Warriors Mission Bay Arena Rendering

Having prevailed in their legal battle with the Mission Bay Alliance over the adequacy of the Environmental Impact Report for the proposed 18,000-seat arena and event center to rise in San Francisco’s Mission Bay, the Golden State Warriors are slated to break ground at 300 South Street on January 17 at noon.

As plugged-in people should be well aware, the Warriors have been pushing forward with a project schedule that has called for breaking ground for the new “Chase Center” in the first quarter of 2017 in order to have the $1 billion arena ready in time for the start of the 2019-2020 NBA season, which is a year later than originally planned.

204 thoughts on “Warriors Slated to Break Ground for New SF Arena in Two Weeks”
  1. Horrible decision by the Warriors. This is bad for Oakland, for S.F. and for the entire region. This is very unfair to Oakland and will hurt Oakland’s economy.

      1. Oakland has supported this franchise for nearly 50 years. The Warriors have used Oakland, taken disposable income out of Oakland, received a renovated arena in 1997 courtesy of Oakland taxpayers and now want to divest out of Oakland? The Warriors have been very successful in Oakland and should be making that one million plus dollars investment in Oakland instead of taking it over the bridge to S.F..

        1. I’m tending more and more to agree. If Brooklyn was good enough for Barclay’s edifice, the Warriors should have built their palace in downtown Oakland with easy BART access.

          1. Exactly. A new arena at the 60 acre Howard Terminal at Jack London Square would have been phenomenal.

          2. Oakland is no Brooklyn. Brooklyn is world class in its own right. The Nets moved from Jersey which is more akin to Oakland.

        2. So much drama and hyperbole. People in Oakland can take BART/Central Subway and be at the stadium within 30 minutes. Also, people commute from all over the Bay Area to see the Warriors. They’re Oaklands team as much as they’re Marin’s team as much as they’re San Mateo’s team. Its not like the Warriors are moving to Florida.

          1. The Warriors play in Oakland, have their practice facility and headquarters at 10th & Broadway in DTO, and have had their arena renovated with Oakland taxpayer money. So yes, they belong more to Oakland than to any other city in the Bay Area. Of course, people from all over the Bay Area are and can be Warrior fans just like A’s and Giant fans come from all over the Bay. I think you are missing the point about the relocation. It has a whole more to do than just access from Oakland.

        3. I don’t get the line of thought here. If the Warriors are taking disposable income out of Oakland, wouldn’t you want them to leave?

          Moreover, I don’t think that sports franchises help solve Oakland’s problems, or are necessary for the city to thrive.

          1. I would want them to invest in Oakland in the same way they are willing to invest in San Francisco. I want the supposed economic windfall that SF and the Warriors are claiming is going to San Francisco, to go to Oakland instead as a reward for nearly 50 years of loyal support.

          2. The majority of people at any Warriors game have nothing to do with Oakland. They aren’t from there and don’t live there. There are many, many, many times more Warriors fans — paying or otherwise — outside of Oakland city limits. That has always been, is now, and will always be the case. Period.

      2. All’s fair in love and warriors. Perhaps the owners believe this a favorable time to return their team to their origins. As George Washington wrote: “Favorable moments in war, as in love, once lost are seldom regained.”

        1. Their origin is in Philadelphia. The Warriors have been in Oakland four times longer than they ever were in San Francisco. At this point the Warriors are much more an Oakland team than an S.F. team. The Warriors and the NBA should be ashamed of themselves for the way they have treated Oakland. This is just a very unfair relocation to a neighboring city which has not footed the bill for the Warriors success.

          1. It’s a business and the owners feel they can make more money in San Francisco. No fault of their own. There are only a few examples of sport teams around the Country that stay in their cities due to local attachment. Oakland still have their A’s and maybe Raiders. I think the Raiders are moving so maybe just the A’s.

          2. If they are such an “Oakland team” then why were they never named the Oakland Warriors?

            Why didn’t Oakland make them a better offer? And don’t hide behind juvenile posturings of “ashamed” and “unfair”. Nothing personal, just business. Why would the Golden State Warriors LLC owe anything to Oakland different from any other corporation?

          3. Getting rid of the Warriors and the Raiders would be the best thing that could happen to Oakland.

      3. Don’t engage with this notorious troll. He has literally spent years spamming various blogs, news sites, etc. with the same nonsensical garbage. He is not even from Oakland, nor does he live there. Nothing he says has any validity and is routinely in direct opposition to concrete facts.

        1. Has he ever made a positive comment here on ANY topic? I mean, I can be sarcastic and negative, but everything is a conspiracy and a threat and awful to him.

    1. I’m still not sure you understand. Professional sports teams don’t care about their cities.

      If you want more evidence, look at, well, the Raiders, the A’s, and the Niners. They don’t care about you. Period.

    2. The Warriors belong where they can cut the best deal. The Warriors are a business. Businesses move where they think they can maximize their profit. I know this all feels so personal, but those are the facts, IMO.

      1. I guess paying a billion dollars out of pocket, paying tens of millions extra for local transit improvements, and getting zero tax payer help is the ‘best deal’.

        Such a crying shame that people don’t take notice when a group of people spend money to build a good product for their fans. Levis stadium was an example of a corporate sell out for maximum subsidy to pad the owners pockets.

        Chase Center is the indoor event center that San Francisco deserves. I have no doubt it’ll be as widely loved as ATT Park once its built.

    3. Unfair it not, it’s a done deal. Time to move on. Also, Oakland will survive and thrive, the city economy is far more robust than to be totally dependent on a mere basketball team. Really, if that is all the city had going for it (and we all know it has a whole lot more) than the city would be in serious need of a serious intervention, as no major city should be depended on a sports team to prop up its economy.

      1. I agree. Oakland will thrive without the Warriors. Even Lacob said “Oakland is the future.” It’s the disrespect shown the city of Oakland by this organization for decades that bothers me the most. They’ve used Oakland as a motel without ever acknowledging the city and even distancing themselves from Oakland while kissing up to San Francisco. But you are right. This is an exciting time for the great city of Oakland.

  2. Very good to see this finally come to frutation. Welcome back Warriors and all the other attractions that will come to this new Arena.

  3. The Warriors still owe Oakland 60 million for the complete renovation of the Oakland Arena in 1997. Pro teams attempt to create a fake “civic pride” within their communities in order to enrich themselves. This is not the same as a locol bank or an appliance store relocating to a different city. There is civic pride attachment by sports fans to these teams.

        1. Yeah, Field of Schemes is left wing garbage. 2014 BTW. It was brought up about the debt by Oakland/Alameda but it appears to be a non issue. It is the Warriors contention that they are bond by the lease and when that ends, so does their stay at Oracle. Unless they have something in the lease or have a contract stating the Warriors organization are responsible for the repayment of the bonds, they don’t have a leg to stand on.

          1. There is the “Warriors’ contention” along with the City of Oakland’s contention. It will all be decided in court.

    1. The Golden State Warriors LLC doesn’t owe Oakland $60 million, or so they say. Probably end up decided in another kind of court.

      Plenty of corporations promote their “civic pride”, not just sports corporations. You might have a better argument if they had some special public trust or privilege, like a church or press 1st amendment; or a special license to the public commons, like TV stations with FCC frequencies. But these are just “a bunch of pituitary cases stuff a ball through a hoop,” Robin, Annie Hall. The second noble truth tells us that the root of all suffering is attachment. Joe Lacob delivers your moment of Zen.

      1. The argument is economic. Divesting out of a loyal host city of nearly 50 years and causing economic pain for a few extra pieces of silver. That’s the point. We don’t hold corporations responsible for their decisions? They just get a free pass because it’s “just a business?” To Oakland this is no different than if a company had left town and relocated to Mexico?

        1. Uh, yeah. Freedom, as in they are free to move out of town. I suspect they expect to make kilo tonnes of silver from this move. Smart guys that can count and account, that’s the point. The shareholders should hold the corporation responsible for their business decisions and this one looks like a winner.

          Apparently, sports teaming isn’t different enough for Oakland to have made the Golden State Warriors LLC a better deal than they think they have in SF. AFAIK, this corporation isn’t violating the law or a contract or any obligation of any material kind by moving to SF. All the rest of this is just juvenile claims.

          And of course it will hurt economically to lose the Warriors, but it would probably hurt even worse to pay the cost to keep them. Same with the Raiders. Oakland is just out priced. Woulda thought y’all were used to that by now.

          1. No, were doing pretty well, but thanks for the concern. I guess you must be a free trader. Race to the bottom economics?

          2. Well we’re movin on up,…We finally got a piece of the pie….now we’re up in the big leagues….ain’t nothin’ wrong with that.
            Oakland can’t afford to pay the Warriors enough to keep them from movin on up.

          3. yeah, the founder of Zappos and a co-owner of the Warriors has been a Warriors fan since childhood.

    2. I’m so, so sorry this is news to you. It’s been going on for 70 years all over America.

      It’s the way the world works. You’re complaining about gravity at this point.

        1. They are not moving out of the country, just across the bay – no shaming required. If the Raiders move to London I am sure that Twitter will light up.

          1. Oakland will be hurt economically, so it would be the same if the Warriors moved to Mexico for the city. Maybe Mayor Schaaf should be the one shaming the Warriors on Twitter.

  4. JWB, The hotels on Hegenberger by Oakland International along with some of the restaurants in the area depend on Warriors and Raider fans.

    1. Yeah well I don’t really care about that. The potential for a large, new, thriving neighborhood full of actual Oakland residents is much more valuable than the tourism dollars generated by sports teams, especially when you net out the massive subsidies that are required to build their stadia. Think Fruitvale Village but on a way bigger scale.

      1. It all comes down to divesting out of certain neighborhoods just like what the Warriors are doing in east Oakland. People like the Warriors owners and their lenders don’t invest in Oakland. That’s the problem.

          1. Red lining, racism, tortured image created by SF selective media, eletism, etc. It certainly isn’t crime, since SF recorded 700 more violent crimes than Oakland in 2016. Also, downtown S.F. is much more crime ridden than downtown Oakland.

  5. Finally!! I’ve been waiting for this news for almost FIVE long years since they had their press conference on piers 30-32 making official their intent to cross the bay. So very happy that the Warriors are coming back home to SF to stay! The City FINALLY will be receiving their long overdue missing piece of critical civic infrastructure – a brand new world class arena 100% privately financed by the team. No more having to cross the bay or driving to San Jose to see first class performances. I never really understood why SF couldn’t have a nice-sized arena of its own for so long. Thank you Warriors for taking care of this problem!! Go Dubs!!!!

    1. “Back home?” With 9 years in Daly City and 45 years in Oakland, I think Oakland is more “home” than S.F. Also, this move is bad for the entire region. This move takes economic activity from a city that needs it and gives it to a congested city which doesn’t need further congestion. This hurts Oakland and S.F. along with creating additional congestion throughout the region.

      1. Sorry, but the whole reason they are even in the vicinity of the Bay Area, is because of San Francisco. They didn’t pick up and move 3000 miles west in 1962 to go to a 2nd tier city like Oakland. Oakland stole the team from SF and now they are coming back HOME.

        1. The 2nd tier basketball city is San Francisco. Oakland is first rate all the way. History and attendance has already confirmed that fact.

          1. Is that why Oakland is on the verge of losing ALL of its pro teams? If I were you, I’d put all my energy into saving the A’s from leaving Oaktown. Warriors are coming home…

          2. If Oakland is such a great NBA city, they can attract another team – I think the Sacramento Kings have been looking for a new arena

          3. Oakland is a less desirable destination for the 200 events/year planned for this arena. History and attendance has already confirmed that fact.

          4. I wonder how many of you are gonna be on here crying in 30 years when the city of Santa Clara offers the Warriors a better handout.

            No hurt feelings, here. Just business…

          5. I was delighted to see SF “lose” the San Francisco 49ers to Santa Clara. SF keeps the brand and SC gets the $$$ costs and the big old dead space for more than 300 days/year. Excellent.

            Besides most of the use of this new arena/offices are not for b-ballering. SF’s a big enough little seaside town to get by fine with or without “a bunch of pituitary cases stuffing a ball through a hoop.”

          6. Jake, I wish I could upvote you for that Annie Hall reference. Aside from being extremely funny, it’s very poignant. I love using it when people dismiss sports that way.

      2. “This move takes economic activity from a city that needs it”

        C’mon. The way you talk about Oakland in your other posts make it sound like it is the epicenter of the Universe. This is great for San Francisco as it provides a venue for concerts, conventions and a NBA Team. Yes, it will take the shine off Oakland for not having them but time will pass. SF is party central for the Bay. in October, they have over a million people one weekend with Fleet week, the Italian Festival and Oracle World. So, congestion is not an issue. Face it, the Warriors are moving to SF with all the benefits. What is said on this site means absolutely nothing.

        1. San Francisco isn’t congested? Of course it is. San Francisco doesn’t need the Warriors. Also, the plan is to keep the Golden State name as to not alienate Oakland fans who would never support a “San Francisco” team.

          1. Don’t worry, there’s a waiting list of fans that will gladly replace those few “fans” who turn on their team for a name change.

          2. They are planning to change the name to San Francisco Warriors. This is confirmed from a very solid source. From a marketing perspective, SF can bring people buying merchandise around the world. This is the same that LA did with Anaheim when they renamed the Angels and their merchandise sales are way way up. Oakland doesn’t have anything to offer the Warriors. Anyway, it’s done.

      3. You’re conveniently leaving out the years the warriors spent playing at Bill Graham Auditorium, right in the middle of downtown SF. Also, the cow palace is literally right at the border of SF…one of its parking lots is even partially within SF city limits. Also, Oakland is literally right next door, in the same metropolitan area, so your hysteria about the team moving “away” is pretty dumb to begin with.

        Also, can you answer why the team was named the “San Francisco Warriors” for a decade, but has never had “Oakland” in the name? Could it be that the team actually is connected to SF, and the bay area as a whole, and that Oakland doesn’t exist in a magic bubble by itself?

        1. The team discriminated against Oakland by refusing to take the city’s name while enjoying the benefits of the arena and location.

          1. Well, now they will no longer be taking advantage of the Oakland arena and Oakland location, so you don’t have to feel discriminated against. This is how major league works.

            The Giants had their aaa team in Fresno for years while they were winning championships, but decided to switch – Fresno ended up affiliated with the Astros in 2015 and won their first championship since coming to town in 1998… go figure.

          2. Oracle Arena can be re-purposed for sideshows and Police Chief interview facilities.

        2. No one in Oakland is going to support the “San Francisco Warriors” after the Warriors humiliated and used their city without ever acknowledging it in their name or uniforms. That name change, to S.F., if it happens, will be a huge slap in the face to Oakland and the final straw to many East Bay fans.

          1. That’s ridiculous. But even if it were true, the Warriors wouldn’t care. They will pick up so many new patrons from SF and the South bay – much wealthier areas – for games and other events it will far more than make up for boycotting oaklanders.

          2. and who cares? it would be much worse for warriors to lose SF support than oakand. they’re replaceable

  6. What is like to be so desperately ineffectual there Elmano? The fact is that they are leaving and there’s nothing you can say or do to stop it or to stop them from being successful in their current and future business endeavors. You have literally no bearing on the decision the organization makes or the results thereof.

    You’re going to be denying that they are moving even after they’ve already started playing in the new arena. Get over it and find something useful to do.

  7. I live in the East Bay, but the current Coliseum BART + walk past the cement and chain link fences of O.co/Oak-Alameda/McAfee is not a great fan experience. And no chance anything was going to get built by Jack London or City Center.

    1. No chance of anything being built in Jack London or City Center simply because Warrior ownership refuses to. It’s a simple matter of greed by ownership. They bought the franchise with the idea of ripping it away from Oakland and taking it to S.F.. keep in mind that they will also take the concerts and other shows with them from Oak to S.F. Also, the very nice practice facility at 10th & Broadway in Oakland next to the Marriott Hotel will be abandoned. Oakland will be hurt near the airport and in DTO. This is what Oakland gets for nurturing the Warriors for nearly 50 years.

