BOK Center v. Sprint Center

[Hoss]

Big deal. Vision 2025 passed by a 20-point margin. If the arena were that big of a sticking point, Vision wouldn't have passed by such a huge margin, which I think virtually everyone will describe as a "mandate."

Once again, those pesky facts.

I found this blurb from the day after's Tulsa World to be telling of the opposition to the proposals:

Opponent Michael Bates acknowledged defeat a little after 7:30 p.m., saying early returns indicated that all propositions were going to pass with a good margin countywide.

Bates told a crowd of about 30 people at an opposition watch party that the apparent outcome was "disappointing."

"We worked pretty hard because we believed sincerely from the heart that these propositions were not right for our city and a sales tax increase is not going to be good for our economy," he said.

"A tax is not going to lead us into a golden era of prosperity, and I still believe that," Bates said.

[MichaelBates]

But I will argue that the arena was needed for a public spirit investment. The arena made Tulsans proud and has become a public gathering spot where we share time together.

Glad you're back, Michael.

Do you really think the arena inspire feelings of any sort in most of Tulsa County's half-million residents? Perhaps people in your social and professional circles had that reaction. You're entitled to your feelings; I just doubt that they're widely shared.

One of the sad things about the Vision 2025 campaign was the constant drumbeat from the Vote Yes side that we needed the arena in order to feel proud of our city, that we should feel ashamed for our "lack of investment in ourselves" (despite voter approval of something like a billion dollars in city, county, and school improvements over the previous decade). I felt then, and still feel, that we have far better reasons to feel good about our city.

I don't get the "gathering place" argument either. Tulsans gather at River Parks for the 4th of July fireworks and Oktoberfest, for Mayfest, for the Tulsa State Fair, at the zoo, the PAC, neighborhood parks, high school football games, and Cain's Ballroom, on Brookside, in the Brady and Blue Dome districts. The arena brings people together who have a particular interest and who have the disposable income for a ticket (or can justify funding club seats out of their company's marketing budget).

Big deal. Vision 2025 passed by a 20-point margin. If the arena were that big of a sticking point, Vision wouldn't have passed by such a huge margin, which I think virtually everyone will describe as a "mandate."

The packaging of the proposal into four propositions, lumping the arena in with higher education, common education, and medical projects, was done very deliberately. There was even an attempt to lump the American Airlines subsidy with the arena, but AA officials protested. They grouped the projects as they did because they feared the arena -- which had been twice defeated by voters in the City of Tulsa -- could not stand on its own, and I think it's reasonable to assume that they had polling confirming their fears. Arena backers conducted extensive surveys in the months before the election was set. Might it have won anyway? Possibly, especially after months of messaging that "we have to do something" to fix the local economy (which was already on the upswing).

[Hoss]

Glad you're back, Michael.

Do you really think the arena inspire feelings of any sort in most of Tulsa County's half-million residents? Perhaps people in your social and professional circles had that reaction. You're entitled to your feelings; I just doubt that they're widely shared.

One of the sad things about the Vision 2025 campaign was the constant drumbeat from the Vote Yes side that we needed the arena in order to feel proud of our city, that we should feel ashamed for our "lack of investment in ourselves" (despite voter approval of something like a billion dollars in city, county, and school improvements over the previous decade). I felt then, and still feel, that we have far better reasons to feel good about our city.

I don't get the "gathering place" argument either. Tulsans gather at River Parks for the 4th of July fireworks and Oktoberfest, for Mayfest, for the Tulsa State Fair, at the zoo, the PAC, neighborhood parks, high school football games, and Cain's Ballroom, on Brookside, in the Brady and Blue Dome districts. The arena brings people together who have a particular interest and who have the disposable income for a ticket (or can justify funding club seats out of their company's marketing budget).

The packaging of the proposal into four propositions, lumping the arena in with higher education, common education, and medical projects, was done very deliberately. There was even an attempt to lump the American Airlines subsidy with the arena, but AA officials protested. They grouped the projects as they did because they feared the arena -- which had been twice defeated by voters in the City of Tulsa -- could not stand on its own, and I think it's reasonable to assume that they had polling confirming their fears. Arena backers conducted extensive surveys in the months before the election was set. Might it have won anyway? Possibly, especially after months of messaging that "we have to do something" to fix the local economy (which was already on the upswing).

