015-21, WSU was even better than that. https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/3444339/2022/07/25/pac12-big12-tv-viewership/?unlocked_article_code=1.x1A.vnHn.fJjMK2Ro8tEa&source=user_shared_article&smid=ta-ios-share
Yes, OSU and WSU have compelling stories and history, so they punch above their weight (available eyeballs).
How do you put a cost on losing a franchise that has been part of my life for 56 years? I moved away from Oregon years ago but the Blazers have always been my one team to cheer for.
That team went away in the 90’s courtesy of the Jailblazers. Not even remotely what they were for the first 20 years. Hit the bricks. Bring in an NHL franchise
JC-- What has the Blazer ownership/mgmt or team done over the years to endear themselves to the NBA Commissioner, such that he would take the extraordinary step of intervening, with other owners support? Some good cities with good history have lost teams in the past.....as a wonderful follow of you says, "...just sayin'...."
There’s more than dollars that the city gets out of a big 4 professionals sports team.
If only it were that simple. Lots of "players" in the drama, each with their own agendas and motives. Thinking a simple solution lies on a spreadsheet won't cut it--although for the key player, Dundon, that appears to be his sole focus. Seems like you're saying "hey, if he can make more money moving the team, good for him--it is all about the 'bottom line.'" No, it really is much, much more than that.
Sorry, it isn't. How do you think guys like Dundon got to be guys like Dundon. They're driven. They're driven by accomplishment and return on investment. The idea of let's just do something nice for the people of this city is ludicrous.
Just watched Episode 10, Season 3 of Ted Lasso (one of the best shows ever). A billionaire meets with a half-dozen other billionaire futbol team owners to convince them to create a super-league that would price their average fans out, shutting them out from the teams they'd lived-and-died for all their lives. Richmond owner Rebecca gives an amazing speech that shreds the sociopath greedheads. It is inspired, and worth finding on Google. I have only pity for those who put money/profits ahead of people. Jesus didn't, and I don't.
I disagree with nothing you wrote. And if we all worked to emulate Jesus—and we should —it would be an incredible, wonderful world.
This column today, however, is about how things are…not as we would like them to be.
And thanks for the link — great speech. Won’t move Dundon, Judy Allen, Adam Silver or shortsighted Portland and Oregon elected officials. Sad to say.
I also can't disagree. Some psychological maladies, especially intertwining fear and avarice and lack of empathy, e.g., are very hard to overcome indeed.
Just found Rebecca's speech. It is the difference between Dundon and Paul Allen. https://www.instagram.com/reel/DVyObQ8iQOJ/
Your view is known as "suicidal altruism." The money changers should not have been in the Temple to begin with!!
Oh, it should be noted that altruism does not necessitate "suicide." Check the clip from Ted Lasso. None of the billionaire club owners gave their lives, they just had food thrown at them. Small price for continuing to provide endless enjoyment (and, yes, frustration) to their teams' innumerable fans.
Interestingly, for Durkheim the opposite of altruistic suicide was ego suicide, where a non-integrated (into society) person commits suicide, probably out of despair. That is not what we're talking about here. Here the opposite of socially sacrificing for the good of all is the sociopathic pursuit of personal gain with absolutely no regard for the consequence on others. Both Dundon and his choice of politicians to support personify that.
My study of sociology (including Durkheim) is four decades past, so I had to look it up. I much prefer "suicidal altruism" to "greed-driven sociopathy," or even Tragedy of the Commons. It should be pointed out that Christ's sacrifice would also be called "social altruism," so I'm in good company. Thanks for the reference. "Suicidal altruism (more formally known as altruistic suicide) is the deliberate sacrifice of one’s life for the perceived benefit of others or for a larger social cause. Pioneered by sociologist Émile Durkheim, it occurs when an individual's bond to their group, tradition, or belief system entirely overshadows their instinct for self-preservation."
True
If Seattle gets an expansion team as Adam Silver has promised Seattle, the NBA won’t need Portland anymore. Portland basketball fans, unfortunately will drive to Seattle for NBA games. Just as so many do to see NFL, MLB, and NHL games. Adam Silver won’t do anything to stop Dundon from moving the Blazers. Jody Allen sold us out for an extra $250 million to a Texas sized jackass with an ego the size of Russia.