      1. Yes, that’s exactly what they did!

        Just wondering, did you protest when the Supersonics moved from Seattle?

        1. “World class events” are the same acts that have been playing at Oracle and at the Fox Oakland for years. Nice attempt at a dig at Oakland. Haven’t you heard that Oakland is cool now?

          1. yes, ive heard oakland is cool for criminals. there are entertainers than SF can attract, that Oakland cant

    2. Chain link fence a bad experience? Wait until you miss the last BART connection out of San Francisco after a Warrior’s double OT game.

      1. How is that different from now? Try missing the last Bart out of the Colisseum area after a double OT game … you’ll wish you were stuck in downtown SF instead.

        1. Yeah, being stuck in Upper Bayview is much better than being stuck in Jack London Square after missing a BART train after a Warriors game.

          1. Upper Bayview? Really? When was the last time you were in that neck of the woods? Nineteen seventy never?

          2. Upper Bay View? Is there such an area? I guess The new UC Hospital, which is right next door to the new Arena, is in Upper Bay View also.

          3. “Upper Bayview?” Did Bayview annex Dogpatch and Mission Bay? You have no idea what you’re talking about.

  8. Somedays our regional planning is like a bad version of Les Miserables. Oakland of course would be Jean Valjean.

    1. What regional planning? We are seeing the Warriors shoehorning a 18,000 seat arena in a congested city when they currently have a central location with its own BART station convenient to most of the Bay Area. The “regional planning” is to put everything in San Francisco until it either sinks or the entire city is covered in concrete. As for the congestion this causes the entire region? Who cares about that.

  9. Teams should stay in the cities that supported them for years and that represent the city?
    Where exactly are the San Francisco 49ers playing now?

  10. Woohooo! So sick and tired of driving to sj or oak for concerts. Finally there will be a stadium right in the city!

    1. So much yes to this. I’m a huuuuge Dubs fan, but seeing them live ‘aint cheap. I’ll definitely be looking forward to some arena concerts that I would normally have to go to Oracle or SAP for.

  11. Anybody have any details on how they get fans and concert goers out of the new arena on the KT, 200 nights a year? They’d have to line up several trains like VTA does at a 49er’s home game @ Levi’s. Without additional tracks switching away from the main line on 3rd Street that can’t happen unless cutting off the Bayview from the KT is seen as acceptable (it’s not)

    [Editor’s Note: The Warriors Arena Traffic, Transit and Parking Plan.]

  12. Such Sturm und Drang, again !! I wonder if the Warriors’ EIR accounted for all the additional traffic….on SocketSite discussing it. And it’s so simple:
    The Eastbay fans – who make up a majority of current attendees – have no reason to be upset b/c it’s just a little move across the Bay, but the move was absolutely essential b/c crossing over – or under – the Bay is an enormous and unsustainable burden to the monied fans from west of the Bay…it’s just coincidence the owner is one of them.

  13. The Warriors will become a strictly S.F. team catering to the rich and to corporations. The move is also a land exploitation play to develop the surrounding area. East Bay fans will feel alianated, disconnected, inconvenienced and resentful regarding this needless move. Enjoy the last couple of years of a passionate basketball experience in Oakland because the entire atmosphere will never be replicated in corporate San Francisco regardless of the engineering attempts by the Warriors to recreate Oakland passion and ferver in San Francisco. The Warriors as we currently know them will never be the same.

    1. there is as much passion or more in SF for the warriors. 50% of the fans at every game come from SF. And they are already mostly catering to the rich. to get a decent seat in a mid-season game is already $250+, a good seat is $400+. And is just as easy forOakland fans to get to SF as for SF fans to get to Oakland. and there are plenty of things to do in SF before and after the game, unless the wasteland near Oracle. The name will be changed to SF as it should be. now more fans can also come from Peninsula. the warriors are now a world class team and belong in a world class city

      1. They’ve already tried the “world class city” and failed miserably. Oakland rescued them from San Francisco and nurtured into champions with a nice arena and devoted fans.

          1. Because Oakland baked the cake and now it’s served to San Francisco on a silver platter.

          2. yeah, I guess SF will have the cake box arena and enjoy what is inside too. Just desserts afterall.

            Meanwhile, as their false hopes for a sports complex fade away, Oakland can plan how to better utilize a yuge area serviced by BART, fwy, and airport.

            BTW, a key contribution to enabling the Warriors to return to SF was the success of the Port or Oakland in becoming the primary container port in the Bay Area. Had the SF port won out in that contest back in the 1970s and 1980s, then much of Mission Bay and SF’s eastern waterfront would be still be industrial. Thanks Oakland for doing the heavy lifting/portage and running the heavy/dirty trains/trucks to free so much of SF for redevelopment into much higher value real estate. There’s no whining in such a win win.

        1. The current ownership is responsible for the championship. If the city of Oakland was so good at nurturing champions, why did the Warriors suck for 35 years?

        1. They’ll be plenty of bars and restaurants around right outside the arena (unlike Oracle). Look at what AT&T Park did for the surrounding area.

          1. If the Warriors really wanted to be next to restaurants and bars they would have built at Howard Terminal and would have become a natural westward extension of Jack London Square. That area is already filled with restaurants and bars. Much more stuff than a Mission Bay. What a lost opportunity to really expand and further energize the Oakland waterfront. What the Warriors and the NBA are doing is inexcusable and unforgivable.