Michael, this is just sour grapes seven-years-old.  2025 passed.  You can't unpass it.  What's done is done.

Most people I talk to think it's a great thing for the city.  On both sides of the political spectrum.  You seem to be the lone holdout.

What happens next year when we get the NCAA regional here?  Are you going to talk down the economic benefits the city will have from out-of-town visitors that we would never have gotten?

Sadly, I suspect my answer is 'yes'.

[RecycleMichael]

I wonder what circles you run in that don't love the arena. We have been to many hockey, football and basketball games and mingled with many Tulsans who love the atmosphere of the BokCenter. The concerts we have seen have been magical and I love that the biggest stars in entertainment have been to our city the past year.

I love the arena and I love downtown on nights when they are bringing in big shows. It adds to Tulsa and the extra few dollars it costs me each year are well worth it in my opinion.  

[rwarn17588]

Glad you're back, Michael.

Do you really think the arena inspire feelings of any sort in most of Tulsa County's half-million residents?

According to a poll, yes. When you have a facility that has a 75 percent favorable rating barely a year after it opens, I'd say that inspires feelings. Positive ones, in fact.

http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=16&articleid=20090913_16_A1_TheBOK578262&archive=yes

I know for a fact that I'll remember the Paul McCartney concert for the rest of my days. And very fondly, I might add. And I wasn't even a Beatles fan.

[Patrick]

Sales tax and hotel/motel tax receipts have been declining since around the time the BOK Center opened. You've got the burden of proof if you want to claim that receipts aren't as far down as they might be had there been no BOK Center.

My man, this is a weak point to argue.  There is no way to prove/disprove it.  The burden of proof is on you as much as it is on me.  Yes, aggregate tax receipts are down... globally.  "It's the economy, stupid."

You'd have to be able to show that the arena allowed Tulsa to capture sales taxes that would otherwise have gone outside Tulsa.

Check license plates in the various parking lots around the BOK Center and on the street the night of a concert.  People drive in from out of town - out of state - to catch some of these acts.  The acts would not have stopped without it.  Fact.  End of argument.  Full stop.

[JoeMommaBlake]

This is the most fun thread I've read on this forum in some time. I miss the good old days of healthy TulsaNow debate...back before the admins booted all the a-holes off. Am I the only one who misses them, or just the only one who visits this site to be entertained first, informed second?

Now we have super nice guys (Bates and Patton) arguing. I can get in to this. This, friends, is entertainment.

My two cents:

There are a few different types of people in Tulsa

A. Midtowner types. These folks tend to love Tulsa. They value the local places. They like parks, trails, statues, and fountains. They'd double the number of all of those things if it helped to make Tulsa cooler. They don't mind paying for nice either. They go out. They want to be entertained. They want Tulsa to be a city in which we should all be proud....not necessarily for it's friendliness, or it's cleanliness, or its convenience, or its "live-ability", but for its art, architecture, entertainment, restaurants, culture, night-iife, festivals, etc. They drink Marshall Beer and eat at Elote. They go downtown every time there's an event. They buy Steve Cluck's shirts. These people travel and when they do, they can't help but wish Tulsa offered some of the same things that other cities offer.

B. South Tulsa types. These folks tend to love Tulsa. They love the Christian subculture. They like high school football and are proud to pack the orange slices for their kids' soccer games. They love the conveniences that Tulsa offers. Affordable homes, wide streets, a large selection of churches from which to choose, good public schools (in south Tulsa), and a concentration of consistent chain restaurants are all attractive to these folks. They too want to be proud of Tulsa. They're the ones who want to be proud of its conveniences, its cleanliness, and its friendliness...and of course its live-ability. These people travel to experience the culture that they don't even look for or care about in their home town and they're really pleased with the lifestyle.

C. Everybody else. These folks live here for some reason or another. They don't really care about any of this stuff. They just want to go to work, come home, watch some TV, and go to the lake on the weekend. They may occasionally complain about roads or road construction, and they care about police only when they get a ticket or when they are a victim of a crime. Other than that, they don't care...and that's okay. As for pride? They may care more about the Sooners or Cowboys than they do about Tulsa. Tulsa's just a place to live. It suits them fine. They may like their neighbors or their church or their kids' teams, and they may even go downtown to a BOK event, but those things are all just a part of life and they don't connect their emotions for those things to their emotions for Tulsa. They may even be more likely to be proud of their specific neighborhood than they are of Tulsa as a city.

