Opinion: to compete with SoDo Arena others need to show viability.

Chris Hansen has said from the start that he can make the SoDo arena work with an NBA only scenario. Now we have independent economic analysis from the SoDo arena FEIS that not only is it viable to have a NBA-only arena, but the public participation would provide direct positive economic return to the citizens of Seattle.

I want to believe the NHL is now economically viable enough now to make it possible.

It is true about franchise values being higher, and I believe it may be possible to have hockey first. I've also been hearing about arena efforts for a decade to bring the NBA back, and it has superior economics, their franchise values now average $1.1 billion.

A variety of people have been and are trying a variety of things, great. It always has come back to needing some public support either directly or indirectly with infrastructure (roads, bridges, a parking facility, light rail station, etc.). That has been the case for the NBA. It would be true for the NHL in Tukwilla.

A privately financed NHL-only arena is viable?

Ok, sounds good, Ray Bartoszek, show it. I have a bird in the hand with Chris Hansen and SoDo. I see what Chris Hansen brings to the table, an actual plan. Until I see some evidence that Bartoszek has a viable plan (or is still around), I'll refrain from calling this a two arena race, because it isn't, not yet.

I think we all could do without the hype. If I read one more story include false equivalency from a Journalist I'm just going to barf. The NHL is not equal to the NBA and Tukwilla isn't equal to downtown Seattle. Ray Bartoszek has not produced a competing plan to Chris Hansen, he leaked an idea without any identifiable financial facts. It's journalistic hackery to imply otherwise. Also, if you are writing your stuff while sitting in the Mariners press box, stop it.

At this point, I require actual proof that something that is being advertised as an alternative actually is one. Everybody, City of Seattle, King County, the press, at this point, should require actual proof that what is being compared to the proposal in SoDo is viable. That requirement also goes for the proponents of endless rumors in Bellevue, too.

I must see it spelled out before I give equivolent support for anything else, anywhere else. So far I only see Chris Hansen, SoDo, NBA-only (at the least) as a verifiable scenario (see of the SoDo FEIS, Appendix F).

While we are unhappy that Seattle City Councilmember Burgess, Mayor of Seattle ED Murray, and potential arena builder Chris Hansen are right about the viability, and what it would take to do hockey first, or hockey only. Maybe it isn't viable for the city, or SoDo, or even Tukwilla "privately" funded.

Maybe that's why the NHL expansion plans are sliding a year, because as a solo project, in this market, it is a questionable investment on its own. They might be waiting on the NBA.

While pondering all this, can the politicians in Seattle admit that the substitution effect going out of Seattle and into Tukwilla, or Bellevue, is bad for the city? The Seattle Times never seems to talk about it.

Lastly, can we fans, that are paying 100% of this one way or another, agree that Tukwilla and Bellevue should show their plans are viable before giving the City of Seattle a hard time for not jumping to finance part of a  NHL-only proposal?