          2. I’ve never seen someone with a bigger chip on their shoulder about Oakland than you. You make Dave look reasonable by comparison. The bars and restaurants that will emerge around the new arena, coupled with what’s already there in SoMa, South Beach, Potrero Hill and Dogpatch make Howard Terminal and Jack London Square look amateurish.

          3. E Gon – Your “missed opportunity” for the Warriors at the Howard Terminal site is not a complete lost cause. Why don’t you focus all your energy on building the A’s a new stadium at that prime Oakland site instead of wasting your time lamenting over the Warriors coming home to SF. Surely a new baseball park at HT that you say would be an “extension of Jack London Square” would be really awesome for your town. Not only that but the views from the upper deck seats looking out toward the new and improved San Francisco skyline would be out of this world!

        2. youre right, way more to do around the colloseum in oakland.

          your non stop oakland cheerleading is pretty funny though.

      2. It’s way easier for SF fans to get to Oakland than it will be for the few “Oakland fans” who will want to support a “San Francisco” team at Mission Bay.

      1. Heck, they’ll sell out of all the new “San Francisco Warriors” merchandise and I’ll be the first in line to snap it up.

        1. The disrespectful Warriors already sell “San Francisco” merchandise in Oakland. It’s creepy and kind of disgusting to go to a sporting event in Oakland and seeing all those pretentious people who care nothing for Oakland wearing their “San Francisco” apparel inside an Oakland building paid for by Oakland taxpayers. You almost have to shower as soon as you get home. It’s a bad look. Very disrespectful.

          1. “The City” logo jersey has always remained a part of the Warriors official merchandise. The players still wear them occasionally during games paying homage to SF as their destination when they came out west from Philly.

          2. How did you feel during the Finals when the National TV audience saw pictures of the GG Bridge and other SF attractions. Yeah, no respect for Oakland and very disrespectful. Now, at least, when the SF Warriors go to the Finals, they will be saying live from SF and showing all the famous sites.

      2. Until the shine wears off and they start losing. Then we will see the exact situation happening in Santa Clara. Empty seats and a dead atmosphere. Enjoy the atmosphere in Oakland while you can. These will be the best years for the Warriors organization. They are putting everything into trying to win in Oakland in order to open up their development dreams at Mission Bay.

          1. How many phony “sell outs” do the Giants take credit for? Thousands of empty seats at many Giant games even with the success of winning three World Series in recent years.

          2. Yeah, man, that Giants franchise has been a complete disaster since they moved to San Francisco!

  14. This is going to be tons of fun monitoring the construction progress. I haven’t been this excited about a building project in The City since AT&T (Pacific Bell) Park!

    1. I hope Oakland refuses any lease extensions at the Oakland Arena. The Mayor has really been delinquent in not speaking up against this injustice. Oakland should be complaining to the NBA and to the national media. Oakland politicians stay quiet because of the perks like luxury suites given to the local politicians by the Warriors.

      In Sacramento, Kevin Johnson fought for Sacramento’s NBA franchise while Oakland hands off the Warriors to Ed Lee with a kiss on the cheek. Oakland should be demanding an expansion NBA franchise to compete head to head with the ungrateful and disrespectful “San Francisco Warriors.”

      1. Yeah, not going to happen. You should embrace the future and come enjoy the SF Warriors and the 200 events the new Arena will bring. It will be interesting to see what the old Oracle Arena becomes. If the A’s decide to build there, it will probably be torn down and the rest of the land will probably be housing and suburban big box stores.

        1. The Oakland Arena will compete on price with the more expensive Chase Center. Also 41 home dates will be available in Oakland while the “San Francisco Warriors” are home. The Arena is still a very nice venue and will not be torned down.

          1. Yes, but next to ZERO chance of the Oakland Arena getting a team to compete with the Warriors nine miles away. See – Seattle. As to what will happen to the building…..look at older buildings in Portland, Seattle and Phoenix reference. It’ll probably hang on for 5-10 years being a second tier venue and eventually be razed as part of a complete redevlopment of the site….which would be good for Oakland.

            And life goes on

          2. Don’t forget one of the owners of the Warriors is Guber. He is chairman and CEO of Mandalay Entertainment Group. Look for high profile shows at the Chase Center while, if still around, Oakland gets the Ice capdades and Harlem Globe trotters. I’ve been to the Oracle Arena and even with the ten year old renovations, it is not a very nice venue.

      2. What fantasy world do you live in?

        The current ownership group did not spend $450 million for the team to be in Oakland. That price was based upon what the value of the team will be when exsiting in San Francisco.

        I wonder if they will become the SF Warriors. I haven’t heard or read anything definitive.

        1. You are right, the relocation was premeditated. Although the value of the team has already skyrocketed in Oakland and would have gone even more with a new arena at Jack London Square. The extra gravy is just San Francisco pretentiousness and greed. How much more money do the Warrior billionaire owners really need. They could have done the right thing and still made a huge fortune while further contributing to Oakland’s renaissance.

          1. The Warriors value have increased becuase they won a Final and have a couple of high profile players. Not becuase of the City of Oakland. When Cleveland was here during the Finals, they stayed in SF. No use pondering on what could have happened. They are moving.

          2. You don’t seem to understand a few things.

            1. Oakland is Oakland, it’s nice, I live on this side now, but it is not San Francisco, it is not the Alpha.

            2. Ho much money do the oweners need? As always, as much as they can possibly make.

            3. The right thing? Seriously? There is no right thing, they’ve done nothing wrong. It’s their asset to do with as they see fit.