I know those are broad generalizations, but you get the picture...

In that context, many of us on this forum identify most with group A. We're reading this message board because we care about the details. We have these conversations because we want a better Tulsa and to most of us, that means more unique and attractive venues, parks, sights, retail, restaurants, events, festivals, etc. Most of us are thrilled to have an arena and would gladly pay for it times two...not because it pays for itself or makes money or whatever...but because it makes our city a better place to live. We might even overlook the way these things are financed if we have to, just don't stop giving us nice things. Bates cares about Tulsa. I know this to be a fact. He doesn't necessarily seem to need any of those things to contribute to his pride.
I kinda do. I want bells and whistles. I want visitors to Tulsa to have the same feelings I have when I'm in another city. I want people to be jealous of my hometown. The Tulsa that existed before the arena was less cool than the one we have now. I like a cooler Tulsa. I know you do too, Michael. I think the only difference between us is that we have a different stance on their (bells and whistles) value and on the sacrifices needed to make them a reality. I think they're really valuable and I think it's worth the sacrifice. I understand that you don't believe them to be as valuable and you are not willing to sacrifice to get them. It's okay if we disagree.

As for the arena's affect on downtown....Ed Sharrer was right (because he's a smart dude). It should've been on the other side of downtown. It was a mistake to put it over there. Most people that I know agree with that sentiment. Our city already suffers from having its entertainment areas all spread out and detached...and we perpetuated it by placing the arena over there...away from the entertainment areas....I guess hoping that another one will sprout up around it? How's that working out?

I echo Michael Patton's sentiment about the civic pride benefit of the BOK. It is a gathering place, though in a different way than the River Parks. I believe in this idea of emotional momentum. It's a fickle thing. There was some momentum already going in the Blue Dome before the arena came to be, but to counter you a bit, Mr. Bates, after 1974, Goodfellas, and Kitchel's places went out of business, they might not have been so quickly replaced if not for positive momentum that the arena helped to create. I know for a fact that Joe Momma's wouldn't be downtown if Vision 2025 hadn't passed. No Joe Momma's means no Boomtown Tees, no Max Retropub, etc, etc. It also means that my south location (which I've since sold), goes out of business and I'm back looking for a job instead of providing 65. It means one of downtown's biggest advocates doesn't have the avenue or the credibility to work to better our town. For some reason as a business owner, people care more about what I have to say than they would if I sold Amway....not that there's anything wrong with Amway.

I have to wonder if Elliot would've continued to develop in the Blue Dome District without that momentum. Would there be a Dilly Deli where 1974 once was or a Yokozuna where Tsunami was? Would Tom and Angie Green have the IDL Ballroom and Electric Circus, and ENSO? How would Dwelling Spaces be doing?

Furthermore, what was the arena's affect on The Mayo, The Courtyard Marriot, and The Holiday Inn? I have to believe these things all benefitted from the momentum that this major thing helped to create.

We can't overlook the emotional value that something like the BOK center has. It has made many a Tulsan believe that we can be something better. It has turned some of group B and C into group A. People tell me all the time at Joe Momma's that they are so happy to have discovered downtown. They're south Tulsans who never thought about a lifestyle different than the one they were used to. They do now. Their new lifestyle includes spending money with local restaurants instead of chains and visiting downtown Tulsa instead of another city.

Every time Joe Momma's steals a customer away from Hideaway, it helps Tulsa. Every time someone who used to eat and drink at TGI Fridays goes to McNellies, it makes our city better. Keeping our dollars in town is critical right now and the downtown restaurants and bars (almost entirely local) are doing a great deal to help....and the arena helps us a great deal.

To me there's no argument here. Vision 2025 was good for Tulsa. The River vote would've been good for Tulsa. The next vote that groups B and C vote down, will be another missed opportunity for Tulsa. Meanwhile, OKC is voting Yes. Little Rock is voting Yes. They grow. They attract employers, conventions, tourists and we...."win by not raising taxes?"

Tulsa can continue the pattern of only raising taxes in a reactionary way to bandage our city (see the recent street vote) or we can start raising them to make our city healthy and strong so that it doesn't need bandages.

