Warriors Owner Shuts Down San Mateo Ice Rink; City Furious

Here you can chat about anything that's not Warriors related.

Moderators: Mr. Crackerz, JREED, Guybrush, 32


Rookie
Posts: 3
» Mon Nov 09, 2015 9:42 pm
Warriors' Owner Dennis Wong, owner of SPI Holdings , LLC of San Francisco has shut down the Bridgepointe Ice Rink in San Mateo. Thousands of youth hockey players and figure skaters are out of luck as SPI thumbs its nose at the City of San Mateo: http://www.smdailyjournal.com/articles/ ... 23961.html

Please sign our petition asking the City of San Mateo to stand up to Mr. Wong and deny their request to change the rink's zoning to big box retail. Thanks for helping our kids keep what few recreational opportunities remain in San Mateo.

https://www.change.org/p/mayor-maureen- ... m=copylink
User avatar

Moderator
Posts: 13751
» Thu Nov 12, 2015 4:17 pm
That's capitalism, man. It's why I never felt bad for Oakland Raiders fans when their football games were being blacked out: because if the Raiders had a fan base that felt compelled to sell out their home games, like most other teams, the games would be broadcasted live instead of slipping into purgatory.

Likewise, SPI Holdings owns a piece of land. Currently, that piece of land is being occupied by an ice rink that they believe isn't making enough money. So they want to demolish it and build retail stores. The most simple fix to this problem would be finding people who want to use the ice rink and shelling out some cash to keep it opened. If the owners were making money on this place, any incentive to demolish and rebuild (which costs a pretty penny in it's own right) would be effectively destroyed. Since this isn't the case, I chalk this up to another case of economic natural selection. Apparently, ice rinks aren't all the rage in San Mateo anymore. Cause, like I said, no businessman is going to shut down a location that brings in an ample cashflow relative to the area.
User avatar

Site Admin
Posts: 3975
» Thu Nov 12, 2015 9:35 pm
I had a longer reply, but 32 summed up the business side of the decision nicely. I do want to add that the reason why I didn't delete this obvious 1-and-done post is because it's topical in Bay Area sports with the far shadier actions of Jed York. This type of thing happens a lot in the Bay, and people need to stop blaming the businessmen (although what York did was reprehensible), and start asking themselves why all the corrupt property dealinsgs are allowed to continue.

I admit that I don't know the particulars of this instance, bu bottom line is that people need to pay more attention to local government then watching the reality tv, sideshow spectacle that's the presidential race. If people in the Bay Area cared half as much about things like campaign contributions and city and county councils, as they do about not being allowed to pirate Game of Thrones (SOPA) and their Netflix bill going up (Net Neutrality), then maybe **** like this wouldn't happen all the time.

Also, it should be noted that this guy is a minority investor, it's not like he's the face of the franchise.

Moving this to the Off Topic forum.

Rookie
Posts: 7
» Sun Feb 28, 2016 3:54 am
32 wrote:That's capitalism, man. It's why I never felt bad for Oakland Raiders fans when their football games were being blacked out: because if the Raiders had a fan base that felt compelled to sell out their home games, like most other teams, the games would be broadcasted live instead of slipping into purgatory.

Likewise, SPI Holdings owns a piece of land. Currently, that piece of land is being occupied by an ice rink that they believe isn't making enough money. So they want to demolish it and build retail stores. The most simple fix to this problem would be finding people who want to use the ice rink and shelling out some cash to keep it opened. If the owners were making money on this place, any incentive to demolish and rebuild (which costs a pretty penny in it's own right) would be effectively destroyed. Since this isn't the case, I chalk this up to another case of economic natural selection. Apparently, ice rinks aren't all the rage in San Mateo anymore. Cause, like I said, no businessman is going to shut down a location that brings in an ample cashflow relative to the area.


Nice analysis. It's interesting how people usually want something when they know they're about to lose it. For example... if you got crap laying around your house that you don't use... and someone else barges in and says you know what since you don't use this... let me take it... and you all of a sudden find a reason to use it.

Or you got crap boxed up in the garage... and one day you go through your stuff to clean out the clutter. And you find every reason to keep most of it.

ANyways good an analysis. peace

Rookie
Posts: 3
» Wed May 25, 2016 2:52 pm
This is not a simple matter of allowing a land owner to do what they want with a property. The property has a land use restriction, requiring an ice rink onsite. This zoning restriction was put in place as a condition for building the mall. The Warriors' owner purchased the property at a discount, given the land restriction. The owner has refused to renew the lease of the profitable rink operator, despite not having the approval of the City to convert the property to an alternative use. The owner is not abiding by the zoning rules so that he has more leverage in obtaining concessions from the City. As a result, the public has been without a promised recreational amenity for three years while the owner attempts to lawyer and PR his way into concessions.

If the Warriors owner didn't want to own a property that required an ice rink, he should have bought an alternative property. Instead, he is denying the community a profitable and extremely busy ice rink so that he can make millions more by installing another Walmart or other big box store.

Rookie
Posts: 3
» Wed May 25, 2016 3:03 pm
This is a zoning issue so it isn't simply a matter of allowing a property owner to maximize his profits through whatever use they prefer. You are not allowed to build a high profit casino in a residential neighborhood; the well-being of the community trumps the profits of one landowner.

I am not sure of the basis for your statement on the rink's cash flow and the popularity of ice rinks in San Mateo. The ice rink was profitable and the rink operators wanted to renew their lease. In addition, the rink was open 530a-1230a every day, similar to other rinks in the area.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests