Warriors Mission Bay Arena Rendering: 11/3/15

While the target opening date has been moved back to 2019 and a pair of lawsuits remain unresolved, the Golden State Warriors have sold the naming-rights for their proposed Mission Bay Arena to JPMorgan Chase which plans to dub the arena Chase Center.

And while the pre-construction deal “should give potential lenders confidence as the Warriors seek [private] financing for the $1 billion arena,” the timing is likely as politically motivated as it is financially, designed to signal the “inevitability” of the arena and solidify an air of “too big to fail,” as was JPMorgan Chase but not the Warriors’ original Pier 30-32 plans.

The financial terms of the naming-rights deal have not been released, but it’s expected to be worth at least, if not more than, the $200 million that Barclays paid for the Nets new arena in Brooklyn.

The Warriors have announced, however, that as part of the deal, JPMorgan Chase has “committed $25 million over the next three years for Bay Area projects including building and renovating sports and entertainment facilities in disadvantaged neighborhoods.”

Comments from Plugged-In Readers

  1. Posted by Orland

    Silly me, I thought these guys were well-heeled enough to simply write checks to build this thing without need of financing and selling naming rights.

    • Posted by gribble

      When you have the kind of money they have, financing saves you money. Your cash makes you a greater ROI than your debts cost you.

    • Posted by zig

      You think they got rich being dumb?

    • Posted by Swiftamine

      That was very silly of you.

    • Posted by Ohlone Californio

      You should have stopped at “silly me.” It at least made sense and was true.

      • Posted by Orland

        So then, they simply aren’t the “Big Deal” they like to portray themselves as. Not when they give up that much of the deal and have to share the limelight. What’s the sense of having all those Billions. Just your usual hustlers.

        • Posted by Ohlone Californio

          no, that’s not a very valid way to look at the way these things are done. it may or may not be your true opinion, I don’t know. You seem prone to like to simpy buzz this forum for fun. But no. What sharing of the limelight? Who are “they” ? to you? Anyone who cares to know understands who the ownership group is and they are fine with that seemingly.

          • Posted by Orland

            BS Lacob et al. are now simply faces in the crowd beholding to the true movers and shakers (empty corporate entities they may be). In other words, no Big Deal. Surprising and diminishing.

          • Posted by Ohlone Californio

            No, they’re not faces in the crowd. If you watch a game they are named faces on camera. That’s not what is known as “faces in the crowd,” so you’ve misused that idiom. If you follow the team they are interviewed intermittently as well. Again, everything you’ve said remains silly. They’ve given naming rights yes. When that deal expires, they’ll sell the naming rights to another entity.

          • Posted by Orland

            You truly don’t believe their stature hasn’t been diminished by their scrambling for scratch?

          • Posted by Ohlone Californio

            No I do not, and nor would many others think that way. I take exception to your language again, as well. “Scrambling” ? They probably had numerous scenarios to choose from. “Scratch” ? Kind of a reach when discussing $10M a year.

        • Posted by sparky-b

          Those poor giants owners had to have PacBell-SBC-AT&T Park. 3 different names on the stadium just to scrape by and make payroll.

          • Posted by Orland

            Giants ownership was admittedly desperate to secure corporate backing when they agreed to what were then and ever more so since a bargain terms giveaway to Pacific Bell and its successors. Wonder what they could get today.

  2. Posted by farts

    should we be happy that Chase is offering $25mil for sports facilities in “disadvantaged neighborhoods”? or should i be more jaded?

    • Posted by Tony

      You have to read between the marketing crap. Sounds like enough money to renovate a few soccer or baseball fields around the city. We don’t need to act like that makes their bank a righteous institution, but hey is money that will make a few parks better. So at least it’s positive.

      • Posted by gentrified is a dirty word for clean

        It said “Bay Area” so I’d be careful wit expecting too much of it around the city. Anybody who followed the NIMBY soap opera around the Beach Chalet soccer fields would be foolish to try to fund any such projects in SF. No matter how good or sensible or beneficial something is, you can always rely on someone whose lives stink to try to ruin the fun for other people.

        • Posted by Orenthal Jay

          sorry but your comment is BS. the fields did not get blocked, the artificial turf is there right now, and the minor delays didn’t cost anyone anything since the fishers were paying the bills. the swells got what they wanted, and your NIMBY comments are nonsense that are par for the course these days. The NIMBYs are not as powerful as you pretend they are.

          • Posted by Ohlone Californio

            yeah, the turf pitches are there and they are awesome. the whole thing is beautiful.

  3. Posted by farts

    chase center vs. barclay’s center: more expensive, less cool. #sanfrancisco

    • Posted by donjuan

      Chase center, unlike most SF development, actually does look cool.

  4. Posted by Defu

    Should have called it the Pay to Play Palace.

  5. Posted by gentrified is a dirty word for clean

    Ambulance Chase Center

  6. Posted by ess

    Chase is a New York name.

  7. Posted by citicritter

    donjuan: I beg to differ, Chase Center (current Warriors Arena design) does not “look cool” – on the contrary, it looks like a bunch of cliche/formula corporate sports architecture design moves thrown together. Now, the first Warriors Arena design by Snohetta for Pieres 30-32 looked (and was) much cooler, design wise; and Barclays Center looks (and is) much cooler than either of these SF designs — architecturally speaking, anyway.

  8. Posted by Joy

    Now is the time to develop the waterfront all along the Bay. Build it right and it will be used for many years ahead. If San Francisco doesn’t get this right they are just going to miss the biggest opportunity.

  9. Posted by Joy

    Why don’t they move the stadium over to Treasure Island and have a large statue created to symbolize world peace. It would be beautiful to view at night like a statue of liberty. That way that can use boats as transportation to get to the games.

Comments are closed.

Recent Articles