This latest streets vote should've never been necessary. If we had been conducting our business well over the years and investing in growing our city and encouraging its citizens to spend money in town, we'd not have the budget problems we currently have. Our streets would be better, we'd have more police, and we'd have a more attractive and special city.

Someday the anti-tax folks will get it. It's almost never a bad idea to invest in improving the city.

I don't deny the "fix the spending" part of it at all, but there's an equally important piece. Maybe these tough times and the hard looks at the budget that they make us take will play a part in improving the efficiency of our government for the future. Hopefully we can combine that with some creative initiatives to invest some new dollars into additional improvements and attractions.

[Hoss]

This is the most fun thread I've read on this forum in some time. I miss the good old days of healthy TulsaNow debate...back before the admins booted all the a-holes off. Am I the only one who misses them, or just the only one who visits this site to be entertained first, informed second?

Now we have super nice guys (Bates and Patton) arguing. I can get in to this. This, friends, is entertainment.

My two cents:

There are a few different types of people in Tulsa

A. Midtowner types. These folks tend to love Tulsa. They value the local places. They like parks, trails, statues, and fountains. They'd double the number of all of those things if it helped to make Tulsa cooler. They don't mind paying for nice either. They go out. They want to be entertained. They want Tulsa to be a city in which we should all be proud....not necessarily for it's friendliness, or it's cleanliness, or its convenience, or its "live-ability", but for its art, architecture, entertainment, restaurants, culture, night-iife, festivals, etc. They drink Marshall Beer and eat at Elote. They go downtown every time there's an event. They buy Steve Cluck's shirts. These people travel and when they do, they can't help but wish Tulsa offered some of the same things that other cities offer.

B. South Tulsa types. These folks tend to love Tulsa. They love the Christian subculture. They like high school football and are proud to pack the orange slices for their kids' soccer games. They love the conveniences that Tulsa offers. Affordable homes, wide streets, a large selection of churches from which to choose, good public schools (in south Tulsa), and a concentration of consistent chain restaurants are all attractive to these folks. They too want to be proud of Tulsa. They're the ones who want to be proud of its conveniences, its cleanliness, and its friendliness...and of course its live-ability. These people travel to experience the culture that they don't even look for or care about in their home town and they're really pleased with the lifestyle.

C. Everybody else. These folks live here for some reason or another. They don't really care about any of this stuff. They just want to go to work, come home, watch some TV, and go to the lake on the weekend. They may occasionally complain about roads or road construction, and they care about police only when they get a ticket or when they are a victim of a crime. Other than that, they don't care...and that's okay. As for pride? They may care more about the Sooners or Cowboys than they do about Tulsa. Tulsa's just a place to live. It suits them fine. They may like their neighbors or their church or their kids' teams, and they may even go downtown to a BOK event, but those things are all just a part of life and they don't connect their emotions for those things to their emotions for Tulsa. They may even be more likely to be proud of their specific neighborhood than they are of Tulsa as a city.

I know those are broad generalizations, but you get the picture...

In that context, many of us on this forum identify most with group A. We're reading this message board because we care about the details. We have these conversations because we want a better Tulsa and to most of us, that means more unique and attractive venues, parks, sights, retail, restaurants, events, festivals, etc. Most of us are thrilled to have an arena and would gladly pay for it times two...not because it pays for itself or makes money or whatever...but because it makes our city a better place to live. We might even overlook the way these things are financed if we have to, just don't stop giving us nice things. Bates cares about Tulsa. I know this to be a fact. He doesn't necessarily seem to need any of those things to contribute to his pride.
I kinda do. I want bells and whistles. I want visitors to Tulsa to have the same feelings I have when I'm in another city. I want people to be jealous of my hometown. The Tulsa that existed before the arena was less cool than the one we have now. I like a cooler Tulsa. I know you do too, Michael. I think the only difference between us is that we have a different stance on their (bells and whistles) value and on the sacrifices needed to make them a reality. I think they're really valuable and I think it's worth the sacrifice. I understand that you don't believe them to be as valuable and you are not willing to sacrifice to get them. It's okay if we disagree.

As for the arena's affect on downtown....Ed Sharrer was right (because he's a smart dude). It should've been on the other side of downtown. It was a mistake to put it over there. Most people that I know agree with that sentiment. Our city already suffers from having its entertainment areas all spread out and detached...and we perpetuated it by placing the arena over there...away from the entertainment areas....I guess hoping that another one will sprout up around it? How's that working out?

I echo Michael Patton's sentiment about the civic pride benefit of the BOK. It is a gathering place, though in a different way than the River Parks. I believe in this idea of emotional momentum. It's a fickle thing. There was some momentum already going in the Blue Dome before the arena came to be, but to counter you a bit, Mr. Bates, after 1974, Goodfellas, and Kitchel's places went out of business, they might not have been so quickly replaced if not for positive momentum that the arena helped to create. I know for a fact that Joe Momma's wouldn't be downtown if Vision 2025 hadn't passed. No Joe Momma's means no Boomtown Tees, no Max Retropub, etc, etc. It also means that my south location (which I've since sold), goes out of business and I'm back looking for a job instead of providing 65. It means one of downtown's biggest advocates doesn't have the avenue or the credibility to work to better our town. For some reason as a business owner, people care more about what I have to say than they would if I sold Amway....not that there's anything wrong with Amway.

I have to wonder if Elliot would've continued to develop in the Blue Dome District without that momentum. Would there be a Dilly Deli where 1974 once was or a Yokozuna where Tsunami was? Would Tom and Angie Green have the IDL Ballroom and Electric Circus, and ENSO? How would Dwelling Spaces be doing?

Furthermore, what was the arena's affect on The Mayo, The Courtyard Marriot, and The Holiday Inn? I have to believe these things all benefitted from the momentum that this major thing helped to create.

We can't overlook the emotional value that something like the BOK center has. It has made many a Tulsan believe that we can be something better. It has turned some of group B and C into group A. People tell me all the time at Joe Momma's that they are so happy to have discovered downtown. They're south Tulsans who never thought about a lifestyle different than the one they were used to. They do now. Their new lifestyle includes spending money with local restaurants instead of chains and visiting downtown Tulsa instead of another city.

Every time Joe Momma's steals a customer away from Hideaway, it helps Tulsa. Every time someone who used to eat and drink at TGI Fridays goes to McNellies, it makes our city better. Keeping our dollars in town is critical right now and the downtown restaurants and bars (almost entirely local) are doing a great deal to help....and the arena helps us a great deal.

To me there's no argument here. Vision 2025 was good for Tulsa. The River vote would've been good for Tulsa. The next vote that groups B and C vote down, will be another missed opportunity for Tulsa. Meanwhile, OKC is voting Yes. Little Rock is voting Yes. They grow. They attract employers, conventions, tourists and we...."win by not raising taxes?"

Tulsa can continue the pattern of only raising taxes in a reactionary way to bandage our city (see the recent street vote) or we can start raising them to make our city healthy and strong so that it doesn't need bandages.

This latest streets vote should've never been necessary. If we had been conducting our business well over the years and investing in growing our city and encouraging its citizens to spend money in town, we'd not have the budget problems we currently have. Our streets would be better, we'd have more police, and we'd have a more attractive and special city.

Someday the anti-tax folks will get it. It's almost never a bad idea to invest in improving the city.

I don't deny the "fix the spending" part of it at all, but there's an equally important piece. Maybe these tough times and the hard looks at the budget that they make us take will play a part in improving the efficiency of our government for the future. Hopefully we can combine that with some creative initiatives to invest some new dollars into additional improvements and attractions.

You sir, have just earned my nomination for post of the year.

[YoungTulsan]

Someday the anti-tax folks will get it. It's almost never a bad idea to invest in improving the city.

I'm about as conservative as you get.  Most mainstream conservatives would refer to me as a kook and ostracize me from their party (The GOP).  I voted for Ron Paul in 2008.  I believe in ending the foreign empire.  I believe in shutting down the Federal Reserve.  I believe in getting rid of the Department of Education, the Department of Homeland Security, the CIA, and getting out of the UN, World Bank, NAFTA, NATO, and it goes on and on.

So that makes me a kook far right whacko in many peoples eyes.


HOWEVER......

I believe the whole argument for limited government on a FEDERAL level means that things are handled better on a LOCAL level.  Most conservatives are blindly against anything that is a tax or governance without giving any credence to its merits.  The whole purpose of the Constitution and its limits on the federal government were in the interests of decentralized powers.

I repeat, decentralized POWERS.  That isn't to say that no government whatsoever has the right to control certain aspects of society which individuals (whom I believe need to be protected from out of control power structures) on their own would not be able to accomplish.

It isn't an issue of no government or power structure has the right to perform certain services and directives, the main question needs to be, what LEVEL of governance is that specific issue tackled by in the most EFFICIENT and non-corruptible manner.

The problem with the federal government today is that it is so out of control huge that it attracts corruption exponentially more as its consolidated powers grow.  It is like a gravitational force, the bigger the power over the masses increases, the more special interests, elites, corporations, and the obscenely wealthy will target that power so they can hijack it.

So think about this for a minute.  Conservatives are opposed to the government having  all of these powers.  Some of these functional services of government are a necessity.   The most efficient level for them to be handled on is not Federal.  For many of them, it is not even on a State level (although our State is a fairly small one in terms of population and budget)..  When the community handles something, it is often times the best, most efficient, and least corruptible manner in which to handle things.  Not to say that our local "oligarchy" as some like to refer to it as, is not without flaw.  But take any function our City and County governments are performing and hand it off to a HIGHER power and that corruption and inefficiency only increases.  Hand it off to a smaller entity and I don't believe some of these issues (such as roads, amenities, the arena, ballpark, universities, retail developments, infill, etc.) could be handled properly by an entity smaller than say the City of Tulsa.  The goal of our Republic with limits on government to protect the individual from the tyranny of the majority and/or elite should still have a little bit of pragmatism attached to it.  We still need to see the forest from the trees.   Limit out of control power consolidation, but also realize that there is a certain level on which things NEED to be done.  Accept that sometimes things that you oppose on a Federal level should be SUPPORTED on a local one.

Just because you are a conservative and oppose BIG things doesn't mean that you can't anchor your sentiments and realize that some things are a necessity and getting them done on a local level is absolutely the most efficient and effective way to get things done for the betterment of the community.

This is why I can both oppose the out of control Federal government and also appreciate the fact that the BOK Center has been a good thing for Tulsa County.

[we vs us]

Blake, you pretty much just won the thread. 

+ eleventy billion.

[Cats Cats Cats]

I think the recent hotel openings have to be attributed to the arena and the new entertainment downtown.  I do not feel like there is an influx of business to downtown (especially with the economic downturn) to warrant the investment in the holiday in and courtyard.  It is kind of interesting the investment in downtown in Tulsa is starting to transform it into something better, like a place people actually go.  I also think things are too spread out.  Blue dome is the only location besides elote that is open at night.  (Elote gets all that hotel business by themselves).  I am suprised by the concerts that have come through.  Hopefully I will be suprised by the WNBA attendance.  Even of we argue the arena won't pay for itself now.  It's effects are obviously generating investment in downtown and places for people to spend money.  Which means more tax revenue even if there is no event.

[TheArtist]

Good post Blake.

[Renaissance]

This is the most fun thread I've read on this forum in some time. I miss the good old days of healthy TulsaNow debate...back before the admins booted all the a-holes off. Am I the only one who misses them, or just the only one who visits this site to be entertained first, informed second?

Yes, you are.  The forum was dying.  Way back when, the debate was healthy, but the a-holes poisoned it.  Booting those guys was necessary or none of these latest threads could exist.  Well, they could exist, but they'd devolve before normal thoughtful posters bothered to join.  All the discussion of the latest developments downtown?  We're taking honest looks at what might work and what won't--but who would bother if FOTD was still around sh*tting on every single one?

Back to regularly scheduled thread (and yes, you're 100% correct about the arena location).

[Stone]

Back to regularly scheduled thread (and yes, you're 100% correct about the arena location).

I'm probably in the minority but I like the location of the arena. Especially on the NEW east bound section of the IDL. That spot as you're heading south towards the bridge is a spectacular view of the city skyline and the BOK only adds to that. Yeah, it's a good walk to the other entertainment districts but hopefully with a healthy DT and new infill it won't seem that way in the future.

[Stone]

I'm probably in the minority but I like the location of the arena. Especially on the NEW east bound section of the IDL. That spot as you're heading south towards the bridge is a spectacular view of the city skyline and the BOK only adds to that. Yeah, it's a good walk to the other entertainment districts but hopefully with a healthy DT and new infill it won't seem that way in the future.