I agree with most of what you said. Silver doesn't have the authority to stop an owner from moving. Influence other owners? Maybe. But he works for the owners and they will make the decision regarding Dundon. No owner is going to give the commissioner the power to destroy their own franchise.
Yes, I agree Jody Allen stuck it to the franchise--she has no interest in anything but the biggest price and that remaining 20% ownership was absolutely brilliant. Have you seen the valuation increases of major sports franchises? I'm sure you have.
As for Dundon, I don't see him the way you do. I see him as a hard-nosed, smart, visionary, profit-driven businessman with a sense of urgency. Everything Portland and Oregon officials are not.
I appreciate your comment. I really hope city hall and Tom Dundon can find some common ground on the Moda Center. My gut tells me no. I’m hoping I’m wrong.
And yes, Jody Allen made both a brilliant as well as a curious move with the 20% stake. As far as how quickly professional sports teams can appreciate in value, look at Paul Allen. He bought the Blazers in 1988 for $70 million and his sister sold it $4.25 billion in 2026. Thats a hell of an ROI. Mr. Allen did well with the Blazer investment.
PDX: Oakland North.
Bingo!
Meaning what exactly? Dundon is John Fisher's alter ego?
Meaning Oakland served the Warriors and A's for decades and city leadership did a tonne to keep them on the East Bay - to no avail. Portland seems fait accompli to suffer the same fate.
Thanks for the elaboration. Just goes to show, sometimes one is invited to dinner and other times one is on the menu.
R.I.P. City??
Since Silver works for Dunden, et.al., how can he force him to do anything? Would need weight and support of other owners I suspect.
Think Allen chose Dunden’s group because they needed her $ and thus retain 20% ownership?🤔Lots of moving parts here. All I know is I want Dunden out of town.😏 Preferably without the Blazers.🤞
I mean the “et al” is really the most important.
If abandoning Portland isn’t in the best interests of the league, the Commissioner and Board of Governors have influence.
No owner is going to give Silver the authority to prevent a move. The owners, collectively will decide that because they also do not ever want to be in the position of a single pencil neck commissioner determining their franchise's future.
Thanks for not making fun of his ears, Rich. The neck is better.
I have no idea how I missed the ears! LMAO!
As I have no dog in this skirmish, I hesitate to comment. I just would like to see the NBA, owners, and the inept City of Portland all part ways, and take their baggage with them.
then my friend and hero John wouldn't have to waste any more time on this crowd. Just sayin', Charlie
I thought Berger's comments about Portland's self-made reputation as a city for investment were instructive. Canzano also grimaced when Berger shot down Portland as a MLB city, but I think Berger has Portland scoped out pretty accurately. Pride in our home doesn't always allow us to see what others see when analyzing us.
Portland has a well-deserved reputation for being one of the worst investment regions in America. You're right--when you sit in the middle of the boiling water it's hard to know that you're about cooked.
Dundon has less than zero interest in having the Blazers remain in Portland. It's possible that he has never even been to Portland before this, and he certainly hasn't shown any evidence that he wants to establish a presence here. So far, everything he's done is straight out of the Clay Bennett play book.
I'm less certain about where he might move them. Nashville is more likely to get the Grizzlies than the Blazers., and it seems like that city has its eye more on MLB.
I still think he wants to get the team to Raleigh. Though smaller, that Research Triangle SMSA has a younger, more affluent demographic and it's growing.
He already has a favorable arena deal in place. Lenovo Center is currently undergoing a $300 million renovation and it's already set up for basketball.
Great post. You made this point which is excellent: "I still think he wants to get the team to Raleigh. Though smaller, that Research Triangle SMSA has a younger, more affluent demographic and it's growing."
In other words, Raleigh is everything Portland is not--visionary, smart, energetic and exciting.