            An Arena at Jack London Square? No one can get there now, imagine the hell trying to get off of 880 or from BART to Jack London. That’s not smart for the Warriors, and not smart for the A’s

    1. Are you saying it’s more difficult to get to Jack London Square than to China Basin? I’ve never had any trouble getting in or out of Jack London Square even with 20,000 people st events like Eat Real Festival and Bike fest. There is plenty of parking and the 12th Street BART station is less than 3/4 of a mile up Broadway at 11th Street. Great location for the Warriors or A’s.

      1. You must not actually live and move around the area much because….880/980 and the streets around Jack London are gridlock from late afternoon until as late as 8PM every weekday.

  15. Frankly, the bay area is one big city. SF, Oakland, SJ, all the same. For the folks who live here it is one space and both the old and new location can be reasonably reached by public transit. Sometimes location discussions can go a little myoptic. Good to have a final decision.

    1. The Bay Area is a very provincial place. There are three very distinctive regions. West Bay, East Bay and South Bay. San Francisco has looked down on Oakland for decades. SF thinks that it’s better than Oakland and the snooty attitude along with the negative media coverage coming out of SF has effected Oakland’s growth and prosperity. There is no love loss between Oakland and San Francisco. This move is like losing your wife to the rich snobby jerk down the block.

      1. and North Bay and inner Bay and outer Bay and coast and valley(s) and mountains. The San Francisco Bay Area is highly varied, even if some of the residents have highly unvaried opinions.

        1. Say something positive about Oakland to a San Franciscan, watch their reaction, and listen to their response.

          1. I’m a San Franciscan and I think Oakland is a great place.

            Can you say something positive about Oakland without denigrating San Francisco at the same time? Apparently not. It seems that the only incapable of acting like a provincial jerk is you.

          2. That makes zero sense? Who cares? really who has reactions to…..

            I’ll just stop there,

            You’re not saying anything worth an actual thoughtful response.

          3. I remember taking a picture at Mountain View Cemetery in Oakland and sending it to an acquaintance in SF with a caption of “here inn beautiful Oakland.” The response was “certain areas, others not so much.” I was introduced by a friend to a San Franciscan in SF as being from Oakland. I received an odd look and the person who introduced me quickly said ” but he lives in the hills.” San Franciscans for the most part don’t know Oakland but they are sure of one thing…they don’t like it.

      2. Yep. SF snagging the Warriors from Oakland is the epitome of losing your wife to the rich snobby jerk down the block. They are just doing it because they can. Like Mayor Gavin Newsom having an affair with Ruby Rippey-Tourk, the wife of Alex Tourk, his ‘best’ friend…

  16. Marin County would go to the West Bay while Napa and Wine Country to the East
    Bay. Really only three major regions in the SF/Oak/SJ Bay Area.

    1. Oakland isn’t a “region” of anything. The North Bay Area consists of Marin, Napa, Solano, and Sonoma counties, with a combined population of more than 1.2 million.
      Really very weird to try to claim there is no northern bay area. Also weird to insist there is a ‘West Bay” area instead of the peninsula. All very weird and disqualifying.

      1. I like to call SF and the Peninsula the West Bay. The North Bay is much smaller than the Oakland region consisting of Alameda and Contra Costa counties and their 2.6 million resident population.

      2. As a proud graduate of the Academy of Art’s Cartography and Pre(emptive)-Law Program’s No Permissions Needed Creative Categorization Seminar, I commend you for your efforts.

        Unfortunately, the Pacific Ocean is the defining water feature of San Francisco, not the Bay it shares with Oakland. The secondary water feature being the water gap where the main rivers of Northern California cut through the Coastal Ranges, known as the Golden Gate. In this, as in so many things, Oakland lags far behind as a perpetually also randy, but at least it will always be known as the Paris of the Jersey side of the overflow basin some call the Bay.

        1. Insofar as the alcades changed the name from Yerba Buena to San Francisco – after the Bay – as opposed to Pacifica – after the Ocean, historians might beg to differ.

          1. Well, a name is not the thing named, nor does it capture all aspects. Certainly geographers and hydrologists wouldn’t disagree with what I wrote, nor would they beg. Telling differences between an art and a science. Besides, both the Presidio and the Mission were named for St. Frank many decades before a US naval officer decided to rename a village. Seems the name “San Francisco” has long been liberally associated in these parts, or would you beg to differentiate?

          2. No begging here, sir: I speak only for the historians, not as one of them…I believe the future lies ahead.

        2. The Bay defines SF as a city much more than the Pacific Ocean. SF isn’t even viewed as a beach town. The association and orientation is to the Bay.

  17. So it’s Peralta Hacienda vs Yerba Buena. Just as I thought, the Bay Area is named after a body of water not any particular city. So in reality, it’s not “San Francisco’s Area” as it is many times distorted to be. It’s named after the body of water and not the 49 square mile land mass once known as Yerba Buena. Maybe the Warriors should change their name to “Yerba Buena Warriors.”

    1. Lacob has never said anything negative about Oakland or the Coliseum. They just want a newer, nicer home that’s more centrally located for fans across the bay area.

      1. There is nothing more centrally located for fans in the Bay Area than Oracle Arena. And the Warriors have been falsely denigrating Oracle by disingenuously claiming it’s “the 2nd oldest arena in the NBA.” The shell is 2nd oldest, while the enterior was completely renovated in 1997. The second level and the luxury suites were installed in 1997 to create a state-of-the-art arena. This is all about a real estate deal at Mission Bay.

