It becomes increasingly apparent to NBA * fans and Seattle sports fans that the Sonics * will eventually not be in Seattle. How soon depends not upon attendance, but upon the outcome of a court case. This isn’t necessarily a suprise to Sonics fans, as we have known that at least one minority owner bought the team with the sole intent of moving it * . David Stern recently made comments that if the Sonics leave Seattle the team will not be replaced (unlike Charlotte). Stern has had a recent case of foot in mouth concerning the viability of his league in a business sense. From the previous link

Stern repeated earlier criticism of Seattle’s City Council for promoting a measure, overwhelmingly passed by voters, that requires any funds to help build an arena earn money at the same rate as a treasury bill.

That measure means there is no way city money would ever be used on an arena project, Stern said.

Stern just admitted publically that there is NO economic advantage to be gained from spending public dollars on an NBA arena. Think about the impact of that. He claims that a city can’t earn back money at treasury bill rates from a stadium investment. Why would ANY city fully fund a stadium?

Just two weeks ago he made statements that Seattle should emulate the San Antonio model, a model which involved a super-majority of public funding and which was so successful that the team is already demanding over 100 Million dollars in public funds to update the FIVE YEAR OLD AT&T Center. Perfect business model. A city should provide 85% of initial funds and then every five years should expect to spend nearly that same amount on updates.

Stern is working very hard to break his league. This is more than just about stadiums, but about regions and cities that Stern would lose in his efforts to get fully funded stadia. Why would any sports owner approve a move from market 13 to market 42 by Nielsen TV ratings? How will that help their next contract? Would the peripheral markets in Tulsa really be better than Vancouver BC, Spokane and Boise?

Furthermore, as the league continues to shrink its market penetration in English speaking North America through moves like the Seattle - Ok City how does it see its future? Would a league really be better for not having youth in the Puget Sound wanting to be NBA stars? Would it be better without Brandon Roy, Nate Robinson, Dan Dickau and others? Maybe Stern doesn’t realize it but a league doesn’t last long if it can’t appeal to the best athletic talent in its home nation, especially not while shrinking the number of viewers who care.

The good news for the great citizens of Cascadia is that though we have already lost one NBA team and will soon lose another, there is a sports league expanding to the region. Seattle will be getting an MLS team.

David Stern you did great in the 80s and 90s, but its the 21st century now and you are failing to understand that though sports in the USA are global in appeal they must first appeal locally and around North America as a whole. Your inability to adapt the league to the some time competive strings of global and local appeal mean that you are becoming sports version of Sears.

You will still be around, but at one point you were a top two league in America. Your league’s appeal continues to fall. As the NFL * and MLB * compete for top status, you have fallen behind NASCAR * and are currently battling with the NHL * and MLS * for pro-sports respectability.

Any owner that votes to turn its back on millions of consumers and future consumers for a short term gain is emulating the day traders of the 90s. Vote against Clay Bennett and his short-sightedness.

* Link goes to Fanhome forums