SkyscraperPage Forum

SkyscraperPage Forum (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/index.php)
-   Downtown & City of Portland (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=192)
-   -   Albina Vision / Rose Quarter Redevelopment (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=152548)

maccoinnich Mar 29, 2017 7:08 PM

Bumping this because we've discussed it before (read back the last few pages). In terms of number of seats VMC fills a niche in the metro area market very nicely, however is currently underused due to lack of loading dock, ability to rig for heavy shows, etc.

Quote:

Originally Posted by maccoinnich (Post 7472444)
Here is a chart of all the spectator venues I could think of in the Portland Metro Area, showing their maximum capacity:

http://i18.photobucket.com/albums/b1...psfymtnywo.jpg

VMC is shown in green, with both its current capacity (12,888) and post renovation capacity (8,000). Post renovation it would probably have a lower capacity because of the installation wider seats, ADA access, hospitality suites etc.


maccoinnich Mar 29, 2017 7:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by innovativethinking (Post 7755970)
Why is it that you and others fail to see studies after studies showing VMC is a money pit that won't generate any positive revenue?

That is what we might call an "alternative fact". Here are the financials from the most recent study:

Quote:

Originally Posted by maccoinnich (Post 7472096)

http://i.imgur.com/t0VhUm9.jpg?1

In the most likely of the options to move ahead ("Tenant/User Enhancements" or "Strategic Market Enhancements") the arena would make an operating profit of $253,000 or $449,000 a year.


petcarpdx Mar 29, 2017 7:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by innovativethinking (Post 7755970)
Why is it that you and others fail to see studies after studies showing VMC is a money pit that won't generate any positive revenue?

Please link us to those studies. Here is a link to the VMC Options Study that includes the second chart maccoinnich posted. It's pretty informative, but if you have current studies that disagree with their findings I would love to read them too. I appreciate that we all have opinions on this, but I haven't seen substantive evidence that VMC is doomed to always be the money pit it currently is.

PdX Farr Mar 29, 2017 8:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by maccoinnich (Post 7756017)
Bumping this because we've discussed it before (read back the last few pages). In terms of number of seats VMC fills a niche in the metro area market very nicely, however is currently underused due to lack of loading dock, ability to rig for heavy shows, etc.

Sadly, there is one missing that a city the size of ours should have, thats a 35-55k seat stadium. MC site would be a excellent location for one. Its sad that the states largest venues are 1.5 and 2.5 hours away from the Portland Metro area in Corvallis and Eugene. We would certainly host some pretty good events with such a venue.

cab Mar 29, 2017 11:13 PM

Why do you as an "innovative thinker" fail to see that a fixed up Memorial Coliseum could be financially feasible and an asset to that area? Take a walk around that area some time. That building is by far the best element of the area architecturally. With a little TLC that building could be brilliant.

Tykendo Mar 29, 2017 11:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cab (Post 7756331)
Why do you as an "innovative thinker" fail to see that a fixed up Memorial Coliseum could be financially feasible and an asset to that area? Take a walk around that area some time. That building is by far the best element of the area architecturally. With a little TLC that building could be brilliant.

Best element of the area architecturally? Disagree. It's a glass box. The roof of the Moda Center is much more attractive. The only thing the arena misses, is maybe, more glass surrounding it. But it is a very nice design that holds up today against others. The only thing I really don't care for is the attached parking structure.

2oh1 Mar 30, 2017 2:01 AM

Everybody seems to come up with different numbers for Memorial Coliseum's finances. I'd love to see real honest numbers showing the total amount of money the Coliseum has made or lost, decade by decade, since the Blazers left.

Quote:

The coliseum currently loses about $55,000 a year for the city, on average, not counting a mounting maintenance bill and money spent on improvements. It hosts 117 events a year with attendance of 384,326, and paid attendance of 184,329.
Source.

I think Memorial Coliseum is going to stagnate until the Blazers want the space for a new arena (or something else?)... or until it falls down. The cost of preparing that building to withstand an earthquake is probably staggering, and that's without doing any upgrades at all other than preventing it from falling down.

I think the MC is gorgeous, but I also think it's a massive waste of land. Compare how Providence Park fits into Goose Hollow with how much land the Blazers have eaten up. I'm still not convinced we couldn't fit a baseball stadium on that spot, but that's a topic for another day. And there will be plenty of other days for the discussion. Come back a decade from now and the topic will probably be the same.

MarkDaMan Mar 30, 2017 3:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by babs (Post 7755944)
I'm not so sure about that. Detroit is building a new arena and leaving the Palace of Auburn Hills. Phoenix is planning to build a new arena. The Warriors are also getting a new on in SF. Dallas has talked about a new arena too.

It all boils down to revenue generation. Concrete arenas are really hard to remodel and structurally change the seat configuration. The are too many suites at the Moda up high but none at the lower levels, which could command higher prices. At some of the newer arenas, the upper level is being turned into a party zone to financially compensate for the cheap seats. It's not about the seat count anymore or the ability to do a soft remodel. If the Blazers think the current configuration isn't a money maker, they will want a new arena.

Oracle Arena (Warriors) is just 5 years younger than Memorial Coliseum and the Warriors are a perennial contender for the NBA title. It makes sense they're getting a new arena and in a completely different city.

Talking Sticks (Suns) was poorly designed and has not aged well. I used to go to Coyotes/Suns games there and you'd have to watch half the game on the screens because the odd octagonal bowl created obstructed views for thousands of seats in the upper bowl. Phoenix also has a very strange relationship with local arenas. The Coyotes are either getting a new arena or moving to a new market even though Gila River Arena only opened in late 2003 (location, location, I know...) I went to the grand opening of Chase Field in '98 and there's absolutely no reason why it can't be renovated for the Diamondbacks for another 20 years, but they're seriously considering building a new ballpark. Phoenix...

The Palace, although only 8 years older than the Rose Garden, is being abandoned for Little Caesars Arena (awful name) not because they were searching for a new arena, but the Red Wings are building LCA and the Pistons have signed on as a tenant well after the arena was already going up.

Some arenas, Philips Arena and Target Center to name a two, are looking to improve their revenue stream because they have less than 16,000 and 15,000 home game crowds respectively. The Rose Garden is 9th in the league this year for average attendance, 19,000+ per game on average in one of the smallest markets and on an off year, until recently. While the suites are weirdly far removed from the action (I much prefer the 100 bowl to a suite) the very large and hugely expensive 200 level makes the arena very profitable. Add in a healthy cut from concessions and the parking garages, I'm sure Paul Allen is pleased with the arena's performance.

That the Blazers are also contractually obligated to play in Portland until 2025 also makes talks for a new arena years off at best.

urbanlife Apr 2, 2017 1:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by innovativethinking (Post 7755668)
You don't need a midsize arena when you have the Rose garden next door

Stadiums aren't one size fits all, it actually makes sense to have more than one arena of different sizes.

innovativethinking Apr 2, 2017 5:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by urbanlife (Post 7759494)
Stadiums aren't one size fits all, it actually makes sense to have more than one arena of different sizes.

Not really. Just put curtains up on the 300 level like they do now anyways for smaller events

urbanlife Apr 2, 2017 6:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by innovativethinking (Post 7759615)
Not really. Just put curtains up on the 300 level like they do now anyways for smaller events

And what if the Moda Center is being used? Can't have two events going at the same time.

innovativethinking Apr 2, 2017 7:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by urbanlife (Post 7759637)
And what if the Moda Center is being used? Can't have two events going at the same time.

Really? lol you know their smart enough to schedule appropriately

urbanlife Apr 2, 2017 1:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by innovativethinking (Post 7759669)
Really? lol you know their smart enough to schedule appropriately

Currently they can schedule two events at the same time. How would they be able to schedule two events at the same time with only one arena? We have a unique situation that is good for the city to have both arenas functioning. You can deny that all you want, but that fact is still valid. Also the current state of the Coliseum is still profitable, so why get rid of something that is making a profit?

innovativethinking Apr 2, 2017 4:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by urbanlife (Post 7759733)
Currently they can schedule two events at the same time. How would they be able to schedule two events at the same time with only one arena? We have a unique situation that is good for the city to have both arenas functioning. You can deny that all you want, but that fact is still valid. Also the current state of the Coliseum is still profitable, so why get rid of something that is making a profit?




Source.

Nope that's where your wrong. It doesn't make a profit. It's a money pit

maccoinnich Apr 2, 2017 7:27 PM

And yet the article you link shows that it would make an operating profit in the most realistic of the renovation scenarios.

2oh1 Apr 2, 2017 9:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by maccoinnich (Post 7760016)
And yet the article you link shows that it would make an operating profit in the most realistic of the renovation scenarios.

An operating profit, assuming the predictions turn out to be true... but how many decades would it take to work off the debt?

Quote:

Essential repairs and replacement
Cost: $35.1 million
Annual income (ticket taxes/parking/capital reserve): loss of $100,000

User/tenant enhancements
Cost: $61.3 million
Annual income (ticket taxes/parking/capital reserve): $150,000

Strategic market enhancements
Cost: $91.1 million
Annual income (taxes/parking/capital reserve): $258,000

Covered open-air venue
Cost: $95.3 million
Annual income (ticket taxes/parking/capital reserve): loss of $112,000

Track with dynamic floor
Cost: $142.9 million
Annual income (ticket taxes/parking/capital reserve): loss of $490,000

innovativethinking Apr 2, 2017 9:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 2oh1 (Post 7760106)
An operating profit, assuming the predictions turn out to be true... but how many decades would it take to work off the debt?


Clearly they don't care if it's not making money. They just like to look at it so nothing else matters

urbanlife Apr 3, 2017 5:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by innovativethinking (Post 7760146)
Clearly they don't care if it's not making money. They just like to look at it so nothing else matters

Clearly you don't see the benefit of having the Memorial Coliseum, so what's the point of even talking about this since this conversation has gone nowhere...

Photogeric Apr 3, 2017 3:14 PM

The two redundant venue argument is stale. Just look at Staples Center, they have the Lakers, Clippers and Kings as well as a host of other events going on and they manage to make it work. It just takes creative scheduling on their part sometimes.

mhays Apr 3, 2017 3:56 PM

The truth is somewhere in the middle as usual. I don't know where but will take a crack at it.

Moda Center could handle most bookings by itself but it would miss some, and those might skip Portland. (PS, LA has numerous arenas and stadiums.)

Renovation would cost a lot. Revenues might cover heat, lights, event staff, etc., but there's zero chance of recovering the renovation dollars. The argument for keeping the arena therefore relies on the public benefits of whatever use the arena will have, including the historic argument and the specific activities. Maybe there's a case for that.

I'd add that there's also opportunity cost. Could the site be sold or leased? Assuming eight acres, with urban zoning it seems like it could be worth over $100,000,000.

On the flip side, a large publicly-owned parcel is a very useful commodity, and will be increasingly important as Portland densifies and grows.


All times are GMT. The time now is 11:46 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.