I found another market size ranking that has Portland at No. 22. But Raleigh-Durham is No. 21 and is probably a much better NBA market than Portland based on southeast tradition (Duke, NCS, UNC, Wake Forest, Greensboro, etc): https://www.sportsmediawatch.com/nba-market-size-nfl-mlb-nhl-nielsen-ratings/
Portland is already 23rd TV market in country in 2025, which reflects a -3% in households vs previous year. The city of Portland is slipping. And won’t hit rock bottom until Blazers leave and the electorate makes it majority National Socialists on the city council (almost there, w/ 5 out 12 socialists, already). Still some nice spots in PDX, but the local government is a joke.
Certainly easier to manage two pro franchises that are only 3 hours by freeway apart.
They need to do whatever is necessary to keep the blazers in Portland. It will never pencil directly for the tax payers as a return on the 600m. It will revitalize the whole area
and bring in new businesses and tax revenue streams. The other option is to have a decaying arena with no tenant and watch Portland move closer to becoming Oakland.
You got me at "Oakland!"
Jody Allen was under no obligation to sell the Trail Blazers to a Portland friendly owner. As trustee of Paul Allen’s estate, she had a fiduciary duty to maximize the value of the sale for the estate’s beneficiaries. If Paul Allen had wanted the team to remain in Portland regardless of price, he could have explicitly included that instruction in his estate plan.
And has the City of Portland retained an experienced professional negotiator? Right now, they appear to be reacting to every move Dundon makes instead of setting the agenda themselves. Their next move seems fairly obvious, yet they haven’t made it. It looks like they’re playing defense while Dundon is controlling the negotiation and the narrative too.
Feels like the JV team trying to play a game with the varsity team with the expected result.
You also don't insult the party across the table, or you won't even get them to the table.
I agree with you in general, a respectful dialog helps a negotiation along. However, Dundon isn’t at the table and is controlling the negotiation.
In negotiations, the person who speaks first usually gets the shorter end of the stick.
Age old debate on if it is an advantage or disadvantage to speak first and I’ve never let that determine how I negotiate. I’ve always tried to understand what the other persons goals were, stated what mine are and then tried to reach an agreement that satisfied both parties. And sometimes there isn’t a solution and you shake hands and walk away.
Seattle (SuperSonics, 2008→OKC): Balked at a $300M KeyArena fix; team left. Took 18 years and a $1.15B arena rebuild (Climate Pledge Arena) to land the Kraken and now a shot at NBA expansion — paid far more later than the original ask.
• St. Louis (Rams, 2016→LA): Wouldn’t upgrade the Edward Jones Dome to NFL standards; team left for LA. City sued and won a $790M settlement (~$280M to the city), but still has no NFL team nine years on — money went to budget gaps, not sports.
• Oakland (Warriors, Raiders, A’s — all left 2019–2024): Lost all three tenants rather than reinvest in the Coliseum. Ended up selling its ownership stake (~$105M+) just to cover budget shortfalls and pay off old debt; site is now slated for housing/redevelopment, not a new venue.
• Hartford (Whalers, 1997→Carolina) & Quebec City (Nordiques, 1995→Colorado): Both skipped arena investment, both still have no NHL team decades later — no do-over available.
• Bottom line: Declining to fund the venue almost always costs more later (lawsuit payouts, bigger eventual rebuilds, lost leverage) — and getting a team back is the exception, not the rule.
Courtesy of Claude AI
Several of those areas cited are a little off. The St. Louis stadium met NFL standards. What is didn't meet was a clause between the city and the team owner that the stadium had to be maintained as one of the top 8 stadiums in the league. Stan Kroenke was looking for an excuse to get back to LA. He found it as new stadiums were built that were better, causing the ranking of the EJ Dome to slip.
Way off on the Oakland situation. The Warriors wanted to build a new arena in SF to get closer to their fan base west of the bay. Oakland was willing to build new stadiums for both the A's and Raiders, but A's owner John Fisher wanted a big mixed use real estate development. He tried and failed to get it done on any of several other sites (Fremont, Laney College, Howard Terminal).
He jumped at what looked like that opportunity in Las Vegas, but that ended up being narrowed down after he committed to the move. The fact that Fisher got control of the Colisuem site squeezed out the Raiders, who would have gone for a new football only stadium elsewhere on that site.