      2. Lacob is telling the World that Oakland is just not good enough for him. The implication to casual observers will be that Oakland isn’t a good place to locate a business even though Oakland was actually a huge success for the Warriors. Lacob is not being held accountable for the harm his irresponsible decision will have on perceptions about Oakland.

        1. You continue to miss the point

          There are more people and companies with big money in San Francisco than there are in Oakland

          Furthermore there is the question of control. The ownership group will own and control the buildings in SF

          That’s the reason for the deal.

          1. The rich people and corporations couldn’t make the six mile trip to Jack London Square to a new Warrior arena? Didn’t a poster mention that we are one happy Bay Area? I guess Oakland is just not good enough for the elite & wealthy that Lacob will have populating his fancy San Francisco shrine. We can’t inconvenience the wealthy of San Francisco. Let’s build the arena so close to the SF elite that they’ll trip into as they stumble out of their foyers.

          2. Jack London is in Oakland in a difficult to reach location….in OAKLAND not SF

            It’s Oakland, not SF
            It’s Oakland, not SF

            No matter how you slice it, the team has more value in SF than it does in Oakland

            You can wish upon as many stars as you like and travel on the trolley to land of Make Believe if you must….but here in the real world San Francisco is more desiriable because there is more money to be made there than in Oakland.

            What’s so difficult to understand about that?

            It’s not even a disparagement of Oakland, it’s just a fact

    1. Oh, just sales? Isn’t that the name of the game in our capitalist system? I’ll take that as “best.” It’s a great arena.

      1. and when they move to San Francisco, they will still be number 1 in Northern California and probably move up to the top ten in the World. Face it SF is better than Oakland for the Warriors.

        1. History has proven that Oakland is better than San Francisco for the Warriors. Lacob is just exhibiting elitism, and a certain contempt for Oakland despite the benefits that the Oakland Arena provided his organization. It’s needless greed and typical of how the wealthy run roughshod over communities like Oakland.

          1. History has proven that? How so? Prior to the Lacob era the Warriors championship was in SF.

          2. The Warriors were playing at the Oakland Coliseum Arena the year they won their first Championship. No one expected the Warriors to be in the Champioship that year so the Oakland Arena had booked the Ice Capades. The Warriors were forced to play some of games at the Cow Palace. The players were disappointed and felt they had no home court advantage in “San Francisco”

        2. Part of the reason Oracle in Oakland is no.1 in Northern California is the access, central location and direct access to BART. The Oakland Arena will still beat the new San Francisco arena in all of those categories.

          1. Oracle Arena’s location has better access to a larger community with lower incomes than the location where the Warriors are building their new arena. FTR, SF and San Mateo Counties have ~30% higher income per capita than the Jersey side of the Bay. I’m confident that if you measure the two locations on a distance to dollars of income basis you would find the new SF arena is far ahead of any possible Oakland location. And that will allow the arena owners to generate more profit. So on an access to disposable income and net profit basis, the new location crushes the old location all the way to the bank.

          2. Oracle arena already draws from those dollars. That’s a bad excuse for elitism. This SF is better than Oakland non sense has built on elitism and racism. That’s the simple truth.

          3. Well then, certainly the new SF arena will “draw from those dollars” that the old Oakland arena has drawn from. The Warriors are banking on the SF location drawing MORE dollars per attendee than the Oakland location. Also more events and more total annual attendees, according to their forecast in their EIR.

            Ya know the Warriors have learned from and referred to the Giants experience since moving to China Basin. The Giants did a survey of their attendees a while back to determine how they get to the ballpark and from where. They found that about one thousand fans boarded BART at the Pleasanton Station to get to the game.

            You’ve made a yuge number of outlandish and unsupported statements on this and previous threads. If you are going to try to claim “racism” is behind the preference of some people for SF to Oakland then our correspondence will end for me with the following:

            You are confusing “elitism and racism” for good business sense and ROI. I’ve previously pointed out to you that the incomes and property values are significantly higher in SF than Oakland. This isn’t about some corporation (GSW LLC) making a morally better or worse judgement, this is just business driven by economics. That’s the simple truth.

          4. Right, we all know what creates great “economics.” The Warriors have a moral responsibility to the city which hosted them for what will be nearly 50 years. A city which gave them use of new arena, renovated that arena back in 1997, and has the most passionate and devoted fans in the NBA. It’s simple greed and it’s wrong. I don’t care about the greedy ROI argument. The fact is that they are a great success in Oakland. There is no need to move to another city which has had zero to do with their success for the last 45 years. This is not a failed franchise like the San Francisco Warriors who were rescued from Daly City by Oakland. So yes, this is about leaving a diverse city which has been stigmatized for year for its demographics by the very wealthy, by banks and by corporations. You can burry your head in the sand and hide behind “home values” an “ROIs” but that’s the bottom line.


    Interesting front page article in this morning’s Chron about what a runaway success Mission Bay is as center for cutting edge biomedical startups providing entre to some of the giants in the field. They were right all along. That Salesforce land is too valuable to waste on a sports/entertainment venue.

    What a disaster for SF: a crappy designed building in the wrong location.

    1. It was purchased fair and square by the Warriors ownership team. Mission Bay Alliance gazillionaires & UCSF stakeholders had every opportunity to pool their money together and buy the land….but they didn’t and Golden State stepped up.

      What an incredible gift for SF: A nicely designed (and MUCH needed civic) building in the perfect location.