The stories regarding the moves of both Hartford and Quebec City are complex and have little to do with arena investment by the cities involved. The Nordiques' move had more to do with a weakening Canadian dollar, which necessitated a sale to a new owner--one whose intent was to move the team. Quebec City built a new arena shortly after the team moved. Hartford's move had to do with the State of Connecticut not wanting to subsidize a team that wasn't winning and had declining attendance.
Reply courtesy of Bruce AI 😉
The Los Angeles NFL stadium was built with private money. LA tax payers told the NFL carpet baggers to get lost for years. The baggers finally caved. Most municipalities in our country "survive" without a professional sports franchise. The cost of serving the debt incurred to satisfy a bagger equals out the financial gain from hosting one.
I love AI for this reason!!!
Great post. Oakland lost the Seals (NHL), too. And when you thought it couldn’t get any worse, Oakland lost In-N-Out Burger. First ever to close. Portland’s on that trajectory.
Portland owns the arena. They wanted it. They need to pay for the renovation. Pretty simple. For proud Oregonians it's a tough pill to swallow but Portland as a city is not a pro sports city. They couldn't even keep a minor league baseball team. The city government will never do what it takes, the same as it takes in every pro sports city, to keep the Blazers. They are gone at the first opportunity. The difference between this and the Sacramento situation is they had a former NBA all-star as their mayor and they did everything they needed to do. There was no justification for the Kings to move. PDX will provide Dundon with every reason he needs to justify moving the team.
Portland has Ron Wyden, who’s friends with Silver and also happens to be the biggest basketball fan in Congress. Wyden also experience dealing with unethical people in the business world, such as when he subpoenaed and interrogated the tobacco CEOs in the nineties. I don’t think he’s intimidated by a guy like Dundon and will call him out if he’s in fact not acting in good faith.
Doesn’t Wyden spend half his time in New York?
He might since his wife is from there.
If being a "pro sports city" means subsidizing a private business entity with tax payer money, count me out. The City of Portland should buy the Blazers if that is what you want.
There is precedent. The State of Oregon "owns" the University of Oregon whose football team is a professional enterprise. Ask Dillon Gabriel.
That's exactly what it takes to have a pro franchise in your city for one of the 4 major pro leagues, NFL, MLB, NBA or NHL. You and I may not like it, but that's just the way it is, everywhere. I don't believe Portland will do that. Not agreeing or disagreeing, just how politics play out in Portland. That's why the Blazers are gone.
I agree. Regardless of the Blazers, COP needs to invest in the facility that is owned by the City. The request for Portland is 120 million dollars. Which is a bargain to maintain and update a city-owned facility. The largest portion is from the state and is partially based on taxes from athletes (and others). If the Blazers leave, there goes that funding source.
It seems that Dundon can get what he wants which clearly seems to be moving the team just by basically refusing to negotiate with the city. This just doesn’t look like it is going to end well for Portland. The city may own part of this debacle but it’s tough to do a deal with someone who isn’t bargaining in good faith.
What is the plan for MODA if the Blazers move out?
Seriously, why would Dundon suddenly offer to pay 600 to 800 million to upgrade a building AND HE DOESNT GET MONEY BACK!?!
And how does the Portland government plan to make $$ on the MODA center if the Blazers are gone for good?
So they should do a worse deal in order to rescue a bad one?
" Said Silver: “I was hoping more progress would have been made by now on that agreement. It seems to have gone off track in various ways.”" Silver reportedly gets paid $40-50M a year. He has every incentive to make sure transfers of ownership go well for key markets. Portland is not a huge market, but it is 41st in America (I guess that leaves 10 markets that are larger, however). Why isn't Silver getting the city and Dundon together in a meeting to hammer all of this out? That would be the adult thing to do.
His predecessor sure got involved in these matters - first in paving the road for the Sonics to move to OKC, then blocking their return years later by preventing the sale of the Kings to a would-be owner who planned to move them to Seattle.
If the City deems it vital to keep the Blazers, call his bluff. Give him everything he wants for an extended lease of __ years. Then he'll reveal his true motive to stay or go, and we can end this drama.
Gone of track in various ways. . . 🤣