    2. I agree. That’s no place for an 18,000 seat basketball arena. San Francisco’s and the Bay Area’s quality of life will suffer due to this relocation.

      1. As a current Warriors season ticket holder and someone who lives 3 blocks away from the stadium site…I couldn’t be more excited. BRING IT ON!

    3. actually, I read the full article and it spoke mostly about how large Bio companies are buying up start up companies. It is only 12 acres the Warriors bought and there will be two office buildings on site to rent out to Bio companies. The Arena won’t even take up 25% of the site.

      1. the mission bay as a biotech destination has been an unmitigated disaster. While biotech has been rapidly growing in South San Francisco, Boston and NY, it has barely grown in MB

        1. It only has 100% occupancy and a waiting list clamoring to get in. MBA is absolutely right, those 12 acres should be devoted to UCSF/biomedical.

          It IS time we began to take a more regional approach to planning. I can understand the Warriors might want an upgrade from Oracle (though certainly not a necessity). However, the place to build it is downtown Oakland near BART.

        2. Disaster might be the wrong word, but the hoped for bio-tech center that was supposed to emerge here has not. Salesforce was going to take blocks and blocks of MB, now its Uber and the arena. Blocks 33 and 34 are going to be used for administrative office space and parking. Kaiser took a big chunk of land. Bio-tech developments don’t seem to be in high demand here given the above.

          The problem in part was the constrained amount of land available for bio-tech development. This was never going to be a Pill Hill. Meanwhile SSF and Brisbane are planning huge amounts of space targeting bio-tech. In Brisbane’s case their large project sadly has no commensurate new housing development planned, while HP Lennar does not seem to be of interest to bio-tech firms so far. A big chunk of that space may be taken by an educational group.

          MB as a bio-tech hub was a non-starter though that does not justify, IMO, building the arena there.

          1. as an executive in the biotech world, I [would say that] most of my colleagues would categorize MB a failure as a biotech hub. There are 200 biotechs in South SF. Despite the idea of shifting it to MB, SSF has only grown stronger while MB has not. The core tenants pulled out early on. Boston has now taken over the Bay Area as the #1 biotech hub after we held it for 30 yrs.

    4. As it is, UCSF MB is hemmed in by Dogpatch, the freeway and the inlet by AT&T Park. A good bit of that land is slated for residential use so grandiose plans (at one time) for a huge bio-tech center were pipe dreams IMO. Oyster Point has a larger footprint and the massive Brisbane office project will likely get the lion’s share of bio-tech and research firms that locate/expand in the area.There does not seem to be bio-tech interest in Lennar’s HP project.

      Bottom line, UCSF MB was never going to be a Pill Hill. I oppose the stadium for many reasons, but even the additional 12 acres would not have mitigated the physical constraints on UCSF MB spawning boatloads of bio-tech/research space.

        1. Traffic/infrastructure. I’d love to have an entertainment venue in SF for concerts and such the trade-off is worsening the already bad traffic situation. The reality of the latter trumps my desire for the former.

          1. Maybe the Mission Bay group will come in with a last minute legal challenge to this irresponsible development and relocation.

          2. Unfortunately, that is highly unlikely.

            It begs the broader issue of lack of regional planning and permitting authority in the Bay Area. And the failure of many cities to provide housing and instead encourage office/tech development. The South Bay is notorious for this. An entitlement project there I’m involved in actually has received permission from one of the cities to up-develop an apartment block. In doing so some green space will be removed, which is unfortunate. But the city was under pressure from one of its big employers to provide more housing the project has been approved. That is a rare exception.

            Its not just SF and Oakland – the whole Bay Area has a housing/jobs imbalance. The Central SOMA plan, hopefully it will not be approved as is, will worsen that. But look no further than El Camino from SSF to Burlingame. A broad boulevard surrounded by one and two story commercial buildings and parking lots. Close to BART, 280 and 101. Thousands and thousands of residential units could be built there – medium scale development – and yet just a handful of projects have been built in the last 5 years. During the boom cycle. Brisbane is planning a huge office development near the Bay and yet virtually no housing is being built there.

            It impacts the quality of life in the region and ultimately the region’s ability to compete with emerging metro areas such as Seattle, Atlanta, Dallas and Houston. Not to mention LA which is going through a potentially grand rebirth.

          3. I agree. In Oakland, we see the same thing. Underutilized surface parking lots and banked parcels within blocks of downtown Bart station sitting there for years while San Francisco becomes overbuilt. Oakland has 8 BART stations, the most of any city in the Bay Area, and the land around most of them is completely underutilized.

            There is no regional planning in the Bay Area as everything is crammed into San Francisco.

          4. Its crammed into SF and the Silicon Valley. Both a locus for jobs, but adding to the house/jobs imbalance by their planning deacons. The Peninsula too is not part of the problem. From a regional POV this stadium location is a wrong choice. Not saying it has to be in Oakland – it could be any number of places in the East Bay.

    1. Exactly. Thank you. Poster are projecting their personal anxiety. It’s a done deal. The City will adapt. The fans wil adapt. Life will go on.

  19. Warriors fans support what’s good for the Warriors. That means the move to SF. People who put their backwater suburb’s reputation above the the good of the team are not Warriors fans.

    1. What “backwater suburb” are you referring too? With these types of attitudes maybe San Francisco IS the perfect place for this eletist organization and its snobby and uninformed fans. This is the “The City” feeling I get from many “fans” at Warrior games in Oakland. Very arrogant, classless and disrespectful towards the city of Oakland.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *